Offseason grades so far

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
Chef Boi RD
CC Legend
Posts: 15822
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 6:36 pm
Location: Vancouver

Re: Offseason grades so far

Post by Chef Boi RD » Thu Jul 18, 2019 6:45 am

Brilliant post by asidas, especially the Miller part. A voice of reason and not emotion. Respectable.

And hats off for Benning for not taking Sakicd bait. The Avs have every right to be pissed at Joe letting Barrie go, he’s glue like Edler and that’s why the players love Benning and hate Sakic.

Jimbro will find a way to bring Barrie home

Tuna your thoughts on Barrie’s disenchantment over being dealt to Toronto instead of Vancouver.

Players want to player here cause of what Bennings done, Blob? Thoughts?
"I just want to say one word to you. Just one word. Are you listening? - Plastics." - The Graduate

User avatar
Chef Boi RD
CC Legend
Posts: 15822
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 6:36 pm
Location: Vancouver

Re: Offseason grades so far

Post by Chef Boi RD » Thu Jul 18, 2019 6:48 am

Cherry Picker wrote:
Thu Jul 18, 2019 6:44 am
It’d be nice to have not moved the first, everyone can agree, but top six LW was a black hole on the Canucks and the prospects they were hoping to challenge for that spot were not developing well (Dahlen, Goldobin, Gadjovich). I mentioned earlier this year that the top line would ideally get someone, like a Blake Wheeler, with size and skill to play with Pettersson and Boeser. Miller has the size and skill to potentially be that kind of player. I don’t think he’ll get as many points as Wheeler, but if he plays all year with those two who knows? Another GM isn’t going to give a fairly young top six winger with a pretty decent contract away for much less than a first. So the question is would you rather move Horvat to get a player like him? Do you want to pass on the opportunity to compete, which basically means not adequately filling one of the team’s biggest needs when the opportunity presents itself. Do you want to put another place holder, some susceptible to concussions, or an undeveloped prospect in the top six? Personally I’m fine with the move. It might not work out, but you have to take some chances to fill your team’s needs. I don’t want to follow the Edmonton model where they don’t or can’t bring in anyone that fills their needs and are constantly getting placeholders like Granlund or Gagner and then back in the lottery. Yes, the Canucks could have kept Granlund and Eriksson in the top six and saved the first round pick, but nobody would say the Canucks are improving or will be challenging for the playoffs this season if they had done that. So, basically you’re throwing the season away and tanking for the draft by not doing what it takes to build a proper line-up. Pettersson, Boeser, Horvat, and Hughes have the potential to be an excellent core in the NHL. They need a team built around them. Trading Miller for a first round likely lottery protected draft pick helps with that tremendously. The games are played on the ice, bad things might happen to ruin the season. As Canuck fans, we all know this. But at the very least the Canucks line-up looks quite competitive going into the season. Maybe bad things will ruin a couple other team’s seasons. Maybe the Canucks stay relatively healthy and find some chemistry. Good things could happen, too. By icing a competitive line-up at the start of the season, they’re giving themselves a chance, which is more than they had prior to signing Miller.
Losing is for losers, Cherry

This off season will go down as one of the most brilliant off seasons in Canuck history, starting with drafting Podkozlin and Hoglander, trading for Miller and signing Myers, Ferland and Benn. Just brilliant! But the best part, we don’t have to see Smiley Hutton anymore, Mike Gillis draft pick.
"I just want to say one word to you. Just one word. Are you listening? - Plastics." - The Graduate

User avatar
The Brown Wizard
CC Legend
Posts: 8899
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:19 pm
Location: in the shed with a fresh packed bowl

Re: Offseason grades so far

Post by The Brown Wizard » Thu Jul 18, 2019 7:25 am

Nuckertuzzi wrote:
Wed Jul 17, 2019 8:47 pm
rikster wrote:
Wed Jul 17, 2019 7:16 pm
... if you want to go into detail as to why trading away a draft pick today which will be at worst 2 drafts away is a bad idea for the Vancouver Canucks I'm open to a change of opinion...

