Apologies mods if this belongs in the "Ownership and Management" thread. I would normally share my thoughts there but I really wanted to add a poll option to gauge posters' preferences.
There is a lot of understandable angst in this market over the state of the team and consequently many conflicting opinions on how to facilitate this rebuild. On the one hand many people want to unload the driftwood and wipe the slate clean ASAP. On the other hand, many of those same people also can't stand the current management group. The upcoming draft should (hopefully) be one of the most defining ones for this franchise.
Are we really going to entrust them to clean up their own mess and if not, how long are we going to let them stick around and with what scope? If we are going to make a management change mid-season, our options are limited... though I hear future GM of the year winner Kevyn Adams is available!
I think about the only thing we can agree on right now is that rebuild is necessary (and a change in ownership if we're dreaming). So with this being said, what is your preferred immediate timeline for the rebuild and potential management change?
Well we have no real pressure to try to unload our vets with term. But if they can manage to do so and grab another 1st along the way and maybe another prospect or two why not. Those with term are going to be selective about where they go to so even a 1st will be later in the round.
The only real chance of another higher 1st is Garland. And I don't mean top 10. I get that we need to keep vets but we can get some back in trades and unload them later or let them walk when their contracts are up, even if that is 2 years from now. We really need to maximize on what we have now.
We can unload Myers after his trade protection changes. Players like Debrusk and Boeser we have to convince to go. Debrusk will be an easier convince. Marcus Pettersson is still a good player for us notwithstanding some opinions on him. I would be happy to have him and Hronek as the vets on D to help this team moving forward. Unless better options come along that won't cost us picks or prospects.
I think this management team can do the job. I don't know how much cohesion there is in the front office. It seems Rutherford guided the Hughes trade. So if they are working together and for the same goals I see no reason to replace them yet. Of course bringing in a new team in the offseason may also make it easier to part with some players especially if their mandate is to clean house. Some better deal maybe available come July 1st.
Next season is a write off, too, so the older players have another chance to up their trade value next season. If they trade any UFA besides Bluegar, they’ll be lucky. No rush getting rid of management as it’s only drafting and developing that matters at this point.
“Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. This is the war room.”
- President Merkin Muffley
You can't limit these guys to UFA trades while conducting an exhaustive search for their replacements without them knowing that they are cooked. Once they know they won't have jobs here after this season they likely don't bring their A games (not that those have been all that good) and possibly do jack shit and possibly more harm than good.
There is only one guy you can bring in as an interim GM to handle this and that is Ryan Johnson.....and you can only do that if the plan is to keep him on as GM of the Abbotsford. In that event you can count on him continuing to bring the best he can. Maybe he's the guy that inherits Allvin's spot under a new PoHo? I don't know if a new PoHo would like that plan though, because I would think he would want to hire his own staff for the big club.
But plan B is the best option for this team right now. Shitcan them and let Johnson handle the balance of the year. He's acquainted with the up and coming organizational depth and he is all too aware of the lack thereof on the current NHL roster. While he's handling things, spend the next 4 weeks looking for Rutherford's successor, hire him and he has 3+ months to prepare for the draft and make any other moves with non-playoff teams once the regular season is over.
Somewhere in NW BC trying (yet again) to trade a(nother) Swede…..
It's a tough call - but we really shouldn't rush into getting new management - but - we also don't want these sticking around so long that a new team has undo a bunch of moves to 'put their stamp on the team'.
Current management doesn't seem to have a plan for the future other than 'younger, faster' (which any of us could say).
I'd like to see a management team with a vision come in tomorrow.
Voted for the last option, ultimately. With the economy probably going into the tank I don't expect current ownership to stick out the rebuild that is necessary, let alone make the major investments that could help make the most of the prospect depth going forward (How nice would it be to, say, have a practice facility big enough for a league leading player development staff to work out of, that the Abby Canucks could also use, etc?)
So, I guess I find myself hoping the Canucks will do what they are probably going to do (a rebuild full of shortcuts that undermine the project), only to have it result in some kind of major (but not too costly, in the long term) failure that forces them right back into rebuilding - this time with the cupboards only half empty, replacing management if it hasn't already happened, etc.
So we get a few high draft picks in the next couple of years, maybe even over the next 3 or 4 years. However, so will a number of other teams. What makes us think that our high draft picks will be better than other teams' high draft picks. Or better than other teams whose high draft picks are already established? Even if we get McKenna and Dupont, that's only two guys.
Yes, we need a few years of suckage, but I would argue that it is even more important to have a competent, possibly even brilliant, management and scouting staff in place to surround those top performers through trades and careful selection of role players , to smartly manage the contracts and cap space, to not rush the prospects, draft a few later round gems, etc etc. most of these things take time and patience as there will be setbacks. Sometimes you have to trade away a Petey and extend the timeline. This is why I picked option 4. I don't think such a management could survive here.
I voted asap because the next management should own the rebuild. Plus, they’ve failed at the task to date and there is no evidence that they will be better at the next task.
I can see the argument for keeping this group through the tdd because they should be in the middle of negotiations, but I’d rather have next group choose if the prime returns are drafter players.
dbr wrote: ↑Mon Feb 09, 2026 7:48 am
Voted for the last option, ultimately.
Only reason I didn’t is because it is the least likely to actually happen…..so I went with what I’ll settle for.
My second choice would be asap. I can't imagine a management performance more abysmal than the one we've seen. God only knows why the Aquas are still keeping them. Must be money-related.
Aaronp18 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 10, 2026 9:58 am
Can em now, this team has completely imploded and management should've seen it coming to better prepare.
I’d say management decisions were a partial cause of it.
Very likely, so whether their moves caused the player issues or the player issues existed anyways and they didn’t take the necessary steps to mitigate things either way they need gone yesterday at this point!
