Management Thread | Who needs draft picks Edition

[mossey3535]

Leaning hard into this draft does not mean wasting the big three’s prime. Quite the opposite.

The hope of 3 picks in the top 40 of what is supposed to be one of the top drafts in a decade is 2 impact players in your lineup by 25/26. And both on ELC contacts.

Maybe scouting screws it’s up sure. But I actually like the odds of them not screwing up better than us successfully retooling without those ELCs.

Yeah even a re-tool NEEDS to have a couple of lucky home-run ELC players. And you can only get those through the draft. I think that's what's overlooked whenever the whole "retool vs rebuild" argument is made.

Both need draft capital, and both benefit if you get a player who can slot in after 1-2 seasons. It's just that one has a longer term outlook than the other.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Well I'm all on board the Fire Rutherford, Fire Allvin train. Except unlike 2015 I just don't have the energy to care as much as I did for the whole Fire Benning era. Allvin isn't completely incompetent like Benning was, so I do think he could scrounge up a wildcard playoff spot. And there will be many fans who get excited about that and think everything is great. I, on the other hand, wanted to see a Stanley Cup. It's going to be a long, long time before this city gets a sniff at one (and I'm talking decades).

 

[andora]

You could stop playing quinn hughes 30 min a night?

and that's only sort of an exaggeration. Pettersson and MIller are eating up huge minutes as well. Spread the wealth and the team might lose more then it wins.

Players are going to try, that's undeniable. Seems to me that Tocchet kind of knows it doesn't matter how many wins or losses the team ends up with, so if mgmt leans on him to skewer things the right way, then so be it.

I get it.. but.. the old actions speak louder than words.. how many minutes do you cut from petey kuzmenko miller boeser hughes until it goes into hey whats going on here

I just dont think it works like that.. especially with players that can do damage regardless of 20 minutes or 17 minutes.. miller and petey on the pk for example

 

[Diogenes92]

Look at the past few cup winning teams, all have retooled.

Pens retooled with JR no less
Caps retooled
Blues retooled
Bolts retooled
Avs retooled

Yes they all drafted a strong few players, then reowrked it until it finally worked.

We're talking franchise level players that were drafted and retained in many cases. Top 2 picks in most cases.

Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems as though Petey and Hughes are already becoming impatient and ready to move on if they don't start winning soon (I don't believe and haven't been given any evidence that they can even make the playoffs next year).

You can't say the same of Stamkos, Hedman, Ovechkin, Crosby, Malkin, Mackinnon, etc. Again--franchise level players that were all drafted 1st or 2nd overall.

The St. Louis Blues are the only team that didn't draft a franchise player in the top 2 picks in that group. I don't count Erik Johnson (who they traded) as franchise level.

They got hot at the right time and were an aberration.

 

[CanucksSayEh]

I think the argument is to lean into this year's draft lotto. so if we're wasting any primes, it's the next month of Petey, Demko's and Hughe's 'prime'

But the team isn't even willing to do that to ensure a stronger future foundation.

It's just hard to bench, scratch, or even limit guys in their career to date seasons, that have future contracts on the line.

Icing half of Abbotsford is about all that can be done without potential backlash, but we simply have too much firepower to lose as much as many want. Of course, only the number of teams beneath and above us matter. Not the points. Currently, there is no one lower in the standings that shouldn't be.

 

[racerjoe]

We're talking franchise level players that were drafted and retained in many cases. Top 2 picks in most cases.

Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems as though Petey and Hughes are already becoming impatient and ready to move on if they don't start winning soon (I don't believe and haven't been given any evidence that they can even make the playoffs next year).

You can't say the same of Stamkos, Hedman, Ovechkin, Crosby, Malkin, Mackinnon, etc. Again--franchise level players that were all drafted 1st or 2nd overall.

The St. Louis Blues are the only team that didn't draft a franchise player in the top 2 picks in that group. I don't count Erik Johnson (who they traded) as franchise level.

They got hot at the right time and were an aberration.

I don't care how you got them, they are clearly top 5 -10 players in their positions.

As far as proving anything... all those players have also proven without a decent team around them they are not making the playoffs. So as we agreed, this team was dreadful for the last 9 years with Benning.

Now to the point I was making... clearly all these team had great players and then had to pivot, and retool.

 

[DS7]

It's just hard to bench, scratch, or even limit guys in their career to date seasons, that have future contracts on the line.

Icing half of Abbotsford is about all that can be done without potential backlash, but we simply have too much firepower to lose as much as many want. Of course, only the number of teams beneath and above us matter. Not the points. Currently, there is no one lower in the standings that shouldn't be.

This is up to management, but it doesn't have to be hard if you can sell the plan.

Look at what Yzerman did with Dylan Larkin, the captain who was set to be UFA this season. Star player on the Red Wings, drafted 2014, and has been part of losing seasons in a perpetual rebuild for 8-9 years. Yzerman managed to sell him on a vision where he was okay with extending as a UFA despite trading away their #2 RHD and tanking another year, in Larkin's 9th year on the same team. why can't we do the same? why is that considered outside our realm of possibility?

To say it is hard is true, but this is why management is being paid millions, to make these hard forward thinking decisions. So whenever people say Petey and Hughes are gonna walk away if we rebuild, I think back to why are we so different from the Red Wings and Larkin? I give Petey and Hughes credit, those two are smarter than that and can realize what a short term (and by that I mean this draft) reset can mean for their future too if it is sold to them in the right way.

Maybe Yzerman is too high a standard, but Gillis had to sell the Sedins on his vision as they were UFA when the Canucks were out of the playoffs two of the last three years.

 

[Diogenes92]

I don't care how you got them, they are clearly top 5 -10 players in their positions.

As far as proving anything... all those players have also proven without a decent team around them they are not making the playoffs. So as we agreed, this team was dreadful for the last 9 years with Benning.

Now to the point I was making... clearly all these team had great players and then had to pivot, and retool.

Its not a great argument to say that the Canucks are in the same position that any of those teams were at when they decided to "retool" (a loaded term that can be defined in a myriad of ways).

It would be more accurate to list every team that tried to "retool" and didn't win the cup in the same timeframe. Which I imagine would be quite a lot.

The teams that were able to pull it off had a solid canvas from which to build upon. I don't believe for a second that the Canucks are in the same boat. There are too many brutal contracts (attached to good and bad players) to get it done.

For the sake of playing along, let's say the Canucks are able to perform a minor miracle this off-season:

They're able to shed a bunch of cap without losing any important assets, they're able to add difference makers in free agency, and they're able to fleece mutiple teams in trades that instantly improves their team.

I still don't think they can come close to being a cup contender, let alone make a conference final in the next couple of years. And then Petey starts to cost 11+ million. Then what?

 

[Nucker101]

Video game shit:

- playing Hughes 30 mins a night
- trading a 1st and a 2nd when you’re 27th place in the league
- continuing to add on more future salary when you’re 27th place in the league

- Pretending like it’s all normal and the people against it are into video game fantasies

 

[andora]

Its not a great argument to say that the Canucks are in the same position that any of those teams were at when they decided to "retool" (a loaded term that can be defined in a myriad of ways).

It would be more accurate to list every team that tried to "retool" and didn't win the cup in the same timeframe. Which I imagine would be quite a lot.

The teams that were able to pull it off had a solid canvas from which to build upon. I don't believe for a second that the Canucks are in the same boat. There are too many brutal contracts (attached to good and bad players) to get it done.

For the sake of playing along, let's say the Canucks are able to perform a minor miracle this off-season:

They're able to shed a bunch of cap without losing any important assets, they're able to add difference makers in free agency, and they're able to fleece mutiple teams in trades that instantly improves their team.

I still don't think they can come close to being a cup contender, let alone make a conference final in the next couple of years. And then Petey starts to cost 11+ million. Then what?

Why so drastic.. can it be
- shed a couple contracts
- add some depth via free agents that can work in this system
- a couple more low key trades for potential or another solid trade for a roster player

Doesnt need to be grandiose to keep moving in their direction

 

[Diogenes92]

Video game shit:

- playing Hughes 30 mins a night
- playing your 4th line 5 minutes a night
- trading a 1st and a 2nd when you’re 27th place in the league
- continuing to add on more future salary when you’re 27th place in the league

- Pretending like it’s all normal and the people against it are into video game fantasies

But...meaningful games in March. At least, meaningful to the players and coaches.

And meaningful in ruining their 5-8% chance at Bedard.

 

[Diogenes92]

Why so drastic.. can it be
- shed a couple contracts
- add some depth via free agents that can work in this system
- a couple more low key trades for potential or another solid trade for a roster player

Doesnt need to be grandiose to keep moving in their direction

I hate to break it to you, but that approcah isn't going to get it done. That might get Aquilini his much desired 2 games of playoff revenue, though.

And when Petey starts costing as much as 12+ million (market value for what he brings), it makes things even more dire.

It makes it hard to maintain their direction when all of their good players start costing more and their bad players are still making too much money.

The plan they've chosen has put them on a 2-3 yeat clock, imo.

Miller isn't getting any younger, and Demko hasn't proven that he can stay healthy. These are two players that are paramount to the Canucks success moving forward.

 

[andora]

I hate to break it to you, but that approcah isn't going to get it done. That might get Aquilini his much desired 2 games of playoff revenue, though.

And when Petey starts costing as much as 12+ million (market value for what he brings), it makes things even more dire.

It makes it hard to maintain their direction when all of their good players start costing more and their bad players are still making too much money.

The plan they've chosen has put them on a 2-3 yeat clock, imo.

Miller isn't getting any younger, and Demko hasn't proven that he can stay healthy. These are two players that are paramount to the Canucks success moving forward.

do the math - the models we want to follow of paying your top players / cheap depth and value where you can and limited mid range contracts actually start to get in line once pettersson starts making his money.

when pettersson makes that much? you pay him, and you pay your other good players - that's the point. pettersson's first year of his new deal we have like 37 million as of right now / 51 the next year / 68 the year after

Oel is the only bad long term deal .. others expire soon and/or could get moved..

 

[Nucker101]

Jeff Marek was on 650 today and said taking to people around the league leading up the to TDL, teams have no idea what the Canucks direction and plan is.

I don’t blame them either. Plenty of contradictory moves.

 

[Diogenes92]

do the math - the models we want to follow of paying your top players / cheap depth and value where you can and limited mid range contracts actually start to get in line once pettersson starts making his money.

when pettersson makes that much? you pay him, and you pay your other good players - that's the point. pettersson's first year of his new deal we have like 37 million as of right now / 51 the next year / 68 the year after

Oel is the only bad long term deal .. others expire soon and/or could get moved..

Debatable.

Also, that model relies upon them not signing anymore garbage contracts, which is a big fat 'if'.

Jeff Marek was on 650 today and said taking to people around the league leading up the to TDL, teams have no idea what the Canucks direction and plan is.

I don’t blame them either. Plenty of contradictory moves.

The only people who seem to know exactly what is going on are HF Boards experts.

Their credentials clearly outweigh any of the overpaid analysts and members of other NHL franchises.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Jeff Marek was on 650 today and said taking to people around the league leading up the to TDL, teams have no idea what the Canucks direction and plan is.

I don’t blame them either. Plenty of contradictory moves.

I've noticed that a number of the 'experts' who have been trashing the Canucks moves at the deadline, have been saying that the Canucks are sabotaging their 'rebuild'.?

Having an opinion on the trade is fine, but Rutherford has staled from the very get -go thats its a 'retool'.......Clearly, some of the experts are ill informed.

 

[Nucker101]

I've noticed that a number of the 'experts' who have been trashing the Canucks moves at the deadline, have been saying that the Canucks are sabotaging their 'rebuild'.?

Having an opinion on the trade is fine, but Rutherford has staled from the very get -go thats its a 'retool'.......Clearly, some of the experts are ill informed.

Could be. But Marek was talking about other teams in the NHL being confused by how the Canucks are operating.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Could be. But Marek was talking about other teams in the NHL being confused by how the Canucks are operating.

Yeah..there was a lot..another example here..Why would the Canucks be hoarding picks if they are in a retool..?..If your elite players aren't sticking around for a rebuild, how can it be the wrong time..?




"So even though the draft pick GM Patrik Allvin traded wasn’t their own — it’s the pick acquired in the Bo Horvat trade — the Canucks should be stockpiling draft picks, not trading them.

Hronek is the right player, but it’s the wrong time for this kind of move." Rob Williams,Daily Hive.

Canucks made the right trade at the wrong time... again | Offside

Filip Hronek is a really good defenceman, one that will help the Vancouver Canucks' back end for years to come.

dailyhive.com

Why the Canucks should have avoided trading for an expensive piece like Filip Hronek

Hronek represents a massive upgrade on the Canucks blue line, but he's not the type of player they should be adding right now.

theathletic.com

 

[Bleach Clean]

I am genuinly curious how you came up with 10%

Anecdotal. It's not a number based upon a study. I'm looking at the Cap, the players now, the strength they'll need to have to consistently be in the playoffs, the limited assets and the potential type of players they'll need to attain. It is very unlikely that they spend no assets to move cap AND gain enough pro assets within 2 years to create a sustainable playoff team thereafter.