Take care..

Ok then I will repeat myself.

I don't like the trade because…

A) It is a risky trade and we have a very recent reference point that shows how it can backfire: Ottawa

B) Miller to me is not a player worth taking that big of a risk on.

C) There are other means of acquiring players that don't have to cost as much or at as big of a risk, even if you need to aim lower it's probably a better option weighed against the risk.

D) Why now? We don't know enough about where we're at in the stage of our development as a team to be making such a risky trade. If we are going to use those assets in a trade, why not wait till we've actually taken a step forward and who knows by then can maybe dangle them for a better deal.

E) Stand ground against hamstrung team. If you have to get him, play hardball for a lower price and if Tampa says no simply walk and go to option C. It's not like Miller is a player you can't afford to pass up on.

F) Good draft year. If we miss and retain it, that's fine but implies trade didn't work and didn't assess team well enough (D). Would also leave us exposed the next year..can assume improvement by then but been around game long enough to know growth is not always a straight line (see A, Ottawa prob felt 2nd year was safe after getting Ktachuk..hell I'm sure they didn't expect 1 pick to be lottery, let alone both).


This is how I feel. I will accept if you disagree or contend with any of my points but I'm not changing my mind on it. In fact, if I was offered a chance to rescind it I would. Because ultimately I want the same as you which is the best for this team and if we disagree on what is best, cool...I have no problems with you buddy. As long as you allow me my opinion and don't categorize it as complaining for the sake of complaining.

Lastly, since I can't take back the trade I will be on board with it because I have no choice. I won't dispute that Miller will help the team. Just not comfortable with by how much and at such a cost but will hope for the best.

Take care ;) ...
I think whats lost here is that Miller isnt just you run of the mill 2nd/3rd scrub. He is a dynamic offensive asset that was stuck behind some future hall of famers and other terrific players in tampa.

We NEEDED a top 2 line winger with speed, size and skil...thats exactly what we added.

A later 1st is more than acceptable sticker price for that.
Witchcraft... Oh, but it IS. A dark and terrible magic...

User avatar
The Brown Wizard
CC Legend
Posts: 8899
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:19 pm
Location: in the shed with a fresh packed bowl

Re: Offseason grades so far

Post by The Brown Wizard » Thu Jul 18, 2019 7:29 am

RoyalDude wrote:
Thu Jul 18, 2019 6:48 am
But the best part, we don’t have to see Smiley Hutton anymore, Mike Gillis draft pick.
:lol:

Too bad about Horvat for you. Youll have to wait on that one for a while
Witchcraft... Oh, but it IS. A dark and terrible magic...

User avatar
UWSaint
CC 2nd Team All-Star
Posts: 434
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 5:37 pm

Re: Offseason grades so far

Post by UWSaint » Thu Jul 18, 2019 8:43 am

asidas wrote:
Wed Jul 17, 2019 9:54 pm
I think the trade for miller was great. We add a player of 1st round value today, rather then wait 3-4 years for that gamble of a 1st rounder to make any contribution to the team. Virtanen and juolevi were top 5 picks who i would take miller over any day. The pick 2 years from now will not be a top 5 pick.

Miller is the type of player who compliments our core. He is someone we would hope a rookie could become, but he is already there. He is fiesty, versatile, heavy and a playmaker. Great cap hit and in his prime years now. With Canucks selecting podkolzin and Hoglander. Realistically, all our drafting needs are covered. We are good on center for a long time. We landed wingers. We have dmen coming and some vets signed long term. Juolevi will break out this year and college signings will be there for injury help.

