Canucks Managerial Thread | 9

[TruGr1t]

WD count down to firing has to have started. If management truly believes this is a playoff team the only conclusion they'll come to is that it's a coaching problem.

 

[ahmon]

So Kassian just remains a member of the Canucks forever? Again, SOB (and I think Bernier, too) were both moved because of their lack of discipline/focus to the team (read: partying) and it was being a distraction to the team. Where does the team draw the line and make a judgment call? How many years does Kassian get? 3? 4? 5? Does he just stay on the Canucks forever?

Also, the entire management team wasn't gutted and the executive that was working with Kassian was still on the team.

Bang on, the Kassian love affair here is humorous.

 

[Hit the post]

Again, SOB (and I think Bernier, too) were both moved because of their lack of discipline/focus to the team (read: partying) and it was being a distraction to the team.

Funny thing is Bernier is STILL playing in the NHL today; and up till recently so, was SOB.

Bang on, the Kassian love affair here is humorous.

He's the bizzaro version of Vey.

 

[canucksfan]

Hamhuis is our best trading chip. After that it is pretty low. Don't think Vrbata has much value.

 

[Canucker]

Bang on, the Kassian love affair here is humorous.

I was never really a big Kassian fan, even at the time of the trade I disliked it...but I really don't think he was handled very well...I'm sure a lot of it was his own doing, but I don't think he spent enough time in the AHL and IMO thats on Gillis and AV....but despite this, Benning never should have, ever, had to spend a 5th round pick to get rid of Kassian...especially to take on an aging, overpaid plug in Prust. Thats just bad business, even if you wanted to be rid of Kassian.

 

[ItsAllPartOfThePlan]

Hamhuis is our best trading chip. After that it is pretty low. Don't think Vrbata has much value.

Do we trade Hansen?

 

[canucksfan]

Do we trade Hansen?

If the return is very good then yes.

 

[Canucker]

Do we trade Hansen?

I would hope not in most cases...but if someone wanted to overpay, I'd definitely listen. I think Hansen is one of the best (I've grown to hate this word now but it fits) mentors on this team...he's a true pro, works his ass off every game and is highly accountable. Part of me hopes he can retire a Canuck, and part of me wants to cash in on him.

 

[VanJack]

They could trade Vrbata, Hamhuis, Miller and Burrows, without affecting the on-ice performance all that much.....considering you've got more than $21m a season tied up in those guys, it speaks volumes about where this team is at right now....and the owner is now paying $6m a season for veterans to play in Utica...laughable really.

 

[Horse McHindu]

Canucks need to be careful about unloading too many vets at once

Canucks need to be careful about unloading too many vets at onceBy

While the Canucks likely won't make the playoffs this season, and will likely be sellers at this year's deadline, they have to be careful to not sell all/most vets at the deadline this year for the following reasons:

1) By trading all/most vets at the deadline this year for picks and prospects, you are essentially "putting all your eggs in one basket"........the basket being the 2016 draft. Perhaps a better way to go, would be to make sure you have multiple 1st and 2nd round picks over the course of the next 2-3 years. For instance - trade off Vrbata and Hamhuis at this year's deadline (re-sign Hammer in the off-season), and then trade off Burrows and Miller at next year's deadline. Keep trading off vets that are in the final year of their contracts.

2) Trading all/most vets at the deadline puts way too much pressure on the kids moving forward. A large reason why the Canucks have been fairly successful over the past 16 years, is because they've done a good job of pushing their top prospects gradually and slowly. Think - Naslund, the Sedin twins, Kesler, Schneider, etc. As it pertains to the current 'young' group, Bo Horvat should be the team's 2nd line Center next season. Hutton should get a sniff as a 4th defenseman next season, while guys like McCann, Virtanen, Baertschi, Vey, Etem, etc., should be protected by a strong veteran presence. That's where guys like the twins, Sutter, Burrows, Hansen, and perhaps a Lucic come in.

In goal, Markstrom should once again be 50/50 with Miller in terms of starts and perhaps even 60/40 (favoring Markstrom). Once Markstrom proves himself yet again, then you can move Miller next season.

-Do NOT have trade Brandon Sutter with the expectation that Horvat will be the #2 or even #1 center if Henrik goes down. Horvat should be #2 next season, and even play at #3 at times if he's struggling. Veteran Sutter can help take pressure off.
-Do NOT over-exert Ben Hutton. Keep using Hutton the way they're doing this year, and give him a sniff of Top 4 duty to see how he does. If he excels in his sophomore year (i.e. #sophomoreslump), then you can make plans to move him up on a more permanent basis.

-Make sure that defense has a strong blend of vets and youngsters to accomodate Markstrom. Last thing you want to do is give Markstrom a higher workload and put him behind a green defense. That's how you ruin a kid's confidence.

3) Trading all/most vets at the deadline line this year gives UFA vets too much bargaining power in terms of wanting to sign here. If you trade away all/most vets, you risk over-exerting your prospects. This then puts pressure on a GM to sign vets. Vets take advantage of this pressure and as result, have more bargaining power during negotiations (and hence - GM's are put in a position where they have to overpay for said vet to sign).

Conclusion: Canucks should absolutely be sellers at this year's deadline, but they should only sell vets that are on the final year of their contracts. Trade Vrbata, trade Hamhuis (and re-sign him in the off-season). Keep Sutter, Miller, Burrows, Hansen, Edler, etc.

p.s.________Canucks should try and their own 1st round pick + 1st rounder from Hamhuis deal to guarantee a Top 3 or Top 2 selection if possible.

 

[ahmon]

Canucks need to be careful about unloading too many vets at onceBy

While the Canucks likely won't make the playoffs this season, and will likely be sellers at this year's deadline, they have to be careful to not sell all/most vets at the deadline this year for the following reasons:

1) By trading all/most vets at the deadline this year for picks and prospects, you are essentially "putting all your eggs in one basket"........the basket being the 2016 draft. Perhaps a better way to go, would be to make sure you have multiple 1st and 2nd round picks over the course of the next 2-3 years. For instance - trade off Vrbata and Hamhuis at this year's deadline (re-sign Hammer in the off-season), and then trade off Burrows and Miller at next year's deadline. Keep trading off vets that are in the final year of their contracts.

2) Trading all/most vets at the deadline puts way too much pressure on the kids moving forward. A large reason why the Canucks have been fairly successful over the past 16 years, is because they've done a good job of pushing their top prospects gradually and slowly. Think - Naslund, the Sedin twins, Kesler, Schneider, etc. As it pertains to the current 'young' group, Bo Horvat should be the team's 2nd line Center next season. Hutton should get a sniff as a 4th defenseman next season, while guys like McCann, Virtanen, Baertschi, Vey, Etem, etc., should be protected by a strong veteran presence. That's where guys like the twins, Sutter, Burrows, Hansen, and perhaps a Lucic come in.

In goal, Markstrom should once again be 50/50 with Miller in terms of starts and perhaps even 60/40 (favoring Markstrom). Once Markstrom proves himself yet again, then you can move Miller next season.

-Do NOT have trade Brandon Sutter with the expectation that Horvat will be the #2 or even #1 center if Henrik goes down. Horvat should be #2 next season, and even play at #3 at times if he's struggling. Veteran Sutter can help take pressure off.
-Do NOT over-exert Ben Hutton. Keep using Hutton the way they're doing this year, and give him a sniff of Top 4 duty to see how he does. If he excels in his sophomore year (i.e. #sophomoreslump), then you can make plans to move him up on a more permanent basis.

-Make sure that defense has a strong blend of vets and youngsters to accomodate Markstrom. Last thing you want to do is give Markstrom a higher workload and put him behind a green defense. That's how you ruin a kid's confidence.

3) Trading all/most vets at the deadline line this year gives UFA vets too much bargaining power in terms of wanting to sign here. If you trade away all/most vets, you risk over-exerting your prospects. This then puts pressure on a GM to sign vets. Vets take advantage of this pressure and as result, have more bargaining power during negotiations (and hence - GM's are put in a position where they have to overpay for said vet to sign).

Conclusion: Canucks should absolutely be sellers at this year's deadline, but they should only sell vets that are on the final year of their contracts. Trade Vrbata, trade Hamhuis (and re-sign him in the off-season). Keep Sutter, Miller, Burrows, Hansen, Edler, etc.

p.s.________Canucks should try and their own 1st round pick + 1st rounder from Hamhuis deal to guarantee a Top 3 or Top 2 selection if possible.

you are assuming we can't acquire other vets?

I don't know why you want to make that assumption?

 

[racerjoe]

Canucks need to be careful about unloading too many vets at onceBy

While the Canucks likely won't make the playoffs this season, and will likely be sellers at this year's deadline, they have to be careful to not sell all/most vets at the deadline this year for the following reasons:

1) By trading all/most vets at the deadline this year for picks and prospects, you are essentially "putting all your eggs in one basket"........the basket being the 2016 draft. Perhaps a better way to go, would be to make sure you have multiple 1st and 2nd round picks over the course of the next 2-3 years. For instance - trade off Vrbata and Hamhuis at this year's deadline (re-sign Hammer in the off-season), and then trade off Burrows and Miller at next year's deadline. Keep trading off vets that are in the final year of their contracts.

2) Trading all/most vets at the deadline puts way too much pressure on the kids moving forward. A large reason why the Canucks have been fairly successful over the past 16 years, is because they've done a good job of pushing their top prospects gradually and slowly. Think - Naslund, the Sedin twins, Kesler, Schneider, etc. As it pertains to the current 'young' group, Bo Horvat should be the team's 2nd line Center next season. Hutton should get a sniff as a 4th defenseman next season, while guys like McCann, Virtanen, Baertschi, Vey, Etem, etc., should be protected by a strong veteran presence. That's where guys like the twins, Sutter, Burrows, Hansen, and perhaps a Lucic come in.

In goal, Markstrom should once again be 50/50 with Miller in terms of starts and perhaps even 60/40 (favoring Markstrom). Once Markstrom proves himself yet again, then you can move Miller next season.

-Do NOT have trade Brandon Sutter with the expectation that Horvat will be the #2 or even #1 center if Henrik goes down. Horvat should be #2 next season, and even play at #3 at times if he's struggling. Veteran Sutter can help take pressure off.
-Do NOT over-exert Ben Hutton. Keep using Hutton the way they're doing this year, and give him a sniff of Top 4 duty to see how he does. If he excels in his sophomore year (i.e. #sophomoreslump), then you can make plans to move him up on a more permanent basis.

-Make sure that defense has a strong blend of vets and youngsters to accomodate Markstrom. Last thing you want to do is give Markstrom a higher workload and put him behind a green defense. That's how you ruin a kid's confidence.

3) Trading all/most vets at the deadline line this year gives UFA vets too much bargaining power in terms of wanting to sign here. If you trade away all/most vets, you risk over-exerting your prospects. This then puts pressure on a GM to sign vets. Vets take advantage of this pressure and as result, have more bargaining power during negotiations (and hence - GM's are put in a position where they have to overpay for said vet to sign).

Conclusion: Canucks should absolutely be sellers at this year's deadline, but they should only sell vets that are on the final year of their contracts. Trade Vrbata, trade Hamhuis (and re-sign him in the off-season). Keep Sutter, Miller, Burrows, Hansen, Edler, etc.

p.s.________Canucks should try and their own 1st round pick + 1st rounder from Hamhuis deal to guarantee a Top 3 or Top 2 selection if possible.

I use to agree with this, but I really don't see it that way at all anymore.

Yeah you don't want to throw your kids to the wolves, but if you can get value for someone you do it. There is now plenty of depth guys in FA. When rebuilding you are not trying to win a cup that year anyway, so finding guys who fit or help you win is less important. I would be doing much more of what Toronto is doing, and adding lots of guys on one year deals and looking to flip them for value. Keep certain guys in the AHL too, don't throw young kids to the wolves, but get value anywhere you can.

 

[Horse McHindu]

you are assuming we can't acquire other vets?

I don't know why you want to make that assumption?

Of course the Canucks could acquire other vets via trade. But to do so, they would have to trade picks or prospects would they not? Given the fact that the Canucks are in a rebuild-retool, that is the exact opposite of what the Canucks should be doing.

Now having said that, I'm all for trading picks/prospects for guys that are in that 20-23 range. If the Canucks can put together a solid offer for Drouin, by all means, do it.

 

[RandV]

As I keep saying, we have no idea what was going on behind the scenes with Kassian or why the Canucks were making the personnel decisions that they were.

Do you really think that if Kassian was setting the world on fire and contributing to the team that they would just arbitrarily bench him?

I don't focus on the behind the scenes speculative stuff. I mean if you want to speculate personally I don't think it was so much that Kassian was intentionally traded, as it was Benning simply wanted Prust and Kassian was the price... with a little extra because Prust was such an important locker room guy and Montreal could barely bring themselves to part with him.

Rather What I focus on is the treatment Kassian received based on his on-ice play. While you have the quote with Kassian admitting he was being an idiot, you also have him saying 'I had no idea what the **** is going on anymore' with how he was being utilized in the latter half of the season.

You can basically break his season into 4 phases last year:

1. Played only at ES and entrenched on a line with Matthias & Richardson. Through about 20 games he was only on pace for about 15 points on the season, but you could see they would come as this line was an effective 3rd line and Kassian was visibly the offensive spark driving it, while the other two were more defensive. While a new guy like Vey was mysteriously getting more opportunities, at least when lines got shuffled and a handful of players shuffled through the press box this 3rd line never got touched.

2. Sidelined with hand/finger injury, came back to the dog house. A minor injury that sidelined him for a little, and it was about a week or two before he was due back that management visibly blew up at him and all the trade rumours started. When he came off the IR he didn't even get a game, it was straight to the press box. Personally I speculated at the time that in a side by side comparison with Hamhuis who was also out injured at the team Kassian's commitment to off-ice training/discipline was less than stellar.

3. Back from injury, this was the point of the season where he actually got the most opportunity and put up some decent points (bringing his average season total up to a 30-point pace), but it was also the most erratic because he was constantly in Willie's dog house. He could put up 8 points in 8 games playing with the Sedins, have a poor night in game 9 and it was back to the press box with Willie choosing to play a guy like Brandon McMillan played instead. We also got that great quote out of him (Willie) about how sometimes someone just has to give a guy a chance (McMillan) for them to succeed. Oh except you Kass, your ass is sitting

4. Back injury, season over and kind of end of the discussion. Management had actually seemed to settle down on Kassian claiming they were happy how he finished, or something to that extent... but then he was unexpectedly traded to Montreal.

Looking at the whole thing from a bigger picture though, we were a team that needed "age gap" players, and here we had a 24 year old 30-point player who while not nescessarily physical could be physical intimidating, who while Bertuzzi like upside would be a big stretch he still likely had/has it in him to be a 40 point player, with a career year at 50-60 points. So why the hell would you trade him for Brandon Prust? And throw in a minor draft pick to boot?

Even then, this could be forgiven for a one of thing where the team gave up a young player they probably shouldn't have. Happens every once and a while, sometimes you just have to accept the reasoning and let it go (Grabner). Except that in this case Kassian is just one of about a dozen equal brain dead moves our new management team has made in a year and a half. And the results are there on the ice right now for everyone to see.

 

[ahmon]

Of course the Canucks could acquire other vets via trade. But to do so, they would have to trade picks or prospects would they not? Given the fact that the Canucks are in a rebuild-retool, that is the exact opposite of what the Canucks should be doing.

Now having said that, I'm all for trading picks/prospects for guys that are in that 20-23 range. If the Canucks can put together a solid offer for Drouin, by all means, do it.

1. Could you imagine a scenario where we trade our vets for high picks and acquire "lesser" vets for lower picks? We still got value no?

Considering you mainly want to insulate the kids, even "lesser" vets can do that?

2. Free agrency, canucks can sign vets through FA without losing picks/prospects?

 

[sting101]

I don't focus on the behind the scenes speculative stuff. I mean if you want to speculate personally I don't think it was so much that Kassian was intentionally traded, as it was Benning simply wanted Prust and Kassian was the price... with a little extra because Prust was such an important locker room guy and Montreal could barely bring themselves to part with him.

Rather What I focus on is the treatment Kassian received based on his on-ice play. While you have the quote with Kassian admitting he was being an idiot, you also have him saying 'I had no idea what the **** is going on anymore' with how he was being utilized in the latter half of the season.

You can basically break his season into 4 phases last year:

1. Played only at ES and entrenched on a line with Matthias & Richardson. Through about 20 games he was only on pace for about 15 points on the season, but you could see they would come as this line was an effective 3rd line and Kassian was visibly the offensive spark driving it, while the other two were more defensive. While a new guy like Vey was mysteriously getting more opportunities, at least when lines got shuffled and a handful of players shuffled through the press box this 3rd line never got touched.

2. Sidelined with hand/finger injury, came back to the dog house. A minor injury that sidelined him for a little, and it was about a week or two before he was due back that management visibly blew up at him and all the trade rumours started. When he came off the IR he didn't even get a game, it was straight to the press box. Personally I speculated at the time that in a side by side comparison with Hamhuis who was also out injured at the team Kassian's commitment to off-ice training/discipline was less than stellar.

3. Back from injury, this was the point of the season where he actually got the most opportunity and put up some decent points (bringing his average season total up to a 30-point pace), but it was also the most erratic because he was constantly in Willie's dog house. He could put up 8 points in 8 games playing with the Sedins, have a poor night in game 9 and it was back to the press box with Willie choosing to play a guy like Brandon McMillan played instead. We also got that great quote out of him (Willie) about how sometimes someone just has to give a guy a chance (McMillan) for them to succeed. Oh except you Kass, your ass is sitting

4. Back injury, season over and kind of end of the discussion. Management had actually seemed to settle down on Kassian claiming they were happy how he finished, or something to that extent... but then he was unexpectedly traded to Montreal.

Looking at the whole thing from a bigger picture though, we were a team that needed "age gap" players, and here we had a 24 year old 30-point player who while not nescessarily physical could be physical intimidating, who while Bertuzzi like upside would be a big stretch he still likely had/has it in him to be a 40 point player, with a career year at 50-60 points. So why the hell would you trade him for Brandon Prust? And throw in a minor draft pick to boot?

Even then, this could be forgiven for a one of thing where the team gave up a young player they probably shouldn't have. Happens every once and a while, sometimes you just have to accept the reasoning and let it go (Grabner). Except that in this case Kassian is just one of about a dozen equal brain dead moves our new management team has made in a year and a half. And the results are there on the ice right now for everyone to see.

What are the other 11 brain dead moves?

Don't agree on Kassian.

 

[TheWolf*]

A group my buddies and me are going on the road to follow Kassian. We are also starting a petition to have Robson Street renamed Zack Kassian Ave. Love that dude so much. Can't believe we traded him. **** I miss him. I wonder if we could get #9 retired when Benning is fired.

 

[sting101]

Very true about Weisbrod. But look at who brought him in and who approved it? Once against, when you find a dumb decision, follow the trail and it leads to Jim Benning and Trevor Linden.

What do you think of John Wall, Rick Celebrini, Judd Brackett, and Ryan Johnson. Are they part of the dumb decisions?

 

[MarkMM]

What do you think of John Wall, Rick Celebrini, Judd Brackett, and Ryan Johnson. Are they part of the dumb decisions?

I think they work for and at the direction of the President and General Manager, who decide the make-up of the management team, run the decision-making process and have the final call.

 

[Pip]

A group my buddies and me are going on the road to follow Kassian. We are also starting a petition to have Robson Street renamed Zack Kassian Ave. Love that dude so much. Can't believe we traded him. **** I miss him. I wonder if we could get #9 retired when Benning is fired.

 

[Rotting Corpse*]

A group my buddies and me are going on the road to follow Kassian. We are also starting a petition to have Robson Street renamed Zack Kassian Ave. Love that dude so much. Can't believe we traded him. **** I miss him. I wonder if we could get #9 retired when Benning is fired.

Posts like this should be against the rules.

They do nothing to add to or continue the discussion. They aren't funny, and make no point.

 

[Pip]

Posts like this should be against the rules.

They do nothing to add to or continue the discussion. They aren't funny, and make no point.

that's true for the vast majority of his posts

 

[banme*]

that's true for the vast majority of posts

 

[Hit the post]

What do you think of John Wall, Rick Celebrini, Judd Brackett, and Ryan Johnson. Are they part of the dumb decisions?

I'm sure Ron Delorme managed to unearth some NHLers.....

 

[Rotting Corpse*]

Here's a fun stat, inspired by our dearly departed Yannick Weber.

In 1976-77, YOUR Vancouver Canucks received just 18 goals from Defensemen:

Dennis Kearns 5
Harold Snepsts 4
Bob Dailey 4
Larry Goodenough 2
Larry Carriere 1
Jack McIlhargey 1
Dave Fortier 1

This number, 18 goals from the back-end, is the club record-low. It's a mark that hasn't been challenged in nearly 40 years.

Until now. This season we have just 12 goals: 6 from Edler, 6 from the rest. Can we do it? It's by far the closest we've come in recent memory. Even the strike-shortened year we got 28 goals.

Offense from the D has been a glaring problem since Gillis was here and Benning has done nothing but make it worse.