Management Threads | Structure. Standards. Habits.

[ephmrl]

You sound worried.

Coming from the guy who has been peddling conspiracy theory takes about what seems to be a reasonably mild injury to a player with no history of previous shoulder injuries and doesn't even require surgery for it.

 

[LemonSauceD]

Entire bottom 6? They are going to ice guys on min for the whole 4th line so that’s like 2.2m? You really only need to spend money on a 3C and if you can spend find a guy for like 4-5M you can have that guy carry a rookie + line Pod who would be like max 2M.

Like 2 year from now this is what we project to see.

5.5 Kuz - 11M Petey - 4.75M mik. ~21.5M
4.9 garland - 8M Miller - 6.65M Boeser ~ 19.5M
???? - ???? - ????
850k - 850k - 850k. ~ 2.5M

7.85 Hughes - ????
3.25M Soucy - 6.75 Hronek ~ 10M
787k Hirose - 787K min 1.5M

5M Demko
1M Silovs

That’s 68M total, add in OEL 4.7, that’s 73M.
Cap is expected to go up another 4M that year so that’s like 92M cap? So we have 18M to spend on the 3rd line and ok Hughes partner. Hell spurge a little and spend more in a 2nd line C.

Edit: I don’t think we’ll keep Garland or Boeser but if Pod and Hog replaces them, that that should cost a lot less for us.

edit

 

[rypper]

The people complaining about the Hronek injury are probably the same ones complaining about the canucks "trying to win" down the stretch, despite shutting a few players down.

Also, the same people pissed off the team isn't doing a tear down rebuild are the same people exaggerating the injury and hoping the trade fails so they can point at it and say "I was right!"

 

[Hoglander]

The Canucks shut him down with injury after only a few games which he likely should never have played in. If Detroit would have kept him it seems reasonable that they would have also shut him down at some point.

Trading for a player that was shut down with injury for the remainder of the season sounds like a bargaining chip to me.

The Canucks paid a huge price for a player in a sling at the TDL when they had zero chance to make the playoffs. It was a weird, impatient sort of trade.

I don't know, Eichel still got 4 good pieces after having more concerning injury issues. I don't think it would have changed much, with the expectation that Hronek would be %100 by training camp. No surgery was required.

"Huge price" is over the top here. It was more like a smallish overpay if anything. I think it absolutely would've been a mid-1st plus.

 

[Diogenes92]

Coming from the guy who has been peddling conspiracy theory takes about what seems to be a reasonably mild injury to a player with no history of previous shoulder injuries and doesn't even require surgery for it.

What evidence do you have that it's a mild injury?

Rutherford said it "shouldn't require surgery". That doesn't exactly sound reassuring to me.

Also, the same people pissed off the team isn't doing a tear down rebuild are the same people exaggerating the injury and hoping the trade fails so they can point at it and say "I was right!"

I think people are mad about the trade because it is just another rush job move to make the playoffs while mortgaging the future.

What evidence is there that it is already a slam dunk successful move?

Injury concerns for a player that has a history of somewhat serious injuries is a fair concern to have imo.

 

[Diogenes92]

I don't know, Eichel still got 4 good pieces after having more concerning injury issues. I don't think it would have changed much, with the expectation that Hronek would be %100 by training camp. No surgery was required.

"Huge price" is over the top here. It was more like a smallish overpay if anything. I think it absolutely would've been a mid-1st plus.

Eichel is a #1 C. I don't see the comparison between Hronek.

I think having two top 40 picks in such a deep draft is huge price. Not much of an exaggeration there. They could've drafted Moore with the pick.

Why are people acting like this trade is already a resounding success? There is nothing to go on.

At least I can say that I wish the Canucks would've kept the picks and built up their prospect pool. I don't think they're a playoff team next year.

 

[rypper]

What evidence do you have that it's a mild injury?

The fact that he could have kept playing if the season meant anything, that he came back mid injury to show what he was to a new team and coach etc.

We disagree on his injury history. I think this shoulder injury is no different from the regular bumps and bruises every player goes through.

I've never said it was a slam dunk, but I like the process. Trading for a right shot 25 year old is what the team needs, considering they were never going to commit to a rebuild.

 

[Diogenes92]

The fact that he could have kept playing if the season meant anything, that he came back mid injury to show what he was to a new team and coach etc.

This is all according to management and a coach that just aquired the player. No bias there?

And are you really going to defend the Canucks medical staff opinions on players after their track record?

 

[EdJovanovski]

Went to development camp today

 

[rypper]

This is all according to management and a coach that just aquired the player. No bias there?

And are you really going to defend the Canucks medical staff opinions on players after their track record?

He came in and played 4 games and didn't look out of place. If it was a serious injury he wouldn't have done that.

 

[tantalum]

Went to development camp today

And?

 

[Diogenes92]

He came in and played 4 games and didn't look out of place. If it was a serious injury he wouldn't have done that.

That's not a ringing endorsement.

I thought he looked just okay. But I don't hold it against him since he was playing injured.

 

[I Hart Conor Garland]

On a strategic level, I'd argue there was no better time in the league's entire history to rebuild than during the flat cap era from Covid, when you can leverage cap space for additional picks and prospects at a greater rate than we will probably never see again.

You know the Canucks will finally commit to it in the most mind numbingly predictably obvious year not to because we all really f***ed up in past lives and are being run through the absolute f***ing wringer for it in this torturous "fandom" we share. Then there are the grimy rat fink scumbags existing just to aggravate on here. Rat poison is too good for those things.

 

[rypper]

That's not a ringing endorsement.

I thought he looked just okay. But I don't hold it against him since he was playing injured.

