Management Threads | Structure. Standards. Habits.

[RandV]

I think you and I have agreed in the past, that there are avenues to do this, but you need to be more aggressive than this management has been to date. I don't think you "blow it up", but for instance, I don't believe trading Miller would have been the death knell for this group's window like some other people, especially given the veteran talent that's subsequently been on the trade market due to the flat cap. In my eyes, you're basically ending up in the same situation in either scenario unless you actually improve this roster significantly, which hasn't nearly been achieved yet, and I'm doubtful they'll even achieve it before Pettersson has to make a decision.

There's been some good players moved the prior two seasons, but where's the bargains this summer? Going with centers the guys on the move were an aging and/or washed up Kevin Hayes and Ryan Johansen, for 2nd round picks you have Alex Kerfoot and Ross Colton, in free agency the biggest signings were an aging Ryan O'Reilly and more of an elite 3rd line center JT Compher. For a center with an equivalent impact to JT Miller was Pierre-Luc Dubois whom LA paid a heavy price for.

Like if after trading Miller previously a year or two from now with 'the plan' coming together we need to reacquire an impact center to play behind Miller from the LA example that's likely to be leaving you wishing we had just kept Miller rather than practically given him away a few years ago.

 

[Peen]

Did anyone here post on any canucks forums in the late 90s during the Messier era? Curious how the discussion was

 

[F A N]

Did anyone here post on any canucks forums in the late 90s during the Messier era? Curious how the discussion was

That was a different era without the salary cap though. The Canucks had failed to land Gretzky and they landed Messier. That was seen as a huge addition to a team with Bure, Mogilny, and Linden (if Bure and Mogilny could be healthy together).

 

[Peen]

That was a different era without the salary cap though. The Canucks had failed to land Gretzky and they landed Messier. That was seen as a huge addition to a team with Bure, Mogilny, and Linden (if Bure and Mogilny could be healthy together).

But what about after the shine wore off and there were clear problems?

How was the discussion?

 

[DS7]

I don’t think a bunch of us are against trading Miller. We are against trading Miller for crap. If we can get like 2 1st rounder + something as it was reported at the TDL, a lot of us would be fine with it.
Trading Miller for like 28-31st, Lundkvist and Chytil is not the right deal to make.

A lot of us would not consider that crap though. Because you have to take into account the cap space we free up, and that is extremely valuable in the flat cap era from covid.

Miller for 28th, Lundkvist (RHD), Chytil (3C) + ~$37 Million in cap flexibility over the next 8 years.
(cap commitment for Chytil is $4.4M x 4, and Lundqvist is $925k x 1)

The cap is a considerable amount of flexibility you can use to leverage for picks (1st round = $4-6 mil, 2nd round = $1-3 mil) Again, we can go into hypotheticals forever, but it's really what your belief is on how Miller's value will appreciate/depreciate as he ages and whether that $37 Mil in extra cap space can be deployed in a way that materially improves the team.

Opening this cap up in advance of the 2023 Offseason from the 2022 TDL would have been able to land us Marino IMO. or given us the flexibility to. So let's say we do it, and we also give up a prospect/Player for Marino.

It would have also opened another can of worms with whether we keep Horvat or not. My preference was to move on... In the event we trade Horvat as well, with two RHD in the team in Lundkvist and Marino, a second 1st rounder in 2023 (let's say Wallinder / Moore), and a 2nd, plus the UFA we need to sign to fill in the 2C spot.

Then you can look at UFA options like Compter or RoR as a stop gap while you have a 2C on the farm in Oliver Moore developing, and Chytil at the 3C spot we are lacking right now.

So hypothetically, we can have (if we traded both Horvat and Miller)

Marino (4.4M)
Lundkvist (925k)
Chytil as 3C (4.4M)
UFA 2C stopgap (2022 Offseason -> Copp at $5.5Mx5yrs / Trocheck at $5.5x7yrs, or 2023 Offseason -> Compter at 6Mx5? Right hand centre)

17th overall pick (Moore as a 2C in the system)
2nd Rounder (in system)

Vs

Miller (8Mx8)
Horvat (8.5Mx8)
Player or Prospect in Marino trade
3rd rounder

This outcome sees us having depth at a cheaper price and younger players in a position of need, with reinforcements on the farm coming up in the next 2-4 years, while competing.

Not saying this is easy because we're entering video game realm here, but cap flexibility at the right time opens up these possibilities. That's taking a step back to set ourselves up for the future.

Similar to how Tampa 'lost' that trade with us on JT, but they leveraged the cap space and the 1st in that brief window of time from us to make a deft acquisition in Blake Coleman to win a cup. A trade isn't just a trade in isolation, but a step in the body of work.

