CanucksCorner.com Forums

rikster wrote:Hey DieHard...

Not an up-to-date recap of Bennings work while in Vancouver but it does a give a fairly accurate breakdown of his transactions....

http://www.nucksmisconduct.com/2016/2/2 ... raft-picks

Interesting the negative comments from fans over the Shinkaruk for Grandlund deal...

Regarding Chaput, an article from todays Province...

http://theprovince.com/sports/hockey/nh ... -he-should

Should the team be further ahead in the rebuild than it is?

You think it should which is fair...

But what are you basing that on? For me as compared to the likes of the Avs and the Flames and the Islanders and the Canes and the Jets are they taking longer to rebuild?

The Oilers and the leaves each took 10 years and the luck of the lottery to draft McDavid and Matthews, are the Nucks rebuilding slower than they are?

Maybe I'm being overly optimistic but given what Benning has done with a 5th and a 6th and a 23rd over the past 3 seasons and the picks that weren't dealt and the acquisitions he did make I'm feeling pretty confident that the team won't be languishing in lottery pick territory for nearly as long as the teams listed above have...

Benning has made some very astute trades prior to this year with the Baertshi and the Grandlund deals being home runs...

I was interested in how he would do at this years deadline because this is the first opportunity he's had to deal from a position of strength since he got here and the jury sez he did a very good job...

We are very fortunate that he is a master talent evaluator, which will ensure that the rebuilding period takes less time than most do....

Take care....

Sorry for the delay in responding - kids will take up all your time! I see where you are going regarding rebuilds and I like to think the leaves and Oilers are exactly what we are trying to avoid - band aid solutions that never seem to really work. The leaves kept trying to build around a mediocre at best core, while the Oilers kept drafting the same type of player with the high pick and wondering what the problem was. I wouldn't emulate either system.

Chicago, Pittsburgh, Washington, LA - these are the teams to emulate. They were torn apart almost right to the studs and rebuilt. All used high picks - Crosby and Malkin, Toews and Kane, Ovi and Backstrom, Doughty and Kopitar - and built around those guys. It took time but produced a consistent winning team. Hopefully Benning tries this method because a couple more high picks are coming.

I do agree he's has some good trades in Granlund and Sven, but he's had more howlers in Sutter, Gudbranson (maybe not fair yet but he was awful when he played), Kesler. I liked his trades of Hansen and Burr even if it was hard to see them go.

I think we have a similar point though - more draft picks! He's a good talent evaluator so the more picks the better. Hopefully he keeps accumulating assets because it's the most likely way to build a strong team in the least amount of time.

Diehard1 wrote: Chicago, Pittsburgh, Washington, LA - these are the teams to emulate. They were torn apart almost right to the studs and rebuilt. All used high picks - Crosby and Malkin, Toews and Kane, Ovi and Backstrom, Doughty and Kopitar - and built around those guys. It took time but produced a consistent winning team. Hopefully Benning tries this method because a couple more high picks are coming.

Interesting that nobody's talking about the "Detroit Model" anymore, now that Father Time has exposed their mediocre drafting and reliance on three fluke picks (Lidstrom, Zetterberg and Datsyuk) to sustain them for 2 decades of success!

Also needs to be pointed out though, that each of the teams (except the Kings) you cite won the lottery in big years.

HAWKS - jumped from 5th to 1st to draft Kane, stole Toews at 3rd after Erik Johnson and J Staal
PENGUINS - had a 1 in 18 chance to get the 1st overall in the Crosby Sweepstakes, got Malkin after losing the 2003 draft lottery
CAPS - Jumped 2 spots to get Ovechkin, nabbed Backstrom at 4th
KINGS - drafted Doughty 2nd overall without winning the lottery, and Kopitar 11th overall

They all also had extended playoff droughts as they bottomed out:

HAWKS - 3 playoff wins over 8 seasons (plus lockout year)
PENGUINS - 4 seasons (plus lockout) in the basement - not too far off their 6 seasons in the basement that resulted in Lemieux and Jagr
CAPS - over 8 seasons, made the playoffs 3 times, won 5 playoff games, and had a 4-year playoff drought
KINGS - 6 season playoff drought, 11 years of not making it past the 1st round

So if we're following any of those models:

A. We haven't won the lottery yet - how much better does the rebuild look today if we had Laine or Matthews? How much better will it look if we draft Patrick?

