Management Discussion | Pre-Season Approaching

[Just A Bit Outside]

I went over this in other threads but Murphy suffered two concussions last season. With the amount he has left, there’s no way I’d risk taking him on.

 

[MS]

I went over this in other threads but Murphy suffered two concussions last season. With the amount he has left, there’s no way I’d risk taking him on.

Ah, fair. I knew that at some level but it's been a long time since last year and had totally forgotten.

 

[I Hart Conor Garland]

Honestly it seems like something changed with the message and team direction from when JR initially came in, to sometime in the off season. I don't think it's Patrik Allvin coming in steering things this way.

That’s an interesting theory. Have you any suspects?

 

[Peen]

They've realized (correctly) that the only way out of Benning's mess is through.

There are too many prime-aged players to think a rebuild is remotely an option.

All a multi-year re-tool does is shorten the Demko/Hughes/Pettersson window. Plus this organization needs to get guys like Pettersson back on track in a competitive environment, not a losing one.

It sucks. There were so many f***-ups from Benning that shortened whatever window this team will have and reduced the peak. But right now it's really all we've got and the only reasonable option - hopefully this group can do with Benning's mess what Gillis was able to do with Nonis' mess in 2008.

They haven't been helped by the way the market absolutely died for moving salary.

I'm a pretty big believer that nearly any "model" can work in most circumstances. It really just comes down to your ability to execute. Obviously there's certain circumstances that necessitate certain things. We should have torn down 2014 or 2016 onwards.

HOWEVER, the path they've chosen necessitates finding a clear cut top pair partner for hughes, a fairly decent second pair guy, and a high leverage top six ES/PK guy (either that's a C who shifts Miller back to LW like Danault or a better version of Mikheyev).

I don't see how they do all that over the next two years. I think, for a lot of people (Chris Gear included), it's easier to think "Well we're only two-three pieces away" but no one can contextualize the difficulty of that. Firstly, it would take a miracle to pull off. Secondly, if we are making those arguments, other teams will think the same. Thirdly, those assets are scarce to come by. Fourthly, we don't have the capspace to do those things. Fifthly, we don't have the assets to acquire. Sixth, we don't have a prospect pool of guys you can reasonably project to be impact players over the next few years. Also, this team as is is not a top 5-8 team in the league so I'm not sure why this is as seen as a year of true contention. I think there were avenues through a small re-tool that would have not seen us drop off that significantly.

They've chosen a path of very minimal flexibility. Maybe they can unearth a small handful of diamonds to bridge the gap to a better prospect pool - a tanev and a burrows magically appear out of nowhere. Maybe they somehow get the assets we need with minimal acquisition cost. Maybe they can cut the cap needed.

They would need to be extremely shrewd. I hope they pull it off. The division we play in has three teams that will be bad in a few years, one that is managed by Ken Holland, and then three teams that are pretty far off any Tampa/Colorado/Toronto levels of regular season consistency.

 

[I Hart Conor Garland]

No team in any sport ever would rebuild when almost all of their most important players are aged 23-27. This team was never going to be trading Hughes/Demko/Pettersson and starting from scratch and it's ridiculous to set that as an expectation and be disappointed about it when it didn't happen.

This is why they did not trade Boeser. If they did then 53/40/9/43/35/70/57/2 were all gonna demand trades. I have that on VERY good authority.

 

[Just A Bit Outside]

This is why they did not trade Boeser. If they did then 53/40/9/43/35/70/57/2 were all gonna demand trades. I have that on VERY good authority.

NBA style tear down.

 

[I Hart Conor Garland]

NBA style tear down.

NBA don’t live here no mo

 

[MS]

I'm a pretty big believer that nearly any "model" can work in most circumstances. It really just comes down to your ability to execute. Obviously there's certain circumstances that necessitate certain things. We should have torn down 2014 or 2016 onwards.

HOWEVER, the path they've chosen necessitates finding a clear cut top pair partner for hughes, a fairly decent second pair guy, and a high leverage top six ES/PK guy (either that's a C who shifts Miller back to LW like Danault or a better version of Mikheyev).

I don't see how they do all that over the next two years. I think, for a lot of people (Chris Gear included), it's easier to think "Well we're only two-three pieces away" but no one can contextualize the difficulty of that. Firstly, it would take a miracle to pull off. Secondly, if we are making those arguments, other teams will think the same. Thirdly, those assets are scarce to come by. Fourthly, we don't have the capspace to do those things. Fifthly, we don't have the assets to acquire. Sixth, we don't have a prospect pool of guys you can reasonably project to be impact players over the next few years. Also, this team as is is not a top 5-8 team in the league so I'm not sure why this is as seen as a year of true contention. I think there were avenues through a small re-tool that would have not seen us drop off that significantly.

They've chosen a path of very minimal flexibility. Maybe they can unearth a small handful of diamonds to bridge the gap to a better prospect pool - a tanev and a burrows magically appear out of nowhere. Maybe they somehow get the assets we need with minimal acquisition cost. Maybe they can cut the cap needed.

They would need to be extremely shrewd. I hope they pull it off. The division we play in has three teams that will be bad in a few years, one that is managed by Ken Holland, and then three teams that are pretty far off any Tampa/Colorado/Toronto levels of regular season consistency.

I don't disagree. It's a path of minimal flexibility. It's also the only path they could reasonably have taken, and the same path that probably 25 other NHL teams are on or have been on to get where they are. It's great to have a perfect tank/15 year window with superstars like Pittsburgh - and maybe that could have happened here with better decisions between 2014 and 2019 - but this is the reality for most teams. You have to execute perfectly to turn your situation into a legitimate contender. Some do. Most don't. Hopefully we will.

They absolutely need a Tanev, and if they could make that happen the roster suddenly looks pretty good. But this is where they probably didn't leave themselves enough flexibility if that player hits the market.

I wonder what Artem Zub will cost next summer.

 

[Peen]

I don't disagree. It's a path of minimal flexibility. It's also the only path they could reasonably have taken, and the same path that probably 25 other NHL teams are on or have been on to get where they are. It's great to have a perfect tank/15 year window with superstars like Pittsburgh - and maybe that could have happened here with better decisions between 2014 and 2019 - but this is the reality for most teams. You have to execute perfectly to turn your situation into a legitimate contender. Some do. Most don't. Hopefully we will.

They absolutely need a Tanev, and if they could make that happen the roster suddenly looks pretty good. But this is where they probably didn't leave themselves enough flexibility if that player hits the market.

I wonder what Artem Zub will cost next summer.

I'm not saying they need a 15 year window.

They have 4 years left on Demko and 5 left on QH. That's a timeline where they need to add and have no flexibility.

My whole point is that they have to be really good now to make the most of the 4-5 years. Like a top ten team by the end of the season and one that has their major issues solved or with a clear plan to solve over the next twelve months. It's just a near impossible task.

 

[MS]

I'm not saying they need a 15 year window.

They have 4 years left on Demko and 5 left on QH. That's a timeline where they need to add and have no flexibility.

My whole point is that they have to be really good now to make the most of the 4-5 years. Like a top ten team by the end of the season and one that has their major issues solved or with a clear plan to solve over the next twelve months. It's just a near impossible task.

Yup.

But what other option is there?

It's basically the same situation as we were in in 2008. That time we got it right.

The big question will be how much internal growth we get from players now that they're playing in a quality organization with a quality coach. 2008-2011 Sedins/Kesler/Burrows etc. absolutely blew the doors off the players they were previously and the expectations that were there pre-Gillis. And we saw signs of this last season with the way that Miller and Horvat blew up in the 2nd half and Pettersson rebounded with his best play since the fall of 2018. Maybe it was a blip? Maybe it's sustainable? I don't know.

I really don't have a feel at all for where this team is at relative to being a legitimate contender. I wouldn't be surprised at all if they're much closer than most people think. But I also wouldn't be surprised if we're further away. This will be a fascinating season.

 

[Vector]

I really don't have a feel at all for where this team is at relative to being a legitimate contender. I wouldn't be surprised at all if they're much closer than most people think. But I also wouldn't be surprised if we're further away. This will be a fascinating season.

Just want to point out how nice it is to go into the season without the massive sense of hopelessness and doom. They may fall on their face, be boring, succeed, or whatever else but it’s not something any can completely predict. With nearly the same damn team too. Just now it appears that the organization is being run like an actual NHL franchise again.

Like, I’m excited for opening day? I actually don’t know the last time that happened. 2011?

 

[strattonius]

'Ruhtherford and Alvin lied to us!!!'

They didn't lie it's just going to take time to execute. No one here anticipated the market we had. Some of you would rather make some questionable to awful asset decisions just to see 5M in CAP right now.

I wanted Boeser traded too but I'd rather gamble on him again than have a 3rd and 4th rd pick and some fairytale RHD that didn't exist.

 

[credulous]

Yup.

But what other option is there?

if the canucks had non qualified boeser, kept the third they got for hamonic instead of using it to acquire dermott and signed something like tyler motte, evan rodriguez and haydn fleury for less than what they signed mikheyev for would they really be that much worse a team? miller slides over to the wing and garland gets bumped up a line. pearson and hoglander both remain in the top 9. dickinson is probably still getting regular minutes. however they get a decent third line wing/center in rodriguez, a great team guy in motte and haydn fleury gives them a servicable LD/RD with some upside to replace dermott. they'd also have ~8 mil in cap space to jump on the next player with a good contract and the right age profile like marino or bjorkstrand that comes onto the market

i'm not saying this is the objectively correct way to build the team. i have no idea what trades are out there or what players refuse to play in vancouver or anything else. i'm not the expert. i am however confident that the team as constructed is not good enough to be anything more than a pretender and that when i see management make moves that reduce flexibility and cut off opportunities for improvement it leads me to believe they lack either the courage or the creativity to take the risks necessary to win a stanley cup in vancouver. everything they have done has been supremely conservative to the point where they are basically returning the same team as last year. they were gifted a potential free piece in kuzmenko but then went on to commit cap to players like mikheyev and boeser that potentially compromise their ability to keep him. they seemingly want to lock up miller AND horvat to long term contracts that will limit their ability to add to this roster. they haven't made a single move that gives me confidence in this group building a winner

 

[4Twenty]

No team in any sport ever would rebuild when almost all of their most important players are aged 23-27. This team was never going to be trading Hughes/Demko/Pettersson and starting from scratch and it's ridiculous to set that as an expectation and be disappointed about it when it didn't happen.

Uh their most important forward is 29.

3 of their 4 top 4 defensman last year were 31+.

Horvat’s going on 28. Pearson is essentially a 1st line player here. He’s 30.

I disagree with the guy you’re quoting with scrapping Demko, Hughes and Pettersson but there was definitely a case to be made to rebuild around them.

It feels like you’re trying to stack the deck of the conversation with your 23-27 age usage as well. Colorado traded players and rebuilt their roster when Mackinnon was 22.

Also it’s not like this group has ever had success beyond extremely weird circumstances (the bubble and playing with nothing on the line by being eliminated from the playoffs in November). They absolutely didn’t have to choose this way forward.

It’s weird to me you’re one of the guys trumpeting this stuff too. The “fake Stanley cup” target of playoffs you seem to support now is ironic.

 

[CanucksSayEh]

Can cap space transition to RD? More importantly, what intangibles does Mr. Cap space bring to the table? Don't want any cap space causing rifts in the room.

 

[FlowMaster]

Biggest surprise was not moving on from Boeser and bringing in someone like Marino.

 

[Peen]

Yup.

But what other option is there?

It's basically the same situation as we were in in 2008. That time we got it right.

The big question will be how much internal growth we get from players now that they're playing in a quality organization with a quality coach. 2008-2011 Sedins/Kesler/Burrows etc. absolutely blew the doors off the players they were previously and the expectations that were there pre-Gillis. And we saw signs of this last season with the way that Miller and Horvat blew up in the 2nd half and Pettersson rebounded with his best play since the fall of 2018. Maybe it was a blip? Maybe it's sustainable? I don't know.

I really don't have a feel at all for where this team is at relative to being a legitimate contender. I wouldn't be surprised at all if they're much closer than most people think. But I also wouldn't be surprised if we're further away. This will be a fascinating season.

I also lean glass half full on the outcomes this season. i'm more optimistic about this season's roster than I was last seasons, and - relatively speaking - I have a less favourable view of the teams around us.

