Management Discussion | Pre-Season Approaching

[canucksfan]

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.

Doubling down on a core that has done jack shit is absolutely pointless.

The endgame is to be a Stanley Cup contender. There is no way the team will be one in three years with the current group. If the team continues to suck, very likely, EP likely pulls a Tkachuk. Demko is a UFA after that and probably walks.

You may not agree with it, but it's quite clearly a plan. It speeds up the process because in about 4 years we will have to be rebuilding anyways.

 

[RobertKron]

Doubling down on a core that has done jack shit is absolutely pointless.

The endgame is to be a Stanley Cup contender. There is no way the team will be one in three years with the current group. If the team continues to suck, very likely, EP likely pulls a Tkachuk. Demko is a UFA after that and probably walks.

You may not agree with it, but it's quite clearly a plan. It speeds up the process because in about 4 years we will have to be rebuilding anyways.

You're kind of ignoring that this is a business.

 

[canucksfan]

You're kind of ignoring that this is a business.

And we have fans throwing jerseys on the ice and the product is terrible.

 

[Cancuks]

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.

One of the best things about having pending UFAs on the roster is that they are motivated to get the big contract. Extending Miller and Boeser two seemingly emotionally fragile players took all the motivation out of their sails and now we see it blow up in our faces. Horvat at least is playing for a contract but the moment he is re-signed his play will go off a cliff as well and we'll be regretting it just like Miller.

Also having these pending UFAS are valuable commodities for contenders as they can be free of their cap hit after the season as a pure rental. Now we're going from getting a bushel full of picks for these guys to having to retain or take back cap dumps in order to move them to another rebuilding team.

Absolutely unacceptable and it's all because management just like Benning thought the team under Boudreau last season was the real Canucks and they were a free agent or two from being able to score their way to the Cup like the 80s Oilers or 90s Pens.

 

[MS]

Doubling down on a core that has done jack shit is absolutely pointless.

The endgame is to be a Stanley Cup contender. There is no way the team will be one in three years with the current group. If the team continues to suck, very likely, EP likely pulls a Tkachuk. Demko is a UFA after that and probably walks.

You may not agree with it, but it's quite clearly a plan. It speeds up the process because in about 4 years we will have to be rebuilding anyways.

It's a plan that has neither an endgame nor any realistic possibility of being signed off on by any owner.

Doing a rebuild and keeping those three players for the 3-4 year duration of that rebuild is ... pointless. Again, what are you trying to accomplish? All you're doing is walking a pretty decent core to UFA without trying to compete, while also not being bad enough that you have a real shot at getting legitimately high picks (look at those Arizona/Chicago/Montreal rosters).

If you're going to rebuild, you basically have to commit fully and trade all 3 of those guys now. And again, that is pure video game stuff that would never happen in real life with real people trying to run a real business. 92 point teams with early-mid 20s cores do not burn it to the ground. Ever.

The best realistic shot is hoping you can do what the post-2020 Panthers did (and the post-2008 Canucks) and turn a core with some decent pieces going sideways into a legit 3-5 year contending window with a series of shrewd moves. So far, you can obviously argue that they have not made a series of shrewd moves, but that doesn't mean it isn't the best realistic plan.

 

[canucksfan]

It's a plan that has neither an endgame nor any realistic possibility of being signed off on by any owner.

Doing a rebuild and keeping those three players for the 3-4 year duration of that rebuild is ... pointless. Again, what are you trying to accomplish? All you're doing is walking a pretty decent core to UFA without trying to compete, while also not being bad enough that you have a real shot at getting legitimately high picks (look at those Arizona/Chicago/Montreal rosters).

If you're going to rebuild, you basically have to commit fully and trade all 3 of those guys now. And again, that is pure video game stuff that would never happen in real life with real people trying to run a real business. 92 point teams with early-mid 20s cores do not burn it to the ground. Ever.

The best realistic shot is hoping you can do what the post-2020 Panthers did (and the post-2008 Canucks) and turn a core with some decent pieces going sideways into a legit 3-5 year contending window with a series of shrewd moves. So far, you can obviously argue that they have not made a series of shrewd moves, but that doesn't mean it isn't the best realistic plan.

I know the owner wouldn't sign off on it because he wants his cheap playoff revenue that never happens. I said that in my original post.

I illustrated what I would be trying to accomplish. Speed up the process to establish a contending team. Do you honestly believe the current team could contend for a Cup? And what happens after EP, Demko, and Hughes are free agents? We have nothing in the prospect pool to help these guys in the next 3-4 years. If the Nucks had a decent farm then I would be in favor of letting this group compete. However, there is no way this team can acquire prospects.

The current group obviously needs to improve but how can management do that? It's a capped-out team, with little trade chips and no prospects coming up.

It's a hopeless situation. I said in the GDT that the Nucks have to be in the worst situation in the league. They have some good pieces but they have so many terrible contracts and no prospects making it very difficult to improve.

 

[MS]

I know the owner wouldn't sign off on it because he wants his cheap playoff revenue that never happens.

I illustrated what I would be trying to accomplish. Speed up the process to establish a contending team. Do you honestly believe the current team could contend for a Cup? And what happens after EP, Demko, and Hughes are free agents? We have nothing in the prospect pool to help these guys in the next 3-4 years. If the Nucks had a decent farm then I would be in favor of letting this group compete. However, there is no way this team can acquire prospects.

The current group obviously needs to improve but how can management do that? It's a capped-out team, with little trade chips and no prospects coming up.

It's a hopeless situation. I said in the GDT that the Nucks have to be in the worst situation in the league. They have some good pieces but they have so many terrible contracts and no prospects making it very difficult to improve.

It isn't just this owner that wouldn't sign off on it. It's any owner. And any GM that proposed tearing down a team in this situation would likely be fired on the spot.

They need to find a way to hit a home run on a quality D to have a solid chance to move into the top 6-8 teams in the NHL. The 3-line forward depth is excellent assuming Miller returns to form. The goaltending should be excellent. Hughes and OEL at LD is solid. They have one massive Tanev-sized hole in the roster next to Quinn Hughes.

The reason why the Boeser deal is so frustrating to me is that they blocked themselves off for the time being of being able to make this sort of move if it presents itself. If they would have fired Boeser in the sun and left themselves the flexibility to make a big move for a Zub in UFA in 2023 (or at this year's deadline if Ottawa flops), I'd feel pretty damn good about this roster going into 23-24.

 

[TruGr1t]

The best realistic shot is hoping you can do what the post-2020 Panthers did (and the post-2008 Canucks) and turn a core with some decent pieces going sideways into a legit 3-5 year contending window with a series of shrewd moves. So far, you can obviously argue that they have not made a series of shrewd moves, but that doesn't mean it isn't the best realistic plan.

I’ve never understood your comparison to 2008. You were obviously there and know the players. On the basis of defense alone there is no comparison, but the farm system also was yielding well at that time with guys like Hansen, Burrows and Raymond breaking in. Not even getting into Edler and Bieksa breaking out. That was a consistent 100+ point team waiting to happen, there was just a bit of an hiccup in the WCE transition.

 

[canucksfan]

It isn't just this owner that wouldn't sign off on it. It's any owner. And any GM that proposed tearing down a team in this situation would likely be fired on the spot.

They need to find a way to hit a home run on a quality D to have a solid chance to move into the top 6-8 teams in the NHL. The 3-line forward depth is excellent assuming Miller returns to form. The goaltending should be excellent. Hughes and OEL at LD is solid. They have one massive Tanev-sized hole in the roster next to Quinn Hughes.

The reason why the Boeser deal is so frustrating to me is that they blocked themselves off for the time being of being able to make this sort of move if it presents itself. If they would have fired Boeser in the sun and left themselves the flexibility to make a big move for a Zub in UFA in 2023 (or at this year's deadline if Ottawa flops), I'd feel pretty damn good about this roster going into 23-24.

We've agreed before, the Boeser signing is terrible and has really screwed up what they can do.

This year, they aren't contending. The defense is horrible. Next season, Horvat and Kuzmenko are both UFAs. Losing Horvat would weaken the depth at center. So if they sign him, that limits what they can do on the backend. If they let him walk and focus on the defense, then their centre depth is crap. After that season, EP is a RFA. If the team continues to suck, decent possibility, he might request a trade.

