Toggle sidebar

Management Threads | Structure. Standards. Habits.

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
I think people should stop trying to fix our problems by acquiring more good scorers, and realize that a big part of the problem is we do have good scorers already, but few good hockey players. That’s what the team needs. Guys who can put in work in the other 140 feet of ice to help complement the scorers. Garland is one, and a lot of people want him gone. We should be trying to get more Garlands. I want it to look like f***ing Christmas time.
 
geebaan said:
Can someone tell me what’s up with OEL? Why is he getting written off here? I’m confused.
Click to expand...

Track record for 30 year old defensemen coming off ankle surgery and suffering through a foot injury isn’t good. So they probably evaluated him as a 6/7th guy. Then being unable to move any contracts due to an extremely poor bargaining position necessitated this as the most logical way to clear space and improve the team.
 
  • Like
Reactions: geebaan and rypper
One thing that stands out to me about how the OEL buyout went down and how it relates to the new management group—there were zero leaks about this. Nothing from Dhaliwal, Friedman, LeBrun, Dreger, local media, etc. No one in the media was reporting that this could happen. Only a few places speculated that it should happen.

One big culture change that has happened in the last year has been how the number of leaks seemingly from within the organization has stopped. And how much of a problem it was before.

Every leak that has come out since then involving the Canucks seems to be originating from either the other team involved (Pittsburgh, Isles, etc) or directly from the agents themselves (usually where Dhaliwal and Friedman get their info).
 
  • Like
Reactions: MarkusNaslund19, arttk and MarkMM
DS7 said:
What is everyone's best case scenario for the cap space freed up with OEL?
Click to expand...
My preference is trading the 2024 first for a good young defensemen, and then good free agent signings for a 3rd line centre and depth defender.
 
DS7 said:
What is everyone's best case scenario for the cap space freed up with OEL?
Click to expand...
Use it like the canes used theirs last summer. Stay away from FA and all the term that gets passed around to mid players, try and solve someone else's problem by taking a decent player that they don't have room for. Boston has some good dmen they will probably need to move to become cap compliant. And these guys usually only have a couple years on their deals
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrentSopelsHair, geebaan, racerjoe and 4 others
Melvin said:
For pure chaos reasons, I really hope that our laughably thin D and relative lack of cap space leads to Elias Pettersson 2 making the team.
Click to expand...
Is EP II coming to training camp? For some reason I thought he was going to be back in the SHL.
 
Vector said:
Track record for 30 year old defensemen coming off ankle surgery and suffering through a foot injury isn’t good. So they probably evaluated him as a 6/7th guy. Then being unable to move any contracts due to an extremely poor bargaining position necessitated this as the most logical way to clear space and improve the team.
Click to expand...

Ankle surgery to go along with a major knee operation a few seasons back that completely nuked his skating ability. Terrible combination.

Melvin said:
For pure chaos reasons, I really hope that our laughably thin D and relative lack of cap space leads to Elias Pettersson 2 making the team.
Click to expand...

It'll be even funnier when that thin group performs better than last years 27.8MM group.
 
  • Like
Reactions: geebaan, Lindgren and Vector
StickShift said:
One thing that stands out to me about how the OEL buyout went down and how it relates to the new management group—there were zero leaks about this. Nothing from Dhaliwal, Friedman, LeBrun, Dreger, local media, etc. No one in the media was reporting that this could happen. Only a few places speculated that it should happen.

One big culture change that has happened in the last year has been how the number of leaks seemingly from within the organization has stopped. And how much of a problem it was before.

Every leak that has come out since then involving the Canucks seems to be originating from either the other team involved (Pittsburgh, Isles, etc) or directly from the agents themselves (usually where Dhaliwal and Friedman get their info).
Click to expand...
- Mikheyev knee injury
- Bruce firing everyone knew weeks in hand
- Tochet signing everyone knew weeks in hand
- Pearson's health spiraling in to successive surgery after surgery
- Bear trade

Just to name few.
 