The miller trade also let it be known to UFAs that we are looking to max out our ELC contracts and go for it. You dont wait for EP and QH to sign their top dollar contracts to then start being competitive. With miller there, Myers and Benn came on board and figure we will be a contender. With Ferlund now, I think we are a playoff team. I dont think the canucks are finished yet, We have a beautiful city to help attract players. All we lacked was a competitive team. Now with a competitive team, we can load up on ufas and trade out our garbage (which the process has begun) gone are the days the fringe players were all we could attract. Frankly, ufas saw our team as a stop gap and choices were slim. Benning had last dibs and is roasted today daily for his past signings.

If you were EP and QH and had a taste of playoffs. You will realize you cannot be a playoff team for long unless you take a team friendly cap hit. If the team is still in rebuild mode and middle of the pack. I would then care about dollars more then a chance at a championship. Cause and effect. Its all relative. It is was gillis used to leverage players that fucked benning when he took over.

I truly believe we are playoff bound this coming year. So much so i bought season tickets after ferlund signed. Boeser will sign and ericksoon and baertchi will be moved.
Keep posting.
Hono_rary Canadian

User avatar
Reefer2
MVP
MVP
Posts: 5027
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 8:47 am

Re: Offseason grades so far

Post by Reefer2 » Thu Jul 18, 2019 9:25 am

rikster wrote:
Wed Jul 17, 2019 7:35 pm

Do you even know what they gave away in those trades?

But walk us thru those 7 or 8 picks that they just gave away....

Take care...
Sorry rikster - this is always the stupidest argument to try and determine who the Canucks may have picked but here goes:

2015 Canucks trade a 2015 2nd round pick #53, they could of drafted Vince Dunn, Anthony Cirelli, Denis Malgin, Domink Simon, MArkus Nutuvaara, all of these guys played over 100 games in the NHL since then and they may have been used to fill holes on the current team.

2016 Canucks traded 2016 2nd #33 and 2016 4th #94, 5th round #124 2016 2nd from ANA #55, they could of drafted, Alex Debrincat, Samuel Girad, Victor Mete, Jesper Bratt, all of these guys plaed over 100 NHL games

2017 Canucks traded 7th round, #157, SJS #112 they could of drafted Drake Batherson and Sebastian Aho, Drake played only 20 games but Aho well nothing needs to be said about him.

All of these numbers are from Hockey DB and they only go to the 2017/18 season it seems. If you take into account last season full numbers this list would look worse.

So if the Canucks kept all those picks they could/may/pray of/have had some good players, hell in Aho they would have a legit 1st or 2nd d pairing guy on the cheap.

EDIT - rikster, I am not saying you are stupid just that type of argument of asking the what ifs that CANNOT be answered properly.
Last edited by Reefer2 on Thu Jul 18, 2019 10:04 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
The Brown Wizard
CC Legend
Posts: 8899
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:19 pm
Location: in the shed with a fresh packed bowl

Re: Offseason grades so far

Post by The Brown Wizard » Thu Jul 18, 2019 9:38 am

asidas wrote:
Wed Jul 17, 2019 9:54 pm

my buddy is dating tyson barrie's sister. The deal was in place days before the draft. Barrie met with green and even had an 8 year x 8.25 m extension in place. On canada day, they were all in victoria when he got word of his trade to toronto. He told everyone what happened and went for a prolonged walk (wasnt happy at all). They kept saying sakic was asking too much (from canucks), and good on benning to draft the russian. Word is if canucks still have the cap space, he will come here. But obviously go to where he gets paid the most. He was the glue of the avs. Mackinnons best friend. Apparently no team functions happened unless barrie was there. The avs players hate how sakic treated barrie.
Good post man. Welcome and please stay.

Regarding ^this^ part of it....glad we didn't have to throw down assets to acquire what looks like will be ours for zippo in a year anyway if we want.
Witchcraft... Oh, but it IS. A dark and terrible magic...

User avatar
SKYO
CC Legend
Posts: 11012
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:34 pm

Re: Offseason grades so far

Post by SKYO » Thu Jul 18, 2019 10:52 am

Plus with Miller he can help with faceoffs as well when needed.

-

& If you want a key faceoff win you want Beagle taking it.

