| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| JOSHUACANADA |
Posted - 02/22/2017 : 21:11:14
Are the Vancouver Canucks buyers or sellers at the 2017 trade deadline? |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| The Duke |
Posted - 03/16/2017 : 16:19:58
Everybody misses players in the draft. If not im sure Getlaz and Perry would have been picked earlier ( dont know how teams missed these 2 esp considering their size ) , we can all name some , Datsuyk , L.Robataille , Messier and on and on ......BUT lately the leafs ARENT missing. Even when picking Marner and Nylander they had options. I`m sure they would have picked other players if not for Mark Hunter , guaranteed.
Before this new crop of extremely talented young leafs.........the last time i remember the leafs picking a real impact player was Clark back in 1985.....30 years of lack luster picks . Think youd even fluke one . Guess they did with Rask. |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 03/16/2017 : 14:35:37
quote:
Originally posted by The Duke
As for the draft , the people you have in place who determine talent can make or break you. Leafs took Luke Schenn several places ahead of Eric Karlsson !!!! Great scouting. Lindholm , Dumba and Trouba were all taken after Morgan Reilly . Debatable if all 3 are better than Reilly. ............Leafs are seemingly finding gems in the later rounds these past few seasons whereas before this new management team and Mark Hunter they couldnt find a solid NHL player in the 1st round.
Here's an opinion I've had for a long time and I touched on it with the Oilers and their "lucky/unlucky" situation of having those 1st's in years where the top tier of the draft wasn't all that great! Regardless of how good or bad Rielly is, or how good or bad Dumba, Trouba, Lindholm, etc turn out, my question would be, how many of those teams (Minny, Winnipeg, Carolina) or others, actually had those 3 above Rielly on their draft boards. It's easy to blame the Leafs and their scouts, but I wouldn't be shocked if Rielly was the top D man on 3/4's of the teams draft lists, maybe more? If he doesn't pan out and become what they thought he would, it's not simply on "their" scouts, it's on ALL of the scouts who tabbed him as the best dman! Let's not forget, this is the guy Brian Burke would have taken if he had the 1st overall pick (I believe those were Burkie's comments?
I trust you see what I am saying? |
| JOSHUACANADA |
Posted - 03/15/2017 : 14:52:05
quote:
Originally posted by The Duke
Alex i agree that in a game 7 you can flip a quarter. Theres actually ZERO difference in both teams. The team who usually wins is the one who catches the breaks in game 7 , for sure . But most times its the teams who bear down , find that extra gear and create their own breaks causing them to come out on top.....I do remember Steve Smith banking it in off Grant Fuhrs skate , Trevor Lindens called off goal against the Rangers where his Toe was in the blue paint ffs , bulls*** call. Vancouvers Stan Smyl`s hitting the iron etc...etc...Gretzkys missed call.....all of those teams could have won for sure , guess destiny wasnt on their side .............................As for the draft , the people you have in place who determine talent can make or break you. Leafs took Luke Schenn several places ahead of Eric Karlsson !!!! Great scouting. Lindholm , Dumba and Trouba were all taken after Morgan Reilly . Debatable if all 3 are better than Reilly. ............Leafs are seemingly finding gems in the later rounds these past few seasons whereas before this new management team and Mark Hunter they couldnt find a solid NHL player in the 1st round.
If you offered Reilly for Trouba straight up to Winnipeg, they would answer with "Reilly and?" |
| The Duke |
Posted - 03/15/2017 : 12:15:59
Alex i agree that in a game 7 you can flip a quarter. Theres actually ZERO difference in both teams. The team who usually wins is the one who catches the breaks in game 7 , for sure . But most times its the teams who bear down , find that extra gear and create their own breaks causing them to come out on top.....I do remember Steve Smith banking it in off Grant Fuhrs skate , Trevor Lindens called off goal against the Rangers where his Toe was in the blue paint ffs , bulls*** call. Vancouvers Stan Smyl`s hitting the iron etc...etc...Gretzkys missed call.....all of those teams could have won for sure , guess destiny wasnt on their side .............................As for the draft , the people you have in place who determine talent can make or break you. Leafs took Luke Schenn several places ahead of Eric Karlsson !!!! Great scouting. Lindholm , Dumba and Trouba were all taken after Morgan Reilly . Debatable if all 3 are better than Reilly. ............Leafs are seemingly finding gems in the later rounds these past few seasons whereas before this new management team and Mark Hunter they couldnt find a solid NHL player in the 1st round. |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 03/14/2017 : 09:53:02
quote:
Originally posted by The Duke
People keep refering to the Oilers as an example of how tanking doesnt work , utter nonsense. RNH was a mistake as #1....Yakopov was a blunder as #1.....just tough breaks. What about those years Crosby and Tavares were available as their picks ?? Would tanking then be a mistake ?? foolishness....
Thats like saying tanking doesnt work the year they got McDavid.....or didnt work out for the leafs by getting Matthews , or the Jets getting Laine....thats crazy talk. The Oilers were just victims of that not so clear cut Superstar available in some of those draft years .
I don't often defend the Oilers, but I have to in this case. I get it, tank or not, they got a bunch of #1's in a row. Unfortunately for them, RNH and Yakupov were not great as 1OA's. BUT, let's not kid ourselves, it's likely that every other team would have made those same picks. Had they not, let's look closely at their other options. After taking Hall at #1 in 2010, they get RNH at 1 in 2011. Their other options, Landeskog, Huberdeau, Larsson (who they now have at the expense of Hall), Strome. There's your top 5. NONE are franchise like players like a Crosby, Tavares, McDavid, etc. The following year, 2012, they get Yak. I recall the backlash they got for not going for Murray or trying to trade down first and draft him (Murray) as they needed D. How do you think that would have worked out? Rounding out the top five after Yak and Murray was Galchenyuk, Reinhart and Rielly. Again, ZERO franchise players. Galchenyuk has turned out to be the best of the bunch, but again, he's not in the class of the Crosby's and Tavares' of the world!
I guess what I'm saying is, the Oilers got unlucky in that two of the years they had 1OA, the draft really didn't hold any major difference makers. Look at Chicago having Toews fall into their lap at 3OA. Regardless of your draft position and result of tanking AND your draft expertise level, the talent has to actually be there in said draft to make major difference!
quote:
Originally posted by The Duke
Yes Alex i remember well those 1993 leaf memories. It was my personal all time favorite leaf team . Clark is my all time favorite leaf with Gilmour and Sittler rounding out my top 3.......and we still talk about the Cut !!!!!!
But there always little things that leave us with ...what if ??? The leafs were leading that series 3 games to 2 at the time of the CUT . LA comes back and wins the series , the leafs were close but not good enough or they would have won.
Same as the Canucks , game 7 sure, but they lost, not good enough.
Ott vs Ana ....same thing , Ana wins....Ott not good enough or they would have won.
Any team that goes to a final series in any sport have a great team. BUT if you dont win.....your just not good enough , or you would have won.
IMO, this is sheer ignorance. Getting to the final and losing in game 7 and you wanna tell me a team wasn't good enough? That's insane. Seriously, think about what you're saying. Does the best team always win? Does it? If your answer is yes, I wont bother debating with you any longer because that's just lunacy at it's finest. Ask Steve Smith and the '86 Oilers if they feel the best team won the cup that year? Sorry, but using that as an excuse for your Leafs who came close is just a cop out. Nothing more........  |
| The Duke |
Posted - 03/10/2017 : 20:37:57
All valid points but i thinking tanking out SHOULD be helpful to a rebuild , not an hindrance. BUT you still have to have a Great hockey mind to put it all together along with a the right people in place to draft the right players.
Colorado was doing great 2 years ago until suddenly their goaltending wouldnt stop a beach ball. Does Joe Sakic cut it as a GM ?? i dont know. Columbus started out with Doug Mclean ?? are u kidding me, look at them now. Phoenix , a very uncertain , unstable organization .
Didnt take Peter Chillari long to turn around the Oilers did it ??
Leafs have drafted more talent in 3 years with Mark Hunter and Kyle D in place than they drafted in the last 20 years, Tank , plus have smart people to rebuild....
People keep refering to the Oilers as an example of how tanking doesnt work , utter nonsense. RNH was a mistake as #1....Yakopov was a blunder as #1.....just tough breaks. What about those years Crosby and Tavares were available as their picks ?? Would tanking then be a mistake ?? foolishness....
Thats like saying tanking doesnt work the year they got McDavid.....or didnt work out for the leafs by getting Matthews , or the Jets getting Laine....thats crazy talk. The Oilers were just victims of that not so clear cut Superstar available in some of those draft years .
Yes Alex i remember well those 1993 leaf memories. It was my personal all time favorite leaf team . Clark is my all time favorite leaf with Gilmour and Sittler rounding out my top 3.......and we still talk about the Cut !!!!!!
But there always little things that leave us with ...what if ??? The leafs were leading that series 3 games to 2 at the time of the CUT . LA comes back and wins the series , the leafs were close but not good enough or they would have won.
Same as the Canucks , game 7 sure, but they lost, not good enough.
Ott vs Ana ....same thing , Ana wins....Ott not good enough or they would have won.
Any team that goes to a final series in any sport have a great team. BUT if you dont win.....your just not good enough , or you would have won. |
| JOSHUACANADA |
Posted - 03/10/2017 : 13:46:47
I was going to respond about the tanking to rebuild, somewhere along the same lines as you Alex. If tanking was the sure fire way to rebuild Colorado, Columbus and Pheonix would or will be multiple cup winners. |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 03/10/2017 : 11:52:09
quote:
Originally posted by The Duke
Yes Alex i seen those leaf teams and Gilmour was one of my favorites. I also watched all of the 1994 Canucks playoffs too. Bure was also one of my favorite players to watch.
As good as some of those old leaf teams you speak of were , they werent good enough. NOW , they have the starting peices , first time in 50 years. Only because they bottomed out , my only point.
It's far too easy to say these teams weren't good enough because they didn't win it all, but in reality, they were good enough. Want proof? Look back to the finals in 1993. As a Leaf fan, you ought to remember this well, but in case you or anyone else has forgotten, here's how close the Leafs were to the SCF.........
They lost to Gretzky and the Kings in the semi's of the "Campbell Conference". They lost this series 4-3. They led the series 3-2. They lost games 6 AND 7 by identical scores of 5-4. BOTH, one goal losses. Game 6 was even in OT. A lucky bounce here or there and the Leafs are through to an epic Montreal / Toronto matchup that ALL of Canada wanted! Oh, and lets not forget, and I'm certain you and EVERY Leaf fan hasn't, that in that game 6, in overtime in fact, Gretzky clipped Gilmour with a high stick to the chin, cutting him open. Kerry Fraser failed to call a penalty, one which at the time would not only have seen Toronto get a 5 min powerplay, but would have also resulted in Gretzky hitting the showers! Yup, we all know how this played out........Gretzky, not long thereafter, scored the OT winner to force a game 7.
You can also say that TO may have lost to Montreal, a team that seemed destined to win, but let's not forget the big shift early in that series (game 2) around the Mcsorley stick measurement! That series could have been vastly different had LA secured a 2-0 lead ON THE ROAD, if not for that stick measurement and resulting OT win by Montreal. Keep in mind, they then went on to win the next two BOTH in OT as well. Though they won the series 4-1, it was a very tight series. My point is, had Toronto won that semi, they could have easily won the cup. Both Montreal and Toronto were divisional 3 seeds and conference 4 seeds. Montreal won the cup. Don't try to tell me that Toronto "wasn't good enough". That'd be like saying the Canucks weren't good enough to win the cup in 2011. I get it, they didn't win it. But it doesn't mean they weren't good enough and really doesn't support your argument re rebuilding/retooling whatsoever!
Oh, and before I move on, your examples of CHI and Pitt are legit. LA however, not even close. It's actually a real stretch to include them in your argument. The Kings did not "draft in the top 3 for a couple of seasons". Sure, they got Doughty at 2 a year after having the 4th overall, but that 4th became Thomas Hickey. I think you'd agree he didn't contribute a lot to their success. They also did pick at #5 the following year and grabbed Brayden Schenn. In fairness they moved him and Simmonds and a 2nd in a deal for Mike Richards who it could be argued was a contributor to their cups even if he wasn't much in their 2nd run. Kopitar they got at 11. The fact he turned out as good as he did is pretty fortunate for LA considering they could have ended up with Luc Bourdon had Vancouver taken Kopitar (just one small example as there are many others LA could have gone with). My point is, even with high draft picks, there's no guarantee that you'll get franchise guys (see Edmonton up until McDavid). Chicago lucked out big time in getting Toews at 3 as they could just as easily have had E. Johnson or Staal.
It's even more difficult now with the draft lottery. There's even less guarantee you'll get a potential franchise player. Impact player, sure, but even then, you still have to draft well. Look at Vancouver with Virtanen. Sure, he's still young, could mature/develop into something really good, but at the time I personally liked Ehlers and Nylander more. Toronto didn't exacly "bottom out" to get Nylander did they? Pretty sure the Canucks finished worse than them! In reality, unless you get a guy who ends up as a top 5 sort of player along the lines of Crosby, Kane, McDavid, Mathews, etc, drafting well is just as important to a rebuild, actually more so, than simply tanking. |
| The Duke |
Posted - 03/09/2017 : 20:05:58
Well the last 5 consecutive stanley cup winners have all tanked , that should tell ya something.
As for Burrows. Yes he is a good hockey player but he will be 36 years old next month. Dahlen is 19 years old. Steal for Vancouver. |
| JOSHUACANADA |
Posted - 03/09/2017 : 16:21:29
quote:
Originally posted by The Duke
some good news for the Canucks though.....J.Dahlen is tearing it up . Ottawa may regret this one.
4 game winning streak with 3 goals and 4 points for Burrows in 4 games in the big league, versus a 5 point game in the Swedish Tier 2 league. I will give you a 5 point game is a great accomplishment, but for now Ottawa looks to be doing fine. The pickups have filled out the biggest weakness my team had heading into the playoffs which was lack of middle 6 players and secondary scoring. Both Burrows who is playing a point per game in the top 6 and Stalberg who is playing 0.75 points per game with 2 goals and an assist, plying in the middle 6, have been great additions. If we have buyers remorse it will happen after this post season which wasn't a guarantee without them. |
| JOSHUACANADA |
Posted - 03/09/2017 : 16:16:07
quote:
Originally posted by The Duke
Its hard to win a stanley cup unless you trade your aging ( once upon a time ) star players to a contender and BOTTOM out for a couple of seasons.....draft in the top 3 for a couple of seasons and rebuild.
Look at whose winning cups these days....Chicago ( Kane and Teows )....Pitts ( Crosby and Malkin ).....LA ( Kopitar and Doughty )
These teams would never have a cup unless they did what they did , bottom out.
The only way to get these franchise players is to bomb.
That is not a 100% rule. Boston, Detroit, Anaheim, Dallas and New Jersey have all won cups without tanking. You could argue most of those teams that built thru the draft got lucky thru by landing generational talent, you could argue that teams that tanked more than those teams have had less success, some with 11 years of tanking before a playoff round. |
| The Duke |
Posted - 03/09/2017 : 16:14:36
some good news for the Canucks though.....J.Dahlen is tearing it up . Ottawa may regret this one. |
| The Duke |
Posted - 03/09/2017 : 16:11:03
Yes Alex i seen those leaf teams and Gilmour was one of my favorites. I also watched all of the 1994 Canucks playoffs too. Bure was also one of my favorite players to watch.
As good as some of those old leaf teams you speak of were , they werent good enough. NOW , they have the starting peices , first time in 50 years. Only because they bottomed out , my only point. |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 03/09/2017 : 16:08:05
quote:
Originally posted by JOSHUACANADA
Duke, I know its hard to falthom, but they are 7 points out from a playoff spot with a poor injury riddled season and a breakout of the mumps happening now and for the last month or so. They have traded 2 good, hard competing veteran middle 6 players and have a poor win loss record since the trade deadline. But in an alternate reality they don't trade those 2 players at the deadline and instead load up a few players, the mumps outbreak doesn't happen and there injuries are less severe, they might be in the thick of a playoff drive. They aren't far now and the teams they are chasing for the final playoff spot aren't playing well either, (LA and St Louis). Its only by coach WD ineptitude alone, by his weird and unjustified line combinations and deployment, that Vancouver isn't closer to a playoff position now.
Joshua.....There's been talk about Willie's line combos and what not but the big talk here now is why is he not playing the youth more. Best example, Goldobin. Here's the thing. Linden's recent comments didn't exactly offer up a vote of confidence for WD's future. He's likely gone at seasons end. So, if you're Willie, do you play the youth and see what you have for a future you're prob not a part of, or do you try to play what you think gives your team the best shot at winning? By winning, there's still that outside shot at a playoff spot (though it's getting less and less likely), there's other teams watching who may be interested in your services and your NHL coaching record is currently above .500 at 107-97 with 26 OTL's. Not a bad resume with a pretty sub par team. These numbers prob look pretty good to some people. In fact, Darren Dreger mentioned yesterday there's teams already asking about Willie and whether or not anyone has any info on whether or not the Canucks plan on cutting him loose. He feels he won't be unemployed long. Not saying it's an instant head coaching gig, but someone will likely grab him pretty quick. Is it not fair to say he's had a lot of affect on Bo Horvat's development? The guy is a good teacher of the game and I'd have no prob if they retained him and let him be involved in a rebuild, but again, this takes us back to the ownership not being willing to go into rebuild mode. Sigh......  |
| The Duke |
Posted - 03/09/2017 : 16:00:53
Its hard to win a stanley cup unless you trade your aging ( once upon a time ) star players to a contender and BOTTOM out for a couple of seasons.....draft in the top 3 for a couple of seasons and rebuild.
Look at whose winning cups these days....Chicago ( Kane and Teows )....Pitts ( Crosby and Malkin ).....LA ( Kopitar and Doughty )
These teams would never have a cup unless they did what they did , bottom out.
The only way to get these franchise players is to bomb. |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 03/09/2017 : 15:57:46
quote:
Originally posted by The Duke
OK Alex, thats fine , the Canucks got Bo Horvat . Can you imagine what they could have to play with Bo Horvat if they traded the Sedins at the time of the Kesler deal. PLUS bottoming out for a couple seasons ??......Theres at least 3 ELITE level YOUNG stars MISSING off the Canucks lineup because they decided to keep the Sedins.
Not nearly as much as you think. As I explained above, at the time of the Kesler deal, 99.9% of planet earth figured the Sedin's were more or less done. Their value was at an all time low coming off 47 and 50 point seasons. Their returns at that time would not have netted "future superstars"! Funny how so many people hated on the Sedin's for years claiming you can win with them, they're soft, etc, but now they'd have netted future superstars after their worst seasons in nearly a decade??? 
quote:
Originally posted by The Duke
They`re Re-tooling......excellent !!!!!!
My leafs started Re-tooling in 1968 when i was just 5 years old. Guess what ? It doesnt work !!!!!!!
So here we are 50 years later.....The leafs are in FULL REBUILD , finally !!!! and the future has NEVER looked brighter....
The leafs have 3 future SUPERSTARS in the making because they did the exact same thing as the ( Blackhawks , Penguins , Kings , Capitals etc....) did years ago , finally the leafs are doing something RIGHT !!!!
I try to tell ye fellas this and everyone disagrees ???? Why ?
OK Alex, i dont mean to come off as a Canucks hater, i like all Canadian teams but these Canadian teams have to look at their counterparts south of the border and learn some valuable lessons......As Brendan Shanahan obviously did , spending all those years in Detroit..
I try to speak reality , not fantasy . The Canucks got Horvat ( fine player ) and what ?? No goalie , No upcoming superstar , over the hill ( no value ) Sedins.....
I`ve been following hockey all my life ( 53 yrs old now ) and What the leafs are doing now is the only way to go. I pity Canuck fans for years of misery coming because of their terrible management , esp of the Sedins , and what they could have had , too late now , window has closed.
How long do you think theyre retool / rebiuld will take now ??...The leafs have 5 hockey players right now with MORE points than the Canucks leading scorer ( Bo Horvat ) and yet theyre in 9th spot........what chance do the Canucks have over the next few seasons ??
Anyway , ill disagree with anyone who sez the Canucks should have kept the Sedins all these years. Set them back for years to come.
What part of my post did you not understand? I fully agree(d) with you that the Canucks should have done a full rebuild. Did you fail to read the part where I explained the ownership's way of thinking and their plans for this franchise? I don't agree with it, nor do you, but unless you and I wanna try and raise enough money to buy the Canucks and run it our way.......? They are not prepared to lose countless dollars in a rebuild and in their mind, if it takes a 10 year "retooling" over a 4 year rebuild, where they make the playoffs half of those years (even with little or not success once there), they seem to be fine with it. AGAIN, I don't like this path!!! I'm not agreeing with their way of thinking. I'm sure I'm not the only Canucks fan who doesn't like it nor am I the first fan to disagree with his teams ownerships direction or way of thinking.
So, don't twist this into why the Sedin's should have been dealt back in 2014, cuz the truth is, their value wasn't anywhere near what you imply. Like I mentioned before, you claimed at one point they should have dealt them in 2011? How asinine is that???
As for your Leafs "retooling since '68" ? You must have missed a few good seasons back in the early 90's? I seem to recall a pretty good Pat Burns led team with Dougie Gilmour and others who made a couple of good runs at a cup? 99-04 saw 6 solid playoff appearances with 3 trips to the quarters and 2 to the semis. The Leafs did in fact "retool" many times and had some success and for arguments sake, could have won a cup in that time.
Anyway, my whole point here is that I'm not disagreeing with your opinion that the Canucks should have rebuilt by now or at least looked at starting a rebuild a few years back. Your points on the Sedins however, are wrong. Not only did you suggest terrible times to move them, you completely overvalue what the return likely would have been. Your piling on of the Schneider trade kinda backfired really as well. That's actually a trade that's worked out quite well for the team as having Schneider at 30ish years old is not what a rebuilding team needs. But my last point to you is this.....When you say you'll disagree with anyone who says the Canucks were wise to keep the Sedins, do you understand the position/power the Sedins hold when it comes to them moving? Do you know for sure that perhaps management at one point quietly, out of the public, asked them to waive their NTC's? It's been said that management has offered to move them IF THEY DESIRED A CHANGE, but maybe earlier than that, someone approached them out of the media and asked them to consider waiving? We may never know, but i'll tell ya this much, you have no idea how these two are made up if you think for a second that they'd have gone public if this scenario in fact did play out. Like is said, we may never know.......  |
| JOSHUACANADA |
Posted - 03/09/2017 : 10:28:37
Duke, I know its hard to falthom, but they are 7 points out from a playoff spot with a poor injury riddled season and a breakout of the mumps happening now and for the last month or so. They have traded 2 good, hard competing veteran middle 6 players and have a poor win loss record since the trade deadline. But in an alternate reality they don't trade those 2 players at the deadline and instead load up a few players, the mumps outbreak doesn't happen and there injuries are less severe, they might be in the thick of a playoff drive. They aren't far now and the teams they are chasing for the final playoff spot aren't playing well either, (LA and St Louis). Its only by coach WD ineptitude alone, by his weird and unjustified line combinations and deployment, that Vancouver isn't closer to a playoff position now.
Any discussion about having traded the Sedins years ago basically requires the Sedins consent. From what I have read and heard, the Sedins don't want to leave and management doesn't want to ask them. They are riding out there legacy contracts and giving them there farewell tour as per there wishes. 1 more season and the rebuild can happen in earnest, with the possibility that the Sedins sign 1 more contract in Vancouver, being still on the table. |
| The Duke |
Posted - 03/09/2017 : 08:39:21
Joshua , i didnt say a word about the Canucks moving the Sedins at this years deadline . I said they should have moved them when they shipped out Kesler.
OK Alex, thats fine , the Canucks got Bo Horvat . Can you imagine what they could have to play with Bo Horvat if they traded the Sedins at the time of the Kesler deal. PLUS bottoming out for a couple seasons ??......Theres at least 3 ELITE level YOUNG stars MISSING off the Canucks lineup because they decided to keep the Sedins.
They`re Re-tooling......excellent !!!!!!
My leafs started Re-tooling in 1968 when i was just 5 years old. Guess what ? It doesnt work !!!!!!!
So here we are 50 years later.....The leafs are in FULL REBUILD , finally !!!! and the future has NEVER looked brighter....
The leafs have 3 future SUPERSTARS in the making because they did the exact same thing as the ( Blackhawks , Penguins , Kings , Capitals etc....) did years ago , finally the leafs are doing something RIGHT !!!!
I try to tell ye fellas this and everyone disagrees ???? Why ?
OK Alex, i dont mean to come off as a Canucks hater, i like all Canadian teams but these Canadian teams have to look at their counterparts south of the border and learn some valuable lessons......As Brendan Shanahan obviously did , spending all those years in Detroit..
I try to speak reality , not fantasy . The Canucks got Horvat ( fine player ) and what ?? No goalie , No upcoming superstar , over the hill ( no value ) Sedins.....
I`ve been following hockey all my life ( 53 yrs old now ) and What the leafs are doing now is the only way to go. I pity Canuck fans for years of misery coming because of their terrible management , esp of the Sedins , and what they could have had , too late now , window has closed.
How long do you think theyre retool / rebiuld will take now ??...The leafs have 5 hockey players right now with MORE points than the Canucks leading scorer ( Bo Horvat ) and yet theyre in 9th spot........what chance do the Canucks have over the next few seasons ??
Anyway , ill disagree with anyone who sez the Canucks should have kept the Sedins all these years. Set them back for years to come. |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 03/08/2017 : 07:38:24
quote:
Originally posted by The Duke
Van should have been sellers the day they let Kesler go. Sedins should have been right behind him while they had huge value . They should have started a major rebuild right there and then.......... Where did it get them by keeping the Sedins ??....Nobody is giving them any real value for the Sedins now , at this point in their careers. So the Sedins will play out theyre last days there, no stanley cup , and no return for the Canucks , stupid .............................If they would have reaped the huge rewards for the Sedins then , plus 2 top 3 overall picks after bottoming out for 2 years they would be in the position the leafs are now............so now they STILL have to rebuild but WITHOUT the returns on these assets , stupid............i brought this up a few seasons ago and got frowned upon by some posters , but this was so obvious to see coming.
Ugh....not the Sedin *%#@ again! Duke, was it not you who I got into this with regarding them some time back. Was it not you who claimed the Canucks should have traded them back in 2011? Right after their cup run? While the Canucks window was still very open??? Yeah, right......If it was not you, my apologies, but I seem to think it was especially as you bring it up again and I really can't be bothered to go looking it up right now.
I have to agree with you that a full rebuild around the time that Kesler moved on would have been the thing to do. Here's the problem though, and I've prob mentioned this before as well. THE OWNERS HERE IN VANCOUVER ARE ABOUT THE BOTTOM DOLLAR! Who am I, or you, to say that's wrong. It's their money that would be lost in a rebuild. If I had my way, this rebuild would have already happened but it's too easy for me to say to do it when it's not my money being spent and lost!!!
Also, when Kesler left would have been a terrible time to move the Sedins. That's a fact. They were coming off their worst years in forever with only 47 and 50 points. Teams, fans, etc immediately wrote them off as "finished" yet you think that's when they should have dealt them? Truth is, the following year after big bounce back seasons of 76 and 73 points would have been the time. Prob is, and i'm not sure how many times I've tried to explain this, the Sedin's held the power. Their NTC's that were well earned after years of being faithful to the franchise, playing on deals that were very team friendly, etc, were what was stopping a move. I actually praise the organization for not pestering these guys to waive and rather stick around and mentor the young guys in their "retool". Again, I don't agree with the mindset of the retool over a full rebuild, but I think I've made it clear that that decision unfortunately wasn't mine!
Here's the key to what's gone on in Canuck land over the past 3-5 years. IF you bought in to the plans of ownership (something admittedly very few did), most of the moves they've made, were actually quite good for that plan. Ryan Miller is a great example. I hated the acquisition. BUT, I hated the plan. IF you liked the plan, then Miller actually made a lot of sense. See where i'm going? It's easy to hate the moves when you hate the immediate future plan to begin with!!!
Lastly, your next post that mentions the "dummy" who let Schneider go is even better. You seem to leave out a lot of important factors regarding that trade and why the team was forced to move a goalie at the time. Pile on about how they ended up moving both of their goalies, fine, but before you call anyone a dummy, let's look at the return he got. Do you know who the young kid they drafted with the pick they moved Schneider for? He's actually looking like a big part of the future of this team, currently leading them in scoring and i'd bet you they'd prefer him today over a 31 year old goalie considering where this team is. In other words, I don't think they'd trade Bo Horvat for Cory Schneider today. Then again, he's a "dummy", so maybe he would? |
| JOSHUACANADA |
Posted - 03/04/2017 : 20:14:38
quote:
Originally posted by The Duke
Joshua , you just stated that the Canucks should go on a .....Full Rebuild Mode ......so , dont you agree that this would have been much easier if they got full value on a return from the Sedins ??? instead of nothing ??
Good job Benning ?...Horrible job i think. set them back years. Which dummie let Cory Schneider go ?...not sure myself but i seen mant terrible moves by the Canucks.
No chance the Sedins were gonna be moved this deadline with there No Trade clause and the expansion draft looming, maybe in the offseason, but its unlikely, because they will want to have a final skate in front of the Vancouver fans, before moving along. If they do move along it wont be easy and Vancouver will not get great return at this point in there careers and at there current cap hit of $14 million combined. I think we are past the point the Sedins ever get traded. They get move at the end of next years deadline, don't resign and retire, resign in Vancouver or sign with another team at the end of next year. This is the only time I can see the Sedins moving on from Vancouver. |
| The Duke |
Posted - 03/04/2017 : 08:29:26
Joshua , you just stated that the Canucks should go on a .....Full Rebuild Mode ......so , dont you agree that this would have been much easier if they got full value on a return from the Sedins ??? instead of nothing ??
Good job Benning ?...Horrible job i think. set them back years. Which dummie let Cory Schneider go ?...not sure myself but i seen mant terrible moves by the Canucks. |
| JOSHUACANADA |
Posted - 03/02/2017 : 08:14:27
Vancouver now has only $49 million tied up next season on 7 NHL forwards, 6 Defenseman and a starting goalie. $23 million to spend on 5 bottom 6 forwards and a backup is not a bad position to be in next year. |
| JOSHUACANADA |
Posted - 03/02/2017 : 08:11:50
I have to say I think Vancouver did the right thing sending veteran talent for picks and prospects. They now have cap space and a clear cut direction to rebuild. With Miller UFA in the offseason and Markstrom signed long term, all they have to do is punch the clock until the Sedins final contract runs out and go on a full rebuild mode with all the picks they have accumulated. I think having a team wide breakout of the mumps actually benefited this team, by having them realise early this was not the year to battle till the last week just to miss or get bounce in the first round of the playoffs. Good job by Benning. |
| The Duke |
Posted - 02/28/2017 : 18:16:13
Van should have been sellers the day they let Kesler go. Sedins should have been right behind him while they had huge value . They should have started a major rebuild right there and then.......... Where did it get them by keeping the Sedins ??....Nobody is giving them any real value for the Sedins now , at this point in their careers. So the Sedins will play out theyre last days there, no stanley cup , and no return for the Canucks , stupid .............................If they would have reaped the huge rewards for the Sedins then , plus 2 top 3 overall picks after bottoming out for 2 years they would be in the position the leafs are now............so now they STILL have to rebuild but WITHOUT the returns on these assets , stupid............i brought this up a few seasons ago and got frowned upon by some posters , but this was so obvious to see coming. |
| leigh |
Posted - 02/27/2017 : 16:53:15
Fair point Justin. And today they traded Burrows to the Sens. I guess that settles that. Sellers. |
| just1n |
Posted - 02/24/2017 : 17:41:56
The mumps going around is not going to help them be sellers! |
| leigh |
Posted - 02/24/2017 : 13:25:56
You'd think they'll be buyers - as of today. They are still in the hunt, albeit from a distance - but most of the teams between them and a playoff spot are notoriously flaky. I doubt that the Sedins will be traded, ever. So this leads me to believe that the Canucks will try to bring in some talent to help them bring home a cup. If this is the case, it's flawed thinking on their part, but that's what I think they'll do. Too much sentimentality there (they regret letting Linden go years ago) |
| just1n |
Posted - 02/24/2017 : 10:05:34
Hopefully they can trade Hansen or else Vegas will pick him up in the expansion draft. |
| JOSHUACANADA |
Posted - 02/23/2017 : 20:47:38
Thanks admin. I just wanted to help with some leg work to get traffic and comments going. I will leave my opinion below the polls. That being said I would probably have worded the polls slightly differently. I included polls for the Canadian teams numbering close to the amount of days left before the deadline. Glad you picked Vancouver first to feature on the home page.
My opinion is of course that Vancouver will be seller's. Miller, Markstrom, Sedins if any option presents itself, or my least favorite option Eriksson, who I think has been an excellent addition to Vancouver even though it wasn't primarily beside the Sedins. With that said I am still of the position if the right opportunity presents itself Vancouver should have or could still buy there way out of a rebuild. Nobody is talking about them in the Colorado forward sweepstakes, but how much would either Landeskog or Duchene change the landscape in Vancouver, for the cost of a Dman they can spare and a 1st rounder. |
| admin |
Posted - 02/23/2017 : 17:09:02
quote:
Originally posted by JOSHUACANADA
Vancouver is a team most predicted to bottom out the West, which is not happening right now, but they are looking like they will end up below the bubble. They have 2 legacy contracts in the Sedins that will be hard to move and a few enticing veterans that might make other teams better contenders in a playoff race. I predicted Vancouver would have tried to buy there way out of a rebuild this year, but others have thought its time to sell and rebuild. Whats the right course of action for Vancouver to take.
JoshuaCanada, can you copy and paste your reasoning below this in a post. I want to feature this poll on the home page but feature polls should be short and sweet and leave opinion to the comments after the poll. Appreciate the polls today! Nice! Thanks! |
|
|
