2017/2018 Management Discussion | NEW MOD WARNING IN OP AS OF 5/20/18

[MadaCanuckle]

The best part of your posts is that you think you are clever. Makes me chuckle every time.

I know a guy in the current management group who thinks he is the clever guy in the city. A guy from Harvard or whatever. A guy who almost ruined a basketball franchise. A guy who only has a job in professional sports because of his connections and the ability to be an brainless-yes-man. A guy who will be unemployed for a long long time after this. And this guy is desperate. So he comes to every single social media and tries to "educate them". When the crap that he sells is pointed out, he tries to be funny but mock everyone else because he doesn't know more. So he keeps trying to derail threads to prevent the true facts to be spread.

 

[Wilch]

I know a guy in the current management group who thinks he is the clever guy in the city. A guy from Harvard or whatever.

Just to be clear, he got in as a hockey player. Had he gotten into Harvard based on the merit of his academic prowess, it might be a different story. I feel like kids who get into Ivy League schools not on merit obtain little to none of the knowledge that's taught at the institutions yet they do pick up a ton of arrogance.

 

[Pavel96]

Here's a simple question that just popped into my head for Trevor. Sorry if it's been asked before.

He has said before that the Vancouver market wouldn't allow for a rebuild. That he couldn't just walk into the room with the Sedins and tear it down.

At this point, how is Vancouver accepting 4 years of bottom 3 hockey? How are the wins/losses they have accumulated any different than a rebuilding team? They aren't - the only difference is that rebuilding teams acquire a horrible record like that trading away veterans for picks - not trading away picks for veterans before the season.

Simply put. He said Vancouver couldn't handle a rebuild - as in the fans couldn't/wouldn't support losing hockey.

But they truly have given the fans the most negative parts of a rebuild - lacking a lot of the positivity/fun (getting to see young players actually play, accumulating a lot of draft picks, watching the team spend those draft picks on prospects not old injured veterans) that comes with a true rebuild (further example of this is their prime possession - the guy who literally got Benning an extension - was a 23rd overall pick.

What gives? Trevor and Jim have absolutely delivered the hockey fans of this city some of the least competitive hockey played by the Canucks (statistically) and they claimed from the beginning they absolutely could not do that. The city wouldn't stand for it.

So why have they given it to us and are still holding their heads high?

 

[Wilch]

Here's a simple question that just popped into my head for Trevor. Sorry if it's been asked before.

He has said before that the Vancouver market wouldn't allow for a rebuild. That he couldn't just walk into the room with the Sedins and tear it down.

At this point, how is Vancouver accepting 4 years of bottom 3 hockey? How are the wins/losses they have accumulated any different than a rebuilding team? They aren't - the only difference is that rebuilding teams acquire a horrible record like that trading away veterans for picks - not trading away picks for veterans before the season.

Simply put. He said Vancouver couldn't handle a rebuild - as in the fans couldn't/wouldn't support losing hockey.

But they truly have given the fans the most negative parts of a rebuild - lacking a lot of the positivity/fun (getting to see young players actually play, accumulating a lot of draft picks, watching the team spend those draft picks on prospects not old injured veterans) that comes with a true rebuild (further example of this is their prime possession - the guy who literally got Benning an extension - was a 23rd overall pick.

What gives? Trevor and Jim have absolutely delivered the hockey fans of this city some of the least competitive hockey played by the Canucks (statistically) and they claimed from the beginning they absolutely could not do that. The city wouldn't stand for it.

So why have they given it to us and are still holding their heads high?

Because the Vancouver Canucks is owned by a stupid trust fund baby who runs a multi hundred million dollar franchise like a family owned pizzeria.

 

[ChefBoiRD]

Who said pizzeria?!?!

 

[Pavel96]

Who said pizzeria?!?!

Ah... one of those pizzeria's that sell the metal containers of pasta noddles and the salad's in the same containers.

 

[Kickpuncher]

Here's a simple question that just popped into my head for Trevor. Sorry if it's been asked before.

He has said before that the Vancouver market wouldn't allow for a rebuild. That he couldn't just walk into the room with the Sedins and tear it down.

At this point, how is Vancouver accepting 4 years of bottom 3 hockey? How are the wins/losses they have accumulated any different than a rebuilding team? They aren't - the only difference is that rebuilding teams acquire a horrible record like that trading away veterans for picks - not trading away picks for veterans before the season.

Simply put. He said Vancouver couldn't handle a rebuild - as in the fans couldn't/wouldn't support losing hockey.

But they truly have given the fans the most negative parts of a rebuild - lacking a lot of the positivity/fun (getting to see young players actually play, accumulating a lot of draft picks, watching the team spend those draft picks on prospects not old injured veterans) that comes with a true rebuild (further example of this is their prime possession - the guy who literally got Benning an extension - was a 23rd overall pick.

What gives? Trevor and Jim have absolutely delivered the hockey fans of this city some of the least competitive hockey played by the Canucks (statistically) and they claimed from the beginning they absolutely could not do that. The city wouldn't stand for it.

