The Rebuild Started...

[me2]

My theory: I think Gillis recognized that we needed to rebuild, but Francesco Aquilini was having none of it. The Sedins were only 3 years removed from career seasons and were signed for a few more years. FA probably thought that with the right mix, the Sedins could carry the load for a couple more years.

So he goes out and hires JB and explicitly tells him he's not to do a rebuild, that they wanted a competitive team with butts in the seats for the playoffs. JB does what he can for the next couple of years to win now, much to the chagrin of the fan base that, quite correctly, had been calling for a rebuild. JB becomes the focal point of fan ire, when really he's just following his marching orders. This attempt to retool leads to the precipitous decline of the Sedins and an unintentional rebuild. I speculate that last season was when FA finally came around to the realization that the Sedins were done and the team absolutely needed a rebuild. I think they signaled this when Linden used the dreaded 'R' word.

A lot of that is true and the timeline is right. The only things I'd add are

a) JB wasn't forced to not rebuild but rather not rebuilding was his plan too. He was hired because he didn't want to rebuild, he and FA saw things the same way.

b) Nobody made JB make bad moves. It is one thing to not rebuild, it is another to make bad errors of judgment while trying to execute it.

 

[CanaFan]

Whether it was forced or not, since 2013, we have either had 2 first round picks, or a top 10 pick, or both with the exception of where we drafted Boeser. Call it an accidental rebuild or whatever, but it's been happening. If we took Nylander and tkachuk instead of Virtanen/juolevi, most people would say it's been a successful rebuild. Just because we missed on our top picks, doesn't mean the rebuild didn't start in 2013.

Is a rebuild something that happens to a team or is it something a team actively pursues?


Because everything you’ve described has “happened” to the Canucks, not that they sought for it to happen.

 

[I in the Eye]

I fail to not see the parallels between the Feaster Flames and the Benning Canucks. If you look at the old articles, you could basically change the names across the board (except can keep Weisbrod's name the same) and they could be articles written today about the Canucks. Here's a quick example:

Deposed Calgary Flames GM Feaster drafted well, but often lost at the trade table

Draft just the beginning for rebuilding Flames

Calgary wasn't rebuilding under Feaster, and the Canucks aren't rebuilding under Benning. If you classify what Benning is doing as a "rebuild", you also have to classify what Feaster did as a "rebuild". As bad as Feaster was, he was still better than Benning at rebuilding, since Benning is still consistently looking for "hockey deals" and not "draft pick deals". Four years in, and Benning has still not accepted where his team is at. At this point, "getting the player you want" at the NHL level is irrelevant. It's just a waste. The Canucks, suck. The best you'll achieve is marginal gains. At worst, marginal losses. The Canucks will be hovering around the bottom for the foreseeable future. What is relevant is maximizing value and getting the most value as you can to convert it into quality draft picks. If done right, the "rebuild" could/should have already been over... and here we are, years away still. That the Canucks couldn't convert pieces of the old core into more 1sts, 2nds, and 3rds is inexcusable, IMO. To me, it's a fireable offense. It cost the Canucks lost years with very little to show for it.

 

[krutovsdonut]

let's see

all the old regulars are gone except edler and tanev, tanev being one of the youngest old regulars, and edler having an ntc he has publicly stated he will not waive.

we have a bunch of young prospects and players who are the obvious emphasis and focus of the team including a couple already on the team.

we have, without question, one of the strongest prospect groups in the league

we presently have a motley crew of stop gap roster players including some failed hail marys and half busted leftovers who were prospects of the previous regime. none of these players are the emphasis and focus of the team although some have more future than others.

sure looks like a rebuild to be. it seems to walk like a duck and talk like a duck, but since it's benning's duck i guess for some it must be a goose.

 

[CanaFan]

let's see

all the old regulars are gone except edler and tanev, tanev being one of the youngest old regulars, and edler having an ntc he has publicly stated he will not waive.

we have a bunch of young prospects and players who are the obvious emphasis and focus of the team including a couple already on the team.

we have, without question, one of the strongest prospect groups in the league

we presently have a motley crew of stop gap roster players including some failed hail marys and half busted leftovers who were prospects of the previous regime. none of these players are the emphasis and focus of the team although some have more future than others.

sure looks like a rebuild to be. it seems to walk like a duck and talk like a duck, but since it's benning's duck i guess for some it must be a goose.

Circumstantial.

 

[y2kcanucks]

let's see

all the old regulars are gone except edler and tanev, tanev being one of the youngest old regulars, and edler having an ntc he has publicly stated he will not waive.

we have a bunch of young prospects and players who are the obvious emphasis and focus of the team including a couple already on the team.

we have, without question, one of the strongest prospect groups in the league

we presently have a motley crew of stop gap roster players including some failed hail marys and half busted leftovers who were prospects of the previous regime. none of these players are the emphasis and focus of the team although some have more future than others.

sure looks like a rebuild to be. it seems to walk like a duck and talk like a duck, but since it's benning's duck i guess for some it must be a goose.

You should try responding to my post a page ago. I debunk most of what you say here.

 

[me2]

let's see

all the old regulars are gone except edler and tanev, tanev being one of the youngest old regulars, and edler having an ntc he has publicly stated he will not waive.

we have a bunch of young prospects and players who are the obvious emphasis and focus of the team including a couple already on the team.

we have, without question, one of the strongest prospect groups in the league

we presently have a motley crew of stop gap roster players including some failed hail marys and half busted leftovers who were prospects of the previous regime. none of these players are the emphasis and focus of the team although some have more future than others.

sure looks like a rebuild to be. it seems to walk like a duck and talk like a duck, but since it's benning's duck i guess for some it must be a goose.

of course most of the old guard are gone: 5 offseasons have come and gone

Of course there are prospects being talked about, there is nothing else good to talk about, the team stinks.

The team has been driven into the ground by mismanagement, a horribly run team looks like a tank rebuild team. When you are at the bottom, everything is up. By the time Ottawa trades Karlsson they'll look just like the Canucks, they must be a competently run rebuilding team.....

 

[krutovsdonut]

You should try responding to my post a page ago. I debunk most of what you say here.

i did. it does not answer the reality in front of us. to summarize your view, "it can't be a rebuild because they sign veterans who are not replacement players and didn't chase picks aggressively enough".

to which i say let's watch the prospect game.

 

[Bleach Clean]

of course most of the old guard are gone: 5 offseasons have come and gone

Of course there are prospects being talked about, there is nothing else good to talk about, the team stinks.

The team has been driven into the ground by mismanagement, a horribly run team looks like a tank rebuild team. When you are at the bottom, everything is up. By the time Ottawa trades Karlsson they'll look just like the Canucks, they must be a competently run rebuilding team.....

Bingo. Krutov, I hope, gets this.

The major difference between people seeing this as a rebuild, and those recognizing that it's not, is understanding action + situation vs. just situation. Krutov will look at a situation that via no concerted action by the GM, can represent markers of a rebuild, and then he calls it a rebuild. Y2K will look at the same situation and condemn inaction by the same GM, and refuse to call it a rebuild because of that inaction.

So really, does a GM need to act like rebuilding GMs before him? Or, does he not have to act towards a rebuild in a focused manner? How one answers this question determines what that person expects of a rebuild.

For me, Krutov and PoM are dead wrong because of this. A failing team can represent a rebuild to fans who expect little focused action towards a rebuild.

 

[Paulinvancouver]

1. What do you define as a rebuild?
2. What the f*** does it matter that you put a label on everything?

 

[Bleach Clean]

1. What do you define as a rebuild?
2. What the **** does it matter that you put a label on everything?

1. Read my post for my definition.
2. I didn't ask the question, the OP did.

If you have something to contribute, do so.

 

[y2kcanucks]

i did. it does not answer the reality in front of us. to summarize your view, "it can't be a rebuild because they sign veterans who are not replacement players and didn't chase picks aggressively enough".

to which i say let's watch the prospect game.

You clearly missed the point then. Just because we have prospects doesn't mean we're rebuilding. That point was debunked quite easily by pointing at other teams (like Tampa) who have prospects. I'd argue they have a better prospect pool of players they have collected since the time Benning was hired as Canucks GM. Most of those players were available to Benning too, but your super scout picked other players.

 

[Shareefruck]

Whether it was forced or not, since 2013, we have either had 2 first round picks, or a top 10 pick, or both with the exception of where we drafted Boeser. Call it an accidental rebuild or whatever, but it's been happening. If we took Nylander and tkachuk instead of Virtanen/juolevi, most people would say it's been a successful rebuild. Just because we missed on our top picks, doesn't mean the rebuild didn't start in 2013.

I don't disagree if you're just saying that they had an accidental/unintentional rebuild, but I think it's debateable whether or not that actually qualifies as one.

 

[I in the Eye]

I like this explanation in this link:

At its core, what a 'rebuilding' team means is that it's going through a losing stretch that's expected, because it doesn't have the tools needed to be competitive. As such:

• Expensive free agents are avoided.
• Young kids are given a better chance to play, to see if they're going to work out.
• Overall team salary tends to be low.

It also is a "signal" to fans to not expect the team to compete and win; GMs or other team executives often want to make sure it's clear they're not trying to win in the short term, because otherwise their jobs may be at stake. If you signal a "rebuild", that may earn you a few more years (if people think it was a good idea and like your rebuilding plan, anyway).
Some teams avoid "rebuild" and instead "refresh" or "retool". The Chicago White Sox are a good example of this: they went through several "retools" since 2005, where the team seemed to have fallen apart and the GM decided to be aggressive in the trade/free agent market rather than a full rebuild. This is often the case in mid-market teams, where an extended losing period might cost too many fans (in particular in a two-team market like Chicago, where the Cubs have the better presence, and so the White Sox need to pretend at least to be competitive). It's often hard to do this for long periods of time, unless you have nearly unlimited salaries available, because constant retooling means you never lose enough games to get high draft picks.

What does it mean to rebuild a team?

 

[y2kcanucks]

Bingo. Krutov, I hope, gets this.

The major difference between people seeing this as a rebuild, and those recognizing that it's not, is understanding action + situation vs. just situation. Krutov will look at a situation that via no concerted action by the GM, can represent markers of a rebuild, and then he calls it a rebuild. Y2K will look at the same situation and condemn inaction by the same GM, and refuse to call it a rebuild because of that inaction.

So really, does a GM need to act like rebuilding GMs before him? Or, does he not have to act towards a rebuild in a focused manner? How one answers this question determines what that person expects of a rebuild.

For me, Krutov and PoM are dead wrong because of this. A failing team can represent a rebuild to fans who expect little focused action towards a rebuild.

Good post.

I honestly can't see how someone can look at what a GM like Benning has done and call it a rebuild. Just because the team is bad doesn't mean he's rebuilding. Bad teams get high draft picks and will have an improved prospect pool because that's how the NHL draft works. So simply having a better prospect pool does not mean you're rebuilding.

What has Benning done, outside of failing at what he was trying to accomplish, that is consistent with what rebuilding teams do?

 

[pgj98m3]

Good post.

I honestly can't see how someone can look at what a GM like Benning has done and call it a rebuild. Just because the team is bad doesn't mean he's rebuilding. Bad teams get high draft picks and will have an improved prospect pool because that's how the NHL draft works. So simply having a better prospect pool does not mean you're rebuilding.

What has Benning done, outside of failing at what he was trying to accomplish, that is consistent with what rebuilding teams do?

I like this.....still semi in doghouse.

 

[hellstick]

I want to say it started the moment the Sedins played their final game, but the actions of management signing depth players to big dollars and term doesn't signify a proper rebuild. The Beagle and Roussel signings wreak of poor direction. Are we going to improve from 73 points and grind out an extra four or five next year? I can handle being bad, thems the ropes in the new age NHL, you're good until you're not and then you rebuild from there. But it's hard for me to cheer for a poor team making poor choices, and I feel like that's been the Canucks MO the moment Linden has been hired.

Should have just signed a bunch of mercenaries, called it a development year, and wake up for the draft.

 

[ProstheticConscience]

Trading Burr and Hansen were the only two moves this team has made in four years that even qualify as the kind of moves a team that's rebuilding actually makes. The rest aren't.

This team is not rebuilding. It just sucks and the people in charge keep being totally clueless as to why.

 

[Egghead1999]

This team will not rebuild until one of the rebuilding teams have won the cup

 

[Phenomenon13]

Trading Burr and Hansen were the only two moves this team has made in four years that even qualify as the kind of moves a team that's rebuilding actually makes. The rest aren't.

This team is not rebuilding. It just sucks and the people in charge keep being totally clueless as to why.

Bieksa trade?

 

[ProstheticConscience]

Bieksa trade?

Considering the draft pick that came back was immediately thrown away in the Sutter deal, no.

 

[Melvin]

Trading Burr and Hansen were the only two moves this team has made in four years that even qualify as the kind of moves a team that's rebuilding actually makes. The rest aren't.

This team is not rebuilding. It just sucks and the people in charge keep being totally clueless as to why.

Hansen waa traded because they were worried about not being able to protect Granlund in the expansion draft and we got another age gap player instead of pure futures. It was no more a rebuilding trade than Garrison.

 

[Peter10]

This topic is flogging a dead horse...."rebuild".."transition to youth"..?...All of the media are calling it a rebuild,and rebuilding teams are generally at the bottom of the standings right.?

Benning has not actively tried to acquire lots of picks,but these moves don't suggest he's loading up on veterans.

• Dahlin
• Goldobin
• Petrus Palmu (via the pick for Hansen)
• Boucher, via wavers,
• Brisebois for Lack.
• Leipsic for Holm-
• Motte: kind of a whatever return for Vanek,but still a move to get younger

What young prospects have been blocked by veteran players that Benning has brought in?

Yes,bad teams are rewarded with good players..is not that why we have the draft..?..Is our current prospect pool now invalidated because Benning didn't acquire enough picks or do things the 'right way".?

I wouldn't trade Tampa's current prospect pool for ours...and don't forget they went through a span of 6 years and only made the playoffs once (2007-11)....

So they spent to cap..its Aqualini's money...Other than Boesers bonus' going over,what are the ramifications of that?

• Bonino and Sbisa in the Kesler trade when he could have gone for prospects/pick along with that 1st
• A pick for Dorsett
• A pick for Vey
• Signing Miller
• Signing Vrbata
• Forsling for Clendenning
• A pick for Baertschi
• Signing Bartkowski
• Kassian + Pick for Prust
• Bonino and picks for Sutter and pick
• Shinkaruk for Granlund
• A pick for Larsen
• McCann + a pick for Gudbranson
• Signing Gagner
• Signing Del Zotto
• Signing Nilssson
• Signing Burmistrov
• Signing Vanek
• A pick for Pouliot

These are all moves designed to either compete or shortcut their way to "the next core". He is loading up on veterans. The fact that this so called "rebuilding" team may very likely only have one rookie in their starting line up come october should give you a clue.

P.S.: It is freaking D-A-H-L-E-N. Its seriously not that difficult.

 

[tantalum]

b) Nobody made JB make bad moves. It is one thing to not rebuild, it is another to make bad errors of judgment while trying to execute it.

This is the real issue. It isn't whether they are rebuilding now or 4 years ago or three months ago. It is that no matter what strategy they were pursuing the management team did a horrible job. If they were retooling they failed. If they were going for it they failed. If they were rebuilding they failed. If they did multiple things in the span of a handful of years they failed.

The column comparing the Leafs and Canucks is accurate. They started at the same point 4 years ago. One is poised to be a contender. The other can STILL be directly compared to where the other was 4 years ago. Under this fantastic leadership the canucks are 3-4 years behind the Leafs on the rebuilding pathway despite starting from essentially the same spot. And quite honestly with each Beagle and Roussel contract they fall further behind.

And seriously, anyone who pretends they were rebuilding for the first three years at all should given their head a shake. The only time Linden and Benning have been truthful is when they said they owed it to the Sedins to try to go for the playoffs (and at the end of every camp when they truly believe they have a playoff team). They weren't rebuilding and that was right from the jackass'..err horse's...mouth.

 

[iFan]

The rebuild started with Gillis in 2013 with Schneider for Horvat and Gillis trying to negotiate a deal with Kesler but being stubborn on the return.

The rebuild was halted until very recently. This was first evidenced by the Miller, Vrbata, Bonino, Vey, Clendening, Sutter, Gudbranson, etc. acquisitions and giving up more draft picks and prospects than we received.

The only aspects of a rebuild from the Benning era is unintentionally finishing bottom of the league while spending to the cap and receiving high picks as a result, as well as the Burrows/Hansen trades (but they weren't going to help us compete at this juncture anyways, so trading them was common sense).

If we were truly rebuilding, we would have acquired more draft picks/prospects and held on to players like Forsling and McCann.

I still don't think we are 'rebuilding' as Benning has consistently maintained that they want to compete every season and still gives up draft picks in trades (Pouliot) and competes in meaningless games where we win and it costs us Zadina.

Actually Gillis wasn’t stubborn on the return... he wanted to rebuild and owners blocked the trade to the Ducks as they didn’t want a rebuild.