Of course, you have to take a step back at the right time, and it was the right time because this is still the tail end of the flat cap era. With cap space going up next year and Miller locked into his contract, we know this is all moot now. This isn't the right time for that step back.

It's not really us saying, "rebuild now!", but just acknowledging the fact that it was a wasted opportunity to not trade Miller earlier for that return. And we just have to hope for the best.

To me, we have to hope that JT ages well like Pavelski, but IMO that represents a 99th percentile outcome (you may disagree on this I respect that). I think it's wishing for a unicorn when considering the probabilities of players aging well like that.

And I'll take my changes with the high end magic beans over the unicorn, especially in a deep 2023 class.

I really hope you're right, and I REALLY want to eat crow over this, but to me, it just feels like we've capped our ceiling. This is less a 'cup window' and more a '1st round appearance' window that we're entertaining here for the next few years.

 

[arttk]

As I said, if they do move Myers it is more substantial, maybe enough, though I don't view $18M as a lot of space if you're basically forced to acquire those positions at market premium either via UFA or by taking on bad contracts to address those positions. You are obviously not trading any more futures to fill those positions, as you don't have any. It's still going to be extremely tight cap-wise for the foreseeable future, and the kicker is you probably don't have any impact ELCs for 3-4 years. You're basically trying to compete with your entire roster making max contract. And you're starting with a non-playoff team.

I know the story, they're going to try to make this work. It's an extreme long shot, and they haven't done enough to convince me it's remotely likely unless they get extremely lucky with internal development.

In terms of assets, we should get picks from Beau, Myers, Garland (if we are patient) and maybe even Boeser. Who the hell knows how high those picks are but let’s say 2 2nd and 2 3rds, that should be enough to get back at least a 3C. also trading Garland and Boeser will free up additional 11M. So let’s say the 3C is expensive and cost like Garland’s cap, well trading Boeser means you have now 24M to spend in FA to fill wing, 2C and top4D hole. It will take good negotiator to get a FA to come but it seems like that is this managements strength.

 

[strattonius]

Best C's available this offseason were Compher, Killorn, O'Reilly and Johansen.

Don't know why Miller@8M is such a problem. He's far and away the best player of the aforementioned group by a considerable margin.

 

[arttk]

A lot of us would not consider that crap though. Because you have to take into account the cap space we free up, and that is extremely valuable in the flat cap era from covid.

Miller for 28th, Lundkvist (RHD), Chytil (3C) + ~$37 Million in cap flexibility over the next 8 years.
(cap commitment for Chytil is $4.4M x 4, and Lundqvist is $925k x 1)

The cap is a considerable amount of flexibility you can use to leverage for picks (1st round = $4-6 mil, 2nd round = $1-3 mil) Again, we can go into hypotheticals forever, but it's really what your belief is on how Miller's value will appreciate/depreciate as he ages and whether that $37 Mil in extra cap space can be deployed in a way that materially improves the team.

Opening this cap up in advance of the 2023 Offseason from the 2022 TDL would have been able to land us Marino IMO. or given us the flexibility to. So let's say we do it, and we also give up a prospect/Player for Marino.

It would have also opened another can of worms with whether we keep Horvat or not. My preference was to move on... In the event we trade Horvat as well, with two RHD in the team in Lundkvist and Marino, a second 1st rounder in 2023 (let's say Wallinder / Moore), and a 2nd, plus the UFA we need to sign to fill in the 2C spot.

Then you can look at UFA options like Compter or RoR as a stop gap while you have a 2C on the farm in Oliver Moore developing, and Chytil at the 3C spot we are lacking right now.

So hypothetically, we can have (if we traded both Horvat and Miller)

Marino (4.4M)
Lundkvist (925k)
Chytil as 3C (4.4M)
UFA 2C stopgap (2022 Offseason -> Copp at $5.5Mx5yrs / Trocheck at $5.5x7yrs, or 2023 Offseason -> Compter at 6Mx5? Right hand centre)

17th overall pick (Moore as a 2C in the system)
2nd Rounder (in system)

Vs

Miller (8Mx8)
Horvat (8.5Mx8)
Player or Prospect in Marino trade
3rd rounder

This outcome sees us having depth at a cheaper price and younger players in a position of need, with reinforcements on the farm coming up in the next 2-4 years, while competing.

Not saying this is easy because we're entering video game realm here, but cap flexibility at the right time opens up these possibilities. That's taking a step back to set ourselves up for the future.

Similar to how Tampa 'lost' that trade with us on JT, but they leveraged the cap space and the 1st in that brief window of time from us to make a deft acquisition in Blake Coleman to win a cup. A trade isn't just a trade in isolation, but a step in the body of work.

Of course, you have to take a step back at the right time, and it was the right time because this is still the tail end of the flat cap era. With cap space going up next year and Miller locked into his contract, we know this is all moot now. This isn't the right time for that step back.

It's not really us saying, "rebuild now!", but just acknowledging the fact that it was a wasted opportunity to not trade Miller earlier for that return. And we just have to hope for the best.

To me, we have to hope that JT ages well like Pavelski, but IMO that represents a 99th percentile outcome (you may disagree on this I respect that). I think it's wishing for a unicorn when considering the probabilities of players aging well like that.

And I'll take my changes with the high end magic beans over the unicorn, especially in a deep 2023 class.

I really hope you're right, and I REALLY want to eat crow over this, but to me, it just feels like we've capped our ceiling. This is less a 'cup window' and more a '1st round appearance' window that we're entertaining here for the next few years.

I don’t really why you guys continue to think it’s a good idea to have Chytil even as a 3C. We are talking about a zero PK zero PP only ES player. This is not fantasy hockey, having a 3center not being able to PK is fine if you have your 1C,2C and 4C that can Pk. Problem is we are not NYC and our 1C is Petey and we don’t want him to PK so if we have Chytil, we would need to find a 2C that is good at PK and also contribute offensively which is not easy.

Like you guys just keep on looking at assets and completely ignore the concept of actual team building, like come on, this is not fantasy hockey. We are trying to build a better team and not trying to win fantasy asset cup. Yes Miller is a risk for regression due to his age but until he regress he is still putting up PPG.

Also do you honestly we can convince Trochek who is American to pick us over NYC who also happens to be a contender? Or Copp who is also American to pick us over his home town team? Have you not paid attention to the fact that Americans want to go home ever since Covid? Good job at proposing a plan that would fail even with the benefit of hindsight.

Tampa didn’t lose the trade with us, they HAD no freaking choice at all but to unload cap so they can meet the cap. It was either trade multiple piece or trade one. If anything they got more out of that trade than they should have because Benning was dumb as shit and didn’t leverage Tampa’s cap situation one bit. Also they did not take a step back at all, they unloaded a 3rd line player for a 1st, that’s a bloody win even if you want to spin that story in your favor.

 

[bossram]

No that was a genuine question, I don’t really watch the devils, don’t really have the time to do that.

From my understanding, Hronek is also one of the top performing D last season as well. So at the end of the day, we still filled a top4 spot.
i still don’t believe we have the asset to get Marino last season even if we traded for a 1st. We know you guys undervalue the shit out of Ty Smith. But I guess you just need to lower your IQ to Hextall’s level to understand how he could value or overvalue Smitih due to his pedigree and a late 1st we get from Miller would not have beat Smith.
The package from Miller was weak, so I don’t think you can look at that package and think for certain that there was enough there to help us land a top4 guy or a 2C.

Hronek does not have nearly the history or performance of high-level defensive play. He's a different kind of defenseman.

IMO Marino fit the team's biggest need to a perfect tee. They did not acquire him. He went out and performed like a godsend for NJ instead.

I don't completely buy this. The cost would have been a 1st and a 3rd value wise, but PIT may have wanted a prospect like Ty Smith more. We didn't have a Ty Smith, or even a prospect of that value.

Responding to both of you: I still don't buy that PIT really valued Smith that highly. When injuries wrecked their blueline last season, Smith was truly their last resort to insert into the lineup. Coaching and management didn't seem to think highly enough to use him. We also know teams would prefer to trade players out of the division, which would have given the Canucks an advantage in trade negotiations.

Also we know that Allvin was willing to part with significant assets later on (1st + 2nd for Hronek) for a defenseman he liked (and crucially is not cost controlled). So it seems Allvin is/was willing to pay significantly for players he personally feels are worth it. So I would conclude that he did not personally find Marino that appealing, not enough to pay the price required.

 

[arttk]

Hronek does not have nearly the history or performance of high-level defensive play. He's a different kind of defenseman.

IMO Marino fit the team's biggest need to a perfect tee. They did not acquire him. He went out and performed like a godsend for NJ instead.

Responding to both of you: I still don't buy that PIT really valued Smith that highly. When injuries wrecked their blueline last season, Smith was truly their last resort to insert into the lineup. Coaching and management didn't seem to think highly enough to use him. We also know teams would prefer to trade players out of the division, which would have given the Canucks an advantage in trade negotiations.

Also we know that Allvin was willing to part with significant assets later on (1st + 2nd for Hronek) for a defenseman he liked (and crucially is not cost controlled). So it seems Allvin is/was willing to pay significantly for players he personally feels are worth it. So I would conclude that he did not personally find Marino that appealing, not enough to pay the price required.

I don’t know why we still debate that Pitt did not value Smith.
We know that we were in discussion for Marino and that our 1st was off limits. We know that Pitts preferred NJ’s package over ours so that means Smith and 3rd was better that the best we could offer which would not include a 1st. We know top4 guys are traded usually for 1st and 2/3rd. With that you can deduct that pitts valued Smith as a 1st.

You can’t really say because we traded our EXTRA 1st for Hronek it meant we were willing to trade our own 1st. The value between our 1st and an extra 1st is very very different especially considering at that point in time the management team haven’t made the decision between Bo or Miller and didn’t know if they would even trade both of them or 1 of them and that they would get an extra 1st.

If you read the Athletics and that article about Pitts, then you would know that org was dysfunction as f***. Like Hextall was not talking to the coach and the coach was talking to owners and not to Hextall and it was such a shitshow that the players were pissed and the dressing room was bad. It was just a poorly run team. Like I said, if you want to argue you don’t agree with how Hextall valued Smith, sure I can buy that. But looking at how top4D are valued typically, how we were not willing to put our 1 and only 1st rounder in play, it’s only logical to conclude they valued Smith as a 1st round equivalent.

Also I don’t know why you guys continue to think that a former mid 1st round pick that trended well enough to play in the NHL in D+3, put up .5ppg in his rookie year and made the all rookie team would suddenly be worth shit because of a sophomore slump where the whole team was absolute dog shit to the point of finishing as a bottom 5 team.

 

[F A N]

But what about after the shine wore off and there were clear problems?

How was the discussion?

I'm not sure. But a lot (of turmoil) also happened during that time with Quinn being fired, Keenan's reign, Linden trade, Burke hire, Keenan fired etc.

Obviously there was massive disappointment with Messier not being the point per game player he was the previous season, the Canucks losing, and the Linden trade. Then you have Bure holding out and the Burke and Keenan rift. By the end of it, Messier was kept in an effort to push for the playoffs but at the time he was still one of the team's most important players (being the playmaking C).

I think at the time, Messier wasn't a hated player as he was still a solid contributor and there wasn't as salary cap. Even if he was blamed for forcing Linden out of town, the trade was objectively a good one almost right from the beginning.

 

[Tob]

Mole man with the 180IQ move of giving Ian cole the opportunity to be the good guy while management catches flack for allowing the jersey number anyway. Got ahead of some of the negative stuff and libel that's been said about Cole.

 

[DS7]

I don’t really why you guys continue to think it’s a good idea to have Chytil even as a 3C. We are talking about a zero PK zero PP only ES player. This is not fantasy hockey, having a 3center not being able to PK is fine if you have your 1C,2C and 4C that can Pk. Problem is we are not NYC and our 1C is Petey and we don’t want him to PK so if we have Chytil, we would need to find a 2C that is good at PK and also contribute offensively which is not easy.

It certainly isn't fantasy. Chytil isn't the end all be all, this scenario doesn't preclude us still going after Bleuger, Soucy and Cole. Again, I said I wouldn't play too deep into hypotheticals because it'll be fantasy hockey as you said. I'm just highlighting the additional flexibility provided on both the cap front and the prospect pool, which can further be traded for players that management can see fit to target. I'd be curious to see what their plan was had they pulled the trigger on a JT trade, they must have had one if they entertained it while wanting to be competitive.

Like you guys just keep on looking at assets and completely ignore the concept of actual team building, like come on, this is not fantasy hockey. We are trying to build a better team and not trying to win fantasy asset cup. Yes Miller is a risk for regression due to his age but until he regress he is still putting up PPG.

I mean, we did see this combination of JT, Petey, Hughe fail to make it through an 82 game schedule to playoffs under two different coaches. I'm fine with giving them third coach and hoping it's the charm with Horvat out of the picture, but if it falls apart again, I'm not sure you can say there's been any team building at all up to this point. So may as well inject some more combinations into it, just like we are now with revamping the entire defense.

Aren't you worried at all that JT will do a mini-tavares effect and in essence for a shorter window because his prime and Petey/Hughes won't overlap for more than perhaps 2-3 years? Do you think we can contend for a cup in that time?

Also do you honestly we can convince Trochek who is American to pick us over NYC who also happens to be a contender? Or Copp who is also American to pick us over his home town team? Have you not paid attention to the fact that Americans want to go home ever since Covid? Good job at proposing a plan that would fail even with the benefit of hindsight.

Is it your opinion we are that bad an FA destination in the market? Will you only accept hypothetical UFA proposals if they are Vancouver born players?

I've been told time and time again by you guys that this team is going to be a playoff team with the elite core of Petey, Hughes, Demko. if that is the case, then I definitely think this is a selling point to a free agent to play in Vancouver during their primes and with a chance at a prominent role because there's less competition on the depth chart.

And if we're this bad at attracting talent, then should we not then be building this team through the draft rather than trading for these pending RFA/UFA players who may not want to be at a non contending team that's not their home town?

Tampa didn’t lose the trade with us, they HAD no freaking choice at all but to unload cap so they can meet the cap. It was either trade multiple piece or trade one. If anything they got more out of that trade than they should have because Benning was dumb as shit and didn’t leverage Tampa’s cap situation one bit. Also they did not take a step back at all, they unloaded a 3rd line player for a 1st, that’s a bloody win even if you want to spin that story in your favor.

I've been arguing with too many Benning supporters lately, so my bad on attributing that viewpoint to you. But this is arguing from the view point of those who believe that because that JT pick ended up being in the 20s and we got a 1st line player from it, then it was good trade on our part, but I disagree as well. Ignore this one.

 

[arttk]

It certainly isn't fantasy. Chytil isn't the end all be all, this scenario doesn't preclude us still going after Bleuger, Soucy and Cole. Again, I said I wouldn't play too deep into hypotheticals because it'll be fantasy hockey as you said. I'm just highlighting the additional flexibility provided on both the cap front and the prospect pool, which can further be traded for players that management can see fit to target. I'd be curious to see what their plan was had they pulled the trigger on a JT trade, they must have had one if they entertained it while wanting to be competitive.


I mean, we did see this combination of JT, Petey, Hughe fail to make it through an 82 game schedule to playoffs under two different coaches. I'm fine with giving them third coach and hoping it's the charm with Horvat out of the picture, but if it falls apart again, I'm not sure you can say there's been any team building at all up to this point. So may as well inject some more combinations into it, just like we are now with revamping the entire defense.

Aren't you worried at all that JT will do a mini-tavares effect and in essence for a shorter window because his prime and Petey/Hughes won't overlap for more than perhaps 2-3 years? Do you think we can contend for a cup in that time?



Is it your opinion we are that bad an FA destination in the market? Will you only accept hypothetical UFA proposals if they are Vancouver born players?

I've been told time and time again by you guys that this team is going to be a playoff team with the elite core of Petey, Hughes, Demko. if that is the case, then I definitely think this is a selling point to a free agent to play in Vancouver during their primes and with a chance at a prominent role because there's less competition on the depth chart.

And if we're this bad at attracting talent, then should we not then be building this team through the draft rather than trading for these pending RFA/UFA players who may not want to be at a non contending team that's not their home town?


I've been arguing with too many Benning supporters lately, so my bad on attributing that viewpoint to you. But this is arguing from the view point of those who believe that because that JT pick ended up being in the 20s and we got a 1st line player from it, then it was good trade on our part, but I disagree as well. Ignore this one.

When you are building a team you need a balance between certainty and flexibility. Yes if we have 8M extra you would have flexibility but makes little sense if the cost is certainty. I think that’s why the team didn’t want to trade him unless we know we can get a young 2C in return or at least assets they knew for certain that could do that.
Throwing away a PPG center so you can make a couple of gambles in getting a 2C is a dangerous game. You lose the gamble and you have a massive hole that would tank the team.

Adding to that, we know we have a bunch of bad cap expiring in the coming season, the goal should be to keep the good parts and then replace the bad ones as they go away. It’s a balance between trying to improve as fast as possible while being somewhat patient and not reckless.

John Tavares is still ppg.. the problem with Tavares is he makes 11M and he never really provided 11M worth of value. Oh and Miller makes 3M less than Tavares. As the cap go up to 95 in about 2 seasons, the expectation of a 8M player is going to be way different. Hell you have PLD and Horvat make 8.5 and they put up less pts than Miller and are way more flawed than he is. I think Miller probably can’t play center when he’s 33, so we have essentially 3 years to find him a center and if he continues to be PPG playing on the wing making 8M when the cap is like 95+, is that actually a bad thing? I don’t think so.

I think leaving a big ass hole in 2C and banking on FA alone to address it is reckless especially if your targets are Americans and the competition for them are the most attractive city in NA or their hometowns. The competition for a 2C in FA is pretty damn intense, you can’t bank your teams fortune on like 1/32 - 1/16 odds. But if you have Miller already and you manage to add a 2C via FA, then we are THAT much better.

I don’t think we are a good destination until you actually show upward trajectory.

 

[racerjoe]

Responding to both of you: I still don't buy that PIT really valued Smith that highly. When injuries wrecked their blueline last season, Smith was truly their last resort to insert into the lineup. Coaching and management didn't seem to think highly enough to use him. We also know teams would prefer to trade players out of the division, which would have given the Canucks an advantage in trade negotiations.

Also we know that Allvin was willing to part with significant assets later on (1st + 2nd for Hronek) for a defenseman he liked (and crucially is not cost controlled). So it seems Allvin is/was willing to pay significantly for players he personally feels are worth it. So I would conclude that he did not personally find Marino that appealing, not enough to pay the price required.

Well I think it is pretty clear pits management and their coaches weren't on the same page... so yeah, I don't think it matters if he was played or not.

Look at the comparables to Smith, they were worth around a 1st. Its not a hard concept to figure out his value.

From us where were the extra assets we had? We had to trade Horvat to get the assets to get Hronek.

Also to the general discussion I wanted to add cap space is great and can be worth gold, however it isn't worth anything vs someone earning their contract. So in the now, Miller is a much better asset than 8 mil in cap space now. Maybe that changes down the road, and that is why his contract isn't great, but in the here and now losing miller without filling his spot is a negative.

Its the exact reason I wanted to keep Horvat until I heard his ask. Horvat at 6.5-7, good. Horvat at 8.5 bad.

 

[DS7]

When you are building a team you need a balance between certainty and flexibility. Yes if we have 8M extra you would have flexibility but makes little sense if the cost is certainty. I think that’s why the team didn’t want to trade him unless we know we can get a young 2C in return or at least assets they knew for certain that could do that.
Throwing away a PPG center so you can make a couple of gambles in getting a 2C is a dangerous game. You lose the gamble and you have a massive hole that would tank the team.

Adding to that, we know we have a bunch of bad cap expiring in the coming season, the goal should be to keep the good parts and then replace the bad ones as they go away. It’s a balance between trying to improve as fast as possible while being somewhat patient and not reckless.

John Tavares is still ppg.. the problem with Tavares is he makes 11M and he never really provided 11M worth of value. Oh and Miller makes 3M less than Tavares. As the cap go up to 95 in about 2 seasons, the expectation of a 8M player is going to be way different. Hell you have PLD and Horvat make 8.5 and they put up less pts than Miller and are way more flawed than he is. I think Miller probably can’t play center when he’s 33, so we have essentially 3 years to find him a center and if he continues to be PPG playing on the wing making 8M when the cap is like 95+, is that actually a bad thing? I don’t think so.

I think leaving a big ass hole in 2C and banking on FA alone to address it is reckless especially if your targets are Americans and the competition for them are the most attractive city in NA or their hometowns. The competition for a 2C in FA is pretty damn intense, you can’t bank your teams fortune on like 1/32 - 1/16 odds. But if you have Miller already and you manage to add a 2C via FA, then we are THAT much better.

I don’t think we are a good destination until you actually show upward trajectory.

That's a fair take, and for me, it was a gamble that would have be worthwhile to pursue in a historical window where we saw the flat cap depress salaries to the point where I think it is possible to get that 2C even as a stop gap while you draft that prospect with the picks you accumulate. The gamble we've committed to now is that that Miller will continue to be a PPG player as a centre into his mid 30s.

Re: Miller, I don't think that is a bad thing to have an $8M Winger if he maintains PPG, the hole at 3C will still exist though, with less draft capital and certainty to replace him with.

My concern with the three years to find a center in a competitive window is that our draft picks will theoretically be in the mid teens to 20s should this retool succeed, and that is entering magic bean territory when it comes to finding that 2C, when we could have loaded up in this year's class from what was essentially a lost season. We can only hope future draft classes can turn out just as strong as well, but the 2023 season does seem like a time when we could have capitalized on a strong class considering the main club floundered during that time.

Also, if we are pushing to compete as much as we can in this window, we will almost certainly be trading away draft capital to make these pushes, which makes it more uncertain about us finding that 2C replacement. Management will have to show a level of creativity and flexibility that we haven't seen in a while in the last decade

My final thought on this, is that if we aren't considered a good destination despite the core, why are we mortgaging the future for this short term push then? If we can't sell this situation to a free agent, how much better of a chance do we have to sell this situation to Hughes and Petey who have no home town roots and ties to this place? You believe Miller makes that much of a difference to this, so I can only hope this turns out true as the games play out.

Cheers

 

[RobertKron]

I'm not sure. But a lot (of turmoil) also happened during that time with Quinn being fired, Keenan's reign, Linden trade, Burke hire, Keenan fired etc.

Obviously there was massive disappointment with Messier not being the point per game player he was the previous season, the Canucks losing, and the Linden trade. Then you have Bure holding out and the Burke and Keenan rift. By the end of it, Messier was kept in an effort to push for the playoffs but at the time he was still one of the team's most important players (being the playmaking C).

I think at the time, Messier wasn't a hated player as he was still a solid contributor and there wasn't as salary cap. Even if he was blamed for forcing Linden out of town, the trade was objectively a good one almost right from the beginning.

No people f***ing hated Messier at the time as well. By his final year, my mom - legitimately the kindest, most polite and positive person I've ever known - would shout "UGH" and get up off the couch (no remote) to turn the TV off whenever he was interviewed. He made a shitload of money, floated around with zero intensity, was arrogant as hell, was sticking his nose into personnel decisions, there were heaps of rumours leaking out from all over the place about him being an asshole to teammates who weren't in his circle, and he just kind of came off like a total dipshit.

Like, look at this dumb motherf***er:

 

[RandV]

No people f***ing hated Messier at the time as well. By his final year, my mom - legitimately the kindest, most polite and positive person I've ever known - would shout "UGH" and get up off the couch (no remote) to turn the TV off whenever he was interviewed. He made a shitload of money, floated around with zero intensity, was arrogant as hell, was sticking his nose into personnel decisions, there were heaps of rumours leaking out from all over the place about him being an asshole to teammates who weren't in his circle, and he just kind of came off like a total dipshit.

Like, look at this dumb motherf***er:

Yeah for the other questions I don't know when message boards really became a big thing for fans to flock to, as these were the early days of the internet. I got onto one called Fanhome which used the same format currently on HF in '99, and knew of hockeysfuture.com at the time but the format was a lot shittier until they made the change to the current look in 2002. So in the summer of '97 I feel like it was a lot more face-to-face discussion at school/work/bar/etc, or was for me at least.

And in terms of the Messier signing it went from huge hype in the summer but quickly turned to anger and scorn that season. I know Messier was old but he was just coming off a great season in New York and we were supposed to be getting a 40 goal, PPG+, gritty ass kicking leader, which is why the team gave him a 3 year $21M+ deal. What we got was an arrogant 60 point floater that was so far up his own ass he tore the room apart making everyone worse that season.

One thing that's always bugged me talking about it years later is people supporting Messier's time here saying 'the Canucks were bad anyways'. This wasn't the '94 Canucks team anymore but they were still only one season out of the playoffs, and had a lot of good pieces in place but a big gaping hole down the middle. Like had we gotten Gretzky in '97, we probably make the playoffs in '97 and '98. The team was essentially:

Gelinas - *** - Mogilny
Naslund - Linden/Sillinger - Bure
Brashear - Sillinger/Linden - Noonan
Odjick - Scatchard - Walker

Lumme - Ohlund
Hedican - Aucoin
Babych - Murzin

Irbe
McLean

Plug in a legit top line center like Messier was supposed to be, or at least a good center with enough $$$ left over to also fix the #2C, and decent chance you're back in the playoffs.

 

[arttk]

That's a fair take, and for me, it was a gamble that would have be worthwhile to pursue in a historical window where we saw the flat cap depress salaries to the point where I think it is possible to get that 2C even as a stop gap while you draft that prospect with the picks you accumulate. The gamble we've committed to now is that that Miller will continue to be a PPG player as a centre into his mid 30s.

Re: Miller, I don't think that is a bad thing to have an $8M Winger if he maintains PPG, the hole at 3C will still exist though, with less draft capital and certainty to replace him with.

My concern with the three years to find a center in a competitive window is that our draft picks will theoretically be in the mid teens to 20s should this retool succeed, and that is entering magic bean territory when it comes to finding that 2C, when we could have loaded up in this year's class from what was essentially a lost season. We can only hope future draft classes can turn out just as strong as well, but the 2023 season does seem like a time when we could have capitalized on a strong class considering the main club floundered during that time.

Also, if we are pushing to compete as much as we can in this window, we will almost certainly be trading away draft capital to make these pushes, which makes it more uncertain about us finding that 2C replacement. Management will have to show a level of creativity and flexibility that we haven't seen in a while in the last decade

My final thought on this, is that if we aren't considered a good destination despite the core, why are we mortgaging the future for this short term push then? If we can't sell this situation to a free agent, how much better of a chance do we have to sell this situation to Hughes and Petey who have no home town roots and ties to this place? You believe Miller makes that much of a difference to this, so I can only hope this turns out true as the games play out.

Cheers

One more thing, we would not have 8M in free cap space if we traded Miller the year before or last year. His cap was like 5.7 and Lundkvist and Chytil would’ve taken up like 3M of that so you really only have 2M in cap savings.

You need to add more pieces and start to win some games before we would be seen as an attractive place. We know players usually put all Canadian teams on their NTC because of tax and various other reasons. You need more to overcome that. I think even in 2011, we were attractive to guys with local connection like Hamhuis, Garrison and Manny.

 

[VanJack]

Scanning the Canucks payroll on Cap Friendly, I finally have the sense that at long last the Canucks are finally right-sizing under the salary cap.

The numbers may not show it right now. But with the contracts for Myers and Pearson mercifully coming to end after this season, and maybe even sooner than that if there's a trade--the rest of the payroll makes sense. And with OEL gone, the Canucks don't have a single player 30 or older--other than Miller--on a long term contract.

The right guys--Miller, Pettersson, Hughes and Demko will be getting big money. And the rest of roster is arrayed out mostly the way it should be paid. There's still a few deals that are a little rich, but nothing approaching the abominable contracts for the likes of Myers, OEL, Eriksson, Beagle etc..etc.

It looks like they finally have some depth on their AHL farm team for call-up duty; and a few promising young prospects ripening on the farm and over in Sweden.

It's taken Rutherford and Allvin less than two season to undo the dog's breakfast left behind by Benning and Company. And while they're still not likely going to be a playoff team next season, at least they have a future that's beginning to come into focus.

 

[valkynax]

Scanning the Canucks payroll on Cap Friendly, I finally have the sense that at long last the Canucks are finally right-sizing under the salary cap.

The numbers may not show it right now. But with the contracts for Myers and Pearson mercifully coming to end after this season, and maybe even sooner than that if there's a trade--the rest of the payroll makes sense. And with OEL gone, the Canucks don't have a single player 30 or older--other than Miller--on a long term contract.

The right guys--Miller, Pettersson, Hughes and Demko will be getting big money. And the rest of roster is arrayed out mostly the way it should be paid. There's still a few deals that are a little rich, but nothing approaching the abominable contracts for the likes of Myers, OEL, Eriksson, Beagle etc..etc.

It looks like they finally have some depth on their AHL farm team for call-up duty; and a few promising young prospects ripening on the farm and over in Sweden.

It's taken Rutherford and Allvin less than two season to undo the dog's breakfast left behind by Benning and Company. And while they're still not likely going to be a playoff team next season, at least they have a future that's beginning to come into focus.

Biggest thing for me is, OEL is gone. But it's not due to their shrewd skills, rather it's basically throwing a pile of money at a problem to make it go away. Now them having the conviction to pull a move like this alone is already putting them lightyears ahead of the fat dobber. They didn't spend the wallet on retirees looking for a final cash out, but that's not exactly ground breaking, most teams didn't due to cap crunch and the possibility of cap increase next year.

We still don't know how the team will perform on ice, especially when the pressure mounts. Pete extension still not done. Still unsure how well Miller's contract will age. And jury's still out on Hronek - I've been pretty public on how about much I absolutely HATE the trade, as they basically pissed away a premium draft pick, from a premium draft year, on an inconsistent player with many question marks, a trade that feels very much JEB-esque. It is completely possible that Hronek will kick ass seven ways from Sunday next season and make the trade worthwhile, but as it stands now, I think the trade is not looking good.

They did some good things, but I wouldn't start singing their praises yet, not until the on-ice product shows massive, tangible, and consistent improvements.

 

[Diogenes92]

They did some good things, but I wouldn't start singing their praises yet, not until the on-ice product shows massive, tangible, and consistent improvements.

This is really the only thing that actually matters.

Every off-season in recent memory we see the narrative that on paper this team should easily be playoff bound. The embarrassing "Canucks are quietly..." trend that became a meme on here.

Need to see some consistent results for once.

 

[valkynax]

This is really the only thing that actually matters.

Every off-season in recent memory we see the narrative that on paper this team should easily be playoff bound. The embarrassing "Canucks are quietly..." trend that became a meme on here.

Need to see some consistent results for once.

I have no problem giving them credit for good things that are done, things like having the guts to buy out that bum OEL, trading Horvat for a reasonable return. But, like you said, we need to start seeing some results on ice. And I'm of course not talking about the franchise tradition of come flying out of the gates like hot shit then fall face first into a pile of hot shit in 2 months.

 

[rypper]

The fact that they slow played free agency was a nice change from past years. (Slow played as in didn't dump term and dollars on the biggest name free agent.) They targeted players who filled needs for them and got good deals done.

 

[bossram]

Well I think it is pretty clear pits management and their coaches weren't on the same page... so yeah, I don't think it matters if he was played or not.

Look at the comparables to Smith, they were worth around a 1st. Its not a hard concept to figure out his value.

From us where were the extra assets we had? We had to trade Horvat to get the assets to get Hronek.

Assets? Trade Miller.

I'm not sure we have many comparables for a Smith trade. Not many young, former 1st rounders who were very bad early in their career are traded at that point.