Management Threads | Structure. Standards. Habits.

Status
Not open for further replies.

I am toxic

. . . even in small doses
Oct 24, 2014
9,459
14,902
Vancouver
Canucks could have packaged Martin and a 5th round pick to CBJ and got an RHD in return.

Assuming CBJ had any interest in Martin, or draft pic . . . oh, wait, nvm . . .
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Play

TruGr1t

Proper Villain
Jun 26, 2003
23,355
7,256
From what I have read the last couple months many are saying this is easily a playoff team, which I think is a big stretch in itself.

It was quite a bit easier to be optimistic before training camp than where we are today. Though I think the consensus is they were about even to make the playoffs for most.
 

HairyKneel

Registered User
Jun 5, 2023
1,093
970
Thanks Captain Obvious.

Most teams spend to the CAP and our history is utter failure. Any other riveting prognostications for us?
He’s pretty cunning isn’t he?

It will take time to dig out of the mess they were left with. I don’t like all the moves but they seem to be on the right track but i don’t have a tantrum about trading a fifth round pick for a decent 4th liner who can pk.
 

I am toxic

. . . even in small doses
Oct 24, 2014
9,459
14,902
Vancouver
Where did you get that insider information?

I found out that CBJ claimed Martin off waivers. I have my sources.

And I just have a hunch that they value draft picks.

Just a hunch though. It could be that - like the Ruthervin apologists- Jarmo believes draft picks don't matter.
 

strattonius

Registered User
Jul 4, 2011
4,222
4,478
Surrey, BC
Canucks could have packaged Martin and a 5th round pick to CBJ and got an RHD in return.

Assuming CBJ had any interest in Martin, or draft pic . . . oh, wait, nvm . . .

Yeah a waiver stop-gap backup goaltender and a 5th rd pick would be enough to land Andrew Peeke...?

Do you really believe those two pieces land a competent partner for Hughes? Or what imaginary player/trade are you thinking of?
 

I am toxic

. . . even in small doses
Oct 24, 2014
9,459
14,902
Vancouver
Yeah a waiver stop-gap backup goaltender and a 5th rd pick would be enough to land Andrew Peeke...?

Do you really believe those two pieces land a competent partner for Hughes? Or what imaginary player/trade are you thinking of?

I doubt it.

But if - for the sake of argument - it took a 3rd to get Peek, then packaging Martin and a 5th would bring that to say a 4th to get Peeke.

I mean, assuming CBJ had a glut of RHD, and a need for a backup goaltender.

And believed that draft picks matter.
 
Last edited:

RandV

It's a wolf v2.0
Jul 29, 2003
26,865
4,972
Vancouver
Visit site
So our management should endlessly look for a top 4 dman a day before the season starts instead of improve other areas of the roster?

No one is trading what we need on the blueline. And it's definitely not on waivers like some are hoping. I'm glad Alvin is pursuing other areas of weakness with the roster instead of sitting back waiting for a magical defenseman to pop up.
Yeah still a few days to see if they can pull off something, but it's kind of tricky situation. It's not so easy to just snap your fingers and get a perfect cheap partner for Hughes, as that player will have value on pretty much any team.

I feel like this ended up being a bit of a snafu because of Tocchet, but personally as long as it's within reason I don't mind the coach having the agency to muck things up for the GM. Like going into training camp we all assumed it was going to be Hughes-Cole, Soucy-Hronek, and whoever with Myers. It's perfectly reasonable that management thought they had things covered, as I believe that's the role Cole played with Tampa (Top 4 RD), and Soucy is known for playing both sides. But Tocchet opens training camp and decides he really likes Cole with Hronek and Soucy with Myers, and whatever RD is left in the organization to player with Hughes, and leaving management looking bad demanding a RH D for Hughes.
 

Lindgren

Registered User
Jun 30, 2005
6,030
3,956
Yeah still a few days to see if they can pull off something, but it's kind of tricky situation. It's not so easy to just snap your fingers and get a perfect cheap partner for Hughes, as that player will have value on pretty much any team.

I feel like this ended up being a bit of a snafu because of Tocchet, but personally as long as it's within reason I don't mind the coach having the agency to muck things up for the GM. Like going into training camp we all assumed it was going to be Hughes-Cole, Soucy-Hronek, and whoever with Myers. It's perfectly reasonable that management thought they had things covered, as I believe that's the role Cole played with Tampa (Top 4 RD), and Soucy is known for playing both sides. But Tocchet opens training camp and decides he really likes Cole with Hronek and Soucy with Myers, and whatever RD is left in the organization to player with Hughes, and leaving management looking bad demanding a RH D for Hughes.
If Rutherford/Alvin didn't know that Tocchet was determined not to play a lefty with Hughes, and they expected Cole or Soucy to be on that first pair, that's a major communications screw-up. But it's possible we'll see very shortly that they knew all along, that it's all well in hand, etc., as they'll bring in Hughes's new right-shot partner just in time for the season opener.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hodgy

RandV

It's a wolf v2.0
Jul 29, 2003
26,865
4,972
Vancouver
Visit site
If Rutherford/Alvin didn't know that Tocchet was determined not to play a lefty with Hughes, and they expected Cole or Soucy to be on that first pair, that's a major communications screw-up. But it's possible we'll see very shortly that they knew all along, that it's all well in hand, etc., as they'll bring in Hughes's new right-shot partner just in time for the season opener.
What I'm saying is not so much that they didn't talk with Tocchet at the time but more Tocchet wasn't going to decide what he liked until he actually got the players in training camp. Like I said Cole should have been the obvious choice on paper for Hughes here, but the coach gets things going in training camp and decides he really likes him with Hronek.

It ends up looking bad on management but I don't think they really care and personally I'm in favour of it for now. As a change of pace, considering how closely in step Desjardins and then Green used to work with Benning.
 

PuckMunchkin

Very Nice, Very Evil!
Dec 13, 2006
12,413
10,086
Lapland
I know this is just me being negative. And evil too etc.

But the early fruits of our AHL revamp are not that great. Höglander and Podkolzin have not progressed one bit.

Obviously it is too early to say if they've successfully put our AHL affiliate on the right track to help us develop players again, but just a thought that occurred to me. Höglander has not progressed at all, Podkolzin seems to have gotten worse.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DFAC

strattonius

Registered User
Jul 4, 2011
4,222
4,478
Surrey, BC
I know this is just me being negative. And evil too etc.

But the early fruits of our AHL revamp are not that great. Höglander and Podkolzin have not progressed one bit.

Obviously it is too early to say if they've successfully put our AHL affiliate on the right track to help us develop players again, but just a thought that occurred to me. Höglander has not progressed at all, Podkolzin seems to have gotten worse.

It has nothing to do with the work they're putting in to our development and everything to do with individual's abilities.

Abbotsford is going to be a wagon this year with lots of players competing for NHL games. If anything, the fact that Pods and Hogs have been pushed down the roster and seemingly stagnating in development is showing we are accruing some depth and they just weren't that good to begin with.
 

Diogenes92

Registered User
Dec 13, 2014
1,642
1,481
North Vancouver
I know this is just me being negative. And evil too etc.

But the early fruits of our AHL revamp are not that great. Höglander and Podkolzin have not progressed one bit.

Obviously it is too early to say if they've successfully put our AHL affiliate on the right track to help us develop players again, but just a thought that occurred to me. Höglander has not progressed at all, Podkolzin seems to have gotten worse.
You're not being negative. You're just going off of the evidence in front of you.

Being a fan of a team isn't all about being nauseatingly optimistic about everything.

I like to think of HF Canucks as the "This is fine" dog in a burning house meme.
 

PuckMunchkin

Very Nice, Very Evil!
Dec 13, 2006
12,413
10,086
Lapland
It has nothing to do with the work they're putting in to our development and everything to do with individual's abilities.
Than why does it need to be fixed if development has "nothing to do with" how our players develop?

We can just ignore it and concentrate our efforts on getting the right individuals.
Abbotsford is going to be a wagon this year with lots of players competing for NHL games. If anything, the fact that Pods and Hogs have been pushed down the roster and seemingly stagnating in development is showing we are accruing some depth and they just weren't that good to begin with.
 

Nazzlind

Registered User
Sep 9, 2010
1,397
726
Lower Mainland
I doubt it.

But if - for the sake of argument - it took a 3rd to get Peek, then packaging Martin and a 5th would bring that to say a 4th to get Peeke.

I mean, assuming CBJ had a glut of RHD, and a need for a backup goaltender.

And believed that draft picks matter.
CBJ is also trying to make the playoffs this year so maybe if we throw in Garland or Beauvillier, we can get Jiricek too!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad