Ronning's Ghost wrote: ↑Tue Oct 06, 2026 10:23 pm
...the Canucks
are trying to build a roster around a system?
Would this make them professional hockey innovators ?
I think this is the wrong way to do things. The Canucks have ZERO future surefire core players. They have some guys in the system who could be that. Beggars can't be choosers -- find the talent, build a system around the talent. When you go the other way, you will do things like not draft the BPA. IF Marco Rossi had a breakout 90 point campaign this year (that's not a prediction, its a hypo) and Marco Rossi expresses an interest in a long term deal, you don't say "well, Marco, we have this vision for centers and you are not it." To be sure, you might legitimately sell high on Rossi after such a campaign, concluding that he is just a touch too old for your target. But you don't let your vision of an ideal interfere with the tangible.
Now once you have a better idea about what attributes your core guys will bring, then you can start being more intentional about who to bring in to complement them, then you will have a custom system around them that will inform filling out the roster.
Last point: x's and o's are not complicated in hockey. There's only so much variation, and if you aren't the innovator, there's no trade secrets. What's more, different systems can win Cups. The Hurricanes were not the Panthers, who were not the Avalanche, who were sort of like the Lightning....
The best coach is a guy like AV who can pivot based on the talent. Otherwise, you are like Tockey -- who is not a bad coach with the right guys, but also a coach that can sap the superlatives for the "wrong" guys for his system. I think Tocchet saw that in his coaching, too, I just don't know that he'll ever be able to put in practice what he knows intellectually to be true.