Post-Game Talk: 18/19 Endless boilerplate arguments regarding Management thread | Pt. V. Oil up your mouse wheel.

[Jay Cee]

It seems that, by this point, most if not ALL the UFA signed turned out to be hot garbage.

Not saying this to excuse the dear leader's blunder, but I always wondered...why that year in particular, where everyone around NHL handed out big contracts to these trash players like Johnny ****ing Appleseed? Were all these UFA's hyped up to the stratosphere?

Because being a ufa these days is a blank cheque. I don't understand why more players don't go that route. Look at Beagle. He wouldn't have gotten that good of a contract from another team, but he was getting paid regardless and that's just crazy. He sucks.

 

[vanuck]

Edit: moved to 2018 Roster thread.

 

[Hit the post]

Because being a ufa these days is a blank cheque. I don't understand why more players don't go that route. Look at Beagle. He wouldn't have gotten that good of a contract from another team, but he was getting paid regardless and that's just crazy. He sucks.

I wouldn't say he sucks....he's just overpaid (which happens on every team; unfortunately for us, it seems to be a consistant theme with this management - especially with players that DO suck on the team vs the odd time occurance).

 

[nuck luck]

I love all of the responses making fun of this here- sarcasm- they are laughable. Each of these knee jerk posts misses the point and conflates all of the posters other positions with this one.

If we believe that EP is the real deal and special, on the level of some of the names of young franchise types being discussed in the league today, then being in the right situation at the right moment to select him took a lot of luck and a set of specific conditions.

All of the chain selection posts: imagine if we selected Ehlers/Tkachcuk/etc., man our lineup would look terrific with them and EP. There is literally less than a 2% chance we would have been in a position to select a franchise player in EP if we had selected the other two. Those players would have made our team better and we would not have picked this franchise player.

I would not look backwards and say, glad we lost so we could select him, but I can be happy we did select him. For all of you making fun of the comment (almost all of you are on team tank now and have been over the past two years), isn't that exactly what you are doing. Let's suck to get a better player? Our bad talent, bad management, and bad selection did just that- it made us suck. And so we finally got to pick a player that looks like he can change things for real.

If he is that player, the debate can be had: would you rather have a franchise EP or Ehlers and Tkachuk? Debate away. My opinion is that right now, I want the upside of EP over those two! That makes the poster being made fun of have a valid point. Would it be nice to have all three- yup!!! But it was almost not statistically possible for it to happen if you think the Ehlers and Tkachuk would have made a difference to the quality of the team.

It does not excuse the god awful drafting of Virtanen and Juolevi, but it most certainly explains the ability to get lucky (and smart) in drafting EP. That is not something that can reasonably be made fun of as so many of you are doing on this page.

Flame away

(bolded) The simple fact that you are defending this idiotic theory (Other's 'liking' the theory or pom 'liking' your post) proves that their replies weren't knee jerk reactions and their aim was spot on, many of you can be fused as the same ilk and mind.

This draft is not like picking numbers for the lottery. It has been confirmed by Friedman that only one other team had Pete ranked high in the draft and they were picking late. Just this fact alone increases the odds of us walking away with Pete even if we drafted later. Conditions don't need to be identical to select the same player if nobody before us has Pete on their radar.

With a smart GM with a plan to rebuild from the start, we should have done exactly what Toronto did and placed our top picks in the AHL to develop further. This would increase our odds even further because we would only be a max 4-5 spots back from where we picked. So it's not far fetched that we could have all the players mentioned. BTW, you just picked a random percentage number (2%) to emphasize your point. I suggest you use decimals next time if you want to make it seem more calculated and precise. There's only a 4.79% chance that the odds you suggested would be a whole number.

Your next paragraph is supposed to mean what? I think we're all glad we selected him, not just you...so what? And it's not just about getting draft picks, pay attention. We are all capable to see the faults and don't easily get persuaded by media hype or babble from the front office. We know there is no SC future with bennbrod running this organization so we want him gone. The sooner the better because he can set this team back multiple years with another one of his trades or RFA acquisitions.

Tired of the 1 or 2 option limit you puck bennies can only come up with. It doesn't have to be Pete or Tkachuk/Nylander so let's leave that there. The only reason you provide two options is because the response is geared in your favor. I just explained that if we kept Nylander with the Comets for 2 years as the Leafs did, our draft position doesn't change because Virt was not a factor. Tkachuk could have been sent down for a year and still our position doesn't change since OJ hasn't had a sniff of NHL time yet. We might have moved back 4-5 spots with Nylander and Tkachuk both playing their first year in the NHL after a year or two with the comets, but there still wasn't a team picking in the top 15 spots that had Pete going as their first pick. So there's a 88.47% chance we could have still drafted Pete. See what I did there...

So the real debate is, what would you prefer:

Nylander/Tkachuk/Boeser/Pete/Bo or Virt/OJ/Boeser/Pete/Bo? debate away...

**and in case you think Nylander would make a difference to put us near Playoffs (laughable), we don't have a Matthews to pair with him.

Myself, if we have:

Tkachuk/Pete/Boeser
Nylander/Bo/?

Our top 6 is pretty much done. Bo has proven to me that he could make that line work if he had 1 skilled winger. Draft focus should be on D and we can consider trades involving draft picks to move back a few spots.

 

[nuck luck]

So as the team starts to plummet again putting pressure on Benning how's his prime 'achievement' our much vaunted prospect pool looking at the moment?

Pettersson aside, seems like a lot of well regarded guys have graduated to North American pro at the same time and hit that stumbling block. Gaudette, Dahlin, and Juolevi have done okay but the early start mediocre is more of an indication of Granlund/Gaunce/Goldobin type players than actual impact guys, while Lind and Gadjovich are doing about as well as Cole Cassels did. Meanwhile in a critical development year Demko hasn't played yet due to a concussion, one that was made more severe when the Canucks forced him on the plane to Utica when he said himself he wasn't ready for it yet.

Seems like a big chunk of guys that a few months ago people were pencilling in as important cogs on a competitive roster are looking like they require a downgrade in expectations. Now of course it's still too early, and personally I like giving a prospect (especially coming out of the CHL) one freebie adjustment year in the AHL, but guys that are going to make an NHL impact soon usually look better than this. Early prognoses is looking like more the same where only the top picks are really going to make an impact for us.

I find it funny when the puck bennies use the oils as an example of tanking and say that they don't want this team to follow suit. But, if you edited the names, I think you can copy/paste this post to the oils thread and fans there would agree.

 

[nuck luck]

That is the correct question to which I have never received a response.

If Benning is doing a good job, what would this team look like today had we had an average gm?

What if we'd had a bad gm?

If you can't establish an objective standard by which someone can be judged, it makes distinctions like good and bad meaningless.

Agreed! It makes me sad to think where this team would be if MG was still GM. He would have started with a rebuild right away and would have loaded up on picks and not let a single player walk for nothing in return.

 

[y2kcanucks]

I love all of the responses making fun of this here- sarcasm- they are laughable. Each of these knee jerk posts misses the point and conflates all of the posters other positions with this one.

If we believe that EP is the real deal and special, on the level of some of the names of young franchise types being discussed in the league today, then being in the right situation at the right moment to select him took a lot of luck and a set of specific conditions.

All of the chain selection posts: imagine if we selected Ehlers/Tkachcuk/etc., man our lineup would look terrific with them and EP. There is literally less than a 2% chance we would have been in a position to select a franchise player in EP if we had selected the other two. Those players would have made our team better and we would not have picked this franchise player.

I would not look backwards and say, glad we lost so we could select him, but I can be happy we did select him. For all of you making fun of the comment (almost all of you are on team tank now and have been over the past two years), isn't that exactly what you are doing. Let's suck to get a better player? Our bad talent, bad management, and bad selection did just that- it made us suck. And so we finally got to pick a player that looks like he can change things for real.

If he is that player, the debate can be had: would you rather have a franchise EP or Ehlers and Tkachuk? Debate away. My opinion is that right now, I want the upside of EP over those two! That makes the poster being made fun of have a valid point. Would it be nice to have all three- yup!!! But it was almost not statistically possible for it to happen if you think the Ehlers and Tkachuk would have made a difference to the quality of the team.

It does not excuse the god awful drafting of Virtanen and Juolevi, but it most certainly explains the ability to get lucky (and smart) in drafting EP. That is not something that can reasonably be made fun of as so many of you are doing on this page.

Flame away

Add this to the list of stupid theories. "If we picked good players instead of bad players, the team wouldn't have continued to suck so we could eventually get a good player."

Let's bench Pettersson then. And Horvat. Hell, why play with a goalie at all? By your theory let's continue to suck and then we'll continue to be put in positions to get more good players. Even if Benning screws up at the draft again this year we'll just keep sucking to get a good player the next year.

It's piss poor logic.

People are on team tank because they want a change in management. They also realize the team needs to bottom out to get top stars in the draft, and would prefer the GM not to f*** up those picks when they do have them otherwise it prolongs the team's stay at the bottom. But hey, you do you man. You praise your GM for f***ing up picks to keep the team at the bottom longer so that maybe they'll get a good player at some future draft. Who knows? Maybe taking Pettersson costs the Canucks Hughes and Lafreniere meaning we could have had 2 future stars instead of one. Damn GM.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Agreed! It makes me sad to think where this team would be if MG was still GM. He would have started with a rebuild right away and would have loaded up on picks and not let a single player walk for nothing in return.

My guess is the Canucks would be an exciting playoff team by now. Especially with how bad the Pacific division is, the Canucks would likely be running away with the division.

 

[y2kcanucks]

It seems that, by this point, most if not ALL the UFA signed turned out to be hot garbage.

Not saying this to excuse the dear leader's blunder, but I always wondered...why that year in particular, where everyone around NHL handed out big contracts to these trash players like Johnny ****ing Appleseed? Were all these UFA's hyped up to the stratosphere?

FOMO is a real thing, and in that year there were a bunch of 2nd liners entering their 30's who were on the downswing of their careers, and a huge drop off after that. That group got grossly overpaid because their name values were at the top of free agency. Smart GM's would avoid them, dumb GM's got caught.

It's why, unless there's someone who's a real star like Tavares, it's never a good idea to overspend in free agency. Especially so if the player you're going for is entering his 30's. The player I wanted going into 2016 was Jonathan Marchessault. Analytics helped me identify him, and I'd have signed him as he signed dirt cheap in Florida.

 

[I in the Eye]

Every good to great team in the league misses out on top end projected talent each year... but they are too busy winning and having fun to care. However, thanks to the lottery rules, mediocre to bad teams have a chance to get top end projected talent each year. In an alternate universe where the Canucks draft Ehlers and Tkachuk, it is not a foregone conclusion that the balls would have landed such a way that they would not be in a position to pick Pettersson. Run the draft lottery again (since it runs again in this alternate reality), and what is the new drafting order?

 

[opendoor]

I love all of the responses making fun of this here- sarcasm- they are laughable. Each of these knee jerk posts misses the point and conflates all of the posters other positions with this one.

If we believe that EP is the real deal and special, on the level of some of the names of young franchise types being discussed in the league today, then being in the right situation at the right moment to select him took a lot of luck and a set of specific conditions.

All of the chain selection posts: imagine if we selected Ehlers/Tkachcuk/etc., man our lineup would look terrific with them and EP. There is literally less than a 2% chance we would have been in a position to select a franchise player in EP if we had selected the other two. Those players would have made our team better and we would not have picked this franchise player.

I would not look backwards and say, glad we lost so we could select him, but I can be happy we did select him. For all of you making fun of the comment (almost all of you are on team tank now and have been over the past two years), isn't that exactly what you are doing. Let's suck to get a better player? Our bad talent, bad management, and bad selection did just that- it made us suck. And so we finally got to pick a player that looks like he can change things for real.

If he is that player, the debate can be had: would you rather have a franchise EP or Ehlers and Tkachuk? Debate away. My opinion is that right now, I want the upside of EP over those two! That makes the poster being made fun of have a valid point. Would it be nice to have all three- yup!!! But it was almost not statistically possible for it to happen if you think the Ehlers and Tkachuk would have made a difference to the quality of the team.

It does not excuse the god awful drafting of Virtanen and Juolevi, but it most certainly explains the ability to get lucky (and smart) in drafting EP. That is not something that can reasonably be made fun of as so many of you are doing on this page.

Flame away

You're vastly overestimating how much effect a decent player or two is going to have on the entire team's fortunes in the face of the pile of junk that is the rest of the roster. Look at the team right now with Pettersson; they're still garbage and could easily be picking top 5 just like they did in 2017.

 

[valkynax]

FOMO is a real thing, and in that year there were a bunch of 2nd liners entering their 30's who were on the downswing of their careers, and a huge drop off after that. That group got grossly overpaid because their name values were at the top of free agency. Smart GM's would avoid them, dumb GM's got caught.

It's why, unless there's someone who's a real star like Tavares, it's never a good idea to overspend in free agency. Especially so if the player you're going for is entering his 30's. The player I wanted going into 2016 was Jonathan Marchessault. Analytics helped me identify him, and I'd have signed him as he signed dirt cheap in Florida.

Sorry not sure what FOMO is.

Yeah I get what you're saying. But even then, looking at 2016, I'm shocked at how straight up awful these contracts are. I mean...you would THINK maybe, just maybe, ONE of these UFAs sign would be worth a damn but man...

Was there even a single big contract from that off season that didn't turn out to be total shit?

 

[y2kcanucks]

Sorry not sure what FOMO is.

Yeah I get what you're saying. But even then, looking at 2016, I'm shocked at how straight up awful these contracts are. I mean...you would THINK maybe, just maybe, ONE of these UFAs sign would be worth a damn but man...

Was there even a single big contract from that off season that didn't turn out to be total ****?

Fear Of Missing Out

And no, those were all awful contracts.

 

[Intangibos]

You're vastly overestimating how much effect a decent player or two is going to have on the entire team's fortunes in the face of the pile of junk that is the rest of the roster. Look at the team right now with Pettersson; they're still garbage and could easily be picking top 5 just like they did in 2017.

If Manny was healthy he could have saved us a few games throughout the playoffs and allowing Kesler to get more favourable matchups.

Hamhuis was probably our #1 D that year. Bieksa and Hamhuis played extremely well defensively and if we're being honest I think it's fair to assume Bieksa wasn't the top guy on that pairing. Losing him, forcing us to run with Rome/Alberts was a big deal. Even losing Rome played a role to some extent.

Adding Lapierre/Higgins as well made a pretty big difference as well, especially Lapierre who filled in better than expected for Malhotra.

Not adding Lapierre may have cost us a number of games. Malhotra staying healthy would likely have won us some games. Hamhuis not getting hurt in the finals may have been enough to win just one more game.

A few wins may not seem like much, but just 8 points can make a difference and one player with some timely goals or defensive play can play a pivotal role in 4 wins throughout 82 games. Not dealing Hamhuis and Hansen that one year was pretty costly when they went on a tear and were the keys to several victories near the end of the season.

$4m being spent on a top 4 D rather than a #6/7 guy like Gudbranson is actually pretty significant.

 

[Phenomenon13]

Hilarious. Do you think that the oilers hitting on those high picks prevented them from getting McDavid? Hall, Nugent-Hopkins, Eberle, Klefbom, Draisaitl, etc... do you think thank god we didn't hit on those picks with Nurse and Yakupov and got us McDavid.

Nylander and Tkachuk in there rookie years would not change the course of our team enough to stop the Pettersson pick.

 

[RandV]

You're vastly overestimating how much effect a decent player or two is going to have on the entire team's fortunes in the face of the pile of junk that is the rest of the roster. Look at the team right now with Pettersson; they're still garbage and could easily be picking top 5 just like they did in 2017.

But on the other under competent management the rest of the roster wouldn't necessarily be a pile of junk. It's impossible to say what could have been but I still think it's a huge stretch that under competent leadership the team could have Horvat, Nylander, Boeser, Tkachuk, and Pettersson all in place.

 

[nuck luck]

My guess is the Canucks would be an exciting playoff team by now. Especially with how bad the Pacific division is, the Canucks would likely be running away with the division.

