The Rebuild Started...

[Shareefruck]

Thats bizarre..not trying to totally appeal to authority but before July 1st, Ferraro said that Beagle was precisely the player the Canucks should target....for 1 or 2 years.

How can it be taken in any other way?

 

[ProstheticConscience]

So...in a couple more years we'll know if there's any possibility of the team really being rebuilt into a contender or whether the Aquamen are the new Charles Wang.

Low. Very, very low.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

I think Im starting to see a pattern here, why people disagree over the rebuild.


It is similar to a person who is wounded or sick, taking actions to getting better (rebuilding) vs healing because of the built in mechanics in a human body (the way the league is setup to help bad teams with higher draftpicks).

Canucks are getting better because of the latter, they are doing VERY VERY VERY LITTLE of the former. People are attributing the latter as rebuilding, when it is more akin to passively healing.

 

[Bleach Clean]

I think Im starting to see a pattern here, why people disagree over the rebuild.


It is similar to a person who is wounded or sick, taking actions to getting better (rebuilding) vs healing because of the built in mechanics in a human body (the way the league is setup to help bad teams with higher draftpicks).

Canucks are getting better because of the latter, they are doing VERY VERY VERY LITTLE of the former. People are attributing the latter as rebuilding, when it is more akin to passively healing.

Very well put.

The confusion is that both processes heal. So passive healing will work, eventually. It's just that it should never be confused for active healing, which is the mode of the rebuild vs. just drafting with your assigned picks. Every team drafts. Every team passively heals their organization, every year. Only a select few actively heal, and those are usually the ones with the gravest of injuries (cellar dwellers).

 

[Canucks1096]

Nope.

If moving a couple of veterans makes your team a rebuilding most teams would qualify according to your logic. Random moves don't make the team a rebuilding one.

Pittsburgh traded Pouliot for a pick, Sheary and hunwick for a pick, rebuilding?.....

The oilers traded Maroon at deadline, they were not rebuilding just suck.

The blackhawks have been selling they aren't rebuilding.

Etc.

There are very few moves in your list that fit rebuilding, when your factor in the team's strategy. Vanek is about the only one with a semi-decent case. The rest are just normal turnover.

This is another example when I say people just read what they want to read. Listen to what they want to listen too or believe what they want to believe.

The user listed more than a couple. But for some reasons you are telling him we are only moving only a couple of Vets. Why did you do that? I am pretty sure you read more than a couple of examples from the user

The whole entire Gillis core. Kesler Sedins Burrows Hansen Higgins. Garrison Tanev Edler Bieksa Hamhuis. Everyone of these Benning try to move. Some he got back picks and prospects. Some wouldn't waive ntc, some had no value. The core Benning inherited are pretty much all gone except for Tanev AND Edler because he won't waive his ntc. So Benning is pretty much building a brand new core and restocking the farm team. I have no clue how this is not a rebuild.

You guys keep saying he needs to add picks but Benning like add prospects. There is really not of a difference? If there is you guys are doing a horrible job at explaining it. Hawks got Sharp Ladd Versteeg Leddy. 4 impact players by trading older players or a pick. Nash got Forsberg. I am pretty sure Nash GM is not saying darn I should I ask for 2nd round pick instead of Forsberg.

Beagle and Rousell. I admit I don't like the 4 year contracts. Part of the rebuild you bring players to help the young players. Both can do that. Horvat is suppose to be the number 1 center. He never had a year with 50% offensive zone starts. With Beagle, Horvat doesn't need to take a lot of defensive zone faceoffs. Horvat doesn't need to play PK as well.

If you look at the young players Canucks got in trades Dahlen Goldobin Baer Liepsic Granlund vs all the players we drafted outside of the 1st round. The draft picks are not better players.

Somebody is going reply more picks equal better chance to get a star. I can reply back and say If Benning acquire more prospects better chance to get a star as well. Hawks got Sharp for a 3rd round pick.

Look at the rebuilding teams. Most didn't get better because of those extra picks that they got.

 

[Canucks1096]

I think Im starting to see a pattern here, why people disagree over the rebuild.


It is similar to a person who is wounded or sick, taking actions to getting better (rebuilding) vs healing because of the built in mechanics in a human body (the way the league is setup to help bad teams with higher draftpicks).

Canucks are getting better because of the latter, they are doing VERY VERY VERY LITTLE of the former. People are attributing the latter as rebuilding, when it is more akin to passively healing.

In the hockey world if the team is really sick. One main cure is to get a high picks for at least 3 or 4 years or more. If you do that assuming you pick the right player. You are 75% heal already. The remaining 25% can a be a combination of Water/Vitamin C/Rest. Trade for Prospects/picks/free agent. Remaining 25% it really depends on the team/person.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

In the hockey world if the team is really sick. One main cure is to get a high picks for at least 3 or 4 years or more. If you do that assuming you pick the right player. You are 75% heal already. The remaining 25% can a be a combination of Water/Vitamin C/Rest. Trade for Prospects/picks/free agent. Remaining 25% it really depends on the team/person.

And in a league with enforced parity that 25% is the difference between a playoff team and... well the Canucks. Our Doctor Benning is saying "Just wait and see." The result of leaving all the usual stones unturned will be a weaker finished product. That product will soon enter another rebuild period before making more than a small dent in the playoffs.

You guys are focusing on that 75% (we are not doing great there either with the Virtanen & Juolevi picks being, lets agree less then optimal?).

The rest of us are focusing on that 25%, the bit that the GM has far more control over.

 

[Bleach Clean]

In the hockey world if the team is really sick. One main cure is to get a high picks for at least 3 or 4 years or more. If you do that assuming you pick the right player. You are 75% heal already. The remaining 25% can a be a combination of Water/Vitamin C/Rest. Trade for Prospects/picks/free agent. Remaining 25% it really depends on the team/person.

You are doing nothing actively in order to get those high picks.

 

[me2]

In the hockey world if the team is really sick. One main cure is to get a high picks for at least 3 or 4 years or more. If you do that assuming you pick the right player. You are 75% heal already. The remaining 25% can a be a combination of Water/Vitamin C/Rest. Trade for Prospects/picks/free agent. Remaining 25% it really depends on the team/person.

And Benning has actively tried not to get better via that 3/4 year 75% method.

 

[me2]

Benning doesn't sell. Or, sell well. I think Vanek would have helped the offense, which is the biggest concern with the twins departing. YMMV

In any case, Beagle on a 1 year contract doesn't exist, so I think the point about his unsuitability for the rebuild should stand. Agree/Disagree?

Completely unsuited on 4. Like Eriksson, like Sutter, he'll be at his worst just as the team is starting to compete.

 

[SillyRabbit]

Aquilini’s and Benning have set a mandate to make the playoffs. Rebuild is over boys. Or to be more accurate, it never started.

 

[brokenhole]

Ha ha ha ha this thread, anybody want to edit and change their choice...lol.

 

[Seattle Totems]

I think Im starting to see a pattern here, why people disagree over the rebuild.


It is similar to a person who is wounded or sick, taking actions to getting better (rebuilding) vs healing because of the built in mechanics in a human body (the way the league is setup to help bad teams with higher draftpicks).

Canucks are getting better because of the latter, they are doing VERY VERY VERY LITTLE of the former. People are attributing the latter as rebuilding, when it is more akin to passively healing.

Alcoholics Anonymous would also be a great analogy. AA is not based on evidence or science. The success rate of AA is not any better than the rate of recidivism. In other words alcoholics who did not attend AA or any self help treatment would quit drinking at the same rate as those who went to AA meetings. This is the Canucks in a nutshell.

 

[me2]

This is another example when I say people just read what they want to read. Listen to what they want to listen too or believe what they want to believe.

The user listed more than a couple. But for some reasons you are telling him we are only moving only a couple of Vets. Why did you do that? I am pretty sure you read more than a couple of examples from the user

The whole entire Gillis core. Kesler Sedins Burrows Hansen Higgins. Garrison Tanev Edler Bieksa Hamhuis. Everyone of these Benning try to move. Some he got back picks and prospects. Some wouldn't waive ntc, some had no value. The core Benning inherited are pretty much all gone except for Tanev AND Edler because he won't waive his ntc. So Benning is pretty much building a brand new core and restocking the farm team. I have no clue how this is not a rebuild.

You guys keep saying he needs to add picks but Benning like add prospects. There is really not of a difference? If there is you guys are doing a horrible job at explaining it. Hawks got Sharp Ladd Versteeg Leddy. 4 impact players by trading older players or a pick. Nash got Forsberg. I am pretty sure Nash GM is not saying darn I should I ask for 2nd round pick instead of Forsberg.

Beagle and Rousell. I admit I don't like the 4 year contracts. Part of the rebuild you bring players to help the young players. Both can do that. Horvat is suppose to be the number 1 center. He never had a year with 50% offensive zone starts. With Beagle, Horvat doesn't need to take a lot of defensive zone faceoffs. Horvat doesn't need to play PK as well.

If you look at the young players Canucks got in trades Dahlen Goldobin Baer Liepsic Granlund vs all the players we drafted outside of the 1st round. The draft picks are not better players.

Somebody is going reply more picks equal better chance to get a star. I can reply back and say If Benning acquire prospects better chance to get a star as well. Hawks got Sharp for a 3rd round pick.

Look at the rebuilding teams. Most didn't get better because of those extra picks that they got.

People that can't tell natural turnover and general movement from a rebuild. The old core was old, it's been 5 years, you'd expect most of it to be turned over through natural processes. It was. Don't confuse this with a rebuild.

 

[me2]

This is another example when I say people just read what they want to read. Listen to what they want to listen too or believe what they want to believe.

The user listed more than a couple. But for some reasons you are telling him we are only moving only a couple of Vets. Why did you do that? I am pretty sure you read more than a couple of examples from the user

The whole entire Gillis core. Kesler Sedins Burrows Hansen Higgins. Garrison Tanev Edler Bieksa Hamhuis. Everyone of these Benning try to move. Some he got back picks and prospects. Some wouldn't waive ntc, some had no value. The core Benning inherited are pretty much all gone except for Tanev AND Edler because he won't waive his ntc. So Benning is pretty much building a brand new core and restocking the farm team. I have no clue how this is not a rebuild.

You guys keep saying he needs to add picks but Benning like add prospects. There is really not of a difference? If there is you guys are doing a horrible job at explaining it. Hawks got Sharp Ladd Versteeg Leddy. 4 impact players by trading older players or a pick. Nash got Forsberg. I am pretty sure Nash GM is not saying darn I should I ask for 2nd round pick instead of Forsberg.

Beagle and Rousell. I admit I don't like the 4 year contracts. Part of the rebuild you bring players to help the young players. Both can do that. Horvat is suppose to be the number 1 center. He never had a year with 50% offensive zone starts. With Beagle, Horvat doesn't need to take a lot of defensive zone faceoffs. Horvat doesn't need to play PK as well.

If you look at the young players Canucks got in trades Dahlen Goldobin Baer Liepsic Granlund vs all the players we drafted outside of the 1st round. The draft picks are not better players.

Somebody is going reply more picks equal better chance to get a star. I can reply back and say If Benning acquire prospects better chance to get a star as well. Hawks got Sharp for a 3rd round pick.

Look at the rebuilding teams. Most didn't get better because of those extra picks that they got.

Being terrible at your job is not a rebuild.

Turn over through natural aging processes are not a rebuild.

Watching pro-Benning supporters trying to rewrite history to explain his incompetence as intentional rebuild is sad. So many of these were anti-rebuild through most of this period, now they've flip flopped to claim it was a plan all along. If you want to know what the plan is look at the surrounding moves, listen to the team talk about it's expectations. Quick retool. Trying to trade 1st rounds for quick fix veterans etc. That's what's going on in Benning's mind, not a rebuild.

 

[RandV]

Aquilini’s and Benning have set a mandate to make the playoffs. Rebuild is over boys. Or to be more accurate, it never started.

And this certainly wouldn't be the first time. Wasn't it reported 2-3 years ago that managements opinion that with where they were at for the time all the 'heavy lifting' had been done and they were ready to move forward with what they had? That falls in line with Benning trying to trade for Lucic in 2015 and Weber in 2016.

 

[Canucks1096]

You are doing nothing actively in order to get those high picks.

Sorry I am not clear. When I say high picks. I mean like in the top 10. Those are almost never traded unless you have something elite like a Schneider. Not many rebuilds can acquire a top 10 pick.

 

[Canucks1096]

Being terrible at your job is not a rebuild.

Turn over through natural aging processes are not a rebuild.

Watching pro-Benning supporters trying to rewrite history to explain his incompetence as intentional rebuild is sad. So many of these were anti-rebuild through most of this period, now they've flip flopped to claim it was a plan all along. If you want to know what the plan is look at the surrounding moves, listen to the team talk about it's expectations. Quick retool. Trying to trade 1st rounds for quick fix veterans etc. That's what's going on in Benning's mind, not a rebuild.

True but the last few years they could of try to sign more high end Free Agents to replace the core. But they didn't. Please explain that? This year there were no reports that they went after Taveres Neal or Stansey. If they weren't planning to replace the core with youth. They would of went after those players but they didn't.

We are not having debate of Benning is a good GM. We are having a debate it he is rebuilding. So base on your.theory many people seem think if you get draft picks you are rebuilding. So pretend if they got 10 extra picks none worked out. So that means getting those 10 picks is not a rebuilding move. Because you are defining rebuild with results.

The funny thing is when people bring up Benning is not rebuilding. They like go back in 2015 and 2016 when a 1st was offered to Lucic and Subban and signing Sutter and Eriksson. Question why are you going back 2 to 3 years to think of examples. I will tell you why because most of legit example are 2 to 3 years ago and not now. The facts you need to go back 2 to 3 years proves you have less of argument right now.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

Sorry I am not clear. When I say high picks. I mean like in the top 10. Those are almost never traded unless you have something elite like a Schneider. Not many rebuilds can acquire a top 10 pick.

And certainly not when it is not your goal to acquire them.

 

[Bleach Clean]

Sorry I am not clear. When I say high picks. I mean like in the top 10. Those are almost never traded unless you have something elite like a Schneider. Not many rebuilds can acquire a top 10 pick.

Let me ask you this: If your team is consistently picking in the 11-15 range, and you're adding vets to try and compete year after year, are you rebuilding?

 

[brokenhole]

True but the last few years they could of try to sign more high end Free Agents to replace the core. But they didn't. Please explain that? This year there were no reports that they went after Taveres Neal or Stansey. If they weren't planning to replace the core with youth. They would of went after those players but they didn't.

We are not having debate of Benning is a good GM. We are having a debate it he is rebuilding. So base on your.theory many people seem think if you get draft picks you are rebuilding. So pretend if they got 10 extra picks none worked out. So that means getting those 10 picks is not a rebuilding move. Because you are defining rebuild with results.

The funny thing is when people bring up Benning is not rebuilding. They like go back in 2015 and 2016 when a 1st was offered to Lucic and Subban and signing Sutter and Eriksson. Question why are you going back 2 to 3 years to think of examples. I will tell you why because most of legit example are 2 to 3 years ago and not now. The facts you need to go back 2 to 3 years proves you have less of argument right now.

Well weather you believe Botchford or not he says they were going to go after Tavares at the tune of 84 mil but Linden wanted no part of it. Thats not rebuilding its going for the playoffs, its always about the playoffs...there never has been a rebuild with this owner.

 

[LordBacon]

The rebuild will never happen unless our gracious lord aquaman allows it. I started watching hockey and the canucks since 2011 (call me a bandwagoner I dont care), I lurk around hockey sites alot and I remeber a lot of poster saying aquaman likes to mess with the operation side of things. I honestly thought it was a joke at first but now im starting to believe it. This team is on its way to a whole new world of agony and despair. But hey im not the only canucks fan who's getting used to this crap right?

 

[Nuckles]

The rebuild is over before it even started. Only the best GM of all time could have accomplished that.

 

[LordBacon]

The rebuild is over before it even started. Only the best GM of all time could have accomplished that.

Agreed. Toronto should really take a good look at us and learn how its supposed to be done. They will continue to suck for years to come.

 

[me2]

Let me ask you this: If your team is consistently picking in the 11-15 range, and you're adding vets to try and compete year after year, are you rebuilding?

Nobody takes runs at stamkos, Lucic, Subban, Eriksson, Sutter, etc if they are planning on rebuilding period for the next 3-5 years. The absurd rewritting to fit the current putrid state of the team is just desperation to justify the support for Benning.