Canucks Young Guns

[Mickey107]

Gudbranson trade, Sutter trade, Eriksson are not rebuild moves.

I had a pm with another poster at the time. We were both laughing at the guzzlers attempts to pawn those moves off as part of a rebuild. For awhile we dismissed it as trolling. Now it’s pretty clear these posters arent quite that crafty,

That’s what you get from hockey helmet wearing fans who lack the basic skill of communication. A wild imagination and a failure to grasp reality.

Here to help.

Oh; I get it; This: “SUTTER ISNT TOO FAR BEHIND WHAT HORVAT BRINGS TO THE TABLE” is simply sarcasm.

[Chef Boi RD]

I was group PM’ing with other CC’ers at the the time and we were all flabbergasted with Blob and IN’s inability to understand the difficult circumstances Benning was under due to the colossal mess the previous regime left him with and the demands put on him by the owners and this fickle fan base, and lunacy of the local media

[Blob Mckenzie]

Gillis had a gun to Elmers head and forced those three horrific moves. Now I have heard it all.



You can’t even make this shit up

[Chef Boi RD]

Gillis had a gun to Elmers head and forced those three horrific moves. Now I have heard it all.



You can’t even make this shit up

Eriksson - placeholder UFA signing. Whatever. You want Andrew Ladd instead?

Sutter? Sutter and Lockwood are still Canuck property. Bonino was never going to resign here. Win Benning. Sutters contract becomes modified and only 2 years left on it after this July

Gudbranson? You miss McCann and Asplund or something. Would you rather Griffin Reinhart for Barzal and Beauvillier?

[Blob Mckenzie]

Eriksson shouldn’t have been signed- 6 million

Keep McCann, draft Debrincat and sign Polack, savings of 2 million.

Do not make Bonino trade and flog him for picks/prospects. Had two years to do it.


Probably saving 8-10 million on the cap and the team would be better.

You’re welcome

[Ronning's Ghost]

Hey RG, ‘higher’ or ‘lower’ regarding this 3rd round pick - Lockwood?

Sorry, never seen him play. Ask me again after his first playoff series.

Not an ideal situation but give Benning credit for doing his best to appease many parties

I never said he wasn't doing his best. I'm sure he's very hard working.

...the difficult circumstances Benning was under due to the colossal mess the previous regime left him with and the demands put on him by the owners and this fickle fan base, and lunacy of the local media

Barely speedbumps to a true genius.

Gudbranson? You miss McCann and Asplund or something?

One would expect a first-round pick from a drafting genius to be more valuable than what Gudbranson has shown so far.

You could go with the theory that the defence just needs better coaching, but who hires the coaching staff ?

[Ronning's Ghost]

Hey RG, ‘higher’ or ‘lower’ regarding this 3rd round pick - Lockwood?

It's also important to remember that while the Strangelove test (TM) of drafting is an interesting measure of progress, the only outcome that actually matters is whether the drafting process results in a sufficient amount of talent to win the Stanley Cup. Please remind me of in what season the Dynasty will start.

[Hockey Widow]

It's certainly the best crop of prospects the Canucks have had since I've been following the team, circa 1990.

When I look over the list I see potential on D but still a few impact years away. Hughes, Juolevi, Woo, Rathbone. Two lefties, two righties.

I see a load of potential in the bottom 6, maybe bottom 9.

I don't see a lot with top six potential, maybe Dahlen.

And that's all it is is potential. Until we see them in the show, if we see them in the show, it's hopes and dreams. Almost all on the list are still 2-3 years away from having a meaningful impact. Hopefully there is a diamond or two that can crack its lineup sooner rather than later and develop right along our current new core.

Which brings us to the placeholders. Slowly over these next two years they will hopefully be moved out to make room. They still have value to the still developing team. Benning has shown an ability to move players out so I'm not too worried about it. And while it would be nice to think that these types of players could bring us a decent return, for the overwhelming most part, they won't.

But it is hard to argue that Benning has created a decent looking prospect pool. Yes, we must temper that with reality, they haven't played a game in the NHL yet. That however does not diminish the fact that we are talking prospects, potential. Really, is there anyone there who is truly not excited by the potential?

[Chef Boi RD]

Nice post HW. Very pragmatic and unbiased. We can only wish that the BenningHatecrew will eventually follow suit, putting an end to their afflicted views on what otherwise is a fantastic job Jim Benning has done under what most sound minds see as a very difficult environment to manage from

Bravo Jim Benning

[Topper]

Gudbranson trade, Sutter trade, Eriksson are not rebuild moves.

because you say so.

[Meds]

Eriksson shouldn’t have been signed- 6 million

Keep McCann, draft Debrincat and sign Polack, savings of 2 million.

Do not make Bonino trade and flog him for picks/prospects. Had two years to do it.


Probably saving 8-10 million on the cap and the team would be better.

