Assets today may not be assets tomorrow. No rebuilding.

[Island Nucklehead]

Just as a follow up, Farhan, I completely see where you're comming from man. And I know that if this cap wasn't in the way, or we had more room under it, I would love to see DN make a move for more depth on the back end. But given our present circumstances, I think that the D will have to hold fast...and I believe they can make due with what they have, which is more than I can say for the forwards at this time.

As well, I wouldn't be opposed to seeing the Canucks deal away Morrison and Cooke for a forward and defenceman, just as long as the forward is the key acquisition. Problem is (and I think it's the main reason we haven't seen a deal yet), both these guys make too much, so getting anything substantial for them is practically impossible (unless of course DN has the naked/drunk photos to accompany his offer fax).

[tantalum]

If teams like the Red Wings or Devils adopted this approach (remember the numerous disappointments early in the Red Wing dynasty, or the Devils missing the playoffs right after their first Cup victory), they would have been caught in this endless rebuilding cycle too. They were smart – they retooled and made changes consistently in an effort to get better. The Canucks could learn from this.

When you have a core with a winning history you can simply re-tool after an underachieving year. The canucks don't have that like the Devils, Wings and even the Avs did. The core was not a winning core and had to be changed. It is beyond re-tooling IMO.

That said, a rebuild need not result in an endless cycle of missing the playoffs. There are different ways to rebuild but as I said before: A change in management style, a change in coaching staff, a change in team philosophy on and off the ice (i.e. build from the net out), a large turnover of players, a change in the core that you build around.....that is pretty much the definition of rebuild in my world.

It just so happens the way Nonis has gone about this rebuild is in such a way that the team should remian competitive and be in the mix for the final playoff spot until late into the season. And with an astute move here and there they can be in the playoffs.

But this is a rebuild. No doubt about it.

[Farhan Lalji]

Depth on "D" is a major issue if a player gets hurt. But let me ask you this...if Markus Naslund goes down, how much of a chance do we have? Say Naslund and one of the Sedins is out, I would argue that this would be almost as much of a limiting factor as losing Salo/Mitchell. The only difference being the D play more. So yes, depth on D > depth at F.
.

LOL - I''m getting too addicted to posting! Anyway - this thread has me going.

IMO - If Markus Naslund and/or the Sedin twins went down (but Luongo and all our D still remained healthy), the Canucks could still do a (decent) job to prevent the opposition from scoring. Veenyo would tighten up the system even moreso.

Canucks wouldn't be .500, but I also suspect that we'd win more games than people give credit.

I also suspect that with more ice time, guys like Kesler, Burrows, and Cooke would score a little more than they are now (I'm not saying they'll start scoring TONS....but I do think they'll score a bit more).

IMO - the chances of guys like Morrison, Kesler, Bulis, Pyatt, etc. "stepping up" (in the absence of Naslund, Sedin, Sedin) would be GREATER (and easier) then the chance of Bieksa, Kraijeck, and Fitzpatrick "stepping up" (in the absence of Ohlund, Mitchell, Salo).


I truly believe that a good defense can survive without a good offense, but a good offense will eventually crumple without a good defense.

I understand your position that we can't simply bring in guys because of what MIGHT happen (i.e. our defense getting injured, etc.), but I still have nightmares of what happened last season..........when Ohlund, Salo, AND Jovanovski were all injured.


When these injuries occured BOTH our offense and defense suffered.

We all know how talented our forwards were last year as well.

I guess another thing that concerns me, is how big the gap is between our 3rd and 4th/5th defensemen.

Like I said before, Kraijeck and Bieksa have really elevated their games this season, but they simply CANNOT handle any more responsibility. Now - compare this to a team like Calgary for instance. Phaneuf and Reghyr are great, but their 3rd, 4th, and 5th d-men aren't significantly worse than their top two......and would be far more competent as "top" d.

To make a long story short - I guess what I'm trying to say is that I wouldn't WORRY about the Canucks' depth on d, if there wasn't such a substantial gap in talent between our top 3 and bottom 3.

As for our forwards.......the Canucks are getting their chances. Period. Pyatt, Cooke, Morrison, Kesler, and Burrows are all consistently getting shots and opportunites.

