Vancouver Canucks Rebuild Off to Good Start

[Mal Reynolds]

That's an... incredibly positive... article. I want to be optimistic too, and there is some upside here, some players who have intriguing potential... but I'll sum up my case for my perspective - I'll call it "realistic" as opposed to "negative" - by saying this: in our division, we have teams like Edmonton, Calgary and Anaheim, all of whom have better younger pieces to build off of, and more valuable older pieces to sell off (should they go that route). They have their own issues and problems to resolve but I just don't see how we can keep up with the "arms race" at this point

That said, with any luck we can snag a big "future" piece or three this year in the draft and things will be rosier But imo, acting like the rebuild/"transition" is going well and well on its way is a bit, well, dishonest. We have a ways to go yet

 

[NoShowWilly]

Well yeah eventually we jump on that big free agent. This past year was not the time. Now we have a 6m soon to be 32 yr old for another 5 yrs.

Now I believe Eriksson will be better than this but what does that matter if we are nowhere close.

It is another few years before we start upwards in my opinion.

 

[valkynax]

Well yeah eventually we jump on that big free agent. This past year was not the time. Now we have a 6m soon to be 32 yr old for another 5 yrs.

Now I believe Eriksson will be better than this but what does that matter if we are nowhere close.

It is another few years before we start upwards in my opinion.

Yeah I agree, that's why I don't care when some critics say oh the Dahlen trade is bad he's at least 2-3 years away from NHL.

This article is being a little too rainbow and unicorn. Sure the Canucks exceeded expectations but that's because the expectations were literally non-existent. It takes a special type of talent to disappoint when there's not even a bar set, and Benning actually managed to do so in the past.

And while the TDL showed a little promise, I will need to see a LOT more actions before I can confidently tell myself that the team is on the right track to a proper rebuild.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Yeah I agree, that's why I don't care when some critics say oh the Dahlen trade is bad he's at least 2-3 years away from NHL.

This article is being a little too rainbow and unicorn. Sure the Canucks exceeded expectations but that's because the expectations were literally non-existent. It takes a special type of talent to disappoint when there's not even a bar set, and Benning actually managed to do so in the past.

And while the TDL showed a little promise, I will need to see a LOT more actions before I can confidently tell myself that the team is on the right track to a proper rebuild.

Has anyone said the Dahlen trade is bad?

 

[valkynax]

Has anyone said the Dahlen trade is bad?

No not from this board. I remember listening to Bob McKenzie's cast and he said he asked around the league's GMs about the Dahlen Burrows trade and some dismisses the trade with Dahlen still a few years from NHL as reason.

 

[JuniorNelson]

Canucks could be competitive next season. They don't want that. They want to suck again. They might even extend the suckage. Perverse!

If they wanted to move along, they'd make decisive moves. Slots would be opened up before the expansion draft. Horvat would be secured. Miller would be returning.

These things might still happen. They might be laying groundwork for an open audition for a new top line. They might be readying the kind of momentous occasion that redefines a hockey club. They might even have a new starter in mind. It doesn't seem apparent right now.

 

[Rick Rocket]

If they let Miller go and also don't replace him with a starter... we may be on the right track

 

[ChilliBilly]

If they let Miller go and also don't replace him with a starter... we may be on the right track

perfectly happy with Markstrom Demko and Bachman rotating around ....

 

[Pastor Of Muppets]

The title of this thread is basically an open invitation from every 'negative nelly' on the Canucks board...Personally,Its still too early to say whether its off to a good start..its finally going in the right direction.

The Canucks have been in the playoffs 18 out of the last 25 years, and there has been some excellent hockey...So its the end of one cycle and the beginning of another..Right now,the Canucks are exactly where they are supposed to be,getting a higher pick.

 

[RandV]

That is on the owners. If they are willing to eat the contracts and let the young guns play. Look at the leafs, they have over 11M at the robidas island

Leafs have Laich, Michalek, and Greening on the farm, and these players are costing them $8.3M against the cap. It works because they are cap dumps acquired through trade for a price, who's contracts expire this year.

You can't really do the same thing with longer term team vets who while maybe not worth their contracts are still capable NHLers (like Burrows). Besides Eriksson has a no movement clause so he can block going to the minors.

There's really no way around it, while we try to rebuild the team the 10M+ for Eriksson and Sutter are going to be on the books for the next 4 years at least.

 

[PM]

What rebuild? I've been told time and time again by Canucks management and media that our fanbase won't support a rebuild so clearly we aren't rebuilding.

 

[Pastor Of Muppets]

Even if you wait until June 2019 to buyout Eriksson that will still leave us with a $5.55M cap hit for 2 years, $3.55M for 1 year, and $555k for another 3 years. The way Benning structured this contract was so ****ing stupid, it basically guarantees he won't be bought out.

Regarding that list of forwards you mentioned, I'm having a very difficult time coming up with a legitimate top 6 from that. Not to mention the fact that you're banking on most of those guys panning out which isn't realistic.

That defense also doesn't look like a "very good core" to me either.

After next season doesn't Erikssons NMC become a NTC..?....Maybe there's an out there that he could be traded.?

 

[Egghead1999]

Leafs have Laich, Michalek, and Greening on the farm, and these players are costing them $8.3M against the cap. It works because they are cap dumps acquired through trade for a price, who's contracts expire this year.

You can't really do the same thing with longer term team vets who while maybe not worth their contracts are still capable NHLers (like Burrows). Besides Eriksson has a no movement clause so he can block going to the minors.

There's really no way around it, while we try to rebuild the team the 10M+ for Eriksson and Sutter are going to be on the books for the next 4 years at least.

They are not on the the "robidas island"; Cowen, lupul are
I mean give them two choices: sitting at the pressbox for 4 years or is placed on long-term injured reserve

 

[Havre]

That is on the owners. If they are willing to eat the contracts and let the young guns play. Look at the leafs, they have over 11M at the robidas island

I'm not really sure how we will get rid of those contracts early without paying for it in some way other than just dollars from the owners.

Personally I'm not really sure how the rebuild could look any worse at this point.

1) Bad long term contracts - CHECK

Even if it is only two at the moment and Sutter by itself hardly is a franchise killing contract)

2) No absolutely high end talent - CHECK

I love Horvat and I think we have done a good job with filling the roster with guys like Tryamkin, Stetcher, Hutton etc. who would have been excellent additions to a strong core, but who are unlikely to be the "core" of a cup winning team. Things could change at the top end of course, but so far it looks like what we got is just a bunch of more "complementary pieces".

3) No enthusiasm for the current regime - CHECK

At least when you bring in the people Toronto brought in you will for some time bring in some optimism. Fans, players etc. will start believing that something might happen. Even Eakins gave you that for some months eh weeks.

Of course you will have some players that maybe might develop into something. Any maybe you might get lucky. Of course we could. That is not the same as saying this rebuild has gotten off to a good start.

 

[CpatainCanuck]

The worst thing for the Canucks rebuild would be to improve too quickly before actually drafting any star players. Following the Calgary Flames model or the St. Louis Blues model or the Nashville Predators model could simply lead to a long period of mediocrity.

 

[SpaceCowboy]

My time line for hope is more 3-5 years.

Dahlen Horvat Boeser
Baertschi 2017 Draft Goldobin
Eriksson Sutter Granlund
Virtanen Gaunce Gaudette

Tanev Hutton
Stecher Juolevi
Tryamkin Brisebois

Demko
Markstrom

Not all of those pieces will still be here, and some may obviously not pan out. There will likely be another high draft pick in 2018, and there may be FA pieces added in 2018 as well. I think in 3-5 years that could be a young, competitive team.

I am incredibly high on Horvat, but if he's our 1C, it's not going to be good. He's an amazing player, but you really need a clear unequivocal 1C to compete. And Horvat I think excels against 2C's better.

 

[JanBulisPiggyBack]

I am incredibly high on Horvat, but if he's our 1C, it's not going to be good. He's an amazing player, but you really need a clear unequivocal 1C to compete. And Horvat I think excels against 2C's better.

For a team that wants to compete for the cup I agree, you want to try and acquire that premiere number 1 guy and have Horvat be a 1b Centre. The biggest challenge is finding one in the draft who can fill that role, because there rarely is one available in free agency. Ryan Johansson maybe but I don't really see him becoming better than horvat will become

 

[Horse McHindu]

The Vancouver Canucks exceeded expectations at the trade deadline. They flipped veterans Alex Burrows and Jannik Hansen to the Ottawa Senators and San Jose Sharks respectively. General manager Jim Benning managed to pick up high-end prospect Jonathan Dahlen from the Senators; while picking up 2014 first rounder Nikolay Goldobin and a conditional fourth from their divisional rival, the Sharks. With these trades brought, essentially, the official start of the Canucks’ rebuild. Despite not always being given ample opportunity, the team’s young core has been putting up results.

http://lastwordonhockey.com/2017/03/11/vancouver-canucks-kids-getting-job-done/

It's a dumb article, and written by someone who CLEARLY does not understand what Benning is doing. Period. Benning has been "rebuilding" this team since he got here. However - Benning's interpretation of a rebuild, is different (and correct) from many of the ignorant "hockey guru's" out there.

When you rebuild a team, you don't just trade every guy over the age of 26 for draft picks and hairless 19 year old kids. A good rebuild entails SLOWLY phasing out the vets, while SLOWLY infusing youth and prospects into roles that will challenge them (so that they grow), but not over-exert them (so that they lose confidence).

A smart rebuild will have a combination of kids and vets that have either played at an elite level, or vets that have been leaders in the lockerroom. These vets are the ones that will hold the kids accountable (i.e. get the kids to compete hard every night regardless of where they are in the standings and what part of the season it is), while the current/former elites will show these kids the 'tricks of the trade.'

An important component to rebuilding is to get the kids to compete hard for a playoff spot, and even get the kids some playoff experience even if they end up getting curb stomped in the first round by a true contender .

Mediocre minded "hockey pundits" (mainly from Eastern Canada) are quick to point out that not embracing a "full rebuild" (i.e. trading every veteran Tom, Dick, and Harry for a hairless 19 year old kid or draft pick) is simply delaying the inevitable, but many of these "pundits" do NOT point out that the "tear down" approach, more often than not, also carries a MAJOR risk of delaying a successful rebuild.

Why? Because - without the right veteran leadership (i.e. vets that are lockerroom leaders and/or have played at an elite level), a team loses its "culture" which then puts the team at risk for eventually becoming too green, too entitled, not competing hard every night, losing confidence, and becoming directionless..........case in point, the Edmonton Oilers of 2006-2015, and the Colorado Avalanche at current.

 

[Horse McHindu]

It's a dumb article, and written by someone who CLEARLY does not understand what Benning is doing. Period. Benning has been "rebuilding" this team since he got here. However - Benning's interpretation of a rebuild, is different (and correct) from many of the ignorant "hockey guru's" out there.

When you rebuild a team, you don't just trade every guy over the age of 26 for draft picks and hairless 19 year old kids. A good rebuild entails SLOWLY phasing out the vets, while SLOWLY infusing youth and prospects into roles that will challenge them (so that they grow), but not over-exert them (so that they lose confidence).

A smart rebuild will have a combination of kids and vets that have either played at an elite level, or vets that have been leaders in the lockerroom. These vets are the ones that will hold the kids accountable (i.e. get the kids to compete hard every night regardless of where they are in the standings and what part of the season it is), while the current/former elites will show these kids the 'tricks of the trade.'

An important component to rebuilding is to get the kids to compete hard for a playoff spot, and even get the kids some playoff experience even if they end up getting curb stomped in the first round by a true contender .

Mediocre minded "hockey pundits" (mainly from Eastern Canada) are quick to point out that not embracing a "full rebuild" (i.e. trading every veteran Tom, Dick, and Harry for a hairless 19 year old kid or draft pick) is simply delaying the inevitable, but many of these "pundits" do NOT point out that the "tear down" approach, more often than not, also carries a MAJOR risk of delaying a successful rebuild.

Why? Because - without the right veteran leadership (i.e. vets that are lockerroom leaders and/or have played at an elite level), a team loses its "culture" which then puts the team at risk for eventually becoming too green, too entitled, not competing hard every night, losing confidence, and becoming directionless..........case in point, the Edmonton Oilers of 2006-2015, and the Colorado Avalanche at current.

I would not be surprised in the very least, if this author (and other 'hockey guru's' in the media) say something to effect of, "Wow, Benning has abandoned the rebuild already!" should Benning decide to be active in the UFA market this off-season.

This article really pisses me off, even though it's well intentioned.

 

[David Bruce Banner]

Next couple of drafts are going to be crucial. We need to get lucky and pick well. We also have to hope that Boeser and Juolevi develop into solid+ NHLers... and later round picks like Gaudette and Brisbois turn into useful pieces.

I don't see us making the playoffs next year, no matter how bad ownership/management wants it. Long shot the year after too.

 

[Horse McHindu]

Next couple of drafts are going to be crucial. We need to get lucky and pick well. We also have to hope that Boeser and Juolevi develop into solid+ NHLers... and later round picks like Gaudette and Brisbois turn into useful pieces.

I don't see us making the playoffs next year, no matter how bad ownership/management wants it. Long shot the year after too.

I agree that the playoffs will be a long shot next year as well, but this should not dissuade management from being active in the UFA market in the off-season.

An important component to rebuilding, is getting your kids to compete for a playoff spot with the intention of getting them playoff experience.

Look at teams like Columbus and Calgary. There's a reason why they have guys like Hartnell and Brouwer there.

 

[CanaFan]

I agree that the playoffs will be a long shot next year as well, but this should not dissuade management from being active in the UFA market in the off-season.

An important component to rebuilding, is getting your kids to compete for a playoff spot with the intention of getting them playoff experience.

Look at teams like Columbus and Calgary. There's a reason why they have guys like Hartnell and Brouwer there.

So Hartnell and Brouwer helped make Cbj and Calgary good, but Edmonton (who had Ryan Smyth) was a disaster cause they had no vets to show them the way? What about Doan in Phoenix? Iginla in Colorado?

I'm always impressed by your ability to cherry pick anecdotal evidence whenever you want to write a new narrative about vets and character. When Edmonton sucks it's cause they have no vets (even though they had some). When CBJ is good it's cause they have vets (even though they are mainly led by younger players).

It's just so much cherry picking.

 

[Horse McHindu]

It's why it is so important to hold onto guys like Forsling, McCann and those draft picks.

I wasn't aware that Forsling and McCann were on the road to superstardom.

 

[Horse McHindu]

So Hartnell and Brouwer helped make Cbj and Calgary good, but Edmonton (who had Ryan Smyth) was a disaster cause they had no vets to show them the way? What about Doan in Phoenix? Iginla in Colorado?

Vets........not grandpa's!

Hartnell and Brouwer are vets, but are still highly impactful vets.

Smyth in 2006 was a great hockey player (was he even a vet then?), and the Oilers went to the cup that year. When Smyth came back to Edmonton however, he was well past his prime and ready to be put to pasture.

Doan and Iginla are also way past their primes at this stage of their careers. 4-5 years ago however, those are the types of guys you'd want in the lockerroom (i.e. combination of veteran leadership, having played at an elite level, and still able to show the kids the ropes).

I'm not cherry picking. I'm commenting on what I see.

 

[CanaFan]

Vets........not grandpa's!

Hartnell and Brouwer are vets, but are still highly impactful vets.

Smyth in 2006 was a great hockey player (was he even a vet then?), and the Oilers went to the cup that year. When Smyth came back to Edmonton however, he was well past his prime and ready to be put to pasture.

Doan and Iginla are also way past their primes at this stage of their careers. 4-5 years ago however, those are the types of guys you'd want in the lockerroom (i.e. combination of veteran leadership, having played at an elite level, and still able to show the kids the ropes).

I'm not cherry picking. I'm commenting on what I see.

Ok so let's clarify then.

Are vets useful because of their "veteran-ness" i.e. experience, character, leadership, etc?

Or because they are good, effective players i.e. they compete hard, make more good plays than bad ones, etc?

This could actually get us somewhere.