Management Thread | The Song Remains the Same Edition

[racerjoe]

There seems to be a big disconnect because of what some people perceive when they hear certain words. While the Canucks never tanked they did Rebuild under Benning. Because he was such a terrible GM the Canucks are now in the position they are in. That does mean they have a strong few guys to build around.

If you want to keep petey Hughes and Demko, you have to try and turn things around quick. It won't be easy and yes teams are in better position, then the Canucks, but that doesn't mean you don't try. Worst case you are a few years down the road and no worse off.

 

[sting101]

They paid nothing for Booth and got a 3rd back in that deal. Then Booth fell off a cliff, although I will acknowledge that his fit was questionable from the start. But they paid nothing.

Ballard was a failure.

Honestly the biggest sore thumb in Gillis’ trade history from 2010 onwards was the Pahlsson trade. I hated the Schneider deal, and still think they could have done better there, but it worked out for them because Schneider’s body gave out and we were bad anyways so it didn’t matter.

They paid 13% of the salary cap for 2 useless players. Would 10.7 million in todays money look like paying nothing.

The biggest failure was not using Hodgson and Schneider to get the pieces necessary to win with Henrik and Daniel at 31-34yrs old

Derrick Roy was hated that was terrible move for the room alone to say nothing about how poorly he played

Bernier was a bad move and Kassian.

Higgins and Hansen last contracts

But yes Benning was the worst pro scouting and contract cap knowledge of all time. It's not even close.

 

[Peen]

Why on earth would we just ignore the first two years of their tank/rebuild where they had top-10 picks and 20 draft selections in 14 rounds?

Why on earth would we just ignore that Detroit was trying to finish bottom-3 in all of those years but that it isn't that simple and automatic to draft #1 overall and get a franchise C?

You’re not really wrong here about Detroit, but the Canucks haven’t tried to bottom out in any year except the TDL onwards in 2017 and you won’t acknowledge that aspect.

 

[MS]

You’re not really wrong here about Detroit, but the Canucks haven’t tried to bottom out in any year except the TDL onwards in 2017 and you won’t acknowledge that aspect.

Of course I've acknowledged that? I've repeatedly said that it was an accidental tank. The whole meaning of 'accidental' is that it wasn't what they were trying to do.

But the bottom line is that we ended up with 6 top-10 picks as part of that accidental tank and the sort of collection of talent you'd expect from an intentional tank. And much better than what teams like Arizona/Detroit/LA were rewarded with for their years of tanking.

 

[I Hart Conor Garland]

There’s a funny alternate timeline where we are managed by Dale Tallon and coached by Mike Babcock.

If that alternate timeline includes being owned by Tom Gaglardi, I take Tallon and Babcock.

 

[Hit the post]

There’s a funny alternate timeline where Buffalo drafted Dale Tallon...

 

[Peen]

Of course I've acknowledged that? I've repeatedly said that it was an accidental tank. The whole meaning of 'accidental' is that it wasn't what they were trying to do.

But the bottom line is that we ended up with 6 top-10 picks as part of that accidental tank and the sort of collection of talent you'd expect from an intentional tank. And much better than what teams like Arizona/Detroit/LA were rewarded with for their years of tanking.

Actually, I would suggest that it isn’t.

Maybe from the results it is, but the process isn’t the same. We didn’t acquire a wealth of picks when we were further away. We never leveraged capspace. These are the products of intentional tanking.

The reason we never see teams rarely in the gutter for as long as us is because effective, intentional tanking like what Toronto did in 16 means you’re able to turn the corner quickly.

My guess is that we will see the same progress from Chicago and Anaheim given what I saw out of them this summer.

 

[Reverend Mayhem]

If you want to keep petey Hughes and Demko, you have to try and turn things around quick. It won't be easy and yes teams are in better position, then the Canucks, but that doesn't mean you don't try. Worst case you are a few years down the road and no worse off.

Another consideration, which I hate because I'm really "Cup is the only thing" camp is if you don't go scorched earth just yet you don't need to really burn assets to rid of OEL/Miller deals. But I think as long as those deals are in place, you are not reaching the upper echelon of the league of which you are seriously contending for a Cup. Which likely means you are locking into another 6-7 years of middling hockey where if you get lucky maybe you win a round or two, but otherwise likely are going to be watching 6-7 more years of streaky, at times uninspired hockey.

The other part of me is wondering if you do that, you aren't simply just saying goodbye to those 3 at some point down the road anyways. I think there is a route where you can make this team an upper echelon contender, but the thing that doesn't inspire my confidence is that I don't think we have the people in place to do that...not that they are bad, I just think that requires some form of Pollock-level miracle work.

 

[theguardianII]

Good Lord, one win against the worst team in the league and the "this team is closer than you think" crowd is already back. Drance is prophetic.

Management manipulation of media and astro surfing.

If Holland is building your team it will take 70 years, just like Benning can spend 8 years "rebuilding" while making zero improvement to the roster or the standings and exiting with a mess of contracts and no farm. I'd take spending 7 years and end where Det is now versus spend 8 years with Benning and end where we are now.

The clock in Det starts with Yzerman in 2019 in my books. And their lack of centres reflects their lack of top 3 picks and only one top 5 pick, the point of tanking is to land that franchise centre in the first couple picks of the draft, not try to be half in half out and pick 6-10 every year.

Holland has a playoff team now, but it is very strange they aren't winning more. Their defence is a little shallow, Nurse is not THAT good. Should the Canucks buy out OEL I can see him signing there for peanuts and playing a 3/4 role with some PP time, something he is really good at. Him AND Schenn? IMO pts the Oilers as favourites in the NHL not just in Canada. But it is strange that TO and Edmonton have almost the exact same issues, goal and defence with two super stars at forward. Nurse - Rielly, Barrie - Holl, Liljegren - Bouchard, Murray - Campbell And both at the same parts of their playoff windows and looking like a single cup run, maybe two and then cap hell or older players or losing one super star on each team. Almost like a plan.

Why on earth would we just ignore the first two years of their tank/rebuild where they had top-10 picks and 20 draft selections in 14 rounds?

Why on earth would we just ignore that Detroit was trying to finish bottom-3 in all of those years but that it isn't that simple and automatic to draft #1 overall and get a franchise C?

They over filled the farm, so many prospects and more coming.

Detroit also enjoyed 20 years of playoffs and a few cups too.

They traded away over half their 1rst rnd picks.

They invented the "Luongo contract" and had more of them to suffer through.

They sold the farm for success and even then their top player bolted to Russia which could have helped them more here as a mentor but he wanted to win and cost them another 1rst rnd pick to shed that salary.

Detroit's 7 years which BTW were not as bad as the Canucks, has ended up with them having only two players over 30 yrs old, over 25 prospects under 21 yrs old, more than 41 million dollars in cap space next year and added picks.

They are also ahead of the Canucks in the standings in a tougher division.

Now not all those prospects will pan out 70 to 80% are not likely to but that still means 2 to 5 will. And that is just the one's under 21, there are older one's too.

Canucks will have an 8 million dollar 30 yr old Miller or Horvat 28/29 and similar money, Detroit will have no players of that age taking that kind of money and supported by only 2 players around 24 yrs old.

Is management in denial or just being arrogant about what fans really want? Are they using the extremes to scare fans? Embarrassment to get the forums ridiculed nationally again? There is manipulation happening. It would be illogical for it not to be happening. Allvin is just so disconnected from reality of the majority of fans and this market.

 

[theguardianII]

Of course I've acknowledged that? I've repeatedly said that it was an accidental tank. The whole meaning of 'accidental' is that it wasn't what they were trying to do.

But the bottom line is that we ended up with 6 top-10 picks as part of that accidental tank and the sort of collection of talent you'd expect from an intentional tank. And much better than what teams like Arizona/Detroit/LA were rewarded with for their years of tanking.

Two players? Pettersson and Hughes? That's enough in 3/4 years?

Arizona has been a joke, they are still owned by the NHL by way of the NHL's satellite company holds the loan and is guaranteed by the NHL.
There have been years they didn't even make he cap minimum but were never punished for breaking the rules. Public knowledge through the Arizona bankruptcy hearings.

But Arizona now has 19 EXTRA picks over the next 3 drafts, 11 players under 25, 37 million n cap space next year, 29 prospects under 21 yrs old with 40 draft picks coming plus whatever Chychun gets them.

And are those team's behind at all? All are ahead with more cap space, YOUNGER players and much more depth.

 

[racerjoe]

Another consideration, which I hate because I'm really "Cup is the only thing" camp is if you don't go scorched earth just yet you don't need to really burn assets to rid of OEL/Miller deals. But I think as long as those deals are in place, you are not reaching the upper echelon of the league of which you are seriously contending for a Cup. Which likely means you are locking into another 6-7 years of middling hockey where if you get lucky maybe you win a round or two, but otherwise likely are going to be watching 6-7 more years of streaky, at times uninspired hockey.

The other part of me is wondering if you do that, you aren't simply just saying goodbye to those 3 at some point down the road anyways. I think there is a route where you can make this team an upper echelon contender, but the thing that doesn't inspire my confidence is that I don't think we have the people in place to do that...not that they are bad, I just think that requires some form of Pollock-level miracle work.

OEL sure I get that. I don't look at miller though as a bad Contract. Maybe I am alone on this, but he is still a ppg play driving Forward, those are worth 8 mil, and while he may take steps back, hopefully it will happen as the cap goes up.

 

[vancityluongo]

Why on earth would we just ignore the first two years of their tank/rebuild where they had top-10 picks and 20 draft selections in 14 rounds?

Why on earth would we just ignore that Detroit was trying to finish bottom-3 in all of those years but that it isn't that simple and automatic to draft #1 overall and get a franchise C?

You're right - but the margin here is very thin. If Detroit simply takes Hughes over Zadina, they have a better core than us.

And stars are not the only way to build a team. Look at Vegas, Seattle.



The core here is fine and sure, better than Detroit or Arizona or Montreal. But they just don't have the ability to make moves to find contributing players, even if they had the pro scouting ability to do so. You rightfully point out that amateur scouting is hard - so is pro scouting.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

I could be in the minority, but I take Detroit’s core over ours, if “core” includes long-term immovable contracts like OEL and Miller. Seider, Edvinsson, and Hronek >>> Hughes and OEL. They have way more flexibility to improve their roster long-term as well.

 

[Reverend Mayhem]

I could be in the minority, but I take Detroit’s core over ours, if “core” includes long-term immovable contracts like OEL and Miller. Seider, Edvinsson, and Hronek >>> Hughes and OEL. They have way more flexibility to improve their roster long-term as well.

Easily. They have better prospects and young guys at a better position.

OEL sure I get that. I don't look at miller though as a bad Contract. Maybe I am alone on this, but he is still a ppg play driving Forward, those are worth 8 mil, and while he may take steps back, hopefully it will happen as the cap goes up.

Yeah, perhaps. I just don't like Miller as a leader for this team. If he's a culture-setter for the dressing room I am not optimistic.

 

[F A N]

A big part of the rebuilding process is the drafting. Drafting Petey, Hughes, and Demko gave us premium players playing premium positions. Whiffing on picks, even when they're not complete busts hurts. It also didn't help that no other team in NHL lottery history had the type of bad lottery luck the Canucks had.

Even then, unintentionally, we drafted in the top 10 from 2013 to 2019 + Boeser in the year that we didn't.

 

[racerjoe]

Easily. They have better prospects and young guys at a better position.



Yeah, perhaps. I just don't like Miller as a leader for this team. If he's a culture-setter for the dressing room I am not optimistic.

I say this so often, we have no idea if he is a good leader or bad leader. For two years people were saying strip the C from Bo give it to Miller, and then I was saying the same thing I am now. We don't know.

Whoever the leader is after Bo, I just hope the team picks a good person, and a good leader.

 

[Reverend Mayhem]

I say this so often, we have no idea if he is a good leader or bad leader. For two years people were saying strip the C from Bo give it to Miller, and then I was saying the same thing I am now. We don't know.

Whoever the leader is after Bo, I just hope the team picks a good person, and a good leader.

I agree with that in principle. I see people say all the time about similar players who for better or worse wear their heart on their sleeve that they should be the captain. I think for 90% of all reality (words are failing me), it is just a letter. Leaders lead regardless.

I don't know what the room is like or how well-liked he is, but when the team is playing like dogshit and he's going through a rough stretch, it's not good PR to say how you think you are playing well defensively. Or when you have a horrible turnover and half-ass your backcheck. These are all things that I can see. Personally, if I turned the puck over or had a 50-50 puck that I didn't get, I'd backcheck the living shit outta that to prove that's my puck. When a team is going through a rough stretch, I think of the Burrows quote that "satisfaction leads to complacency". So I don't really know what is going in the room, but there have also been clear markers that even with context just make me cringe as a competitor.

 

[mriswith]

Why on earth would we just ignore the first two years of their tank/rebuild where they had top-10 picks and 20 draft selections in 14 rounds?

Why on earth would we just ignore that Detroit was trying to finish bottom-3 in all of those years but that it isn't that simple and automatic to draft #1 overall and get a franchise C?

Depends on what you're discussing. If you're asking a generic "how long has Detroit been rebuilding" then you absolutely count the Holland years.

If you're using them as a a model of what to expect when tanking, then it isn't useful to include completely wasted years under mismanagement where Holland had a capped out roster and was blowing all of his picks.

You've beaten that exact drum many times on the "age gap" argument - it isn't useful to use Benning's age gap trades as a model for what to expect from all age gap trades. It applies to mismanaged rebuilds too.

In 2019 Det had the highest cap in the league. That is at odds with trying to land the first overall pick. Signing Perron, Copp and Chiarot this summer is at odds with trying to land Bedard. In between that their roster has been ugly but they have not been tanking for 7 years. They are definitely trying to build through the draft and they've had worst in the NHL draft lottery luck, even worse than us, but I don't know how it could count as a 7 year tank.

You can take it all in as data but not as a 7 year model.

I'd still switch places with them and I expect they'll be a multi-year contender before we are.

 

[credulous]

it's surprising to me that people still talk about vancouver's roster like they are temporarily embarassed stanley cup contenders. insert a right handed dman here, a third line center there, tweak the 4th line and we're right up there with the best of the best, right?

meanwhile you have to really stretch to find any positives about this team beyond pettersson, hughes, kuzmenko and sometimes demko. mikheyev, studnicka and bear have been held up as examples of the canucks adding useful pieces when mikheyev is basically exactly what you should expect to get for that contract on the free agent market, bear is a depth piece at best and studnicka doesn't even belong in the nhl. half the roster could be replaced with players being healthy scratched around the league and it would probably be an improvement

vancouver needs a run of finds comparable to duclair, verhaeghe, marchment, montour and forsling just to get to 'solid playoff team'. then having cleared that almost impossible hurdle they need to figure out a way to keep them all

 

[racerjoe]

it's surprising to me that people still talk about vancouver's roster like they are temporarily embarassed stanley cup contenders. insert a right handed dman here, a third line center there, tweak the 4th line and we're right up there with the best of the best, right?

meanwhile you have to really stretch to find any positives about this team beyond pettersson, hughes, kuzmenko and sometimes demko. mikheyev, studnicka and bear have been held up as examples of the canucks adding useful pieces when mikheyev is basically exactly what you should expect to get for that contract on the free agent market, bear is a depth piece at best and studnicka doesn't even belong in the nhl. half the roster could be replaced with players being healthy scratched around the league and it would probably be an improvement

vancouver needs a run of finds comparable to duclair, verhaeghe, marchment, montour and forsling just to get to 'solid playoff team'. then having cleared that almost impossible hurdle they need to figure out a way to keep them all

If that is what you are reading, you are misunderstanding. Most acknowledge they are far away.

Some like myself don't think we are bad as we currently look this year, and still think we are far away. Like I am one of the more positive people here and I think at best this year we were a bubble team and had us at 5th in the div before the year started... and I was a positive posters.

The crux of what the team should do relies completely on if you think petey is the real deal imo. If you do you try and win now. If not, bring it all down, and start over.

 

[Reverend Mayhem]

If that is what you are reading, you are misunderstanding. Most acknowledge they are far away.

Some like myself don't think we are bad as we currently look this year, and still think we are far away. Like I am one of the more positive people here and I think at best this year we were a bubble team and had us at 5th in the div before the year started... and I was a positive posters.

The crux of what the team should do relies completely on if you think petey is the real deal imo. If you do you try and win now. If not, bring it all down, and start over.

Personally, I think we're at some sick and twisted Sophie's choice-type crossroads.

 

[credulous]

If that is what you are reading, you are misunderstanding. Most acknowledge they are far away.

i'm just refuting the argument that pettersson, hughes and demko somehow make it unthinkable that this team could or should rebuild. if we were talking about a situation where horvat was signed to a reasonable deal and there was someway out from under the boeser/oel deals without giving up assets then i'd consider the argument but everything is lined up against this team contending any time soon

kuzmenko on a bridge deal just means we get to watch him for a couple more years before he walks. they're not contending while he's here and if he's a real difference maker then they either can't afford him or can't afford to put good players around him when his deal is up

horvat isn't going to bring back any assets that are as good as horvat. the best case if you want to contend is probably carlo + lysell and that's not good enough

after the deadline you're left with a one line team with miller and trash on the second. you have hopefully 2 quality defenseman and maybe an alright third pairing with some combination of dermott, bear, stillman and burroughs. you've got two giant problems in boeser and oel. smaller but still substantial problems in garland and myers. you've got nobody of the quality you need for a third line and your fourth line is one of the worst in the league

barring a miracle run of trades and free agent signings this team is years away from being anything more than a playoff pretender. if it takes 3 years to 'retool' then you're in a situation where hughes is one year from walking, kuzmenko is probably gone and miller, mikheyev and oel are all on the backside of their careers

i'm not talking about a 'burn it all down' rebuild where pettersson and hughes are shipped out for futures either. i'm just saying this team needs to take a longer view than next season or the one after. getting a player like peeke who only has 3 years on his deal and then can walk is not an answer for the canucks problems

if this team can't contend in the next 3 years then any move made needs to acknowledge that reality

 

[tradervik]

i'm just refuting the argument

You are not living up to your username!

 

[John Belushi]

Reminds me of those memes,

3X3+3/3

It's gotta be four right?!

80% of people can't answer this question

ten?

 

[me2]

Mike Gillis secret tanked when he flipped Luongo and Schneider for futures in separate deals.

Yup, good Gillis started to rebuild but got fired. No rebuilding since then, just mismanagement.