Regardless, if it was as serious an injury as you claim, he wouldn't have played at all.

 

[EdJovanovski]

And?

Willander looked very lazy in drills, spent his time just talking to Pettersson when they were supposed to be doing a puck protection drill. But in their mini 3v3 scrimmage Willander was the best player of that group. He had a few nice shots as well.

Lekkerimaki was more engaged in the drills and was also great in the scrimmage. Some really nice shots. Those 2 were definitely the best players.

Saganiuk was the hardest worker in the drills, did them with a really intense pace. Was ringing off really fast crisp passes that seemed to catch the other guys off guard receiving them as many other players took it more lax than him.

McWard skated back toward the bench hunched over and then punched the glass in anger, seems like he may have got hurt.

I expected Pettersson to look better than he did.

Fitzgerald was impressive, scored a few goals off nice shots.

Alriksson was kinda funny to watch, looked soooo much like Myers out there lol.

Hirose was pretty impressive, kept control of the puck against much bigger guys.

Namestnikov is short but looked like a tank, he was strong as hell in all the board battles.

 

[Diogenes92]

Regardless, if it was as serious an injury as you claim, he wouldn't have played at all.

I disagree.

The team has shown to screw up player health and injuries too often. Ie last season with Pearson.

Lets go one season without the team screwing up a diagnosis and then I will start to trust in their judgement again.

 

[MS]

You sound worried.

Huh?

 

[VanillaCoke]

He came in and played 4 games and didn't look out of place. If it was a serious injury he wouldn't have done that.

If it wasn't atleast somewhat serious he wouldn't have been "shut down for the season"

Let's hope there's no issues there, but it's far less than a nbd guarantee as it's being made out to be.

 

[rypper]

If it wasn't atleast somewhat serious he wouldn't have been "shut down for the season"

Let's hope there's no issues there, but it's far less than a nbd guarantee as it's being made out to be.

At this point we're arguing over semantics, but if was truly "shut down for the season" seriously injured the option to continue playing would have never been there.

The team had nothing to play for, so he didn't play. If they were in the hunt still, he could have played.

 

[mriswith]

Also, the same people pissed off the team isn't doing a tear down rebuild are the same people exaggerating the injury and hoping the trade fails so they can point at it and say "I was right!"

I haven't seen anyone actually advocate a tear down rebuild.

And I think that doesn't give enough credit to fans that are engaged enough to still post here. Surely everyone has had their fill of being "right" about the Canucks failing after 8 years of Benning and would be more than happy to be wrong and watch a winner for once.

 

[arttk]

I haven't seen anyone actually advocate a tear down rebuild.

And I think that doesn't give enough credit to fans that are engaged enough to still post here. Surely everyone has had their fill of being "right" about the Canucks failing after 8 years of Benning and would be more than happy to be wrong and watch a winner for once.

well there were a bunch of people advocating for trading away Miller, Horvat, Kuzmenko, Garland, Boeser and any other players not name Petey, Hughes and Demko.
That’s pretty much a tear down rebuild considering it’s super likely Petey, Hughes and Demko will request a trade out of here.

 

[Hoglander]

Eichel is a #1 C. I don't see the comparison between Hronek.

I think having two top 40 picks in such a deep draft is huge price. Not much of an exaggeration there. They could've drafted Moore with the pick.

Why are people acting like this trade is already a resounding success? There is nothing to go on.

At least I can say that I wish the Canucks would've kept the picks and built up their prospect pool. I don't think they're a playoff team next year.

The point of bringing up Eichel wasn't to say that they were comparative in value, but to show that having an injury doesn't automatically mean a discount - in this case Eichel was significantly more injured, yet still got solid value.

It wasn't 2 top 40 picks. It was close though, 17 & 43. What do you think his value would have been? The 1st for a 25 year old top 4 RHD is a given. If we were the team trading away that player, I believe we would be wanting more than just the 17th.

I'm not claiming a resounding success. What I initially questioned you about, was your claims that we could have got him for cheaper at the draft - and I have yet to see anything that would confirm that.

 

[RandV]

well there were a bunch of people advocating for trading away Miller, Horvat, Kuzmenko, Garland, Boeser and any other players not name Petey, Hughes and Demko.
That’s pretty much a tear down rebuild considering it’s super likely Petey, Hughes and Demko will request a trade out of here.

It's not something that was necessarily said but I would add that realistically if you wanted to tank to the bottom for Bedard you're probably need to trade Pettersson. That's how bad the basement teams were.

 

[arttk]

It's not something that was necessarily said but I would add that realistically if you wanted to tank to the bottom for Bedard you're probably need to trade Pettersson. That's how bad the basement teams were.

There are a couple of people here complaining we should’ve continued the tank down the stretch. The reason we couldn’t tank as hard was because we were playing these shit teams a lot down the stretch and they are impressively shit.

 

[Diogenes92]

The point of bringing up Eichel wasn't to say that they were comparative in value, but to show that having an injury doesn't automatically mean a discount - in this case Eichel was significantly more injured, yet still got solid value.

I'm not claiming a resounding success. What I initially questioned you about, was your claims that we could have got him for cheaper at the draft - and I have yet to see anything that would confirm ththat.

I think Eichel was a very special exception since he truly had superstar potential if the surgery he wanted to get was a success. The payoff was huge and worth the gamble.

As I said before, I think that using the worry of injuries card against Detroit would've been a legitimate bargaining chip to use.

If the Canucks had offered the 17th pick for Hronek at the draft, I think Detroit likely bites. They were clearly looking to move on from him as they shopped him at the TDL. Canucks were willing to pay the most.