Management Threads | Structure. Standards. Habits.

[arttk]

Not sure what you've been watching the last decade but it sure stinks of medocrity at best to me.

Its looking like more medocrity to come, too. Especially with this 4th iteration of a retool taking place.

last decade was not mediocrity, it's f***ing tire fire

 

[MS]

last decade was not mediocrity, it's f***ing tire fire

The Benning era was the worst decade of management in the modern history of the NHL and the false equivalencies to the current management group - who look to be doing at least pretty average, competent things - continue to confuse me. Like half this board was convinced they were going to trade #11, sign Matt Dumba to a 6x6, and ruin every prospect they touch with terrible development because that's what they've grown used to ... but that isn't what we're dealing with anymore.

And as for the Magic Rebuild crowd where we walk our core players to UFA and waste their prime years with more losing seasons while accumulating magic beans and then somehow retain those already unhappy players, I don't even know what to say anymore. It's just pure fantasy, both in terms of the human element and the business element of running a pro sports team.

 

[4th line culture]

Losing on purpose = bad, make players sad

Losing by accident = good, make players happy

 

[TruGr1t]

The Benning era was the worst decade of management in the modern history of the NHL and the false equivalencies to the current management group - who look to be doing at least pretty average, competent things - continue to confuse me. Like half this board was convinced they were going to trade #11, sign Matt Dumba to a 6x6, and ruin every prospect they touch with terrible development because that's what they've grown used to ... but that isn't what we're dealing with anymore.

And as for the Magic Rebuild crowd where we walk our core players to UFA and waste their prime years with more losing seasons while accumulating magic beans and then somehow retain those already unhappy players, I don't even know what to say anymore. It's just pure fantasy, both in terms of the human element and the business element of running a pro sports team.

You realize that continuing to be a mediocre, mid-90s bubble team will likely also walk these players to free agency and waste their prime years, right? The only thing that won't is a meaningful improvement, which "pretty average" management probably won't result in.

Some people, probably Pettersson and Hughes among them, just want a higher bar around here then mucking around in perpetuity.

 

[MS]

You realize that continuing to be a mediocre, mid-90s bubble team will likely also walk these players to free agency and waste their prime years, right? The only thing that won't is a meaningful improvement, which "pretty average" management probably won't result in.

Some people, probably Pettersson and Hughes among them, just want a higher bar around here then mucking around in perpetuity.

And this might well be the case.

And if it is, then the logical thing to do in a couple years will be the full rebuild everyone wants.

But right now, the only logical thing to be doing is basically what they're doing. Whether they do it well enough and can get a Panthers-type result remains to be seen.

The notion that you take this team, where it is, and blow it up for a rebuild is just nonsense and does not happen in pro sports. And the notion that you could do that and somehow retain your already unhappy superstar players is just pure pie-in-the-sky fantasy.

 

[DS7]

And as for the Magic Rebuild crowd where we walk our core players to UFA and waste their prime years with more losing seasons while accumulating magic beans and then somehow retain those already unhappy players, I don't even know what to say anymore. It's just pure fantasy, both in terms of the human element and the business element of running a pro sports teteam.

Almost no one is advocating a rebuild right now. I think most of us realize it's too late. But that was the correct path for the last three to five years. To be able to leverage a historical cap crunch with the stacked draft class of 2020 and 2023.

As for the Magic beans. That's why the tanking thread was so popular last few years when those seasons are lost. A lot of us wanted the nucks to get the picks that had a 95% chance of being an NHL player in the top 5-10 range.

The real magic beans are trying to build a cup contending prospect pool with picks in the 10s-20s. Which is what this team is trying to do now.

Like you said it's a business. Detroit somehow managed to convince Larkin to sign long term despite him being in a losing environment for 8 years. It's more complicated than simply player x is gonna be unhappy if we don't make playoffs.

Again, I don't think rebuilding makes sense now. But it's just frustrating that this team could have been so much further along but the excuse back then was it wouldn't be "fair to the Sedins" and we're seeing shades of that now with Petey and Hughes.

Give it a good honest run with this core for sure, but management needs to throw sentimentality out the window and treat it like a business. The minute they think this is not a cup contending roster, they need to stock up and rebuild.

PA seems to think they can win a cup with this team so let's see what he does. But a future rebuild shouldn't be off the table in the range of outcomes.

 

[MS]

Almost no one is advocating a rebuild right now. I think most of us realize it's too late. But that was the correct path for the last three to five years. To be able to leverage a historical cap crunch with the stacked draft class of 2020 and 2023.

As for the Magic beans. That's why the tanking thread was so popular last few years when those seasons are lost. A lot of us wanted the nucks to get the picks that had a 95% chance of being an NHL player.

The real magic beans are trying to build a cup contending prospect pool with picks in the 10s-20s. Which is what this team is trying to do now.

Like you said it's a business. Detroit somehow managed to convince Larkin to sign long term despite him being in a losing environment for 8 years. It's more complicated than simply player x is gonna be unhappy if we don't make playoffs.

Again, I don't think rebuilding makes sense now. But it's just frustrating that this team could have been so much further along but the excuse back then was it wouldn't be "fair to the Sedins" and we're seeing shades of that now with Petey and Hughes.

Give it a good honest run with this core for sure, but management needs to throw sentimentality out the window and treat it like a business. the minute they think this is not a cup contending roster, they need to stock up and rebuild.

PA seems to think they can win a cup with this team so let's see what he does. But a future rebuild shouldn't be off the table in the range of outcomes.

Dylan Larkin is from the suburbs of Detroit and played his college hockey at Michigan and is a different kettle of fish from our core players who have zero ties to the area.

Treating it like a business is trying to make money and trying to win hockey games. And that's what you do when you have 2 of the best 5 players in the history of the franchise right now, under the age of 25.

And again : if building around those guys fails and they force their way out in 2 years, the most logical option is probably a full rebuild. No argument there. But we aren't remotely at that point.

 

[RandV]

Losing on purpose = bad, make players sad

Losing by accident = good, make players happy

You know I think there's another serious misconception happening here when it comes to rebuilding in regards to the Canucks:

Trading for futures = increasing value in the future

Like if you make these trades last season it's like investing and in 2 years you will have more value to help Pettersson and Hughes contend. This is especially relevant with the Hronek trade.

First picking at random I think 5 years is enough to go back to the 2018 trade deadline and look how the actual trades are working out. Just copying and pasting from hockeydb.com. And keep in mind there's a handful of recent 1st and 2nd round picks that don't look valuable as just a name but were much more valuable at the time, like Brett Howden, that I'm not going to bother highlighting:

Tomas Tatar - 2018-Feb-26 Traded from Detroit Red Wings to Vegas Golden Knights for round 1 pick in the 2018 draft (Joe Veleno), round 2 pick in the 2019 draft (Robert Mastrosimone) and round 3 pick in the 2021 draft (Aidan Hreschuk)

Evander Kane - 2018-Feb-26 Traded from Buffalo Sabres to San Jose Sharks for Danny O'Regan, conditional round 1 pick in the 2019 draft (Brayden Tracey) and conditional round 4 pick in the 2019 draft (Ethan Keppen)

Ryan McDonagh - 2018-Feb-26 Traded from New York Rangers with J.T. Miller to Tampa Bay Lightning for Vladislav Namestnikov, Brett Howden, Libor Hajek, round 1 pick in the 2018 draft (Nils Lundkvist) and conditional round 2 pick in the 2019 draft (Karl Henriksson)

Paul Statsny - 2018-Feb-26 Traded from St. Louis Blues to Winnipeg Jets for Erik Foley, conditional round 1 pick in the 2018 draft (Rasmus Sandin) and conditional round 4 pick in the 2020 draft

Ryan Hartman - 2018-Feb-26 Traded from Chicago Blackhawks with round 5 pick in the 2018 draft (Spencer Stastney) to Nashville Predators for Victor Ejdsell, round 1 pick in the 2018 draft (Nicolas Beaudin) and round 4 pick in the 2018 draft (Philipp Kurashev)

Rick Nash - 2018-Feb-25 Traded from New York Rangers to Boston Bruins for Matt Beleskey, Ryan Spooner, Ryan Lindgren, round 1 pick in the 2018 draft (Jacob Bernard-Docker) and round 7 pick in the 2019 draft (Massimo Rizzo)

Now of course occasionally you see a big win, but for the most part the team 'selling' just in terms of player impact overwhelmingly loses the deal. Obviously there's a time, place, and reason to do these types of deal, I won't get into that. And of course even a competitive needs to keep a balance of the salary cap and cheap ELC's coming in, so you just don't want to trade everybody (like our #11 pick). But the real question for the Canucks is how viable it is when they already have Pettersson/Hughes/Demko at age 23/22/26 who Demko aside (who could rebound to be included) just broke out as top 10 players in their position.

Back to the Hronek trade, the Isles 1st and a 2nd. The 1st ended up being ASP, which is a good approximation for 'we could have had him'. Hronek is 25 and should/could be our #2/3 guy for 5-10 years. How long is it going to take ASP to reach that level, 3-5 years? If you don't want to wait is ASP going to increase in trade value in 2 years over the 1st rounder that acquired him? That's a tough one but on average I'd say value remains pretty neutral.

So the question I would pose is this is an extra 1st, you have the cap space for another player, and a critical need for a top 4 RD. What actual value is gained by waiting when Pettersson/Hughes are going to be 24/23 entering their best years as elite players now? And there's no relevance to the Benning years here because he didn't have elite players in this age bracket.

 

[Diogenes92]

Again, I'm not disagreeing that there have been issues in the past with the Canucks trainers/medical personnel. However, you really need to explain what the 'mistake' is.

Well, that's a different argument and kettle of fish from what was being discussed, if you're pairing these arguments together, then yeah, people are gonna drag you over it, because...

I think that having the opinion that trading for an injured player and then dressing him in 4 games when the season was lost was a mistake. There was no good reason to risk Hronek's shoulder getting worse.

This team (under Benning and Allvin) seems to have this weird belief that they're still in a playoff hunt even when all the numbers and common sense would say otherwise. It is frustrating to have to watch that and by playing Hronek when he had his shoulder in a sling sort of triggered me.

Believing that it was a mistake to play him when he clearly wasn't even 95% healthy and also believing they overpaid for him via trade (for many reasons) is not a huge stretch of the imagination, is it?

...this is why people are giving you grief. You haven't really done a great job of explaining what the 'injury concerns' are beyond this shoulder injury. Other posters have pointed out that the concussions are more of a concern, but you were talking about his shoulder while trying to portray the Canucks staff as ranging from incompetent to malicious. Again, the latter part is what I find unbelievable.

I have seen a lot of incompetence and lack of accountability from the Canucks org i amny different facets.

Even Hughes openly spoke out against how Pearson was handled. That speaks to an internal frustration with the medical staff. Its not only an uninformed fan like me spouting conspiracy theories.

The competitive cycle thing, I personally disagree with, and the arguments re: we need to be doing something if we want to keep Hughes/EP/Demko are valid, IMO. Unless you're Shane Doan, not a lot of players want to stick around longterm with a team that's struggling.

This is where we will disagree. I am not that high on this core to bring the Canucks to the promised land. So I don't believe in pleasing or catering to them.

I think Hughes/EP/Demko are worth building around, although I respect people who feel another course of action should be taken.

They have had a decent amount of years to accomplish something and haven't shown any sort of killer instinct when it counts.

Such as actually qualifying for the playoffs without being gifted a play-in round while being outside of the top 16.

 

[Diogenes92]

At least, this time, it's not Jim f***ing Benning at the helm. A retool is not intrinsically a bad thing, it just needs to be done competently.
Jury's out on that, but turning around the supertanker of failure takes a while.

If it's going to take a while then it really isn't a retool.

 

[Angry Little Elf]

 

[AwesomeInTheory]

You realize that continuing to be a mediocre, mid-90s bubble team will likely also walk these players to free agency and waste their prime years, right? The only thing that won't is a meaningful improvement, which "pretty average" management probably won't result in.

Some people, probably Pettersson and Hughes among them, just want a higher bar around here then mucking around in perpetuity.

I mean, being a team sniffing at the fringes of the playoffs was enough to get Rick Nash to commit to another contract in Columbus while suffering through not one, but two of the worst GMs.

Yeah, he did request a trade a few years after signing, but that was because the team essentially flatlined, lol.

 

[AwesomeInTheory]

There was no good reason to risk Hronek's shoulder getting worse.

That's fair, but we don't really know what the issue was with him and it doesn't speak to him being injury prone or whatever 'injury concerns' is supposed to be implying.

It is frustrating to have to watch that and by playing Hronek when he had his shoulder in a sling sort of triggered me.

Legit question: is this actually true or hyperbole/exaggeration?

Believing that it was a mistake to play him when he clearly wasn't even 95% healthy and also believing they overpaid for him via trade (for many reasons) is not a huge stretch of the imagination, is it?

It's not, but assuming that management ordered him to play and got the medical staff to sign off on it in order to show him off (or whatever) is. That's the part I'm taking issue with.

I have seen a lot of incompetence and lack of accountability from the Canucks org i amny different facets.

Even Hughes openly spoke out against how Pearson was handled. That speaks to an internal frustration with the medical staff. Its not only an uninformed fan like me spouting conspiracy theories.

Third time: I'm aware of Pearson and there is absolutely something there. What, we don't know.

And third time, again: Allvin cleaned house with the Canucks training/medical staff last year.

Like, I'm not disagreeing with what has happened/what we've seen, but I am hesitant with some of the conclusions you're arriving at.

This is where we will disagree. I am not that high on this core to bring the Canucks to the promised land. So I don't believe in pleasing or catering to them.

They have had a decent amount of years to accomplish something and haven't shown any sort of killer instinct when it counts.

Such as actually qualifying for the playoffs without being gifted a play-in round while being outside of the top 16.

And you know, that's totally fair. But in their defense, they have not been provided with a lot of great supporting pieces throughout most of that time, with us being subjected to absolutely insane decisions like signing Holtby or chasing OEL.

The Flames had Iginla for years and weren't doing jack shit until they lucked into a goalie Sutter had inside knowledge on and had some other guys like Regehr, etc. come aboard. One or two star players can only do so much.

EP and Demko have been incredibly consistent and the org has never had a dman on the level of Hughes. I'm super skeptical that Hughes is going to be here long term (I get a sense we'll be seeing him Tkachuking off to Jersey) but it's worth trying to build a contender.

There are a lot of obstacles in the team's way, but things seem to be going in the right direction, so I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt. Getting Kuze and firing OEL into the sun were both wins in my mind (even if we're going to have Benning's legacy going until the heat death of the universe.)

Gun to my head? I don't think management is going to pull a rabbit out of the hat. But I'd rather see the team try to continue to make smart moves instead of throwing the proverbial baby out with the bathwater.

It's not an ideal situation, not by a long shot. And I really f***ing wish we had tried for Bedard this year. Sigh.

 

[rypper]

Legit question: is this actually true or hyperbole/exaggeration?

A lot of chatter on twitter but not from any reputable sources, mostly one person posting it and the rest parroting what they said.

 

[Hansen]

I don't know who is in charge of dealing with numbers with players but huge misstep to allow Cole to take Luc Bourdon's 28.

 

[Huggy43]

I don't know who is in charge of dealing with numbers with players but huge misstep to allow Cole to take Luc Bourdon's 28.

Came here to ask the same thing.
Big oversight by our Front Office.

 

[Angry Little Elf]

I don't know who is in charge of dealing with numbers with players but huge misstep to allow Cole to take Luc Bourdon's 28.

I wonder if he asked for permission from the bourdon family at least

 

[Diogenes92]

That's fair, but we don't really know what the issue was with him and it doesn't speak to him being injury prone or whatever 'injury concerns' is supposed to be implying.

Shoulder injuries and concussions are serious and potentially long-term injuries. (Speaking from experience having had both while playing competitive tennis, hockey, and soccer for over two decades).

I have concerns knowing how physically demanding NHL hockey is. And the large price they paid for him makes it more of a gamble than in normal circumstances imho.

Legit question: is this actually true or hyperbole/exaggeration?

He was seen in a sling when he first reported to Rogers Arena unless I'm mistaken.

It's not, but assuming that management ordered him to play and got the medical staff to sign off on it in order to show him off (or whatever) is. That's the part I'm taking issue with.

i was never serious about this. I was being sarcastic. Call it the overall frustration of a long-time Canucks fan.

Third time: I'm aware of Pearson and there is absolutely something there. What, we don't know.

And third time, again: Allvin cleaned house with the Canucks training/medical staff last year.