B. In the 4 years since the Canucks' streak of winning the NW Division, they've had a 100+ point season. They're 5 years removed from a President's trophy. By my estimation, that puts us halfway through the rebuilds you've cited. The exception is Pittsburgh, but we ain't getting a Malkin and Crosby any time soon.

C. We haven't gone as deep into the toilet as any of the teams were, nor for as long a period of time as those teams.

So if we're following any of those models

That's how I like to look at things...

Too often we judge moves on an "as compared to perfection" basis which isn't based on reality, the realistic approach is to judge on an "as compared to other rebuilding/retooling" teams basis...

Don't get some fans who demand a home run on every transaction management makes, whether it be a player transaction or a contract transaction....

While I don't expect many wins over the foreseeable future, I will expect that the team play an up tempo style of game and trust that they will keep that in mind when they make their next coaching decision....

Take care...

ESQ wrote: So if we're following any of those models:

A. We haven't won the lottery yet - how much better does the rebuild look today if we had Laine or Matthews? How much better will it look if we draft Patrick?

B. In the 4 years since the Canucks' streak of winning the NW Division, they've had a 100+ point season. They're 5 years removed from a President's trophy. By my estimation, that puts us halfway through the rebuilds you've cited. The exception is Pittsburgh, but we ain't getting a Malkin and Crosby any time soon.

C. We haven't gone as deep into the toilet as any of the teams were, nor for as long a period of time as those teams.

A. One elite first line player better. Laine and Horvat or Matthews and Eriksson immediately replace the Sedins as 2/3rds of the first line. And that first line replacement seems to be our biggest hurdle at the moment (with a decent stable of young D, Demko working his way up, and more lower end depth at the forward position). Heck, if we had one of those two, Benning's "Retool" might actually be a retool. Sadly, with Canuck luck it ain't so (so far).

B. Agreed. But this is extended because of the failure to "retool" or "rebuild" after the Stanley Cup failure (not Benning, but the previous regime). My worry, is that without getting those high picks and hoping for Detroit's previous luck at drafting, the team will be stuck in the mire of mediocrity for a lot longer than 10 years. Now maybe Benning, who admittedly has a good eye for young prospects, will be able to get lucky and obtain legit first line replacements without having top picks, but I think I'd rather have both his drafting skill and a high pick to ensure that. If Gaudette's year is any indication, I may very well be wrong.

C. As noted above, not having the high picks that result from such a time in the toilet may hamper a rebuild, but here's to hoping that Benning's prowess will overcome that hurdle. But I am not yet fully convinced. If Gaudette and Boeser miraculously come in next year and play like contenders for the Calder, I will officially accede to those pundits labeling JB a genius.

Ehlers and Tkachuk would be 2/3 of a future first line. Listened to a scribe for the London Knights and he said people who cover the team were stunned when Elmer chose Juolevi over Little Walt.

All the Canucks need is to do is tank to save the franchise from eternal doom.

MillerTime is ruining that though aha.

Patrick won't be as good as matthews, but he sure as shit would have superb potential to be a poor mans #1C, he or Hischier...Vilardi would be a good #2C ala J. Carter.

I think the Canucks are due for a lotto win, 47 cracks at the lotto(not technically, but you know what I mean), one of em has bound to click, even BC'ers win the lotto 6/49 once in awhile lol.

Possible lineup in 2018/19 when the Sedins retire and Gaudette + Dahlen should sign.

Dahlen Patrick Granlund
Baertschi Horvat Virtanen
Goldobin Gaudette Boeser
MacEwen Sutter Lockwood

Ehlers and Tkachuk would be 2/3 of a future first line. Listened to a scribe for the London Knights and he said people who cover the team were stunned when Elmer chose Juolevi over Little Walt.

Heard the same interview, only a tad different than you did....

They thought the Nucks would take Tkachuk, probably thought Columbus would take Pulujarvi too...But hey, they know prospects better than Benning so can understand why you'd take their opinion over his...

I mean they do cover the team so they would know best, eh?

Thinks both will become excellent NHL players, looking over the Nucks system I can understand why they chose a defenseman and with that draft being so deep there was an abundance of riches to choose from...

Take care...

It will be interesting to see which of Juolevi or Tkachuk turns out to be the better player. At the moment Tkachuk is winning the race but I don't think we will be able to make a sure judgement call until a couple years down the road.

