CanucksCorner.com Forums

A good, yet depressing, read UW.

UWSaint wrote: The expansion draft is going to make for curious trades this deadline and make for a ton of offseason movement. That's the time to make a hockey deal, I think. Ben Hutton would be my first on the block (Sbisa, well, I am assuming no one really values him more than an equivalent FA that can be had for a similar salary). Hutton for value, not because I dislike him. But I am not sold on him long term and I think there is the potential that other teams might overvalue him.

This is exactly my thoughts as well, I've expressed how I think Hutton could really brig back the top 6 forward talent we need in the Trade thread.

Timing is interesting though. Hutton is exempt from expansion draft protection therefore the acquiring team would not need to protect him and could in turn protect another d-man instead if necessary. Maintaining their defensive depth.

So would we get more for him pre-expansion draft or post when teams may need to fill out their rosters picked through by the Knights? I'm not sure really.

Hold onto Hutton. Early in the season he was gliding everywhere and looked like crap. He seems to be playing with more speed now. I noticed last night he was pumping his legs more powerfully and moving his feet much faster than he did earlier this year. He can be a core piece if he plays like he did last night consistently. Still young with more upside to explore before the Canucks should consider moving him. He has limited trade value now. That should grow if he consistently puts it all together.

Soapy wrote:You are all way .....
what happened to the redwings plan?
that was the destination every team wanted.

To echo UDub's post, I think people have realized that the "Redwings Plan" was premised on a total fluke in drafting Nicklas Lidstrom 53rd overall. Without getting the greatest defenseman of his generation with their 2nd round pick, I don't think any of the cups come to Detroit.

The Wings' window was extended by two more fluke picks in Datsyuk (171st overall) and Zetterberg (210th). But now that the fluke picks are either gone, I think the curtain's been pulled back and the Redwings are clearly not the class of the NHL.

So in UW's analysis, the Wings had heaps of luck, which overcame mediocre drafting and mediocre/poor asset management for years.

ESQ wrote:

Soapy wrote:You are all way .....
what happened to the redwings plan?
that was the destination every team wanted.

To echo UDub's post, I think people have realized that the "Redwings Plan" was premised on a total fluke in drafting Nicklas Lidstrom 53rd overall. Without getting the greatest defenseman of his generation with their 2nd round pick, I don't think any of the cups come to Detroit.

The Wings' window was extended by two more fluke picks in Datsyuk (171st overall) and Zetterberg (210th). But now that the fluke picks are either gone, I think the curtain's been pulled back and the Redwings are clearly not the class of the NHL.

So in UW's analysis, the Wings had heaps of luck, which overcame mediocre drafting and mediocre/poor asset management for years.

Yes the red wings had horseshoes up their arses at the draft table most definitely. But it's looking like Demko, Tryamkin should have been 1st round picks and Boeser should have been a top 10 pick, so we are going aces with our late 1st round round pickings and outside the first round. McCann did get us a the net front presence we needed in Gudbranson who is only 24. Hutton is looking a steal outside the first round, Gillis' only one and lookout for Lockwood and Brisebios.

ESQ wrote:

Soapy wrote:You are all way .....
what happened to the redwings plan?
that was the destination every team wanted.

To echo UDub's post, I think people have realized that the "Redwings Plan" was premised on a total fluke in drafting Nicklas Lidstrom 53rd overall. Without getting the greatest defenseman of his generation with their 2nd round pick, I don't think any of the cups come to Detroit.

The Wings' window was extended by two more fluke picks in Datsyuk (171st overall) and Zetterberg (210th). But now that the fluke picks are either gone, I think the curtain's been pulled back and the Redwings are clearly not the class of the NHL.

So in UW's analysis, the Wings had heaps of luck, which overcame mediocre drafting and mediocre/poor asset management for years.

I agree, the Red Wings were in the lucky category, for that second gen with Datsyuk and Zetterberg. Not only did Listrom give them a true #1, he gave them it for nearly 20 years!

But the Red Wings also had outstanding player development and coaching at all levels.

The Blackhawks had great drafts, great asset management and great NHL coaching.

In terms of impact, Quenneville is worth all the Oilers first rounders combined (minus McDavid). His ability to quietly (and successfully) rebel against a good deal of conventional wisdom and watch the league catch up but still be a step behind us very impressive. Do not underemphasize the imporance (and rarity) of a top flight coach.

UW, I'm glad you mentioned the lockout year time that Kesler, Burrows, and Bieksa received playing together in Manitoba. The importance of that development year can not be understated.

A lot of players benefited from that. Diana in Calgary had a stellar year in the A and came out strong in the NHL. Part of it was players getting the chance to play together as teammates. You would think somewhere a GM would recognize this. I think a change is needed to allow exceptions to players having to be returned to junior. Perhaps a limit of 1-2 per team.

I truly think Jake will benefit staying there the whole year.

Thank you UW! The voice of reason.

Through all of this crew vs. crew debate, I had these same thoughts. But you always were able to express ideas much more succinctly.

What we also need to add is the owners have no will to rebuild any other way as business and value of the team remains too important to them.

Like you said, the time to act was waking up after the drunk-fest of the Cup run. Those who were still involved had no desire to make those necessary changes for the near-future and their moves reflected that. They were still convinced a bit of tweaking and remaining all-in was going to get the job done. Nothing was coming up the pipeline.

To top it off, Torts fell into their lap and as a by-product, was on the way to helping them "tank" and to shed a few contracts with his charming ways. If they had the foresight as I suggested before, could we have been in on some of the deeper drafts? Perhaps.

Lastly, one of the unluckiest bit of Canuck Luck happened when the team overachieved and made the playoffs in this new regime's first year. Statistically they were not good like the year before and after, but there was relative health and the Sedins.

These developments falsely convinced the owners into the wrong direction and set this organization back further from what was necessary much earlier. To put all the blame on the new President/GM/Coach for the current situation is silly.

To be the Detroits, Chicagos, SJs... yes you have to be lucky but you also have to be good at scouting, trading, drafting and development while you're at the top to remain at the top for a long time.

UWSaint wrote:

The Canucks failed to do that when they were deep, when they knew that 5 years from when the Sedins were 31 they would be 36…. Instead they made guys like Bieksa, Burrows, Hamhuis, and Higgins part of the core. Those decisions pre-dated the current regime.

But to all who are passionate about the debate – it doesn’t really matter. If this rebuild fails, it wasn’t because of what will be done in the next few months, but what was done in the drunken aftermath of a Stanley Cup run.

We can't change that.

Yup HW and I were pissed at MG keeping every player including the depth players from the cup run, all those vets aged themselves and the team became stagnant/stale and their value's decreased tremendously.

But one of MG's biggest blunders was letting ehrhoff go (our only puck-moving QB) over about 700k.

Gillis’ refusal to extend Ehrhoff in June 2011 may have been one of his biggest oversights.

Believing his open-market value to be $5M/season (and preoccupied with an internal cap of $4.6M/season), the Canucks tabled Ehrhoff a 5 year/$23M offer, identical to the one signed by Kevin Bieksa. After declining the deal, Ehrhoff was quickly shipped to New York for a 4th round pick, surprising the blueliner who thought progress was being made.

In justifying Ehrhoff’s departure, Gillis told local media, “I think Keith Ballard is going to be a good player for us next year”.
http://www.vancitybuzz.com/2014/11/gaug ... n-ehrhoff/

UWSaint wrote:
Two, the only real non-sideways assets the Canucks truly have to move are Alex Edler and Chris Tanev. Possibly Ryan Miller can bring a B level prospect and a 2d or late (and therefore crapshoot) 1st from a contender who loses a goalie and is absolutely desperate. (By non-sideways, I mean a guy that can bring a return of a prospect or high enough pick – Granlund, Baertschi, etc., these guys aren’t getting you a first round pick and these guys aren’t getting you a prospect better than the ones we’ve dealt (McCann, Shinkaurk)). What we’ve seen is that taking these guys out of the lineup doesn’t equal tanking...

If you can get a good return for Edler (decent potential for top 6 on a decent team) or Tanev (high potential for top 6 on a decent team and high floor (NHL) + one or two more volatile prospects higher round picks), have your ears open. As the deadline nears, shop one or both of them (and obviously Miller).

To not make the same mistake Gillis made, Benning should be trying to get max value from ONE of Edler or Tanev for help up front, this could be done prior to the expansion draft or the NHL draft, hard to see it being done by the TDD unless a contender or pretender wants to go all in and will sacrifice youth/picks in a calculated trade.

Skyo, I do agree Ehrhoff is more valuable as a Canuck than on any other team.

But given how the Hoff has dropped off, its tough to fault Gillis on not extending him.

Hank wrote:Thank you UW! The voice of reason.

Through all of this crew vs. crew debate, I had these same thoughts. But you always were able to express ideas much more succinctly.

What we also need to add is the owners have no will to rebuild any other way as business and value of the team remains too important to them.

Like you said, the time to act was waking up after the drunk-fest of the Cup run. Those who were still involved had no desire to make those necessary changes for the near-future and their moves reflected that. They were still convinced a bit of tweaking and remaining all-in was going to get the job done. Nothing was coming up the pipeline.

To top it off, Torts fell into their lap and as a by-product, was on the way to helping them "tank" and to shed a few contracts with his charming ways. If they had the foresight as I suggested before, could we have been in on some of the deeper drafts? Perhaps.

Lastly, one of the unluckiest bit of Canuck Luck happened when the team overachieved and made the playoffs in this new regime's first year. Statistically they were not good like the year before and after, but there was relative health and the Sedins.

These developments falsely convinced the owners into the wrong direction and set this organization back further from what was necessary much earlier. To put all the blame on the new President/GM/Coach for the current situation is silly.

To be the Detroits, Chicagos, SJs... yes you have to be lucky but you also have to be good at scouting, trading, drafting and development while you're at the top to remain at the top for a long time.

All of this has been talked about ad nauseam for four years and it still sounds the same. So many what ifs and if only. Well, it is what it is. Mistakes were made and everyone knows that!
I wanted to start rebuilding the team by the first round exit in 2012 but was told by most, that's silly.
It's so nice to be able to lay blame somewhere but in reality, there is no true blame.
I don't know how many times I have said over the years to people that having two superstar twins on the same team has never, ever, happened before and that whatever highs come from it will come equal lows.

What I do notice is that so many want to blame the owners, why?
They have given us stability.
They have been willing to spend to the cap.
They have spent more than most on team facilities, management, coaches, staff, trainers, etc.
They purchased our very own farm team, something we did not have before, and on and on.
Did they hang on to MG too long? Maybe, but until he faultered, how were they to know?
They are not the only owners that interfere from time to time but it is their money.
And, yes, it is a business. Every team is. If a business fails too miserably, it will be sold or even worse, moved!
Never think that can't happen. I'm sure the Family would love to have both hockey and basketball in that building but they can't get it so they are hanging on to their Canucks for now, Thank God.
There is one thing I agree with in all this retro talk and that is the plain old BAD LUCK streak.
We have had more than our share, for sure! The list is long.
Won't bring up everything, it would take too long so;
In the last 10 to12 years, how many first round picks have panned out?
Bo Horvat. Right now, at this point, that's about as much as I can say. That list should be longer over the next 2 or 3 years.
I'm tired of placing blame. I want to move on and forward.

Well, actually, I have one pet peeve. I don't really like "Little Willie", cause he won't go home.
(yeah, I'm so old, I remember that trashy British rock band from the 70s)

micky107 wrote:

Hank wrote:Thank you UW! The voice of reason.

Through all of this crew vs. crew debate, I had these same thoughts. But you always were able to express ideas much more succinctly.

What we also need to add is the owners have no will to rebuild any other way as business and value of the team remains too important to them.

Like you said, the time to act was waking up after the drunk-fest of the Cup run. Those who were still involved had no desire to make those necessary changes for the near-future and their moves reflected that. They were still convinced a bit of tweaking and remaining all-in was going to get the job done. Nothing was coming up the pipeline.

To top it off, Torts fell into their lap and as a by-product, was on the way to helping them "tank" and to shed a few contracts with his charming ways. If they had the foresight as I suggested before, could we have been in on some of the deeper drafts? Perhaps.

Lastly, one of the unluckiest bit of Canuck Luck happened when the team overachieved and made the playoffs in this new regime's first year. Statistically they were not good like the year before and after, but there was relative health and the Sedins.

These developments falsely convinced the owners into the wrong direction and set this organization back further from what was necessary much earlier. To put all the blame on the new President/GM/Coach for the current situation is silly.

To be the Detroits, Chicagos, SJs... yes you have to be lucky but you also have to be good at scouting, trading, drafting and development while you're at the top to remain at the top for a long time.

All of this has been talked about ad nauseam for four years and it still sounds the same. So many what ifs and if only. Well, it is what it is. Mistakes were made and everyone knows that!
I wanted to start rebuilding the team by the first round exit in 2012 but was told by most, that's silly.
It's so nice to be able to lay blame somewhere but in reality, there is no true blame.
I don't know how many times I have said over the years to people that having two superstar twins on the same team has never, ever, happened before and that whatever highs come from it will come equal lows.

What I do notice is that so many want to blame the owners, why?
They have given us stability.
They have been willing to spend to the cap.
They have spent more than most on team facilities, management, coaches, staff, trainers, etc.
They purchased our very own farm team, something we did not have before, and on and on.
Did they hang on to MG too long? Maybe, but until he faultered, how were they to know?
They are not the only owners that interfere from time to time but it is their money.
And, yes, it is a business. Every team is. If a business fails too miserably, it will be sold or even worse, moved!
Never think that can't happen. I'm sure the Family would love to have both hockey and basketball in that building but they can't get it so they are hanging on to their Canucks for now, Thank God.
There is one thing I agree with in all this retro talk and that is the plain old BAD LUCK streak.
We have had more than our share, for sure! The list is long.
Won't bring up everything, it would take too long so;
In the last 10 to12 years, how many first round picks have panned out?
Bo Horvat. Right now, at this point, that's about as much as I can say. That list should be longer over the next 2 or 3 years.
I'm tired of placing blame. I want to move on and forward.

Well, actually, I have one pet peeve. I don't really like "Little Willie", cause he won't go home.
(yeah, I'm so old, I remember that trashy British rock band from the 70s)

Mick, I agree about the moving forward part. I'll condense this.

What I'm saying here is how the fans want to move forward. There are different interpretations of how and why we're in the here and now.

It's not about blaming the owners. It's recognizing what they want as the owners. The tanking ain't gonna happen the way the tank crew wants it. Trading your top players and throwing some of our good prospects at the wolves is Kevin Lowe Oilers stupid. We have Canuck Luck and will never get 6 number one picks. We can't even get one.

What is the rush at this point? Even if the twins are the 2nd line after Bo, they will still be protecting him and the other lines from playing too much. Their contracts are almost done anyway. Yeah, I never get the lack of respect they have even from our own fans.

You also need placeholders if you haven't drafted or developed your own right? There aren't enough prospects to fill both NHL and AHL squads. And these contracts aren't quite the albatrosses like some of the previous regime has given out either.

This regime is doing it the best way they can as quickly as they can... something all good organizations have been doing forever. The last regime talked the talk but couldn't walk the walk. So they walked the plank instead.

MG wasn't selling a plan of tanking as he was fired. He was still telling the owners that he could get them back to the promised land quickly and his actions or inactions showed that. His inability to draft (without a blue-chip piece) and develop even one high-end prospect to replace the Burke/Nonis core is telling.

JB is doing what he needs to do under the mandate and I personally think it's been pretty good considering the circumstances. Bloody hell, he still has Delorme and Smyl working with him.

MG's draft record is garbage and is the main reason we're where we are right now. However he was advocating a rebuild, and ownership shot him down.

Hockey Widow in Dec 2015 wrote: Under Gillis he [ownership] refused a rebuild request. Gillis couldn't trade Luongo and wanted to buy him out and keep Cory. Owner said no and Gillis was told to trade Cory. Owner flys to Flrida to kiss and make up with Roberto. But he trusts Linden and Linden sold him on a slow rebuild, or as we have come to know it, a transition. Owner now on board with a full rebuild, Benning and Linden not under the playoff pressure, this year. Owner still thinks we should be competitive next year. Linden and Benning have full autonomy, Gillis didn't, he had a leash.

Either way,"fixing" a perceived age gap by trading draft picks for waiver fodder like Vey, Baertschi, Etem, Pedan, Prust etc. is a piss-poor rebuild strategy. Stockpile picks, grab your placeholders on waivers, PTO's or reclamation UFA, avoid big money/term UFA's and build through the draft. Two of the best "placeholders" for this team have been Cracknell and Skille, how much did they cost?

At the end of the day we can be a lottery team with 5 draft picks, or we can be a lottery team with 8-10 draft picks.

I saw that the prime example of IN and Roberto Macenzzis theory that full tanking is the only way to fly - the last place team in the league - the Colorado Avalanche took a serious ass kicking last night at the hands of your Montreal Canadiens, a team that has never embraced the full tank theory

Duschene - 3rd overall - 2009
Landeskog - 2nd overall - 2011
McKinnon - 1st overall - 2013

Result? The shittiest team in the NHL in 2016-17 season