Why is our management group considered smart?

[hammertime]

13 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:

Remember when we drafted a smurf centre? Petey’s pretty alright. 

They drafted a 6'2 C still filling out. Who was PPG in the Allsven and 2 PPG in the SHL qualification in his draft year. They are not comparable

 

[DSVII]

1 hour ago, canuck73_3 said:

Aquilini wants to win with this roster, keeping this roster together fits what he wants. Ergo keeping it together is working with him to show him you’re willing to play ball. 
 

When it blows up in his face you show him his plan isn’t working and now it is his turn to play ball. This isn’t rocket science to follow. 

That theory credits Aqualini with a level of introspection that I doubt he has.

[canuck73_3]

1 minute ago, hammertime said:

They drafted a 6'2 C still filling out. Who was PPG in the Allsven and 2 PPG in the SHL qualification in his draft year. They are not comparable

 

Petey was tall but a smurf when drafted. He even weighed less than Lekkerimaki by 11 pounds 

 

Lekkerimaki was the bpa at his spot period, you don’t waste 1st round pucks on organization needs, thats how you end up with Virtanen and Juolevi. 

[hammertime]

5 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:

Petey was tall but a smurf when drafted. He even weighed less than Lekkerimaki by 11 pounds 

 

Lekkerimaki was the bpa at his spot period, you don’t waste 1st round pucks on organization needs, thats how you end up with Virtanen and Juolevi. 

Bold claim cotton. let's see if it pays off!

 

Kemell clearly out paced him in Liiga if you're going for a guy with Lekkerimaki's skillset. My money also says at least 2 of the 4 big D taken after in the 1st will become influential top 4 d with cornerstone potential. 

 

I appreciate that you want to give JR ad PA the benefit of the doubt but there isn't any big braining going on here. 

[canuck73_3]

3 minutes ago, hammertime said:

Bold claim cotton. let's see if it pays off!

 

Kemell clearly out paced him in Liiga if you're going for a guy with Lekkerimaki's skillset. My money also says at least 2 of the 4 big D taken after in the 1st will become influential top 4 d with cornerstone potential. 

 

I appreciate that you want to give JR ad PA the benefit of the doubt but there isn't any big braining going on here. 

Kemell was one of my hopeful’s but I’m not going to write a guy off less than 6 months after he’s drafted. 

[canuck73_3]

32 minutes ago, DSVII said:

That theory credits Aqualini with a level of introspection that I doubt he has.

A level of pull Rutherford does have. 

[Ghostsof1915]

The worrying thing is Management says the right things.

But doesn't seem to do those right things. If fact all they've done is made minor deals.

[Fred65]

16 minutes ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

The worrying thing is Management says the right things.

But doesn't seem to do those right things. If fact all they've done is made minor deals.

Apart from Mikayev and Kusmenko both making a great line with EP

[Drakrami]

Same reason people were saying coach Green was well regarded in the league? So well regarded that hes still not hired yet nor have been heard of as a candiddate. Either people/the media makes stuff up. Or management team itself has a propaganda team that spreads these things. Im actually leaning towards the latter from all these years following different stories. 

[Elias Pettersson]

Rutherford is the only one in management with a pedigree.  Everyone else has less experience than Benning.  

 

At the end of the day, they need to make a bold move.  A franchise altering move.  Horvat probably is that move.  If they can get a team to overpay for him for a cup run then that may be the deal that changes this franchise around.  Similar to the Linden deal...

[RU SERIOUS]

 Hold on to your hats because In his seven seasons as GM of the Pittsburgh Penguins, Rutherford traded away six first-round picks despite him categoricallly stating upon arrival in Vancouver {QUOTE} "I don't want to trade draft picks, unless they're later round picks. It's not the cycle we're in to trade high draft picks".   (Of course that 2nd round draft pick they threw away for that Still-Man trade doesn't count)

 

Take a moment to read what he left behind in Pittsburg. 

https://thehockeywriters.com/penguins-rutherford-poor-decision-making-effects/

[dougieL]

57 minutes ago, Drakrami said:

Same reason people were saying coach Green was well regarded in the league? So well regarded that hes still not hired yet nor have been heard of as a candiddate. Either people/the media makes stuff up. Or management team itself has a propaganda team that spreads these things. Im actually leaning towards the latter from all these years following different stories. 

Yeah I didn't understand the Green thing either.

 

 

[Alflives]

2 hours ago, RU SERIOUS said:

 Hold on to your hats because In his seven seasons as GM of the Pittsburgh Penguins, Rutherford traded away six first-round picks despite him categoricallly stating upon arrival in Vancouver {QUOTE} "I don't want to trade draft picks, unless they're later round picks. It's not the cycle we're in to trade high draft picks".   (Of course that 2nd round draft pick they threw away for that Still-Man trade doesn't count)

 

Take a moment to read what he left behind in Pittsburg. 

https://thehockeywriters.com/penguins-rutherford-poor-decision-making-effects/

Marching orders from the owner to try and “win now” are showing in these types of moves.  Aquilini has insisted on this direction from his management since he bought the team.  It’s his way or the highway.  

