Management Threads | Structure. Standards. Habits.

[sting101]

I would argue if you are training at the same level as everyone else, you are not doing all you can do. You would need to do something different.

Like what exactly? If there is top notch nutrition ,top notch training programs, coaching, access to information, competition and check points at every step of the way what are you thinking is the missing ingredient for baseline competence vs contender levels

Can you clarify what you mean by this?

I was referring to their playoffs chances with their current roster.

You said they should be doing better than just hoping to be a playoff team in 20 months of managing and i listed 8 reasons why that is gonna take time and what stood in the way.

 

[MarkusNaslund19]

Love how you included Hagel while completely ignoring that it cost TB 2 1st rounders and a decent prospect and also Marino as undervalued. Once again it seems like how you value things are completely different than anyone else.

I assume Kuzmenko would count as those undevalued players or that doesn't count in your humble opinion?

Letting OEL's contract go on for 2 more years will pretty much ensure this team sucks for the next 2 years considering how bad of a fit he is for us. Yes we are paying the cost of dead cap for buying out now but we are not paying the other cost which is having an absolute anchor that makes it hard for us to compete and keep Petey.

To me it feels like he combines outliers and hindsight bias "Just go get a Devon Toews, Hagel or a Stephenson for very little".

 

[Javaman]

I realize I'm potentially going "meta" here but it seems to me one of the best things to happen to HFCanucks was the firing of Benning.

These management threads are much more interesting now. Posters that I used to automatically agree with because we all agreed "Benning sucks" are now making posts that I will never, ever give a "like" to, lol.

Well done everyone and carry on

 

[sting101]

Prospect pool. I said prospect pool. You listed our prospects.

We have the prospect pool, contract structure and tradeable assets of a team exiting its cup window.

i agree with this somewhat but i have a hard time downloading it onto the new regime given the circumstances that Benning left them in.

We already knew we had work to do post 21 playoffs and then Benning acquires and keeps OEL Pearson Dickinson Hamonic Holtby Virtanen Garland and 29 million to add to Myers 6 = 35 million (42% of our cap) in not a single player who pushed the needle forward in a good way (ok maybe Garland but he's miss cast and expensive) and throws in a 9OA 2-2nds walks away from Tanev and Toffoli to do it.

We WERE gutted in cap and prospects as you say like a contender would be.

On the flip side It's pretty promising to walk away from 20 months and have Willander Lekkerimaki Raty EP2 Bains McWard Hirose and the jewel of Kuzmenko with Pod Silovs and Hoglander still young enough to project some upside. This is where your statement is out dated

A better contract structure (that yes still has a ways to go) and a mid to upper middle pipeline now in 20months. It's on a positive track but even JR admits its got a ways to go yet

 

[RobertKron]

IMO it's an indictment of the club. Everything they've done is in service of making the playoffs now. The majority of the cap benefit of the OEL buyout is for this season only. They've been scrambling to clear cap during training camp for both seasons they've been on board.

Given all that and they still don't believe they are a real playoff team, it reflects very poorly on the job they've done.

What is a "real" playoff team? Few teams in the league are a lock to make the playoffs even if they have a bad season. The Canucks are obviously not one of them. This should come as a revelation or surprise to nobody.

 

[Diogenes92]

You said they should be doing better than just hoping to be a playoff team in 20 months of managing and i listed 8 reasons why that is gonna take time and what stood in the way.

I wasn't only referring to this mangement group. I'm also grouping ownership into this as well, as the current situation is partially their own fault. The mismanagement spans many years and at different levels.

From what I heard and read all offseason the Canucks were more than likely to make the playoffs with their new additions.

 

[HairyKneel]

Build towards a cup window.

That should be the job of every GM.

Theyve built towards short term improvement to try to get EP to sign long term and then figure out the rest later.


If they are actually competing right now...
They should trade their 1sts next year add the year after and their prospects that wont play this year or next for immediate help.

The prospect pool was a disaster when they took over. The cap situation was worse. The picks going in and out are negligible. They are trying to weave through Elmer’s mess. I’m going to give them a bit more runway considering it’s been 20 months. If we are having this conversation in two years I’ll gladly call for Allvin’s dome on a stick. This mess couldn’t be fixed this fast especially when you have a directive to ice a competitive team from the owner.

The owner is trying to serve two masters. It can work but it’s not like a tear down always works. It usually doesn’t. Not sure how long you’ve been a fan but are you aware of 84-88?

Albert! Albert! Albert! Albert!

 

[arttk]

TB traded two late 1sts for multiple seasons of 1st line calibre play from Hagel, at an AAV of $1.5M. Yes, that is great value. As usual, it seems you are unable to analyze player value in the context of a hard cap world. You need guys providing surplus value over their contracts, and I'm in favour of trades to acquire such players. Marino is another example. 1st pair quality RHD locked in long-term at $4.4M, which will look like an even better deal as the cap rises. Fantastic value. Again, you just can't grasp this concept.

I've said in other threads in the past before, front office doesn't get any credit for talent evaluation on Kuzmenko. He was only eligible to sign an ELC. 32 teams in the NHL wanted to pluck him from Russia. Allvin did not find a diamond in the rough on the cheap. I give them credit for the recruitment though.

The obsession you have with every move having to contribute to "convincing" Petey to stay is really bizarre. Alright, why hasn't Petey signed yet then, if the club has done so much to convince him? Why didn't he re-sign after OEL was bought out then? You'd think he'd be under contract by now given how adamant you are that the Petey Charm Offensive is working.

my point is that when you say “find undervalue you who provide surplus value”. It’s ridiculous to suggest that Hagel is undervalue when the asking price is 2 1st and a prospect. If anything nobody undervalued the surplus value Hagel provided.
Marino is a curious case of everyone knew he was good and yeah he provides surplus value.
I don’t disagree with the idea of having surplus value but it’s completely unrealistic to think that everyone on the lineup needs to provide that. Even NJD had to face reality and pay Meier to keep him because that’s just the way how the league works, you have to pay at some point to have talent and the point of getting those cheaper contracts is to give you the opportunity to do that.
Hronek is an awful example considering we have 1 legit 1st paring guy on the team and considering his play last season, he could be a top paring guy for us. If you only have 1 top paring guy and you have the opportunity to trade for him for market value price, then you f***ing do it because your team needs that foundation more than it needs surplus value.
That’s the problem when you over focus on surplus value and not on actual team building.

The problem of your idea of holding onto OEL for 2 more years is that you completely ignore the opportunity cost. OEL has proven last year that having 2 offensive LD that can’t Pk doesn’t work. Before we even talk about his contract, just having him, the player, for 2 more years will ensure that we won’t be able to get better. So basically by keeping him for 2 years, you are essentially forfeiting the next 2 seasons. So what do you get in return, like 4 years less in penalty but you lose time and you probably will lose Petey and throw this team into a rebuild essentially making an OEL buyout not even needed. so when you say that is better long term planning, all you see is cap and you completely miss the fact by trying to save a 2mil for 4 years, you are proposing a plan that will lose us the most important longer term piece in Petey.

Yeah Petey hasn’t signed, the team has improved on paper and he still haven’t signed. You think he will sign if we decided to keep OEL and didn’t have money to upgrade the roster?

 

[PuckMunchkin]

i agree with this somewhat but i have a hard time downloading it onto the new regime given the circumstances that Benning left them in.

We already knew we had work to do post 21 playoffs and then Benning acquires and keeps OEL Pearson Dickinson Hamonic Holtby Virtanen Garland and 29 million to add to Myers 6 = 35 million (42% of our cap) in not a single player who pushed the needle forward in a good way (ok maybe Garland but he's miss cast and expensive) and throws in a 9OA 2-2nds walks away from Tanev and Toffoli to do it.

We WERE gutted in cap and prospects as you say like a contender would be.

On the flip side It's pretty promising to walk away from 20 months and have Willander Lekkerimaki Raty EP2 Bains McWard Hirose and the jewel of Kuzmenko with Pod Silovs and Hoglander still young enough to project some upside. This is where your statement is out dated

A better contract structure (that yes still has a ways to go) and a mid to upper middle pipeline now in 20months. It's on a positive track but even JR admits its got a ways to go yet

Ok so we don't disagree on that much.

The current management does not get a free pass from me anymore because of how they have resigned most of the team and have decided to take a less patient approach improving the team.

BUT I do agree that the reign of error that we lived through before is where you find the real culprits of our current misery.

To me trying to go straight for the cup with a team like that, with out taking a step back while waiting out like the Myers contract, is a foolish endeavor. Also I think we are getting close to the point where it is their team. If they had chosen a more patient path then I would think there is a lot more wait & see to be had.

In the way the leagues CBA works, it is pretty much impossible to try to simultaneously improve your team in the now and build towards a future cup window few years ahead.

What is a "real" playoff team? Few teams in the league are a lock to make the playoffs even if they have a bad season. The Canucks are obviously not one of them. This should come as a revelation or surprise to nobody.

The fact that the management has taken the path they have and agree with me on the state of the team is the revelation.

 

[Lindgren]

Ok so we don't disagree on that much.

The current management does not get a free pass from me anymore because of how they have resigned most of the team and have decided to take a less patient approach improving the team.

BUT I do agree that the reign of error that we lived through before is where you find the real culprits of our current misery.

To me trying to go straight for the cup with a team like that, with out taking a step back while waiting out like the Myers contract, is a foolish endeavor. Also I think we are getting close to the point where it is their team. If they had chosen a more patient path then I would think there is a lot more wait & see to be had.

In the way the leagues CBA works, it is pretty much impossible to try to simultaneously improve your team in the now and build towards a future cup window few years ahead.


The fact that the management has taken the path they have and agree with me on the state of the team is the revelation.

Agreed. The bolded is particularly well put.

You'd think there would be numbers of posters wanting management to be more aggressive in trying to improve in the short term, but somehow they're satisfied with the contradictory course the team is taking.

 

[arttk]

Agreed. The bolded is particularly well put.

You'd think there would be numbers of posters wanting management to be more aggressive in trying to improve in the short term, but somehow they're satisfied with the contradictory course the team is taking.

What win cup is a combo of high end talent and depth.
If you have the high end then it’s relatively easier to build that depth. Look at Pitts, Blues, Washington. Hell Vegas did the opposite and had depth and then upgraded the top almost one piece at a time.
We have the top end so the next steps is to build out the rest, brick by brick.

Also people are somehow absolutely obsessed with the Tampa model where you have a ton of elite guys overflowing to the 3rd line but ignore the Vegas model where you have like just like 5 top guys and just insane depth that max out on system play.

Getting to insane depth takes time and good trades, good FA signings and internal development. Problem is all of that stuff is hard to predict as a fan so some of y’all just assume there is no path to get there because you can’t predict if we can get the next Stephenson through trade, or sign an underaged Whitecloud or see some random dude develop beyond what was projected despite a large chunck of guys that are really good in the NHL are not projected to be as good as they are like Stephenson and etc.

 

[Lindgren]

What win cup is a combo of high end talent and depth.
If you have the high end then it’s relatively easier to build that depth. Look at Pitts, Blues, Washington. Hell Vegas did the opposite and had depth and then upgraded the top almost one piece at a time.
We have the top end so the next steps is to build out the rest, brick by brick.

Also people are somehow absolutely obsessed with the Tampa model where you have a ton of elite guys overflowing to the 3rd line but ignore the Vegas model where you have like just like 5 top guys and just insane depth that max out on system play.

Getting to insane depth takes time and good trades, good FA signings and internal development. Problem is all of that stuff is hard to predict as a fan so some of y’all just assume there is no path to get there because you can’t predict if we can get the next Stephenson through trade, or sign an underaged Whitecloud or see some random dude develop beyond what was projected despite a large chunck of guys that are really good in the NHL are not projected to be as good as they are like Stephenson and etc.

I suppose I do fall in to that category bolded above: I think "there is no path to get there." Or almost no path. I've said multiple times that I don't think the Canucks will win a playoff round within the next four years.

People who, on the one hand, like the job management is doing, don't often, on the other hand, express their disagreement with that position. They think Rutherford's current assessment is accurate, and they don't seem confident in a timeline for that to change (or at least not confident enough to convey it). That seems contradictory to me. It seems odd that they don't want management to be more aggressive.

I disagree with the one or two who have said directly that they think that the team is on a path to start winning in the playoffs, but that disagreement at least makes a certain kind of sense to me. I hope that they're right and I'm wrong, but it's a faint hope.

 

[MarkMM]

Agreed. The bolded is particularly well put.

You'd think there would be numbers of posters wanting management to be more aggressive in trying to improve in the short term, but somehow they're satisfied with the contradictory course the team is taking.

Personally I would have preferred a step back but not necessarily full rebuilld. With Petersson, Hughes and Demko we have the hardest parts already in place and they're as elite as you can hope for so a full rebuild wouldn't make sense, but with the cap hangover from Benning I advocated that we wait out the worst of it while accumulating assets so we can have a deeper asset pool while still in the last few years of our core's window. So I do get that argument and was in favour of it.

But it seems clear that ownership wouldn't even allow that step back, and with that in mind, I look at what management has done with the constraints placed upon them and I'm encouraged with what they've done. If you rule out a step back (which likely wasn't their call) then as hard as it is they've made progress on all fronts.

Our cap is better allocated, we've gotten rid of most of the inefficient contracts (OEL will haunt us for almost a decade unfortunately) and JR honestly owned up to we still have "one or two" deals left, and one of those is definitely Myers who will be gone in a year and the other likely being Garland / Beauvillier, one of which is guaranteed to be gone as well. So cap is better.

Our prospect pool? Even with the trades of picks out our prospect pool is clearly better, Lekkerimaki is showing promise, Willander is what we've needed most, Raty has potential, Silovs is great, and we've got some depth beneath that. Yes, yes, every team has these types of prospects BUT we didn't have that under Benning so it IS an improvement.

Our defence? Hronek is a huge addition, making Hughes not the only legiitimate top four, we've got Cole and Soucy who are better than running with what we had last year, with the long-term hope of Willander and maybe EP2 stabilizing our defense corps for years to come. Better now with a brighter future.

Penalty killing looks to be better, and goaltending deeper.

So in the end while I would have preferred a calculated step back, given the constraints management has measurably done what they've said they were going to do, they've made the team faster, younger, have dealt with most of our cap inefficiencies and are going to be clear of almost all of it by the end of this year (OEL hangover notwithstanding), they've measurably improved our biggest weaknesses in defence and penalty killing while making the team deeper all around.

And then most of all, I think the biggest thing being underestimated is the structure, culture and off-ice operations which is flippant to say "everyone does that" because that's just not factually true, it wasn't true here, it's not true on a number of other teams, and was likely the reason the team played below it's potential and if done right and best of breed (back to how Gillis had it) then it could become a competitive advantage, and by all accounts is being invested in as such.

 

[arttk]

I suppose I do fall in to that category bolded above: I think "there is no path to get there." Or almost no path. I've said multiple times that I don't think the Canucks will win a playoff round within the next four years.

People who, on the one hand, like the job management is doing, don't often, on the other hand, express their disagreement with that position. They think Rutherford's current assessment is accurate, and they don't seem confident in a timeline for that to change (or at least not confident enough to convey it). That seems contradictory to me. It seems odd that they don't want management to be more aggressive.

I disagree with the one or two who have said directly that they think that the team is on a path to start winning in the playoffs, but that disagreement at least makes a certain kind of sense to me. I hope that they're right and I'm wrong, but it's a faint hope.

Sure and I disagree with that and that’s fine. I just feel like as long as you have high end guys and you setup a good foundation, you really need like a couple lucky breaks in terms of lucking out on a couple of guys and you can be a contender.

 

[Lindgren]

Sure and I disagree with that and that’s fine. I just feel like as long as you have high end guys and you setup a good foundation, you really need like a couple lucky breaks in terms of lucking out on a couple of guys and you can be a contender.

What do you think the odds are (roughly, of course) that the Canucks win a playoff round within the next four years?

Personally I would have preferred a step back but not necessarily full rebuilld. With Petersson, Hughes and Demko we have the hardest parts already in place and they're as elite as you can hope for so a full rebuild wouldn't make sense, but with the cap hangover from Benning I advocated that we wait out the worst of it while accumulating assets so we can have a deeper asset pool while still in the last few years of our core's window. So I do get that argument and was in favour of it.

But it seems clear that ownership wouldn't even allow that step back, and with that in mind, I look at what management has done with the constraints placed upon them and I'm encouraged with what they've done. If you rule out a step back (which likely wasn't their call) then as hard as it is they've made progress on all fronts.

Our cap is better allocated, we've gotten rid of most of the inefficient contracts (OEL will haunt us for almost a decade unfortunately) and JR honestly owned up to we still have "one or two" deals left, and one of those is definitely Myers who will be gone in a year and the other likely being Garland / Beauvillier, one of which is guaranteed to be gone as well. So cap is better.

Our prospect pool? Even with the trades of picks out our prospect pool is clearly better, Lekkerimaki is showing promise, Willander is what we've needed most, Raty has potential, Silovs is great, and we've got some depth beneath that. Yes, yes, every team has these types of prospects BUT we didn't have that under Benning so it IS an improvement.

Our defence? Hronek is a huge addition, making Hughes not the only legiitimate top four, we've got Cole and Soucy who are better than running with what we had last year, with the long-term hope of Willander and maybe EP2 stabilizing our defense corps for years to come. Better now with a brighter future.

Penalty killing looks to be better, and goaltending deeper.

So in the end while I would have preferred a calculated step back, given the constraints management has measurably done what they've said they were going to do, they've made the team faster, younger, have dealt with most of our cap inefficiencies and are going to be clear of almost all of it by the end of this year (OEL hangover notwithstanding), they've measurably improved our biggest weaknesses in defence and penalty killing while making the team deeper all around.

And then most of all, I think the biggest thing being underestimated is the structure, culture and off-ice operations which is flippant to say "everyone does that" because that's just not factually true, it wasn't true here, it's not true on a number of other teams, and was likely the reason the team played below it's potential and if done right and best of breed (back to how Gillis had it) then it could become a competitive advantage, and by all accounts is being invested in as such.

You may well be right about the role of ownership. Do you think ownership is at the same time holding them back from making more moves, such as trading more first round picks? Or trading more futures to get out from bad contracts?

 

[arttk]

What do you think the odds are (roughly, of course) that the Canucks win a playoff round within the next four years?

I have no clue, I honestly don’t think about it like that because I am not going to pretend I can predict what moves they will and will not make and which prospects will make it or not. I will say that for those saying we don’t have the cap to make things work, they are just plain wrong because they haven’t actually sat down and did the math.

If you ask me about this year, I am reserving my opinion until half way through because there are too many question marks like Hronek, Boeser, Kuz, Soucy.

 

[Lindgren]

I have no clue, I honestly don’t think about it like that because I am not going to pretend I can predict what moves they will and will not make and which prospects will make it or not. I will say that for those saying we don’t have the cap to make things work, they are just plain wrong because they haven’t actually sat down and did the math.

If you ask me about this year, I am reserving my opinion until half way through because there are too many question marks like Hronek, Boeser, Kuz, Soucy.

That's the thing I find puzzling, that a fan could be happy with the moves the team is making and yet have really no feeling/optimism about where it's headed.

 

[arttk]

That's the thing I find puzzling, that a fan could be happy with the moves the team is making and yet have really no feeling/optimism about where it's headed.

I would say it’s cautious optimism. Benning left behind an absolute shit sandwich and i never assumed it would or could be fixed in 2 seasons never mind we are in the flat cap era.

 

[sting101]

It's actually a good question about winning a playoff round or more.

You have to walk before you can run and we're at least walking in the right direction but i'm not confident that the players we have added are the types that suit playoff hockey and that Pettersson and Hughes could hold up when they are constantly targetted

How many on our roster would be considered good puck battle guys against other playoff teams?

In the grand scheme this is a PP reliant team with a great goalie who can steal a round all things going good.

I'm not confident in Garland Mikhayev Hoglander Kuzmenko Boeser being able to battle through the trenches to score or that Hronek and Hughes would hold up getting slammed by teams heavy forecheck.

We really need more hammers instead of nails. So much work still to be done

 

[arttk]

It's actually a good question about winning a playoff round or more.

You have to walk before you can run and we're at least walking in the right direction but i'm not confident that the players we have added are the types that suit playoff hockey and that Pettersson and Hughes could hold up when they are constantly targetted

How many on our roster would be considered good puck battle guys against other playoff teams?

In the grand scheme this is a PP reliant team with a great goalie who can steal a round all things going good.

I'm not confident in Garland Mikhayev Hoglander Kuzmenko Boeser being able to battle through the trenches to score or that Hronek and Hughes would hold up getting slammed by teams heavy forecheck.

We really need more hammers instead of nails. So much work still to be done

I think until the season start, we don’t really know what kind of team we have. It’s really hard to project anything until we get a better sense what this coaching staff is able to implement.
Obviously I am completely ignoring the “identity” BB implemented.

 

[stampedingviking]

Ya I'm just not feeling it this season.

Well, there's a surprise

 

[credulous]

i'm amongst the most negative people on this board about the team and the management and even i think they'll manage to win a playoff round within 4 years. how low are everyone else's expectations that they can answer they don't expect a playoff round win AND that they are happy with this team/management?

 

[VanillaCoke]

It's the lowest bar in the league

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Personally I would have preferred a step back but not necessarily full rebuilld. With Petersson, Hughes and Demko we have the hardest parts already in place and they're as elite as you can hope for so a full rebuild wouldn't make sense, but with the cap hangover from Benning I advocated that we wait out the worst of it while accumulating assets so we can have a deeper asset pool while still in the last few years of our core's window. So I do get that argument and was in favour of it.

But it seems clear that ownership wouldn't even allow that step back, and with that in mind, I look at what management has done with the constraints placed upon them and I'm encouraged with what they've done. If you rule out a step back (which likely wasn't their call) then as hard as it is they've made progress on all fronts.

Our cap is better allocated, we've gotten rid of most of the inefficient contracts (OEL will haunt us for almost a decade unfortunately) and JR honestly owned up to we still have "one or two" deals left, and one of those is definitely Myers who will be gone in a year and the other likely being Garland / Beauvillier, one of which is guaranteed to be gone as well. So cap is better.

Our prospect pool? Even with the trades of picks out our prospect pool is clearly better, Lekkerimaki is showing promise, Willander is what we've needed most, Raty has potential, Silovs is great, and we've got some depth beneath that. Yes, yes, every team has these types of prospects BUT we didn't have that under Benning so it IS an improvement.

Our defence? Hronek is a huge addition, making Hughes not the only legiitimate top four, we've got Cole and Soucy who are better than running with what we had last year, with the long-term hope of Willander and maybe EP2 stabilizing our defense corps for years to come. Better now with a brighter future.

Penalty killing looks to be better, and goaltending deeper.

So in the end while I would have preferred a calculated step back, given the constraints management has measurably done what they've said they were going to do, they've made the team faster, younger, have dealt with most of our cap inefficiencies and are going to be clear of almost all of it by the end of this year (OEL hangover notwithstanding), they've measurably improved our biggest weaknesses in defence and penalty killing while making the team deeper all around.

And then most of all, I think the biggest thing being underestimated is the structure, culture and off-ice operations which is flippant to say "everyone does that" because that's just not factually true, it wasn't true here, it's not true on a number of other teams, and was likely the reason the team played below it's potential and if done right and best of breed (back to how Gillis had it) then it could become a competitive advantage, and by all accounts is being invested in as such.

I guess everyone has their own opinion, but ownership disallowing a 'step back'in the last two years does not add up...Even though, Aqualini declined one in 2013 (after signing the Sedins).

Aqualini begged JR to join the organization (he flew to JR's house in Carolina, and JR initially said no...then said he needed time to think about it)..I dont believe for a second that, that JR does not have 100% control of hockey ops..It was JR's decision to do a' retool'..Common sense, and the age and make up of the roster, tells you, it was the right call.

 

[Lindgren]

I guess everyone has their own opinion, but ownership disallowing a 'step back'in the last two years does not add up...Even though, Aqualini declined one in 2013 (after signing the Sedins).

Aqualini begged JR to join the organization (he flew to JR's house in Carolina, and JR initially said no...then said he needed time to think about it)..I dont believe for a second that, that JR does not have 100% control of hockey ops..It was JR's decision to do a' retool'..Common sense, and the age and make up of the roster, tells you, it was the right call.

What's the bar for you? What does the team have to accomplish, roughly, and in what timeline, roughly, for you to say JR has succeeded?