Devil's Advocate for the Hronek trade

[hammertime]

One thing I will say is this group has been better when it comes to their pro scouting. 

 

Kuzzmenko, Beauvellier, Mikheyev, Kravtsov, Bear, Aman, Wolanen. All these guys have met and exceeded expectations. I'm hoping we got the right fit with Hronek. 

 

I think the main thing we need to do is bring in a veteran D who can chow PK mins as well as hope to bring Schenn back. I would target Dumoulin or possibly Mayfield this offseason especially in lieu of Schenn. Of course pursue the much talked about Livingstone.

 

 

 

Kuzzi Pete Beau

Mikheyev Miller Garland

I think this top 6 can win their matchups in hard minutes and will thrive on counter punching with the leagues best. Which should afford us the luxury of developing the kids in favorable minutes on somewhat interchangeable 3rd lines to keep the pressure on. 

 

Hoglander Aman Dries (utility)

Kravtsov Joshua Podkolzin (Energy)

 

 

 

Hughes Schenn/Mayfield

Dumoulin Hronek

OEL Bear 

Wolanen Livingstone

 

I think this would be a solid and well balanced group. If we can't move Myers so be it I personally like Myers and I like what he brings my only issue is his cap hit which will soon expire. I would have no problem brining him back for 2m. 

 

If we can maneuver ourselves into the playoff race I think we look to add a legit shut down 3/4 C nothing special a Blueger/Sundqvist/Kampf type and maybe some rented muscle. I'd like to wait though and stop tinkering with the forward group lets see what we have and give the kids a chance. 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

[DSVII]

3 hours ago, Maniwaki Canuck said:

About the timing of this deal:  It's not a "win now" move or about being "buyers" at the deadline.  The guy is 25 and likely has 8 good years ahead of him.  It was an opportunistic acquisition of a player we really need for the future.  Yes, it would have been better to have drafted our own equivalent 4-5 years ago, but we didn't. 

It definitely is a buyer/win now move in my books. Or at least a move to hit that 'make playoffs next year' threshold that management is gunning for. 

 

The benefit of drafting a player like Hronek is you get maybe 6 years of cost control (3 yrs ELC and 3 years RFA let's say). This is buying Hronek as he enters his 6th year

 

The guy is 25 years old and has one cost controlled year before he goes RFA and wants a raise, and people who play with Hughes (if that is the plan) tend to post good stats that will make them expensive in contract years. Contenders are contenders by leveraging as many cap efficient contracts and ELCs possible. That's really the timing issue here. Drafting a potential Hronek can net you a player who has 3 cost controlled years giving you top 4 minutes like Hughes did in 2019-2021.

 

I think this will have the effect of making us a good team, but because we are paying market value for every member of our core in the next two years (with Petey and Hronek due), it won't make us a contending team. Colorado won that cup with Nate MacKinnon at $6.3 mil and Makar on his ELC at $880k. That's what the potential opportunity cost of that draft capital could be. 

 

The best time to draft that player was probably 2020-2022 but the team either traded those picks away or blew up their own tank, the 2nd best time though is now. 

 

Of course, if management can find some more Kuzmenko deals that cost nothing that will change my tune but those don't grow on trees. And even if they have one in the works it is very risky putting yourself in a cap crunch just before the offseason when teams can pounce on you like a shark, and buying players at a premium at TDL when they're highest as opposed to seeing if you can do a Devon Teows type deal at the draft where players are cheapest from the cap crunched teams. And this offseason will probably see a lot of those trades where Dmen can go for cheaper due to the super teams loaded up in the East.

 

Timing on in the short term (buying players at the highest at TDL rather than the draft, using said player to destroy your tank position out of the top 10 draft picks) and long term (Not giving yourself the potential 6 years of ELC+RFA cost controlled play from your prospect, putting yourself over the cap right before the draft and other teams will force you to trade away more future capital to offload that cap. ) doesn't sit well with me for this trade.

 

We're trying our best to be the early 2000s Minnesota wild or Nashville predators. And because JR is competent, we'll most likely hit that milestone as opposed to Benning's accidental rebuild. And that prospect doesn't give me comfort tbh.

 

Edited March 5, 2023 by DSVII

[Maniwaki Canuck]

2 minutes ago, DSVII said:

It definitely is a buyer/win now move in my books. Or at least a move to hit that 'make playoffs next year' threshold that management is gunning for. 

 

The benefit of drafting a player like Hronek is you get maybe 6 years of cost control (3 yrs ELC and 3 years RFA let's say). This is buying Hronek as he enters his 6th year

 

The guy is 25 years old and has one cost controlled year before he goes RFA and wants a raise, and people who play with Hughes (if that is the plan) tend to post good stats that will make them expensive in contract years. Contenders are contenders by leveraging as many cap efficient contracts and ELCs possible. That's really the timing issue here. Drafting a potential Hronek can net you a player who has 3 cost controlled years giving you top 4 minutes like Hughes did in 2019-2021.

 

I think this will have the effect of making us a good team, but because we are paying market value for every member of our core in the next two years (with Petey and Hronek due), it won't make us a contending team. Colorado won that cup with Nate MacKinnon at $6.3 mil and Makar on his ELC at $880k. That's what the potential opportunity cost of that draft capital could be. 

 

The best time to draft that player was probably 2020-2022 but the team either traded those picks away or blew up their own tank, the 2nd best time though is now. 

 

Of course, if management can find some more Kuzmenko deals that cost nothing that will change my tune but those don't grow on trees. And even if they have one in the works it is very risky putting yourself in a cap crunch just before the offseason when teams can pounce on you like a shark, and buying players at a premium at TDL when they're highest as opposed to seeing if you can do a Devon Teows type deal at the draft where players are cheapest from the cap crunched teams.

 

Timing on a micro scale (buying players at the highest at TDL rather than the draft, using said player to destroy your tank position out of the top 10 draft picks) and macro scale (Not giving yourself the potential 6 years of ELC+RFA cost controlled play from your prospect, putting yourself over the cap right before the draft and other teams will force you to trade away more future capital to offload that cap. ) doesn't sit well 

 

We're trying our best to be the early 2000s Minnesota wild or Nashville predators. And because JR is competent, we'll most likely hit that milestone as opposed to Benning's accidental rebuild. And that prospect doesn't give me comfort tbh.

 

You're absolutely right about the cost control issues.  We'll have one year of this guy as a relative bargain and after that we'll have to pay market value.  But that's better than not having a top RD at all.  To go from where we are to being a contender during the Petey-Hughes window is going to take a lot of sharp moves from management, no question.  But that is a common trait of nearly every cup winner in the salary cap era, very few of which started from scorched earth rebuilds.  You need good management to win in this league. 

[DSVII]

3 minutes ago, Maniwaki Canuck said:

You're absolutely right about the cost control issues.  We'll have one year of this guy as a relative bargain and after that we'll have to pay market value.  But that's better than not having a top RD at all.  To go from where we are to being a contender during the Petey-Hughes window is going to take a lot of sharp moves from management, no question.  But that is a common trait of nearly every cup winner in the salary cap era, very few of which started from scorched earth rebuilds.  You need good management to win in this league. 

I agree with you on the most part. But I doubt the majority are advocating a scorched earth rebuild, just a proper one. I think Pittsburgh/Chicago/Tampa/LA have all gone through that cycle and they've won most of the cups in the cap era. The frustrating thing is the the Nucks have always tried to short cut the natural cycle of the NHL rather than even go for a soft reset.

 

Anyways, yeah i hope Allvin can make it work! I agree with your sentiment. 

 

On an unrelated tangent, and i'll preface this by saying I'm not smart as a GM lol, but I always think the right move is to not follow the market trend. If the market is pricing RHD at a premium, then perhaps it's time to look for more skilled, but cheaper LHD that can play competently on the right side (i.e Shea Theodore, TJ Brodie, Sergachev, Gonchar, Dumoulin) 

 

[86Viking]

On 3/3/2023 at 10:31 PM, VancouverHabitant said:

Last 24 hours have become a dunking contest between Vancouver media members on our management.  I don't deny the validity of the criticism but I do find the coverage and conversation really one-sided and extremely negative.  

 

That has been Vancouver media for a long time, nothing new in regards to them. Tune out the always negative nancies on social media/radio etc and you save yourself from a ton of the negativity. Fans are very frustrated, imagine how the players feel! 

 

I am curious if GM Alvin attempts to sign Hronek to an extension this summer, or does he wait it out and at worst qualify Hronek in summer of 2024 for 5.5m or whatever his QO is?

 

I am hoping for JT 2.0 type of return from Hronek, we need that to be the case. My main disappointment to this trade was 2 things:

 

1. We included our 2023 1st round pick, I would have be deadset on just the NYI 1st as the offer...it could be unprotected in 2024, so that is a big risk for us with the recent history of what happened to Ottawa and the Duchene trade. All the NYI need is for Sorokin to get a major injury next year and they could be a NON playoff team in a similar spot to Vancouver this season no?!?

 

2. Why did we make the trade in season? Hronek is hurt currently and if Detroit was willing to move him now while still kind of in a playoff race outside chance of making it they chose to gain some GREAT assets by moving Hronek and Bertuzzi to continue adding assets and becoming a better team long term not a short sighted short term thinking like Vancouver has had for a decade. Waiting till the draft, if the NYI pick was in 2023 we could have see who was available when the pick came up and then decide to trade for Hronek or make a draft selection...never know who slides at the draft! BUT, the team wants to show their ELITE players QH, EP, TD that they are making an addition this team has lacked for I don't know....forever in acquiring an top 4 RHD, so I am hopefully this works out well and maybe OEL and Hronek can be a passable 2nd pair. Now we just need a better RHD for Hughes to play with!

[Maniwaki Canuck]

1 hour ago, aGENT said:

Honestly, my only problem with the deal is situational for where the Canucks are as a franchise, cap space etc. A bottom 6+/- team, with a shallow pool, no cap space, selling high 2nd and 1st round picks is DEFINITELY debatable.

 

Other than that... Hronek is a good player, that we got at fair value. And yes, you can't just "wait until the draft" for players like these. There's no guarantee, he'd still be available, wouldn't cost more, wouldn't have more suitors etc. Young, 2 way/offence leaning RHD aren't just available whenever it suits you. It's a dumb argument IMO.

 

The bigger problem is management inability to proactively clear cap before baking a move like this.

I think that failure to clear the corresponding cap space is the fairest criticism of this move and of others this management has made like signing Mikhayev in the summer.  If you don't clear that space first and you're over a barrel, it undercuts your already weak bargaining power in moving some of the players we need to move.  But I'm sure they've tried and know what poison pills they're going to have to swallow in the summer.  I'm still glad to see them making credible moves to improve the team during this window. 

[SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME]

1 hour ago, aGENT said:

Honestly, my only problem with the deal is situational for where the Canucks are as a franchise, cap space etc. A bottom 6+/- team, with a shallow pool, no cap space, selling high 2nd and 1st round picks is DEFINITELY debatable.

 

Other than that... Hronek is a good player, that we got at fair value. And yes, you can't just "wait until the draft" for players like these. There's no guarantee, he'd still be available, wouldn't cost more, wouldn't have more suitors etc. Young, 2 way/offence leaning RHD aren't just available whenever it suits you. It's a dumb argument IMO.

 

The bigger problem is management inability to proactively clear cap before baking a move like this.

Yeah, that’s definitely a fair criticism. I have no doubt that this management group has been working hard on the cap issue, since the day they arrived, but as of yet, they’ve made very little tangible headway, which is definitely concerning.

 

They’ve chosen a really challenging high wire act with about the highest degree of difficulty, in retooling this roster, and hoping to somehow address the cap and the prospect pool along the way, without committing to a rebuild. They will need such a high “batting percentage” on nearly every move they make (trades, signings, draft, etc), for this plan to succeed. 
 

It’s going to be fascinating to watch them perform this high wire act the next couple years, especially in a fishbowl market like Vancouver.

I wish them all the success in the world.

 

Maybe they’ll pull it off. It would be pretty legendary if they did succeed with this plan and deliver a contender within a short timeline. But it could easily all come crashing down as well, and they basically have left themselves no safety net, if that happens.

Edited March 5, 2023 by SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME
Typos

[Baggins]

6 hours ago, iinatcc said:

You know what I mean contextually right? 

There will be trades and FA signings to be made of course but recent successes (Avs and Bolts) roster is composed of players developed in their system and opposed to the Canucks. There was a video on that in youtube showing the numbers and the difference is staggering (and before someone says "oh it's youtube how credible is that" I assume the person did their research on a numbers side).

 

Look at the Devils, most of their forwards were either drafted or developed or both by their organization. And yes their D-core is composed mostly of trades and signings, but even so the assets Devils game up were meager compared to Vancouver's gave up out of desperation to get OEL and Hronek in separate years. 

 

As people in the media mentioned. If you were already a playoff team wanting to get over the hump then yes Hronek would be a good pickup but not if you are one of the bottom teams of the league. 

 

Also one might ask why would Yzerman and the Red Wings organization do this? Why trade a very good RHD d-man at this point? And before someone says "oh it's because they already have Seider" or "it's because his contract expires after next season" then why couldn't Yzerman wait until the draft when perhaps other teams that got eliminated in the playoffs early would try to acquire him? It's because Yzerman knew he could sell high Hroneck (and help the team's future) if any desperate team was willing to overpay. Good new for Yzerman it was Allvin/JR that was willing to overpay.

 

What is my point in the last part ... bascially that it was an overpayment and pretty reckless. A good comparison is when Brian Burke traded for Phil Kessel (not at extreme) but the basic idea buying high and giving up a good deal of your future to win now until the medium term.

 

When Petey is 33 like Stamkos and Kilhorn we can take a count of how many drafted players are on the roster. Take a look at the span of draft years for key the players. You absolutely need high end talent to be a contender. But even high end talent doesn't become a contender without building a team around them. The quicker you do that the bigger the window to contend. The bigger the window the greater the chance of actually winning a cup. Fail to build around your high end talent and you don't contend at all and you have to start over.

 

From 2009 to 2016 the Oilers drafted 10th, 1st, 1st, 1st, 7th, 3rd, 1st, and 4th overall. They had 65 draft picks in that span. Despite the high picks, and getting the player of the deacade in 2015, seven years later (13 from the first top 10 pick) they are sitting in a wild card spot. In reality can you actually depend entirely on magic beans to find the golden goose?

 

Funny thing about Yzerman, he said when he trades a player he actually prefers to get a player back because he knows what he's getting. Detroit seems to be rebuilding their rebuild. But he also said some of the acquired picks might be moved.

 

It wasn't an overpayment at all for Hronek. It was very comparable to what other good top 4 RHD have been traded for.

[iinatcc]

9 minutes ago, Baggins said:

It wasn't an overpayment at all for Hronek. It was very comparable to what other good top 4 RHD have been traded for.

The trade itself is fine (albeit a slight overpayment) but, as Drance said, it's the right trade for the wrong team. 

 

[aGENT]

33 minutes ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

Yeah, that’s definitely a fair criticism. I have no doubt that this management group has been working hard on the cap issue, since the day they arrived, but as of yet, they’ve made very little tangible headway, which is definitely concerning.

 

They’ve chosen a really challenging high wire act with about the highest degree of difficulty, in retooling this roster, and hoping to somehow address the cap and the prospect pool along the way, without committing to a rebuild. They will need such a high “batting percentage” on nearly every move they make (trades, signings, draft, etc), for this plan to succeed. 
 

It’s going to be fascinating to watch them perform this high wire act the next couple years, especially in a fishbowl market like Vancouver.

I wish them all the success in the world.

 

Maybe they’ll pull it off. It would be pretty legendary if they did succeed with this plan and deliver a contender within a short timeline. But it could easily all come crashing down as well, and they basically have left themselves no safety net, if that happens.

Well summarized Sid. And I think that's where a lot of the frustration is coming from.

 

They've basically picked the most challenging route, with the lowest likelihood of success. It's not impossible that they pull it off, it's just improbable.

 

But yeah, if they manage to pull it off, it will be pretty epic 

 

If they don't though (as many fear), things could get pretty ugly around here though 

Edited March 5, 2023 by aGENT

[SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME]

9 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Well summarized Sid. And I think that's where a lot of the frustration is coming from.

 

They've basically picked the most challenging route, with the lowest likelihood of success. It's not impossible that they pull it off, it's just improbable.

 

But yeah, if they manage to pull it off, it will be pretty epic 

 

If they don't though (as many fear), things could get pretty ugly around here though 

What I’m finding works for me, and cuts down on the angst, is just accepting their plan as the reality for the short term future of this team. And then analyzing their moves within that paradigm. It simplifies things. At this point, I’m just gonna “let them cook” (as my kids would say ), and see what happens.

 

I’ve stopped weighing their decisions against any hypothetical rebuild. It’s a conscious decision I’ve made, for my own mental health and quality of life. 

Edited March 5, 2023 by SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME

[aGENT]

14 minutes ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

What I’m finding works for me, and cuts down on the angst, is just accepting their plan as the reality for the short term future of this team. And then analyzing their moves within that paradigm. It simplifies things. At this point, I’m just gonna “let them cook” (as my kids would say ), and see what happens.

 

I’ve stopped weighing their decisions against any hypothetical rebuild. It’s a conscious decision I’ve made, for my own mental health and quality of life. 

Yup, same. Not the route I'd have taken (though I wouldn't have done a full rebuild either... Likely a deeper retool though).

 

But I will move forward judging their moves in the frame of what they're ACTUALLY doing (vs what I'd prefer). Otherwise I may as well bang my head on a wall 

[SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME]

1 minute ago, aGENT said:

Yup, same. Not the route I'd have taken (though I wouldn't have done a full rebuild either... Likely a deeper retool though).

 

But I will move forward judging their moves in the frame of what they're ACTUALLY doing (vs what I'd prefer). Otherwise I may as well bang my head on a wall 

Deeper, more aggressive retool is probably my ideal plan as well.
 

(Which may actually be what they’re trying to do. We don’t know what moves they’ve attempted, but failed to pull off. It “takes two to tango” and they might not be finding willing partners for some of the moves we’d like to see.)

I think the typical rebuild plan doesn’t really work with Pettersson and Hughes.

The timelines don’t really match up. A rebuild probably takes longer than we have with them and the results wouldn’t come to fruition until those guys are out of their primes (admittedly, I tend to define “prime years” at younger ages than most CDCers) and on the downswing of their careers (and less value for money, due to the typical salary vs performance age progression).

 

With the full tear down, it actually means selling Pettersson and Hughes, which would certainly return huge hauls, but no guarantees of drafting similar quality players. Those guys are special. Generational picks for this organization IMO. It may take a decade or more before we again draft players (if ever) of their quality, even if we sold everything for a fat stack of extra first rounders (barring a couple lottery wins, of course).

 

So, how to “re-thing” a team, built around those core guys (and the expected timeline/window at their ages)?

 

It’s easier said than done.

 

I’ll never fully endorse the current management’s approach, but I also don’t think it’s anything close to the worst plan. Like I’ve said time and again, they’ve definitely committed to attempting something with a very high degree of difficulty (perhaps needlessly so), but, even given the risk, it’s still a fairly cogent and logical approach, especially considering the overall circumstances here.

[88Canuck]

48 minutes ago, iinatcc said:

The trade itself is fine (albeit a slight overpayment) but, as Drance said, it's the right trade for the wrong team. 

 

That makes zero sense! 
 

Also, he is 25 (not 35) and entering his prime. He address the now and the later. We needed to address the defence, specifically the rhd. Again, we had needs, he’s taking care of those needs (now & later), so I don’t understand his / others logic that it isn’t a good trade, or it’s the wrong timing / “wrong team”. Just because this trade was made, doesn’t mean we can’t draft more defencemen or make further trades & signings to further address the defence. 
 

