Confirmed with Link: Canucks sign F Micheal Ferland to a 4-year, $3.5M AAV Deal

[member 290103]

Seems I touched a nerve here and I should reiterate I'm not targetting you specifically, but the whole "anti-Benning" mentality is where I'm getting fed up.

"Blind faith followers" is the exact kind of thing I, and I'm sure a majority of the posters here are sick of. Getting called that after saying "Ferland AAV isn't so bad" is toxic. I'm presuming you're using this as an over the top swing in the opposite direction as opposed to calling me, or others, that.

As for being irrationally optimistic, we have rays of sunshine after a long, crappy, stormy winter. Is the on ice product not better going into this year? Did we not go up in the standings, and us much as I hate to paraphrase Benning, were we not playing meaningful games in March? Do Myers, Miller, Benn and Ferland not make the team better then Hutton, Pouliot, Granlund and Gaunce? Did we not just dump Del Zotto, Nilsson, Gagner, and Gudbranson and are trying (according to the media) to dump Sutter and Eriksson? Does none of that merit any kind of optimism? We have improved and the rest of the division has stagnated or regressed, that's cause for some optimism. It can be that false spring we are used to getting in March these last few years, but is anyone complaining about that brief few days of good weather?

Hearing a fresh take that Myers or Miller is going to bring the team down, solely by merit of a Benning acquisition, is wholly tiresome. That isn't criticism, that's hating. Arguing the subjective merits of trading a first, or signing a 5 year deal, is valid criticism. Wondering where all these new faces fit on the roster? Valid too.

And I'm not a Benning cheer leader, the guy needs to be jobless asap. Guys an idiot, but that doesn't mean everything he touches turns to garbage immediately.

As for my example, I have two brothers that verbatim put the rest of us through that on a long car trip. One farted non-stop, the other wouldn't stop whining and crying about it, making demands about someone needing to do something. My parents pulled over and spanked the cryer. He didn't make a peep after that, and the other brother stopped farting. I don't know about any moral or lesson to the story, but I can tell you which one my parents found more annoying.

Wer are all stuck in the car on this one.

Fair enough. I think the disconnect here is that you have surmised that people are hating on Benning's latest moves just because Benning made them. I suggest there is merit behind the vast majority of their complaints. I have heard several people suggest Tyler Myers is not a very good defenseman - likely best suited to a 5/6 slot. Better than Pouliot? Sure. Hutton? Maybe.........but is that the measuring stick now? Has it come to that? Is Miller a good acquistion? Ignoring what he is paid and what was given up for him, maybe. But must we now evaluate the player ignoring the cost in order to be positive? It seems that way.

 

[Teflon Jim]

Anyway, my point re:Ferland was that it's fairly good contract value but it's confusing given the direction and current structure of this team.

So what's your opinion of the direction and current structure of the team and is it consistent with the ones clearly stated by management and ownership?
JB has clearly stated that they're gonna do what they think is best for the team and ignore the outside noise.
We armchair gms have no say in the decisions of the club because we're the outside noise JB has and will continue to ignore.
No matter how much we may dislike any club moves , come hockey season we will get to see them on the ice performing and that is what they should be judged on going forth.
We know they have holes in their games otherwise they would be number 1s at their position but they were available for one reason or another and upgrade our team flaws and all.
For better or worse they will start the season as the 50th edition of the nucks and we will cheer for them to be better because that's what a true life long nuck fan does. We also have no influence over any club decisions and can only protest by turning hockey off which is something I myself have not done going on 50 years.
Taking a pessimistic approach with team direction in my experience is gonna take you on a rollercoaster of emotions while being optimistic allows you to maintain some sort of sanity.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

I just want the season to start so we can talk about concrete results one way or another. Also, it'll be better hockey than we've seen in years.

This completely...the results will spell it out for all to see.

 

[Ryan Miller*]

My focus for the off-season would be to off-load some of the bad contracts while I still can. I think it is probably too late for many of them, but I would trade Sutter and Beagle for absolutely anything while they still might have SOME perceived value. I would not have re-signed Edler. Clear up cap space for future flexibility and keep roster spots open for younger players.

Yes I think you have to build a competent team but, as they should have learned from the past four seasons, surrounding your young stars with junk is not how you go about this. It absolutely stinks that they are in this position of coming off four playoff-less years and needing to go for it while Pettersson still has an ELC but their refusal to do this in the past is the exact reason they are in this spot to begin with. As Colorado has shown, it really doesn't have to be a long, drawn out process if you just avoid the FA market and focus on accumulating young players and picks and developing those players. I DO believe that additional losing seasons are going to be detrimental to the players and the fanbase, but that's exactly why they need to stop following the formula that has given them four losing seasons in a row! It is the classic "repeating the same mistake and expecting different results."*

It ****ing sucks but I swear if they can just ****ing do this for one god damn season they will be able to get to a winning team faster than if they keep trying to short-circuit the process by committing term to mediocre players like Ferland and Myers.

With regards to the injuries. What I would love to see this team do is simply give regular rest days to guys like Tanev and Edler. What I can never understand about this team is they will get Tanev back in the lineup and immediately play him 20 minutes in 3 games in 4 nights and then act shocked when he gets injured again. I would be trying to find games throughout the schedule where the team can strategically afford to sit them occasionally. Don't play them in back-to-back nights. Try to keep them healthy by being proactive instead of running them into the ground and then whining when the inevitable happens. At one point last season Edler was the NHL leader in blocked shots by like a 15% margin. Then eventually he got injured and everyone rolled their eyes like it's his fault. Even sitting young guys like Horvat and Boeser occasionally would probably be beneficial long-term to the franchise and you can schedule it for games where you are playing weak teams and don't need them as much.

With regards to 3 years from now, that is virtually impossible to say. If you actually focus on youth and player development instead of just paying lip service to it, you might be able to produce more than just one top prospect from the first round each year. You can actually put yourself in a position where you have depth and have multiple young players competing for spots that aren't blocked by wastes of space like Eriksson and Schaller.

Acquire quality young talent and provide them with the opportunity to play. Stop ****ing signing ****ing free agents. The absurdity of saying "we need to do X because people can't afford to wait any longer" is that they would not have waited as long if you hadn't been doing X all along!

*not ever said by Albert Einstein, by the way.

OK, a lot of this reads as opinion and rhetoric to me. Some of it isn't really grounded in facts, like the idea that Colorado has executed a quick rebuild. In fact their rebuild has been very long and drawn out as it has been a rebuild of the rebuild that started with drafting Matt Duchene 2nd overall in 2009. While the Canucks were in the final in 2011, the Avs were drafting Landeskog 2nd overall. So I think any comparison b/w the Colorado and Vancouver rebuilds is bizarre.

In your response, I kind of wanted a clearly laid out countering vision of the future and not so much a critique of the past (which has already been done ad nauseam). What I would have liked to see is not so much gestures to what you would do, but a realistic plan and line-up that you would ice, and how you would deal with the possible negatives of this lineup. Then we could more firmly disagree on things; for example, I would really disagree with the proposition of going into next season with Goldobin/Virtanen in the top-6. Perhaps I'm just demanding too much, but that's what would present a reasonable critique of Benning's off-season to me, rather than mere rhetoric and rehashing.

I guess this question is open to others, if they would like to take a stab at articulating a compelling alternate vision for the 2019/2020 Canucks than the current one. Otherwise, I have to side with Benning's vision, because I find it moderately compelling, as do other Canuck fans I have talked with outside this site.

 

[Melvin]

OK, a lot of this reads as opinion and rhetoric to me. Some of it isn't really grounded in facts, like the idea that Colorado has executed a quick rebuild. In fact their rebuild has been very long and drawn out as it has been a rebuild of the rebuild that started with drafting Matt Duchene 2nd overall in 2009. While the Canucks were in the final in 2011, the Avs were drafting Landeskog 2nd overall. So I think any comparison b/w the Colorado and Vancouver rebuilds is bizarre.

In your response, I kind of wanted a clearly laid out countering vision of the future and not so much a critique of the past (which has already been done ad nauseam). What I would have liked to see is not so much gestures to what you would do, but a realistic plan and line-up that you would ice, and how you would deal with the possible negatives of this lineup. Then we could more firmly disagree on things; for example, I would really disagree with the proposition of going into next season with Goldobin/Virtanen in the top-6. Perhaps I'm just demanding too much, but that's what would present a reasonable critique of Benning's off-season to me, rather than mere rhetoric and rehashing.

I guess this question is open to others, if they would like to take a stab at articulating a compelling alternate vision for the 2019/2020 Canucks than the current one. Otherwise, I have to side with Benning's vision, because I find it moderately compelling, as do other Canuck fans I have talked with outside this site.

Well of course it's my opinion. That is what we are here for, to exchange opinions. I'm not going to lay out for you a perfectly detailed plan of what exactly I would do step-wise; that's a pretty unrealistic ask. What a weird comment to make.

I will stop critiquing the past when they actually try something different instead of trying to build a competetive team through free agency every single year and failing every single year.

I am not going to present to you some sort of firm 14-point-plan that would require knowledge I do not possess, but a general change in focus to player development instead of band-aid free agency solutions is generally what I would like to see. And clearing out all this garbage.

 

[bandwagonesque]

My focus for the off-season would be to off-load some of the bad contracts while I still can. I think it is probably too late for many of them, but I would trade Sutter and Beagle for absolutely anything while they still might have SOME perceived value. I would not have re-signed Edler. Clear up cap space for future flexibility and keep roster spots open for younger players.

Yes I think you have to build a competent team but, as they should have learned from the past four seasons, surrounding your young stars with junk is not how you go about this. It absolutely stinks that they are in this position of coming off four playoff-less years and needing to go for it while Pettersson still has an ELC but their refusal to do this in the past is the exact reason they are in this spot to begin with. As Colorado has shown, it really doesn't have to be a long, drawn out process if you just avoid the FA market and focus on accumulating young players and picks and developing those players. I DO believe that additional losing seasons are going to be detrimental to the players and the fanbase, but that's exactly why they need to stop following the formula that has given them four losing seasons in a row! It is the classic "repeating the same mistake and expecting different results."*

It ****ing sucks but I swear if they can just ****ing do this for one god damn season they will be able to get to a winning team faster than if they keep trying to short-circuit the process by committing term to mediocre players like Ferland and Myers.

With regards to the injuries. What I would love to see this team do is simply give regular rest days to guys like Tanev and Edler. What I can never understand about this team is they will get Tanev back in the lineup and immediately play him 20 minutes in 3 games in 4 nights and then act shocked when he gets injured again. I would be trying to find games throughout the schedule where the team can strategically afford to sit them occasionally. Don't play them in back-to-back nights. Try to keep them healthy by being proactive instead of running them into the ground and then whining when the inevitable happens. At one point last season Edler was the NHL leader in blocked shots by like a 15% margin. Then eventually he got injured and everyone rolled their eyes like it's his fault. Even sitting young guys like Horvat and Boeser occasionally would probably be beneficial long-term to the franchise and you can schedule it for games where you are playing weak teams and don't need them as much.

With regards to 3 years from now, that is virtually impossible to say. If you actually focus on youth and player development instead of just paying lip service to it, you might be able to produce more than just one top prospect from the first round each year. You can actually put yourself in a position where you have depth and have multiple young players competing for spots that aren't blocked by wastes of space like Eriksson and Schaller.

Acquire quality young talent and provide them with the opportunity to play. Stop ****ing signing ****ing free agents. The absurdity of saying "we need to do X because people can't afford to wait any longer" is that they would not have waited as long if you hadn't been doing X all along!

*not ever said by Albert Einstein, by the way.

Colorado's rebuild was long and convoluted, and succeeded largely as a result of luck. They drafted Landeskog 2nd overall at a time when it happened to be much easier for poor teams to retain top selections, won the draft lottery in a season where a surefire superstar was available, then had a 10th overall selection in a very deep draft develop into a superstar. That's their entire 1st line, on a team that doesn't have much apart from the best 1st line in the NHL. Sakic, for the record, is of course a better executive than Benning.