I didn't even consider the Pac division and the competition, but I completely agree.

Probably the easiest run to get to the Conference Finals too...

 

[SeawaterOnIce]

Benning took over in 2014.

5 drafts and all we have to show for it is Virtanen, Gaudette, Boeser and Pettersson.

UFA signings + trades have mostly yielded nothing in significance and we have not seen this franchise stock a surplus of picks at any of the drafts.

The rebuild never started.

 

[The Drop]

Benning took over in 2014.

5 drafts and all we have to show for it is Virtanen, Gaudette, Boeser and Pettersson.

UFA signings + trades have mostly yielded nothing in significance and we have not seen this franchise stock a surplus of picks at any of the drafts.

The rebuild never started.

Gaudette and Virtanen haven’t shown much either....

 

[nuck luck]

This completely stupid argument rests on the assumption that we would keep 2 players who were not only NHL ready but also ready to generate top 6 production in the NHL in the AHL.

Difficult for you because you seem to ignore future considerations and only care for immediate gratification.

All good teams/business' make a plan and follow through, allow for unexpected surprises, but the path is still headed in the same direction.

The Leafs kept Nylander on their farm team, they had a plan and followed through. What is Tkachuk gonna do if he was sent down? cry and not play anymore or work harder and come back the following year with a determined mindset coupled with pro experience. The last thing on any good GM's mind should be upsetting some 18 year old prospect that whines because he didn't make the cut.

You're the typical 'now' type person who can't seem to comprehend the benefits of investing for the future. A good organization won't throw in all high quality prospects immediately into their lineups. They have a plan and want to focus on player's development instead of being motivated by self-gratifying masturbatory actions to prove that they are smarter than everyone else and attempting a re-tool on the fly.

'Completely stupid' is thinking that there any dividends by allowing a failed RFA acquisition on a bloated contract dictate what's best for him and not the team. Your suggestion is the epitome of 'dumb and dumber'.

Thanks for dropping by, always here to help in any way!

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Hilarious. Do you think that the oilers hitting on those high picks prevented them from getting McDavid? Hall, Nugent-Hopkins, Eberle, Klefbom, Draisaitl, etc... do you think thank god we didn't hit on those picks with Nurse and Yakupov and got us McDavid.

Nylander and Tkachuk in there rookie years would not change the course of our team enough to stop the Pettersson pick.

Couple up Nylander,Tkachuk with the Sedins (and Horvat).in 2016-17....I believe that combination would have altered the destiny of drafting Elias Pettersson.

 

[Jack Burton]

Couple up Nylander,Tkachuk with the Sedins (and Horvat).in 2016-17....I believe that combination would have altered the destiny of Elias Pettersson.

I was wrong about Elias.

Surely you can admit management has some blunders?

 

[nuck luck]

But on the other under competent management the rest of the roster wouldn't necessarily be a pile of junk. It's impossible to say what could have been but I still think it's a huge stretch that under competent leadership the team could have Horvat, Nylander, Boeser, Tkachuk, and Pettersson all in place.

The only guarantee is that our prospects would be better, depth improved, and overall team would be improved compared to what we have now.

We would definitely still have Bo since he was a MG pick. We may not have Pete, but we would have a good chance for McD or Matthews and others that would make this team better.

We would definitely have more picks and better prospects in the system. A smart GM would have used the cap space to acquire 1st round picks like Arizona did taking Datsyuk and using that pick for Chychrun.

 

[Intangibos]

Couple up Nylander,Tkachuk with the Sedins (and Horvat).in 2016-17....I believe that combination would have altered the destiny of Elias Pettersson.

What if we had traded Tanev away like many people here wanted?

What if we had dumped Hamhuis and Hansen in that year where they carried us to a few victories near the end of the season and we finished just a few points ahead of Toronto who drafted Matthews?

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

What if we had traded Tanev away like many people here wanted?

What if we had dumped Hamhuis and Hansen in that year where they carried us to a few victories near the end of the season and we finished just a few points ahead of Toronto who drafted Matthews?

I’d say we would probably have still lost the lottery.