The Rebuild Started...

[Canucks1096]

Because Gubranson missed 52 games. Or are you banking on that happening to someone this season?

Stecher was called up 4 or 5 games into the season because Tanev got hurt. When Tanev came back in early Nov. Gudbranson didn't get hurt yet He got hurt sometime in Dec. Stecher didn't get sent down and he was playing ahead of Larsen and Biega. Which means once the Canucks saw stecher more he earned a roster spot.

 

[Canucks1096]

Ok that is a lie, Stecher was absolutely good enough in preseason and outplayed enough people to earn a spot. He was sent down not because of performance but because vets comes first. Larsen was brought in for the PP and he stunk, Gubranson was brought in for his pedigree and he stunk. Stecher didn’t get called until an injury popped up. Hell they wanted to send Tryamkin down because all the roster spots were promised to the vets even though the vets were crap.

Once they saw how Stecher perform when Tanev was out. He was playing ahead of Biega and Larsen.

 

[Canucks1096]

There was never going to be a proper rebuild until the Sedins retired. Yeah, there was a 2-3 year window where the Canucks are legitimate SC contenders, and right after that , there should have been a proper rebuild. Even Gillis knew that back in 2014.

But there was also that mentality of "One more kick at the can!", which inevitable dragged it to this year. Like others have mentioned, I think Aquilini has ordered the team to be competitive every year. So until he goes, I don't see much hope.

We can't even "fail" properly. When it was obvious to everyone that we weren't going the playoffs, somehow every year we have a surge of wins in meaningless games, making our draft position worse. How we haven't had a top-3 pick in the last 4 years is ridiculous. In any draft, there is a HUGE gap in talent from the top 1-2 to the next crop.

What is your definition of a proper rebound? What is JB not doing the last few years that rebuilding trams do?

Last year 7th last, 2nd, 3rd last. What surge of wins happened in 2015/2016 season and 2016/2017 season.

 

[CanaFan]

What is your definition of a proper rebound? What is JB not doing the last few years that rebuilding trams do?

Last year 7th last, 2nd, 3rd last. What surge of wins happened in 2015/2016 season and 2016/2017 season.

Draft picks, mainly.

 

[Canucks1096]

Draft picks, mainly.

Benning likes to try different approach. Trade draft picks for struggling young players.

2nd round pick for Baer
2nd round pick for Vey
3rd round pick for Pedan
4th round pick for Pouliot
5th round pick for Larsen

They got Dahlen for Burrows. Goldobin for Hansen. So if Benning doesn't trade those picks for young players and he got picks back for Burrows and Dahlen instead. That's an extra 7 picks.

So does that mean JB is rebuilding?

 

[Seattle Totems]

It's not rocket science. If Benning could simply acquire draft picks at the deadline for pending UFA'S and open spots on the roster for competition we could say he is doing his job.

 

[Seattle Totems]

Benning likes to try different approach. Trade draft picks for struggling young players.

2nd round pick for Baer
2nd round pick for Vey
3rd round pick for Pedan
4th round pick for Pouliot
5th round pick for Larsen

They got Dahlen for Burrows. Goldobin for Hansen. So if Benning doesn't trade those picks for young players and he got picks back for Burrows and Dahlen instead. That's an extra 7 picks.

So does that mean JB is rebuilding?

Benning goes into most TDL trying to make "hockey trades" for waiver wire fodder that other teams dont want. Why are we still debating this? It's not a rebuild and if it's something else it's clearly not working. The fans aren't buying it and even the shills cant spin this.

 

[Kryten]

It's not rocket science. If Benning could simply acquire draft picks at the deadline for pending UFA'S and open spots on the roster for competition we could say he is doing his job.

Will be interesting this year with 3 upcoming UFAs Edler, MDZ, Nilsson. Nilsson absolutely needs to be attempted to move this year sometime. MDZ needs to be moved although I like the actual grit he gives our D, not fake Gudbranson grit. Edler needs to return a haul if traded for it to be worthwhile. He can not be allowed to walk for nothing either. Id be very happy with him returning depending on cost

 

[CanaFan]

Benning likes to try different approach. Trade draft picks for struggling young players.

2nd round pick for Baer
2nd round pick for Vey
3rd round pick for Pedan
4th round pick for Pouliot
5th round pick for Larsen

They got Dahlen for Burrows. Goldobin for Hansen. So if Benning doesn't trade those picks for young players and he got picks back for Burrows and Dahlen instead. That's an extra 7 picks.

So does that mean JB is rebuilding?

Ya, if he targets draft picks instead of an unending run of 21-24 year olds it probably supports an argument that he was rebuilding. Instead he’s been doing a ‘retool on the fly’ or a ‘delicate dance’ or whatever other stupid name they have given over the past few years (ironically never ‘rebuild’, at least of their own volition).

 

[arttk]

Stecher was called up 4 or 5 games into the season because Tanev got hurt. When Tanev came back in early Nov. Gudbranson didn't get hurt yet He got hurt sometime in Dec. Stecher didn't get sent down and he was playing ahead of Larsen and Biega. Which means once the Canucks saw stecher more he earned a roster spot.

Edler was hurt all Nov, and then Larsen and Gubranson got injured soon. Biega didn’t even get his 2nd game until December. They have always treated Biega as a #8 guy that gets passed by everyone.

Bascially the only reason Stecher stuck was because we had at least one guy out every single month.
Now you can argue that oh we are going to have at least one guy injured every month in the forwards group so therefore at least one kid will get time but that is banking on circumstance instead of planning your roster for a kid to uneasy a vet and move him out when that happens. We have like 2 guys that are moveable and they are Gagner and Granlund. Granlund sure you can waive but good luck getting someone to take on an extra year of Gagner.

 

[Canucks1096]

Edler was hurt all Nov, and then Larsen and Gubranson got injured soon. Biega didn’t even get his 2nd game until December. They have always treated Biega as a #8 guy that gets passed by everyone.

Bascially the only reason Stecher stuck was because we had at least one guy out every single month.
Now you can argue that oh we are going to have at least one guy injured every month in the forwards group so therefore at least one kid will get time but that is banking on circumstance instead of planning your roster for a kid to uneasy a vet and move him out when that happens. We have like 2 guys that are moveable and they are Gagner and Granlund. Granlund sure you can waive but good luck getting someone to take on an extra year of Gagner.

If you actually Google Philip Larsen games. You will notice a bunch of games he was a healthy scratch which proves Stecher was playing ahead of Larsen. So your argument that Caucks play vets ahead of younger players and Stecher only played because of injuries is 100% wrong.

You are kind of changing the goal post a little. Before you said vets play ahead of young players. Now you are saying everyone plays ahead of Biega. That means young players do play ahead of Vets then.

 

[Canucks1096]

Ya, if he targets draft picks instead of an unending run of 21-24 year olds it probably supports an argument that he was rebuilding. Instead he’s been doing a ‘retool on the fly’ or a ‘delicate dance’ or whatever other stupid name they have given over the past few years (ironically never ‘rebuild’, at least of their own volition).

The funny thing when those trades were made and if you go back and find those forums. I would say at least more than half actually liked those trades. Now those trades don't work out and now people are acting like experts saying those type of Trade are not for rebuilding teams.

The last few years in my opinion it is a rebuild. It may not seem like a good rebuild however he won't know until at least few years later.

The rebuild it is close to done. Maybe another 1 more impact forward and more D. We should need to wait for it to grow.

 

[RobertKron]

I do agree that the rebuild is nearly done. They were on the cusp of cup contention last year, and this season ought to put them over the top.

 

[CanaFan]

The funny thing when those trades were made and if you go back and find those forums. I would say at least more than half actually liked those trades. Now those trades don't work out and now people are acting like experts saying those type of Trade are not for rebuilding teams.

Your recall and mine differ then, because I don’t think many of those deals were well liked at the time. Regardless, popularity is not what determines whether something is a rebuild move or not. I mean I think most people would be thrilled if we could acquire Patrick Kane for Bo Horvat but that wouldn’t make it a rebuild move.

The last few years in my opinion it is a rebuild. It may not seem like a good rebuild however he won't know until at least few years later.

And that’s your opinion, which is fine. But that’s what we are debating in this thread and many are (rightly IMO) saying that Benning has yet to engage fully in a rebuild. Even at the last TDL he focussed on “hockey trades” and getting warm bodies into the line up instead of draft picks. That continues his run of making not-rebuild moves.

The rebuild it is close to done. Maybe another 1 more impact forward and more D. We should need to wait for it to grow.

Lol omg no, not even close. Can I ask how long you’ve followed hockey for? Because you seem to have a fairly ... optimistic ... expectation for how many prospects will pan out or, perhaps, an underappreciation for how many good pieces a bottom 5 team needs to add to become competitive again. We are several years away at least and still require several more high end talents on both defense and forward. We aren’t that close IMO.

 

[me2]

The funny thing when those trades were made and if you go back and find those forums. I would say at least more than half actually liked those trades. Now those trades don't work out and now people are acting like experts saying those type of Trade are not for rebuilding teams.

The last few years in my opinion it is a rebuild. It may not seem like a good rebuild however he won't know until at least few years later.

The rebuild it is close to done. Maybe another 1 more impact forward and more D. We should need to wait for it to grow.

That is two tank years away then, assuming every year hits a homer. So probably more like 3 or 4 tank years.

 

[y2kcanucks]

The funny thing when those trades were made and if you go back and find those forums. I would say at least more than half actually liked those trades. Now those trades don't work out and now people are acting like experts saying those type of Trade are not for rebuilding teams.

The last few years in my opinion it is a rebuild. It may not seem like a good rebuild however he won't know until at least few years later.

The rebuild it is close to done. Maybe another 1 more impact forward and more D. We should need to wait for it to grow.

Wait what?

The rebuild hasn't even started and you think it's close to done???

I guess those of us who paid attention to why the Oilers were a disaster know better. You'll find out...

 

[Canucks1096]

Wait what?

The rebuild hasn't even started and you think it's close to done???

I guess those of us who paid attention to why the Oilers were a disaster know better. You'll find out...

So when you are rebuilding you are getting rid of the old core and building a new young core. Could be a combination of the young players you inherited and young players you bring in. Most rebuilding teams will try to gets picks and prospect for the old core that they are getting rid of.

The old core Sedins Kesler Burrows Hansen Higgins Garrison Hamhuis Edler Tanev

Sedins and Edler refuse to waive ntc.

Kesler Bieksa Garrison all got draft picks.

Burrows and Hansen got young prospects.

Hamhuis they try to move to Dal in young package but something happened and that didn't happened

They try to move Higgins for a draft pick. He had no value.

They try to move Tanev but according to Botchford they can only get a 2nd round pick.

So the old core. Benning try to get picks and prospects for all of them. You are saying the rebuild didn't that. That's ridiculous. It may not be a great rebuild but its definitely rebuild. I will admit it didn't fully start until 16/17.

Aside from 3rd round pick for Dorsett and Kassian and 5th round pick for Prusy. After those trades Benning traded a pick for any Vets or pending ufa. It's always for early 20 year old. You can still make those moves when your rebuilding. When Hawks were rebuilding they got struggling Sharp for a 3rd round pick. Rebuilding teams had gotten lucky before with trades like that

I always hear this mythe Sedins are holding back the rebuild. Last 4 years they had nobody to replace the Sedins.

Last year when Canucks signed Gagner and Vanek and MDZ and people were saying there taking ice time from younger players. Tell me which young players was ready last year that didn't player. The answer is 0.

The Last few years when young players were ready. Canucks found a way to fit them on the roster.

This off season they decided to get scorers in free agency. Why because they want to give the kids offensive minutes.

 

[Canucks1096]

Your recall and mine differ then, because I don’t think many of those deals were well liked at the time. Regardless, popularity is not what determines whether something is a rebuild move or not. I mean I think most people would be thrilled if we could acquire Patrick Kane for Bo Horvat but that wouldn’t make it a rebuild move.




And that’s your opinion, which is fine. But that’s what we are debating in this thread and many are (rightly IMO) saying that Benning has yet to engage fully in a rebuild. Even at the last TDL he focussed on “hockey trades” and getting warm bodies into the line up instead of draft picks. That continues his run of making not-rebuild moves.



Lol omg no, not even close. Can I ask how long you’ve followed hockey for? Because you seem to have a fairly ... optimistic ... expectation for how many prospects will pan out or, perhaps, an underappreciation for how many good pieces a bottom 5 team needs to add to become competitive again. We are several years away at least and still require several more high end talents on both defense and forward. We aren’t that close IMO.

I watched hockey since 1991/1993 season. The first season Bure came put

This season they had Horvat and Boeser. I think most will agree Pettersson and Hughes will become impact players. 1 more Boeser type of player and one more elite D. Adding 4 4 elite pieces with Boeser and Pettersson is not close? Most elite teams have 4 to 6 elite pieces.

Those 6 would similiar to Jets Ehlers Connor Laine Scheifele Morrisey Trouba.

Dahlen Pettersson Boeser
Baer/Goldobin Horvat Boeser 2
Gaudette Virtanen

Hughes number 1 D not drafted
Juolevi Tryamkin


Demko

So this lineup is not close? Pettersson and Hughes and 2 more elite players will definitely make a difference. Nj and Col within a year had a high draft pick and made playoffs the next year.

 

[CanaFan]

I watched hockey since 1991/1993 season. The first season Bure came put

This season they had Horvat and Boeser. I think most will agree Pettersson and Hughes will become impact players. 1 more Boeser type of player and one more elite D. Adding 4 4 elite pieces with Boeser and Pettersson is not close? Most elite teams have 4 to 6 elite pieces.

Those 6 would similiar to Jets Ehlers Connor Laine Scheifele Morrisey Trouba.

Dahlen Pettersson Boeser
Baer/Goldobin Horvat Boeser 2
Gaudette Virtanen

Hughes number 1 D not drafted
Juolevi Tryamkin


Demko

So this lineup is not close? Pettersson and Hughes and 2 more elite players will definitely make a difference. Nj and Col within a year had a high draft pick and made playoffs the next year.

No, that line up is not close. The Jets have a superstar in Blake Wheeler, a stud D in Byfuglien, a Vezina candidate in Hellebuyck, and a more well rounded roster to boot.

You’re also assuming Dahlen, Demko, Juolevi, Gaudette, and Goldobin become NHLers, let alone high end NHLers. Almost certainly 2-3 of those 5 will not.

Your comparisons are just so far off, that’s why I asked how long you’ve been watching hockey. If you’ve been watching since 91-92 (same as me) you should bloody well know that not all prospects pan out as NHLers, and even fewer do as elite players. As it stands today, we have 2 that would qualify as “above average”. 2.

We clearly have a long ways to go brother. Don’t pin your hopes on 100% of things going perfectly right, that’s just not how things ever go.

 

[Hockeyphysio]

I think when you rebuild, you are trying to rebuild your asset base projecting it 3-5 years down the road.

I see no evidence of us accumulating assets consistently. We sign contracts that are negative value on day one. We target players in trades who only hold value due to pedigree (with a few exceptions).

I don't think we are rebuilding at this point. The next GM will have to rebuild by purging negative assets and trading our older players for actual value

 

[ProstheticConscience]

I watched hockey since 1991/1993 season. The first season Bure came put

This season they had Horvat and Boeser. I think most will agree Pettersson and Hughes will become impact players. 1 more Boeser type of player and one more elite D. Adding 4 4 elite pieces with Boeser and Pettersson is not close? Most elite teams have 4 to 6 elite pieces.

Those 6 would similiar to Jets Ehlers Connor Laine Scheifele Morrisey Trouba.

Dahlen Pettersson Boeser
Baer/Goldobin Horvat Boeser 2
Gaudette Virtanen

Hughes number 1 D not drafted
Juolevi Tryamkin


Demko

So this lineup is not close? Pettersson and Hughes and 2 more elite players will definitely make a difference. Nj and Col within a year had a high draft pick and made playoffs the next year.

No, that lineup is not close. Not even.

You're making the same mistake Benning is. You're assuming all the prospects will turn out as everyone hopes. They won't. This literally never happens. It's like everyone's so hung up on the novelty of finally having a prospect pool but they haven't gotten around to figuring out how they actually work.

Horvat and Boeser: it's reasonable to assume these are good players and will improve moving forward.
The rest:
Baertschi has never scored more than 35 points in a season and he'll be 26 when the season opens.
Virtanen's heading into his draft +5 season and he hasn't shown he can consistently be an even mediocre NHL player, much less a good one.
Goldobin hasn't shown he's an NHL player period.
Pettersson has played zero NHL games.
Dahlen has played zero NHL games.
Hughes has played zero NHL games.
Juolevi has played zero NHL games.
Tryamkin's gone. He's not part of the team anymore. Penciling him into future lineups is pure fantasy.
Demko has played one NHL game. He played it well, but still.

You always need more, especially if you're trying to rebuild. Look at those names and add Lind, Gadjovic, Woo, Jasek and the rest: how many will bust? How many will Benning trade like McCann? How many will get injured and not sufficiently recover? How many will get pissed off and bolt like Tryamkin? That's why we're always so angry with Benning losing or downgrading draft picks in every deal he does. Out of the Canucks entire prospect pool, only Pettersson and Hughes really stick out as elite talent. Demko comes in close behind. The rest are the standard array of prospects every team assembles, and assuming players are automatically going to slot in where you hope is a great way to end up short of good prospects and have to sign FAs for big money and limit your options. Which is...hey. Exactly what's going on.

 

[Canucks1096]

No, that line up is not close. The Jets have a superstar in Blake Wheeler, a stud D in Byfuglien, a Vezina candidate in Hellebuyck, and a more well rounded roster to boot.

You’re also assuming Dahlen, Demko, Juolevi, Gaudette, and Goldobin become NHLers, let alone high end NHLers. Almost certainly 2-3 of those 5 will not.

Your comparisons are just so far off, that’s why I asked how long you’ve been watching hockey. If you’ve been watching since 91-92 (same as me) you should bloody well know that not all prospects pan out as NHLers, and even fewer do as elite players. As it stands today, we have 2 that would qualify as “above average”. 2.

We clearly have a long ways to go brother. Don’t pin your hopes on 100% of things going perfectly right, that’s just not how things ever go.

2013 Horvat
2014 Virtanen Tryamkin Demko
2015 Boeser Gaudette
2016 Juolevi
2017 Pettersson
2018 Hughes

Dahlen, Goldobin or Baer. I think a few young player Benning traded for are going to solid nhlers. Don't think that unrealistic

2 more impact players one wing and
one D that not drafted yet.

So I think on average one or two prospects a draft makes it to the nhl and I think everyone is going to make it to nhl? Where did you come to that conclusion? It really seem like you are disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing.

A lot of people are high on Lind Gadjovich, Woo. I don't have them listed. A lot think Virtanen and Gaudette are 3rd line players but lot of people think there top 6.

Man it's funny I have been called pessimistic and optimistic a lot on this forum. But reality I just call it the way I see it.

Mclennan even said Canucks would be a really good teams in 2 to 3 years

 

[Canucks1096]

No, that lineup is not close. Not even.

You're making the same mistake Benning is. You're assuming all the prospects will turn out as everyone hopes. They won't. This literally never happens. It's like everyone's so hung up on the novelty of finally having a prospect pool but they haven't gotten around to figuring out how they actually work.

Horvat and Boeser: it's reasonable to assume these are good players and will improve moving forward.
The rest:
Baertschi has never scored more than 35 points in a season and he'll be 26 when the season opens.
Virtanen's heading into his draft +5 season and he hasn't shown he can consistently be an even mediocre NHL player, much less a good one.
Goldobin hasn't shown he's an NHL player period.
Pettersson has played zero NHL games.
Dahlen has played zero NHL games.
Hughes has played zero NHL games.
Juolevi has played zero NHL games.
Tryamkin's gone. He's not part of the team anymore. Penciling him into future lineups is pure fantasy.
Demko has played one NHL game. He played it well, but still.

You always need more, especially if you're trying to rebuild. Look at those names and add Lind, Gadjovic, Woo, Jasek and the rest: how many will bust? How many will Benning trade like McCann? How many will get injured and not sufficiently recover? How many will get pissed off and bolt like Tryamkin? That's why we're always so angry with Benning losing or downgrading draft picks in every deal he does. Out of the Canucks entire prospect pool, only Pettersson and Hughes really stick out as elite talent. Demko comes in close behind. The rest are the standard array of prospects every team assembles, and assuming players are automatically going to slot in where you hope is a great way to end up short of good prospects and have to sign FAs for big money and limit your options. Which is...hey. Exactly what's going on.

So I listed on average one or two prospects a draft in my lineup that will make it to nhl. For some reason you think one or two prospects is all?

 

[VintageBure]

can someone help me out? No idea how to vote on any thread.

 

[y2kcanucks]

So when you are rebuilding you are getting rid of the old core and building a new young core. Could be a combination of the young players you inherited and young players you bring in. Most rebuilding teams will try to gets picks and prospect for the old core that they are getting rid of.

The old core Sedins Kesler Burrows Hansen Higgins Garrison Hamhuis Edler Tanev

Sedins and Edler refuse to waive ntc.

Kesler Bieksa Garrison all got draft picks.

Burrows and Hansen got young prospects.

Hamhuis they try to move to Dal in young package but something happened and that didn't happened

They try to move Higgins for a draft pick. He had no value.

They try to move Tanev but according to Botchford they can only get a 2nd round pick.

So the old core. Benning try to get picks and prospects for all of them. You are saying the rebuild didn't that. That's ridiculous. It may not be a great rebuild but its definitely rebuild. I will admit it didn't fully start until 16/17.

Aside from 3rd round pick for Dorsett and Kassian and 5th round pick for Prusy. After those trades Benning traded a pick for any Vets or pending ufa. It's always for early 20 year old. You can still make those moves when your rebuilding. When Hawks were rebuilding they got struggling Sharp for a 3rd round pick. Rebuilding teams had gotten lucky before with trades like that

I always hear this mythe Sedins are holding back the rebuild. Last 4 years they had nobody to replace the Sedins.

Last year when Canucks signed Gagner and Vanek and MDZ and people were saying there taking ice time from younger players. Tell me which young players was ready last year that didn't player. The answer is 0.

The Last few years when young players were ready. Canucks found a way to fit them on the roster.

This off season they decided to get scorers in free agency. Why because they want to give the kids offensive minutes.

Lol okay then. You can think this is a rebuild all you want. You're wrong, but you think that. I posted a few pages ago why this isn't a rebuild. Here's my post:

Based on the evidence, the rebuild has not started. This is just a bad team that is quite directionless. Management that thinks they can compete for the playoffs every year, but the results just aren't there.

Throughout the last several years the Canucks have loaded up the team with veterans. Even last year it was stockpiled with veterans. During the season they traded away a draft pick, and they traded away a prospect (for now pieces). They have not traded away a player straight up for a draft pick since June 2015 when they traded away Kevin Bieksa for a 2nd round pick, but then a month later they flipped that draft pick to bring in Brandon Sutter. This team has not acquired a pick in the top 3 rounds, for a player, and kept and used that pick at the draft since they got a 1st round pick back as part of the Ryan Kesler trade. The lack of draft picks acquired does not suggest that this team is in a rebuild.

Every year the Canucks load up on veterans. Some people will point to the team adding a couple of rookies or youth to the lineup, but I easily counter that by pointing to the fact that every team in the NHL adds rookies and youth to the lineup. That was something that our teams have typically had problems doing, but if you actually look around the league, including the contenders, young players are incorporated into their lineups with regularity. The Boston Bruins are an example of this. They've been adding youth into their lineup steadily in recent years; however, they clearly are not in a rebuild. They did an aggressive retool in 2015, or a one year mini-rebuild perhaps (much more than anything Benning ever did here); however, they have kept the majority of their core and have not been afraid to put their youth in key roles. While Benning is too busy focusing on overloading the team with veterans and 4th liners, Boston focused on adding skill players and giving opportunities to their top young players to play with those skill players. They avoided overloading their team with aging veterans.

Some will point to our prospect pool as an indication that the Canucks are rebuilding, but that over simplifies the Canucks situation and also ignores facts. First of all, any team that has been as bad as the Canucks have been will have an improved prospect pool. Any team. That's just the nature of how the NHL draft works. Bad teams are rewarded with higher draft picks. Our drafting in other rounds has not been entirely incompetent either, so we are starting to accumulate some decent prospects. That's not the result of a rebuild, that's the result of the team just plain being bad. Furthermore, we're adding some decent prospects that are on the same level that other teams have plenty of as well. Just look at Tampa for example. They've been one of the top teams in the league for most of Benning's tenure here, yet they also have a stockpile of prospects that I would say is much deeper than what Benning has assembled. That's without Tampa having a single top 10 pick during this time period (Benning has had 4), and with Tampa only having 3 first round picks in the last 5 drafts.

Each year Benning has been here the Canucks have spent to the cap. Last year the Canucks went over the cap due to Brock Boeser hitting his bonuses. It's very rare for rebuilding teams to be this expensive. In some cases you'll see rebuilding teams take on other team's bad contracts in order to add an extra prospect or draft pick, but the Canucks haven't bothered to do that. Instead, every year they are big players in the UFA market, often times adding their own bad contracts. Again, not something you usually see from rebuilding teams especially when you factor in these contracts are multi-year deals.


So, looking at the evidence and how the team has been run, it's safe to conclude that the Canucks have not yet even started a rebuild. They may call it a rebuild, the standings may suggest they're probably in a rebuild, but it's not a rebuild. Instead, this is merely a bad team that has poor management. It's a team that's trending down and is stuck in the bottom of the NHL standings, yet has management that continues to try to make the playoffs every year. The emphasis has not been on rebuilding through the draft, or around youth. The emphasis has quite clearly been to spend to the cap on bringing in as many veterans as they can, leaving a minimal amount of roster spots for youth. They can talk about "doing things the right way" and rebuilding through the draft, but the fact of the matter is they have not bothered to employ this strategy. This delayed rebuild is going to keep the Canucks at the bottom of the standings for a long time, in what will be quite easily the darkest time in Canucks history.

You're more than welcome to wrongfully think they've been rebuilding by signing veterans to long-term contracts, and by trading away draft picks and neglecting to acquire any. You can make up excuses for them not trading Hamhuis all you want. This is not a rebuild. Most competent teams get younger even when competing, and in fact those competitive teams do a much better job of implementing youth into their lineup than the Canucks have, yet you say the Canucks are rebuilding? Get out of here with that joke ass bullshit.