Management Discussion | Just Have a Plan

[rypper]

I am not even going to say I come in peace

Did I hear right that the canucks confirmed they have talks with several people about the coaching position? Did they fire Bruce and i missed it? As an oiler fan I can say our entire organization often rides in a clown car. But if the canucks did make that statement? It is beyond oiler level stupid and disrespectful.

What the hell happened with the team? If Bruce got hired a month earlier I think you guys make the playoffs last season.

How did he lose the room so quickly?

It's a really long and stupid set of circumstances.

The owner hired the coach before GM/POHO. Who didn't know that the coach had an option second year. So they're stuck with a coach they didn't pick, don't really want, and are quick to tell everyone that in mostly indirect ways.

Most of us thought they wouldn't be able to fire boudreau because the owner wouldn't want to pay 2 coaches not to coach, but here we are.

 

[SeawaterOnIce]

What a f***ing moron.

'My performance got critical acclaim' says the guy who signed almost all of the bad contracts that f***ed over this organization, including the current too-short Pettersson deal.

Dude's unemployed and was probably paid blueberries as AGM. Just a guy that's bitter about getting fired.

 

[iFan]

finished watching the Rutherford presser and first thing is he's a great sales man, a great talker, handles himself really well. He took some heated questions and didn't react to it and answered it. BUT the problem I'm having with him is a lack of direction, a lack of ability, a lack of a plan. He complains about the cap but shot himself in the foot when he signed Boeser, Mikheyev and Miller well leaving Horvat unsigned. He should've known it was going to be hard to move out bad contracts when we don't have assets in the system and the prospect pool is bone dry. He should be able to understand why moving Miller was the best option as he'll be 30 for next season and we're still a few years away from competing, Miller will not be an asset to the future of the Canucks when we're ready to bounce back so signing him to that deal was ridiculously dumb. But it does sound like some buyouts are coming, I think OEL is done here... hopefully. I think Myers is gone as well. Willing to see what happens with the offseason but my confidence in this group is very very very low given what they've shown us so far.

 

[MarkusNaslund19]

And like I said above, it's pretty clear that this whole coaching mess rests with ownership.

Rutherford and Allvin very clearly wanted to bring in 'their guy' in the summer and were forced to keep a lame duck coach they didn't want because the fans liked singing a dumb song.

I can't really blame management much for being frustrated that they're stuck with someone they don't want.



Wait, what?

Canucks Announce Dr. Bill Regan Named Head Team Physician | Vancouver Canucks

…Dr. Rob Drapala and Dr. Michael Orenstein also announced as new Team Physicians

www.nhl.com

All of these guys have medical degrees?

My understanding is that it's because Fredo doesn't want to pay 3 coaches at once, which seems like a dumb line in the sand to draw.

I'm coming to have a pet theory that Rutherford has spoken so cruelly about Boudreau and undermined him from the start because he felt that he could make things awkward enough that Fredo would have to move off of his stupid line in the sand decision.

When Rutherford says he underestimated how much needed to happen here, it may be a tacit admission that he underestimated how stupid and stubborn our ownership is.

Again apples to oranges. Name me another situation where a coach is still employed and every insider has all but confirmed who the specific replacement coach is. Not speculating names, but actually identified the next coach in advance.

And how about the team president openly stating that he’s been talking to potential replacements for months while his current coach is still here.

Just give me one example.

There are other examples, but they're no less dysfunctional. I believe St. Louis had a weird one with Hitchcock and Mike Yeo where Yeo was hired as an assistant coach but it was the worst kept secret in the league that he was replacing him soon.

Mike Yeo sucks, btw, so of course he's on our staff.

 

[MS]

My understanding is that it's because Fredo doesn't want to pay 3 coaches at once, which seems like a dumb line in the sand to draw.

I'm coming to have a pet theory that Rutherford has spoken so cruelly about Boudreau and undermined him from the start because he felt that he could make things awkward enough that Fredo would have to move off of his stupid line in the sand decision.

When Rutherford says he underestimated how much needed to happen here, it may be a tacit admission that he underestimated how stupid and stubborn our ownership is.

I completely agree.

I think they've been leveraging hard behind the scenes doing anything and everything to get ownership to sign off on a coaching change and the public comments on Boudreau were a shot across ownership's bow as part of that.

 

[sandwichbird2023]

Which person on staff has an irrelevant resume and is filling a quota?

Based on the team's transactions and their willingness to follow along, all of them?

 

[iFan]

I completely agree.

I think they've been leveraging hard behind the scenes doing anything and everything to get ownership to sign off on a coaching change and the public comments on Boudreau were a shot across ownership's bow as part of that.