Definitely don't want Petey or Gaudette taking any key faceoffs, they need to be working with Manny Malhotra all season.

2018/19 faceoff stats:

Beagle FO% 56.2%, taken 758, per game 13.3
Horvat FO% 53.7%, taken 2018, per game 24.6
J.T. Miller FO% 49.4%, taken 524, per game 7.0
Sutter FO% 48.5%, taken 462, per game 17.8

Pettersson FO% 41%, taken 627, per game 8.8
Gaudette FO% 40.4%, taken 371, per game 6.6
A long time ago, a baseball player remarked: "If I owned a ballclub, I'd hire a $5,000 coach and a $15,000 scout."

User avatar
micky107
MVP
MVP
Posts: 9852
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 6:27 am

Re: Offseason grades so far

Post by micky107 » Thu Jul 18, 2019 11:03 am

.
Playoffs are on the horizon>>>>>THIS YEAR. With the additions and soon to be subtraction, :mrgreen: , all is on track for
a re-entry to post season play for the Vancouver Canucks.

We don't have to win the conference or even the division. Just get in.
.
... Right?
"evolution"

Nuckertuzzi
CC 2nd Team All-Star
Posts: 309
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 1:52 pm

Re: Offseason grades so far

Post by Nuckertuzzi » Thu Jul 18, 2019 12:25 pm

Uncle dans leg wrote:
Thu Jul 18, 2019 7:25 am
I think whats lost here is that Miller isnt just you run of the mill 2nd/3rd scrub. He is a dynamic offensive asset that was stuck behind some future hall of famers and other terrific players in tampa.

With all due respect it's not lost on me, he is a good player. Just questioning if good enough at such a cost and risk.

Anyway, I appreciate all the responses. Many excellent points today without getting into mudslinging, the way I like it here, kudos!

User avatar
Meds
CC Legend
Posts: 6770
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: Offseason grades so far

Post by Meds » Thu Jul 18, 2019 12:55 pm

Nuckertuzzi wrote:
Thu Jul 18, 2019 12:25 pm
Uncle dans leg wrote:
Thu Jul 18, 2019 7:25 am
I think whats lost here is that Miller isnt just you run of the mill 2nd/3rd scrub. He is a dynamic offensive asset that was stuck behind some future hall of famers and other terrific players in tampa.

With all due respect it's not lost on me, he is a good player. Just questioning if good enough at such a cost and risk.

Anyway, I appreciate all the responses. Many excellent points today without getting into mudslinging, the way I like it here, kudos!
Jake Virtanen was selected 6th overall and has yet to score at even a 30 point pace.

JT Miller has cracked the 50 point pace in each of his past 4 seasons.

He is only 3 years older than the guy we drafted.

So had we kept the pick, we might have ended up with a 30 point player who wouldn't even see NHL action for 2 or 3 years. In fact most draft analytics would support that outside of the top 10 the majority of players have a better chance of capping out at 40 points per year or less.

I fail to see how the cost and risk were so high? Can you explain that part of your thought process?

User avatar
rikster
MVP
MVP
Posts: 436
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 6:41 am

Re: Offseason grades so far

Post by rikster » Thu Jul 18, 2019 1:26 pm

DonCherry4PM wrote:
Wed Jul 17, 2019 7:58 pm
rikster wrote:
Wed Jul 17, 2019 7:16 pm
To apply a blanket statement to the Canucks situation and defend it by saying trading picks is a bad idea is complaining for the sake of complaining...

Sorry, its the way I see it ... if you want to go into detail as to why trading away a draft pick today which will be at worst 2 drafts away is a bad idea for the Vancouver Canucks I'm open to a change of opinion...
Hey, Rikster,

Good to see you back posting on a regular basis.

Rather than a complete blanket statement would you prefer to call it a rule of thumb, particularly for a GM who, I think most would agree, has shown his greatest skill to be at the drafting table?

I agree that trading and signing UFA's or players out of college are all possible ways to improve the team in addition to drafting.

But to date, on your assessment of JB's actions, would you say that JB has improved the team most by:

1) trading picks for players,
2) signing players in free agency,
3) signing players out of college, or
4) drafting players?

I am not going to take the time to list every move JB has made and compare them but I think it is pretty clear from any somewhat reasonable assessment that JB has made the greatest improvements to the team (to date) by drafting. And it isn't even close.

My opinion is that JB's drafting skills have shown a trend line of improvement (with a bit of a blip in 2016 but the story isn't yet written :lol:) and I don't see any reason why this won't continue or flatline. Based on that, I would submit that a late 1st round pick can be converted by JB into a player of Brock's talent or even better. And it wouldn't seem a stretch that an earlier first round pick could be converted by JB into a player of Pettersson's or Hughes' talent. Of course, there is always risk and nothing is a sure thing. There would have to be a player of that potential available to JB wherever he picks and development would have to go properly. But even with Miller, there is a chance this past season wasn't an anomaly, there is a chance he could get hurt, there is a chance he could not find chemistry on the team, etc.

I can understand how you would disagree, but, notwithstanding the above-noted risk, I would rather have another gamebreaker like Boeser (or Petterson or Hughes) in two to four years and another 3rd round pick than I would have Miller now. That isn't to say I don't like Miller. I do. But I am of the opinion that the opportunity cost (given JB's "genius" as drafting) is too great. That said, I can fully understand how the "now" nature of Miller would play into your assessment of the trade.

Now if JB is gone by the time we get to make the pick and (heaven forbid) we have a GM with Gillis skills at the drafting table, this trade will go down as being (at that point) an uncontested win. But I think we are all hoping that won't happen.

Cheers.
Hi DonCherry4PM

The short answer to your question is all 4....

I don't judge decisions and moves made against perfection, I am more like the politician who once said "If you agree with me on 9 out of 12 issues then vote for me, if you agree with me on 12 out of 12 issues then see a psychiatrist....

I also view things in an "as compared to" world where I judge how our GM is building the organization as compared to what other GM's are doing...

And I go back to the state of the organization when Gillis was fired and think about the prediction an analyst made when he thought it could take the team as long as 7 years to become a serious contender again...That's how broke it was...

Benning has a clear philosophy in building a team which is to insulate and mentor the kids of the future with quality veterans....Agree or disagree but that is the philosophy which was sold to ownership and I agree with it...For the first two years the media and some fans were consumed with rebuild or retool and ignored Bennings philosophy even though he reminded them of it every time it came up...

So he inherited a system void of a future...In particular he inherited a team with just 1 core player in Horvat in its entire system...

He also inherited a veteran team with lots of movement clauses, some he wanted to retain to help the kids and others had little value or devalued themselves by exercising their movement clauses...

He has used each of the 4 methods of acquiring players you listed and each has given differing degrees of help....

I don't fret about the moves which didn't work out or didn't work out as well as hoped because I don't expect my GM to pitch a perfect game...

You can get into the hall of fame by hitting a baseball successfully 3 1/2 times out of 10, and they all don't have to be for homeruns...

If a move produced a just a single or the odd time a move didn't work out and would be considered a strikeout, I'm ok as long as the team is trending in the right direction...

I think the team is headed in the right direction and rather than complain about the singles or the strikeouts, I applaud the work management has done so far...If Benning and company felt that moving the pick for Miller was the right move at the right time then I am on side with it and even as amateur GM's it's very easy to write the case for why the move was a smart move to make...

As a season ticket holder who lives on the Island, when I go to games I expect to be entertained and for a while I stopped attending the games because they had very little entertainment value...

Last year was fun, in particular the Avs game and the Leaves games...it's been awhile since the entertainment value has been so high and I expect an even better year this year...

Take care...

