Confirmed with Link: Canucks sign F Micheal Ferland to a 4-year, $3.5M AAV Deal

What do we think of the deal?


  • Total voters
    432
Status
Not open for further replies.

bandwagonesque

I eat Kraft Dinner and I vote
Mar 5, 2014
7,099
5,400
The most frustrating part of trying to post here is this persistent volley:

Alice: I dislike this transaction for reasons X, Y, and Z
Bob: You hate everything Benning does.
Alice: Not true, and, also, not relevant. I have given the reasons: X, Y, and Z. Do you disagree with these reasons?
Bob: The negativity here is so frustrating! There is no reason to dislike this transaction! You just blindly hate Benning!
Alice: I have given reasons. They are X, Y, and Z. do you have anything to say about X, Y, or Z?
Bob: The negativity is so toxic! Why can't we all just be positive about the Canucks!!
Alice: I am begging you to please address my argument. They are, again, X, Y, and Z.
Bob: BLIND hATE ToxiC NeGaTIVitY

There is just zero opportunity for actual discussion when this is the perpetual modus operandi.
What you're describing has nothing to do with what is happening, which is that when Benning makes a move, rather than examine it rationally, many posters start from an assumption it must be bad, and then work backwards from there to figure out why it must be bad. Your hypothetical x, y and z arguments usually arise from this, and anyone who wades in to say so just gets the goalposts moved on them over and over again until they give up. In many cases, "You hate everything Benning does!" isn't ad hominem. It succinctly and accurately describes the behaviour and perspective of a given poster.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Draino

m9

m9
Sponsor
Jan 23, 2010
25,107
15,229
You're permitting yourself to disapprove of the second by disregarding a factor that completely negates the implied criticism.

If that's what you believe to be true, why not just say that? Why turn a fairly moderate post into a perceived attack of Benning?
 

bandwagonesque

I eat Kraft Dinner and I vote
Mar 5, 2014
7,099
5,400
If that's what you believe to be true, why not just say that? Why turn a fairly moderate post into a perceived attack of Benning?
You said Benning ought to have done something widely perceived as impossible, and that the fact that he didn't represented a mistake on his part. Maybe I overreacted, but that doesn't seem like a moderate statement. And frankly, moderately inaccurate posts are what's gotten us to this point. People let them slide rather look petty addressing them and they create an atmosphere where everyone can just live in a fantasy world of their choosing. I get jealous of other teams with shitty GMs -- on their subs there are still normal, moderate conversations taking place.
 
Last edited:

Melvin

21/12/05
Sep 29, 2017
15,198
28,055
Montreal, QC
Anyway, my point re:Ferland was that it's fairly good contract value but it's confusing given the direction and current structure of this team.
 

Ryan Miller*

Registered User
Jan 13, 2017
1,079
322
Anyway, my point re:Ferland was that it's fairly good contract value but it's confusing given the direction and current structure of this team.
It's not really very confusing at all though. The Canucks desperately needed forwards who can slot into the top-6 and who provide some physicality.

You said earlier that Ferland would be a bad signing if he took away minutes from Jake. What exactly do you mean by this? I'm assuming you mean that acquiring Ferland impedes Virtanen's development? So you think Virtanen, if given more minutes in say the top 6, could potentially develop? Into what, Ferland? Ferland has proven better than Virtanen in all aspects of the game so far in their careers. Virtanen is likely next out the door with his buddy Hutton.
 

Melvin

21/12/05
Sep 29, 2017
15,198
28,055
Montreal, QC
It's not really very confusing at all though. The Canucks desperately needed forwards who can slot into the top-6 and who provide some physicality.

You said earlier that Ferland would be a bad signing if he took away minutes from Jake. What exactly do you mean by this? I'm assuming you mean that acquiring Ferland impedes Virtanen's development? So you think Virtanen, if given more minutes in say the top 6, could potentially develop? Into what, Ferland? Ferland has proven better than Virtanen in all aspects of the game so far in their careers. Virtanen is likely next out the door with his buddy Hutton.

