CanucksCorner.com Forums

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.

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..

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..

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.

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

Whenever someone says that I cant resist...its my thats what she said

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”

.
BACK ON TOPIC PLEASE!!!

Kick an HFer in the nether regions or go home!

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!!

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.

racer joe and 420 Canuck are getting ass raped in the management thread

Dupe

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.

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.

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.

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.