LOL

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
Blob Mckenzie
MVP
MVP
Posts: 7758
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Re: LOL

Post by Blob Mckenzie »

Linden Vey is about as valuable as a used condom

So ESQ would you just deal all the picks under round 2 for washed our prospects like Vey and Pedan etc?

The Pearson acquisition was undoing a horrible shitty trade. I’m glad to have him but I would have taken a 7th to unload Gudbranson at that point.
“I don’t care what you and some other poster were talking about”
Raile
MVP
MVP
Posts: 108
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2011 9:24 am

Re: LOL

Post by Raile »

Doyle Hargraves wrote: Wed Feb 05, 2020 2:17 pm Linden Vey is about as valuable as a used condom

So ESQ would you just deal all the picks under round 2 for washed our prospects like Vey and Pedan etc?

The Pearson acquisition was undoing a horrible shitty trade. I’m glad to have him but I would have taken a 7th to unload Gudbranson at that point.
It sounds like if ESQ was in charge our beloved pipeline of prospects would not include Adam Gaudette, Tryamkin, Tyler Madden, Will Lockwood, Mike DiPietro, Jack Rathbone..

So basically he's saying he preferred the Mike Gillis approach.. ;)
User avatar
Blob Mckenzie
MVP
MVP
Posts: 7758
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Re: LOL

Post by Blob Mckenzie »

Raile wrote: Wed Feb 05, 2020 3:02 pm
Doyle Hargraves wrote: Wed Feb 05, 2020 2:17 pm Linden Vey is about as valuable as a used condom

So ESQ would you just deal all the picks under round 2 for washed our prospects like Vey and Pedan etc?

The Pearson acquisition was undoing a horrible shitty trade. I’m glad to have him but I would have taken a 7th to unload Gudbranson at that point.
It sounds like if ESQ was in charge our beloved pipeline of prospects would not include Adam Gaudette, Tryamkin, Tyler Madden, Will Lockwood, Mike DiPietro, Jack Rathbone..

So basically he's saying he preferred the Mike Gillis approach.. ;)
:lol:
“I don’t care what you and some other poster were talking about”
ESQ
MVP
MVP
Posts: 1097
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 6:34 pm

Re: LOL

Post by ESQ »

Doyle Hargraves wrote: Wed Feb 05, 2020 2:17 pm Linden Vey is about as valuable as a used condom

So ESQ would you just deal all the picks under round 2 for washed our prospects like Vey and Pedan etc?

The Pearson acquisition was undoing a horrible shitty trade. I’m glad to have him but I would have taken a 7th to unload Gudbranson at that point.
Vey, Pedan, Pearson. One for three. That's a lot better odds than picking in the 3rd-7th round.
User avatar
Cousin Strawberry
MVP
MVP
Posts: 6012
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:19 pm
Location: in the shed with a fresh packed bowl

Re: LOL

Post by Cousin Strawberry »

Cherry Picker wrote: Wed Feb 05, 2020 1:20 pm I can swing bi
:wow:

:lol:

Whenever someone says that I cant resist...its my thats what she said
If you need air...call it in
User avatar
Blob Mckenzie
MVP
MVP
Posts: 7758
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Re: LOL

Post by Blob Mckenzie »

ESQ wrote: Wed Feb 05, 2020 3:55 pm
Doyle Hargraves wrote: Wed Feb 05, 2020 2:17 pm Linden Vey is about as valuable as a used condom

So ESQ would you just deal all the picks under round 2 for washed our prospects like Vey and Pedan etc?

The Pearson acquisition was undoing a horrible shitty trade. I’m glad to have him but I would have taken a 7th to unload Gudbranson at that point.
Vey, Pedan, Pearson. One for three. That's a lot better odds than picking in the 3rd-7th round.
Pearson wasn’t acquired for a draft pick “under the 2nd round”
“I don’t care what you and some other poster were talking about”
User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 12670
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 12:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: LOL

Post by Strangelove »

.
BACK ON TOPIC PLEASE!!! :scowl:

Kick an HFer in the nether regions or go home!
____
Try to focus on someday.
User avatar
Chef Boi RD
MVP
MVP
Posts: 7007
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 6:36 pm
Location: Vancouver

Re: LOL

Post by Chef Boi RD »

PG_Canuck wrote: Wed Feb 05, 2020 11:05 am Definitely some people that would just rather be right than see the Canucks succeed. I noted the fact that our young core progressing isn’t exactly shocking and it should be expected. I don’t have time to go back and forth with some people who just want to use random words from the dictionary to sound a bit smarter.

