Management Threads | Structure. Standards. Habits.

[arttk]

And then they retired?

they didn’t retire because Benning started a rebuild. Are you suggesting Benning did a rebuild?

 

[RandV]

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

Not sure what this post was replying to, but on a different topic just looking at the link itself while it the Sedins in Sept 2017 are saying they are committed to the rebuild they also retired a year later when their contracts were up. They were 36/37, still 2nd line players, and with their health/fitness probably could have kept playing into their 40's.

Nothing wrong with them retiring at this point, just as a huge fan of both the Sedins and believer in Mike Gillis I wonder if we weren't robbed of a better send off. Winning the Cup would be a long shot regardless, but I really feel like we could have seen a few more seasons of them competing in the playoffs before hanging them up.

Let me create a fantasy alternate reality. Aquilini doesn't step in to block Gillis rebuild idea and Kesler trade to Anaheim, and he gets both the ANA and OTT 1st round pick in 2014. It's reasonable to think Canucks take Nylander, Larkin, McCann, Demko, and Forsling. Canucks don't do as good in 2015 or as bad in 2016 and draft in the 10-15 range, and lets say draft Kyle Connor and Jakob Chychrun (Gillis drafting favoured OHL and US players). By the time 2017-18 rolls around the Canucks have completed a successful 3 year rebuild and are a good team again making the playoffs, and instead of retiring the Sedins stick around another 3 years to compete for the Cup.

We'll never know what could have happened but I've always thought a scenario like that is plausible, and yet another reason to dislike Jim Benning and Francisco Aquilini.

 

[arttk]

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.

a) once again, Petey, Huges and Demko said they don't want to be part of a rebuild. i love how you just glaze over that and pretend they don't actually mean it.

b) Philly is looking for a 1st and not looking to dump the player. I mean if you want to come up with imaginary scenarios where we can dump all our good players and get good ones for free. yes in that world of course we can rebuild fast, problem is that world does not exist.

c) i see you using the term prioritizing futures, i am guessing what it actually means is get as many picks as possible by dumping everyone of value?

d) I don't see how we are not prioritizing the future, we beefed up development in the A, looks like we have partnership now with junior teams to get drafted players like that really tall swedish kid over, we are signing a boat load of college FA and we still kept our 1st and multiple 3rds and 4ths and used them to draft.

Trading an EXTRA 1st from the Bo trade doesn't mean we are not prioritizing the future. You do know that picks CAN and tend to have a high rate of busting right? It's like lets put all our eggs into picks and then if 1 of them bust, oh i guess we'll just repeat and repeat and burn time while hoping to get it right.

 

[Bleach Clean]

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.

This is the disingenuous nature of this argument: If Pettersson and his agent can project a winning environment enough to sign this offseason, it's only because of the recent moves alone. It's not that they could have had a projection on management, environment, money etc... already, prior to the recent moves. No, sorry. Every indication from agent and player is that he was going to sign for term, even going back to Benning's botched bridge deal. But the people here who were anti-rebuild or anti-futures used a Tkachuk-esque scarecrow scenario to bolster a narrative that had no grounding to begin with.

JP Barry and Pettersson are and were smart enough to know that the landscape was ripe for a mega deal. Regardless of whether the team traded for Hronek or any other false cause you want to put forward. The biggest indication of this is the rumour from the Benning era. He wants to be here.

The funny thing is now Pettersson can project the team out and make his decision. He doesn't need to see if the team wins or loses first, which would be kind of important if winning and losing was at the heart of the decision to sign, no? And once signed, it will be much harder for him to leave, rather than him just asking out now. (No Tkachuk)

To sum, if he signs this offseason, certain individuals will rightly be questioned for their supposition here. And if he doesn't, then my assertion is definitely open to criticism here. Let's see how it unfolds.

 

[Diogenes92]

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.

I said "for all we know, he could have a bum shoulder".

There's a big distinction between what I said and absolute certainty. I never once claimed that he has a bum shoulder that will never fully heal.

He has a concerning history of injuries to this point. That can't be refuted.

Maybe its time for the mob to take a step back?

 

[Diogenes92]

Oh i wasnt serious i was joking

You said posters so i fake offended

No worries.

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

"Discussing" is an interesting way of putting it.

 

[MS]

a) once again, Petey, Huges and Demko said they don't want to be part of a rebuild. i love how you just glaze over that and pretend they don't actually mean it.

b) Philly is looking for a 1st and not looking to dump the player. I mean if you want to come up with imaginary scenarios where we can dump all our good players and get good ones for free. yes in that world of course we can rebuild fast, problem is that world does not exist.

c) i see you using the term prioritizing futures, i am guessing what it actually means is get as many picks as possible by dumping everyone of value?

d) I don't see how we are not prioritizing the future, we beefed up development in the A, looks like we have partnership now with junior teams to get drafted players like that really tall swedish kid over, we are signing a boat load of college FA and we still kept our 1st and multiple 3rds and 4ths and used them to draft.

Trading an EXTRA 1st from the Bo trade doesn't mean we are not prioritizing the future. You do know that picks CAN and tend to have a high rate of busting right? It's like lets put all our eggs into picks and then if 1 of them bust, oh i guess we'll just repeat and repeat and burn time while hoping to get it right.

It's incredible how this make-believe world keeps getting parroted as an option and the bolded just keeps getting ignored.

 

[Canucker]

a) once again, Petey, Huges and Demko said they don't want to be part of a rebuild. i love how you just glaze over that and pretend they don't actually mean it.

b) Philly is looking for a 1st and not looking to dump the player. I mean if you want to come up with imaginary scenarios where we can dump all our good players and get good ones for free. yes in that world of course we can rebuild fast, problem is that world does not exist.

c) i see you using the term prioritizing futures, i am guessing what it actually means is get as many picks as possible by dumping everyone of value?

d) I don't see how we are not prioritizing the future, we beefed up development in the A, looks like we have partnership now with junior teams to get drafted players like that really tall swedish kid over, we are signing a boat load of college FA and we still kept our 1st and multiple 3rds and 4ths and used them to draft.

Trading an EXTRA 1st from the Bo trade doesn't mean we are not prioritizing the future. You do know that picks CAN and tend to have a high rate of busting right? It's like lets put all our eggs into picks and then if 1 of them bust, oh i guess we'll just repeat and repeat and burn time while hoping to get it right.

I love how you turn a casual media scrum comment into some sort of perceived threat....would they like it? No, probably not...but does that mean they'd immediately jump ship...likely not.

 

[Intangibos]

Some people don't want to get up early for work but that's their f***ing job

 

[arttk]

I love how you turn a casual media scrum comment into some sort of perceived threat....would they like it? No, probably not...but does that mean they'd immediately jump ship...likely not.

"obviously we don't want to be here for a rebuild and have to wait" was the exact quote.

If someone tells you i am obviously not interested in this, do you always naturally assume they don't actually mean it?

No they won't immediately jump ship but when someone has made a decision to go, they will go and in this case, Hughes +Demko can request a trade, Petterson can decide to not extend past UFA. There is a reason why in any kind of employment situation, you don't want to get to the point where your employee is checked out. If you are checked out, that's it. You can try to force them to stay and nothing good will come out of it. Why do you think teams tend to honor trade request and not force them to play out their contract.

 

[racerjoe]

This is the disingenuous nature of this argument: If Pettersson and his agent can project a winning environment enough to sign this offseason, it's only because of the recent moves alone. It's not that they could have had a projection on management, environment, money etc... already, prior to the recent moves. No, sorry. Every indication from agent and player is that he was going to sign for term, even going back to Benning's botched bridge deal. But the people here who were anti-rebuild or anti-futures used a Tkachuk-esque scarecrow scenario to bolster a narrative that had no grounding to begin with.

JP Barry and Pettersson are and were smart enough to know that the landscape was ripe for a mega deal. Regardless of whether the team traded for Hronek or any other false cause you want to put forward. The biggest indication of this is the rumour from the Benning era. He wants to be here.

The funny thing is now Pettersson can project the team out and make his decision. He doesn't need to see if the team wins or loses first, which would be kind of important if winning and losing was at the heart of the decision to sign, no? And once signed, it will be much harder for him to leave, rather than him just asking out now. (No Tkachuk)

To sum, if he signs this offseason, certain individuals will rightly questioned for their supposition here. And if he doesn't, then my assertion is definitely open to criticism here. Let's see how it unfolds.

Seriously, if you are not willing to acknowledge Petey's own words that have been linked in this thread, it isn't worth a discussion.

 

[arttk]

Some people don't want to get up early for work but that's their f***ing job

sure and you can always quit if you don't want to deal with it anymore.

 

[Canucker]

"obviously we don't want to be here for a rebuild and have to wait" was the exact quote.

If someone tells you i am obviously not interested in this, do you always naturally assume they don't actually mean it?

No they won't immediately jump ship but when someone has made a decision to go, they will go and in this case, Hughes +Demko can request a trade, Petterson can decide to not extend past UFA. There is a reason why in any kind of employment situation, you don't want to get to the point where your employee is checked out. If you are checked out, that's it. You can try to force them to stay and nothing good will come out of it. Why do you think teams tend to honor trade request and not force them to play out their contract.

Oh I believe they mean it when they say they don't want to be there for a rebuild...I just don't believe they mean it enough to march into the GM's office and say they want out...and I'm sure a comment like that requires a GM to have a discussion with the players, or their agents...but I don't think it changes how management operates...at least I hope not, the day you let the inmates rule the asylum is the day you should be relieved of your duties as GM.

 

[andora]

Oh I believe they mean it when they say they don't want to be there for a rebuild...I just don't believe they mean it enough to march into the GM's office and say they want out...and I'm sure a comment like that requires a GM to have a discussion with the players, or their agents...but I don't think it changes how management operates...at least I hope not, the day you let the inmates rule the asylum is the day you should be relieved of your duties as GM.

It isnt letting them run the asylum when you acknowledge how hard it is to come by what we have and decide to run with it versus the latter

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Oh I believe they mean it when they say they don't want to be there for a rebuild...I just don't believe they mean it enough to march into the GM's office and say they want out...and I'm sure a comment like that requires a GM to have a discussion with the players, or their agents...but I don't think it changes how management operates...at least I hope not, the day you let the inmates rule the asylum is the day you should be relieved of your duties as GM.

I think the way your key core leaders think affects the way management thinks…If your team leaders and management aren’t working in harmony..you’ve got a big problem.

If they all want to leave the situation..I’d say you literally failed at your job..and your ass (as a GM) would be squarely on the chopping block.

 

[Canucker]

It isnt letting them run the asylum when you acknowledge how hard it is to come by what we have and decide to run with it versus the latter

What did we have? Other than a team at the bottom of the standings, at the top of the cap and without much of a prospect pool to work with?

I think the way your key core leaders think affects the way management thinks…If your team leaders and management aren’t working in harmony..you’ve got a big problem.

If they all want to leave the situation..I’d say you literally failed at your job..and your ass (as a GM) would be squarely on the chopping block.

Sure, if you can’t sell them on a viable plan, you haven’t done your job.

 

[andora]

What did we have? Other than a team at the bottom of the standings, at the top of the cap and without much of a prospect pool to work with?



Sure, if you can’t sell them on a viable plan, you haven’t done your job.

I was just kinda going on with new management coming on..

We had a very good starting goaltender on a good deal
An amazingly gifted game controlling defenceman
A center with elite potential talent and vision with all around capability

An extremely passionate ppg veteran support center/winger
A good offensive goal scoring center


The first three kinda make you go.. hmm

 

[MarkusNaslund19]

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.

He's an RFA at the end of this deal.

Please stop with the 'le epic skeletor and moleman' thing.

And maybe we can minimize the calling for public lynchings hyperbole?

 

[Diogenes92]

He's an RFA at the end of this deal.

Please stop with the 'le epic skeletor and moleman' thing.

And maybe we can minimize the calling for public lynchings hyperbole?

 

[valkynax]

He's an RFA at the end of this deal.

Please stop with the 'le epic skeletor and moleman' thing.

And maybe we can minimize the calling for public lynchings hyperbole?

No.

 

[Diogenes92]

I was just kinda going on with new management coming on..

We had a very good starting goaltender on a good deal
An amazingly gifted game controlling defenceman
A center with elite potential talent and vision with all around capability

An extremely passionate ppg veteran support center/winger
A good offensive goal scoring center


The first three kinda make you go.. hmm

Nobody is saying that having Petey, Hughes, Demko is a bad thing.

Miller's contract sucks and he isn't getting any younger so I'm not so high on him.

The thing is... having multiple elite talents doesn't guarantee results. Ie. Toronto, Edmonton. McDrai have put up multiple historic seasons to no avail.

A properly structured and deep team counts for a lot more than having a few superstars imo.

I just wish there didn't have to be this movement of certain toxic posters (not syaing you're one of them) whose main argument seems to be:

Team isn't rebuilding. We have Petey, Hughes, Demko. You shouldn't even be talking about a rebuild or blowing things up. How dare you. Blah blah blah.

So much for having different opinions.

If that certain group wasnt so toxic, maybe there could be some meaningful discussion.

 

[arttk]

Oh I believe they mean it when they say they don't want to be there for a rebuild...I just don't believe they mean it enough to march into the GM's office and say they want out...and I'm sure a comment like that requires a GM to have a discussion with the players, or their agents...but I don't think it changes how management operates...at least I hope not, the day you let the inmates rule the asylum is the day you should be relieved of your duties as GM.

Yeah that’s why they have agents.

I also don’t think it changes how management operates because they came in thinking they can retool. It’s only you guys and Drance that are bitching about how this needs to be a retool and how magically Petey, Hughes and Demko will be totally cool with despite them saying no.

Also I am pretty sure it’s a bad idea to try to force players to go along with a plan that they are fundamentally against.

 

[andora]

Nobody is saying that having Petey, Hughes, Demko is a bad thing.

Miller's contract sucks and he isn't getting any younger so I'm not so high on him.

The thing is... having multiple elite talents doesn't guarantee results. Ie. Toronto, Edmonton. McDrai have put up multiple historic seasons to no avail.

A properly structured and deep team counts for a lot more than having a few superstars imo.

I just wish there didn't have to be this movement of certain toxic posters (not syaing you're one of them) whose main argument seems to be:

Team isn't rebuilding. We have Petey, Hughes, Demko. You shouldn't even be talking about a rebuild or blowing things up. How dare you. Blah blah blah.

So much for having different opinions.

If that certain group wasnt so toxic, maybe there could be some meaningful discussion.

Personally i would like to see more ideas offered as to how a re-whatever could have been done keeping those three for demkos contract and turn it around reasonably quickly outside of trade miller and trade ufas.. we didnt have any

Miller and horvat were it.. period. Nobody was taking on term at that point so we would have ended up with a couple late firsts and a couple chytils and a couple lundqvists and it was supposed to be combined with taking on a couple bad contracts for 'sweeteners' as a creative approach ... again with some pipedream of getting to a competing point within our 3 amigos prime real estate

I dont recall having seen viable options out of trading horvat and miller..

 

[Diogenes92]

Personally i would like to see more ideas offered as to how a re-whatever could have been done keeping those three for demkos contract and turn it around reasonably quickly outside of trade miller and trade ufas.. we didnt have any

Miller and horvat were it.. period. Nobody was taking on term at that point so we would have ended up with a couple late firsts and a couple chytils and a couple lundqvists and it was supposed to be combined with taking on a couple bad contracts for 'sweeteners' as a creative approach ... again with some pipedream of getting to a competing point within our 3 amigos prime real estate

I dont recall having seen viable options out of trading horvat and miller..

Trade Bo and Miller eatly on. Significantly weakens the team and gives them a chance at Bedard/Carlsson/Fantilli.

Trade Kuzmenko at the deadline for a haul.

Don't hand out any bloated ufa contracts. Don't sign aging players to fat contracts.

Don't spend money as soon as cap space opens up on win-now pieces.

Don't trade futures for win-now pieces.

Use cap space to acquire assets from cap-strapped teams.

It also depends how far back you want to go for when people were screaming for a rebuild.

During the last couple Jimbo years we all wanted one and it would've sped up a rebuild quite a lot. I'm not advocating for a quick turnaround anymore. The time for that has passed. Realistically they should've been in a full rebuild 5 years ago.

If done adequately, 5 years isn't unreasonable for a competitive playoff team. What're the chances of this core winning a cup in the next 5 years with the current game plan? Be honest.

What happens if they miss the playoffs the next two years? Do you think the core will want to stick around even if they aren't rebuilding, but instead "trying to make the playoffs"?

 

[mriswith]

It's incredible how this make-believe world keeps getting parroted as an option and the bolded just keeps getting ignored.

Because it's a bad argument and has been since it started. It only gets referenced as a deus ex machina to defend poor managerial decisions because there is literally no other counter argument so that's the last resort.

It's at best poorly thought out and at worst disingenuous because:

1. They got asked in a scrum if they would like to go through a rebuild. Every single young star player in the league would answer in the exact same way, there's nothing unique about what they said.

2. That doesn't mean that every young star player in the league would demand a trade

3. The word rebuild gets abused more than any other word in hockey to serve whatever argument someone is making at the time. To most people, rebuild means scorched earth Chi/Arizona style, which absolutely no one was even advocating, making the entire argument a false equivalency.

4. Case in point to all of the above, our players called the post bubble managerial incompetence a "shocking reboot" and literally no one demanded a trade afterwards.

Make believe world indeed - for those who think trading Horvat and Miller would mean everybody demands trades.