Canucks & NHL News, Rumours, & Fantasy GM | Every Day We Hiring

[Bgav]

can we get a drance trashing thread going?

Live looks at drance and Jamie (i like canucks talk)

 

[Hodgy]

Drance definitely has a weird thing going on with Willander, but he's otherwise getting way more criticism on here than he deserves. Just like other media members, or posters on here, he is sometimes right and sometimes wrong. The reality of being a host of a daily show is that you need to fill a lot of airtime and so you are going to have a lot of opinions, and by virtue of this, many are going to turn out wrong. Drance isn't dissimilar from most other media personalities.

Like, I've posted this here before, but everyone shits on Drance for his reaction to the Hronek trade, but if you look at the thread on that trade on here, you will see that the overwhelming reaction to that trade on here was also negative at that time, and even @MS who both really likes Hronek and dislikes Drance, had a negative reaction to the trade.

 

[LemonSauceD]

All we need to do is have TAS convince petey that Detroit is the Vancouver of the east.

Did you really go all the way back to like 3-4 rumours threads to quote that..

 

[Peen]

Garland had 'bad team' as an excuse for his play when he was here and then he went to a better team and continued to fail to produce and quickly fell out of favour, playing only ~13 minutes/game. His value 100% has gone down, and that's even before factoring the reduced leverage we'd now have into consideration.

Conor Garland had 14 ESP in his last 60 GP last year. That's just really bad, and it was equally bad across two organizations. I wouldn't touch this guy with a 10-foot pole right now if I was an NHL GM.

I don’t know man. Well first let’s separate it into two thoughts. I’d speculate Garland’s production doesn’t deteriorate as much if he stays and that the same deal is available at the draft this year given the UFA market and quantity of teams positioned of buyers.

Second one is that I still think if Columbus was like hey we want out at this draft, I think they’d still get back at least a second.

I think your evaluation of the player isn’t wrong but the market is different.

 

[theagelessstranger]

The negative media/fans whining has to be the funniest shit I’ve seen. The media in Philadelphia is harder on the Eagles, a team that’s in a different stratosphere in terms of success with multiple recent championships.

The damn fans egged a coach’s house last year.

Does any of that that stop Howie Roseman from being arguably the best GM in the league? Nope.

it's not a competition, it's not about right or wrong or fair or not fair. it's pragmatism. we've seen explicitly the effect that the negative media environment has on this market. players on this team have dwelled on it. it's toxic. it's counterproductive. it makes players not want to play here.

and it's very easy to be honest and straight forward without literally alienating the subjects you're reporting on, who you rely upon having a working relationship with to put a roof over your head, even during the bad times, and without glazing the team.

 

[MS]

Drance definitely has a weird thing going on with Willander, but he's otherwise getting way more criticism on here than he deserves. Just like other media members, or posters on here, he is sometimes right and sometimes wrong. The reality of being a host of a daily show is that you need to fill a lot of airtime and so you are going to have a lot of opinions, and by virtue of this, many are going to turn out wrong. Drance isn't dissimilar from most other media personalities.

The Willander thing is driving probably 95% of the negativity right now.

Like, I've posted this here before, but everyone shits on Drance for his reaction to the Hronek trade, but if you look at the thread on that trade on here, you will see that the overwhelming reaction to that trade on here was also negative at that time, and even @MS who both really likes Hronek and dislikes Drance, had a negative reaction to the trade.

I did?

I had an initial, WOAH this is a lot to process, then when I processed it I tentatively supported the trade.

Day of:

What on earth.

Hronek is a good player and a RHD, and has multiple years of team control. But he's an offensive D and won't have a lot of PP utility here. Will help our transition game considerably.

Two high picks seems like a lot.

No idea what Detroit's doing, either. Their rebuild is going til 2030.

I need to process this one. But we were never rebuilding and people sticking swords in their guts are angry about something that was never happening.

And, to be clear, this is absolutely the case.

If he can be the Toews to Hughes' Makar and be a pairing that tilts the ice for 25 minutes/game, this will be a win regardless of the price.

This is a really fascinating trade.

