Vancouver Canucks Messageboard

So I'm curious what people think is going with our Vancouver Canucks.

Can a team fall so far so fast?

First this is not falling fast, this team has been on a downward spiral for a while.

They are still a good team but without almost half their season against their divisional rivals we are seeing what the current makeup of this team is able to do.

Reefer2 wrote:First this is not falling fast, this team has been on a downward spiral for a while.

They are still a good team but without almost half their season against their divisional rivals we are seeing what the current makeup of this team is able to do.

oh just fuck will yah

They're simply not good enuff to play against the top teams.

What I wrote in another thread:

The team is performing about right from what I predicted @ the beginning of the season. They are a middle of the pack team that's going to battle for one of the bottom playoff spots. They are NOT an elite team nor a top Cup contender anymore. We have not played well vs the bigger skilled teams like the Cali teams for awhile now (ie- kings, ducks, sharks), just look @ our last 2 playoff appearances. The fact is our lineup has a bunch of aging players, a lot of same type softer players and lack of top skilled players in thier primes. It should be no suprise when they perform like this and their position in the standings reflects it.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=10201&start=60

We need to be able to start moving pieces of the core and get fresh blood into the line up. We are not good enough to compete over the long haul with the contenders any more. I just can't see us surviving the western playoffs. If we could I think we could match up against the best in the east over a seven game series but I just can't see us getting out of the west.

I still don't think major changes are needed but I do think we need to start letting go of core pieces to do a proper re-tool.

The thing is, I like our core. Yes they are getting old, but they still have value. They like playing here, good chemistry, good guys we just need to add to this core, and a lot, but we just don't have the trading chips to pull that off. Luongo/Schneider was supposed to return that core player in which I think they did but unfortunately when Horvat becomes that core player, the current core will be long past their prime. Too much of a gap between current core and up coming core due to bad decisions, drafting and trading earlier in Gillis tenure of this organization and herein lies the problem.

RoyalDude wrote:The thing is, I like our core. Yes they are getting old, but they still have value. They like playing here, good chemistry, good guys we just need to add to this core, and a lot, but we just don't have the trading chips to pull that off. Luongo/Schneider was supposed to return that core player in which I think they did but unfortunately when Horvat becomes that core player, the current core will be long past their prime. Too much of a gap between current core and up coming core due to bad decisions, drafting and trading earlier in Gillis tenure of this organization and herein lies the problem.

I can Agee with that. But then I look at teams like Chicago and Boston. They have both traded from the core after winning the Cup and have re-tooled and stayed competitive.

The SJS are an example that have not traded from the core. Always a bridesmaid never a bride. LA has a good young core but they haven't had to make those decisions yet and I can see them not trading from the core and being in the SJS category. Yes they added Richards and Carter so they are in between but moving forward we will see.

I think contending teams show a willingness to trade a piece or two from the core every couple of years to keep it going.

I'm not so held up on MG's trading being the problem but I do agree that his early drafting was poor. To me his biggest problem is too many NTC and a stubborn willingness to hang onto some of the core that may have refreshed the team

I suppose it depends upon who we identify as core. To me players like Hansen, Burrows, Edler are core. Even failing to trade Ohlund or Salo before they hit UFA, when he knew he wasn't going to bring them back. He could have gotten something for both at trade deadline day.

Some GMs know you have to give to get. He seems reluctant to let players go.

Gotta ask. GMMG is a good business man but is he a good enough hockey man?

Are there enough "good" hockey people in the Canuck management team right now?

Lorne Henning
VP of Player Personnel & Assistant GM, NHL
http://canucks.nhl.com/club/page.htm?bcid=614

Stan Smyl
Senior Advisor to the General Manager & Director, Player Development
http://canucks.nhl.com/club/page.htm?bcid=191

Laurence Gilman
Vice President Hockey Operations & Assistant General Manager
http://canucks.nhl.com/club/page.htm?id=40037

Maybe it's time for a complete change of the front office staff as our team is definitely trending downwards the farther we move from the 2010/11 season.

mathonwy wrote:Gotta ask. GMMG is a good business man but is he a good enough hockey man?

Are there enough "good" hockey people in the Canuck management team right now?

Lorne Henning
VP of Player Personnel & Assistant GM, NHL
http://canucks.nhl.com/club/page.htm?bcid=614

Stan Smyl
Senior Advisor to the General Manager & Director, Player Development
http://canucks.nhl.com/club/page.htm?bcid=191

Laurence Gilman
Vice President Hockey Operations & Assistant General Manager
http://canucks.nhl.com/club/page.htm?id=40037

Maybe it's time for a complete change of the front office staff as our team is definitely trending downwards the farther we move from the 2010/11 season.

Edmonton has nothing but top hockey people in management, how are they doing? GMs don't need to be top hockey players, in fact the vast majority of the good ones (Bowman, Holland, Lamoriello, Murray) we're pretty average players.

RoyalDude wrote:The thing is, I like our core. Yes they are getting old, but they still have value. They like playing here, good chemistry, good guys we just need to add to this core, and a lot, but we just don't have the trading chips to pull that off. Luongo/Schneider was supposed to return that core player in which I think they did but unfortunately when Horvat becomes that core player, the current core will be long past their prime. Too much of a gap between current core and up coming core due to bad decisions, drafting and trading earlier in Gillis tenure of this organization and herein lies the problem.

a real post? WTF. I need a drink

I agree with you, Dude. Gillis' ass is on the line this year. We'll see how his "bold move" Horvat turns out, but this team needs some youth to move into the lineup quickly if we have any hope of salvaging the Sedin era.

Hockey Widow wrote:

RoyalDude wrote:The thing is, I like our core. Yes they are getting old, but they still have value. They like playing here, good chemistry, good guys we just need to add to this core, and a lot, but we just don't have the trading chips to pull that off. Luongo/Schneider was supposed to return that core player in which I think they did but unfortunately when Horvat becomes that core player, the current core will be long past their prime. Too much of a gap between current core and up coming core due to bad decisions, drafting and trading earlier in Gillis tenure of this organization and herein lies the problem.

I can Agee with that. But then I look at teams like Chicago and Boston. They have both traded from the core after winning the Cup and have re-tooled and stayed competitive.

The SJS are an example that have not traded from the core. Always a bridesmaid never a bride. LA has a good young core but they haven't had to make those decisions yet and I can see them not trading from the core and being in the SJS category. Yes they added Richards and Carter so they are in between but moving forward we will see.

I think contending teams show a willingness to trade a piece or two from the core every couple of years to keep it going.

I'm not so held up on MG's trading being the problem but I do agree that his early drafting was poor. To me his biggest problem is too many NTC and a stubborn willingness to hang onto some of the core that may have refreshed the team

I suppose it depends upon who we identify as core. To me players like Hansen, Burrows, Edler are core. Even failing to trade Ohlund or Salo before they hit UFA, when he knew he wasn't going to bring them back. He could have gotten something for both at trade deadline day.

Some GMs know you have to give to get. He seems reluctant to let players go.

I would agree, don't think you need to trade a core forward (twins or Kesler) but trading a guy like Hansen, Higgins, or Edler might be a good idea. Do it at the deadline like the Sharks did to maximize value, or trade a few in the offseason like the Hawks did. They are where they are now in large part because they traded Byfuglien, Versteeg, Campbell and Ladd for young players and picks.

Gillis' strength has been signing and re-signing guys. His drafting has been average so dark though I believe that will change soon as the new guys come up over the next couple of years. His trading has been well below average as evidenced by the Ballard, Roy and Booth trades have shown. He does get points for the Ehrhoff and Higgins trades though.

Complimentary players should be replaced in the draft, the Nucks are slowly doing it now as they have a few guys who should contribute over the next couple of years, but I don't think there's been enough movement of guys. When was the last time the canucks traded somebody away for future assets? The Schneider trade is the only one I can think of.

No need to keep everyone every season, change is a good thing. I think we will see a lot of it this offseason if the team doesn't finish well.

Diehard1 wrote: I would agree, don't think you need to trade a core forward (twins or Kesler) but trading a guy like Hansen, Higgins, or Edler might be a good idea. Do it at the deadline like the Sharks did to maximize value, or trade a few in the offseason like the Hawks did. They are where they are now in large part because they traded Byfuglien, Versteeg, Campbell and Ladd for young players and picks.

The Hawks get full marks for building that 2010 roster, but they absolutely butchered retaining their players. That team had "Dynasty" written all over it. Stan Bowman's handling of the contract situation pretty much highlighted why Scotty is puppet-master. Stan couldn't manage a piss-up in a brewery.
to develop you could see one of the defencemen move soon.

No need to keep everyone every season, change is a good thing. I think we will see a lot of it this offseason if the team doesn't finish well.

Don't hold your breath. Gillis has always promised change, but has yet to deliver much. We'll see how this summer goes, as next season will be his first opportunity to remake the roster after the lockout/cap-drop fuckshow that's been these past 2 years.

Dont want to sound like a Pauser fluffer but...

Anyone notice how the Sedins game has tanked since their new contracts?
Nice guys, great team mates, etc but it is becoming ever apparent their game isn't what it once was....even as recently as early this season. Personally I think those huge minute games really took the piss out our top players

An olympic break wont help the Sedins considering the Swedes likely have a team in the final 4

Uncle dans leg wrote:Dont want to sound like a Pauser fluffer but...

Anyone notice how the Sedins game has tanked since their new contracts?
Nice guys, great team mates, etc but it is becoming ever apparent their game isn't what it once was....even as recently as early this season. Personally I think those huge minute games really took the piss out our top players

An olympic break wont help the Sedins considering the Swedes likely have a team in the final 4

I told ya so.

This team just isn't that good, and they're proving what I've claimed for months/years. First I claimed our offense wasn't good enough to go anywhere in the playoffs after it was exposed as not being that good in the 2011 playoffs (we did well despite our offense). They proved me right with back to back embarrassing first round exits. Then I said without major changes this team wasn't going to do well this season, and so far they've proven me right. I've also said the new Sedin contracts would be a major albatross before the end of their contracts...well, those haven't even kicked in yet and they're looking like bad contracts.

Mike Gillis has lost his focus.

April 2008 - When Mike Gillis first got hired...

"I don't think this team is close [to contending] at this particular point," Gillis said. "I think there is a good foundation here.

"I think this team needs to get faster. It needs more grit, it needs to be more competitive.

"We have a solid defence and solid goaltending. But there are a number of areas that need to be addressed.

"If they get addressed well, this team won't be far. A couple of very good decisions, or a couple of really bold decisions, might put this team in a position to win immediately."
http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/mike-gi ... m-1.726550

Fast forward to 2014 and this team is in the same rut, not close to contending, got a decent albeit a more older/banged up foundation, but he has never surrounded them with any talent since Sundin and Demitra haha.

Also tired of hearing about the Stanley Cup final trip and the back to backs prez trophies, why not keep that formula of success then?? why change that magic formula because we lost to the big bad bruins?

Because of that loss to the Bruins, MG has been changing this team and it has lost it's identity of a skilled team to a bigger more mediocre grinding team, that can't keep up with the high flying teams anymore.