Like, I'm not disagreeing with what has happened/what we've seen, but I am hesitant with some of the conclusions you're arriving at.

I am definitely taking a more negative view on this subject. Some of rhe failings wee during the Benning regime for sure. But there have been a few concerning handlings under JR and Allvin which I posted earlier.

And you know, that's totally fair. But in their defense, they have not been provided with a lot of great supporting pieces throughout most of that time, with us being subjected to absolutely insane decisions like signing Holtby or chasing OEL.

I get that they were playing under incompetent mgmt. But sneaking into a wildcard isn't a super tough ask. They have shown to choke in the regular season when the pressure is high and win when it's ggarbage time (previous 2 seasons as a quick example).

EP and Demko have been incredibly consistent and the org has never had a dman on the level of Hughes. I'm super skeptical that Hughes is going to be here long term (I get a sense we'll be seeing him Tkachuking off to Jersey) but it's worth trying to build a contender.

I am not a big fan of EP or Demko's attitudes when they speak publicly. They come across a bit spoiled and entitled for having not accomplished much as a team. They have been fine individually, but that doesn't win cups.

I wish they'd just demand a king's ransom from NJ next season if they're poised for a big cup run. It won't happen. But I really wish it.

There are a lot of obstacles in the team's way, but things seem to be going in the right direction, so I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt. Getting Kuze and firing OEL into the sun were both wins in my mind (even if we're going to have Benning's legacy going until the heat death of the universe.)

Not trading Kuz while his value was at its peak was a mistake imho. They're banking a lot on the next 2 years when they are nowhere near being cup contenders.

Firing OEL into the sun was base-level competence. Not something to congratulate them on, even if expectations have become incredibly low since Gillis was fired.

Gun to my head? I don't think management is going to pull a rabbit out of the hat. But I'd rather see the team try to continue to make smart moves instead of throwing the proverbial baby out with the bathwater.

It's not an ideal situation, not by a long shot. And I really f***ing wish we had tried for Bedard this year. Sigh.

I am fully aware that my hopes for this team are not likely to come to fruition anytime in the next few years. But I don't see why I should give up on my principles and beliefs just because it makes a certain group of fans angry (not including you in said group).

 

[4th line culture]

You know I think there's another serious misconception happening here when it comes to rebuilding in regards to the Canucks:

Trading for futures = increasing value in the future

Like if you make these trades last season it's like investing and in 2 years you will have more value to help Pettersson and Hughes contend. This is especially relevant with the Hronek trade.

First picking at random I think 5 years is enough to go back to the 2018 trade deadline and look how the actual trades are working out. Just copying and pasting from hockeydb.com. And keep in mind there's a handful of recent 1st and 2nd round picks that don't look valuable as just a name but were much more valuable at the time, like Brett Howden, that I'm not going to bother highlighting:

Tomas Tatar - 2018-Feb-26 Traded from Detroit Red Wings to Vegas Golden Knights for round 1 pick in the 2018 draft (Joe Veleno), round 2 pick in the 2019 draft (Robert Mastrosimone) and round 3 pick in the 2021 draft (Aidan Hreschuk)

Evander Kane - 2018-Feb-26 Traded from Buffalo Sabres to San Jose Sharks for Danny O'Regan, conditional round 1 pick in the 2019 draft (Brayden Tracey) and conditional round 4 pick in the 2019 draft (Ethan Keppen)

Ryan McDonagh - 2018-Feb-26 Traded from New York Rangers with J.T. Miller to Tampa Bay Lightning for Vladislav Namestnikov, Brett Howden, Libor Hajek, round 1 pick in the 2018 draft (Nils Lundkvist) and conditional round 2 pick in the 2019 draft (Karl Henriksson)

Paul Statsny - 2018-Feb-26 Traded from St. Louis Blues to Winnipeg Jets for Erik Foley, conditional round 1 pick in the 2018 draft (Rasmus Sandin) and conditional round 4 pick in the 2020 draft

Ryan Hartman - 2018-Feb-26 Traded from Chicago Blackhawks with round 5 pick in the 2018 draft (Spencer Stastney) to Nashville Predators for Victor Ejdsell, round 1 pick in the 2018 draft (Nicolas Beaudin) and round 4 pick in the 2018 draft (Philipp Kurashev)

Rick Nash - 2018-Feb-25 Traded from New York Rangers to Boston Bruins for Matt Beleskey, Ryan Spooner, Ryan Lindgren, round 1 pick in the 2018 draft (Jacob Bernard-Docker) and round 7 pick in the 2019 draft (Massimo Rizzo)

Now of course occasionally you see a big win, but for the most part the team 'selling' just in terms of player impact overwhelmingly loses the deal. Obviously there's a time, place, and reason to do these types of deal, I won't get into that. And of course even a competitive needs to keep a balance of the salary cap and cheap ELC's coming in, so you just don't want to trade everybody (like our #11 pick). But the real question for the Canucks is how viable it is when they already have Pettersson/Hughes/Demko at age 23/22/26 who Demko aside (who could rebound to be included) just broke out as top 10 players in their position.

Back to the Hronek trade, the Isles 1st and a 2nd. The 1st ended up being ASP, which is a good approximation for 'we could have had him'. Hronek is 25 and should/could be our #2/3 guy for 5-10 years. How long is it going to take ASP to reach that level, 3-5 years? If you don't want to wait is ASP going to increase in trade value in 2 years over the 1st rounder that acquired him? That's a tough one but on average I'd say value remains pretty neutral.

So the question I would pose is this is an extra 1st, you have the cap space for another player, and a critical need for a top 4 RD. What actual value is gained by waiting when Pettersson/Hughes are going to be 24/23 entering their best years as elite players now? And there's no relevance to the Benning years here because he didn't have elite players in this age bracket.

Wouldnt the tades that landed the Avs byram and the sens stutzle count in your criteria? I feel those are solid wins for teams getting futures. But maybe I miss read your reply

 

[Diogenes92]

Came here to ask the same thing.
Big oversight by our Front Office.

New mgmt may not even realize the history of 28. If they do then that is even more appalling.

Once Cole finds out I hope he relinquishes the number and chooses something else.

A lot of chatter on twitter but not from any reputable sources, mostly one person posting it and the rest parroting what they said.

Drance and Dodd reported on it last season. I assumed a Sportsnet radio Canucks Talk show was evidence enough.

 

[Huggy43]

New mgmt may not even realize the history of 28. If they do then that is even more appalling.

That’s true.
Same ownership though… but appalling seems to go hand & hand with that guy.

 

[rypper]

Drance and Dodd reported on it last season. I assumed a Sportsnet radio Canucks Talk show was evidence enough.

If that's the case I stand corrected, but I can't find anything on it. Where they discussing what Max Butlman tweeted where he gave a pretty non committal report of it?

 

[RandV]

Wouldnt the tades that landed the Avs byram and the sens stutzle count in your criteria? I feel those are solid wins for teams getting futures. But maybe I miss read your reply

I wasn't targeting any period in particular but just googled '2018 NHL trade deadline' and went down the list. I did say that you can come out ahead in a deal like this, and if you go buy the season look at those two Bryam happened in Nov 2017 so can be included while Stutzle was Sept 2018 so next season.

But those types of trades where you sell to a team for a 1st in a season yet to be played and the end up tanking are the jackpot and quite rare, You have those two guys, Brian Burke's Kessel trade in 2009... and I can't think of any others off the top of my head in the last 15 years? A bit more common than that is the prospect turns out really well, Tage Thompson in Buffalo being the best example of that though.

But overall the point of laying a whole trade deadline list out is that the Canucks could sell Horvat and Miller for futures at the deadline and 3-4 years down the line the best asset they have is a Rasmus Sandin and a few seasons drafting a few spots higher. To buff up the Pettersson/Hughes core we'd have to sell some of that to make a Pierre-Luc Dubois type trade. And the overall point I was making is that 'trading for the future' doesn't necessarily mean 'creating more value in the future'.

For the Canucks situation to make sense you really have to consider where Pettersson/Hughes are right now.

 

[Diogenes92]

If that's the case I stand corrected, but I can't find anything on it. Where they discussing what Max Butlman tweeted where he gave a pretty non committal report of it?

Not sure what source they referenced but I just remember driving in my car and hearing them discuss that.

 

[Peen]

Just give me a proper 3rd line center so we don't have Blueger or Aman playing 20 MPG when (because no one ever plays all 82) one of EP/Miller go down.