I hated the Horvat trade for the reasons that everyone else loved it but turning Horvat into a top-4 RHD at least makes a bit more sense.

Next day :

There has been a lot of questions about the timing and the cost of this (and I have those too) and 'Why did they pay so much?' and 'Why didn't they wait until the draft?' so I decided to do a bit of a deeper dive into just what the market was for young top-4 RHD.

And this is the entire list of RHD born 1997 or later (ie. age 25 or younger) who are playing 20+ minutes/game in the NHL this year.

Cale Makar
Adam Fox
Moritz Seider
Charlie McAvoy
Filip Hronek
John Marino
Andrew Peeke
Noah Dobson
Henri Jokiharju
Sean Durzi

10 guys. That's it. And most are just absolutely unobtainable. These guys basically don't exist, don't get traded, and yeah you can see that everyone was sleeping in a huge way on John Marino last summer. Now, obviously there are some LHS guys who play the right side but in terms of right-shooting defenders who can play heavy minutes, there are shockingly few.

The only 4 U25 RHD who play more than Hronek in the entire NHL are all guys who have won Norris Trophies or are considered future Norris winners (Makar. Fox, Seider, McAvoy).

With that in mind, I can certainly understand the mindset where if you manage to get another team to put this kind of high-minute, high-producing young RH defender on the table, you don't dick around and you pay the price and you get the deal done, because there aren't likely to be many more opportunities to bring in this type of asset.

Like, my takes on this trade ended up being pretty spot on?

The issue with Drance is that he wrote a puff piece about the OEL trade 18 months earlier and then just absolutely eviscerated this trade.

 

[RandV]

Video games and magic beans... Sure.

A rebuild done right is about maximizing asset values. It's simple. You want to add nuance to that decision, fine, but that remains the objective.

When GMs squander value or have the arrogance to think they can manufacture an objective regardless, like 'turn things around in a hurry', they get fired... And you're in a rebuild anyway at the end.

Now that we're here, a video game mentality is maybe not such a bad thing for Johnson to adopt? Learn from the mistakes of RutherVin. Be better than them.

In my opinion and with all due respect I think a very specific case where fans get mixed up with 'video game' logic is this idea around "juicing" the value by playing with contract values/retention. Like you can just you push salary retention button down and in response the return value goes up.

Generally, GM's I would say hate paying assets for $$$. The few cap dump trades we do get happen when a team is forced to due to cap constraints, like Patrick Marleau or our few trades. In actual player trades, cap retention tends to happen to fit the acquiring teams salary cap and any balances usually tends to be a quid quo pro of contract exchanges. I think the Erik Karlsson trade to Pittsburgh is a good overall example of what I'm saying here.

For our perspective what I'm getting at is you're say trading Elias Pettersson to Montreal we're not going to be able to just squeeze another 1st round pick out of them if Vancouver offers to retain $2-3M salary.

 

[MS]

I don’t know man. Well first let’s separate it into two thoughts. I’d speculate Garland’s production doesn’t deteriorate as much if he stays and that the same deal is available at the draft this year given the UFA market and quantity of teams positioned of buyers.

Second one is that I still think if Columbus was like hey we want out at this draft, I think they’d still get back at least a second.

I think your evaluation of the player isn’t wrong but the market is different.

Garland's production in Columbus was UP from his last 30-40 games in Vancouver. And his production cratering at ES started in 24-25 (hidden by new PP usage and production) and this was just a continuation of that.

Dude looks washed. There is absolutely no freaking way that Columbus would get more for him now than they paid.

 

[Vector]

can we get a drance trashing thread going?

It's called the Vancouver Media Thread and I encourage everyone to go there.

 

[Agent007]

The real problem with the Pettersson to Detroit talk is that Pettersson has a full NMC and it would be shocking if he waived to go to Detroit.

It is looking more and more like a catastrophic screw up to not have traded Pettersson before him NMC kicked in.

His agent is the same as Larkin's so it would have to be something where he's really controlling it all behind the scenes (Brisson).