  • Like
Reactions: geebaan and Bleach Clean
Vector said:
Track record for 30 year old defensemen coming off ankle surgery and suffering through a foot injury isn’t good. So they probably evaluated him as a 6/7th guy. Then being unable to move any contracts due to an extremely poor bargaining position necessitated this as the most logical way to clear space and improve the team.
Click to expand...
I dont believe they looked at OEL as a 6-7 D man...Allvin and Tocchet both publicly announced they expected a big resurgence from the player this season.

Planning on having a $7M player, playing 3rd pairing minutes, or sitting in the press box is a non starter.

I do agree with the rest of your post though..Moving him was the only possible way they could do the necessary surgery on the underachieving team.
 
Pastor Of Muppetz said:
I dont believe they looked at OEL as a 6-7 D man...Allvin and Tocchet both publicly announced they expected a big resurgence from the player this season.

Planning on having a $7M player, playing 3rd pairing minutes, or sitting in the press box is a non starter.

I do agree with the rest of your post though..Moving him was the only possible way they could do the necessary surgery on the underachieving team.
Click to expand...
If they actually expected him to be capable of playing like a top-4 then they wouldn’t have bought-him out. Actions speak far louder than words and somewhere along the way they made that evaluation.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: geebaan, rypper and PuckMunchkin
Vector said:
If they actually expected him to be capable of playing like a top-4 then they wouldn’t have bought-him out. Actions speak far louder than words and somewhere along the way they made that evaluation.
Click to expand...

i'm not so sure this is true. if they couldn't move garland or boeser and for some reason value beauvillier then an oel buyout was their only opportunity to create cap room. if they think they can use the 7m in savings this year to get a top 4 dman AND a third line center then it still makes sense to buyout oel (kind of, ignoring all the later cap implications for now) even if you think he'll rebound to some degree
 
Pastor Of Muppetz said:
I dont believe they looked at OEL as a 6-7 D man...Allvin and Tocchet both publicly announced they expected a big resurgence from the player this season.

Planning on having a $7M player, playing 3rd pairing minutes, or sitting in the press box is a non starter.

I do agree with the rest of your post though..Moving him was the only possible way they could do the necessary surgery on the underachieving team.
Click to expand...

I mean, like, they're obviously going to say that. They're not going to say "oh yeah, this guy is total shit and he'll probably be even worse going forward" about anyone, much less a vet like him and a guy they were likely desperately trying to convince other teams to take off their hands. Of course they evaluated him as not being very good: They wouldn't have bought him out if they thought otherwise.

If they thought he was a legit top-4 defenseman, then the gap to his cap hit is going to be less than the cost and hassle of replacing him on top of the buyout hit that will still be on the books when the Canucks relocate to Mars.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: geebaan and rypper
Vector said:
If they actually expected him to be capable of playing like a top-4 then they wouldn’t have bought-him out. Actions speak far louder than words and somewhere along the way they made that evaluation.
Click to expand...
They bought him out in order gain leverage, and get more cap flexibility...Not because he was 'unplayable'.

He could have been serviceable if healthy, and played in the second pairing (he demonstrated he can in his first year here).

They had no intention of buying him out (as Allvin said in his post season presser), but obviously, there's been a change in circumstances recently, ...and in order to reshape the team moving forward..His massive contract had to be bought out.
 
credulous said:
i'm not so sure this is true. if they couldn't move garland or boeser and for some reason value beauvillier then an oel buyout was their only opportunity to create cap room. if they think they can use the 7m in savings this year to get a top 4 dman AND a third line center then it still makes sense to buyout oel (kind of, ignoring all the later cap implications for now) even if you think he'll rebound to some degree
Click to expand...
Bang on...They thought they could move players this off season , but were only getting thrown anchors...They were boxed in.

Buying out OEL was the only conceivable way out to get any flexibility.
 
PuckMunchkin said:
- Mikheyev knee injury
- Bruce firing everyone knew weeks in hand
- Tochet signing everyone knew weeks in hand
- Pearson's health spiraling in to successive surgery after surgery
- Bear trade

Just to name few.
Click to expand...
Pearson’s health is not really like a leak.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom