Management Threads | Structure. Standards. Habits.

[F A N]

i'm not loving the pettersson/miller/blueger/aman centre depth but i can't see anything happening prior to training camp. they might be able to pick up pius suter if they can trade myers, but if that's not possible, maybe someone on a deep team slips through the tracks and we can get them on waivers.

I find it interesting that Beauvillier never really got a chance to be a C at the NHL level? I seem to recall that he was a C in juniors and is his preferred position. Judging by his faceoff stats, it seems he's been strictly a winger since his rookie season.

I guess we still have Studnicka and Dries... At this point, I think management does see Blueger as the team's 3C.

 

[Diogenes92]

I feel like much of the desire for a rebuild from some people is just wanting to feel excitement again after so much failure - some mystery box prospects we can imagine being the light at the end of the tunnel and becoming the next McDavid.

The goal of a teardown rebuild be to come out of the other end with young, top flight 1C, 1D and 1G we can build around right? I mean - don't we already have those pieces? The big issue is money spent on defense that couldn't defend and a lack of cap room to even attempt to augment the quality players we do have. We also have a slight overspend on wing too.

Miller being on the wrong side of 30 with a big fat contract that is just beginning doesn't help matters either.

 

[God]

I find it interesting that Beauvillier never really got a chance to be a C at the NHL level? I seem to recall that he was a C in juniors and is his preferred position. Judging by his faceoff stats, it seems he's been strictly a winger since his rookie season.

I guess we still have Studnicka and Dries... At this point, I think management does see Blueger as the team's 3C.

with beauvillier i think it's just a classic case of "junior centre, nhl winger" like huberdeau.

i'd rather try podkolzin at C than watch dries there. he's so bad. studnicka might be ok with a full offseason of recovery from whatever illness he had that made him lose 15 pounds or whatever, but i'm not really convinced he'll be able to put it together.

 

[andora]

Dickinson finding out he has a broken hand only after being traded to the Blackhawks.

Letting Mikheyev play through a torn ACL.

These two are the ones that have me really worried about the medical staff. I work in this field and neither of these are normal.

The way I see it. Pearson's is not a Canucks medical staff failure. Only way I can think of laying ANY blame at them is if they recommended unnecessary surgery or had him do something incredibly stupid as rehab that got his hand infected.

I didnt remember the dickinson thing so i will go familiarize myself with that one

The mikheyev one i am 50/50 on.. im notbsure what to think about that one.. even though i dont see it as a misdiagnosed issue.

Pearson i agree.. my gut says there is a screw up or two there or it is a one in a million bad luck

So, in other words, a bunch of mistakes by team medical staffs?

That is the conclusion? That is funny - a set back or reaggravation can be totally independent from a competent diagnosis and rehab.. jeez

I'm more or less just trying to say that Hronek hasn't been proven 100% healthy yet and there is no proof to say otherwise...

He may be 98%. He may be 85%. We don't know and may never know.

But it is annoying when certain posters automatically assume that Hronek is fully healed and ready to go for training camp with, wait for it, zero actual evidence.

Almost as a way of defending the overpayment and imo rush job type trade that the Canucks made.

Oh cool another variable thrown in and you took offense to the stationary life post. I take offense to the insinuation that i am possibly defending the trade by discussing misdiagnosed injuries.. get a grip

 

[PuckMunchkin]

I didnt remember the dickinson thing so i will go familiarize myself with that one

The mikheyev one i am 50/50 on.. im notbsure what to think about that one.. even though i dont see it as a misdiagnosed issue.

The Mikheyev situation being a blunder by who ever okayed it, is just my professional opinion.

(I work in physio. Sometimes with Olympic athletes.)

Pearson i agree.. my gut says there is a screw up or two there or it is a one in a million bad luck

IMO it is not conclusive that our med department is a problem but there definitely is quite a bit of smoke.

 

[andora]

The Mikheyev situation being a blunder by who ever okayed it, is just my professional opinion.

(I work in physio. Sometimes with Olympic athletes.)


IMO it is not conclusive that our med department is a problem but there definitely is quite a bit of smoke.

Yeah and fair enough.. you being in the field at that level the opinion carries a lot of weight

I would maybe classify my position on it as it became more of a blunder the longer they let him play with no benefit - making playoffs

But hard to argue against playing it safe from the get go

 

[MarkMM]

I find it interesting that Beauvillier never really got a chance to be a C at the NHL level? I seem to recall that he was a C in juniors and is his preferred position. Judging by his faceoff stats, it seems he's been strictly a winger since his rookie season.

I guess we still have Studnicka and Dries... At this point, I think management does see Blueger as the team's 3C.

with beauvillier i think it's just a classic case of "junior centre, nhl winger" like huberdeau.

i'd rather try podkolzin at C than watch dries there. he's so bad. studnicka might be ok with a full offseason of recovery from whatever illness he had that made him lose 15 pounds or whatever, but i'm not really convinced he'll be able to put it together.

Was wondering the same abuot Beauvillier, there's less evidence of Podkolzin at centre but much of his profile would lead one to think he might excel at that role, just wondering if it's getting a bit late in his career to start giving him substantive experience there. It's been discussed here before, but if Podkolzin could make it work at centre I think he fits the profile of someone who could be a solid 3C and it would conveniently solve a lot of our issues all at once.

If Pettersson / Miller were to go down we'd be in desperate enough straits that I think we'd have to be open-minded about anythinig, Beauvillier would be my first go-to, maybe bring up Raty, try Podkolzin, but I'd start with those first two.

 

[arttk]

It's amazing that people still think an attempt to re-tool means the team will not take another 4-5 years to win... How are you coming to this conclusion?

A re-tool that prioritizes futures, but is still built around Pettersson-Hughes, has every chance to succeed as the one that burns futures to re-tool around Pettersson-Hughes. There's no difference because the mode itself doesn't equate to success or failure, it's the execution of said mode that does.

When Petterson re-signs, this fearmongering over him leaving will be revisited. I've always felt that it is alarmist and doesn't have any place in a rational discussion about this player, but let's see. It's going to be a long summer.

Nobody is saying we should burn all futures in an attempt to retool asap. Hell if you look at what they have done, they are walking a fine line.

They flipped Bo for 1st, Raty and Beau. Raty they kept and they flipped the 1st and the 2nd. Balance. They also kept the futures they got for Schenn, Lazar and hell even the Dickinson trade returned Bloom. If they traded OUR first this year and next year and all the prospects we have then sure, complain about not focusing on the future.

I still don’t know how to feel about the Hronek trade but if he can be a #2 and play at that level for like 5-7 years then that’s a better return than keeping that 1st and 2nd. Draft picks busts as well you know, to improve it can’t just be hoarding lottery tickets and hoping they don’t bust. You need to make tangible moves to improve the team rather than sit and pray the stars align.

Petey, Hughes and Demko has already said they are not interested in a rebuild. I don’t think it’s alarmist to just recognize that they are not lying. When Hughes says something like “ Obviously we don’t want to be here for a rebuild and have to wait and do all that,” you have to at least acknowledge the risk of flipping everything you can for futures whether you decide to call it a rebuild or a “step back”.

 

[racerjoe]

If Petey re-signs this off season or not doesn't make what has happened fear-mongering... If anything it says the team made the correct moves (and I am not saying that or convinced of that).

Its clear Petey wants to play for a winner, its clear he doesn't want to be apart of a rebuild, he has said this. It can't be denied. I think if we fumble the current attempt to win he won't want to stay, new contract or not.

 

[valkynax]

If Petey re-signs this off season or not doesn't make what has happened fear-mongering... If anything it says the team made the correct moves (and I am not saying that or convinced of that).

Its clear Petey wants to play for a winner, its clear he doesn't want to be apart of a rebuild, he has said this. It can't be denied. I think if we fumble the current attempt to win he won't want to stay, new contract or not.

If Pete leaves, Hughes won't be far behind and will likely demand a trade.

What would be scary is if Pete decided to wait and see if the team will look promising this season, before he makes a decision. If this happens and he ends up leaving via UFA, Skeletor and Moleman should be fired, hung, drawn, and quartered.

 

[racerjoe]

If Pete leaves, Hughes won't be far behind and will likely demand a trade.

What would be scary is if Pete decided to wait and see if the team will look promising this season, before he makes a decision. If this happens and he ends up leaving via UFA, Skeletor and Moleman should be fired, hung, drawn, and quartered.

I said this in another thread, but it sounds like he will sign this offseason long term... this doesn't mean he won't ask out later though.

Totally agree if Petey goes hughes and Demko go.

 

[valkynax]

I said this in another thread, but it sounds like he will sign this offseason long term... this doesn't mean he won't ask out later though.

Totally agree if Petey goes hughes and Demko go.

Hope he will...

 

[arttk]

It's amazing that people still think an attempt to re-tool means the team will not take another 4-5 years to win... How are you coming to this conclusion?

Forgot to reply to this point..

Rebuild =! we will win in 4 years, if everything goes well, like you win the draft lottery like once or twice and a bunch of 2nd rounders hit etc, then yeah in 4 years you will see the team STARTING to get out of a rebuild and start to win a bit more.