 

[Hoghandler]

Otherwise, I have to side with Benning's vision, because I find it moderately compelling, as do other Canuck fans I have talked with outside this site.

Trying to be more competitive and adding quality pieces I agree with, but IMO the Miller trade was a risk they just weren't in a position to make. That was a reckless deal, though I do think the team currently looks like a legitimate playoff threat, with depth at every position.

What a lot of people don't seem to take into account is how perceptions of this organisation can change for the better if they are more competitive and win more games. This in turn should make more players willing to come here, opening up a bunch more possibilities to further improve over the coming years. There is value in this.

But if we take a step back and have a miserable season, with poor press, it makes the hill to climb that much more daunting, even with the higher pick. We need guys like Tyson Barrie wanting to play in Vancouver. It's not just the draft where you can turn things around.

 

[bandwagonesque]

Colorado's rebuild was long and convoluted, and succeeded largely as a result of luck, as most successful rebuilds must. They drafted Landeskog 2nd overall at a time when it happened to be much easier for poor teams to retain top selections, won the draft lottery in a season where a surefire superstar was available, then had a 10th overall selection in a very deep draft develop into a superstar. That's their entire 1st line, on a team that doesn't have much apart from the best 1st line in the NHL. Sakic, for the record, is of course a better executive than Benning. But people discount the role luck plays in rebuilding. We can acknowledge this without discounting the importance of skilled management.

 

[arttk]

This completely...the results will spell it out for all to see.

And then you will continue to defend your lord Benning despite the results. Basically what you have been doing in the past few years.

 

[Ryan Miller*]

Well of course it's my opinion. That is what we are here for, to exchange opinions. I'm not going to lay out for you a perfectly detailed plan of what exactly I would do step-wise; that's a pretty unrealistic ask. What a weird comment to make.

I don't really get why. It appears people have lots of time to post, so not sure why they wouldn't want to post something substantive and productive rather than just endless criticism.

I am not going to present to you some sort of firm 14-point-plan that would require knowledge I do not possess, but a general change in focus to player development instead of band-aid free agency solutions is generally what I would like to see. And clearing out all this garbage.

OK what is your vision of "player development" and how should it be best executed? Examples from other organizations? Does your vision not include FA signings whatsoever?

 

[Cogburn]

Fair enough. I think the disconnect here is that you have surmised that people are hating on Benning's latest moves just because Benning made them. I suggest there is merit behind the vast majority of their complaints. I have heard several people suggest Tyler Myers is not a very good defenseman - likely best suited to a 5/6 slot. Better than Pouliot? Sure. Hutton? Maybe.........but is that the measuring stick now? Has it come to that? Is Miller a good acquistion? Ignoring what he is paid and what was given up for him, maybe. But must we now evaluate the player ignoring the cost in order to be positive? It seems that way.

I feel I've surmised correctly...for small percentage of the base. Obviously I don't want to paint a black and white portrait of the fanbase, as I'm sure you don't either.

Myers at 6 million, or Hutton at an alleged 4 million? It's a low bar, but I do feel that's worth the improvement. For everyone saying he's 5/6, I feel I'm seeing an equal number saying he's 3/4, and that he did his best work filling in for Byfuglien and Trouba when they were out.

As for Miller, yes a rebuilding team shouldn't be giving up a first. Benning (and ultimately Aquilini) feel we are close. I know that's not comforting given their past claims and history. In isolation it doesn't look like a trade we should be doing, but after cutting away fat, and adding the other acquisitions, we're in a good enough spot to be competing. I'm not totally against the trade, largely because of my negative view of our development.

I'm sure I'm not the only one looking at a bigger picture this year, which is how I'm asked to frame all of Bennings past moves. They either backfired or were called out before hindsight could kick in. Here we have small increases to a roster that wasn't as bad as how it was credited. A top six and a top nine forward, and either a top six and top four D, or two top six D while losing players that most of the board have been saying we'd be better to walk away from (or something less polite).

I mean if we are forcing a positive spin on things...even if we miss the playoffs both years, that's got to mean Bennings sacked, right? There's your irrational optimism.

 

[Melvin]

I don't really get why. It appears people have lots of time to post, so not sure why they wouldn't want to post something substantive and productive rather than just endless criticism.

