Management Thread | The Song Remains the Same Edition

[sandwichbird2023]

What really makes me find the "you can only win with your core young, in their prime, and cost controlled" takes so baffling is when the last decade was massively defined by the opposite.

It would have been simply impossible for Pittsburgh, Washington, and Tampa to win those 5 cups between them if they had followed through on the philosophy prescribed by this board. As it turns out, core guys like Crosby, Malkin, Ovechkin, Backstrom, and Stamkos are good at hockey and good at winning, even when their age no longer starts with a 2. Good management realizes how irreplaceable and rare these players are and builds around them for as long as they can.

The cups of those teams in the 2010s are quite literally a result of retooling. Retooling is not some unspeakable, profane no-no word synonymous with "incompetence" just because a generational idiot in Jim Benning tried it.

Where were those players drafted again? Oh right, all are top 5 picks.

The cores of those teams comes from "tanking" or "rebuilding", whatever you want to label it. Once you have those pieces you can build from there. Do we have those pieces? You have 2 generational players in your example, as well as 2 locks for the HHOF and 1 borderline lock. Do you put Petey or Hughes in that group? If not, how are we even comparable? You want to retool and be a contender? Fine, get yourself a couple locks for HOF'ers and retool all you want.

 

[racerjoe]

If memory serves correct, they could have kept Tanev + Toffoli simply by avoiding re-signing Virtanen (trade his rights or let him walk) and buying out Sutter’s last year, along with not trading for Schmidt. Losing Tanev and Toffoli was total incompetence that did not even require prior planning to avoid.

From the sounds of it... at least talking to them would have helped instead of not talking to them trying to get OEL, and then watching the two walk for dirt cheap in UFA

 

[arttk]

mikheyev - pettersson - kuzmenko
miller - good piece - hoglander
??? - good piece - podkolzin
who cares - who cares - who cares

hughes - ???
good piece - bear
oel - dermott

is this your playoff hopeful? it still looks like a very bad team to me with an awful defense and no depth at forward

not to mention you're at like 25-30m (depending on whether you keep garland or not) to fill those five good piece + ??? spots

ok, let me pick a playoff team from the west as reference, and their line combos and the projected point for each player. These are point projections so don't scream about it being inaccurate.

LA kings

Byfield (30ish) - Kopitar (65ish) - Kempe (50ish) pts around 150
Iafallo (50ish) - Danault (55ish) - Arvidsson (50ish) pts around 150
Fiala (ppg) - Lizotte (40ish) - Vilardi (55ish) pts around 170
Lemieux - Kupari - Fagemo 30-40ish?

Doughty (50ish) - Andreson (20?) pts around 70
Roy (25-30?) - Durzi (40?) pts around 60-70
Walker (12ish) - Edler(12ish) pts around 25

YVR

Kuz (70ish) - Petey (90ish) - Mik (55ish) pts around 210ish
Miller (ppg) - ????? (50?) - Hog (40ish) pts around 170ish
Pod (40ish) - ????? (40?) - ????? (40ish) pts around 120ish
Joshua - Lazar - Studnicka 30-40ish ..

Hughes (ppg) - Bear (15pts) pts around 95
?????? (40pts) - ?????? (15pts) pts around 55
Dermott (10pts?) - ?????? (10 pts) pts 15-20?

So that's like just comparing offensive output right .. if we get a 50pt and a 40pt center and a 40ish point defender, i tihnk we have better offensive output than this Kings team that is currently making the playoffs.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

From the sounds of it... at least talking to them would have helped instead of not talking to them trying to get OEL, and then watching the two walk for dirt cheap in UFA

100%. Especially when both Tanev and Toffoli wanted to retire as Canucks. It’s kind of hilarious how one of Benning’s main job duties - communication and managing people - was totally ignored.

 

[credulous]

why pick los angeles? they're probably going to fall out of the playoff picture. they need to hold off edmonton and minnesota

also i don't think adding up point totals is very useful. points mostly come down to opportunity and usage. saying your third line c got 40 points doesn't mean anything with regards to how good a team you have

 

[MarkusNaslund19]

Agreed until you get into letting Benning off the hook.

What happened in 2020 was dead obvious well before COVID which is why I spent that entire season calling it Fake Stanley Cup 2020 - a year where the pinnacle would be making the playoffs before an inevitable step back due to poor cap management.

That happened because of the decision in 2018 to spend $6 million on Roussel and Beagle, not because of a pandemic.

And even after the pandemic, they inexplicably decided it was more important to spend $4.5 million on a backup goalie than their best defender.

This is one of those, 'trust me bro', scenarios. I'm not defending Benning, he put us in a situation where keeping those guys would have meant IIRC buying out Sutter and doing something else.

But I happen to firmly unimpeachably know that we made a bunch of moves expecting that we would then keep one or both of Toffoli and/or Tanev and then Luigi did a rug pull. "We ran out of time" was just covering for his boss. Benning wasn't bright, but he was more feckless than comedically stupid. He was willing to be the face of a lot of Aquillini nonsense because he's a coward company man.

It's not Monday morning quarterbacking when people lay it out in advance. We can argue over whether it would be player X or Y but you can't deny people have been calling for this level of planning for years. Every year we get management playing it by ear and finding themselves in pickle when opportunities arrive.

You will never be in a position to get player X if you continue to manoeuvre yourself out being able to do those kinds of moves. No plan to take advantage of those chances has meant we constantly miss them.



How does a young team watch Tanev, Markstrom and Toffoli walk as UFAs and feel they were not undermined on the ice and into the future?

So you missed the point.

I'm saying, the fact that it ultimately happened due to a stupid response to Covid, doesn't mean that they should have been even more stupid prior to knowing Covid would happen.

 

[sandwichbird2023]

ok, let me pick a playoff team from the west as reference, and their line combos and the projected point for each player. These are point projections so don't scream about it being inaccurate.

LA kings

Byfield (30ish) - Kopitar (65ish) - Kempe (50ish) pts around 150
Iafallo (50ish) - Danault (55ish) - Arvidsson (50ish) pts around 150
Fiala (ppg) - Lizotte (40ish) - Vilardi (55ish) pts around 170
Lemieux - Kupari - Fagemo 30-40ish?

Doughty (50ish) - Andreson (20?) pts around 70
Roy (25-30?) - Durzi (40?) pts around 60-70
Walker (12ish) - Edler(12ish) pts around 25

YVR

Kuz (70ish) - Petey (90ish) - Mik (55ish) pts around 210ish
Miller (ppg) - ????? (50?) - Hog (40ish) pts around 170ish
Pod (40ish) - ????? (40?) - ????? (40ish) pts around 120ish
Joshua - Lazar - Studnicka 30-40ish ..

Hughes (ppg) - Bear (15pts) pts around 95
?????? (40pts) - ?????? (15pts) pts around 55
Dermott (10pts?) - ?????? (10 pts) pts 15-20?

So that's like just comparing offensive output right .. if we get a 50pt and a 40pt center and a 40ish point defender, i tihnk we have better offensive output than this Kings team that is currently making the playoffs.

LAK goals against this season = 170, GA per game = 3.4, goal differential = -7 (the only team in the west in a playoff position currently having a negative goal differential)
Van goals against this season = 191, GA per game = 3.98, goal differential = -31.

So if we are comparing to the only playoff team with a negative goal differential, we need to cut down 21 goals against, or lower our GA per game by about 0.5, just to be on par. Also the Kings played the most games in the west so who knows if they'll even hold onto a playoff spot? So even comparing to them, we still have to tighten A LOT just to match them. I don't know if adding a 40-50 pts players makes that much difference in the standing.

I know why you pick the Kings of all the teams in the west, it makes it seem like we are not that far off. I'm sure management are thinking of the same thing, we are just a couple small pieces away. We are not.

 

[racerjoe]

LAK goals against this season = 170, GA per game = 3.4, goal differential = -7 (the only team in the west in a playoff position currently having a negative goal differential)
Van goals against this season = 191, GA per game = 3.98, goal differential = -31.

So if we are comparing to the only playoff team with a negative goal differential, we need to cut down 21 goals against, or lower our GA per game by about 0.5, just to be on par. Also the Kings played the most games in the west so who knows if they'll even hold onto a playoff spot? So even comparing to them, we still have to tighten A LOT just to match them. I don't know if adding a 40-50 pts players makes that much difference in the standing.

I know why you pick the Kings of all the teams in the west, it makes it seem like we are not that far off. I'm sure management are thinking of the same thing, we are just a couple small pieces away. We are not.

Didnt we just a few days ago think our goalie if he was just average would save us a goal a game? So wouldn't that be more than your 21 goal difference?

Just checking.

 

[canucksfan]

Demko talk doesn't make sense

 

[EpochLink]

Demko talk doesn't make sense

Demko is injured and he's not even skating, Friedman pulling names out of his behind

 

[canucksfan]

Demko is injured and he's not even skating, Friedman pulling names out of his behind

That's what I am thinking. If the team trades Demko that's definitely a rebuilding move. However, other moves they have made don't signal rebuild. Furthermore, doesn't make sense to trade him now when his value is low.

 

[arttk]

But I happen to firmly unimpeachably know that we made a bunch of moves expecting that we would then keep one or both of Toffoli and/or Tanev and then Luigi did a rug pull. "We ran out of time" was just covering for his boss.

Yeah except for the part where he spent the cap on Holtby, virtanen on day 1 and pissed off Tanev by not having talked to him. The fact they traded for Schmidt showed that there was money and if he didn’t f*** around with OEL and actually engaged Tanev’s camp prior to FA, he would’ve signed for less than the cap he ended up allocating towards Schmidt.

 

[EpochLink]

That's what I am thinking. If the team trades Demko that's definitely a rebuilding move. However, other moves they have made don't signal rebuild. Furthermore, doesn't make sense to trade him now when his value is low.

Horvat we can get assests, maybe we get something for Myers who knows.

Boeser probably maybe

 

[arttk]

LAK goals against this season = 170, GA per game = 3.4, goal differential = -7 (the only team in the west in a playoff position currently having a negative goal differential)
Van goals against this season = 191, GA per game = 3.98, goal differential = -31.

So if we are comparing to the only playoff team with a negative goal differential, we need to cut down 21 goals against, or lower our GA per game by about 0.5, just to be on par. Also the Kings played the most games in the west so who knows if they'll even hold onto a playoff spot? So even comparing to them, we still have to tighten A LOT just to match them. I don't know if adding a 40-50 pts players makes that much difference in the standing.

I know why you pick the Kings of all the teams in the west, it makes it seem like we are not that far off. I'm sure management are thinking of the same thing, we are just a couple small pieces away. We are not.

I mean I picked them because they are in the Pacific and Edmonton is kinda of a whack comparison since they have McD and Drai , Calgary is like hanging by a thread. VGK and Seattle are built through alternative means (paying lots of money in draft to get players).

Well i think the point is that, we can have similar offensive output and with better D and Demko playing like Demko, we can cut down the GA. Our GA is like 3.9GA which is insane. Out of that, we are average 1PPA. Just improving Pk to league average would cut that down to .6ish PPA. I suppose with defensive improvement and Demko rebound, you could cut your GA down by 1 to 2.9GA

 

[sandwichbird2023]

Didnt we just a few days ago think our goalie if he was just average would save us a goal a game? So wouldn't that be more than your 21 goal difference?

Just checking.

Possibly, but still, this is a comparison to the Kings, who is just exiting their rebuild and barely hanging on to a playoff spot. If we make improvements we can be a wild card team, I don't think we should aim for that.

I mean I picked them because they are in the Pacific and Edmonton is kinda of a whack comparison since they have McD and Drai , Calgary is like hanging by a thread. VGK and Seattle are built through alternative means (paying lots of money in draft to get players).

Well i think the point is that, we can have similar offensive output and with better D and Demko playing like Demko, we can cut down the GA. Our GA is like 3.9GA which is insane. Out of that, we are average 1PPA. Just improving Pk to league average would cut that down to .6ish PPA. I suppose with defensive improvement and Demko rebound, you could cut your GA down by 1 to 2.9GA

I see what you are saying but that is a lot of "if's". If Demko is Demko, if we improve our PK (its been a huge problem under 2 different coaches over 3+ seasons), if we get defensive improvements (we have guys that are trending down, like OEL and Myers, or replacement level player like Burroughs and Stillman), then we might be on a level comparable to LAK?

Yes I suppose if the stars align we can be a wild card team, and if not we'll be out of the playoff drafting 12-14 overall? That is not very exciting at all.

 

[LickTheEnvelope]

ok, let me pick a playoff team from the west as reference, and their line combos and the projected point for each player. These are point projections so don't scream about it being inaccurate.

LA kings

Byfield (30ish) - Kopitar (65ish) - Kempe (50ish) pts around 150
Iafallo (50ish) - Danault (55ish) - Arvidsson (50ish) pts around 150
Fiala (ppg) - Lizotte (40ish) - Vilardi (55ish) pts around 170
Lemieux - Kupari - Fagemo 30-40ish?

Doughty (50ish) - Andreson (20?) pts around 70
Roy (25-30?) - Durzi (40?) pts around 60-70
Walker (12ish) - Edler(12ish) pts around 25

YVR

Kuz (70ish) - Petey (90ish) - Mik (55ish) pts around 210ish
Miller (ppg) - ????? (50?) - Hog (40ish) pts around 170ish
Pod (40ish) - ????? (40?) - ????? (40ish) pts around 120ish
Joshua - Lazar - Studnicka 30-40ish ..

Hughes (ppg) - Bear (15pts) pts around 95
?????? (40pts) - ?????? (15pts) pts around 55
Dermott (10pts?) - ?????? (10 pts) pts 15-20?

So that's like just comparing offensive output right .. if we get a 50pt and a 40pt center and a 40ish point defender, i tihnk we have better offensive output than this Kings team that is currently making the playoffs.

The Canucks already have a better offensive output than the Kings.

The Canucks have the worst defensive group in the league and a historically bad PK.

I also don't know how you have taken OEL out and even Myers both of whom are likely back next year unless the Canucks are looking at giving up assets to move Myers.

Possibly, but still, this is a comparison to the Kings, who is just exiting their rebuild and barely hanging on to a playoff spot. If we make improvements we can be a wild card team, I don't think we should aim for that.


I see what you are saying but that is a lot of "if's". If Demko is Demko, if we improve our PK (its been a huge problem under 2 different coaches over 3+ seasons), if we get defensive improvements (we have guys that are trending down, like OEL and Myers, or replacement level player like Burroughs and Stillman), then we might be on a level comparable to LAK?

Yes I suppose if the stars align we can be a wild card team, and if not we'll be out of the playoff drafting 12-14 overall? That is not very exciting at all.

I don't actually believe it's possible. Another problem with not being a playoff team is you over-pay for free-agents. You can see this by simply looking at the Canucks last 10 years.

Take a look, then look at the UFA pool this summer. There's not much there and the top guys left will be very expensive.

 

[LickTheEnvelope]

I am prepared:

 

[Slapshot_11]

Guessing he was a high pick that has failed to meet expectations

 

[credulous]

Guessing he was a high pick that has failed to meet expectations

he's actually an excellent middle six winger with maybe some upside at c

 

[arttk]

Possibly, but still, this is a comparison to the Kings, who is just exiting their rebuild and barely hanging on to a playoff spot. If we make improvements we can be a wild card team, I don't think we should aim for that.


I see what you are saying but that is a lot of "if's". If Demko is Demko, if we improve our PK (its been a huge problem under 2 different coaches over 3+ seasons), if we get defensive improvements (we have guys that are trending down, like OEL and Myers, or replacement level player like Burroughs and Stillman), then we might be on a level comparable to LAK?

Yes I suppose if the stars align we can be a wild card team, and if not we'll be out of the playoff drafting 12-14 overall? That is not very exciting at all.

I think the motivation behind having a system is to move away from being solely dependent on your goalie going super hero.
I think improving the PK is a necessity, that’s why I say like the 2C and 3C we bring in, they need to be good at PK. The wingers, Pk wingers. The 2nd paring D, good at PK. Like every single guy needs to be able to Pk. I think that’s the most direct way to reduce GA.

Well the idea is you get to that level first and then you continue to find ways to improve. The benefits of drafting in the top 10 this year is that we might get a good center prospect that might be able to come in really soon. considering how many development coaches we have, it’s reasonable to expect some improvement from Pod and Hog and if they don’t improve, you replace them.

 

[Chrysalis99]

I’m of the opinion management doesn’t matter. Over the last 20 years we’ve had numerous Presidents, Vice-Presidents, Presidents of Hockey Operations, General Managers of every kind, special Consultants and a whole host of other front office people. Add to that the coaches, assistants and all the players that have come and gone. There’s ONE THING that’s been constantly in place over that time period….Fredo Aqualini. Until he’s gone nothing changes.

 

[rypper]

Now it's probably nothing, but Demko's mother is pretty active on Twitter and going through her likes, it's a lot (A LOT) to do with the mistreatment of Boudreau, and how bad canucks mgmt etc look.

It's not necessarily a window into what her son thinks but it could be.

 

[arttk]

I am prepared:

Eww

 

[Gurn]

Now it's probably nothing, but Demko's mother is pretty active on Twitter and going through her likes, it's a lot (A LOT) to do with the mistreatment of Boudreau, and how bad canucks mgmt etc look.

It's not necessarily a window into what her son thinks but it could be.

Maybe, Pearson isn't the only guy with medical issues?
wonder if management 'pushed' him to come back sooner than he should have.

 

[arttk]

The Canucks already have a better offensive output than the Kings.

The Canucks have the worst defensive group in the league and a historically bad PK.

I also don't know how you have taken OEL out and even Myers both of whom are likely back next year unless the Canucks are looking at giving up assets to move Myers.

We have better offense right now but the issue is defense. We will need to sacrifice offense to improve on defense due to the type of players we have and the type of players we need to replace them with.

Myers is most likely gone after his bonus is paid out. OEL i am guessing they will buy him out. I don’t think we will need to pay asset to get rid of Myers. 6M cap but 1M cash is an asset to a bunch of teams on low budget tank.