The 2008 team had a far better blue-line situation. Sure our situation on the wing is far better now, but that's the position you least want to be strong relative to C/D. JR/PA's circumstance is, imo, more difficult than Gillis'.

 

[credulous]

Can cap space transition to RD? More importantly, what intangibles does Mr. Cap space bring to the table? Don't want any cap space causing rifts in the room.

cap space is a means to an end. i don't know that marino was ever available to the canucks even in a perfect world but what i do know is that if he was available and there was a deal to be made the canucks either couldn't or wouldn't clear the cap space necessary to execute it. pacioretty is the wrong player and the wrong time for the canucks but imagining he was the right player the canucks could have been paid a useful young player in coghlan to take him on if and only if they had the cap space. montreal got a first round pick to take on a single year of monahan because they had cap space. seattle paid a nominal price for an excellent player on an excellent contract in bjorkstrand because they had cap space. short of a premium young player on an ELC cap space is the most valuable asset in the nhl right now

 

[I Hart Conor Garland]

Whatever Canadian equivalent of the ESPN 30 for 30 is can do one on the wasted generation of Canucks talent and call it (17) Days of Summer.

 

[bandwagonesque]

I'm a pretty big believer that nearly any "model" can work in most circumstances. It really just comes down to your ability to execute. Obviously there's certain circumstances that necessitate certain things. We should have torn down 2014 or 2016 onwards.

HOWEVER, the path they've chosen necessitates finding a clear cut top pair partner for hughes, a fairly decent second pair guy, and a high leverage top six ES/PK guy (either that's a C who shifts Miller back to LW like Danault or a better version of Mikheyev).

I don't see how they do all that over the next two years. I think, for a lot of people (Chris Gear included), it's easier to think "Well we're only two-three pieces away" but no one can contextualize the difficulty of that. Firstly, it would take a miracle to pull off. Secondly, if we are making those arguments, other teams will think the same. Thirdly, those assets are scarce to come by. Fourthly, we don't have the capspace to do those things. Fifthly, we don't have the assets to acquire. Sixth, we don't have a prospect pool of guys you can reasonably project to be impact players over the next few years. Also, this team as is is not a top 5-8 team in the league so I'm not sure why this is as seen as a year of true contention. I think there were avenues through a small re-tool that would have not seen us drop off that significantly.

They've chosen a path of very minimal flexibility. Maybe they can unearth a small handful of diamonds to bridge the gap to a better prospect pool - a tanev and a burrows magically appear out of nowhere. Maybe they somehow get the assets we need with minimal acquisition cost. Maybe they can cut the cap needed.

They would need to be extremely shrewd. I hope they pull it off. The division we play in has three teams that will be bad in a few years, one that is managed by Ken Holland, and then three teams that are pretty far off any Tampa/Colorado/Toronto levels of regular season consistency.

Well, that and a fair bit of luck. But I agree.

 

[Peen]

Well, that and a fair bit of luck. But I agree.

i mean it more so in my own evaluation. I really try and ignore the luck aspect of things and only look at the execution.

I know it gets beaten to death but I liked what the Leafs did leading up to getting Matthews. Yes, winning the lottery was luck but they did the right things to get lucky. Then you make your franchise competitive and respected enough that you can land a guy like Tavares.

I think luck helps you win cups, but execution alone (within reason) should get you to a point where you're competitive year in and year out.

 

[Peen]

Biggest surprise was not moving on from Boeser and bringing in someone like Marino.

The more surprising one for me was Garland. Garland seemed like the type of player who would be valued around the league - especially by the analytic driven teams. He made comments about the adjustment off the ice and the on-ice fit lacked consistency and he's not really a north-south type of BB player. They also have a similar archetype with Hoglander.

Feel like the off-ice factors of team chemistry and Brock's circumstance influenced bringing him back.

The theoretical 40 goal scorer who's never scored 30 goals. He's got to do it this year, and also wake up at ES.

 

[mriswith]

Is drafting a Cup calibre franchise pair like MacKinnon/Makar really much easier?

I haven't been advocating a full tank, just taking two years spending well below the cap to stockpile assets and maximize cap flexibility for when we do try to go for it.