 

[David71]

Apparently Elliott mentioned Florida has made an offer for Larkin. Some other chat about potentially needing a 3rd team to help with this. We've heard Detroit has had interest in EP40 in the past. Makes me wonder if Florida is offering the 9th pick what would we need to add here:

Vancouver:
9th overall

Florida:
Larkin

Detroit:
EP40
24th overall
XX


Last year Philly moved 22 and 31 to go to 12. In 2024 Buffalo moved 42 and 14 to go to 11. Rough idea moving up 13 spots cost pick 31 and 42.

Could you potentially add pick 41 to that package and maybe take back a contract to make it work assuming the other parts work?

give them hoglander to detroit. gotta need space for the kids somehow.

 

[Just A Bit Outside]

All we need to do is have TAS convince petey that Detroit is the Vancouver of the east.

Much like Stansbury is the Harvard of the West.

 

[Bleach Clean]

In my opinion and with all due respect I think a very specific case where fans get mixed up with 'video game' logic is this idea around "juicing" the value by playing with contract values/retention. Like you can just you push salary retention button down and in response the return value goes up.

Generally, GM's I would say hate paying assets for $$$. The few cap dump trades we do get happen when a team is forced to due to cap constraints, like Patrick Marleau or our few trades. In actual player trades, cap retention tends to happen to fit the acquiring teams salary cap and any balances usually tends to be a quid quo pro of contract exchanges. I think the Erik Karlsson trade to Pittsburgh is a good overall example of what I'm saying here.

For our perspective what I'm getting at is you're say trading Elias Pettersson to Montreal we're not going to be able to just squeeze another 1st round pick out of them if Vancouver offers to retain $2-3M salary.

Ok. To understand what you're saying better: Most trades don't include extra compensation (assets) for $$$? That these trades would not be conducted at all if they don't fit cap structures first, so the retention is more to make the trade fit, rather than to gain surplus value from the option? Is that correct?

Localizing it to your example: Pettersson doesn't get another 1st for the $2-3 million retention. He just wouldn't be traded without it.

 

[tyhee]

...

Unless my mind is playing tricks Malholtra used to get very heavy D zone starts, get the puck out and make it easy for the offensive lines. The Sedins would get heavy O zone starts. A sound strategy but tough for Malhotra to look good on shots for/against and zone time. That makes it hard to compare player vs player even on the same team.

Your mind isn't playing tricks. In his two full seasons with Vancouver, according to hockey-reference.com his offensive zone starts were 22.4% in 2010-2011 and an incredible 11.2% in 2011-2012, the latter among the lowest you'll see from anyone, ever. Hockey-reference.com doesn't count neutral zone starts so the rest, 77.6% in 2010-2011 and 88.8% in 2011-2012, were defensive zone starts.

 

[andora]

Drance thinks short players command the same returns as average/big players. He's wrong. There's a clear size bias in the NHL. Garland's value was always going to be capped for that reason.

However, he is not wrong when it comes to valuing the long-term deals of good players in a rising cap environment. That just goes without saying.

Overall, I've noticed that this board has almost completely turned on Drance? I think part of the reason for this is that when he called for the rebuild, his listeners mocked him for it, but VAN is now in a rebuild. I recall him apologizing to his listeners in 2024 too. But now, he has been emboldened by VAN's eventual reality, and I think he's actually trolling those same listeners. He's not being cautious anymore. He's actually pushing his vision unabashedly.

Maybe it's because he thinks those same critics won't admit any fault themselves? I don't know. He has just changed imo.

I think it's simpler and the fact that he says a lot of stupid stuff

 

[thecupismine]

Drance definitely has a weird thing going on with Willander, but he's otherwise getting way more criticism on here than he deserves. Just like other media members, or posters on here, he is sometimes right and sometimes wrong. The reality of being a host of a daily show is that you need to fill a lot of airtime and so you are going to have a lot of opinions, and by virtue of this, many are going to turn out wrong. Drance isn't dissimilar from most other media personalities.

Like, I've posted this here before, but everyone shits on Drance for his reaction to the Hronek trade, but if you look at the thread on that trade on here, you will see that the overwhelming reaction to that trade on here was also negative at that time, and even @MS who both really likes Hronek and dislikes Drance, had a negative reaction to the trade.

My takes were complete trash for about…7-8 years during the Benning/early Alvin era as I had tuned out of hockey for work + hated what had happened to this franchise. I can tolerate bad takes pretty easily, and have (what I think) is a pretty healthy debate about them. I’ve had heated debates in the draft threads about prospects, but harbor no ill will to anyone about it as I’ve generally felt most people were coming at it from a good place.

What I don’t like is when people refuse to admit they’re wrong, double down on it, and then completely trash a young player for really slimy reasons. If you can’t ever publicly show humility, and then follow that up with trying to influence an entire fan base to hate the one guy who’s a bright spot on the team and seemingly pushing the culture forward, I just can’t respect that.

Willander looks more like a future captain and culture carrier than some dude who should be used a case study for why the Canucks have failed, yet Drance brings him up every chance he can to talk about how the Canucks have no one worth anything in the organization other than maybe Buium + should think about drafting small wingers more.

It’s pathetic, exhausting, irresponsible, and intellectually dishonest. Anyways, Garland deal was good, sign Douglas.

 

[ginner classic]

My takes were complete trash for about…7-8 years during the Benning/early Alvin era as I had tuned out of hockey for work + hated what had happened to this franchise. I can tolerate bad takes pretty easily, and have (what I think) is a pretty healthy debate about them. I’ve had heated debates in the draft threads about prospects, but harbor no ill will to anyone about it as I’ve generally felt most people were coming at it from a good place.

What I don’t like is when people refuse to admit they’re wrong, double down on it, and then completely trash a young player for really slimy reasons. If you can’t ever publicly show humility, and then follow that up with trying to influence an entire fan base to hate the one guy who’s a bright spot on the team and seemingly pushing the culture forward, I just can’t respect that.

Willander looks more like a future captain and culture carrier than some dude who should be used a case study for why the Canucks have failed, yet Drance brings him up every chance he can to talk about how the Canucks have no one worth anything in the organization other than maybe Buium + should think about drafting small wingers more.

It’s pathetic, exhausting, irresponsible, and intellectually dishonest. Anyways, Garland deal was good, sign Douglas.

All fair points.

The Garland trade was more than fine. Signing him was ridiculous though. He should have had far more value as a UFA at the last deadline. But who knows. We got offered nothing for Boeser under the same circumstance.

 

[Hodgy]

The Willander thing is driving probably 95% of the negativity right now.



I did?

I had an initial, WOAH this is a lot to process, then when I processed it I tentatively supported the trade.

Day of:







Next day :



Like, my takes on this trade ended up being pretty spot on?

The issue with Drance is that he wrote a puff piece about the OEL trade 18 months earlier and then just absolutely eviscerated this trade.

I think your initial take was pretty clearly negative on the trade. And like, I’m not using this as a gotcha moment or anything, I had a very similar take. My point is that people were shitting on Drance for his initial take where he faced palmed on live TV when he found out about the trade. But like, basically this whole board reacted initially in that same manner. So it really is a glass house kind of thing.

 

[Nucky]

The issue with Drance is that he wrote a puff piece about the OEL trade 18 months earlier and then just absolutely eviscerated this trade.

Everyone in the analytics community disliked that trade, it's weird that Drance would go against that. I remember him vehemently defending Travis Green at every turn as well, makes me thing that he was trying to suck up to the regime in hopes of landing a PR job or whatever he had in Florida. Then he realized that was going nowhere and just spoke his mind.

 

[MS]

I think your initial take was pretty clearly negative on the trade. And like, I’m not using this as a gotcha moment or anything, I had a very similar take. My point is that people were shitting on Drance for his initial take where he faced palmed on live TV when he found out about the trade. But like, basically this whole board reacted initially in that same manner. So it really is a glass house kind of thing.

I don’t think it was that negative?

I was like, woah, seems like a lot but I’m not really sure what to make of it - I need a time out to evaluate this.

And then I took at pretty deep dive on Hronek and the RHD market and within 24 hours was like ‘this seems reasonable’.

 

[MarkusNaslund19]

I think your initial take was pretty clearly negative on the trade. And like, I’m not using this as a gotcha moment or anything, I had a very similar take. My point is that people were shitting on Drance for his initial take where he faced palmed on live TV when he found out about the trade. But like, basically this whole board reacted initially in that same manner. So it really is a glass house kind of thing.

I have been wrong many times, but this was my take and it has aged well and is part of why I find Drance frustrating.

It's not enough to say 'many on the message board were wrong too'.

He's paid to offer his opinion, the Shepard has more responsibility than the flock.


-

"
For those who are freaking out, ask yourself, have you watched much of Hronek or are you looking at JFresh charts (which hilariously I believe are favorable anyway)?


That it happened today makes me think that Allvin thought this was a deal that wouldn't be available in the summer.

RD are the shortest commodity in the league by far and we have just acquired a player who is 25, is trending up, and is already a top 4 with the potential to be more. If he can either be a perfect foil for Hughes, or else be the lynchpin of our 2nd pairing, then it's a fantastic trade unless the Islanders' pick skips forward to next year and ends up a top 5 pick.

In a perfect world, even if we were going to make this trade, I would have preferred to wait to see where the pick ended up. I'm a lot more comfortable trading 19th overall and a 2nd than I am rolling the dice on a non lottery protected draft choice next year for an old team.


There are people absolutely self-reporting their ignorance "We should have traded for Parayko". Thanks for letting everyone know that you stopped watching hockey when the pandemic started. HE would be an OEL acquisition.

"We should have traded more for Chychrun", we should have traded for an LD who is a ufa at the end of his current contract? That would be far less defensible than this (barring further moves).

I suspect that Allvin saw Washington, Nashville, and Detroit throwing in the towel. He knows the Flames are flagging, and suddenly he thinks this pick might end up closer to 20th overall.

I'm not sure on that bet and I would have preferred to wait, but if he's correct then this is absolutely defensible.

But ultimately, people know what draft picks are and they can wishcast on them. "Maybe it's the next Mo Seider". But actually knowing who a 2nd pairing D on an Eastern team is, and what his attributes are, and his development path, and how he might fit onto this team is quite a bit more involved. And that's fine, we all have school, jobs, obligations, etc.

But then maybe carry your opinions a little bit lighter. Wait a bit and see what else we do. If you think this is a trade for this season then you're not worth talking to. Let's see the makeup of the roster next season.

So take a breath, slow your roll, and let's see how this plays out.

 

[Peen]

Frankly I think JTM and Hronek trades were both bad from foresight perspective, but one was a lot riskier.

JTM was bad because of the risk of that pick being unprotected the following year.. and it nearly was because we were falling out of the playoffs with injuries at the time that COVID happened. Tampa made an intelligent bet that almost paid off.

The Hronek trade was bad.. not for value reasons but because they should have pivoted. They knew the culture was rotten and Frankie gave Rutherford the authority. The moves around the core to turn things around quickly worked, but it was always destined to fail.

And honestly, even with hindsight, like ok the players outperformed the asset they returned but what did that get us in the big picture? Were they wins relative to the alternative?

 

[Champion]

And honestly, even with hindsight, like ok the players outperformed the asset they returned but what did that get us in the big picture? Were they wins relative to the alternative?

Catch a temporary buzz, reaponsibilities be damned? That's the Canucks until proven otherwise.




This is Fatquilini, all spent after the Rog was rockin' for a few weeks in the Spring of 2024 yet the team was headed straight off of a cliff.

 

[Bgav]

Regardless of anything if a player has a ntc kicking in his value will go down. period

 

[MarkusNaslund19]

The core was clearly not going to be a contender. The JR/Allvin brass created a one-year window (I was in favour of them spending the assets to do it in '24), then they reverted to back to what they really are, and later flamed out spectacularly. I wanted them to go all-in in '24 because I didn't think they were a legitimate contender, or even consistently "good" team, and that was their best/only shot.

Time has shown....They were not good!

This group was a fringe playoff team that was going to be a 50/50 shot to get in on any given season.

Hronek is objectively worth far more than we traded for him.

And as @MS said, Drance's reasons for not liking it weren't correct or even intelligent.

Coincidentally like 7 things went wrong simultaneously and here we are.

And even STILL we could trade him for a lot more than we dealt for him.