No one is denying how hard this is. The flip side is how hard is it to find players as good as Petey and Hughes, and even Demko.

Actually, MS talks specifically about Pettersson and Hughes as the impetus to perform a re-tool. Where as what I'm saying is that core players are always a given when considering a re-tool, but to actually decide to go forth should depend more on the likelihood of its success.

The issue the other way is when those picks will be able to help you. Its most likely they take 4 years to contribute, and at that point you are still hoping they turn out like Hronek.

I would not have been against keeping the picks, and while I like the player we got do think we probably paid too much.

I do think it is important to realize if you want this team to move forward (like management does) this is the type of move you have to make.

This is not an equal proposition. We are in a rebuild already. A 2 year re-tool is possible, but extremely unlikely given the landscape here. There are just too many factors that have to go right in order to exit, in 2 years, with a consistent playoff team. And by consistent, I mean 5+ years, given the ages of Pettersson and Hughes. And so, it's like comparing the rule (rebuild) to the exception (re-tool). Why are we arguing for the exception?

Look at the past few cup winning teams, all have retooled.

Pens retooled with JR no less
Caps retooled
Blues retooled
Bolts retooled
Avs retooled

Yes they all drafted a strong few players, then reowrked it until it finally worked.

Can you define how these teams re-tooled and how this is a realistic goal for the Canucks? Just at a glance, Pittsburgh has been in the playoffs for 11 years so...?

Let's isolate Tampa Bay for a moment. They had a 2 year dip out of the playoffs in 2011-12 and 2012-13. In that time, their best FA and Trade acquisitions (because that's the route management is taking here) were as follows:

Ben Bishop
Radko Gudas
Kyle Quincey
Teddy Purcell
Nate Thomspon

If you can find more, please correct me, this is just at a glance.

Now with just judging the quality of that group of players, would you say the Canucks are that far away from a similar 2 year on the fly re-tool? If not, please provide your own example as the template.

 

[racerjoe]

Looks like there’s a lot of morons working for nhl teams out there. Should make for some fun and easy trades for Allvin

Wouldn't surprise me if there was a lot of morons.

Again I have no problem with people disagreeing with the direction, but honestly the team has said a few times what they are doing... then at the very least tried to do it.

 

[credulous]

Wouldn't surprise me if there was a lot of morons.

Again I have no problem with people disagreeing with the direction, but honestly the team has said a few times what they are doing... then at the very least tried to do it.

i don't understand why it matters what they say they're going to do?

that's not a pass to be free of criticism

 

[racerjoe]

i don't understand why it matters what they say they're going to do?

that's not a pass to be free of criticism

Where did I say it was free of criticism? I think I actually said it was up for it.

I said you have to be a moron though to not understand what they are doing.

@Bleach Clean Will try to get back to you later, I don't have time to even do a small dig into what you posted.

 

[credulous]

Where did I say it was free of criticism? I think I actually said it was up for it.

I said you have to be a moron though to not understand what they are doing.

@Bleach Clean Will try to get back to you later, I don't have time to even do a small dig into what you posted.

you keep repeating the team says they're going to retool. i don't see why that needs to be said

 

[racerjoe]

you keep repeating the team says they're going to retool. i don't see why that needs to be said

I am so confused as to what point you are trying to make here.

My point is simple. To not understand what the Canucks are trying to do is idiotic as they have said what they would like to do.

If you disagree with it, or think they are doing a bad job of, that is fair and open to debate. I think they haven't been perfect, that is clear.

 

[credulous]

I am so confused as to what point you are trying to make here.

My point is simple. To not understand what the Canucks are trying to do is idiotic as they have said what they would like to do.

If you disagree with it, or think they are doing a bad job of, that is fair and open to debate. I think they haven't been perfect, that is clear.

do you think marek just like missed that the canucks want to "retool"? like he's trying to figure out what they're doing from their moves alone?

when people say they don't understand what the canucks are doing they mean they don't see how their actions are going to accomplish their professed goals. they don't need you to repeat management have said. they are just publically doubting they have a plan that is going to accomplish those professed goals