Confirmed with Link: [VAN/CBJ] Canucks acquire F Tyler Motte, Jussi Jokinen for F Thomas Vanek

Status
Not open for further replies.

Horse McHindu

They call me Horse.....
Jun 21, 2014
9,668
2,650
Beijing
I'm about 3 weeks late to the party on this, but I'll state my thoughts:

I think this deal is a bit of a strange one, but there could be a positive silver lining here. Allow me to explain.

I *highly* doubt that Benning was offered a 1st (lol) or 2nd round pick for Vanek. First off - Vanek isn't a young long term asset like Ryan Hartman or Tomas Tatar and so comparing his value to those guys should go completely out the window. Secondly, comparing Vanek to Nash and Maroon is also inappropriate. Yes - Vanek has outscored both those guys, but those guys bring far more to the table than Vanek (i.e. grit, physicality, defensive play, can play anywhere in the line-up, etc.). What people have to realise with Vanek, is that there's a risk of him being completely useless if he's not playing Top 6 or contributing on the PP. That, combined with his lackluster playoff performances in recent years, is why teams weren't offering much for Vanek.

I find it incredible that people think they other GM's tried to deliberately low ball Benning because they didn't respect him enough, LOL. This, coming a year after Benning acquired Dahlen from the Sens for Burrows. What did we get for Bieksa again? Anyone care to remind me?

The fact that people think that Benning "avoids" picks is absurd in my opinion. The market simply wasn't there for Vanek.

Now here is what wouldn't surprise me: If Benning chose Motte instead of a 3rd rounder. People can debate as to whether that was the right move or not, but here is a fact: More times than not, 3rd round picks eventually develop into Tyler Motte calibre level players. This fact is irrefutable. So again - if the Vancouver media or anyone else is crying or whining that we didn't get a 3rd round pick for Vanek, I think it's quite silly.

In other words - do you want you "Tyler Motte" calibre guy now, or 3 years later? Benning chose now.

I don't mind this trade if the following happens: If Motte bumps Granlund from this team, and lives up to his billing of being a fast skating player that wins puck battles and plays a solid two way game, then I think Motte can be a good long term 4th line player for us. If that's what we got for Thomas Vanek, then I do believe that this trade could be counted as a small win for us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PunkRockLocke

Askel

By the way Benning should be fired.
Apr 19, 2004
2,386
774
Malmö/Vancouver
I'm about 3 weeks late to the party on this, but I'll state my thoughts:

I think this deal is a bit of a strange one, but there could be a positive silver lining here. Allow me to explain.

I *highly* doubt that Benning was offered a 1st (lol) or 2nd round pick for Vanek. First off - Vanek isn't a young long term asset like Ryan Hartman or Tomas Tatar and so comparing his value to those guys should go completely out the window. Secondly, comparing Vanek to Nash and Maroon is also inappropriate. Yes - Vanek has outscored both those guys, but those guys bring far more to the table than Vanek (i.e. grit, physicality, defensive play, can play anywhere in the line-up, etc.). What people have to realise with Vanek, is that there's a risk of him being completely useless if he's not playing Top 6 or contributing on the PP. That, combined with his lackluster playoff performances in recent years, is why teams weren't offering much for Vanek.

I find it incredible that people think they other GM's tried to deliberately low ball Benning because they didn't respect him enough, LOL. This, coming a year after Benning acquired Dahlen from the Sens for Burrows. What did we get for Bieksa again? Anyone care to remind me?

The fact that people think that Benning "avoids" picks is absurd in my opinion. The market simply wasn't there for Vanek.

Now here is what wouldn't surprise me: If Benning chose Motte instead of a 3rd rounder. People can debate as to whether that was the right move or not, but here is a fact: More times than not, 3rd round picks eventually develop into Tyler Motte calibre level players. This fact is irrefutable. So again - if the Vancouver media or anyone else is crying or whining that we didn't get a 3rd round pick for Vanek, I think it's quite silly.

In other words - do you want you "Tyler Motte" calibre guy now, or 3 years later? Benning chose now.

I don't mind this trade if the following happens: If Motte bumps Granlund from this team, and lives up to his billing of being a fast skating player that wins puck battles and plays a solid two way game, then I think Motte can be a good long term 4th line player for us. If that's what we got for Thomas Vanek, then I do believe that this trade could be counted as a small win for us.
There is no use trading for crap like Motte. He will never be a impact player in the NHL. If Benning is such a food drafter WHY DOSENT HE AQUIRE MORE PICKS????

The thing is with a draft pick you have a chance at getting a impact player, there is no use adding meddling players like Motte, You dont win with useless players. If Bennings greatness is his drafting why the hell cant he draft good players, or at least better players in the round than AHL players????
 
Last edited by a moderator:

CanaFan

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
19,887
5,849
BC
There is no use trading for crap like Motte. He will never be a impact player in the NHL. If Benning is such a food drafter WHY DOSENT HE AQUIRE MORE PICKS????

The thing is with a draft pick you have a chance at getting a impact player, there is no use adding meddling players like Motte, You dont win with useless players. If Bennings greatness is his drafting why the hell cant he draft good players, or at least better players in the round than AHL players????

Yep. Basically another long winded excuse for yet another waste of an asset. If this line of thinking was prevalent in the NHL - take the guy who’s a probable fringe 4th liner over a pick that is more likely to bust but also has upside - then we should have seen dozens of trades like this at the TDL. But as usual it’s only Benning who prefers to cash in on a $.50 ticket rather than roll the dice on finding the next Tryamkin or Point; guys who actually move the needle on a rebuild if you hit.

But Benning doesn't understand you can’t build a team by acquiring 20 4th liners.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Horse McHindu

They call me Horse.....
Jun 21, 2014
9,668
2,650
Beijing
There is no use trading for crap like Motte. He will never be a impact player in the NHL. If Benning is such a food drafter WHY DOSENT HE AQUIRE MORE PICKS????

The thing is with a draft pick you have a chance at getting a impact player, there is no use adding meddling players like Motte, You dont win with useless players. If Bennings greatness is his drafting why the hell cant he draft good players, or at least better players in the round than AHL players????

1) Picks likely weren't offered to Benning, and if they were, they sure as hell weren't 1sts or 2nds.
2) Most 3rd rounders don't even reach Tyler Motte level.
3) IF Tyler Motte can turn into a decent long term 4th line player that can skate well, play two-way hockey, and win puck battles, then this deal isn't horrible.

As far as "WHY DOESN'T HE ACQUIRE MORE PICKS?" go, I'll say to you what Dave Tomlinson said to David Pratt on Team 1040 a few weeks back. Lets actually see what Benning does once the season ends, or at the draft. There's a good chance that certain guys will be moved for picks (i.e. Hutton, possibly Baertschi, etc.).
 

Black Noise

Flavourtown
Aug 7, 2014
3,704
946
North Vancouver
1) Picks likely weren't offered to Benning, and if they were, they sure as hell weren't 1sts or 2nds.
2) Most 3rd rounders don't even reach Tyler Motte level.
3) IF Tyler Motte can turn into a decent long term 4th line player that can skate well, play two-way hockey, and win puck battles, then this deal isn't horrible.

As far as "WHY DOESN'T HE ACQUIRE MORE PICKS?" go, I'll say to you what Dave Tomlinson said to David Pratt on Team 1040 a few weeks back. Lets actually see what Benning does once the season ends, or at the draft. There's a good chance that certain guys will be moved for picks (i.e. Hutton, possibly Baertschi, etc.).
Trading for picks at the draft is the worst time, picks are worth the most as teams have complied their list and have a good idea at who they want to select at each pick.

Trading for picks at the deadline is the best time, teams are all thinking about the playoffs and they obviously have less value.

Also, regarding Motte, what is the difference between someone like Motte and basically any NHL fringe player in free agency, like Chaput? Other than the fact he's only 2 years younger, there is none. There's absolutely zero point of acquiring these players. Motte could literally vanish from this team and nothing would change. Thus, getting any draft pick is infinitely better.

Like CanaFan has said, a 3rd round pick has the possibility of being the next Tryamkin, Point, Guentzel, Buchnevich, etc. but could also be a bust.

Motte, if everything works out perfectly, will be a 4th liner. If not he busts.

So basically:
Draft Pick = High Risk High Reward
Motte = Medium Risk Low Reward

A team with little top end talent and an absolute f*** ton of mediocre bullshit should not be taking the low reward guy.
 

MS

1%er
Mar 18, 2002
53,367
83,458
Vancouver, BC
I'm about 3 weeks late to the party on this, but I'll state my thoughts:

I think this deal is a bit of a strange one, but there could be a positive silver lining here. Allow me to explain.

I *highly* doubt that Benning was offered a 1st (lol) or 2nd round pick for Vanek. First off - Vanek isn't a young long term asset like Ryan Hartman or Tomas Tatar and so comparing his value to those guys should go completely out the window. Secondly, comparing Vanek to Nash and Maroon is also inappropriate. Yes - Vanek has outscored both those guys, but those guys bring far more to the table than Vanek (i.e. grit, physicality, defensive play, can play anywhere in the line-up, etc.). What people have to realise with Vanek, is that there's a risk of him being completely useless if he's not playing Top 6 or contributing on the PP. That, combined with his lackluster playoff performances in recent years, is why teams weren't offering much for Vanek.

I find it incredible that people think they other GM's tried to deliberately low ball Benning because they didn't respect him enough, LOL. This, coming a year after Benning acquired Dahlen from the Sens for Burrows. What did we get for Bieksa again? Anyone care to remind me?

The fact that people think that Benning "avoids" picks is absurd in my opinion. The market simply wasn't there for Vanek.

Now here is what wouldn't surprise me: If Benning chose Motte instead of a 3rd rounder. People can debate as to whether that was the right move or not, but here is a fact: More times than not, 3rd round picks eventually develop into Tyler Motte calibre level players. This fact is irrefutable. So again - if the Vancouver media or anyone else is crying or whining that we didn't get a 3rd round pick for Vanek, I think it's quite silly.

In other words - do you want you "Tyler Motte" calibre guy now, or 3 years later? Benning chose now.

I don't mind this trade if the following happens: If Motte bumps Granlund from this team, and lives up to his billing of being a fast skating player that wins puck battles and plays a solid two way game, then I think Motte can be a good long term 4th line player for us. If that's what we got for Thomas Vanek, then I do believe that this trade could be counted as a small win for us.

You don't understand drafting and how to get value through the draft.

Motte is a worthless asset now and just because most third-round picks end up being worthless years down the road doesn't mean the 15-20% chance of hitting on that pick is worth giving up on for free. Or that we couldn't have used that pick and its value in a deal somewhere else. Or traded the prospect selected with that pick while he still had value.

Motte is nothing. He's a middling AHLer approaching waiver status. You can sign a dozen prospects exactly like him, only 2 years older, every year. Jayson Megna is basically exactly the same player and we already have him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: timw33

pgj98m3

Registered User
Jan 8, 2012
1,539
1,078
1) Picks likely weren't offered to Benning, and if they were, they sure as hell weren't 1sts or 2nds.
2) Most 3rd rounders don't even reach Tyler Motte level.
3) IF Tyler Motte can turn into a decent long term 4th line player that can skate well, play two-way hockey, and win puck battles, then this deal isn't horrible.

As far as "WHY DOESN'T HE ACQUIRE MORE PICKS?" go, I'll say to you what Dave Tomlinson said to David Pratt on Team 1040 a few weeks back. Lets actually see what Benning does once the season ends, or at the draft. There's a good chance that certain guys will be moved for picks (i.e. Hutton, possibly Baertschi, etc.).
I'd say you're 3 years late to this party...we've seen what Lindenning can do...progressively poorer finishes while spending to the cap, handing out ludicrous contracts, and giving away picks for scrubs.

Referencing Tomlinson talking to Pratt - HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA....GASP.....HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
 

Ryp37

Registered User
Nov 6, 2011
7,525
1,081
You don't understand drafting and how to get value through the draft.

Motte is a worthless asset now and just because most third-round picks end up being worthless years down the road doesn't mean the 15-20% chance of hitting on that pick is worth giving up on for free. Or that we couldn't have used that pick and its value in a deal somewhere else. Or traded the prospect selected with that pick while he still had value.

Motte is nothing. He's a middling AHLer approaching waiver status. You can sign a dozen prospects exactly like him, only 2 years older, every year. Jayson Megna is basically exactly the same player and we already have him.

Speaking of this subject, after someone tweeted out our prospect Gunnarsson put up 0 points this year the Benningites jumped to his defense saying the fact he's in the SHL means he's doing better than most 5th round picks and the fact he stayed in the lineup despite his 0 points bodes well for his future

Basically everyones talking out their ass on this subject and it's hilarious.
 

CanaFan

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
19,887
5,849
BC
It’s also about timing. If you have a team that is contending for a cup and your 4th line is a weakness then yes, acquiring a decent and cheap 4th liner who can give some utility as you chase a cup is a solid strategy.

But when your team is 29th and a long ways off from competing for anything but the lottery then it’s absolutely a waste of an asset - even an asset that could “only” return a 3rd round pick - because it doesn’t matter who you have on your 4th line in 2018 because it almost certainly won’t be the same player who is on your 4th line in 2023 when you might be competing for a cup.

It’s just pointless to target guys who *might* be 4th liners at this stage of a rebuild. A 3rd round pick and the 5-10% chance at hitting on a Point, Tryamkin, Guentzel is far more useful.
 

Horse McHindu

They call me Horse.....
Jun 21, 2014
9,668
2,650
Beijing
You don't understand drafting and how to get value through the draft.

Motte is a worthless asset now and just because most third-round picks end up being worthless years down the road doesn't mean the 15-20% chance of hitting on that pick is worth giving up on for free. Or that we couldn't have used that pick and its value in a deal somewhere else. Or traded the prospect selected with that pick while he still had value.

Motte is nothing. He's a middling AHLer approaching waiver status. You can sign a dozen prospects exactly like him, only 2 years older, every year. Jayson Megna is basically exactly the same player and we already have him.

It ain't 15-20% homie. It's a LOT lower than that.
 

absolute garbage

Registered User
Jan 22, 2006
4,399
1,769
The people who still don't understand how drafting, assets and supply/demand works, will never do. It just comes down brain power and some don't have enough of it. Explaining it 100 times doesn't change that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: But Gillis

Horse McHindu

They call me Horse.....
Jun 21, 2014
9,668
2,650
Beijing
Statistically Speaking: NHL Draft Pick Value - Article - TSN

Picks 61-91 (3rd rounders) have a 28% chance at playing 100 games, 7.5% chance at being a Top 6 forward or Top 4 defenceman.

Tyler Motte has a 0% chance at being a Top 6 forward.

100 games doesn't really mean anything and so that 28% chance is irrelevant.

7.5% chance - fair enough, but do we even know if Benning was offered that?

I agree with you on Motte by the way. All I'm saying is that IF Motte can be a decent long term 4th line center that skates well, plays a 200 foot game, wins puck battles, and boots Granlund from the line-up, then this deal isn't as awful as people are making it sound.
 

Black Noise

Flavourtown
Aug 7, 2014
3,704
946
North Vancouver
100 games doesn't really mean anything and so that 28% chance is irrelevant.

7.5% chance - fair enough, but do we even know if Benning was offered that?

I agree with you on Motte by the way. All I'm saying is that IF Motte can be a decent long term 4th line center that skates well, plays a 200 foot game, wins puck battles, and boots Granlund from the line-up, then this deal isn't as awful as people are making it sound.
It's still pretty awful because players like Motte are in complete abundance in free agency.

I think it's total bullshit that no one offered a pick. Brandon Bollig got a 6th for f*** sakes yet the only offer for Vanek was Tyler Motte? Benning and Linden spew shit out of their ass all the time so I don't trust them one bit.

I also don't see Motte being a long term option, the dude is 23, historically and statistically, he's entering his prime right now.
 

pgj98m3

Registered User
Jan 8, 2012
1,539
1,078
100 games doesn't really mean anything and so that 28% chance is irrelevant.

7.5% chance - fair enough, but do we even know if Benning was offered that?

I agree with you on Motte by the way. All I'm saying is that IF Motte can be a decent long term 4th line center that skates well, plays a 200 foot game, wins puck battles, and boots Granlund from the line-up, then this deal isn't as awful as people are making it sound.
And if I was 40 years younger, 6 inches taller, 20 lb heavier and had the skills of MacDavid I'd lead us to the promised land.
 

CanaFan

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
19,887
5,849
BC
100 games doesn't really mean anything and so that 28% chance is irrelevant.

7.5% chance - fair enough, but do we even know if Benning was offered that?

I agree with you on Motte by the way. All I'm saying is that IF Motte can be a decent long term 4th line center that skates well, plays a 200 foot game, wins puck battles, and boots Granlund from the line-up, then this deal isn't as awful as people are making it sound.

But you just said 100 games doesn’t mean anything. Well so far that’s all Motte is tracking to be.
 

ProstheticConscience

Check dein Limit
Apr 30, 2010
18,459
10,107
Canuck Nation
Dear god, you really dont understand
Nope. He really doesn't. It's the same rationale we've seen for a while: X round draft picks have only an X% chance of being NHLers, so what does it matter if they're thrown away on X failed pick from X other team? It's just that thinking that's taken the team to where it is now (and has been for three seasons).
 

CanaFan

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
19,887
5,849
BC
Nope. He really doesn't. It's the same rationale we've seen for a while: X round draft picks have only an X% chance of being NHLers, so what does it matter if they're thrown away on X failed pick from X other team? It's just that thinking that's taken the team to where it is now (and has been for three seasons).

Exactly. It’s like they acknowledge the actual reasons for acquiring as many picks as possible (low % odds to hit) but rather than conclude that MORE picks is better they weirdly conclude that NOT TRYING is the correct course of action.

It’s a strange departure from logical thinking.
 

ProstheticConscience

Check dein Limit
Apr 30, 2010
18,459
10,107
Canuck Nation
Exactly. It’s like they acknowledge the actual reasons for acquiring as many picks as possible (low % odds to hit) but rather than conclude that MORE picks is better they weirdly conclude that NOT TRYING is the correct course of action.

It’s a strange departure from logical thinking.
It's trying to rationalize Benning's methods while ignoring their success rate. You simply can't do it in a way that follows logic, statistics and probability because so many things about the Lindenningbrod theory of teambuilding are inherently illogical.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: CanaFan

CanaFan

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
19,887
5,849
BC
It's trying to rationalize Benning's methods while ignoring their success rate. You simply can't do it in a way that follows logic, statistics and probability because so many things about the Lindenningbrod theory of teambuilding is inherently illogical.

Yep. It’s like if Benning traded Horvat for Lucic they’d argue that more teams have won a cup with a guy named “Milan” than “Bo” so there was really no harm in trading him away.
 

absolute garbage

Registered User
Jan 22, 2006
4,399
1,769
Every year, there's 31 7th round picks in the marketplace. That's it. The supply is limited. And since there's no cap to how many of those picks one team can have, a team would prefer to have all of them. Demand is there.

There are hundreds of Mottes in the marketplace playing in various leagues every year. There's also a cap, as one team can have only a limited number of them because of contract/roster spots. There's high supply and low demand, so they cost literally nothing.

Even if it was possible, teams would not waive 7th round picks when the season is about to begin.

You don't even have to know the %s of a 7th round pick to understand that. You just have to have a brain.
 

me2

Go ahead foot
Jun 28, 2002
37,903
5,595
Make my day.
Bovinder raises a good point. If we get offered a 4th rounder for Gaudette we should be all over that quick smart before the other GM realises how big his mistake is. The odds of a 4th rounder turning out are much better than a 6th and Gaudette was a 6th. Easy win for us.
 

Jyrki21

2021-12-05
Sponsor
1) Picks likely weren't offered to Benning, and if they were, they sure as hell weren't 1sts or 2nds.
If so, it's because he very publicly expressed a preference to have older prospects. The idea that picks "weren't available" is provably false:

  • Chicago Blackhawks trade forward Tommy Wingels to the Boston Bruins for a 2019 conditional fifth-round draft pick
  • Montreal Canadiens acquire defenceman Mike Reilly from the Minnesota Wild in exchange for a 2019 fifth-round draft pick
  • Ottawa Senators trade forward Nick Shore to the Calgary Flames for a 2019 seventh-round draft pick
  • Montreal Canadiens trade defenceman Joe Morrow to the Winnipeg Jets for a 2018 fourth-round draft pick
  • Pittsburgh Penguins acquire forward Josh Jooris from the Carolina Hurricanes for forward Gregg McKegg
  • Tampa Bay Lightning acquire defenceman Ryan McDonough and forward J.T. Miller from the New York Rangers in exchange for forward Vladimir Namestnikov, forward Brett Howden, defenceman Libor Hajek, a 2018 first-round draft pick, and a conditional second-round draft pick
  • Detroit Red Wings trade forward Tomas Tatar to the Vegas Golden Knights in exchange for a 2018 first-round draft pick, a 2019 second-round draft pick, and a 2020 third-round draft pick
  • Columbus Blue Jackets acquire Thomas Vanek from Vancouver Canucks for Jussi Jokinen and Tyler Motte
  • Anaheim Ducks acquire Jason Chimera from the New York Islanders for Chris Wagner
  • San Jose Sharks acquire Evander Kane from the Buffalo Sabres for a conditional first-round draft pick and a conditional fourth-round draft pick
  • Blue Jackets acquire Ryan Kujawinski from Arizona Coyotes for Jordan Maletta
  • Vancouver acquires Brendan Leipsic from Vegas Golden Knights for Philip Holm
  • Winnipeg Jets acquire Paul Stastny from St. Louis Blues for 2018 first-round draft pick, Erik Foley and 2020 conditional fourth-round draft pick
  • Calgary Flames claim Chris Stewart on waivers from Minnesota Wild
  • Nashville Predators acquire Ryan Hartman and 2018 fifth-round draft pick from Chicago Blackhawks for 2018 first-round draft pick, 2018 fourth-round draft pick and Victor Ejdsell
  • Nashville signs Mike Fisher for the rest of the season
  • Blue Jackets acquire Ian Cole from Ottawa Senators for Nick Moutrey and 2020 third-round draft pick

2) Most 3rd rounders don't even reach Tyler Motte level.
As has been explained about four million times on this board, you draft for upside. Once it's already clear that a player is unlikely to be a contributor, he is worth less than the possibility – however remote – of a guy being a meaningful player. The Canucks haven't done themselves any favors over the years by using later-round picks on grinders, or passing up high-upside players like Ty Ronning.

Most picks are unlikely to materialize. Do you trade them all every year for Motte? This is obviously faulty logic.
 

vancityluongo

curse of the strombino
Sponsor
Jul 8, 2006
18,561
6,216
Edmonton
Why even bother following the Canucks ever? They will never be more than 15% likely to win a Stanley Cup, even if they win the President's Trophy by 35 points. Those don't sound like very good odds.

Should watch the KHL instead:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->