Jake ain't looking so hot right now, but hopefully this year will be a good wake up call for him and he will prove to be the player Benning (and we all) hope he is.

Blob Mckenzie wrote:Ehlers and Tkachuk would be 2/3 of a future first line. Listened to a scribe for the London Knights and he said people who cover the team were stunned when Elmer chose Juolevi over Little Walt.

We are all incredulous to your Book Writings

I really don't understand the mentality of giving up on your prospects at draft + 1 or draft + 2 year.

If you hop over to hfboard, Virtanen is in the garbage bin, Boeser is questionable because he is regressing and bothered by injuries?? and Juolevi is deemed a bust already LMAO

And some are still fantasizing Shinkaruk's "hidden" potential, implying that Granlund is lucky to be the on the pace of 20+ goals. Welp, even if Shink was given the same amount of ice time and opportunities (provided he can earn it), he wouldn't be able to score 20 goals a year in the NHL.

With this fickle mentality fans will never be satisfied unless you pick a generational talent, even if you manage to pick such talent, these people will still bitch about those who from the same draft year end-up performing better.

rikster wrote:

Ehlers and Tkachuk would be 2/3 of a future first line. Listened to a scribe for the London Knights and he said people who cover the team were stunned when Elmer chose Juolevi over Little Walt.

Heard the same interview, only a tad different than you did....

They thought the Nucks would take Tkachuk, probably thought Columbus would take Pulujarvi too...But hey, they know prospects better than Benning so can understand why you'd take their opinion over his...

I mean they do cover the team so they would know best, eh?

Thinks both will become excellent NHL players, looking over the Nucks system I can understand why they chose a defenseman and with that draft being so deep there was an abundance of riches to choose from...

Take care...

Looking over the system , there's a dearth of talent at EVERY skating position. Tkachuk was rated much higher than Juolevi by pretty much everyone going into the draft. It was a reach and so was Virtanen.

CrzyCanuck wrote:I really don't understand the mentality of giving up on your prospects at draft + 1 or draft + 2 year.

If you hop over to hfboard, Virtanen is in the garbage bin, Boeser is questionable because he is regressing and bothered by injuries?? and Juolevi is deemed a bust already LMAO

And some are still fantasizing Shinkaruk's "hidden" potential, implying that Granlund is lucky to be the on the pace of 20+ goals. Welp, even if Shink was given the same amount of ice time and opportunities (provided he can earn it), he wouldn't be able to score 20 goals a year in the NHL.

With this fickle mentality fans will never be satisfied unless you pick a generational talent, even if you manage to pick such talent, these people will still bitch about those who from the same draft year end-up performing better.

Nobody's giving up on anyone , though Virtanen will do well to turn into a Jack Skille type player at this point. You guys have written of Hunter who was drafted only a year sooner and missed 3/4 of a year due to injury, yet Virtanen needs way more time and is apparently learning to "play the right way". I mean he is scoring at a 20 point pace in the AHL right ?

Juolevi might be a solid 2/3 d man but he is puttering along at a 40 point pace again and is a string bean. I honestly didn't see a number one d man at the WJC of in any of the four games I've seen London play. He looks like Chris Tanev if everything turns out right. Good player but not someone I'd reach for at number five with Tkachuk on the board.

RoyalDude wrote:

Blob Mckenzie wrote:Ehlers and Tkachuk would be 2/3 of a future first line. Listened to a scribe for the London Knights and he said people who cover the team were stunned when Elmer chose Juolevi over Little Walt.

We are all incredulous to your Book Writings

Brilliant contribution Arachnid.

They have two of the games brightest young stars in the game, one is 10th in scoring in the NHL the other is 11th, yet they are not helping their team from currently being the worst team in the NHL. Seguin, Benn and the Stars. Why do they suck? Horrid defence and goaltending. Fuck Juolevi, ya don't need defence. Ya just need Tkachuk! Problem solved!

RoyalDude wrote:They have two of the games brightest young stars in the game, one is 10th in scoring in the NHL the other is 11th, yet they are not helping their team from currently being the worst team in the NHL. Seguin, Benn and the Stars. Why do they suck? Horrid defence and goaltending. Fuck Juolevi, ya don't need defence. Ya just need Tkachuk! Problem solved!

You said it Spidey!