Rutherford didn't take any shots at ownership, he actually praised the owners... the rumour is he flew with the owner to meet with Tocchet... MS did you recently have a career change and now working in Canucks management? it sure as hell seems this way lately with your brown nosing them.

 

[MS]

Rutherford didn't take any shots at ownership, he actually praised the owners... the rumour is he flew with the owner to meet with Tocchet... MS did you recently have a career change and now working in Canucks management? it sure as hell seems this way lately with your brown nosing them.

Of course they didn't criticize ownership.

I'm not 'brown-nosing' them. At all. I've repeatedly said they have not been nearly aggressive enough about moving out bad contracts, that the Boeser contract was a disaster, and that everything they're doing feels very Nonis-y right now. And if you've been here long enough to remember my feelings on Nonis, that's not a compliment.

I just don't have a lot of time for the video-game OMG BEDARDZ unrealistic nonsense that so many here are parroting that they should have been blowing up a 92-point team with a mid-20s core.

And in the case of the coaching situation, it's a mess that clearly falls on ownership.

 

[MarkusNaslund19]

Rutherford didn't take any shots at ownership, he actually praised the owners... the rumour is he flew with the owner to meet with Tocchet... MS did you recently have a career change and now working in Canucks management? it sure as hell seems this way lately with your brown nosing them.

But it's so obvious, no?

Like, a large part of why Boudreau has done so poorly this year is because he was kneecapped by management.

Like, if you tell a bunch of grade 6's that their substitute teacher will be gone by the end of the week and none of her grades matter, then that teacher is absolutely f***ed.

Same thing here. There's no accountability because the players don't feel like there is an adult in the room because they only need to outlast the coach.

Now, it doesn't speak well of our team's leadership core that it's gone this far off the tracks, but pretending that it isn't obvious that there is discord between management and ownership regarding coaching just seems ignorant.

 

[AppleHoneySauce]

Video-Games

 

[brock hughes007]

"The changes we need to make are not with the core players"

"We need to make huge changes and it's going to be controversial"

Knowing what he can and can't say publicly, he must want to change at least some of the core but he doesn't know when or if he will have an opportunity.

After watching that is it safe to assume, that Alvin is the assistant gm..

 

[PuckMunchkin]

Rutherford didn't take any shots at ownership, he actually praised the owners... the rumour is he flew with the owner to meet with Tocchet... MS did you recently have a career change and now working in Canucks management? it sure as hell seems this way lately with your brown nosing them.

There are a few posters here who just refuse to see that it seems the second emperor also has no clothes. It is what it is.



That was a really depressing presser. Probably for everyone here but the 3 or 4 posters who are spinning everything this management does.

But it's so obvious, no?

Like, a large part of why Boudreau has done so poorly this year is because he was kneecapped by management.

Like, if you tell a bunch of grade 6's that their substitute teacher will be gone by the end of the week and none of her grades matter, then that teacher is absolutely f***ed.

Same thing here. There's no accountability because the players don't feel like there is an adult in the room because they only need to outlast the coach.

Now, it doesn't speak well of our team's leadership core that it's gone this far off the tracks, but pretending that it isn't obvious that there is discord between management and ownership regarding coaching just seems ignorant.

If that is true there is no core worth buiding around..

 

[1440]

No, he really was that bad.

We are obviously going to be arguing at cross-purposes here, but this sort of stubborn adherence to the popular narrative is the biggest issue among this fan-base. People get the blinders on and do not appreciate nuance and do not know how to evaluate things when beyond "good, bad and ok".

Benning was a bad GM in a tough organizational setting to succeed in, who also got unlucky with certain injuries, player performance curves and even world events. When you aren't very astute, these things compound and will make you look worse than you are. Take the (often cited) Eriksson signing for example: reasonable player evaluation, bad timing and bad overall strategy. 170 degrees from what I would have done personally, but I have very low expectations for an NHL GM, and it was not even close to the worst deal I have seen done. Shocking, I know, but the Canucks didn't just endure the worst manager in NHL history (who would be deserving of a 1/10 score). Also more shocking... the universe doesn't revolve around Vancouver. (Toronto maybe)

 

[Warh1ppy]

What?

Lame duck means a coach on an expiring contract that everyone knows isn't coming back.

Thanks for the clarification. Wasn't sure what it was supposed to mean. In my world lame duck is someone useless you put in a position to just keep the seat warm and is just literally set up for failure due to their ineptitude.

 

[I Hart Conor Garland]

We are obviously going to be arguing at cross-purposes here, but this sort of stubborn adherence to the popular narrative is the biggest issue among this fan-base. People get the blinders on and do not appreciate nuance and do not know how to evaluate things when beyond "good, bad and ok".

Benning was a bad GM in a tough organizational setting to succeed in, who also got unlucky with certain injuries, player performance curves and even world events. When you aren't very astute, these things compound and will make you look worse than you are. Take the (often cited) Eriksson signing for example: reasonable player evaluation, bad timing and bad overall strategy. 170 degrees from what I would have done personally, but I have very low expectations for an NHL GM, and it was not even close to the worst deal I have seen done. Shocking, I know, but the Canucks didn't just endure the worst manager in NHL history (who would be deserving of a 1/10 score). Also more shocking... the universe doesn't revolve around Vancouver. (Toronto maybe)

The biggest issue with our fanbase is the garbage owner of our franchise.

 

[LickTheEnvelope]

We brought all these new people into the front office for “fresh perspective”, and we’re doing basically the exact same things we’ve always done. Ironic.

Literally the same thing but perhaps even dumber. It's astounding.

 

[arttk]

Rutherford didn't take any shots at ownership, he actually praised the owners... the rumour is he flew with the owner to meet with Tocchet... MS did you recently have a career change and now working in Canucks management? it sure as hell seems this way lately with your brown nosing them.

We are obviously going to be arguing at cross-purposes here, but this sort of stubborn adherence to the popular narrative is the biggest issue among this fan-base. People get the blinders on and do not appreciate nuance and do not know how to evaluate things when beyond "good, bad and ok".

Benning was a bad GM in a tough organizational setting to succeed in, who also got unlucky with certain injuries, player performance curves and even world events. When you aren't very astute, these things compound and will make you look worse than you are. Take the (often cited) Eriksson signing for example: reasonable player evaluation, bad timing and bad overall strategy. 170 degrees from what I would have done personally, but I have very low expectations for an NHL GM, and it was not even close to the worst deal I have seen done. Shocking, I know, but the Canucks didn't just endure the worst manager in NHL history (who would be deserving of a 1/10 score). Also more shocking... the universe doesn't revolve around Vancouver. (Toronto maybe)

Benning was a bad GM because he offered premium assets for non NHL players over and over and over. On top of that he overpaid players, gave extra term and offer ntc over and over. If that wasn’t enough, he would get his coach to play the players he signed and put them in position they have not earned wrecking any sense of meritocracy. Ok if that is not enough not only did he do all of that, he managed to put together a bunch of players that does not adhere to any kind of style. Like he wanted created team that was fast, tough and skillful and the team he built was some Frankenstein where it was slow, soft and had some skills here and there and relied heavily of god level goaltending. This is like only some things, if we want to dive deeper I can go on forever. Like we have not seen management that bad in the NHL since the Milbury era and even Milbury was much better considering the players he was able to draft.

 

[kanucks25]

finished watching the Rutherford presser and first thing is he's a great sales man, a great talker, handles himself really well. He took some heated questions and didn't react to it and answered it. BUT the problem I'm having with him is a lack of direction, a lack of ability, a lack of a plan. He complains about the cap but shot himself in the foot when he signed Boeser, Mikheyev and Miller well leaving Horvat unsigned. He should've known it was going to be hard to move out bad contracts when we don't have assets in the system and the prospect pool is bone dry. He should be able to understand why moving Miller was the best option as he'll be 30 for next season and we're still a few years away from competing, Miller will not be an asset to the future of the Canucks when we're ready to bounce back so signing him to that deal was ridiculously dumb. But it does sound like some buyouts are coming, I think OEL is done here... hopefully. I think Myers is gone as well. Willing to see what happens with the offseason but my confidence in this group is very very very low given what they've shown us so far.

Exactly my thoughts. I appreciate how he handles questions directly and clearly.

However, a lot of what he says doesn't add up.

Farhan asked him directly about the contracts they signed last summer after saying all along that they need to open up cap space, and his only response was "you need some of those players". Need them for what exactly?

He admits they have no cap or prospects, but still thinks they turn it around in 1-2 years. He mentioned buyouts specifically as a way out of the jam, but I don't see how that would be enough. Even if we have that freed up cap space, where are we going to find the type of D-men we need to push this team forward?

It's clear now that the plan isn't really any different than Benning's: acquire other teams' younger players on the cheap and hope they break out so you don't have to go through the development period with actual draft picks. For this to work your pro scouting needs to be pretty elite because you're banking on knowing something about the player that the team who has drafted and developed him doesn't.

There's like no margin for error in this plan; you have to hit homeruns on like every major transaction and I don't know how realistic that is.

 

[Mr. Canucklehead]

Again apples to oranges. Name me another situation where a coach is still employed and every insider has all but confirmed who the specific replacement coach is. Not speculating names, but actually identified the next coach in advance.

And how about the team president openly stating that he’s been talking to potential replacements for months while his current coach is still here.

Just give me one example.

Just going off our own history - Mike Keenan and Marc Crawford.

Burke was meeting Crawford in other cities and Crawford was staying under an alias in hotels to try to keep it hidden, but word was getting out anyway.

But the point still stands, it's pretty outrageous.

 

[iFan]

Benning was a bad GM because he offered premium assets for non NHL players over and over and over. On top of that he overpaid players, gave extra term and offer ntc over and over. If that wasn’t enough, he would get his coach to play the players he signed and put them in position they have not earned wrecking any sense of meritocracy. Ok if that is not enough not only did he do all of that, he managed to put together a bunch of players that does not adhere to any kind of style. Like he wanted created team that was fast, tough and skillful and the team he built was some Frankenstein where it was slow, soft and had some skills here and there and relied heavily of god level goaltending. This is like only some things, if we want to dive deeper I can go on forever. Like we have not seen management that bad in the NHL since the Milbury era and even Milbury was much better considering the players he was able to draft.

Im no fan of Benning so not sure why I’m quoted? But I’d rather our new management group be compared to say Gillis than Benning. It seems the reason they get compared to Benning is because a lot hasn’t seemed to changed. Boeser contract is pretty bad tbh… as is Millers. Those are deals Benning would’ve done for sure! I can’t see Gillis doing that given the state the team is … it’s this short term thinking why the new management group is getting compared to Benning, over a year of work hasn’t shown us that they know what their doing.

 

[arttk]

Im no fan of Benning so not sure why I’m quoted? But I’d rather our new management group be compared to say Gillis than Benning. It seems the reason they get compared to Benning is because a lot hasn’t seemed to changed. Boeser contract is pretty bad tbh… as is Millers. Those are deals Benning would’ve done for sure! I can’t see Gillis doing that given the state the team is … it’s this short term thinking why the new management group is getting compared to Benning, over a year of work hasn’t shown us that they know what their doing.

Accident lol, I had you on quote accidentally and deleted all of it and somehow it showed up

 

[Knight53]

Excellent news:

- Embraced tanking this year
- Horvat trade is very likely

Bad news:

- Looking for almost bust players instead of picks. (Age Gap Strategy/Sea of Studnickas)

Terrible news:

- Want to retool instead of rebuild

 

[Nucklehead Supreme]

Excellent news:

- Embraced tanking this year
- Horvat trade is very likely

Bad news:

- Looking for almost bust players instead of picks. (Age Gap Strategy/Sea of Studnickas)

Terrible news:

- Want to retool instead of rebuild

I still don't think this happens, they keep him for some delusional "playoff push" and then claim they "tried" to resign him but he wanted too much and he walks in FA. Same old same old. Nothing ever changes here.

 

[VanJack]

More of the same after listening to the Rutherford presser.....They want to acquire younger players who've worn out their welcome in the teams that drafted them. Sounds like Jim Benning II to me.

Get ready for another round of the likes of Pouliot, Vey, Pedan, Goldobin, Granlund, Etem, etc. etc. etc. High picks who basically flopped with the teams that drafted them, but were somehow going to magically become 10-year veterans once they arrived in Vancouver.

Rutherford complained that acquiring draft picks can mean a player is four or five years away from helping you....whereas young guy who's been in the league for a couple of years is closer to actually appearing in your lineup. Again, this is a Jim Benning echo-chamber.

But this is vintage Aquilini.....basically the same message we heard back in 2014 when the Sedins were starting to age out. He can't bring himself to bottom out and do a rebuild like the Wings, Ducks, Kings, Rangers and a host of teams who are now on the rebound after rebuilding through the draft..

So it's another decade in the 'mushy middle' of lottery land for the Canucks. Aquilini likes the team, even if you don't. And I guess the owner isn't too enamored with playoff revenues either because that ain't happening any time soon.

 

[AwesomeInTheory]

You're right. John Weisbrod was a bastion of availability and openness.

That’s…not what I was saying.

He made himself available, and, honestly, he was one of those types who loves to hear himself talk. Do you not recall his “the next Nieuwendyk” story where he drove through a snowstorm to scout Mark Jankowski?


There’s a lot of things to hate on with Weisbrod and Benning. Him not being a dial-a-quote for media isn’t one of them.

I don’t like the inaccuracy when people were making shit up in favor of those idiots, also don’t like inventing shit that makes them look bad (because it diminishes from the litany of horrible, dumb things they did.)