You and I both agree on the fact that today's NHL (and management) is all about risk/reward.

Do you think it's a "good" risk to assume that the Canucks' offensive woes will turn around given how many shots (and chances) they get?

[Farhan Lalji]

I
That said, a rebuild need not result in an endless cycle of missing the playoffs. There are different ways to rebuild but as I said before: A change in management style, a change in coaching staff, a change in team philosophy on and off the ice (i.e. build from the net out), a large turnover of players, a change in the core that you build around.....that is pretty much the definition of rebuild in my world.

It just so happens the way Nonis has gone about this rebuild is in such a way that the team should remian competitive and be in the mix for the final playoff spot until late into the season. And with an astute move here and there they can be in the playoffs.

But this is a rebuild. No doubt about it.

I agree about what you said about our core (i.e. unlike Detroit, etc., we weren't a "winning" core and so rebuilding....not retooling....is the way to go).

However - I think the Canucks have to be very careful as to how long this "rebuilding" process takes place.

Most NHL teams would kill to have a superstar goalie. All successful NHL teams NEED a goalie that produces come playoff time. There is a great chance that the Canucks have this in Roberto Luongo.

We have Luongo for 4 years. That's a potentially HUGE advantage for 4 years.

To me - it would just be very frustrating to wait for guys like Kesler, Burrows, Bourdon, and Koltsov to develop, only to then have Luongo's contract run out or whatever (or some other unforseen circumstance).

I mean a few years ago - the WCE line carried us. Who in a zillion years would've then predicted that the WCE line would COMPLETELY lose its magic?

Rebuilding is important......but what should the time frame be? How does a team avoid CONSTANTLY rebuilding? (where old liabilities become assets, and old assets become liabilities).

[Farhan Lalji]

We are only 2-3 players from having a more respectable team, and this could happen by (or at) the deadline.

.

Hey,

Sorry I never responded to this earlier.

Given how much (or how little) cap room that we have, how would you go about this? Which players at WHAT POSITIONS would you acquire?

I agree that all teams would be affected by key injuries, but I still think the Canucks would be MORE affected than most other teams (due to the team's inner lack of parity).

As it relates to our defense - I'm willing to bet that most other teams don't have as severe a drop off from their 3rd to 4th defensemen (as we do with Mitchell to Kraijeck/Bieksa).

We already know how severe the gap is as it relates to our goaltending.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I still think a good defense can survive without a good offense (although there will be certain shortcomings obviously......as we saw with Minnesota and Calgary last year).

On the other hand - a good offense will eventually falter if there are cracks in the defense or goaltending (as we saw with the Canucks last year.....and years previous).

[Jyrki21]

I don't see how our core was any less "winning" than other cores who had regular season success but failed to go far in the playoffs... or do you mean just because they then started losing, whereas teams like the pre-Cup Wings didn't? (Although the post-Cup Devils did). Because I think without the current cap structure in place, last year's Canucks would have been able to make far more adjustments when injuries hit in order to avoid that.

i.e. I don't see such a huge difference between the 2000-2006 Canucks and other good regular season teams. Ottawa, for instance, didn't turn its team any more upside-down than would have happened anyway under a cap structure.

If the pre-cap Canucks just gradually made changes like those teams did, rather than standing pat until panic time comes every few years, the team would have grown organically – it wouldn't need to be uprooted in regular cycles. It's a more complex science under the cap, but I still don't see anything but lost season ticket holders coming out of a scorched earth policy.

That said, I agree, Tant, that Nonis has essentially embarked on a rebuild here which avoids the scorched-earth approach. I guess what I'm advocating against is a fire-sale mentality that so many fans call for the second you miss the playoffs... I don't mind the reshaping of the roster one bit. Just a shame it's a bit too expensive.

[Farhan Lalji]

Farhan, IMHO that NOW strategy is as risky as any. A few years ago, many people (including media types like Pratt & Gallagher) were clamouring for trading the Sedins for players like Gratton (among others). Thank god BB had the patience that he did.

