Toggle sidebar

Management Discussion | Pre-Season Approaching

Status
Not open for further replies.
Pastor Of Muppetz said:
It took them 11 years of no post season to acquire 2 young elite D men (and additions)..Yikes.

The Sabres would be going to year 12 of no post season this season, but I think they'll make it,

Colorado and Edmonton both spent close to a decade being terrible, and getting multiple opportunities tp pick in the top 3.

Maybe thats what you have to do in the modern NHL to get your franchise players...?
Click to expand...
And the Canucks will be staring at a run of making the playoffs once in 12 years, just without any of the actual hope of getting better at some point.

Which option would you take?

MikeK said:
There is no way Miller is going to be worth that contract for even half its length. He's going to be 30 before that deal even kicks in. Having $8m tied up in an aging Miller will cost us at least one of our young players. Too me, that is crippling. I guarantee that Miller extension is going to go down as one of the worst contracts this Franchise has ever given out. Just talking about it makes me angry. It's one of the worst contracts in the league and it hasn't even started.
Click to expand...
Yep. FInd one of the few other remaining dumb GMs. Send him Miller for a 7th round pick or something. Just get the contract off the books.
 
The Miller contract is infuriating. Sure, it’s early, and things can obviously turn round. But if they don’t I think management should really be grilled for it as it really is one of those situations where they thought they were the smartest people in the room. Obviously the first layer of that is the fact that most knowledgeable fans wanted him traded. But the second more important layer is the fact that the market was terrible for Miller because no one wanted to give him that long term contract. But this management of course seemed to think they knew better than the rest of the league in signing Miller to that contact so they better be right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Iron Mike Sharpe and m9
😂😂😂😂😂

1666574733809.png
 
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: Iron Mike Sharpe, Field of Dreams and Breakers
andora said:
I was thinking about this for a second for anyone who follows him, was he going on about no plan in the summer and into training camp?
Click to expand...
Lately he has said that up until the Miller extension and the Dickinson trade it could be argued that they were taking a cautious approach to slowly fix the Benning disaster. But then they started making moves to go in hard short term/win now on Benning’s team.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vector
andora said:
I was thinking about this for a second for anyone who follows him, was he going on about no plan in the summer and into training camp?
Click to expand...

Yes. It’s what has drawn the ire from a certain group here and gets him labeled as negative. In general he has no problem with the signings but felt there was no cohesive plan that would likely result in a Stanley Cup competitor. Figured the end result was a team that maybe has a bit of success but ages out quickly with little reinforcements.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pitseleh, mossey3535, m9 and 1 other person
Vector said:
Yes. It’s what has drawn the ire from a certain group here and gets him labeled as negative. In general he has no problem with the signings but felt there was no cohesive plan that would likely result in a Stanley Cup competitor. Figured the end result was a team that maybe has a bit of success but ages out quickly with little reinforcements.
Click to expand...
Okay cool thank you
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vector
Vector said:
Yes. It’s what has drawn the ire from a certain group here and gets him labeled as negative. In general he has no problem with the signings but felt there was no cohesive plan that would likely result in a Stanley Cup competitor. Figured the end result was a team that maybe has a bit of success but ages out quickly with little reinforcements.
Click to expand...

The problem is that this is lazy armchair quarterbacking.

Benning left a mess. There is *no* realistic plan that would likely result in a Stanley Cup contender.

The two realistic options were :

1) Push forward.

2) Re-tool for multiple years.

(2) would have meant burning most of the Hughes/Demko/Pettersson window not attempting to compete, and hoping that these players would have wanted to stay in an organization that didn't try to build around them when it had the chance. This is the plan that this certain group loves, and it's even less likely to result in a Stanley Cup contender.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lousy, andora and Vector
MS said:
The problem is that this is lazy armchair quarterbacking.

Benning left a mess. There is *no* realistic plan that would likely result in a Stanley Cup contender.

The two realistic options were :

1) Push forward.

2) Re-tool for multiple years.

(2) would have meant burning most of the Hughes/Demko/Pettersson window not attempting to compete, and hoping that these players would have wanted to stay in an organization that didn't try to build around them when it had the chance. This is the plan that this certain group loves, and it's even less likely to result in a Stanley Cup contender.
Click to expand...
This isn't true no matter how many times you repeat it.

There is(was) more than 2 options, and both of your options have their own options.

The notion being pushed that mgmt had zero choice and the team is fine and playing well 5v5 but just unlucky is clearly ridiculous and counter to reality.
 
  • Like
Reactions: canucksfan
VanillaCoke said:
This isn't true no matter how many times you repeat it.

There's more than 2 options, and both of your options have their own options.

The notion being pushed that mgmt had zero other options and the team is fine and playing well 5v5 but just unlucky is clearly ridiculous and counter to reality.
Click to expand...

There are plans and then there is execution.

You'll have no argument from me that they could have executed better or made a different better set of moves, especially on the Boeser front.

But in the big picture, these were the two realistic ways of approaching things.
 
  • Like
Reactions: andora and Vector
MS said:
There are plans and then there is execution.

You'll have no argument from me that they could have executed better or made a different better set of moves, especially on the Boeser front.