He’s just being negative to be negative (whether the trade was right or wrong) and if he / others used logic, it clearly makes sense on many levels. 
 

A top rhd is not easy to get and they jumped on it / figured it out. It’s about multiple moves by multiple means to reach and end. There’s more to come. 

[aGENT]

1 minute ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

Deeper, more aggressive retool is probably my ideal plan as well.
 

(Which may actually be what they’re trying to do. We don’t know what moves they’ve attempted, but failed to pull off. It “takes two to tango” and they might not be finding willing partners for some of the moves we’d like to see.)

I think the typical rebuild plan doesn’t really work with Pettersson and Hughes.

The timelines don’t really match up. A rebuild probably takes longer than we have with them and the results wouldn’t come to fruition until those guys are out of their primes (admittedly, I tend to define “prime years” at younger ages than most CDCers) and on the downswing of their careers (and less value for money, due to the typical salary vs performance age progression).

 

With the full tear down, it actually means selling Pettersson and Hughes, which would certainly return huge hauls, but no guarantees of drafting similar quality players. Those guys are special. Generational picks for this organization IMO. It may take a decade or more before we again draft players (if ever) of their quality, even if we sold everything for a fat stack of extra first rounders (barring a couple lottery wins, of course).

 

So, how to “re-thing” a team, built around those core guys (and the expected timeline/window at their ages)?

 

It’s easier said than done.

 

I’ll never fully endorse the current management’s approach, but I also don’t think it’s anything close to the worst plan. Like I’ve said time and again, they’ve definitely committed to attempting something with a very high degree of difficulty (perhaps needlessly so), but, even given the risk, it’s still a fairly cogent and logical approach, especially considering the overall circumstances here.

Bang on.

 

Yup doesn't make sense to full tear down with Petey and Hughes here. That was never a realistic route IMO.

 

But if we'd moved Miller for the reported Chytil/Lundqvist/1st last year, used the freed cap to add Marino etc,  we'd have been further along where I'd hoped we'd be (and I doubt a whole lot less competitive in the present/near term). With less future cap allocation (and Miller/age risk)

 

I'd also have moved one of Garland/Boeser last summer, even if the return wasn't astounding.

 

Still could have done the Horvat and Hronek trades then as well. But without the massive cap pressure we're now under. Still would have been presently "competitive", with better long and short term cap allocation, better age alignment etc.

 

But as the Rolling Stones say...

 

And I suppose we might not have a top 5-10 pick this year to look forward to, so there's that I guess lol

[Baggins]

12 minutes ago, iinatcc said:

The trade itself is fine (albeit a slight overpayment) but, as Drance said, it's the right trade for the wrong team. 

 

What will this team be in the next 7, 8, or even 9 years? You will never be a contender if you don't build around your top talent. Hronek can be a core player here for the ext 8 years. If he was 28, 29, or 30 I'd agree. But he's 25.

 

Drance is an idiot. Can we agree a top 4 RHD is a difficult position to fill? The last one we drafted was Bieksa in the 5th round in 2001. Again, Hronek is 25. FYI, Pettersson is 24. What's the point of keeping Pettersson if Hronek isn't a good addition at 25? Does adding a quality 25 yr old RHD improve the team for the forseeable future? Does it build on our current young talent? Building is building. You just can't sit around hoping on magic beans. Every piece added in Pettersson's age group moves us closer. 

 

Here's the deal...

Out - Horvat C (28) plus a 2nd rounder

In- Beauvillier LW (25), Raty C (20), Hronek RHD (25) and a 4th rounder.

I'm pretty freakin' happy with that.

 

The biggest complaint moving Bo, other than "but we like him", was we didn't get a good RHD in return. Well with a flip we did. Now if they move any of Boeser, Garland, or Myers, there's no preasure at all in getting a top 4 RHD in return. They're no longer limited to teams with a RHD they are targetting and can move any or all of those players for what they perceive to be the best return from any team.

 

Btw, what I've seen the most is "right player, wrong time". The reasoning being we are a bottom 7 team and out of the playoffs, so why are we adding? That's idiotic. Hronek isn't a rental that disappears at the end of the season. When you're building and opportunity knocks - you answer. If you don't the opportunity can be lost. If we say "not the right time, maybe in June". Will Yzerman simply find a different dance partner? Does he change his mind once he knows exactly what that Isles first is? Or even change his mind simply because he's had time to really consider it. Or possibly make a completely different deal that in turn takes Hronek of the market again. This is a player that can be part of the core for the next 7-8 years. The "when" doesn't matter at all. If the deal is acceptable you grab those opportunities when they presents themself. You snooze you lose.

[granpappy]

1 hour ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

Yeah, that’s definitely a fair criticism. I have no doubt that this management group has been working hard on the cap issue, since the day they arrived, but as of yet, they’ve made very little tangible headway, which is definitely concerning.

 

They’ve chosen a really challenging high wire act with about the highest degree of difficulty, in retooling this roster, and hoping to somehow address the cap and the prospect pool along the way, without committing to a rebuild. They will need such a high “batting percentage” on nearly every move they make (trades, signings, draft, etc), for this plan to succeed. 
 

It’s going to be fascinating to watch them perform this high wire act the next couple years, especially in a fishbowl market like Vancouver.

I wish them all the success in the world.

 

Maybe they’ll pull it off. It would be pretty legendary if they did succeed with this plan and deliver a contender within a short timeline. But it could easily all come crashing down as well, and they basically have left themselves no safety net, if that happens.

if it came to that ... 'crashing down,' it would likely mean the exit of hughes and petey which would be a burn it to the ground situation. couple of high end picks for each of them and unload everything and anything else and we would be in a genuine rebuild. so, while i dont disagree that they need to to hit on a high percentage of their moves i do think (aquilini aside), the safety net is a postponed rebuild. given that hughes is the best dman weve ever had and as stats are proving out, one of the best to play in the nhl and petey is cruising, its a new balancing act of wait a few years for the new prospects or get players now. i dont think its the historical aquilini mode of making the playoffs as much as it is a case of giving petey and hughes the players that can win now. the big sweetner is this years draft and can we luck out this time round

[granpappy]

hopefully we play delia or martin enough to not finish out of the top 9

[SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME]

1 hour ago, granpappy said:

if it came to that ... 'crashing down,' it would likely mean the exit of hughes and petey which would be a burn it to the ground situation. couple of high end picks for each of them and unload everything and anything else and we would be in a genuine rebuild. so, while i dont disagree that they need to to hit on a high percentage of their moves i do think (aquilini aside), the safety net is a postponed rebuild. given that hughes is the best dman weve ever had and as stats are proving out, one of the best to play in the nhl and petey is cruising, its a new balancing act of wait a few years for the new prospects or get players now. i dont think its the historical aquilini mode of making the playoffs as much as it is a case of giving petey and hughes the players that can win now. the big sweetner is this years draft and can we luck out this time round

Yeah, agreed. I actually didn’t mean the team itself wouldn’t have a safety net. If the current plan fails, they can do a tear down rebuild, and they’ll have plenty of good pieces to sell. I just don’t think that same safety net extends to the current management. They’ve sort of pushed all-in and bet on this plan working. If it all comes crashing down on them in spectacular fashion, I don’t expect they’ll survive with their jobs (certainly not all of them, anyway). If the current plan fails horribly, I’d expect a new management group would be installed to handle the rebuild.

[NHL97OneTimer]

17 hours ago, Metal Face Doom said:

I'll give JR and PA the benefit of the doubt.  Most of the players they've brought in have been very solid.  Jim Benning brought in Schimdt.  Jim Bennings track record for trades isn't great.  Nor were his FA signings.  

Agree on JB.  But that doesn't necessarily mean JR & PA will be bang on here.  The pickups have been solid so far though, I'd agree.  But like I said, we'll see....