I see very little flexibility with this team with no prospects coming up.

 

[canucksfan]

And the window for this current group was Miller's old contract which is this year. Signing him to that long contract was dumb.

 

[SeawaterOnIce]

It isn't just this owner that wouldn't sign off on it. It's any owner. And any GM that proposed tearing down a team in this situation would likely be fired on the spot.

They need to find a way to hit a home run on a quality D to have a solid chance to move into the top 6-8 teams in the NHL. The 3-line forward depth is excellent assuming Miller returns to form. The goaltending should be excellent. Hughes and OEL at LD is solid. They have one massive Tanev-sized hole in the roster next to Quinn Hughes.

The reason why the Boeser deal is so frustrating to me is that they blocked themselves off for the time being of being able to make this sort of move if it presents itself. If they would have fired Boeser in the sun and left themselves the flexibility to make a big move for a Zub in UFA in 2023 (or at this year's deadline if Ottawa flops), I'd feel pretty damn good about this roster going into 23-24.

We actually have 2 massive holes on the D. A legit #1D for Hughes and a steady stay-at-home 2nd pairing dman. I like a guy like Zub but he fills neither of these roles.

Nearly impossible to fill these roles without massively sacrificing futures or somehow getting top draft picks.

 

[Coffee]

I agree with JR.

Enough of this wild goose chase, I’m through with this Bruce phase.

 

[MS]

I’ve never understood your comparison to 2008. You were obviously there and know the players. On the basis of defense alone there is no comparison, but the farm system also was yielding well at that time with guys like Hansen, Burrows and Raymond breaking in. Not even getting into Edler and Bieksa breaking out. That was a consistent 100+ point team waiting to happen, there was just a bit of an hiccup in the WCE transition.

I'm not sure how Burrows/Raymond/Hansen are really different from Podkolzin/Hoglander/Aman?

None of those guys were huge prospects at the time and Burrows was thought to be just a generic mid-20s 4th liner.

The key is obviously to create an environment where those guys max out their potential and we have no idea if that will happen going forward right now.

*Nobody* at the time thought that that team was a 'consistent 100-point team waiting to happen'. It was a middling team going sideways with a couple nice core assets who had missed the playoffs 2 of 3 years. The leading scorer on that team who was under team control at the time had 37 points.

Fans getting a hard-on for tanking wasn't really a thing then, but if it were 'More ass for Tavares' would have been a raging thing on these boards in the summer of 2008.

 

[Coffee]

I'm not sure how Burrows/Raymond/Hansen are really different from Podkolzin/Hoglander/Aman?

None of those guys were huge prospects at the time and Burrows was thought to be just a generic mid-20s 4th liner.

The key is obviously to create an environment where those guys max out their potential and we have no idea if that will happen going forward right now.

*Nobody* at the time thought that that team was a 'consistent 100-point team waiting to happen'. It was a middling team going sideways with a couple nice core assets who had missed the playoffs 2 of 3 years. The leading scorer on that team who was under team control at the time had 37 points.

Fans getting a hard-on for tanking wasn't really a thing then, but if it were 'More ass for Tavares' would have been a raging thing on these boards in the summer of 2008.

From what I remember, Burrows and Hansen were the better 200ft players Of all those name.
Something we’ve seen from Podkolzin at times

 

[MS]

We've agreed before, the Boeser signing is terrible and has really screwed up what they can do.

This year, they aren't contending. The defense is horrible. Next season, Horvat and Kuzmenko are both UFAs. Losing Horvat would weaken the depth at center. So if they sign him, that limits what they can do on the backend. If they let him walk and focus on the defense, then their centre depth is crap. After that season, EP is a RFA. If the team continues to suck, decent possibility, he might request a trade.

I see very little flexibility with this team with no prospects coming up.

As I've said a ton of times, it's a shitty situation. Benning f***ed us. There are no easy answers.

Generally speaking, I think getting behind the Hughes/Pettersson/Demko core and trying to maximize the 4-year window we have with those guys is really the only reasonable thing we can do. And I said much the same thing last summer when it was still Benning.

