18/19 MGMT thread VIIII

[4Twenty]

Positive comments are disliked in this thread, and are converged on to turn back to the 'negative'
The 'logic' is taking care of itself...Time and 'progress' are not your friend.

Posters are unable to actually "dislike" posts. All we can do is try to get context of the positives.

Tons of people have admitted progress, but their retorts are nuanced. Lots of posts that are "positive" have very little substance, so people are trying to drag substance out of those posters who hold those opinions.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Ok, sorry for saying "no genuine bones in your body", I'll say no genuine substance to your arguements. Attacking the content not the poster.

No worries..I also accidentally liked your post which I didnt agree with.

 

[Bleach Clean]

Positive comments are disliked in this thread, and are converged on to turn back to the 'negative'..Of course my posts are dismissed by the longtime negative poster cult.
The 'logic' is taking care of itself...Time and 'progress' are not your friend.

If your posts on the topic of Benning had logic as the primary underpinning, I'm sure you would be able to convince others of your position. Why hasn't that happened?

 

[Melvin]

Switching gears: If we go back to canuckfan75's earlier intel that Benning will be fired next year if the team doesn't make the playoffs, what do people suppose are the odds of this happening.

Just generally looking at the strength of the west, teams like STL, CHI and ANA have played poorly. Other teams like EDM have disappointed relative to expectations. Do people see the Canucks as a top8 team next year?

Right now, the top8 are:

1. CGY
2. WPG
3. SJ
4. NSH
5. VGK
6. DAL
7. STL
8. MIN

Do the Canucks overtake any of the above teams?

Further, do any of the non-playoff teams this year make a push next year?

The closer they get the more incentivize they have to "go for it," which will lead to them making stupid deals that push them further away. This is what happened with chia in Edmonton and its what I expect to happen here.

I think this season is probably their best chance. They are probably 50/50. Well see what they do at the deadline and in the offseason, if they taste some success I think it could be disastrous for the team.

 

[Hit the post]

The closer they get the more incentivize they have to "go for it," which will lead to them making stupid deals that push them further away. This is what happened with chia in Edmonton and its what I expect to happen here.

I think this season is probably their best chance. They are probably 50/50. Well see what they do at the deadline and in the offseason, if they taste some success I think it could be disastrous for the team.

Yeah that wouldn’t be something to look forward to; dealing a 1st line forward (Hall) for a #4D (Larsen). He’s been unable to acquire even one after more than four years.

 

[Melvin]

Yeah that wouldn’t be something to look forward to; dealing a 1st line forward (Hall) for a #4D (Larsen). He’s been unable to acquire even one after more than four years.

I haven't let go of the idea that they will trade Horvat at some point, probably for another Guddy type defender.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Disagree..this is a team on the ascendant..no doubt about that (according to nearly all media sources)...The more the team improves, the more secure GM Benning is in his job...and the more secure in what I have to say..

Its not difficult to defend this team at all (unless you are in the 30 people HFVan negative bubble)..They are already punching above their weight and have been commended for it..The team is fun to watch ,and peeps are buying in...Bad news for the long time negative posters....(not seeing too many empty seats lately are we?).

You can disagree all you want. The stats disagree with you. I'll put my stock in the actual facts ahead of people like you saying "the team is getting better because other people think this team is getting better."

 

[Hit the post]

I haven't let go of the idea that they will trade Horvat at some point, probably for another Guddy type defender.

Yeah at least Larsen is a 2nd pairing guy, just nothing special. Benning can’t even get that right.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Positive comments are disliked in this thread, and are converged on to turn back to the 'negative'..Of course my posts are dismissed by the longtime negative poster cult.
The 'logic' is taking care of itself...Time and 'progress' are not your friend.

Wrong again.

Comments that cannot be supported by fact or logic are disliked in this thread. It just so happens the majority of those comments are seen as "positive" and that's because the state of the team is quite poor right now. But there are some positives with the team: Horvat, Pettersson, Boeser, and Markstrom. But on the whole, the team, especially its management group, is quite pathetic. And that's something that can be supported by actual fact, not this fluff you like to come up with.

 

[y2kcanucks]

I haven't let go of the idea that they will trade Horvat at some point, probably for another Guddy type defender.

That would be exactly what our group of fans deserve. Not the realist fans who see this joke of a management group for what it is, but the Benning Bro's who excuse everything he does because they prefer Benning to an actual good hockey team.

 

[bandwagonesque]

You understand that there's no indication or logical way to infer that the trade mentioned will happen and that the assets given up for Larsson were vastly superior to what was given up for Gudbranson, right? Because I think that you do but are pretending not to in order to construct grounds on which to criticize management. As I've said before, it's easy to criticize Benning truthfully and in good faith -- he hasn't done a goid job for the most part. There's no need to be disingenuous.

 

[4Twenty]

You understand that there's no indication or logical way to infer that the trade mentioned will happen and that the assets given up for Larsson were vastly superior to what was given up for Gudbranson, right? Because I think that you do but are pretending not to in order to construct grounds on which to criticize management. As I've said before, it's easy to criticize Benning truthfully and in good faith -- he hasn't done a goid job for the most part. There's no need to be disingenuous.

Why would it matter? The Larsson for Hall deal is one of the most lopsided trades ever. That shouldn't be the standard to measure against.

A recent 1st already playing in the NHL plus a very high 2nd round pick, should have been able to bring in a quality defender. This regime targeted Gudbranson as if he were a quality dman.

 

[I am toxic]

No worries..I also accidentally liked your post which I didnt agree with.

You can unlike your like.

Whether it be a post in this forum, or your opinion of a team's management . . .

 

[rypper]

Right now, the top8 are:

1. CGY
2. WPG
3. SJ
4. NSH
5. VGK
6. DAL
7. STL
8. MIN

Do the Canucks overtake any of the above teams?

Further, do any of the non-playoff teams this year make a push next year?

This year I see us missing because I think either Chicago or St. Louis will continue their hot streaks and get in, and I think Minnesota is in a position where they have to win now, and will go all in at the deadline and make a push.

I just have a funny feeling the injury to Edler will end up being more serious then originally thought and he'll be out for a while. I think the Canucks will sit on their hands regarding their goalie situation and while refusing to use Dipietro, they'll overwork Markstrom.

Next season the playoffs will boil down to what they do with the defense. They cant come back yet again with basically the same 6-7 guys. Which it's starting to seem like they might. If they outright refuse to try to move Edler or Tanev, then they have to move out Gudbranson and do something with Pouliot. They absolutely should not trade Hutton or Stecher. Hughes is a wild card but I get the feeling that a lot of the fanbase thinks he's going to come in and have a Pettersson/Boeser like rookie year and that might not be fair to him.

 

[xtra]

Not only is it unfair to Hughes at his best in year 1 I’m not sure how a 175 pound 5’10 dman is going to do defensively.

He’s going to hit a brick wall and be exhausted physically playing so many games, and his strength is going to wear down.

It’s a major difference playing 82 games vs full grown men than playing a short tournament vs them. Offensively he should be better but defensively he at best might be equivalent to pouliot this year

 

[Bleach Clean]

The closer they get the more incentivize they have to "go for it," which will lead to them making stupid deals that push them further away. This is what happened with chia in Edmonton and its what I expect to happen here.

I think this season is probably their best chance. They are probably 50/50. Well see what they do at the deadline and in the offseason, if they taste some success I think it could be disastrous for the team.

I also think there is a legitimate argument to viewing this year as as their best chance. Their conversion rates have landed right. Their underlying numbers are bottom5~ in the league. The rest of the western conference is in shambles. The road is clear.

What do you envision happens next year that has you considering this year their best shot?

This year I see us missing because I think either Chicago or St. Louis will continue their hot streaks and get in, and I think Minnesota is in a position where they have to win now, and will go all in at the deadline and make a push.

I just have a funny feeling the injury to Edler will end up being more serious then originally thought and he'll be out for a while. I think the Canucks will sit on their hands regarding their goalie situation and while refusing to use Dipietro, they'll overwork Markstrom.

Next season the playoffs will boil down to what they do with the defense. They cant come back yet again with basically the same 6-7 guys. Which it's starting to seem like they might. If they outright refuse to try to move Edler or Tanev, then they have to move out Gudbranson and do something with Pouliot. They absolutely should not trade Hutton or Stecher. Hughes is a wild card but I get the feeling that a lot of the fanbase thinks he's going to come in and have a Pettersson/Boeser like rookie year and that might not be fair to him.

Assuming they shore up their bottom pairing, does the difference between playoffs and no playoffs next year hinge upon Hughes?

 

[4Twenty]

Assuming they shore up their bottom pairing, does the difference between playoffs and no playoffs next year hinge upon Hughes?

I'd like to hop in here, because it relates to our conversation about the defense in the arm chair thread.

I think the difference would be that Hutton-Stecher look like bonfide 2nd pairing defenders, and they could flip/flop easily with the top pair - Stecher looked decent with Edler in the past, same goes for Hutton with Tanev.

I think that is a massive difference than Travis basically running the worst statistical defensman in the NHL consistently on the 2nd pair and more often than not tying them to the Pettersson line.

Just that switch alone IMO improves the outlook. And I'm projecting Hughes to be better than Pouliot right away. If he's not, then we have big problems.

 

[Melvin]

I also think there is a legitimate argument to viewing this year as as their best chance. Their conversion rates have landed right. Their underlying numbers are bottom5~ in the league. The rest of the western conference is in shambles. The road is clear.

What do you envision happens next year that has you considering this year their best shot?

Points from the lowest-playoff team in each conference since the NHL moved to a Wild Card format in 2014:

99
98
97
96
95
95
94
93
91
87

Mean: 94.5
Median: 95.5

Right now the Wild are holding onto the last spot with an 86-point pace, which would be the lowest bar to clear since moving to this format, and even the Blues are only on a 90 point pace.

This, so far, is shaping up to be the easiest year for a team in either conference to make the playoffs in 5 years. The Canucks have a realistic chance of making it to the playoffs with an ~88 point team, which has only happened once.

That's the only reason for my opinion. Next year I would bet money on the playoff bar being raised to its usual ~95 point standard and the Canucks will not be anywhere near this IMO.

 

[Bleach Clean]

Points from the lowest-playoff team in each conference since the NHL moved to a Wild Card format in 2014:

99
98
97
96
95
95
94
93
91
87

Mean: 94.5
Median: 95.5

Right now the Wild are holding onto the last spot with an 86-point pace, which would be the lowest bar to clear since moving to this format, and even the Blues are only on a 90 point pace.

This, so far, is shaping up to be the easiest year for a team in either conference to make the playoffs in 5 years. The Canucks have a realistic chance of making it to the playoffs with an ~88 point team, which has only happened once.

That's the only reason for my opinion. Next year I would bet money on the playoff bar being raised to its usual ~95 point standard and the Canucks will not be anywhere near this IMO.

You know, I wrote about VAN's 84 point pace before deleting it out of my reply to you. I was wondering if you would go to qualification amounts and you didn't disappoint...

Next year, they will have Hughes and hopefully no Gudbranson. They will also have more consistent goaltending overall form the Markstrom-Demko pair. Perhaps even more offense given an expected top6F addition. They are likely to be better. What I can't determine is whether or not a regression to their underlying metrics will off set that improvement, or if their metrics will markedly improve from the changes, or if the same misalignment will persist and their success will be strapped to conversion rates?

Of the three options, I'm expecting some regression to their underlying numbers. It tends to happen this way.

Edit: @420Canuck please see the response above as it addresses your post.

 

[Phenomenon13]

The closer they get the more incentivize they have to "go for it," which will lead to them making stupid deals that push them further away. This is what happened with chia in Edmonton and its what I expect to happen here.

I think this season is probably their best chance. They are probably 50/50. Well see what they do at the deadline and in the offseason, if they taste some success I think it could be disastrous for the team.

To be fair, Chiarelli had no choice but to push for it. The fanbase and ownership wouldn't tolerate another tank season. Especially after that Larsson trade. They had to show improvement.

Benning has the benefit of having a bad season and although he's said all the right things during his latest interview I am a bit nervous because he doesn't follow through with what he says all the time.

 

[Hit the post]

Where is Guds going? He’s got two more years at 4 million after this season. Chiapet was fired, so that’s one less GM dumber than Elmer that we can pawn off this meh #6 D.

 

[xtra]

For everyone here that says he’s a bottom 10 gm but not a bottom 3 gm which gms do you have below him and for what reason?

I’ll give you Dorian in Ottawa cause that’s easy but naming 9 more?

 

[Melvin]

You know, I wrote about VAN's 84 point pace before deleting it out of my reply to you. I was wondering if you would go to qualification amounts and you didn't disappoint...

Next year, they will have Hughes and hopefully no Gudbranson. They will also have more consistent goaltending overall form the Markstrom-Demko pair. Perhaps even more offense given an expected top6F addition. They are likely to be better. What I can't determine is whether or not a regression to their underlying metrics will off set that improvement, or if their metrics will markedly improve from the changes, or if the same misalignment will persist and their success will be strapped to conversion rates?

Of the three options, I'm expecting some regression to their underlying numbers. It tends to happen this way.

I just think it's too soon to say. The Canucks are in an interesting position this season. They can roll the dice and really go for it, make some moves and push to make it to the playoffs with a ~90 point team and hope for the best, or they can sit back and stay focused on the future. I think most fans here would prefer the latter, but the vibe I get from the team is the former is equally likely if not moreso.

If they decide to make some moves and push for it this season, it could well damage their odds next season (see Edmonton the year they made it.) I am for this reason unwilling to speculate on their odds for next season at this stage.

To be fair, Chiarelli had no choice but to push for it. The fanbase and ownership wouldn't tolerate another tank season. Especially after that Larsson trade. They had to show improvement.

Well yes, that's exactly my point, and the same thing I have said to others who claim "Chia is worse than Benning." Benning the last few years has had the easiest job in hockey; he can sit back, do basically nothing, ice one of the league's shittiest teams, and the soft-ball media will do nothing but [MOD].

At some point though, I would imagine he will feel the same kind of pressure to compete that Chia felt. I don't know how long that will take, as the patience this market seems to have for his incompetence almost feels endless at times, but it will happen eventually, and that's when the disaster deals will really be felt IMO.

 

[TruGr1t]

My agenda is to see this new young group of players flourish, and to enjoy watching the team....

Any GM can hit on draft picks over a 5 year span,..?, obviously wasn't the case with the previous regime was it?

A lot of what makes a good GM is hiring the right people...A good coach, a good Director Of Scouting,a good goalie coach..the results are bearing fruit.

New group of young players? As in Horvat, Boeser and Pettersson? Three guys? And yes, any management regime given 4 top-ten picks in 5 drafts (basically three top 5 picks, btw) will generate similar results. There is no doubt in my mind on that point.

And let's stop talking about drafting for a minute because who really cares ... it's the only part of the organization that is somewhat functional. How about we talk about the abysmal pro scouting, the horrible contracts, the pathetic blue line, or the fact our AHL franchise is effectively in ruins. There are so many problems with this organization and you keep talking about three players and a handful of draft picks.

And the team isn't getting better statistically. In five years. And you have Pettersson ... God's gift to parachuting in an NHL star, which basically never happens.

 

[timw33]

New group of young players? As in Horvat, Boeser and Pettersson? Three guys? And yes, any management regime given 4 top-ten picks in 5 drafts (basically three top 5 picks, btw) will generate similar results. There is no doubt in my mind on that point.

And let's stop talking about drafting for a minute because who really cares ... it's the only part of the organization that is somewhat functional. How about we talk about the abysmal pro scouting, the horrible contracts, the pathetic blue line, or the fact our AHL franchise is effectively in ruins. There are so many problems with this organization and you keep talking about three players and a handful of draft picks.

Three good young players is going to be woefully insufficient, especially since none of them play D or Goalie (jury is still out on our goaltenders).