Pro Tank Thread "You said that we'd be better now, better now. But you always let us down."

[Horse McHindu]

Toronto Maple Leafs Draft History at hockeydb.com

This is Toronto's drafting history in recent years, and all the players they have taken. Sorry @y2kcanucks - but I'm not seeing much evidence of where Toronto reaped major benefits (or are in the process of reaping significant benefits) by stockpiling on all of those picks as you claim.

And again - if the Leafs didn't get lucky in 2016, and ended up with a Pierre Luc Dubois instead of Auston "almost generational" Matthews, they'd pretty much be Calgary East. Despite having Matthews, the Leafs still haven't won a playoff round since Brendan "The Genius" Shanahan took over.

You talk about how Toronto didn't saddle themselves with expensive long term contracts, but from what I see, they are about to go through some cap hell. Nylander doesn't seem like he'll settle for anything less than $8.5 million (rumoured), while guys like Matthews and Marner will be RFA's at the end of this season (Toronto Maple Leafs - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps).

Through all of this "genius" planning by Brendan "Foresight" Shanahan, it really does seem like Toronto's window to win a cup may only be this year.

"Now is not the time to panic.........that comes later!" ~ Bane.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Toronto Maple Leafs Draft History at hockeydb.com

This is Toronto's drafting history in recent years, and all the players they have taken. Sorry @y2kcanucks - but I'm not seeing much evidence of where Toronto reaped major benefits (or are in the process of reaping significant benefits) by stockpiling on all of those picks as you claim.

And again - if the Leafs didn't get lucky in 2016, and ended up with a Pierre Luc Dubois instead of Auston "almost generational" Matthews, they'd pretty much be Calgary East. Despite having Matthews, the Leafs still haven't won a playoff round since Brendan "The Genius" Shanahan took over.

You talk about how Toronto didn't saddle themselves with expensive long term contracts, but from what I see, they are about to go through some cap hell. Nylander doesn't seem like he'll settle for anything less than $8.5 million (rumoured), while guys like Matthews and Marner will be RFA's at the end of this season (Toronto Maple Leafs - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps).

Through all of this "genius" planning by Brendan "Foresight" Shanahan, it really does seem like Toronto's window to win a cup may only be this year.

"Now is not the time to panic.........that comes later!" ~ Bane.

Of course you don't see it, because all you see is Jim Benning and you love how he's sucked at his job. For some reason you think trading away picks, stockpiling veterans, and using some of the high draft picks you get (while screwing up 2 of those picks) is doing a good job.

The Leafs outright tanked in 2015-16. They kept some of their star prospects in the minors, focused solely on 1-year deals to flip those assets at the deadline for more picks, and sunk their team that year. It led to Auston Matthews. Stockpiling their draft picks has also led to the organizational depth that they have. Sure you may laugh at some examples I pointed out, but those players are no worse than the likes of Kole Lind, Jonah Gadjovich, or even Olli Juolevi.

But hey, don't let reality reign in on your parade. You've been tooting the Benning horn for years and all that's led to is the worst team in the NHL over the last 3 year period. You praised Benning for not going the tanking route, yet that's exactly where this team has ended up. So even by your own standard Benning has failed, but surely you won't ever admit that.

 

[Peter10]

I'll say this about the reffing in 2011.

The Canucks were a victim of very biased officiating against Chicago in 2009, 2010, and 2011.

The Canucks were also a victim of biased officiating against LA 2012 and even moreso against San Jose in 2013. Just absolutely ridiculous officiating.

And then against Boston - the Canucks were victims of biased officiating in Games, 3,4, and 5. Games 5 of 2011 was one of the worst biased and officiated games in NHL history, and yet the Canucks actually won that one.

However - after the Boychuk hit in Game 6, the officiating was pretty even on both sides (although the Marchand face punch towards Sedin shouldn't have resulted in a misconduct for Sedin).

The Canucks didn't lose Game 6 or Game 7 due to officiating. They were outplayed.

A slightly injured Bruins team outplayed a severely injured Canucks team. In many ways, San Jose and Nashville deserve as much credit for winning the cup for Boston as does Boston themselves. Want to know how the cup would have played out had both teams been healthy? Refer to Canucks/Predators 2011, Hawks/Bruins 2013, Canucks/Bruins Games 1 and 2, and Canucks/Bruins January 7th 2012.

2011 was a great year for us, but it's time to lay it to rest. 2025 will be much better.

Whining much? Officiating wasnt biased, what you may mean is that the officiating was different from the regular season, things which were called there went without a penalty in the playoffs (2011) on both sides. It is not that the officiating was biased, it was just that the different interpretation of the rules fit the Bruins much better than the Canucks. I think injuries were a much greater problem than the different style of officiating.

 

[Hemty]

Of course you don't see it, because all you see is Jim Benning and you love how he's sucked at his job. For some reason you think trading away picks, stockpiling veterans, and using some of the high draft picks you get (while screwing up 2 of those picks) is doing a good job.

The Leafs outright tanked in 2015-16. They kept some of their star prospects in the minors, focused solely on 1-year deals to flip those assets at the deadline for more picks, and sunk their team that year. It led to Auston Matthews. Stockpiling their draft picks has also led to the organizational depth that they have. Sure you may laugh at some examples I pointed out, but those players are no worse than the likes of Kole Lind, Jonah Gadjovich, or even Olli Juolevi.

But hey, don't let reality reign in on your parade. You've been tooting the Benning horn for years and all that's led to is the worst team in the NHL over the last 3 year period. You praised Benning for not going the tanking route, yet that's exactly where this team has ended up. So even by your own standard Benning has failed, but surely you won't ever admit that.

The fact that the Leafs are one of the few favorites to come out of the East this year should tell you that they did it right lol.
And blah yes blah Tavares, that's what happens when a premium Free Agent sees that your team is on the come up and adds himself to the mix, to put you at, if not over, the top.
Doesn't really matter if they lucked out @ the lottery, the fact remains the same, they went all in on the rebuild.
How do some people not get it? Acquire any draft picks + sign short term deals, which you can deal at the TDL + be realistic about it = Perfect Rebuilding.
Management, for whatever reason, will not go about it that way.

 

[CanaFan]

Toronto Maple Leafs Draft History at hockeydb.com

This is Toronto's drafting history in recent years, and all the players they have taken. Sorry @y2kcanucks - but I'm not seeing much evidence of where Toronto reaped major benefits (or are in the process of reaping significant benefits) by stockpiling on all of those picks as you claim.

And again - if the Leafs didn't get lucky in 2016, and ended up with a Pierre Luc Dubois instead of Auston "almost generational" Matthews, they'd pretty much be Calgary East. Despite having Matthews, the Leafs still haven't won a playoff round since Brendan "The Genius" Shanahan took over.

You talk about how Toronto didn't saddle themselves with expensive long term contracts, but from what I see, they are about to go through some cap hell. Nylander doesn't seem like he'll settle for anything less than $8.5 million (rumoured), while guys like Matthews and Marner will be RFA's at the end of this season (Toronto Maple Leafs - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps).

Through all of this "genius" planning by Brendan "Foresight" Shanahan, it really does seem like Toronto's window to win a cup may only be this year.

"Now is not the time to panic.........that comes later!" ~ Bane.

So Toronto’s biggest problem is that they have too many good players to pay?

What do you think will happen here when Boeser, Pettersson, and Hughes (Quinn) are all looking for big raises after their ELCs? That the GM who signed Sutter and Gudbranson to inflated deals is suddenly going to sign these guys to low cap hits?

C’mon man.

 

[Josepho]

Officiating in 2013 was f***ing atrocious. They literally averaged 6 penalties a game.

I'm not sure if the officiating in 2011 was entirely bad (I was like 11 and too emotionally invested to really analyze the game) but I don't think I'm ever going to see something more crooked than Burke being consulted about the Aaron Rome hit before Rome was given a suspension comparable to the following

 

[Horse McHindu]

Whining much? Officiating wasnt biased, what you may mean is that the officiating was different from the regular season, things which were called there went without a penalty in the playoffs (2011) on both sides. It is not that the officiating was biased, it was just that the different interpretation of the rules fit the Bruins much better than the Canucks. I think injuries were a much greater problem than the different style of officiating.

I don’t think I’m really whining as much as I’m calling like I see it (or saw it circa 7.31 years ago). I even concede the fact that officiating was fair and square after the Boychuk hit on Raymond early in Game 6 (aside from Marchand punching Sedin’s face).

Here’s what I think. The ref’s royally screwed up with the Burrows’ biting incident which ultimately resulted in Burrows scoring the OT winner in Game 2. Instead of admitting to their mistake and moving on, I believe that the Ref’s tried to take a holistic approach and be biased towards Boston in Games 3,4,....and 5 to make up for the Burrows thing. Games 3 and 4 = NUMEROUS instances where Boston should have been called for charging, roughing, and boarding.

You actually do make a great point about the regular season/post season disparity. Remember that January 7th 2012 game where Boston tried to play the exact same way? The ref’s penalized them severely, which allowed the healthy Canucks to pistol whip the Bruins with their Power Play.

Anyways - 2012/2013 - same thing. Whenever the Kings and Sharks played physical, it was “good ol’ hockey.” When the Canucks did he exact same thing? They were penalized for it. Admittedly - the Canucks did do a lot of diving in 2011 to sell calls, but again.......I believe the refs decided to take some kind of weird “holistic” approach and penalize the Canucks for their antics in 2011. That officiating was just absolutely terrible.

2015? No complaints. Flames beat us fair and square (although I do think Ferland could have been called for charging on some of those hits).

 

[Horse McHindu]

Why don't you corroborate your version of events with the Leafs board and report back with the results? They should know their team better than anyone here. Pretty easy way to make us all look stupid no?

My goal isn't to make anyone look stupid.

All I know is this: From 2002 until around the time when Sundin left (slightly before or after), the Leafs were trying to be a cup contender and were even giving away 1st rounders if I recall correctly (something Benning has NOT done by the way.....i.e. giving away 1st's despite missing the playoffs the year before).

During Burke's reign (2008-2013), they made the playoffs once.....even during the much heralded "Shanaplan era."

My point is this: I think we might be throwing a little too much praise towards Toronto. They have made the playoffs 4 times since 2002, and haven't won a single playoff round since that time. Granted, that will likely change this coming season, but I think it's possible that some people are giving Toronto a little too much credit. Given Toronto's upcoming cap storm, I'm not sure if Toronto's "window to win" will be as wide as many people think.

 

[Peter10]

My goal isn't to make anyone look stupid.

All I know is this: From 2002 until around the time when Sundin left (slightly before or after), the Leafs were trying to be a cup contender and were even giving away 1st rounders if I recall correctly (something Benning has NOT done by the way.....i.e. giving away 1st's despite missing the playoffs the year before).

During Burke's reign (2008-2013), they made the playoffs once.....even during the much heralded "Shanaplan era."

My point is this: I think we might be throwing a little too much praise towards Toronto. They have made the playoffs 4 times since 2002, and haven't won a single playoff round since that time. Granted, that will likely change this coming season, but I think it's possible that some people are giving Toronto a little too much credit. Given Toronto's upcoming cap storm, I'm not sure if Toronto's "window to win" will be as wide as many people think.

What people are saying that the Leafs only had a good direction after Shanahan took over. Until then they had a sort of re-tool approach (see Burke dealing 2 1sts for Kessel) in order to remain competitive while exchanging the core. That failed hard and is similar to what the Canucks are doing since a few years. Of course Toronto had nice young pieces in place before Shanahan came in but those werent the result of rebuilding since 2002, they were the results of poor management (again similar to the Canucks now). Shanahan took this team and the pieces there, made a plan, went through it (got a bit lucky) and really rebuild since about 2014 ish.

Just like when Benning will be fired by (hopefully no later than) end of this season and new competent management comes in, the rebuild will only really start then. Of course there are nice pieces in place with Horvat, Boeser, Pettersson and Hughes but they wont get anywhere without management that has a plan.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

Not in our history, no. I.e. if we had a 25% chance of winning a top 3 spot each of the last 3 years (can’t recall the exact odds off the top of my head), the probability we don’t win a spot at least once is ~40%. And obviously we’ve been bad more than just 3 times in our illustrious 45 year history.

40% is closer to 50% then it is to 2%.

 

[Horse McHindu]

Of course you don't see it, because all you see is Jim Benning and you love how he's sucked at his job. For some reason you think trading away picks, stockpiling veterans, and using some of the high draft picks you get (while screwing up 2 of those picks) is doing a good job.

1) Trading of picks: Most of those picks were traded for players who themselves were young and were just entering their primes. Despite all of this "pick trading," the Canucks still have a very deep farm. Their current roster is also full of young players such as Baertschi, Horvat, Boeser, Goldobin, Pettersson, Motte, Virtanen, Leipsic, Granlund, Hutton, Pouliot, Stecher, and Gudbranson (if Guds' counts).

2) Veterans. Since Benning took over in 2014, not a SINGLE vet has impeded the progress of a young player or prospect. Not ONCE. The closest this ever came to happening was in 2015 when the Canucks traded for Prust since Gaunce wasn't quite NHL ready (debatable at the time). Smart GM's know that even when teams are rebuilding, it's important to have vets that were either formerly elite players (or still are), or are/were reknowned lockerroom leaders that conducted themselves the right way both on and off the ice.

3) Farm: Our Farm is deeper than it's ever been in its history.......which I find interesting since we've apparently bled away so many picks right? The top prospects in our farm have come from all rounds.....rather than just us being a beneficiary of being a bottom dweller for the past 3 years.

4) Home runs with Boeser, Pettersson, and Quinn Hughes:

The Canucks flat out NAILED these picks. Hughes has yet to play a game but I think we all know where this one is headed. Yes - Ehlers is better than Virtanen, and Tkachuk is better than Juolevi, but how many GM's bat 1.000? Lets take a look at Calgary, Winnipeg, and Vancouver.

Calgary Flames Draft History at hockeydb.com
Winnipeg Jets Draft History at hockeydb.com
Vancouver Canucks Draft History at hockeydb.com

We can look at other teams if you want, but a quick glance at these three teams pretty much indicates that all teams have hits and misses.......even at the top. So why discriminate against Benning and Vancouver?

Virtanen may not be a world beater, but he looks like he'll turn into a very effective 3rd liner for us.......possibly even a 2nd liner. Raffi Torres was a former Top 5 pick was he not? I don't think it's a stretch to say that Virtanen can one day become as effective as Raffi Torres (I'm not making a stylistic comparison by the way, but rather, am just showing that just became a Top 5/6 pick doesn't end up being a superstar, does not necessarily mean that said pick can't be a long term effective player.

You may disagree with this, but I also believe that Juolevi still has a good chance of becoming a 2nd pairing PMD even if it will take a little bit of time.

But hey, don't let reality reign in on your parade. You've been tooting the Benning horn for years and all that's led to is the worst team in the NHL over the last 3 year period. You praised Benning for not going the tanking route, yet that's exactly where this team has ended up. So even by your own standard Benning has failed, but surely you won't ever admit that.

A good and successful rebuild will often take 5-7 years. Yes - the Canucks brought in vets so that the kids could realistically make a push for the playoffs, and it did not pan out that way. So what? We got the best of all worlds:

1) The vets were still there to keep the kids accountable, while teaching them correct on ice and off ice habits.

2) Despite the presence of vets on the team, no young player was actually "held back" or "impeded." All of our young players played in roles that were compatible to their abilities.

3) The Canucks were able to add some great prospects due to being a lottery team (Pettersson, Hughes), along with drafting a stud in Boeser in 2015. So again - we are complaining.....why?!?!

Your biggest issue seems to be that Benning signed vets, but again.....

1) No young players were impeded due to the presence of vets
2) We haven't experienced any cap problems as of yet


You, and many others on here, seem to be angry at 'White elephants' that don't exist anywhere but in your heads. ???? Interesting.

 

[Horse McHindu]

Canucks cap situation:

Vancouver Canucks - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps

Visually, I'm not really seeing how we're going to experience anywhere near the cap problems that Toronto will be facing both this year and next year. @CanaFan.

Our cap seems to be cleverly structured in such a way where a lot of veteran contracts will expire right around the time when it comes to re-upping RFA's.

 

[Josepho]

Tomorrow marks the first regular season game in any league that Quinn Hughes has played in since being drafted.

Stop calling him a home run.

 

[Elias GOATtersson]

Tomorrow marks the first regular season game in any league that Quinn Hughes has played in since being drafted.

Stop calling him a home run.

Not only that, he literally fell into their lap. There was no skill in drafting Hughes. Like edmonton drafting mcdavid isn’t a sign their gm is good at drafting

 

[JT Milker]

40% is closer to 50% then it is to 2%.

Are you trolling? He’s clearly referring to the history of the franchise, even explicitly mentions the 2004 draft in the post. That 40% is since 2016 lol.

 

[Billy Kvcmu]

Im kinda shocked that after 3 seasons of tanking thread, there are still people who are trying to convince people that tanking isnt the best choice

 

[CanaFan]

Canucks cap situation:

Vancouver Canucks - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps

Visually, I'm not really seeing how we're going to experience anywhere near the cap problems that Toronto will be facing both this year and next year. @CanaFan.

Our cap seems to be cleverly structured in such a way where a lot of veteran contracts will expire right around the time when it comes to re-upping RFA's.

And what are we going to replace those veterans with? Probably more veterans.

It’s odd that you think Vancouver will be magically except from the cap problems that Toronto is potentially facing. Good players get paid. That’s not a problem, that’s the goal.

Your Benning spin on this one is way off.

 

[Bojack Horvatman]

Deliberately tanking (via veteran sell off) and risking spending years and years on end in the basement stockpiling picks, is often akin to pouring water into a bucket with a small hole at the bottom.

Yeah - you likely end up drafting great prospects, but the current prospects in your system continue to rot and struggle.....and don’t reach their full potential. Furthermore, they become far more susceptible to learning bad on ice and off ice habits. How many times have we seen this with Edmonton and the New York Islanders in yester-year? When will people learn?

It has been said many times that veteran presence was not a problem in Edmenton. Same with New York as they brought in guys like Doug Weight and Boychuck over the years. Both these teams had questionable to awful goaltending. New York had an okay defence and the oilers defence was putrid. These were just simply bad teams with bad management. Veteran presence is important but it does not make bad teams good.

Oilers wouldn't have Oscar Klefbom if not for trading away Dustin Penner. But they sure missed out on those extra 20 games of veteran presence.

 

[Horse McHindu]

And what are we going to replace those veterans with? Probably more veterans.

No. That money will be used to re-up our RFA’s.

That is what I predict.

 

[Horse McHindu]

It has been said many times that veteran presence was not a problem in Edmenton. Same with New York as they brought in guys like Doug Weight and Boychuck over the years. Both these teams had questionable to awful goaltending. New York had an okay defence and the oilers defence was putrid. These were just simply bad teams with bad management. Veteran presence is important but it does not make bad teams good.

Oilers wouldn't have Oscar Klefbom if not for trading away Dustin Penner. But they sure missed out on those extra 20 games of veteran presence.

With Markstrom, Demko, and Dipietro in net, combined with Hughes, Juolevi, and Tryamkin in our system in some form or another, I don’t think Goaltendinf or defense will be an issue for us in the future like it was for those teams.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

Not in our history, no. I.e. if we had a 25% chance of winning a top 3 spot each of the last 3 years (can’t recall the exact odds off the top of my head), the probability we don’t win a spot at least once is ~40%. And obviously we’ve been bad more than just 3 times in our illustrious 45 year history.

I don't get it. How is 40% closer to 2% then to 50% ?

40% -> 2% = 38%
40% -> 50% = 10%

Okay, I went back and did the math. The probability of us not moving up in any lottery we were eligible for is 13.9% .

I used a 7% chance in 2014because it was the only year I could not find a number for, it didn't affect the numbers much and it seemed about right.

Also unlucky in the Luc bourdon tragedy and the reffing in 2011 finals.

Edit - The odds are even slightly worse, because we had a slim chance to move up in 2006 and 2008 as well. I don't remember when the draft lottery started ... but it was about this time I believe.

re-edit - There was no lottery in 2006.

Somehow that doesn't feel right math wise... Can you tell me your math here?

 

[Bojack Horvatman]

With Markstrom, Demko, and Dipietro in net, combined with Hughes, Juolevi, and Tryamkin in our system in some form or another, I don’t think Goaltendinf or defense will be an issue for us in the future like it was for those teams.

Actually I think defence is are biggest question marks for the future. Tanev and Edler are only top 4 defencemen but Im not sure how long before they decline. None of the defencemen on the roster have top 4 potential. Hughes has superstar potential. Juolevi has been disappointing but does have top 4 potential. Woo is a solid prospect but no sure thing.

 

[Melvin]

I don't get it. How is 40% closer to 2% then to 50% ?

40% -> 2% = 38%
40% -> 50% = 10%



Somehow that doesn't feel right math wise... Can you tell me your math here?

I ran through the numbers a little while ago:

https://hfboards.mandatory.com/posts/148789507/

I didn't calculate the odds of never moving up ever but the raw numbers are there to figure it out or I'll do it when I'm not on my phone.

A lot of it is just because we had 50% at winning one when we entered the league.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

Actually I think defence is are biggest question marks for the future. Tanev and Edler are only top 4 defencemen but Im not sure how long before they decline. None of the defencemen on the roster have top 4 potential. Hughes has superstar potential. Juolevi has been disappointing but does have top 4 potential. Woo is a solid prospect but no sure thing.

Troy Stecher is a Top 4 D man, was a top 4 D man last year too.

 

[Bojack Horvatman]

Troy Stecher is a Top 4 D man, was a top 4 D man last year too.

Agreed. He is are third best defencemen. Do you think he would be top 4 on a playoff team?