OK what is your vision of "player development" and how should it be best executed? Examples from other organizations? Does your vision not include FA signings whatsoever?

That's correct.

I don't think you're interested in having a discussion. You are not addressing any points I make but just dismissing my post and saying I didn't give you what you wanted. Clever pseudonym though, and I appreciate the new approach.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

I think every move and more specifically every FA signing can be evaluated on two basis:
1. Was it a good signing in a vacuum.
2. Was it a good signing by a rebuilding team like the Canucks.

For me, the Ferland and Benn signings pass both tests. I’d have been happy with those even had they been made by Gillis when we were competing for the Cup. The contracts are manageable and the players fit a need.
The Miller trade would have been an excellent one for the early Gillis years when we were just giving up a late first for a guy who could push the team over the top.
I still like the addition for the current team but the high risk associated with an unprotected first is just too much given where the current team is at imo.
Myers was a signing that in a vacuum was a poor one given the contract. It’s not quite as bad for this current team as it fills a glaring need. But on balance I still don’t like it. It’s likely to be a really bad contract down the road when we are competitive and need the cap space.

 

[Ryan Miller*]

That's correct.

What precedent are you invoking for building an NHL team completely through the draft, without any free agency signings? Are you carving new ground? Do you worry at all about young players not having veteran players to guide them through the lows, or an Edmonton situation manifesting? Do you worry about the young players of the Canucks not having a "safe work environment"?

I feel like I'm trying to give you space to say something new and productive rather than contribute to the endless drone of whining. I and others addressed your Colorado point, which you've gone silent on. Obviously, all of us pick and choose what merits the effort of a response. I thought of responding to your "give players like Boeser and Horvat games off" point, but mostly my response would just be that's ludicrous, unprecedented, and impossible (to convince healthy hockey players to sit on the sidelines while their team battles it out). I would say it comes from a perspective of having likely never played a competitive team sport at a high level, and thus lacking significant information and knowledge. I thought that this response would just lead to bickering so I chose not to respond, as I saw no potential substance emerging from that discursive path.

 

[hookshott]

What precedent are you invoking for building an NHL team completely through the draft, without any free agency signings? Are you carving new ground? Do you worry at all about young players not having veteran players to guide them through the lows, or an Edmonton situation manifesting? Do you worry about the young players of the Canucks not having a "safe work environment"?

I feel like I'm trying to give you space to say something new and productive rather than contribute to the endless drone of whining. I and others addressed your Colorado point, which you've gone silent on. Obviously, all of us pick and choose what merits the effort of a response. I thought of responding to your "give players like Boeser and Horvat games off" point, but mostly my response would just be that's ludicrous, unprecedented, and impossible (to convince healthy hockey players to sit on the sidelines while their team battles it out). I would say it comes from a perspective of having likely never played a competitive team sport at a high level, and thus lacking significant information and knowledge. I thought that this response would just lead to bickering so I chose not to respond, as I saw no potential substance emerging from that discursive path.

Seems to have worked okay for the Raptors who consistently gave Kawhi "load management" days off....especially when they played 2 nights in a row.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

Seems to have worked okay for the Raptors who consistently gave Kawhi "load management" days off....especially when they played 2 nights in a row.

Basketball is a different sport though where one superstar like Leonard and LeBron can be key to winning a title. They can play 90% of every playoff game.
In hockey I think you could make a case for managing the load of an older player or one coming back from a major injury like Leonard in basketball. You could probably do the same for Durant when he eventually comes back.

 

[Melvin]

Basketball is a different sport though where one superstar like Leonard and LeBron can be key to winning a title. They can play 90% of every playoff game.
In hockey I think you could make a case for managing the load of an older player or one coming back from a major injury like Leonard in basketball. You could probably do the same for Durant when he eventually comes back.

How does that make it different in a relevant way? The raptors strategically sat him throughout the season, went 15-5 in games where he didn't play, and kept him healthy. It was brilliant and should be something all teams with injury prone players should be trying.