[IBatch]

8 hours ago, canuck73_3 said:

Aquilini wants to win with this roster, keeping this roster together fits what he wants. Ergo keeping it together is working with him to show him you’re willing to play ball. 
 

When it blows up in his face you show him his plan isn’t working and now it is his turn to play ball. This isn’t rocket science to follow. 

That's a pretty childish way to act or run things.    Plus you'd think Aqua would have learned and understood this during the MG/JB era.   IF MG indeed say they needed to rebuild ... and instead did whatever it is you can call the JB era... Re-tool accidental rebuild era?

[IBatch]

2 hours ago, RU SERIOUS said:

 Hold on to your hats because In his seven seasons as GM of the Pittsburgh Penguins, Rutherford traded away six first-round picks despite him categoricallly stating upon arrival in Vancouver {QUOTE} "I don't want to trade draft picks, unless they're later round picks. It's not the cycle we're in to trade high draft picks".   (Of course that 2nd round draft pick they threw away for that Still-Man trade doesn't count)

 

Take a moment to read what he left behind in Pittsburg. 

https://thehockeywriters.com/penguins-rutherford-poor-decision-making-effects/

That's a pretty decent write-up.   Let's hope Allvin is smarter about this.   Some of those moves were simply bad.   Was trading Marino a casualty of this stuff - or was that one of his better signings or both?    

[IBatch]

18 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Marching orders from the owner to try and “win now” are showing in these types of moves.  Aquilini has insisted on this direction from his management since he bought the team.  It’s his way or the highway.  

I don't know where you're getting your information.   So far, aside from some smoke around Brad Richards and around MG telling him it was time to rebuild,  and that's just a few comments nothing completely open - i simply can't find the data.   Just a lot of supposition.  Which is understandable.    JB  half assembled a new core.    And cut corners by bringing in Miller - plus not waiting for cap to shed.   Get that we needed an Edler replacement ... that said their was an avenue of patience, we could have re-signed Edler and Tanev collectively for the same money, banked the cap on Tanevs spot .... and waited for a better opportunity.    Anyways that's in the past now.    By doing nothing, Allvin is doing something at least.    IF we trade for a legit goalie ... that's a big tell.  

[Boudrias]

10 minutes ago, IBatch said:

That's a pretty childish way to act or run things.    Plus you'd think Aqua would have learned and understood this during the MG/JB era.   IF MG indeed say they needed to rebuild ... and instead did whatever it is you can call the JB era... Re-tool accidental rebuild era?

My frustration with the org over the years has been team identity. I realize that is a very easy thing to say. To an extent you have to craft your play around the dominant players on your roster. That said, the Canucks have over the years deferred their 'identity' to easily to those players they think can lead them, not to a CUP, but to playoffs. IMHO there is a difference. Serious CUP play versus an appearance with no real likelihood of actually winning the CUP. 

 

I talk about team identity and can not say what Vancouver's is? I see a lot of pieces that appear desperate for what the Canucks play on the ice should be. As a fan the player I think demonstrates the identity to coalesce is EP40. A solid 200' game that combines a good backcheck and an ability to break up ice with speed and skill. As he matures EP40 is bringing more physicality into his game and is seldom caught on the wrong side of the puck. 

 

Saying all this is not unique to the NHL as most teams would want the same thing. It is about execution which on many nights is not there. When the acknowledged weak point of your team is in the d-zone then clearing that zone is the imperative and making higher risk plays in hopes of generating offense out of the d-zone not as important. This is why it is imperative that management acquire a defensive defenseman to anchor their d-zone around. Hughes is not that player. Hughes is a player with the skill set that could win a CUP for Vancouver. He is not a bedrock in a defensive game where many playoff games are won. The sad reality faced by management is that Meyers, OEL , Burroughs, Schenn are not those players. Hughes and maybe Bear are.   

[IBatch]

3 hours ago, Drakrami said:

Same reason people were saying coach Green was well regarded in the league? So well regarded that hes still not hired yet nor have been heard of as a candiddate. Either people/the media makes stuff up. Or management team itself has a propaganda team that spreads these things. Im actually leaning towards the latter from all these years following different stories. 

You need to do some research.   Green had two other teams very interested.   And well, look at how well our 5 x 5 so far has been this year.  Sloppy.   Maybe Green and Bomber had such a rigid system in place, because we simply didn't have the horses.    Greens biggest failure was not playing our regulars in the pre-season, to see how well they'd gel, and instead looking for that last plug ... they did in fact, pick the best one available in Chiasson in the end but lost a lot of potential toughness in Gadj.   Then McEwen home grown which also was too bad.  

 

To summarize, Green was considered the hardest working coach in the AHL, constantly looking for an edge, had his staff record zone exits and entries with pencils before it was even a thing.   And he'd been coaching for a decade.   Was considered an up and comer and not as big a surprise as people should think, again if they did the research.   Also he wasn't some former player that just walked in and said "hey i'd like to coach" because he was a fan favourite or something.      He's very cerebral.    To me anyways, our record could have easily been worse, and until near the end, already got effort from his players.   This was a rebuilding team ... with a crap roster.    He gave EP, Brock and QHs the minutes to succeed as well.   And did his best to fix JV.    Pearson loved Green.    LE maybe not as much lol.  Pretty stupid of LE given Green had him in the top six often enough... that's how bad we were.

 

 

As for now.   Better roster.   Teams had over a full season after the massive overhaul.   PK still stinks.    Garland, Mikheyev and Kuzmo for sure provides more weapons.   EP is finally starting to be the player we hoped for (not Greens fault he played so bad to start the year ... same with Brock same with Horvat even, that's on them as players). 

 

Bruce for sure was a breath of fresh air ...  but don't forget Greens defensive lessons didn't just go away after Bruce came in, Bruce just blew all the steam out of the room.   The Bump is done.   Now those faults are showing up again.  And this is a better roster. 

[IBatch]

4 minutes ago, Boudrias said:

My frustration with the org over the years has been team identity. I realize that is a very easy thing to say. To an extent you have to craft your play around the dominant players on your roster. That said, the Canucks have over the years deferred their 'identity' to easily to those players they think can lead them, not to a CUP, but to playoffs. IMHO there is a difference. Serious CUP play versus an appearance with no real likelihood of actually winning the CUP. 

 

I talk about team identity and can not say what Vancouver's is? I see a lot of pieces that appear desperate for what the Canucks play on the ice should be. As a fan the player I think demonstrates the identity to coalesce is EP40. A solid 200' game that combines a good backcheck and an ability to break up ice with speed and skill. As he matures EP40 is bringing more physicality into his game and is seldom caught on the wrong side of the puck. 

 

Saying all this is not unique to the NHL as most teams would want the same thing. It is about execution which on many nights is not there. When the acknowledged weak point of your team is in the d-zone then clearing that zone is the imperative and making higher risk plays in hopes of generating offense out of the d-zone not as important. This is why it is imperative that management acquire a defensive defenseman to anchor their d-zone around. Hughes is not that player. Hughes is a player with the skill set that could win a CUP for Vancouver. He is not a bedrock in a defensive game where many playoff games are won. The sad reality faced by management is that Meyers, OEL , Burroughs, Schenn are not those players. Hughes and maybe Bear are.   

Boudrias your name suggests you've followed this team for a long time.   Our identity for sure changes with each core.   For me at least, we were one tough group my entire childhood and early adulthood.    With a lot of tough players. Sure most teams had that, but we were tougher and meaner them most, with a lot of blue collar stars on the team.     Linden's team sure had an identity.   Starting in 1989, come the post season, we amped things up.     And weren't pushovers until the mid 2000's.   The WCE identity was solid.   Best line on hockey, and we still were a tough hard team to play against.     The Sedin era teams also had their own vibe.  Not sure when we switched to going full Swede - and get it's our competitive advantage, but until Lidstrom captained a team to the cup - no European had ever done that before.  

 

My father in-law thinks we won't ever win a cup until we get some of our old Smyl/Linden era back.    You've just named Schenn and Burroughs, two guys that actually don't shy away from the post season style of game.    I don't think he's living in the present (and i'm guilty of that often but not to that degree)  ...  but he makes a good point.  

 

Myers, Schenn and Burroughs ... that's a lot of our toughness right there.    Schenn hits everything that moves and that does have an impact.   So does having him play with QHs... he's abused enough as it is.     Burroughs well we win more with him in the lineup but agree it's not ideal ... neither is Schenn given his age.   Myers has to go he's too expensive.  

 

In the end i do think this current team lacks an identity.   But hope they do make their own, and playoffs are absolutely required to get there. 

[You Mad Bro?]

4 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Rutherford is the only one in management with a pedigree.  Everyone else has less experience than Benning.  

 

At the end of the day, they need to make a bold move.  A franchise altering move.  Horvat probably is that move.  If they can get a team to overpay for him for a cup run then that may be the deal that changes this franchise around.  Similar to the Linden deal...

Agreed. The problem that many people including myself have, is that major piece to move to shake the core and bring futures was so obviously Miller

 

Last deadline. The draft, the off-season. They had ample time to do it. Now he looks unmovable with his contract. Frustrating.