I think they've got that part right. I just think they screwed up by keeping Boeser, over-committing on wingers, and not addressing the D (or leaving room to address the D). And I don't think they've been aggressive or cutthroat enough in their moves. But again, that's execution, not the overarching plan.

From what I remember, Burrows and Hansen were the better 200ft players Of all those name.
Something we’ve seen from Podkolzin at times

Podkolzin and Aman are quality 200-foot players. Raymond would be the Hoglander equivalent who was in-out and struggled defensively for his first season or two before putting it together next to Kesler in 09-10.

 

[Snatcher Demko]

Time to tear it down and rebuild properly. Trade Demko, Hughes, Pettersson as well, (well Petey if he wants out). Tear it down completely and build a new roster during the next several years where they'll have to eat though some bad contracts like OEL. I'd assume they'd need to take back a big crappy contract in return for Miller if they want good assets in return, and thankfully Horvat can be sold now at the TDL.

 

[canucksfan]

As I've said a ton of times, it's a shitty situation. Benning f***ed us. There are no easy answers.

Generally speaking, I think getting behind the Hughes/Pettersson/Demko core and trying to maximize the 4-year window we have with those guys is really the only reasonable thing we can do. And I said much the same thing last summer when it was still Benning.

I think they've got that part right. I just think they screwed up by keeping Boeser, over-committing on wingers, and not addressing the D (or leaving room to address the D). And I don't think they've been aggressive or cutthroat enough in their moves. But again, that's execution, not the overarching plan.

And that's why I don't want to attempt to try with this core because as you said, there are no easy answers. No prospect pool, terrible contracts, and capped out which leaves no flexibility.

Anyways we will have to agree to disagree.

The perfect time to rebuild was when Gillis wanted to.

 

[MS]

And that's why I don't want to attempt to try with this core because as you said, there are no easy answers. No prospect pool, terrible contracts, and capped out which leaves no flexibility.

Anyways we will have to agree to disagree.

The perfect time to rebuild was when Gillis wanted to.

We did do an accidental tank/rebuild from 2015-2019.

And that rebuild should have worked if Benning didn't commit $30 million in cap space in the 20-21 season to Beagle/Roussel/Baertschi/Eriksson/Sutter/Holtby/Benn/Ferland via terrible UFA signings made pointlessly when we were in the middle of that accidental tank. Those stupid signings just f***ed the whole thing and we still haven't recovered.

 

[mossey3535]

I get your argument MS but this whole board has been saying that the defence needed to be overhauled in order for this team to truly contend. Basically any outside observer has been able to identify this need, unfortunately this was lost on the previous management group.

Your argument doesn't align with what management has actually done, rather it's just arguing against a scorched earth rebuild. Basically you say that a full rebuild/tank wasn't realistic (it wasn't) and then you hand wave until it justifies your position. You keep framing a 1-2 year retool as a rebuild in service of your argument of the status quo - "go forward".

I think Colorado is an easy counter example to your argument. They clearly traded parts of the previous core that enabled them to let the group that won last year to progress.

At the time of the Duchesne trade in Nov 2017:

Mackinnon - Year 2 of 7 year deal at $6.3M (8.6% CH, 22yo)
Landeskog - Year 4 of 7 year deal at $5.6M (8.7% CH, 25yo)
Rantanen - Year 3 of 4 year ELC deal at $0.95M (1.3% CH, 21 yo)
Tyson Barrie - Year 2 of 4 year deal at $5.5M (7.53% CH, 26yo)
Matt Duchene - Year 5 of 6 year deal at $6M (9.33% CH, 27yo)

They got rid of Barrie, hit the trade home run with Toews, and pushed forward with their core group of 3 players. Before Miller and other signings:

Hughes - Year 2 of 6 year deal at $7.85M (9.63% CH, 23yo)
Pettersson - Year 2 of 3 year deal at $7.35M (9.02% CH, 23 yo)
Demko - Year 2 of 5 year deal at $5M (6.14% CH, 26yo)
Horvat - Year 6 of 6 year deal at $5.5M (7.33% CH, 27yo)

There are clear parallels with Hughes and Demko being signed to good contracts with another 3+ years remaining. EP, like Rantanen, is a year or so from possibly getting a substantial pay raise. Barrie and Duchene are older players who seemed like they were part of the core but got shipped out.

Five seasons later, they're raising the Cup.

I think that if you sat EP, Demko, and Hughes down and said that this was the plan and that they would have to let Brock walk and not extend Miller in order to fix the defensive aspect of the team that they'd understand.

 

[Peen]

I get your argument MS but this whole board has been saying that the defence needed to be overhauled in order for this team to truly contend. Basically any outside observer has been able to identify this need, unfortunately this was lost on the previous management group.

Your argument doesn't align with what management has actually done, rather it's just arguing against a scorched earth rebuild. Basically you say that a full rebuild/tank wasn't realistic (it wasn't) and then you hand wave until it justifies your position. You keep framing a 1-2 year retool as a rebuild in service of your argument of the status quo - "go forward".

I think Colorado is an easy counter example to your argument. They clearly traded parts of the previous core that enabled them to let the group that won last year to progress.

At the time of the Duchesne trade in Nov 2017:

Mackinnon - Year 2 of 7 year deal at $6.3M (8.6% CH, 22yo)
Landeskog - Year 4 of 7 year deal at $5.6M (8.7% CH, 25yo)
Rantanen - Year 3 of 4 year ELC deal at $0.95M (1.3% CH, 21 yo)
Tyson Barrie - Year 2 of 4 year deal at $5.5M (7.53% CH, 26yo)
Matt Duchene - Year 5 of 6 year deal at $6M (9.33% CH, 27yo)

They got rid of Barrie, hit the trade home run with Toews, and pushed forward with their core group of 3 players. Before Miller and other signings:

Hughes - Year 2 of 6 year deal at $7.85M (9.63% CH, 23yo)
Pettersson - Year 2 of 3 year deal at $7.35M (9.02% CH, 23 yo)
Demko - Year 2 of 5 year deal at $5M (6.14% CH, 26yo)
Horvat - Year 6 of 6 year deal at $5.5M (7.33% CH, 27yo)

There are clear parallels with Hughes and Demko being signed to good contracts with another 3+ years remaining. EP, like Rantanen, is a year or so from possibly getting a substantial pay raise. Barrie and Duchene are older players who seemed like they were part of the core but got shipped out.

Five seasons later, they're raising the Cup.

I think that if you sat EP, Demko, and Hughes down and said that this was the plan and that they would have to let Brock walk and not extend Miller in order to fix the defensive aspect of the team that they'd understand.

I also am at the point where it’s like - if they don’t understand, then ok.

Players apparently demanded Boeser back just for him to lose every foot race and be incapable of primary goal contributions. Every 3 on 3 with him turns into a 3 on 2 against.

Does it suck that we might lose those three players? Sure.

But unless they can pull two top four D, and an elite third line matchup/pk/playmaking C without giving up significant futures, they have no chance

 

[Diogenes92]

We did do an accidental tank/rebuild from 2015-2019.

And that rebuild should have worked if Benning didn't commit $30 million in cap space in the 20-21 season to Beagle/Roussel/Baertschi/Eriksson/Sutter/Holtby/Benn/Ferland via terrible UFA signings made pointlessly when we were in the middle of that accidental tank. Those stupid signings just f***ed the whole thing and we still haven't recovered.

There was a rebuild?

I must have missed when Benning traded expiring contracts for draft picks, and refrained from handing out bloated contracts to middling players, and chose not to trade assets to compete right away.

Oh wait...

 

[Coffee]

Time to tear it down and rebuild properly. Trade Demko, Hughes, Pettersson as well, (well Petey if he wants out). Tear it down completely and build a new roster during the next several years where they'll have to eat though some bad contracts like OEL. I'd assume they'd need to take back a big crappy contract in return for Miller if they want good assets in return, and thankfully Horvat can be sold now at the TDL.

If we trade Quinn Hughes we will be forever looking to fill a role that he does the best.

@MS @geebaan


Am I wrong here? Despite his weaknesses (he only turned 23 btw) we will forever be trying to replace his production from the backend. Unless we somehow gather three or four adequate top 4 defenders. This is a move that will f*** the Vancouver Canucks even more than now.

 

[canucksfan]

Acquiring two top four defensemen is extremely difficult to do. It seems teams really want to hold on to them or are asking a high price.

 

[Diogenes92]

Acquiring two top four defensemen is extremely difficult to do. It seems teams really want to hold on to them or are asking a high price.

It's extremely unrealistic seeing as how we don't have cap space or assets to get it done. It's a pipe dream.

I wouldn't waste my time arguring with these people about the team needing a rebuild. They will cling on to the hope of playoffs until there's literally nothing left. Same as the owner.

If a certain group of fans haven't figured out after all this suffering that the current core won't get it done, then they never will. A rebuild or something close to it needs to happen.

 

[MS]

I get your argument MS but this whole board has been saying that the defence needed to be overhauled in order for this team to truly contend. Basically any outside observer has been able to identify this need, unfortunately this was lost on the previous management group.

Your argument doesn't align with what management has actually done, rather it's just arguing against a scorched earth rebuild. Basically you say that a full rebuild/tank wasn't realistic (it wasn't) and then you hand wave until it justifies your position. You keep framing a 1-2 year retool as a rebuild in service of your argument of the status quo - "go forward".

I think Colorado is an easy counter example to your argument. They clearly traded parts of the previous core that enabled them to let the group that won last year to progress.

At the time of the Duchesne trade in Nov 2017:

Mackinnon - Year 2 of 7 year deal at $6.3M (8.6% CH, 22yo)
Landeskog - Year 4 of 7 year deal at $5.6M (8.7% CH, 25yo)
Rantanen - Year 3 of 4 year ELC deal at $0.95M (1.3% CH, 21 yo)
Tyson Barrie - Year 2 of 4 year deal at $5.5M (7.53% CH, 26yo)
Matt Duchene - Year 5 of 6 year deal at $6M (9.33% CH, 27yo)

They got rid of Barrie, hit the trade home run with Toews, and pushed forward with their core group of 3 players. Before Miller and other signings:

Hughes - Year 2 of 6 year deal at $7.85M (9.63% CH, 23yo)
Pettersson - Year 2 of 3 year deal at $7.35M (9.02% CH, 23 yo)
Demko - Year 2 of 5 year deal at $5M (6.14% CH, 26yo)
Horvat - Year 6 of 6 year deal at $5.5M (7.33% CH, 27yo)

There are clear parallels with Hughes and Demko being signed to good contracts with another 3+ years remaining. EP, like Rantanen, is a year or so from possibly getting a substantial pay raise. Barrie and Duchene are older players who seemed like they were part of the core but got shipped out.

Five seasons later, they're raising the Cup.

I think that if you sat EP, Demko, and Hughes down and said that this was the plan and that they would have to let Brock walk and not extend Miller in order to fix the defensive aspect of the team that they'd understand.

I've posted about this exact thing before a couple weeks back so I'll repost what I wrote then. Basically I disagree completely:

Perception vs. reality on the Duchene trade is so bizarre.

There's this huge Mandela effect where fans seem to universally believe that Colorado decided to re-set their rebuild by trading away superstar Matt Duchene and then suffered another couple years of losing but added Makar out of the deal.

And ... that's not what happened at all.

They had already bottomed out. They had already drafted Makar. They were having their breakout season and made the playoffs in the season Duchene was traded.

And Duchene was not a key cog. He'd been playing terrible hockey for the previous couple years and was viewed as a major off-ice problem (something confirmed on the Phoenix taxi ride after he went to Ottawa). They'd signed Alex Kerfoot and he was outplaying Duchene and they wanted to get Kerfoot more minutes (Duchene's had already plummeted that season before the trade). So they smartly sold high on reputation for a guy who was approaching a huge UFA payday when they felt they had a better internal replacement. And kept on trucking.

It would basically be like managing to get a king's ransom for Brock Boeser right now after Kuzmenko has come in and looked better. It wasn't a tanking transaction. It wasn't a major re-set.

Again, I have zero problems with the notion of making a significant move or two in the framework of moving forward with this core. Trading Boeser? Great. Getting a big haul for Miller including NHL-ready players and then re-investing his salary in the blueline? Great.

But teams don't intentionally do a major re-set from this position and Colorado absolutely did not do a major re-set from this position.