User avatar
rikster
MVP
MVP
Posts: 436
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 6:41 am

Re: Offseason grades so far

Post by rikster » Thu Jul 18, 2019 1:38 pm

Reefer2 wrote:
Thu Jul 18, 2019 9:25 am
rikster wrote:
Wed Jul 17, 2019 7:35 pm

Do you even know what they gave away in those trades?

But walk us thru those 7 or 8 picks that they just gave away....

Take care...
Sorry rikster - this is always the stupidest argument to try and determine who the Canucks may have picked but here goes:

2015 Canucks trade a 2015 2nd round pick #53, they could of drafted Vince Dunn, Anthony Cirelli, Denis Malgin, Domink Simon, MArkus Nutuvaara, all of these guys played over 100 games in the NHL since then and they may have been used to fill holes on the current team.

2016 Canucks traded 2016 2nd #33 and 2016 4th #94, 5th round #124 2016 2nd from ANA #55, they could of drafted, Alex Debrincat, Samuel Girad, Victor Mete, Jesper Bratt, all of these guys plaed over 100 NHL games

2017 Canucks traded 7th round, #157, SJS #112 they could of drafted Drake Batherson and Sebastian Aho, Drake played only 20 games but Aho well nothing needs to be said about him.

All of these numbers are from Hockey DB and they only go to the 2017/18 season it seems. If you take into account last season full numbers this list would look worse.

So if the Canucks kept all those picks they could/may/pray of/have had some good players, hell in Aho they would have a legit 1st or 2nd d pairing guy on the cheap.

EDIT - rikster, I am not saying you are stupid just that type of argument of asking the what ifs that CANNOT be answered properly.
Good work but the point I was making was that sometimes I think Blob just makes things up and doesn't take the time to analyse moves or investigate the way you just did...

I'm not a fan of the drive bye post where someone will say "trading away a first round pick is always the wrong thing to do"...

I would rather the poster make that claim and then lay out why they think that is the case....Otherwise what's the point of debating?

Take care..

User avatar
micky107
MVP
MVP
Posts: 9852
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 6:27 am

Re: Offseason grades so far

Post by micky107 » Thu Jul 18, 2019 1:59 pm

I most certainly do not agree with everything Mr. Blob has to say, however, debating with him is enjoyable as it is with many of my fellow
posters. I have even noticed excellent points and pertinent, useful information relayed in simply a sentence or two. :shock:
Personally, I believe there is "room" for all methods of debate, "all" of which is enjoyable.

My drive by for the day.. :P
"evolution"

User avatar
Puck
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1059
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 2:40 pm
Location: Victoria, BC

Re: Offseason grades so far

Post by Puck » Thu Jul 18, 2019 2:06 pm

Reefer2 wrote:
Thu Jul 18, 2019 9:25 am

Sorry rikster - this is always the stupidest argument to try and determine who the Canucks may have picked but here goes:

2015 Canucks trade a 2015 2nd round pick #53, they could of drafted Vince Dunn, Anthony Cirelli, Denis Malgin, Domink Simon, MArkus Nutuvaara, all of these guys played over 100 games in the NHL since then and they may have been used to fill holes on the current team.

2016 Canucks traded 2016 2nd #33 and 2016 4th #94, 5th round #124 2016 2nd from ANA #55, they could of drafted, Alex Debrincat, Samuel Girad, Victor Mete, Jesper Bratt, all of these guys plaed over 100 NHL games

2017 Canucks traded 7th round, #157, SJS #112 they could of drafted Drake Batherson and Sebastian Aho, Drake played only 20 games but Aho well nothing needs to be said about him.

All of these numbers are from Hockey DB and they only go to the 2017/18 season it seems. If you take into account last season full numbers this list would look worse.

So if the Canucks kept all those picks they could/may/pray of/have had some good players, hell in Aho they would have a legit 1st or 2nd d pairing guy on the cheap.

EDIT - rikster, I am not saying you are stupid just that type of argument of asking the what ifs that CANNOT be answered properly.
CC trade announcement:
Doc sends Reef 4 "have"s in exchange for future considerations

Post Reply