I'm saying that given where the Canucks are at as a non-contender, their top priority should be developing their youth. Regardless of what you think of Virtanen, Juolevi, Gaudette etc, these players should be the focus right now in my opinion. Even if Virtanen's ceiling is Ferland (probably fair,) having him hit that ceiling in 3 years when this team might actually be ready to compete is more important than giving ice time to Ferland (Roussel, Sutter, etc.) now.

The fact that Virtanen might be "out the door" and Gaudette probably in the AHL is exactly the problem, and has been the problem with this team since 2014. Taking constant shortcuts and eschewing younger players in favor of RIGHT NOW has not been successful for them at any point in the recent past and yet it continues to be their strategy.
 

Pastor Of Muppetz

Registered User
Oct 1, 2017
25,986
15,856
I dont really see Ferland as a roadblock for Virtanen or any of the younger players.(especially given JB's comment that Jake can learn from Ferland)...For starters,I believe that Ferland will be playing in the top 6, and if Jake (on the 3rd line) continues to show improvement one of Leivo,Pearson,Baertschi could be moved..There are options...We have to see how it plays out this season.
 

member 290103

Guest
It's the history of the Canucks. 82, 94, 2011 are high points with no cups, no first overall picks, no franchise players, no nothing. If you want to be jaded be jaded, but everyone here is worse off if they can't find something to be optimistic about. We have sucked out loud for almost all of our almost 50 years, but jumping on every single move made and dismissing it just because you hate the guy doing it? That's insanity. Especially since it looks like management has gotten ownerships approval.

This toxic pessimism is super irritating, not because Benning is in any way positive, but because we're stuck with him, probably for a while, AND people snivelling about him. It's like being on a car trip with your family and your brother farts and your sister starts crying THE WHOLE TRIP. Yes, your brother is a knob for that, but now it's irritation on two fronts.

If you'll excuse my take here, that's just a dumb philosophy. I don't agree. As a fan of the team for over 30 years, I have the right to express my displeasure with moves the team makes and I am under no obligation to blindly cheer for them so that fans like you are not irritated. What I'd suggest you do if you are that broken up by people complaining about the Canucks is go join a site where there are other blind faith followers like yourself that are more interested in being irrationally optimistic than realistic.

I am not trying to be a dick, in general I have read your posts before and respect your takes, but I think you are off base here. Might be time to put my on ignore as I am not going to change my tune just so you don't have to read negative commentary on your favorite team.

Your analogy is completely absurd too. I am not crying over a move Benning made 5 years ago. I have been positive about the team for many years prior to Benning. Benning has a track record and history of making terrible moves on an annual basis, dating back to the Summer he was hired. Let me ask you this....if you were on a car trip and your brother farted continually the whole time, without stopping and your sister cried the whole trip, could you blame her? Nope.
 
  • Like
Reactions: megatron and Askel

member 290103

Guest
Anyway who wants to flip out about everything the team does and find reasons to hate it regardless of how flimsy or nonsensical they are upon further investigation can go ahead and do that. But it isn't rational and nothing that happened in the past excuses it or makes it necessary.

Did I flip out about every move the team makes? I don't follow. I don't know if I have even posted my takes on Ferland or Miller. If you go to the survey/vote on Ferland you'll notice I voted it as a good contract. I like it. I don't like the JT Miller move as I don't think that it's appropriate to move a 1st round pick when you are a lottery team. The only teams that should move 1st round picks are those that are on the verge of contending. I have a right to complain about that move. What other moves here are you saying are being inappropriately panned?
 

Ryan Miller*

Registered User
Jan 13, 2017
1,079
322
I'm saying that given where the Canucks are at as a non-contender, their top priority should be developing their youth. Regardless of what you think of Virtanen, Juolevi, Gaudette etc, these players should be the focus right now in my opinion. Even if Virtanen's ceiling is Ferland (probably fair,) having him hit that ceiling in 3 years when this team might actually be ready to compete is more important than giving ice time to Ferland (Roussel, Sutter, etc.) now.

The fact that Virtanen might be "out the door" and Gaudette probably in the AHL is exactly the problem, and has been the problem with this team since 2014. Taking constant shortcuts and eschewing younger players in favor of RIGHT NOW has not been successful for them at any point in the recent past and yet it continues to be their strategy.
The RIGHT NOW mentality in the past led to smelly blunders like the Gudbranson and Eriksson deals, so I agree that it is a serious black mark on this management regime.

However, I think the Vancouver Canucks RIGHT NOW mentality is more apt to the situation than it was in previous years, because I view the Pettersson and Hughes ELC contracts for 2 more years as a competitive window. Do you? Of course, this competitive window might have been a bit more competitive with a stronger management group, but as it stands, I think the Canucks have a competitive advantage over other teams in the league with two top talents earning very little. I believe it might be useful to try to milk this competitive advantage for all it's worth, especially in a market that has been watching different brands of failure since 2011.

On this note, I think there's too much black and white thinking that goes on framing teams always between the "contending" and "non-contending" categories. I think making the playoffs is an accomplishment and even a first round loss produces additional development opportunity for young players, as well as more information for evaluating a team's players in a heightened competitive environment.
 

bandwagonesque

I eat Kraft Dinner and I vote
Mar 5, 2014
7,099
5,400
Did I flip out about every move the team makes? I don't follow. I don't know if I have even posted my takes on Ferland or Miller. If you go to the survey/vote on Ferland you'll notice I voted it as a good contract. I like it. I don't like the JT Miller move as I don't think that it's appropriate to move a 1st round pick when you are a lottery team. The only teams that should move 1st round picks are those that are on the verge of contending. I have a right to complain about that move. What other moves here are you saying are being inappropriately panned?
I was speaking in general terms at that point. But I have seen you argue that because Benning's trades and signings have historically been poor, we should be automatically, reflexively suspicious of every new one. That's the attitude I'm talking about.
 

member 290103

Guest
I was speaking in general terms at that point. But I have seen you argue that because Benning's trades and signings have historically been poor, we should be automatically, reflexively suspicious of every new one. That's the attitude I'm talking about.

So you are surmising that if you witness someone make bad decisions over and over and over again, we should not then be suspicious the next one is also bad? That's exactly what you are saying from what I read.

Honestly, just put me on ignore.....
 
  • Like
Reactions: Josepho and MS

Melvin

21/12/05
Sep 29, 2017
15,198
28,055
Montreal, QC
The RIGHT NOW mentality in the past led to smelly blunders like the Gudbranson and Eriksson deals, so I agree that it is a serious black mark on this management regime.

However, I think the Vancouver Canucks RIGHT NOW mentality is more apt to the situation than it was in previous years, because I view the Pettersson and Hughes ELC contracts for 2 more years as a competitive window. Do you? Of course, this competitive window might have been a bit more competitive with a stronger management group, but as it stands, I think the Canucks have a competitive advantage over other teams in the league with two top talents earning very little. I believe it might be useful to try to milk this competitive advantage for all it's worth, especially in a market that has been watching different brands of failure since 2011.

On this note, I think there's too much black and white thinking that goes on framing teams always between the "contending" and "non-contending" categories. I think making the playoffs is an accomplishment and even a first round loss produces additional development opportunity for young players, as well as more information for evaluating a team's players in a heightened competitive environment.

I don't, unfortunately. And this is of course the crux of it. I don't see this as a team that is likely to be in the playoff race next season, and I think it's pretty absurd for them to assume they will be given they have been no closer than 10 points out of it the last 4 years. I do like the addition of Miller, but I don't think that he and Ferland give them enough additional offense up front and I think the defense is too fragile and shallow. I am also not super high on the goaltending situation, as I think many average goalies fall apart at 30 and I'm not completely sold on Demko at this stage.

I would like to see Demko getting 40+ starts next year, Gaudette as the 3C, and Goldobin/Virtanen getting regular top-six minutes. It's ironic, but the fact that nobody has an appetite for this now is a direct result of them not having an appetite for this in the past.
 
Last edited:

Nazzlind

Registered User
Sep 9, 2010
1,397
726
Lower Mainland
But why wouldn’t a rational fan be jaded? It’s been a debacle the last four years. If something actually works out for Benning, then maybe we will change our tune.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I feel like the bolded sentence is an oxymoron. A truly rational fan wouldn't let biases, frustrations or preconceived notions affect their judgement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WetcoastOrca

bandwagonesque

I eat Kraft Dinner and I vote
Mar 5, 2014
7,099
5,400
So you are surmising that if you witness someone make bad decisions over and over and over again, we should not then be suspicious the next one is also bad? That's exactly what you are saying from what I read.

Honestly, just put me on ignore.....
No, you should have enough confidence in your own intellect and everyone else's to look at the decision objectively. These are relatively simple, binary decisions with tons of publicly available context in which to evaluate them. The comparison between this and trusting a person's life decisions after many poor ones is nonsensical. It's a hockey team acquiring players.
 

member 290103

Guest
No, you should have enough confidence in your own intellect and everyone else's to look at the decision objectively. These are relatively simple, binary decisions with tons of publicly available context in which to evaluate them. The comparison between this and trusting a person's life decisions after many poor ones is nonsensical. It's a hockey team acquiring players.

I provided my evaluation of the decisions. Miller was a bad move, Ferland good. Miller was bad based on the fact Benning, who has a track record of running his teams into the ground, gave up a 1st round pick that is very likely to be a lottery pick in 2021.

How's that for an objective take?
 

member 290103

Guest
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I feel like the bolded sentence is an oxymoron. A truly rational fan wouldn't let biases, frustrations or preconceived notions affect their judgement.

Perhaps, yes. I also think though that you and the others telling me to be rational and objectively evaluate Bennings moves and not consider that in the past all the moves he has made are horrible is just plain stupid. That's like going to a restaurant 5 times and being served disgusting food and then being told to stop being negative and try it again, because they changed the menu.

That's just as irrational as hating on every move Benning makes because it's Benning.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PuckMunchkin

Ryan Miller*

Registered User
Jan 13, 2017
1,079
322
I don't, unfortunately. And this is of course the crux of it. I don't see this as a team that is likely to be in the playoff race next season, and I think it's pretty absurd for them to assume they will be given they have been no closer than 10 points out of it the last 4 years.
Yes, this really is the crux of the matter. Apologies if you've talked about this already, but I'm curious then:

1) What would have been your plan this offseason? Since I believe it is an important factor, how would your plan (if it is, as I'm assuming, more future-oriented, less winning right now-oriented) have dealt with fans of the team who are desperate for some kind of success right now? Ignore them? Moreover, do you believe additional losing seasons would impact to any degree the morale/development of our young players (e.g. like the Oilers)? Even last year, media members like Jason Botchford (R.I.P.) were lamenting that a winner like Pettersson had to experience so much losing. Furthermore, would you acquire any "tough" players to help provide a "safe working environment" for Pettersson/Boeser/Hughes or would you consider their injuries in the past couple of seasons fluke occurrences? Of course, these are all circumstances sort of unfairly handed down upon you by previous mismanagement, but I'm curious still how you would address them.

2) What would your contending team in 3 years look like exactly?
 

Pastor Of Muppetz

Registered User
Oct 1, 2017
25,986
15,856
The RIGHT NOW mentality in the past led to smelly blunders like the Gudbranson and Eriksson deals, so I agree that it is a serious black mark on this management regime.

However, I think the Vancouver Canucks RIGHT NOW mentality is more apt to the situation than it was in previous years, because I view the Pettersson and Hughes ELC contracts for 2 more years as a competitive window. Do you? Of course, this competitive window might have been a bit more competitive with a stronger management group, but as it stands, I think the Canucks have a competitive advantage over other teams in the league with two top talents earning very little. I believe it might be useful to try to milk this competitive advantage for all it's worth, especially in a market that has been watching different brands of failure since 2011.

On this note, I think there's too much black and white thinking that goes on framing teams always between the "contending" and "non-contending" categories. I think making the playoffs is an accomplishment and even a first round loss produces additional development opportunity for young players, as well as more information for evaluating a team's players in a heightened competitive environment.
As disillusioned as I was that Benning gave up that 1st for JT Miller (is that you),it seems like the plan is to 'jumpstart' the Canucks playoff window..The first step is insulating the young core top 6 players with proven big ,physical, quality NHL players, who are still in their prime years....

