Management Thread | Regular Season Edition

[tantalum]

Can't remember which thread it was, but for those who were going on and on about how bad Green is. I just saw a new interview with Tocchet where he reiterated that he consults with Craig Berube, Jon Cooper, and Travis Green in terms of other coaches in the league.

Hello cognitive dissonance. It can't be that maybe there's more going on behind the scenes than people can see from the outside, can it?

Keep in mind thinking the game and coaching can be wildly different things. Being an assistant coach and head coach are also wildly different things. Travis Green seems an intelligent guy. Doesn't mean he's head coach material and thus far in his head coaching career has shown he hasn't done a good job. Can he rectify that? Sure but he has objectively been a below average head coach. Not disastrous but below average.

 

[theguardianII]

What's always impressed me about Allvin, is that in the word of the gambler, "he knows when to hold-em, and when to throw-em". If he figures a guy can't help them, he's as good as gone, even if it was Allvin who signed him in the first place.

So players like Kuzmnko, Mikheyev, Beauvillier, Dickinson and Podkolzin were all flipped, often after only a single season. And Kuzmenko and Podkolzin were players that Allvin actually re-upped, before deciding to cut his losses.

It's such a refreshing approach. Under Benning, even when it became obvious that the guy they signed was a huge mistake and would never live up to expectations, he simply couldn't pull the trigger. And he even re-upped guys like Sutter and Gudbranson, after disappointing seasons.....somehow hoping they'd magically regain their form, whatever that was.

And I think Allvin is hardly done yet with the start of the season a week away. If he can make a deal that improves the hockey club even marginally, he'll do it. And if some guy they like pops up on waivers, he'll be active.

Flipped for what?
Flipped at what expense?

Or cut at all costs regardless of outcome?
Just these three;

Kuz was in only his second year in the league.
Mik was recovering from a very serious knee injury.
Zadorov was asking for 275K, never seriously injured.

Cost - Not counting the players that contributed to the 109pts.
1rst rnd 2024
4th rnd 2024
5th rnd 2024
3rd rnd 2026
2nd rnd 2027
*5th rnd 2024*
AAA RHD prospect
B prospect LHD
2 yrs of 710K retention
Lafferty and/or the added *5th rnd pick in 2024* to get him.

These late picks are important says Allvin.

Return -
26 gms - Lindholm & 54 gms - Zadorov both vital in playoffs. Lindholm 1rst in pts forwards, Zadorov 2nd in pts by defence
4th rnd 2027
Gone for nothing

?????? Good?????

Even though he inherited the OEL contract the buyout was .... well they said at the time they didn't want to add a pick because they were so important so they ended up with 8 years of dead cap space instead of 4 yrs at a lesser cost cap hit of 3.5 mil.
They probably could have traded him by adding one of those supposed priceless traded picks and retained only half of their obligation to his contract, 3.5 mil ending in 2026, instead they get a 2.3+ mil cap hit this year and 4.7+ mil cap hits the next 2 yrs followed by 4 yrs of 2+ mil.
But keeping the draft picks was so vitally important then, really?
What changed?

 

[God]

Can't remember which thread it was, but for those who were going on and on about how bad Green is. I just saw a new interview with Tocchet where he reiterated that he consults with Craig Berube, Jon Cooper, and Travis Green in terms of other coaches in the league.

Hello cognitive dissonance. It can't be that maybe there's more going on behind the scenes than people can see from the outside, can it?

I mean, Tocchet has clearly communicated in interviews that he has specific systems play in mind that seem to be working (perhaps with the exception of holding onto the puck for a perfect shot, but even he's talked about loosening that up).

Green's system was relying on the goalie to save his ass and having the D hit two wingers parked at centre ice for a breakaway, or whatever. And then he'd get mad when anyone asked him a question about it. And he was still shit in NJ, and I doubt he's learned anything.

 

[Hit the post]

Being an assistant general manage and general manager are also wildly different things. Dave Nonis seems an intelligent guy. Doesn't mean he's GM material and thus far in his GM career has shown he hasn't done a good job. Can he rectify that? Sure but he has objectively been a below average GM. Not disastrous but below average.

Edited to talk about Dave Nonis.

I mean, Tocchet has clearly communicated in interviews that he has specific systems play in mind that seem to be working (perhaps with the exception of holding onto the puck for a perfect shot, but even he's talked about loosening that up).

Green's system was relying on the goalie to save his ass and having the D hit two wingers parked at centre ice for a breakaway, or whatever. And then he'd get mad when anyone asked him a question about it. And he was still shit in NJ, and I doubt he's learned anything.

As opposed to Torts who had no system..



edit: and f*ck you Tarantino.

 

[arttk]

Flipped for what?
Flipped at what expense?

Or cut at all costs regardless of outcome?
Just these three;

Kuz was in only his second year in the league.
Mik was recovering from a very serious knee injury.
Zadorov was asking for 275K, never seriously injured.

Cost - Not counting the players that contributed to the 109pts.
1rst rnd 2024
4th rnd 2024
5th rnd 2024
3rd rnd 2026
2nd rnd 2027
*5th rnd 2024*
AAA RHD prospect
B prospect LHD
2 yrs of 710K retention
Lafferty and/or the added *5th rnd pick in 2024* to get him.

These late picks are important says Allvin.

Return -
26 gms - Lindholm & 54 gms - Zadorov both vital in playoffs. Lindholm 1rst in pts forwards, Zadorov 2nd in pts by defence
4th rnd 2027
Gone for nothing

?????? Good?????

Even though he inherited the OEL contract the buyout was .... well they said at the time they didn't want to add a pick because they were so important so they ended up with 8 years of dead cap space instead of 4 yrs at a lesser cost cap hit of 3.5 mil.
They probably could have traded him by adding one of those supposed priceless traded picks and retained only half of their obligation to his contract, 3.5 mil ending in 2026, instead they get a 2.3+ mil cap hit this year and 4.7+ mil cap hits the next 2 yrs followed by 4 yrs of 2+ mil.
But keeping the draft picks was so vitally important then, really?
What changed?

if your question is, was it worth it to spend so much assets to get us into a competitive window. The answer is yes. The only asset of value that was trade is like the 1st, 2nd and they are not even that big of a loss considering we finished quite high and the 1st is like a 28th OA.

I think a big part that you have omitted in the return section is how much cap that freed up that allowed us to add all the players that we have added and setting up the culture that should take us into contender space. If we end up contending for the next 3-5 years (ending up in round 2, 3, finals), would it upset anyone that we trade away every single 1st,2nd,3rd rounder in the next 3 years, f*** no.

 

[rypper]

If we end up contending for the next 3-5 years (ending up in round 2, 3, finals), would it upset anyone that we trade away every single 1st,2nd,3rd rounder in the next 3 years, f*** no.

I can predict one poster who will still be hung up over trading Kuzmenko.

 

[AlainVigneaultsGum]

I can predict one poster who will still be hung up over trading Kuzmenko.

Still missing that fifth we gave up for Lafferty tbh.

 

[tantalum]

if your question is, was it worth it to spend so much assets to get us into a competitive window. The answer is yes. The only asset of value that was trade is like the 1st, 2nd and they are not even that big of a loss considering we finished quite high and the 1st is like a 28th OA.

I think a big part that you have omitted in the return section is how much cap that freed up that allowed us to add all the players that we have added and setting up the culture that should take us into contender space. If we end up contending for the next 3-5 years (ending up in round 2, 3, finals), would it upset anyone that we trade away every single 1st,2nd,3rd rounder in the next 3 years, f*** no.

It's not just to get in to the window but the canucks had a reasonable chance at a playoff run. They were buyers. Buyers don't typically win deadline/near deadline deals. Unless they win the cup.

But mainly I don't understand the thesis that this discussion was started on. Plenty of people evaluate and criticize/approve trades. I don't really recall anyone just accepting any deal as a good deal by Alvin/Rutherford because they made it. Nor, it should be pointed out, did anyone just say a deal was bad because Benning made it. This is a pretty good board for discussing the merits of individual moves. We all have our blind spots and hills to die on but in general it's pretty even keeled.

 

[RobsonStreet]

thanks for illustrating for me

when even the mildest criticism is shut down with "this has very obviously been one of the best-run organizations in the NHL" it's pointless to ever be critical if you expect any kind of discussion

and i'm just pointing out why there's no substantive discussion of management, not trying to convince you or anyone else they are actually bad

Imagining your internal world as complex and other people’s internal worlds as simple is a choice.

If it were easy to shut down debate using rhetoric, either the pro or anti Benning folks would have shouted the other out of the room. That’s not what happened.

What I see now seems more like a fanbase holding a majority opinion with a couple people on social media trying to position themselves as smarter than everyone.

 

[rypper]

Taj is spearheading the "there's not enough controversy surrounding Miller not playing a preseason game yet" movement.

I don't give a shit if he doesn't play a minute if preseason, if it means he's good to go game one.

 

[Vector]

Taj is spearheading the "there's not enough controversy surrounding Miller not playing a preseason game yet" movement.

I don't give a shit if he doesn't play a minute if preseason, if it means he's good to go game one.

#Tajplan

 

[kanucks25]

Can't remember which thread it was, but for those who were going on and on about how bad Green is. I just saw a new interview with Tocchet where he reiterated that he consults with Craig Berube, Jon Cooper, and Travis Green in terms of other coaches in the league.

Hello cognitive dissonance. It can't be that maybe there's more going on behind the scenes than people can see from the outside, can it?

Two things can be true at once.

It can be true that Tocchet and Green are buddies and that Green has good insights on the game and/or players.

But at the same time, it can also be true that Green is a shit head coach at the NHL level. The results we've seen back up that claim.

Perhaps Green does better in a new situation or improves by learning from his experiences. But he was simply not a good head coach here.

I think Exhibit A would be the accountability the players have shown on the ice under Tocchet, especially Miller whose Bozo-Mode Green had absolutely no leash on.

 

[theguardianII]

if your question is, was it worth it to spend so much assets to get us into a competitive window. The answer is yes. The only asset of value that was trade is like the 1st, 2nd and they are not even that big of a loss considering we finished quite high and the 1st is like a 28th OA.

I think a big part that you have omitted in the return section is how much cap that freed up that allowed us to add all the players that we have added and setting up the culture that should take us into contender space. If we end up contending for the next 3-5 years (ending up in round 2, 3, finals), would it upset anyone that we trade away every single 1st,2nd,3rd rounder in the next 3 years, f*** no.

A big question is, What if the team regresses?
Who is there to replace an aging Miller?
Where are the 3, 4, 5 & 6 coming from? The entire league is going XXL on the backend.

Competitive window? A phrase and nothing more. Competitive to not making the playoffs, which half the league makes or competitive at a cup run? How can it be extended for more than another season?

EP ain't that young in hockey terms anymore. Miller certainly isn't. Boeser can't "carry" a line and there are no players like those guys were in the system.
In the system are a bunch of munchkin dmen by today's standards.

Sort of like a VP, one heart beat from being the P. EP gets hurt, Hughes, Demko doesn't get well any of those three jeopardize "competitive"

The three guys I mentioned were all key cogs in last years real season games, two were all season.

The cap space to get players? Which players? Soucy? Pretty much the only one still here making more than 2.5 mil.

With everything I already posted I DO see a way forward but it means trading a hot Boeser and Garland to the right teams THIS year. If not in on Jan 1 make a deal for Necas with retention on either, deal with Rutherford's buddy for some of that Bluejacket depth, there would need to be a lot of wheeling and dealing.

What if Hughes decides to play with his brothers in 2 years.

IMO it is much too easy to slip backwards than leap ahead. Even last year Rutherford said if lucky and everything goes our way. Last year injuries were almost a non factor, shooting percentages were ballistic and the team had more goal scorers. Sprong might help but Tocchet doesn't like a guy with worse defensive chops than Kuzmenko.

Let's make the next 1rst, 2nds and future picks used for the future or players that will be on the team for more than a cup of coffee don't you think?

Anyway we'll see, games aren't always won on paper.

 

[theguardianII]

I mean, Tocchet has clearly communicated in interviews that he has specific systems play in mind that seem to be working (perhaps with the exception of holding onto the puck for a perfect shot, but even he's talked about loosening that up).

Green's system was relying on the goalie to save his ass and having the D hit two wingers parked at centre ice for a breakaway, or whatever. And then he'd get mad when anyone asked him a question about it. And he was still shit in NJ, and I doubt he's learned anything.

Both use the same systems used in PeeWee hockey, basic and dependant on a few players to win.
Systemic defence and a couple of gifted players or PP.

Defensive hockey is much easier to be consistent, keep it close, best defence is a tenacious forecheck, keep the puck to the perimeter, come up with a couple of offensive plays, left side lock, neutral zone trap, 1 - 3 - 1, crash goalie. Skate fast make contact skill not needed speed is and with size a bonus. Dump and pray hockey.

I used to make different systems for different lines because I took whatever was there and made a team, not everyone needs to be a clone.

 

[arttk]

A big question is, What if the team regresses?

Then they f***ed up.

There is no such thing as taking the safest and least risky route to the cup. You need to take risk in order to win. You minimize those risk by making sure the pro, amateur scouting is good, maximizing development and getting good coaches. But at the end of the day, you need to take risks to win. Worrying about “what happens if they f*** up” is loser mentality.

If Demko wasn’t injured, we probably would’ve made the 3rd round, hell we were 1 win from that. Who knows how far we’ll go this year but if the team tracks well, they better be buying and taking those risks because the future is now.

 

[kanucks25]

Re: criticisms of management.

Allvin has already done many things that were puzzling/questionable in the moment and then eventually did not work out.

And then there are things that can be debated, like trading for Lindholm, the Pettersson contract, not retaining Zadorov, or even the overall direction management is taking.

When Allvin first got here he talked a lot about their plan of building "brick by brick" and at the time I kind of interpreted that as a lazy non-answer. But that's kind of exactly what they've been doing. No real homeruns yet but they are consistently getting on base: scouting to find diamonds in the rough, bolstering their off-ice development team, instilling a culture that demands accountability and work-ethic. And yeah you can argue that these are kind of baseline things you'd expect from any management team but as we've seen here in the past and in many places around the league, this stuff isn't as standard as it ought to be.

So, like others have mentioned, (and to continue the baseball theme) nobody is going to bat 1000. But as long as we're tangibly headed in the right direction, I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt on some of the issues. And I don't think anyone can deny that the health of the franchise appears to be significantly improved since the management change.

Benning's incompetence and the toxicity in the market that it created made me dislike my team. A lot of time it turned from dislike to apathy, which is even worse. Right now I just want to breathe the fresh air and enjoy the ride. So although criticisms are definitely warranted and should not be dismissed, I just don't really care right now until they do something really and obviously stupid.

 

[andora]

An underappreciated ability in a management is being able to consistently supply effective bottom 5 forwards and bottom 3 dmen and so far they are doing a good job

THis also allows you to use draft picks to supplement where it matters most.. top end of the lineup

When you dont have to worry about your foot soldiers you get so much more flexibility

 

[theguardianII]

Benning's incompetence and the toxicity in the market that it created made me dislike my team. A lot of time it turned from dislike to apathy, which is even worse. Right now I just want to breathe the fresh air and enjoy the ride. So although criticisms are definitely warranted and should not be dismissed, I just don't really care right now until they do something really and obviously stupid.

I am FAR from being a Benning fan.

Obviously stupid, I think they already did, the OEL buyout and trading Kuzmenko and adding 1rst, 4th and AAA RHD & B LHD prospects for a rental.

There must have been some reason for Lindholm to prefer going to Boston rather than signing here for the same money, some serious reason.

 

[Vector]

I am FAR from being a Benning fan.

Obviously stupid, I think they already did, the OEL buyout and trading Kuzmenko and adding 1rst, 4th and AAA RHD & B LHD prospects for a rental.

There must have been some reason for Lindholm to prefer going to Boston rather than signing here for the same money, some serious reason.

In Boston he gets to be the #1 centre and in Vancouver he would be the #3. As was reported by multiple people.

 

[theguardianII]

In Boston he gets to be the #1 centre and in Vancouver he would be the #3. As was reported by multiple people.

Maybe, but he wasn't in the PO's.
Besides he is 30 yrs old this season, if he signed the same contract here getting paid 7+ mil for 6 years he isn't likely to be #1 in 4 years and the pressure is much less as a #3.

Maybe it had more to do with the chance to win a cup? That makes as much sense, if being the #1 guy is that important no doubt winning a cup is too.

But it doesn't change the price paid for a rental

 

[Vector]

Maybe, but he wasn't in the PO's.
Besides he is 30 yrs old this season, if he signed the same contract here getting paid 7+ mil for 6 years he isn't likely to be #1 in 4 years and the pressure is much less as a #3.

I don’t follow this logic at all.

 

[theguardianII]

I don’t follow this logic at all.

Okay, you say he signed to be the #1 center, that was his wish.

I simply said that if that was THAT important to him then maybe winning a cup is too and the Bruins are playoff machines almost always in the hunt.

Regardless maybe it had to do with the Canucks trying to trade him at the TDL too.

It doesn't matter, it is the short sighted cost of all those assets and a 35+ goal scorer for his short time here.

 

[RobsonStreet]

Okay, you say he signed to be the #1 center, that was his wish.

I simply said that if that was THAT important to him then maybe winning a cup is too and the Bruins are playoff machines almost always in the hunt.

Regardless maybe it had to do with the Canucks trying to trade him at the TDL too.

It doesn't matter, it is the short sighted cost of all those assets and a 35+ goal scorer for his short time here.

I’d be questioning management if they had re-signed Lindholm. I’m concerned they reportedly offered that deal to begin with.

Expiring contracts can be a feature - the guys that walked gave the team the means to spread the wealth across a few other players and mitigate the risk of having too much money and term consolidated in one third line centre and one #4 defenseman. I don’t know why NBA fans seem to understand this better than NHL fans (imo).

This includes getting out from under Kuzmenko’s deal; saying they traded away a 35+ scorer is like saying Benning once traded for a Norris trophy winning Dman - unless their future performance is in line with their past performance, you’re effectively overpaying for nice memories.

 

[MS]

I’d be questioning management if they had re-signed Lindholm. I’m concerned they reportedly offered that deal to begin with.

Expiring contracts can be a feature - the guys that walked gave the team the means to spread the wealth across a few other players and mitigate the risk of having too much money and term consolidated in one third line centre and one #4 defenseman. I don’t know why NBA fans seem to understand this better than NHL fans (imo).

This includes getting out from under Kuzmenko’s deal; saying they traded away a 35+ scorer is like saying Benning once traded for a Norris trophy winning Dman - unless their future performance is in line with their past performance, you’re effectively overpaying for nice memories.

Yeah, it's been nearly 20 years of the salary cap and NHL fans (and media) still have a terrible time understanding how value propositions work.

In the Lindholm deal, even if you accept that they traded Kuzmenko and his 24-25 contract for absolutely nothing it's actually like they received Jake Debrusk back in exchange for Kuzmenko because they basically took that free cash and applied it directly to Debrusk to fill the same spot on the roster.

 

[theguardianII]

I’d be questioning management if they had re-signed Lindholm. I’m concerned they reportedly offered that deal to begin with.

Expiring contracts can be a feature - the guys that walked gave the team the means to spread the wealth across a few other players and mitigate the risk of having too much money and term consolidated in one third line centre and one #4 defenseman. I don’t know why NBA fans seem to understand this better than NHL fans (imo).

This includes getting out from under Kuzmenko’s deal; saying they traded away a 35+ scorer is like saying Benning once traded for a Norris trophy winning Dman - unless their future performance is in line with their past performance, you’re effectively overpaying for nice memories.

Then maybe in 2026 they can just not draft at all. Just sit there and not make a call. Or put Hughes and Boeser on waivers