I think the retool path is not like retool once and you are done. It should be seen as you retool to get the team to a certain level and then you continue to add more pieces year over year with the goal of continuing to improve. I don't know why you guys think the ceiling is capped by going this route. We have the high end pieces, you can be elite if you can just continue to add depth.

 

[Diogenes92]

I didnt remember the dickinson thing so i will go familiarize myself with that one

The mikheyev one i am 50/50 on.. im notbsure what to think about that one.. even though i dont see it as a misdiagnosed issue.

Pearson i agree.. my gut says there is a screw up or two there or it is a one in a million bad luck


That is the conclusion? That is funny - a set back or reaggravation can be totally independent from a competent diagnosis and rehab.. jeez



Oh cool another variable thrown in and you took offense to the stationary life post. I take offense to the insinuation that i am possibly defending the trade by discussing misdiagnosed injuries.. get a grip

I was referring to a certain poster with two letters in their name.

 

[andora]

I was referring to a certain poster with two letters in their name.

Then just say that

 

[AwesomeInTheory]

I'm more or less just trying to say that Hronek hasn't been proven 100% healthy yet and there is no proof to say otherwise...

I dont think anyone would disagree with you there. Plus, injuries can see setbacks or things taking longer (or lesser) to heal.

The issue is you’re taking this point and extrapolating it to the Canucks medical staff and trainers being woefully inept.

Which…isnt as clear cut. That’s where people are disagreeing.

He may be 98%. He may be 85%. We don't know and may never know.

But it is annoying when certain posters automatically assume that Hronek is fully healed and ready to go for training camp with, wait for it, zero actual evidence.

Almost as a way of defending the overpayment and imo rush job type trade that the Canucks made.

And again, you’re jumping things.

We have to assume the following:

- Hronek is injury prone. Not particularly compelling based on what we know, but folks are acknowledging the concussions are a concern.
- Detroit and Vancouver’s medical staff are both incompetent. Players, when they’re traded, are evaluated by both teams. If there were serious concerns over a player and Detroit downplayed it, Vancouver would have grounds to file a grievance. I seriously doubt both orgs made the same mistake.
- Then, assuming Hronek is damaged goods, management were wanting to save face and show off their new acquisition that they rushed him back…either against medical staff recommendations or because Detroit and Van both cocked up the diagnosis.

It‘s not believeable, even if you do consider that there have been issues (again, I point to the Canucks making changes last year…could be a precursor to protecting the org from an NHLPA grievance or lawsuit for Pearson, or could be something else.)

That’s why you are getting flak.

 

[Diogenes92]

Then just say that

It isn't really my fault that you assumed I was referring to you, dude.

But I'm sorry for the confusion.

 

[Bleach Clean]

Nobody is saying we should burn all futures in an attempt to retool asap. Hell if you look at what they have done, they are walking a fine line.

They flipped Bo for 1st, Raty and Beau. Raty they kept and they flipped the 1st and the 2nd. Balance. They also kept the futures they got for Schenn, Lazar and hell even the Dickinson trade returned Bloom. If they traded OUR first this year and next year and all the prospects we have then sure, complain about not focusing on the future.

I still don’t know how to feel about the Hronek trade but if he can be a #2 and play at that level for like 5-7 years then that’s a better return than keeping that 1st and 2nd. Draft picks busts as well you know, to improve it can’t just be hoarding lottery tickets and hoping they don’t bust. You need to make tangible moves to improve the team rather than sit and pray the stars align.

Petey, Hughes and Demko has already said they are not interested in a rebuild. I don’t think it’s alarmist to just recognize that they are not lying. When Hughes says something like “ Obviously we don’t want to be here for a rebuild and have to wait and do all that,” you have to at least acknowledge the risk of flipping everything you can for futures whether you decide to call it a rebuild or a “step back”.

A rebuild around Pettersson-Hughes does not preclude moves to improve the team. Just look at the discussion here regarding Sanheim as an example. Maybe it takes a 1st to take on an onerous contract like that, but maybe PHI just wants to dump the player? If it's the latter, then the Hronek 1st is retained and the team gets a top4 Dman via alternative means. The key difference is that the pick is used rather than expended.

Use whatever term you want to use, but prioritizing futures while building is just an alternative path toward the same goal: Making the team better. Only, the re-tool/rebuild that focuses on futures gives the team the best chance at sustainability.

 

[Burke's Evil Spirit]

When have you heard players say "Yeah I think I would like to go through a rebuild." D

Funny you should ask: Sedins remain committed to Vancouver Canucks’ rebuild

 

[Diogenes92]

I dont think anyone would disagree with you there.

They have been.

Plus, injuries can see setbacks or things taking longer (or lesser) to heal.

The issue is you’re taking this point and extrapolating it to the Canucks medical staff and trainers being woefully inept.

There is precedent to have that opinion.

Which…isnt as clear cut. That’s where people are disagreeing.

Maybe some are. But not all.

And again, you’re jumping things.

We have to assume the following:

- Hronek is injury prone. Not particularly compelling based on what we know, but folks are acknowledging the concussions are a concern.
- Detroit and Vancouver’s medical staff are both incompetent. Players, when they’re traded, are evaluated by both teams. If there were serious concerns over a player and Detroit downplayed it, Vancouver would have grounds to file a grievance. I seriously doubt both orgs made the same mistake.

- Then, assuming Hronek is damaged goods, management were wanting to save face and show off their new acquisition that they rushed him back…either against medical staff recommendations or because Detroit and Van both cocked up the diagnosis.

It‘s not believeable, even if you do consider that there have been issues (again, I point to the Canucks making changes last year…could be a precursor to protecting the org from an NHLPA grievance or lawsuit for Pearson, or could be something else.)

I wouldn't put anything past this org. But I am more leaning towards them just making a mistake by even letting Hronek return for the final four games.

That’s why you are getting flak.

I am getting flak because I dared to have the opinion that maybe the trade was a mistake and an overpayment to boot. I cited injury concerns as a leading factor for that, along with believing that the Canucks paid a huge price when they aren't far enough along in their competitive cycle.

There are a lot of sour fans in here that are easily offended over the retool vs rebuild debate and will attempt to stonewall it at every turn. Its a discussion board.

 

[Burke's Evil Spirit]

I find it interesting that Beauvillier never really got a chance to be a C at the NHL level? I seem to recall that he was a C in juniors and is his preferred position. Judging by his faceoff stats, it seems he's been strictly a winger since his rookie season.

Almost every NHL forward was a C in juniors, it's never a signal of anything.

I'd like to see them take on Jesper Boqvist and/or Pius Suter for some added C depth.

But I can also see the logic of waiting until training camp - see how Hoglander/Podkolzin/Aman look, who might shake loose elsewhere, know for sure if Pearson will be a factor, have the Myers bonus paid out and be able to move him more easily if necessary.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

Funny you should ask: Sedins remain committed to Vancouver Canucks’ rebuild

And then they retired?

 

[DonnyNucker]

They have been.

There is precedent to have that opinion.

Maybe some are. But not all.



I wouldn't put anything past this org. But I am more leaning towards them just making a mistake by even letting Hronek return for the final four games.

I am getting flak because I dared to have the opinion that maybe the trade was a mistake and an overpayment to boot. I cited injury concerns as a leading factor for that, along with believing that the Canucks paid a huge price when they aren't far enough along in their competitive cycle.

There are a lot of sour fans in here that are easily offended over the retool vs rebuild debate and will attempt to stonewall it at every turn. Its a discussion board.

You aren’t getting flak because you don’t like the Hronek trade. It’s because you are putting the onus on others to prove that Hronek isn’t injury prone. If you are going to say he has a “bum” shoulder and likely won’t make a full recovery then offer some supporting evidence. A one off shoulder injury doesn’t prove anything. If you would prefer picks, a rebuild, or a different player that’s fair. Falsely labeling him as injury prone doesn’t carry any weight.

 

[andora]

It isn't really my fault that you assumed I was referring to you, dude.

But I'm sorry for the confusion.

Oh i wasnt serious i was joking

You said posters so i fake offended

They have been.

There is precedent to have that opinion.

Maybe some are. But not all.



I wouldn't put anything past this org. But I am more leaning towards them just making a mistake by even letting Hronek return for the final four games.

I am getting flak because I dared to have the opinion that maybe the trade was a mistake and an overpayment to boot. I cited injury concerns as a leading factor for that, along with believing that the Canucks paid a huge price when they aren't far enough along in their competitive cycle.

There are a lot of sour fans in here that are easily offended over the retool vs rebuild debate and will attempt to stonewall it at every turn. Its a discussion board.

So people are discussing your opinion and where you are getting to said opinion from. It is a discussion board

 

[Canucker]

Funny you should ask: Sedins remain committed to Vancouver Canucks’ rebuild

Funny....I don't recall any "rebuild"...I always thought "it wasn't fair to the Sedins!" to undergo a rebuild with them still around? I must have slept through that one...lol