So why have they given it to us and are still holding their heads high?

Thanks for posting this. It did a great job of succinctly encapsulating the point I most often associate with this team but never articulated.

Benning and Linden have spent the last 4 years sticking the fans with the worst parts of a rebuild without providing any of the benefits that come with it.

And worse, there's no end to this in sight.

 

[pgj98m3]

Thanks for posting this. It did a great job of succinctly encapsulating the point I most often associate with this team but never articulated.

Benning and Linden have spent the last 4 years sticking the fans with the worst parts of a rebuild without providing any of the benefits that come with it.

And worse, there's no end to this in sight.

But...but....Gillis

 

[Kickpuncher]

Ed freakin' Willes, lowering the boom once more.

Ed Willes: Same old story, same old results for Canucks

The first installment in this much-loved franchise came almost two decades ago and concerned the Vancouver Grizzlies who, of course, were the perfect subject because they never won.

...

You may be aware, for example, the finale of the last three Canucks’ seasons has followed a certain pattern, one which lends itself easily to the boilerplate treatment. The Canucks lose. They lose again. Someone gets injured. They never score. Rinse and repeat.

...

ST. LOUIS (or any of the 30 other NHL cities, this is the beauty of our template) — The Vancouver Canucks dropped a 3-0 decision to the _____ here on ____ night, extending their losing streak to ____ games and their goalless streak to ____ minutes.

The Canucks last scored ____ weeks ago in ____. They now sit ____ in the NHL, just ____ points ahead of the last-place (pick one of Buffalo Sabres or Arizona Coyotes).

...

In St. Louis (or wherever), the Canucks were shut out for the ____ straight game while the slumping Blues (or whoever) beat Canucks goalie Jacob Markstrom twice in the first five minutes before coasting to the win.

...

Benning has also taken heat for his recent free-agent signings including ____, ____, and ____ who’ve had disappointing seasons. The (pick one of four-, five- or six-) year contract he handed out to veteran forward ____ has been cited as one of the worst free-agent signings in the last _____ years.

 

[Pavel96]

Ed freakin' Willes, lowering the boom once more.

Ed Willes: Same old story, same old results for Canucks

Great work lol.

'Benning has also taken heat for his recent free-agent signings including ____, ____, and ____ who’ve had disappointing seasons. The (pick one of four-, five- or six-) year contract he handed out to veteran forward ____ has been cited as one of the worst free-agent signings in the last _____ years.


“We’re asking our fans to be patient,” said team president Trevor Linden. “I feel good about our future.”'

 

[Verviticus]

I kind of fall more towards the middle. I do not agree with some posters here that merely drafting an AHL contributor or even star player as a draft success. I do, however, think that it's okay to take a chance on players you feel has a quality or qualities that might allow him to develop into an NHL player. At the end of the day, do you want your 8th or 9th batter to swing for the fences or try to hit a single or bunt to advance a runner?
.

this is a bad analogy like all baseball analogies. four pathetic grinders are not equal to one good player

 

[MS]

No Pisano! I have zero probs with the Lap Dance! The 32 year old has eked a nice niche playing in the Swiss-A League for the last 3 seasons.

However, lets agree to disagree regarding you saying "excellent trade for this team" Personally, I prefer Anaheim's outcome over ours. Yes, Lappy was there playing a certain role with the Sedin core running things, making it to the finals in 2011 (no cup) and then assisting in the team's consecutive, embarrassing first round knockouts that shamed this city after 2011

Laps Canuck Stats

149 games - 14 goals 16 assists.

I can't believe I'm taking the troll bait here, but here goes :

When you're trading a draft pick (especially a mid-round pick), what happens with that pick afterwards is irrelevant. It doesn't matter if the pick busts or is a HHOFer. What you traded was the intrinsic value of the pick, and that's what the trade is judged by.

If someone made the idiotic argument that the Ballard trade was a win for Gillis because the player they took with the #1 pick busted, and Grabner and Bernier were both waiver bait months later ... it would be pretty embarrassing. But hey! I like the asset management of Gillis way better! An NHL defender for a bust and two waiver-wire guys? Amazing! I prefer our outcome to Florida's!

Like, can you see how absolutely moronic an argument like this is? And if you're going to keep bringing crap like this here, people are just going to keep laughing at you.

That trade was a mid-rounder for a guy who came up huge in 2011 when Malhotra lost an eye, and then gave two more years of solid depth service to the team. That's a great trade you do again in a heartbeat. To be arguing otherwise makes you look like a joke.

__________

Also, you're still on with the 'President's Trophy season where we lost to the eventual Cup winner in the playoffs is an embarrassing season' thing (or 'most embarrassing in club history', as you originally stated). How screwed up does your perception of reality have to be to consider that embarrassing while cheering on the Dear Leader who has made us the worst team in the NHL over a 3-year period while telling us he was building a playoff team?

 

[Verviticus]

please don’t f*** up when you quote him. if you aren’t polite enough to ignore him like a good person, f***ing up the quote means i’m stuck seeing his bullshit

 

[MS]

this is a bad analogy like all baseball analogies. four pathetic grinders are not equal to one good player

Also, that's just now how it works.

The overwhelming majority of mid-late round picks who succeed fall into 4 categories :

1) highly skilled/productive players who fell because they were small.
2) highly skilled/productive players who fell because they were slow.
3) highly skilled/productive players who fell because they were in a less-scouted league.
4) highly skilled/productive players who developed later and fell because they were 1-2 years older than the rest of their draft class.

Guys drafted to be grinders/depth guys basically never make it. Paradoxically, the more skilled players are also the (much) safer players to be selecting, while the low-upside guys are much riskier picks that are far less likely to make the NHL in any capacity.

 

[Jyrki21]

Benning on Empty is at issue 9². This one touches upon the trade deadline in a more abstract, general way, so there may still be some unfinished business there. Click twice to enlarge, as always.

 

[absolute garbage]

Why the Jets should be the envy of the NHL

Relevant bit:

In 2015, the Jets brought the Stanley Cup playoffs back to Winnipeg. It was 19 years in the making, but it was all too brief: The Anaheim Ducks swept the Jets out of the first round.

After that series, Cheveldayoff sat down with owner Mark Chipman and laid out what he felt needed to be done for the Jets to contend for the Cup. They needed to get younger, and allow those players to make a multitude of mistakes. The growing pains needed to be palpable, with the knowledge that the franchise would eventually be better for it.

"It wasn't a hard sell for ownership," Cheveldayoff said.

Then came the tougher sell: to the players.

Over time, there was buy-in for the Jets' plans. Blake Wheeler and Bryan Little signed long-term deals. Getting Dustin Byfuglien, who was coveted as a potential UFA, to commit to five years was a coup, as he told the team, "I think we're on the cusp of something here." The Jets identified the players they wanted to build around, and jettisoned the rest. (Happy trails, Evander Kane. May all your track suits remain dry.)

The Canucks last made the playoffs at the same time. The following 3 years have looked different for these teams...

 

[2011 still hurts]

daily reminder that Linden and Benning are complete trash and will waste the primes of Horvat, Boeser and Petersson since they don't understand asset management

FIRE LINDENNING

 

[CanaFan]

daily reminder that Linden and Benning are complete trash and will waste the primes of Horvat, Boeser and Petersson since they don't understand asset management

FIRE LINDENNING

Weren’t Game Days enough? Do we need to be reminded on off-days too?

 

[Cupless44]

Decent article.

Given the message from management and their brutal performance in so many facets of running a hockey team, there truly should be way more heat on ownership and management than there has been up until now.

Are people being too critical of the Canucks, or not critical enough? - Sportsnet.ca

 

[Melvin]

please don’t **** up when you quote him. if you aren’t polite enough to ignore him like a good person, ****ing up the quote means i’m stuck seeing his bull****

I refuse to like his post because of this.

 

[ProstheticConscience]

I know a guy in the current management group who thinks he is the clever guy in the city. A guy from Harvard or whatever. A guy who almost ruined a basketball franchise. A guy who only has a job in professional sports because of his connections and the ability to be an brainless-yes-man. A guy who will be unemployed for a long long time after this. And this guy is desperate. So he comes to every single social media and tries to "educate them". When the crap that he sells is pointed out, he tries to be funny but mock everyone else because he doesn't know more. So he keeps trying to derail threads to prevent the true facts to be spread.

I knew Weisbrod did that. I just f***ing knew it.

 

[me2]

Benning on Empty is at issue 9². This one touches upon the trade deadline in a more abstract, general way, so there may still be some unfinished business there. Click twice to enlarge, as always.

One of your best.

 

[me2]

this is a bad analogy like all baseball analogies. four pathetic grinders are not equal to one good player

They are if you ice all 4 at the same time in the place of the one good player. 8 on 5 ftw.

 

[SillyRabbit]

Reading the article on Cheveldayoff really illustrates something that is obvious but I’m going to state anyway:

Trevor Linden and Jim Benning aren’t intelligent enough to run a hockey franchise.

This isn’t meant to insult them to be petty or rude. They legitimately do not have the mental capacity, foresight, objectivity or vision to identify what it takes to build a winning team and execute it.

That’s what happens when you have two guys with high school diplomas running a half a billion dollar organization.

 

[RandV]

Why the Jets should be the envy of the NHL

Relevant bit:

The Canucks last made the playoffs at the same time. The following 3 years have looked different for these teams...

I'd add the next paragraph to the relevant bit as well:

"It's important. Being together. Being comfortable with the guys in the room. Getting chemistry. Playing with the same guys year after year, it's important," Chiarot said.

Building stability around the right players and getting guys to buy in is perhaps the hardest to recognize and most under appreciated mark of a good GM. This is made even more painfully obvious seeing how Gillis was treated here. And even more painful is how bad Linden and Benning are in this specific aspect.