[Buyout] Oliver Ekman-Larsson

[AnthonyG]

7 minutes ago, Master Mind said:

Right, they don't magically appear. That's why you draft them. Imagine if we didn't throw away so many draft picks over the years and actually used them to draft a quality defense...

Imagine if we did try to draft a dman and injuries ruined their development.

 

Imagine if we tried drafting a dman more than once between 2000-2015 in the 1st round.

[JeremyCuddles]

2 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:

The mystery box could be anything! Even Filip Hronek! 

To be fair, the Hronek vs pick debate is similar to the OEL vs pick debate. You trade for a proven defender, but if you're not gonna build around it better, you're better off with the picks. Those of us that want a rebuild and would rather have picks are of the mindset this team with it's cap constraints can't properly build around our core pieces, even with Hronek. So we traded picks for a player we don't think will be maximized. We need 2 top 4 D and we need a 3C. That'll cost money we don't have. According to capfriendly we have 6mil in cap space. All to replace OEL, add another top 4 D, and add a 3C. I'd rather have just kept the 1st and 2nd rounder we traded for Hronek, not bought out OEL, and just fixed our broken prospect pool and make a Hronek level trade when we have cap flexibility to actually build a contending roster.

 

This is a case where we are trading picks to build a playoff roster. Teams generally don't do that. It's putting the cart before the horse. You trade picks to build on an already established roster. Yes, we're not likely drafting a Hronek with those picks. But we aren't a contending team by trading those picks for a Hronek either. So it made more sense to just stockpile picks and have 2 really good drafts. Wait out some bad contracts. And make a move in a couple years.

 

At least imo. I don't want to sound like a smarty pants know-it-all. But I just don't think we were in a position to be trading for Hronek, as much as I love the guy, and buying out OEL didn't save our team like people want to pretend it did. Cause we have to fill OEL's hole and fill the 2 holes we had before buying him out, with little to no cap space. And with little to no draft capital and a pretty abysmal prospect pool. I dunno. There's always hope, but I just feel holding those picks and waiting a few years was the way to go.

[DrJockitch]

6 minutes ago, chon derry said:

For now he is on a quality team , a team that’s retooling from low quality to a higher expectation, which the positive fan base I’m sure hopes of an even higher quality,  if and when they arrive there. the picks used in acquiring him didnt even exist for the Canucks  prior to the horvat deal. They leapfrogged 2,3 years with raty whose proven more at his stage than a player that hasn’t even been drafted yet.   Bellieveire still has worth in another trade. The trade tree from the horvat deal is still growing 

Did we already trade him?

[DrJockitch]

Just now, N7Nucks said:

To be fair, the Hronek vs pick debate is similar to the OEL vs pick debate. You trade for a proven defender, but if you're not gonna build around it better, you're better off with the picks. Those of us that want a rebuild and would rather have picks are of the mindset this team with it's cap constraints can't properly build around our core pieces, even with Hronek. So we traded picks for a player we don't think will be maximized. We need 2 top 4 D and we need a 3C. That'll cost money we don't have. According to capfriendly we have 6mil in cap space. All to replace OEL, add another top 4 D, and add a 3C. I'd rather have just kept the 1st and 2nd rounder we traded for Hronek, not bought out OEL, and just fixed our broken prospect pool and make a Hronek level trade when we have cap flexibility to actually build a contending roster.

 

This is a case where we are trading picks to build a playoff roster. Teams generally don't do that. It's putting the cart before the horse. You trade picks to build on an already established roster. Yes, we're not likely drafting a Hronek with those picks. But we aren't a contending team by trading those picks for a Hronek either. So it made more sense to just stockpile picks and have 2 really good drafts. Wait out some bad contracts. And make a move in a couple years.

 

At least imo. I don't want to sound like a smarty pants know-it-all. But I just don't think we were in a position to be trading for Hronek, as much as I love the guy, and buying out OEL didn't save our team like people want to pretend it did. Cause we have to fill OEL's hole and fill the 2 holes we had before buying him out, with little to no cap space. And with little to no draft capital and a pretty abysmal prospect pool. I dunno. There's always hope, but I just feel holding those picks and waiting a few years was the way to go.

This is fair and generally agree.  I think we would have been in a better position with cap space and the pics to fix multiple issues or just start building up the system.

That is not the world we live in though, the world we live in has an owner that is fully pushing win now at all future costs and an elderly President who wants the same.  

We will see ultimately when the preseason is done where we are.  

I am happy to wait and see what PA does.  Can he really give the roster the significant shake it needs.

If he just uses the cap space to sign a third line C and pics up a couple of scrap pieces to fill in the blue line through the UFA market then this offseason is an epic failure that did a horrible job of utilizing assets.

[Master Mind]

4 minutes ago, chon derry said:

Small bites… towards an earlier future. How long would you expect petterson and Hughes , and all the other keepers in the line up to wait? Not withstanding putting the fans into that same  equation ? 

The same can be asked of the current method. How many years of failed shortcuts would they withstand?

 

The fans will withstand anything. As evidenced by them defending every poor decision.

[Master Mind]

19 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:

The mystery box could be anything! Even Filip Hronek! 

Drafting a player like Hronek is far more valuable than trading for him.

 

Having a cost controlled player, especially in a tight cap world, is key.

[Master Mind]

17 minutes ago, chon derry said:

For now he is on a quality team , a team that’s retooling from low quality to a higher expectation, which the positive fan base I’m sure hopes of an even higher quality,  if and when they arrive there. the picks used in acquiring him didnt even exist for the Canucks  prior to the horvat deal. They leapfrogged 2,3 years with raty whose proven more at his stage than a player that hasn’t even been drafted yet.   Bellieveire still has worth in another trade. The trade tree from the horvat deal is still growing 

I wouldn't say he's on a quality team. We have a lot to prove before we can say that.

 

Leapfrogging 2-3 years also means draft picks will be lower, and we'll be more likely to continue trading them.

 

I don't see this as a winning formula.

[Master Mind]

19 minutes ago, AnthonyG said:

Imagine if we did try to draft a dman and injuries ruined their development.

 

Imagine if we tried drafting a dman more than once between 2000-2015 in the 1st round.

Not sure why cap it at 2015, but yes our draft record on defense is atrocious. Ideally we can turn that around one day.

 

It doesn't need to be 1st rounders, the Slavins and Pesces of the world can be found in later rounds.

 

But we need to keep our picks to land them.

[chon derry]

7 minutes ago, Master Mind said:

The same can be asked of the current method. How many years of failed shortcuts would they withstand?

 

The fans will withstand anything. As evidenced by them defending every poor decision.

Let’s just say for hypothetical purposes. Question. What if the Horvat deal never happened?   Answer. We wouldn’t have had the picks they traded to acquire hronek. How can you miss something you never had in the first place? The debate about the picks being The salvation of the team is wishful thinking. There’s a far better chance hronek regains his game. Than an unproven , and as of yet an undrafted player that even if he did workout DOES NOT FIT INTO THE CANUCKS WINDOW OF OPPORTUNITY. 

[chon derry]

10 minutes ago, Master Mind said:

I wouldn't say he's on a quality team. We have a lot to prove before we can say that.

 

Leapfrogging 2-3 years also means draft picks will be lower, and we'll be more likely to continue trading them.

 

I don't see this as a winning formula.

Reread the quote I never said he was on a quality team. I did say he’s on a team that is taking steps to improve its quality.      One should be able construe out of that statement “ he’s playing on a lesser quality team”  which by the way he is.    Hence the need to aquire him in the first place. I’ll add he may end up as you say a 4d player since I don’t believe   Their done with the backend. 

[IBatch]

1 hour ago, Master Mind said:

Not saying he was on a contender. If we ever hope to be one though, we shouldn't be paying a premium, in assets and in an extension, for a player to play a role beyond his capabilities.

 

But we'll be hard pressed to get any top pair D when the best method of getting those is through the draft, and we keep trading our draft picks away.

I sure do pine for the late 80's and early 90's when Quin just made the best playoff team we've ever had.   With a lot of cool trades.   Times have changed.   Cap is the be all and end all now.   Shave a .500 million here, and 1 or 2 million there.   I do wonder who the heck will be this years Schenn or Kuzmenko.   And that wasn't enough. 

Edited June 20, 2023 by IBatch

[Dr. Crossbar]

29 minutes ago, DrJockitch said:

I think it is more there is a group that wants the team to get a lot better and contend and a group that just wants to see us hurry up and scrape into the playoffs.

There are those groups, most definitely. I'm referring to the group who are chronically negative, toxic even, masquerading as fans in order to justify their negativity. No matter what changes are made, it's always negative. 

 

35 minutes ago, DrJockitch said:

Personally I would have done a much bigger rebuild when Allvin came in and maybe we are doing that now though again it is definitely not through the draft.  

I get and understand where you're coming from. From my perspective, the time for that was eight years ago.

 

But we are seeing that through ... and some of it is indeed through the draft of that era ... Petey, Demko, Hughes, Boeser,  ... On the periphery ... Hoglander, Podkolzin, Silovs. 

 

We acquired Miller, also Kuz, traded Bo for Hronek, bought out OEL, landed good college UFAs.

 

The core guys that we've drafted then are now entering their prime. We're building around them and going for it. It's like a hybrid. 

 

Fans do deserve a good team now and going for it after 8 years of Benning. Asking fans to be patient for another 8 years + is unreasonable. 

[PhillipBlunt]

6 hours ago, Kurt Nirvanagut said:

Watch him go to Vegas and have a 60 point season and redeem himself and piss all of us off. 

That ain't happening

[chon derry]

10 minutes ago, chon derry said:

Let’s just say for hypothetical purposes. Question. What if the Horvat deal never happened?   Answer. We wouldn’t have had the picks they traded to acquire hronek. How can you miss something you never had in the first place? The debate about the picks being The salvation of the team is wishful thinking. There’s a far better chance hronek regains his game. Than an unproven , and as of yet an undrafted player that even if he did workout DOES NOT FIT INTO THE CANUCKS WINDOW OF OPPORTUNITY. 

You say you’ve watched hronek closely so my second question to you is how come you never added his positive attributes ? 1  The superior outlet pass’s that most journalists mention or  2 his ability to play big minutes or fail to mention his  3 hard shot? If you did watch him as closely as you say you would concur  with these positive attributes even if you did see some down side to his game. But the fact that all you did was mention “he’ll be playing beyond his capability’s “ makes me think you just said it to substantiate a debate of a subject you weren’t entirely up on. The second question is my own quote above that you failed to answer ?

[PhillipBlunt]

3 minutes ago, chon derry said:

You say you’ve watched hronek closely so my second question to you is how come you never added his positive attributes ? 1  The superior outlet pass’s that most journalists mention or  2 his ability to play big minutes or fail to mention his  3 hard shot? If you did watch him as closely as you say you would concur  with these positive attributes even if you did see some down side to his game. But the fact that all you did was mention “he’ll be playing beyond his capability’s “ makes me think you just said it to substantiate a debate of a subject you weren’t entirely up on. The second question is my own quote above that you failed to answer ?

[Dr. Crossbar]

1 hour ago, canuck73_3 said:

Must get tiring moving all these goal posts all the time for some here 

The moving goalposts narrative of OEL regaining his form next season and being a top Dman again, even winning the Cup, has already started. You can see it in real time. 

[chon derry]

4 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

P

[PhillipBlunt]

4 minutes ago, Dr. Crossbar said:

The moving goalposts narrative of OEL regaining his form next season and being a top Dman again, even winning the Cup, has already started. You can see it in real time. 

The mental gymnastics that some are willing to commit to in order to view this move in a solely negative light is astounding. 

[PhillipBlunt]

1 minute ago, chon derry said:

P

Sweet Colby Smulders. 

[EternalCanuckFan]

1 minute ago, Dr. Crossbar said:

The moving goalposts narrative of OEL regaining his form next season and being a top Dman again, even winning the Cup, has already started. You can see it in real time. 

lol it's possible that OEL comes back as a serviceable NHL D but seems quite unlikely that he's going to come close to his former form. Still, if he signs cheap somewhere, he might still provide a lot of value to a NHL team in a bottom pairing role. Good for him if he wins a Cup with his new team.

 

If that happens, then it will certainly cast a bit of a pall on the decision to buy him out. It's always a risk with buyouts. Sometimes buyouts are for players that really can't hash it out in the league anymore. Sometimes they're for players who are just badly overpaid. OEL was likely more the latter.

 

Buying out OEL was the logical choice for the Canucks despite all the baggage it comes with. It was the only choice they had full control over, and it's the result of a bad trade that was not of their own doing. Sure we could say that they shouldn't have worked themselves into further cap hell by committing large cap hits to Miller, Mikheyev and Kuzmenko, but I also get that they are under direction to try and make the team competitive (whether or not I agree with that direction). Clearing cap space other than the buyout was presumably going to cost them assets which they can't give up either. If OEL finds good footing in the NHL again after this, then good for him, but I do think the team made the right decision. Giving up assets while continuing to compete over $7M in cap space to OEL in hopes of him at least being a serviceable bottom pairing Dman would be a worse look, IMHO.