I’ll say, I am ok with how Benning has operated lately, but he quite clearly stumbled upon Pettersson and Hughes by just not building a good enough team and getting high picks - I think to say he was actively rebuilding, when the majority of his targets in previous years were age-gap players, is quite wrong. Nor did he stockpile draft picks in any year, he traded more than he acquired or near the same IIRC. That’s not ‘rebuilding’ in my eyes, that’s just being bad with bad pro-scouting and getting high picks that have since transformed the teams outlook.

Not taking anything away from actually selecting Pettersson/Hughes/Boeser, no one can deny that, but I don’t think this was your typical rebuild.
I strongly disagree with “stumbling” on Pettersson and Hughes. The very vast majority I included wanted either or of Vilardi or Glass. There was hardly a soul in sight who wanted Pettersson. The great MS wanted Vilardi. Benning and his staff had Pettersson ranked no. 1 on their list and had Hughes no. 3 on their list.

Typical rebuild? Like Buffalo. Who are well on their way to their 8th lottery pick in a row. The last 7 drafts they’ve picked jnthe top 8 somewhere. Two of them 1st overalls, one a second overall. Looks like their stumbling into Eichel, Dahlin, Reinhart, Mittlestadt, Nylander, Ristolainen, Cozens ain’t working out for them all that well. The wrong stumbling? Maybe the upcoming stumble will prove to be the right stumble. Meanwhile! Vancouver Canucks!!
“Tyler Myers is my guy... I was taking to Scotty Bowman last night and he was bringing up his name, and saying he’s a big guy and big guy need big minutes to play, he is playing great for ya… and I agree with him… He’s been exceptional” - Bruce Boudreau
User avatar
Cousin Strawberry
MVP
MVP
Posts: 6012
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:19 pm
Location: in the shed with a fresh packed bowl

Re: LOL

Post by Cousin Strawberry »

I agree with the Chef

once is a stumble...3 is a trend. Benning and his staff have an eye for top end talent. Its not just adding those 2 either. Theres depth at every position (although defense is their weakness there are still pieces stewing in development) and hes hitting on all but 1 1st round pick so far.


Pod looking like another key piece.
If you need air...call it in
User avatar
Blob Mckenzie
MVP
MVP
Posts: 7758
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Re: LOL

Post by Blob Mckenzie »

racer joe and 420 Canuck are getting ass raped in the management thread
“I don’t care what you and some other poster were talking about”
PG_Canuck
CC Rookie
Posts: 47
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2020 12:04 am

Re: LOL

Post by PG_Canuck »

Dupe
Last edited by PG_Canuck on Wed Feb 05, 2020 8:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
PG_Canuck
CC Rookie
Posts: 47
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2020 12:04 am

Re: LOL

Post by PG_Canuck »

ESQ wrote: Wed Feb 05, 2020 1:34 pm
PG_Canuck wrote: Wed Feb 05, 2020 11:05 am Definitely some people that would just rather be right than see the Canucks succeed. I noted the fact that our young core progressing isn’t exactly shocking and it should be expected. I don’t have time to go back and forth with some people who just want to use random words from the dictionary to sound a bit smarter.

I’ll say, I am ok with how Benning has operated lately, but he quite clearly stumbled upon Pettersson and Hughes by just not building a good enough team and getting high picks - I think to say he was actively rebuilding, when the majority of his targets in previous years were age-gap players, is quite wrong. Nor did he stockpile draft picks in any year, he traded more than he acquired or near the same IIRC. That’s not ‘rebuilding’ in my eyes, that’s just being bad with bad pro-scouting and getting high picks that have since transformed the teams outlook.

Not taking anything away from actually selecting Pettersson/Hughes/Boeser, no one can deny that, but I don’t think this was your typical rebuild.
It certainly wasn't the rebuild in the style of Edmonton/Buffalo/Toronto/New Jersey etc. etc. - and obviously none of those rebuilds turned out, or if they can be considered completed it took twice as long as Benning's method.

Funny that he continued the "age-gap" acquisition method to get JT Miller and Tanner Pearson, but nobody's complaining about that anymore.

Also, unlike Edmonton/Buffalo/Toronto/New Jersey, Benning succeeded without a single ounce of draft lottery luck, managing to drop the most spots in the draft out of any team in the league.

Its a fair point that he didn't stockpile picks, but my personal opinion is that a Linden Vey is more valuable than a 2nd-round pick, and I could really care less about picks under the second round.

A nice counterpoint to the Benning Rebuild wll be the Red Wings - now entering Year 4 of no playoffs, and IMO no prospect of playoffs for a couple years at least, despite being helmed by two highly-regarded GMs in Holland and Yzerman. Holland had 21 picks in his last 2 drafts, and Yzerman had 11 last year, lets see if that pans out any better by the equivalent point in Benning's re-build.
I take a second round pick every single time over some terrible reclamation project like Linden Vey. For anyone who loves/likes Benning’s drafting or calls him a “drafting guru” should also want the draft picks over those useless filler players. You can go find 20 Linden Vey’s in other NHL systems right now and pay nothing for them.

Canucks have drafted Hoglander/Woo/Lind in the second round the last 3 years. Those could be valuable pieces down the road.
PG_Canuck
CC Rookie
Posts: 47
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2020 12:04 am

Re: LOL

Post by PG_Canuck »

Raile wrote: Wed Feb 05, 2020 3:02 pm
Doyle Hargraves wrote: Wed Feb 05, 2020 2:17 pm Linden Vey is about as valuable as a used condom

So ESQ would you just deal all the picks under round 2 for washed our prospects like Vey and Pedan etc?

The Pearson acquisition was undoing a horrible shitty trade. I’m glad to have him but I would have taken a 7th to unload Gudbranson at that point.
It sounds like if ESQ was in charge our beloved pipeline of prospects would not include Adam Gaudette, Tryamkin, Tyler Madden, Will Lockwood, Mike DiPietro, Jack Rathbone..

So basically he's saying he preferred the Mike Gillis approach.. ;)
When you’re contending you almost always end up trading draft picks to upgrade your contending roster. The Canucks go nowhere in 2011 without adding Lapierre/Higgins (whoever was dealt for picks again) etc to round out the team - you’re not going to want to move roster players out.

We will see a bunch of contenders do that this deadline.
PG_Canuck
CC Rookie
Posts: 47
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2020 12:04 am

Re: LOL

Post by PG_Canuck »

The Brown Wizard wrote: Wed Feb 05, 2020 7:10 pm I agree with the Chef

once is a stumble...3 is a trend. Benning and his staff have an eye for top end talent. Its not just adding those 2 either. Theres depth at every position (although defense is their weakness there are still pieces stewing in development) and hes hitting on all but 1 1st round pick so far.


Pod looking like another key piece.
Guys...you didn’t even read my post and are running with a different narrative I wasn’t putting out there.
User avatar
Hockey Widow
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 2336
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm

Re: LOL

Post by Hockey Widow »

The timing of all the Vey type deals needs to be kept in the equation. Vey, Baertschi, Granldund, Gudbranson types were brought in to fill in an age gap and be placeholders until the draft picks developed. Of those 4 deals the only one I was upset with was the Vey one. The other three I was excited about and thought we got decent value to fill a need at the time. None of them can be looked at in isolation.

Once our draft picks started to develop and look ready to take a roster spot Benning filled the need with older vets. It can be argued too many and too much, valid arguments, but the need was still there. Once he started to graduate draft picks he no longer had the need to trade 2nds and 3rds to fill an age gap.

He didn't stumble into his picks, Brock at 23rd, Pettersson, Hughes were all passed over to get to us. After the Pettersson draft Linden had said, had the Canucks won the lottery they weren't picking either player that went top 3. They had The Alien pegged as their guy. Hughes fell to them yes, but he was passed over to get to them.

Would you like a Virtanen do over? Perhaps. Juolevi do over, probably yes but we have still yet to see him play. After Hughes I doubt Juolevi has a chance of impressing anyone much. And yes Taychoook would look nice in our top six. But Benning has had some nice picks 2-5. So ya, a guy good a drafting should want more picks, no argument. But its too easy to forget what he was trying to do as long as he had the twins. He was trying to be playoff competitive. The team failed. The twins retired. Benning retooled. And every year he has been in charge we have had at least one rookie, usually 2-3, play on the team. So he has integrated young guys every year into the lineup. Mistakes? Of course. But its hard to argue, all things considered, with where the team is at. Still at work in progress but expiring contracts over the next 2-3 years with the addition of some more kids. We are OK.
The only HW the Canucks need
Post Reply