You’re welcome

Can't really bust throw Elmer for the Eriksson signing. Frankly Loui was worth that FA price tag at the time. You always overpay by at least 10% in free agency and Eriksson's production up to that point saw us landing a 200 foot winger who could contribute upwards of 20 goals and 60 points, and honestly at the time of the signing a cap hit of $6M for that was a steal.....the term was more of an issue and if he would have accepted $7M and 4 years that would have been more palatable. I don't think anyone can truly blame Benning for that move because Loui fit a need in Vancouver, if you want to tar and feather someone in this situation it's Eriksson himself who has just not lived up to his billing.

[Blob Mckenzie]

Gudbranson trade, Sutter trade, Eriksson are not rebuild moves.

because you say so.

Myself and I’m sure a lot of other folks.

[Blob Mckenzie]

It's certainly the best crop of prospects the Canucks have had since I've been following the team, circa 1990.

When I look over the list I see potential on D but still a few impact years away. Hughes, Juolevi, Woo, Rathbone. Two lefties, two righties.

I see a load of potential in the bottom 6, maybe bottom 9.

I don't see a lot with top six potential, maybe Dahlen.

And that's all it is is potential. Until we see them in the show, if we see them in the show, it's hopes and dreams. Almost all on the list are still 2-3 years away from having a meaningful impact. Hopefully there is a diamond or two that can crack its lineup sooner rather than later and develop right along our current new core.

Which brings us to the placeholders. Slowly over these next two years they will hopefully be moved out to make room. They still have value to the still developing team. Benning has shown an ability to move players out so I'm not too worried about it. And while it would be nice to think that these types of players could bring us a decent return, for the overwhelming most part, they won't.

But it is hard to argue that Benning has created a decent looking prospect pool. Yes, we must temper that with reality, they haven't played a game in the NHL yet. That however does not diminish the fact that we are talking prospects, potential. Really, is there anyone there who is truly not excited by the potential?

I think most people are on board with the fact it’s a solid prospect pool and has some depth. We generally try to come to this thread and talk about the prospects and their progress etc. Then you have one person who dances around and sprays his dink everywhere about guys who haven’t even turned pro yet being forces, and it being the bestest pool in the world and people should get awards and blah blah blah. Another old mouth breather said the rebuild started long before 2017.... etc. It turns into a a fiasco like most threads. Rinse repeat.

[Meds]

Gudbranson trade, Sutter trade, Eriksson are not rebuild moves.

I had a pm with another poster at the time. We were both laughing at the guzzlers attempts to pawn those moves off as part of a rebuild. For awhile we dismissed it as trolling. Now it’s pretty clear these posters arent quite that crafty,

That’s what you get from hockey helmet wearing fans who lack the basic skill of communication. A wild imagination and a failure to grasp reality.

Here to help.

I think it depends upon the type of rebuild you are wanting.

Gudbranson was coming off of a couple of solid years in Florida, and by solid I mean for a defensive, stay home, blueliner. He also was a big body who had been showing a tendency for punishing opposing forwards down low and in front of the net, and he was tough and was not one to be pushed around. His physical attributes and style looked to fill a gaping hole in the Canucks lineup.....and at the time he was only 24 years old and already eating top-6 minutes. He showed up here and proceeded to play 30 and 52 games in his first couple of seasons, and we didn't like what we saw because we thought we overpaid to get him. Based upon the draft position of McCann, sure it looked like we gave up a 1st and a 2nd for him, but if you want to view it through that lens, then you have to look at what came back through the same glasses, which is to say that we gave up a late 1st, early 2nd, and early 4th, for a 3rd overall and a mid 5th. That's a win if it's just picks going both ways. Go back to the fact that he was only 24 years old and it's not a bad trade at all. His contract extension is $1M too much for the current on ice product.

The Sutter trade wasn't terrible either, it wasn't a great move, but it fit 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. But his contract is also probably $1M too much for what we are getting.

Eriksson was also a move that fit the mold of a stay competitive rebuild and he came at an appropriate price tag for a career 60 point UFA winger with a 200 foot game. He didn't pan out though.

None of these moves fit an all out tank rebuild where the goal is to bottom out to get a top 3 pick for several years running.....the only team that has managed to grab that many top 3 picks in the lottery era is Edmonton, and they are still atrocious over 10 years later with "the best player in the world" as their captain and #1 center.

A rookie GM that started to hit his stride in year 3, which coincided with the beginning a change in the overall philosophy of ownership and the eventual exit of Linden. He's also been the best GM we've had when it comes to drafting.....at least in the last 15-20 years.

[Blob Mckenzie]

Mëds, Gudbranson, Sutter and Eriksson are a bottom pairing D and two third liners. They are being paid gobs of money and big assets were shipped out for Sutter and Guddy. These three should cost about 8 million total st best.

These acquisitions and others( Schaller) speak to the state of the pro scouting. It’s brutal.

Gudbranson was coming off one decent season. He’s been mostly terrible in his time here. The coach has been slashing his ice time even before Edler and Tanev got hurt. Eriksson is a fucking crook. Sutter finally played decent last year but is constantly hurt due to his weak frame. Either way sure a person can justify at the time and say yes the cost was sky high but these were effective players before coming here. Now that we’ve all seen these three slugs, anyone continuing to defend these players and these moves is either a troll or a retard.