But in the big picture, these were the two realistic ways of approaching things.
Click to expand...
This all feels familiar. I feel like Canucks fans who wish they could tear it down to the studs for a rebuild are kind of like the people of a lefty persuasion frustrated watching the Democratic Party not do whatever they can against the Republicans, through possible mechanisms that just aren’t actually realistically going to happen. You personally are the guy on the political message board I like making fun of “DO SOMETHING!!!!!” Twitter. 😆
 
andora said:
I was thinking about this for a second for anyone who follows him, was he going on about no plan in the summer and into training camp?
Click to expand...

No, the Miller contract largely broke him. As it did many. He was leaning in that direction before, though.

Drance also never really liked the Mikheyev deal as he viewed it as an unnecessary overpayment for a third liner, even if it helped with the PK.

Like many, he was pensive through the deadline when nothing happened and it snowballed from there.

He’s now largely seen the light outside of his weird Brock Boeser obsession where he continues to insist Boeser is a really good player and fans are unfair to him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mossey3535
TruGr1t said:
No, the Miller contract largely broke him. As it did many. He was leaning in that direction before, though.

Drance also never really liked the Mikheyev deal as he viewed it as an unnecessary overpayment for a third liner, even if it helped with the PK.

Like many, he was pensive through the deadline when nothing happened and it snowballed from there.

He’s now largely seen the light outside of his weird Brock Boeser obsession where he continues to insist Boeser is a really good player and fans are unfair to him.
Click to expand...



My recollection was that he didn’t mind the Mikheyev signing but not for the Canucks. I’m a bit off on that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mossey3535 and TruGr1t
ManBearPig Matthews said:
This all feels familiar. I feel like Canucks fans who wish they could tear it down to the studs for a rebuild are kind of like the people of a lefty persuasion frustrated watching the Democratic Party not do whatever they can against the Republicans, through possible mechanisms that just aren’t actually realistically going to happen. You personally are the guy on the political message board I like making fun of “DO SOMETHING!!!!!” Twitter. 😆
Click to expand...

I mean, probably yeah.

There are things that seem like great ideas in fantasy/video game land which are just never going to pragmatically happen in the real world.

Blowing up a 92-point team with a young core to tank for Bedard is something that no GM in NHL history would have gone with as a plan, and no ownership group in NHL history would have authorized. It's pie in the sky nonsense outside of EA Sports. This is a real business with real people trying to succeed financially.
 
  • Like
Reactions: I Hart Conor Garland
MS said:
The problem is that this is lazy armchair quarterbacking.

Benning left a mess. There is *no* realistic plan that would likely result in a Stanley Cup contender.

The two realistic options were :

1) Push forward.

2) Re-tool for multiple years.

(2) would have meant burning most of the Hughes/Demko/Pettersson window not attempting to compete, and hoping that these players would have wanted to stay in an organization that didn't try to build around them when it had the chance. This is the plan that this certain group loves, and it's even less likely to result in a Stanley Cup contender.
Click to expand...

I usually agree with you but another option would be to rebuild. I would have traded, Boeser, Miller, and anyone else on a UFA at the trade deadline last year. This year I would have traded Horvat. I would have also looked at trading Garland is the trade made sense. All the trades would obviously be for picks and prospects. I also would have taken on some short-term cap dumps for picks if possible. By doing this, the only long-term terrible contract is OEL. I admit this would have pissed off EP, Hughes, and Demko but I don't see how this team wins anything with this group. Even though management is in a horrible position, I believe they chose the worst possible option, doubling down on the group.

Obviously, ownership would not have done this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: me2
I would feel so much better if we had seen one really big, smart move from this management group over the past 10 months. Not something obvious like dumping Hamonic or signing Kuzmenko. Not just paying a high draft pick to cover your own overspending.

It's why the Boeser signing was such a bad sign to me. It seemed like an emotional signing based on past performance and hope. They already had a replacement locked in with Kuzmenko. They likely could have gotten an asset for him - even a minor one - and moved on. Mikheyev then makes complete sense and you get a better mix in terms of player type.

They just don't deserve the benefit of the doubt to me as of now. They're in a hole. Not a deep one, but it's still a hole.
 
  • Like
Reactions: timw33 and mossey3535
canucksfan said:
I usually agree with you but another option would be to rebuild. I would have traded, Boeser, Miller, and anyone else on a UFA at the trade deadline last year. This year I would have traded Horvat. I would have also looked at trading Garland is the trade made sense. All the trades would obviously be for picks and prospects. I also would have taken on some short-term cap dumps for picks if possible. By doing this, the only long-term terrible contract is OEL. I admit this would have pissed off EP, Hughes, and Demko but I don't see how this team wins anything with this group. Even though management is in a horrible position, I believe they chose the worst possible option, doubling down on the group.

Obviously, ownership would not have done this.
Click to expand...

Rebuilding and keeping Hughes/Demko/Pettersson is absolutely pointless.

Even if those players stay (unlikely) the odds you're competitive again before their contracts run out is miniscule. What exactly is the endgame here?

And again, we saw what happened to these players in 2020 when the team accidentally was forced to take a step back. The same thing would happen but worse if we intentionally did.

It's just video game stuff. To me, it's the definition of a 'no plan plan'. And again, no ownership group would ever have signed off on it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom