Dealing With A Stale Core

Welcome to the main forum of our site. Anything and everything to do with the Vancouver Canucks is dicussed and debated here.

Moderator: Referees

User avatar
Meds
CC Legend
Posts: 7907
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Dealing With A Stale Core

Post by Meds »

It's been a fairly rehashed subject throughout multiple threads, and seems to have gained some traction since Tortorella came right out and made it a headline.....the core of this team needs to change. So who do you consider to be the core of this team, and who would you move out in an effort to apply the paddles to this fibrillating core group of player?

For me Edler is the first guy to be driven to the airport.....I know, I know, none of you saw that coming. He is the stalest cracker in the cupboard and probably the best candidate for change of scenery. His value is down right now, but there is certainly precedent that suggests a player like him is still movable.

Hansen is the next guy I move out. What Hansen brings to the ice is replaceable. He's not what I would call a "core" player, but he's been here for his entire career, and it is also the kind of change that sends a jolt through the roster.

I would then consider shopping Garrison and Higgins. Both are decent players, but neither of them really seem to have the kind of intensity that you see on teams that threaten in the post-season.
User avatar
Arachnid
CC Legend
Posts: 6177
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 12:56 pm
Location: Old Berlin
Contact:

Re: Dealing With A Stale Core

Post by Arachnid »

Meds wrote:It's been a fairly rehashed subject throughout multiple threads, and seems to have gained some traction since Tortorella came right out and made it a headline.....the core of this team needs to change. So who do you consider to be the core of this team, and who would you move out in an effort to apply the paddles to this fibrillating core group of player?

For me Edler is the first guy to be driven to the airport.....I know, I know, none of you saw that coming. He is the stalest cracker in the cupboard and probably the best candidate for change of scenery. His value is down right now, but there is certainly precedent that suggests a player like him is still movable.

Hansen is the next guy I move out. What Hansen brings to the ice is replaceable. He's not what I would call a "core" player, but he's been here for his entire career, and it is also the kind of change that sends a jolt through the roster.

I would then consider shopping Garrison and Higgins. Both are decent players, but neither of them really seem to have the kind of intensity that you see on teams that threaten in the post-season.
Why would you include Hansen in your post about the Core if you don't think he is part of the core?! :eh:

You argue like a woman. :P
I love every move Jim Benning makes 8-)
User avatar
Lancer
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 2386
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 10:41 am
Location: Riga, Latvia

Re: Dealing With A Stale Core

Post by Lancer »

Providing that the new administration finds a taker who can convince Edler to waive his NTC, he's as good as gonzo even if the return may not be ideal. Both he and the organization need him to be somewhere other than Vancouver whether he recognizes it or not.

As for Higgins and Hansen, they're not bad fits - on the 3rd or 4th line. That's the problem: for lack of a viable alternative, they've been thrust into 2nd-line spots and the results we all know. Now, they're getting paid decent salaries for 3rd-liners (a bit rich for 4th liners) and they bring some speed and skill to the line-up but what could the Canucks get for them and who would fill their spots on the 3rd line, let alone the spots they've failed to fill on the 2nd?

There's merit to trading players out to clear a stale room, but you then have to be able to replace what they bring if not add something more. Not sure what Linden and Co. can find on the UFA front and God knows what cowshit other GMs would want to foist upon them unless you want the Canucks to trade the likes of Kesler and/or Edler to fill Higgins' and Hansen's roles.
Love the Sport. Love the Team.

Hate the League.
User avatar
Meds
CC Legend
Posts: 7907
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: Dealing With A Stale Core

Post by Meds »

Arachnid wrote:
Meds wrote:It's been a fairly rehashed subject throughout multiple threads, and seems to have gained some traction since Tortorella came right out and made it a headline.....the core of this team needs to change. So who do you consider to be the core of this team, and who would you move out in an effort to apply the paddles to this fibrillating core group of player?

For me Edler is the first guy to be driven to the airport.....I know, I know, none of you saw that coming. He is the stalest cracker in the cupboard and probably the best candidate for change of scenery. His value is down right now, but there is certainly precedent that suggests a player like him is still movable.

Hansen is the next guy I move out. What Hansen brings to the ice is replaceable. He's not what I would call a "core" player, but he's been here for his entire career, and it is also the kind of change that sends a jolt through the roster.

I would then consider shopping Garrison and Higgins. Both are decent players, but neither of them really seem to have the kind of intensity that you see on teams that threaten in the post-season.
Why would you include Hansen in your post about the Core if you don't think he is part of the core?! :eh:

You argue like a woman. :P
Because you can hit the core with good shock by moving out a guy that has been with them for quite a while. It's not just moving core players, it is who you think is a core player and who you move to shock the core.....not necessarily a core player.

To me the core of this team is Hank, Dank, Kes, Bur, Juice, Hamhuis, and Edler. If I could I would actually move all three of the Swedes out of here as I don't think any of them will bounce back to the point of being useful in the playoffs. I know that none of them can up the intensity to match what we are seeing from LA, SJ, StL, or CHI. But the Twins aren't going anywhere, and I don't see Kesler being replaceable unless we deal with Philly and get one of Brayden Schenn or Coutourier back.....and I'm not totally sold on the latter yet.
User avatar
Cornuck
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 9578
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 11:39 am
Location: Everywhere

Re: Dealing With A Stale Core

Post by Cornuck »

Meds wrote:Because you can hit the core with good shock by moving out a guy that has been with them for quite a while. It's not just moving core players, it is who you think is a core player and who you move to shock the core.....not necessarily a core player.
How much are your going to shock a guy with a NTC?
2019-20 - Playoff Bound
nuckster
MVP
MVP
Posts: 576
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Dealing With A Stale Core

Post by nuckster »

I know that fans have strong opinions about this, but... (here it goes), I believe that we're going to be stuck in nowhere land for the next 4 years while going along with the Sedins as our so-called #1 unit. Don't get me wrong, I am a huge fans of theirs, and I believe they are stand-outs as human beings. BUT, over the last few seasons they have proven to be completely ineffective when the going gets tough (in the playoffs), and most teams know how to handle them now. Just because they showed 'glitter' in a meaningless last game of the year against one of the worse teams in the league, is not justification to get the hopes up.

Despite their willingness to play in different roles, they really don't shine in any defensive capacity, and their offensive numbers have fallen off a cliff. Maybe, hopefully, this upcoming season they can 'regenerate' and put up some decent numbers again, but the fact is, they're past their prime and in all likelihood we're seeing the twilight of their incredible careers.

People are incredibly loyal and get bent out of shape when it comes to any kind of discussion like I put forth here. But I stand by what I say. Ideally you want your leaders to be able to 'man up' and dole out the physical stuff...lead by example. The Sedins were frikin marvelous, but unfortunately their time has past and it's predictable now that they will be the source of a great hope of a renewed future for next year, but i don't see it. It will take approx 3 to 4 years for band-wagoners to finally get it that their time has come and gone.

Given their contract status and where things are, there's basically no other way this can play out. It just is what it is. On the landscape there are no real upancomers for 1st line material and free agency isn't likely going to produce what we're looking for. So I would venture to say that we're in the throes of a 3 to 4 year transition period before the new draftees start fulfilling any kind of potential and the older players sign off.
cc oldtimer
User avatar
Arachnid
CC Legend
Posts: 6177
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 12:56 pm
Location: Old Berlin
Contact:

Re: Dealing With A Stale Core

Post by Arachnid »

Meds wrote:
Arachnid wrote:
Meds wrote:It's been a fairly rehashed subject throughout multiple threads, and seems to have gained some traction since Tortorella came right out and made it a headline.....the core of this team needs to change. So who do you consider to be the core of this team, and who would you move out in an effort to apply the paddles to this fibrillating core group of player?

For me Edler is the first guy to be driven to the airport.....I know, I know, none of you saw that coming. He is the stalest cracker in the cupboard and probably the best candidate for change of scenery. His value is down right now, but there is certainly precedent that suggests a player like him is still movable.

Hansen is the next guy I move out. What Hansen brings to the ice is replaceable. He's not what I would call a "core" player, but he's been here for his entire career, and it is also the kind of change that sends a jolt through the roster.

I would then consider shopping Garrison and Higgins. Both are decent players, but neither of them really seem to have the kind of intensity that you see on teams that threaten in the post-season.
Why would you include Hansen in your post about the Core if you don't think he is part of the core?! :eh:

You argue like a woman. :P
Because you can hit the core with good shock by moving out a guy that has been with them for quite a while. It's not just moving core players, it is who you think is a core player and who you move to shock the core.....not necessarily a core player.

To me the core of this team is Hank, Dank, Kes, Bur, Juice, Hamhuis, and Edler. If I could I would actually move all three of the Swedes out of here as I don't think any of them will bounce back to the point of being useful in the playoffs. I know that none of them can up the intensity to match what we are seeing from LA, SJ, StL, or CHI. But the Twins aren't going anywhere, and I don't see Kesler being replaceable unless we deal with Philly and get one of Brayden Schenn or Coutourier back.....and I'm not totally sold on the latter yet.
Again, that is an illogical argument...shock the core?! That is essentially what we have been doing by getting rid of Lappy, bringing in Roy, letting MayRay go, trading Luo And Cory....

Me thinks you should stick to the Core of the problem and think of creative ways of actually replacing them instead of brining in the fringe players, they are not our problem and as you said, are replaceable.
I love every move Jim Benning makes 8-)
User avatar
ukcanuck
CC Legend
Posts: 3888
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: Dealing With A Stale Core

Post by ukcanuck »

Unless your going to get better players to replace those core players what's the point in moving them?

Doesn't it make more sense to bring in one or two good support players to bolster the core and being along the kids to replace core players as they age.

The only alternative that makes sense is if you can trade core pieces with another underachieving team Ala LA and Philly a few years ago.

Getting rid of Hansen and Higgins just seems like rearranging the deck chairs...


Edit: get a playmaking winger for Kesler and the Sedins make an awesome second line.
User avatar
Arachnid
CC Legend
Posts: 6177
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 12:56 pm
Location: Old Berlin
Contact:

Re: Dealing With A Stale Core

Post by Arachnid »

Maybe the way you shock the core, and this is a tried and true method, into performing again or ask for a trade and wave the NTC is by benching them.

They have to earn their spot. No slackers! 'Hi' Brown Night :D

I can think of no other man than the man we have to do this Mr. John 'Bench Me Coach, I Really Deserve It' Torterella.
He did it to Brad Richards, he's done it before here too, to Booth.
Why not just give the Sedins 5 minutes a period. Garrison 5 too. Play the hungry ones first line. The rooks, the ones that deserve it based on play, other than a clause in their contract or years on the team.

They don't like it? The door is over there....feed their egos amigos....

:mex:
I love every move Jim Benning makes 8-)
User avatar
Cornuck
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 9578
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 11:39 am
Location: Everywhere

Re: Dealing With A Stale Core

Post by Cornuck »

Arachnid wrote: Why not just give the Sedins 5 minutes a period. Garrison 5 too. Play the hungry ones first line. The rooks, the ones that deserve it based on play, other than a clause in their contract or years on the team.
And last season wouldn't have gone any worse.
2019-20 - Playoff Bound
User avatar
Arachnid
CC Legend
Posts: 6177
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 12:56 pm
Location: Old Berlin
Contact:

Re: Dealing With A Stale Core

Post by Arachnid »

Cornuck wrote:
Arachnid wrote: Why not just give the Sedins 5 minutes a period. Garrison 5 too. Play the hungry ones first line. The rooks, the ones that deserve it based on play, other than a clause in their contract or years on the team.
And last season wouldn't have gone any worse.
Exactly Corny! We had nothing to lose....next year if we suck because of Spidey's Great Experiment™ we get Connor :mrgreen:
I love every move Jim Benning makes 8-)
User avatar
Meds
CC Legend
Posts: 7907
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: Dealing With A Stale Core

Post by Meds »

Lancer wrote:Providing that the new administration finds a taker who can convince Edler to waive his NTC, he's as good as gonzo even if the return may not be ideal. Both he and the organization need him to be somewhere other than Vancouver whether he recognizes it or not.

As for Higgins and Hansen, they're not bad fits - on the 3rd or 4th line. That's the problem: for lack of a viable alternative, they've been thrust into 2nd-line spots and the results we all know. Now, they're getting paid decent salaries for 3rd-liners (a bit rich for 4th liners) and they bring some speed and skill to the line-up but what could the Canucks get for them and who would fill their spots on the 3rd line, let alone the spots they've failed to fill on the 2nd?

There's merit to trading players out to clear a stale room, but you then have to be able to replace what they bring if not add something more. Not sure what Linden and Co. can find on the UFA front and God knows what cowshit other GMs would want to foist upon them unless you want the Canucks to trade the likes of Kesler and/or Edler to fill Higgins' and Hansen's roles.
I think you move Edler out, maybe in a package that includes one of Hansen or Higgins.....maybe both. In return you get a top 6 winger. Not sure who, not sure from where.

One of the kids has to play next year. That's a must imho.....

Although it is HIGHLY UNLIKELY that Matt Niskanen gets to unrestricted free agency, if he does, go after him, and go after him hard.

We have a few guys in our existing system that will be stepping in next year, at least I think so. I fill next year out as below.....

Daniel - Henrik - Burrows
______ - Kesler - Kassian
Jensen - Horvat - Santorelli
Sestito - Richardson - ______

Hamhuis - Bieksa
Garrison - Tanev
Stanton - ______

Lack
Markstrom

Booth may or may not fill one of those blanks.....depends on whether or not they buy him out.

Shinkaruk probably needs one more year to put on some size and strength before he is ready for the NHL.
User avatar
Meds
CC Legend
Posts: 7907
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: Dealing With A Stale Core

Post by Meds »

Cornuck wrote:
Meds wrote:Because you can hit the core with good shock by moving out a guy that has been with them for quite a while. It's not just moving core players, it is who you think is a core player and who you move to shock the core.....not necessarily a core player.
How much are your going to shock a guy with a NTC?
If you trade a guy that also has a NTC? More than you think. I'm starting to think that NTC's mean less than we all figured.

And I don't think that you are shocking these guys into making them play for their jobs so they don't have to move. I think it is more a vote of no confidence and a new face in the room that brings something that the departed face did not.
dbr
CC Legend
Posts: 3059
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 5:37 pm

Re: Dealing With A Stale Core

Post by dbr »

Edler's season was fine by advanced stats standards.

(In fact he was on for fewer goals against at even strength than any of the team's other veteran defensemen.)

The team's shooting percentage with Edler on the ice at evens was an abysmal 3.6%, and it is pretty well established among the fancystats set that defensemen don't have an appreciable impact on on-ice shooting percentage so it's tempting to conclude that much of his awful statistical season was related to luck (and poor execution in the offensive end by the team in general).

Trading Edler when his value is likely at its lowest, and on top of that with the main goal being to put a scare into the remaining Canucks ( :roll: ) would be a big mistake.
User avatar
Meds
CC Legend
Posts: 7907
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: Dealing With A Stale Core

Post by Meds »

Arachnid wrote: Again, that is an illogical argument...shock the core?! That is essentially what we have been doing by getting rid of Lappy, bringing in Roy, letting MayRay go, trading Luo And Cory....
Lapierre and Raymond were let go as free agents. The former because of his reputation and the latter because he wanted too much money and wasn't producing as a scoring winger which the Canucks needed.

Roy was brought in to fill a void at center. We gave up Connauton and a 2nd for him. Vigneault then played him at wing half of the time. Roy and Lapierre were both here at the same time.

Lou and Cory were traded because of extenuating circumstances. Neither of them was traded in an effort to effect a positive change on the existing core.
Me thinks you should stick to the Core of the problem and think of creative ways of actually replacing them instead of brining in the fringe players, they are not our problem and as you said, are replaceable.
That's a good thought.....me thinks you shoulg run with it instead of just sniping at other people for a change.
Post Reply