I look at LA and while they might not succeed, they have everything they need in place to make the jump to contention because they are absolutely loaded with assets to use for trades, dumps or just as cheap role players. They aren't perfect, they've mishandled their young players and they are a mediocre bubble team like us, but they have a ton of assets they can use to change that whereas we have almost nothing we can use to fix our situation.

It's a lost opportunity now but there was a world where we keep Pettersson/Hughes/Demko, sell off the UFA "core", run 15-20 mil below the cap and emerge two years from now with an abundance of cap space and young assets moving forward.

All looking 2-3 years down the road does is closes your window further. And in the meantime you're an organization with no plan going sideways.

The problem is that there is no window to be closed further. We are not a contender, those 2-3 years will pass regardless of whether we pretend or not. If the only goal were to win the cup, there isn't an opportunity cost to reloading, unless they manage to swing a home run trade in the next year or win several smaller trades, which is the hardest thing to do in this sport.

We'll be a lot more fun to watch this way though. And ultimately that's why this path won out.

 

[I Hart Conor Garland]

I haven't been advocating a full tank, just taking two years spending well below the cap to stockpile assets and maximize cap flexibility for when we do try to go for it.

I look at LA and while they might not succeed, they have everything they need in place to make the jump to contention because they are absolutely loaded with assets to use for trades, dumps or just as cheap role players. They aren't perfect, they've mishandled their young players and they are a mediocre bubble team like us, but they have a ton of assets they can use to change that whereas we have almost nothing we can use to fix our situation.

It's a lost opportunity now but there was a world where we keep Pettersson/Hughes/Demko, sell off the UFA "core", run 15-20 mil below the cap and emerge two years from now with an abundance of cap space and young assets moving forward.



The problem is that there is no window to be closed further. We are not a contender, those 2-3 years will pass regardless of whether we pretend or not. If the only goal were to win the cup, there isn't an opportunity cost to reloading, unless they manage to swing a home run trade in the next year or win several smaller trades, which is the hardest thing to do in this sport.

We'll be a lot more fun to watch this way though. And ultimately that's why this path won out.

Winning the Stanley Cup is not the main objective in Vancouver. I’m not even sure it’s top three.

 

[MS]

Uh their most important forward is 29.

3 of their 4 top 4 defensman last year were 31+.

Horvat’s going on 28. Pearson is essentially a 1st line player here. He’s 30.

I disagree with the guy you’re quoting with scrapping Demko, Hughes and Pettersson but there was definitely a case to be made to rebuild around them.

It feels like you’re trying to stack the deck of the conversation with your 23-27 age usage as well. Colorado traded players and rebuilt their roster when Mackinnon was 22.

Also it’s not like this group has ever had success beyond extremely weird circumstances (the bubble and playing with nothing on the line by being eliminated from the playoffs in November). They absolutely didn’t have to choose this way forward.

It’s weird to me you’re one of the guys trumpeting this stuff too. The “fake Stanley cup” target of playoffs you seem to support now is ironic.

Fake Stanley Cup was a stupid GM throwing everything at the next season to keep his job with a 16th place finish with no consideration for the future. Totally different thing from doing your best to open a 4-5 year window and taking a similar approach to the what we did in 2008.

My take hasn't changed. I was pro re-signing Tanev in 2020. Pro building around this core in 2021, just not with the asinine insanely short-sighted OEL trade and terrible UFA signings of bottom-roster players.

Rebuild around Demko/Hughes/Pettersson? How does that even work? We take 3 years sliding along as a 20th place team, harvest some picks that won't even play during the primes of those players, hope that they don't stagnate even further in a losing environment ... and then we maybe get a 2-year window at the end of that?

People here are obsessed with certain types of moves and can't see the forest for the trees. Like I said earlier, it's comical that there are people who are OUTRAGED at the Mikheyev deal but would have been frothing if we'd 'used cap space' to 'take advantage' and pay assets to get a worse player on a bigger contract in Bjorkstrand.

As I've said, I think retaining Boeser will be a huge mistake, and we should have cleared out that cap to give ourselves the opportunity to make a big defensive acquisition if/when it presented itself. Other than that? I think they're basically doing the only reasonable thing they can do.