 

[PetterssonSimp]

I don't, unfortunately. And this is of course the crux of it. I don't see this as a team that is likely to be in the playoff race next season, and I think it's pretty absurd for them to assume they will be given they have been no closer than 10 points out of it the last 4 years. I do like the addition of Miller, but I don't think that he and Ferland give them enough additional offense up front and I think the defense is too fragile and shallow. I am also not super high on the goaltending situation, as I think many average goalies fall apart at 30 and I'm not completely sold on Demko at this stage.

I would like to see Demko getting 40+ starts next year, Gaudette as the 3C, and Goldobin/Virtanen getting regular top-six minutes. It's ironic, but the fact that nobody has an appetite for this now is a direct result of them not having an appetite for this in the past.

You listed and said basically everything I feel about this team.

 

[lawrence]

Dzingel isn't really comparable to either Ferland or Miller.

we know that, they know that, but they want to something to bitch at Benning. They need something, to go by, so they used the Dzingel signing as a tool to attack the Ferland signing. Fricking Agenda is wide open.

 

[lawrence]

Anyway, my point re:Ferland was that it's fairly good contract value but it's confusing given the direction and current structure of this team.

why is it confusing.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

I don't, unfortunately. And this is of course the crux of it. I don't see this as a team that is likely to be in the playoff race next season, and I think it's pretty absurd for them to assume they will be given they have been no closer than 10 points out of it the last 4 years. I do like the addition of Miller, but I don't think that he and Ferland give them enough additional offense up front and I think the defense is too fragile and shallow. I am also not super high on the goaltending situation, as I think many average goalies fall apart at 30 and I'm not completely sold on Demko at this stage.

I would like to see Demko getting 40+ starts next year, Gaudette as the 3C, and Goldobin/Virtanen getting regular top-six minutes. It's ironic, but the fact that nobody has an appetite for this now is a direct result of them not having an appetite for this in the past.

17 of the top 30 goalies on the NHL are 30+..There are very few under 25.(most are late 20's/early 30's)...I would say goalies hit their peak around 30.

Putting guys like Gaudette/ Goldoblin in situations over their head is not doing the team or the player any favours..We saw that last year when Goldobin couldn't produce..and Gaudette hit a wall.

When a young player has earned his spot in the pre season, its completely obvious to the fans ,and the media...We all have an appetite for getting the prospects into the lineup, but not before they are ready.

 

[ProstheticConscience]

why is it confusing.

Because the team is already tight against the cap with its second best player still to be signed (also Goldobin, but who cares), there's already a glut of veteran forwards signed for the next couple of years at least, Benning's made another long-term financial commitment to another forward who's hit 20 goals as many times as Sutter has in his career and that's with a great deal of time on two teams' top lines, and Miller is almost certainly going to playing on our top line so Ferland won't be getting the opportunities he has previously. That's why.

 

[Sergei Shirokov]

Ferland is a good signing, its a good number & the length isn't bad either. Injuries are the concern but if he misses alot of time then he can go on IR.

Trading the 1st round pick aside, Benning has done a good job improving the team going into next year. Starting at the deadline getting Pearson till now the team is much improved.

The defense the last number of years has added very little offense, Hughes & Myers are going to help that. This team needed wingers badly, now we have Pearson / JT Miller / Ferland.

Personally I would've looked elsewhere for a FWD rather than paying the price they did for Miller. I'm not saying I agree with the trade, but he's a good player that will help us, so I'm excited to see him play. Same with Ferland, Myers & Benn.

I'm excited for this season, not sure its a playoff team yet but things are looking alot better.

 

[lawrence]

Because the team is already tight against the cap with its second best player still to be signed (also Goldobin, but who cares), there's already a glut of veteran forwards signed for the next couple of years at least, Benning's made another long-term financial commitment to another forward who's hit 20 goals as many times as Sutter has in his career and that's with a great deal of time on two teams' top lines, and Miller is almost certainly going to playing on our top line so Ferland won't be getting the opportunities he has previously. That's why.

But they are ok with Ryan dzingel? Yea extremely confusing. Wide open agenda.

 

[ProstheticConscience]

But they are ok with Ryan dzingel? Yea extremely confusing. Wide open agenda.

They who? I said nothing about Dzingel.