Canucks Young Guns

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
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 19616
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: Canucks Young Guns

Post by Strangelove » Mon Feb 18, 2019 4:45 pm

Blob Mckenzie wrote:
Mon Feb 18, 2019 9:24 am
micky107 wrote:
Mon Feb 18, 2019 12:24 am
Wow, Thanks!!!
Really happy to see Will Lockwood a force again.
A force who hasn’t played an NHL game.



Only on this board



:lol: :roll:



Never change.


All prospects always turn out
CLEARLY the poster said Lockwood is a force in the league in which he is currently playing.

(seriously, you got 'Lockwood is an NHL force' from that??) :crazy:

As a friend I recommend you stop drinking and reading at HF...
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!

User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 19616
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: Canucks Young Guns

Post by Strangelove » Mon Feb 18, 2019 4:47 pm

Meds wrote:
Mon Feb 18, 2019 4:31 pm
Blob Mckenzie wrote:
Mon Feb 18, 2019 4:15 pm
anyone continuing to defend these players and these moves is either a troll or a retard.
it's really not as bad as you make it sound.
Blob is clearly doing some "retarded trolling" here...
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!

Ronning's Ghost
MVP
MVP
Posts: 976
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 5:25 pm
Location: New Westminster

Re: Canucks Young Guns

Post by Ronning's Ghost » Mon Feb 18, 2019 4:50 pm

Meds wrote:
Mon Feb 18, 2019 4:05 pm
the rebuild that they were attempting, one that tries to remain competitive and has roster players who are vets that can help show kids what it takes to play in the NHL and are still of an age that they might be useful pieces when the team is winning again.
And this, this "re-tool on the fly" concept, is my principle objection to the Benning era. He might have done it as well as it could be done, but it was a foolish plan that cost them resources and time on the real rebuild.

User avatar
Island Nucklehead
MVP
MVP
Posts: 8266
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 2:27 pm
Location: Ottawa

Re: Canucks Young Guns

Post by Island Nucklehead » Mon Feb 18, 2019 4:58 pm

Ronning's Ghost wrote:
Mon Feb 18, 2019 4:50 pm
Meds wrote:
Mon Feb 18, 2019 4:05 pm
the rebuild that they were attempting, one that tries to remain competitive and has roster players who are vets that can help show kids what it takes to play in the NHL and are still of an age that they might be useful pieces when the team is winning again.
And this, this "re-tool on the fly" concept, is my principle objection to the Benning era. He might have done it as well as it could be done, but it was a foolish plan that cost them resources and time on the real rebuild.

User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 19616
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: Canucks Young Guns

Post by Strangelove » Mon Feb 18, 2019 5:01 pm

Ronning's Ghost wrote:
Mon Feb 18, 2019 4:50 pm
He might have done it as well as it could be done, but it was a foolish plan that cost them resources and time on the real rebuild.
So in your opinion your Vancouver Canucks led by a new young core could have been fighting a playoff spot at the deadline

... years earlier? :eh:

I guess Ronning's Ghost must be the real genius here...
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!

Ronning's Ghost
MVP
MVP
Posts: 976
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 5:25 pm
Location: New Westminster

Re: Canucks Young Guns

Post by Ronning's Ghost » Mon Feb 18, 2019 5:22 pm

Strangelove wrote:
Mon Feb 18, 2019 5:01 pm
Ronning's Ghost wrote:
Mon Feb 18, 2019 4:50 pm
He might have done it as well as it could be done, but it was a foolish plan that cost them resources and time on the real rebuild.
So in your opinion your Vancouver Canucks led by a new young core could have been fighting a playoff spot at the deadline

... years earlier? :eh:

I guess Ronning's Ghost must be the real genius here...
"Fighting for a playoff spot" is not the objective -- not even an intermediate one. The goal is a sufficient concentration of talent at one time to actually compete for the Cup. Failing to load up on draft picks earlier in the process hurt that goal. I think that's sufficiently clear to everyone who is not of the "Benning can do no wrong" camp that it does not qualify as a genius insight.

User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 19616
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: Canucks Young Guns

Post by Strangelove » Mon Feb 18, 2019 5:25 pm

Ronning's Ghost wrote:
Mon Feb 18, 2019 5:22 pm
Failing to load up on draft picks earlier in the process hurt that goal.
Wrong.
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!

User avatar
Hockey Widow
CC Legend
Posts: 14651
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm

Re: Canucks Young Guns

Post by Hockey Widow » Mon Feb 18, 2019 5:31 pm

Ronning's Ghost wrote:
Mon Feb 18, 2019 5:22 pm
Strangelove wrote:
Mon Feb 18, 2019 5:01 pm
Ronning's Ghost wrote:
Mon Feb 18, 2019 4:50 pm
He might have done it as well as it could be done, but it was a foolish plan that cost them resources and time on the real rebuild.
So in your opinion your Vancouver Canucks led by a new young core could have been fighting a playoff spot at the deadline

... years earlier? :eh:

I guess Ronning's Ghost must be the real genius here...
"Fighting for a playoff spot" is not the objective -- not even an intermediate one. The goal is a sufficient concentration of talent at one time to actually compete for the Cup. Failing to load up on draft picks earlier in the process hurt that goal. I think that's sufficiently clear to everyone who is not of the "Benning can do no wrong" camp that it does not qualify as a genius insight.
As much as I fantasize about a bottom finish, a 1st OA in a Matthews or McJesus draft, fighting for the playoffs should aways be the goal. Really, why else play?
The only HW the Canucks need

Ronning's Ghost
MVP
MVP
Posts: 976
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 5:25 pm
Location: New Westminster

Re: Canucks Young Guns

Post by Ronning's Ghost » Mon Feb 18, 2019 5:38 pm

Hockey Widow wrote:
Mon Feb 18, 2019 5:31 pm
fighting for the playoffs should aways be the goal. Really, why else play?
To win the Stanley Cup. What other objective matters?

They won a couple of President's Trophies. Did either of them make you happy?

User avatar
Blob Mckenzie
CC Legend
Posts: 13641
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Re: Canucks Young Guns

Post by Blob Mckenzie » Mon Feb 18, 2019 5:48 pm

Ronning's Ghost wrote:
Mon Feb 18, 2019 5:22 pm
Failing to load up on draft picks earlier in the process hurt that goal. I think that's sufficiently clear to everyone who is not of the "Benning can do no wrong" camp that it does not qualify as a genius insight.
Another excellent point. You couldn’t be more correct
“SUTTER IS AS GOOD AS COUTURIER”

User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 19616
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: Canucks Young Guns

Post by Strangelove » Mon Feb 18, 2019 6:06 pm

MS' zombies running amok today...
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!

User avatar
Meds
CC Legend
Posts: 6306
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: Canucks Young Guns

Post by Meds » Mon Feb 18, 2019 6:14 pm

Ronning's Ghost wrote:
Mon Feb 18, 2019 4:50 pm
Meds wrote:
Mon Feb 18, 2019 4:05 pm
the rebuild that they were attempting, one that tries to remain competitive and has roster players who are vets that can help show kids what it takes to play in the NHL and are still of an age that they might be useful pieces when the team is winning again.
And this, this "re-tool on the fly" concept, is my principle objection to the Benning era. He might have done it as well as it could be done, but it was a foolish plan that cost them resources and time on the real rebuild.
And I remain unconvinced that this was Benning's plan. I suspect it was a combination of Aquabros and Linden handing down marching orders out of a desire to reap playoff revenues and some misplaced loyalty to the Sedins. Things started changing at the beginning of the 2017-18 season and culminated in Linden's departure and ownership's endorsement of rebuilding to remain competitive long-term. It's no coincidence that this all came to a head at the same time that Hank and Dank retired.

What we have seen in the past 2 years, and particularly this season for the first time, is Benning's team. At the drop of the puck in October of this year the only remaining holdover from the Gillis era will be the threat of Luongo's recapture penalty should he retire "early".

This year has been a good measuring stick for what Benning can do with a team. We are seeing leadership from our young forwards, as well as support from Benning's "Linden-free" off-season signings of Roussel and Beagle. Our forward group and prospect pool is much improved and so long as he can continue to keep the prospect cupboard stocked as we go forward that area is fine and continuing to improve. Goaltending is solid. Markstrom is finally hitting his projected potential, albeit almost a decade late. We have two of the most promising goaltending prospects going.

Our blueline is still a mess needs a face-lift.....

If he's not healthy by TDD then Tanev should be shopped in the off-season, he's getting hurt way too often and his game is just too one-dimensional, however there are still enough GM's out there that would see him as being a cap-friendly contract still signed for next season. If he's back and ready to rock in a week (so so unlikely) then trade him for a prospect. The idea of him to Tampa for Foote has merit, although we would be sweetening the pot to make it happen. If looking at a team like the Bolts as a trade partner then retain $1M of salary and toss in a 3rd or 4th round pick.

Keep Edler.

Stetcher, Hutton, Pouliot, and Gudbranson, are all expendable given the right circumstances.

Look to free agency. Karlsson*, Trouba, Meyers, Gardiner, and Methot, are all worth kicking the tires on (the latter only if Karlsson shows any interest in Vancouver, he liked playing with Methot).

*Only if he hits the market as SJ is looking hard at trying to keep him and it sounds like both parties are mutually seeking a deal.

Our competitiveness next season will depend largely on what Elmer does with the defense corps during the off-season. If it's not improved we will once more be a wild card contender only if the rest of the conference moves up the standings at a snail's pace.

User avatar
DonCherry4PM
MVP
MVP
Posts: 1333
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 10:27 pm

Re: Canucks Young Guns

Post by DonCherry4PM » Mon Feb 18, 2019 6:14 pm

Strangelove wrote:
Mon Feb 18, 2019 6:06 pm
MS' zombies running amok today...
An excellent point. :roll:

Almost as good as RG’s.
Invincibility lies in oneself.
Vincibility lies in the enemy.

- Sun Tzu

User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 19616
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: Canucks Young Guns

Post by Strangelove » Mon Feb 18, 2019 6:21 pm

WIN: DonCherry4PM :roll:
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!

User avatar
Meds
CC Legend
Posts: 6306
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: Canucks Young Guns

Post by Meds » Mon Feb 18, 2019 6:28 pm

Ronning's Ghost wrote:
Mon Feb 18, 2019 5:22 pm
Strangelove wrote:
Mon Feb 18, 2019 5:01 pm
Ronning's Ghost wrote:
Mon Feb 18, 2019 4:50 pm
He might have done it as well as it could be done, but it was a foolish plan that cost them resources and time on the real rebuild.
So in your opinion your Vancouver Canucks led by a new young core could have been fighting a playoff spot at the deadline

... years earlier? :eh:

I guess Ronning's Ghost must be the real genius here...
"Fighting for a playoff spot" is not the objective -- not even an intermediate one. The goal is a sufficient concentration of talent at one time to actually compete for the Cup. Failing to load up on draft picks earlier in the process hurt that goal. I think that's sufficiently clear to everyone who is not of the "Benning can do no wrong" camp that it does not qualify as a genius insight.
While I obviously don't think that Benning can do no wrong, I think that had he come in and loaded up on picks in the first 2 or 3 seasons here, he would have been handed his walking papers and the next guy in would have had to start at square one, so we'd be no better off. However chances are that some of our draft picks that we are quite happy with would have been much different and we'd be lamenting a continued history of piss poor scouting and drafting.

The fact that his first year at the helm saw us fluke out into the playoffs, thanks to a year in the western conference that is really not unlike this one in terms of where teams are at in the standings, really hurt any kind of rebuild plans any sane person was pitching and pushed it back a couple of seasons.

Post Reply