Haha,

Actually a few years ago, I suggested trading the Sedin twins for Lecavlier. (there were rumors of that at the time).

I do admittedly, have the "win now!" type mentality.....and I know its not right. I have no problem with rebuilding, as long as there is a light at the end of the tunnel.

In the last 7 years or so as a Canuck fan, I've seen this team "rebuild"....only to have 1 playoff victory in the postseason.

On the other hand - trading young assets for (extremely) short term help is also idiotic (as you said).

Here's a thought (not just for the Canucks.....but all teams I guess). Given now that we are in the CAP era, it's much easier to sign players via free agency in the offseason. With that in mind, isn't it good strategy to COMPLETELY go apeshit and trade away as many players as possible at the deadline? (assuming your team will miss the playoffs).


For arguments sake - lets say the Canucks would not be in a position to make the playoffs next season. They become sellers at the deadline. However - given how CRAZY certain "buyers" go at the trade deadline, one could argue that the Canucks would get great value for ALL of their top players.

For arguments sake.....what if the Canucks traded (for prospects, young guys, high round draft picks, etc.)

-Naslund
-Ohlund
-Salo
-Mitchell
-Sedin
-Sedin

(I'd even suggest Luongo here....but I don't wish to get flamed ).

So now - the Canucks have a SHITLOAD of prospects, young players, and high end picks.

In the offseason (with 3/4th's their payroll "freed up"), the Canucks go out and sign a whole bunch of players (at their respective market values)

End result:

-A half decent team from signings via free agency
-A deep deep farm and major future promise.

I don't know. I mean if you're going to rebuild, why not REALLY rebuild?.....to the point where having a tremendous future is almost guaranteed.

[Island Nucklehead]

CHEMISTRY....some teams have it, we do not.

Prospects are just that, potential. How does trading our PROVEN players guarantee that the potential we get back produces?

Free agents are a bidding war for players who performed the previous year, if we want anyone decent we will have to overpay for them. I don't think that helps our situation one bit. See Jan Bulis.


How do you figure that any player you sign will be better/cheaper than Markus Naslund?
How does dumping the Sedin twins at a time when they're entering their prime make us better?
You're advocating trading every resource this team has for a massive question mark, to me that just smacks of insanity. Fantasy drafts work in hockey pools and EA Sports video games, not real well in real life. The Ducks are only great now because the stunk for so long. If our scouting was any better we would have had a cup by now, unfortunately it's not.

There is NO guarantee that the people you bring in in return for the people you dump will be any better. Even worse, other teams will try to fleece you in the deal, and you probably will not get great return on guys like Naslund (contract), Ohlund (underrated), Salo (FA in the offseason), and Mitchell (health/contract). The only blue chip assets you have are the Sedin's and Luongo.

IMO, we need to trade away one of our goalie prospects...we have Luongo, and most people would assume he'll be around for a long time. If you want to flip prospects, start there. Trading guys like Morrison and Cooke for 2-mid round picks I'm fine with too, we seem to be able to draft decently in the later rounds.

Finally, this market will not tolerate an expansion-style management system. You're system will ensure that we suck for 4-5 years. Signing free agents will only make the sting less painful, maybe we get a playoff appearance now and then...shit with luck maybe we win a round, I don't see us being a threat.

In short...NOT AN OPTION. Run with what we have, tinker as we go. Keep in mind, it's the first season without the "old" core, and nobody is secure short of Danrik, Nazzy and Luongo in my opinion. Anybody else is fair game and should be treated accordingly come deadline/contract time...that dosn't mean get rid of them, but if the right deal comes along, or the potential for one is there, do it.

[Jyrki21]

IMO, we need to trade away one of our goalie prospects...we have Luongo, and most people would assume he'll be around for a long time.

The day Luongo signed his contract I predicted that Nonis would buckle in years two or three and trade Corey Schneider. I still stand by that – his value will decrease to the Canucks each day that Luongo is in town (and doesn't appear to be going anywhere), and I think it will start to burn a hole is Nonis' pocket once the fans grumble enough about the need for new blood.

I don't think the Canucks will get any return on Ellis or Vincent either, so I think it's Schneider or nothing.