Goaltending looks solid..Check

Defence is vastly improved (although Hughes is the wildcard)

Missing a 1st round pick stings, but realistically..that player won't be NHL ready until 2 years after the draft..Its easy to fall into the mode of being a perpetual lottery team, and thinking that X player is going to be the saviour..

I don't think this team will resemble last years squad at all.
 

Melvin

21/12/05
Sep 29, 2017
15,198
28,055
Montreal, QC
Yes, this really is the crux of the matter. Apologies if you've talked about this already, but I'm curious then:

1) What would have been your plan this offseason? Since I believe it is an important factor, how would your plan (if it is, as I'm assuming, more future-oriented, less winning right now-oriented) have dealt with fans of the team who are desperate for some kind of success right now? Ignore them? Moreover, do you believe additional losing seasons would impact to any degree the morale/development of our young players (e.g. like the Oilers)? Even last year, media members like Jason Botchford (R.I.P.) were lamenting that a winner like Pettersson had to experience so much losing. Furthermore, would you acquire any "tough" players to help provide a "safe working environment" for Pettersson/Boeser/Hughes or would you consider their injuries in the past couple of seasons fluke occurrences? Of course, these are all circumstances sort of unfairly handed down upon you by previous mismanagement, but I'm curious still how you would address them.

2) What would your contending team in 3 years look like exactly?

My focus for the off-season would be to off-load some of the bad contracts while I still can. I think it is probably too late for many of them, but I would trade Sutter and Beagle for absolutely anything while they still might have SOME perceived value. I would not have re-signed Edler. Clear up cap space for future flexibility and keep roster spots open for younger players.

Yes I think you have to build a competent team but, as they should have learned from the past four seasons, surrounding your young stars with junk is not how you go about this. It absolutely stinks that they are in this position of coming off four playoff-less years and needing to go for it while Pettersson still has an ELC but their refusal to do this in the past is the exact reason they are in this spot to begin with. As Colorado has shown, it really doesn't have to be a long, drawn out process if you just avoid the FA market and focus on accumulating young players and picks and developing those players. I DO believe that additional losing seasons are going to be detrimental to the players and the fanbase, but that's exactly why they need to stop following the formula that has given them four losing seasons in a row! It is the classic "repeating the same mistake and expecting different results."*

It f***ing sucks but I swear if they can just f***ing do this for one god damn season they will be able to get to a winning team faster than if they keep trying to short-circuit the process by committing term to mediocre players like Ferland and Myers.

With regards to the injuries. What I would love to see this team do is simply give regular rest days to guys like Tanev and Edler. What I can never understand about this team is they will get Tanev back in the lineup and immediately play him 20 minutes in 3 games in 4 nights and then act shocked when he gets injured again. I would be trying to find games throughout the schedule where the team can strategically afford to sit them occasionally. Don't play them in back-to-back nights. Try to keep them healthy by being proactive instead of running them into the ground and then whining when the inevitable happens. At one point last season Edler was the NHL leader in blocked shots by like a 15% margin. Then eventually he got injured and everyone rolled their eyes like it's his fault. Even sitting young guys like Horvat and Boeser occasionally would probably be beneficial long-term to the franchise and you can schedule it for games where you are playing weak teams and don't need them as much.

With regards to 3 years from now, that is virtually impossible to say. If you actually focus on youth and player development instead of just paying lip service to it, you might be able to produce more than just one top prospect from the first round each year. You can actually put yourself in a position where you have depth and have multiple young players competing for spots that aren't blocked by wastes of space like Eriksson and Schaller.

Acquire quality young talent and provide them with the opportunity to play. Stop f***ing signing f***ing free agents. The absurdity of saying "we need to do X because people can't afford to wait any longer" is that they would not have waited as long if you hadn't been doing X all along!

*not ever said by Albert Einstein, by the way.
 

Hoghandler

Registered User
Jul 9, 2019
1,921
930
Anyway, my point re:Ferland was that it's fairly good contract value but it's confusing given the direction and current structure of this team.

You're confused why the team with the worst winger group in the NHL last season went out and beefed up the wings? Given the direction and current structure of the team and farm system it's pretty obvious why Ferland was a target. Especially on a team so bereft of size, skill and top 6 wing options.

Don't believe it's been mentioned yet but almost all of his production was from primary points last season. Only 6 non primary points of the 40.
 

Raccoon Jesus

Todd McLellan is an inside agent
Oct 30, 2008
61,476
60,900
I.E.
I'm excited to see what he brings to the Canucks. Dude really grew on me over the last few years.

Yes I know same division and all, still.
 

bandwagonesque

I eat Kraft Dinner and I vote
Mar 5, 2014
7,099
5,400
I'm excited to see what he brings to the Canucks. Dude really grew on me over the last few years.

Yes I know same division and all, still.
I just want the season to start so we can talk about concrete results one way or another. Also, it'll be better hockey than we've seen in years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Raccoon Jesus

Cogburn

Pretend they're yachts.
May 28, 2010
15,068
4,467
Vancouver
If you'll excuse my take here, that's just a dumb philosophy. I don't agree. As a fan of the team for over 30 years, I have the right to express my displeasure with moves the team makes and I am under no obligation to blindly cheer for them so that fans like you are not irritated. What I'd suggest you do if you are that broken up by people complaining about the Canucks is go join a site where there are other blind faith followers like yourself that are more interested in being irrationally optimistic than realistic.

I am not trying to be a dick, in general I have read your posts before and respect your takes, but I think you are off base here. Might be time to put my on ignore as I am not going to change my tune just so you don't have to read negative commentary on your favorite team.

Your analogy is completely absurd too. I am not crying over a move Benning made 5 years ago. I have been positive about the team for many years prior to Benning. Benning has a track record and history of making terrible moves on an annual basis, dating back to the Summer he was hired. Let me ask you this....if you were on a car trip and your brother farted continually the whole time, without stopping and your sister cried the whole trip, could you blame her? Nope.

Seems I touched a nerve here and I should reiterate I'm not targetting you specifically, but the whole "anti-Benning" mentality is where I'm getting fed up.

"Blind faith followers" is the exact kind of thing I, and I'm sure a majority of the posters here are sick of. Getting called that after saying "Ferland AAV isn't so bad" is toxic. I'm presuming you're using this as an over the top swing in the opposite direction as opposed to calling me, or others, that.

As for being irrationally optimistic, we have rays of sunshine after a long, crappy, stormy winter. Is the on ice product not better going into this year? Did we not go up in the standings, and us much as I hate to paraphrase Benning, were we not playing meaningful games in March? Do Myers, Miller, Benn and Ferland not make the team better then Hutton, Pouliot, Granlund and Gaunce? Did we not just dump Del Zotto, Nilsson, Gagner, and Gudbranson and are trying (according to the media) to dump Sutter and Eriksson? Does none of that merit any kind of optimism? We have improved and the rest of the division has stagnated or regressed, that's cause for some optimism. It can be that false spring we are used to getting in March these last few years, but is anyone complaining about that brief few days of good weather?

Hearing a fresh take that Myers or Miller is going to bring the team down, solely by merit of a Benning acquisition, is wholly tiresome. That isn't criticism, that's hating. Arguing the subjective merits of trading a first, or signing a 5 year deal, is valid criticism. Wondering where all these new faces fit on the roster? Valid too.

And I'm not a Benning cheer leader, the guy needs to be jobless asap. Guys an idiot, but that doesn't mean everything he touches turns to garbage immediately.

As for my example, I have two brothers that verbatim put the rest of us through that on a long car trip. One farted non-stop, the other wouldn't stop whining and crying about it, making demands about someone needing to do something. My parents pulled over and spanked the cryer. He didn't make a peep after that, and the other brother stopped farting. I don't know about any moral or lesson to the story, but I can tell you which one my parents found more annoying.

Wer are all stuck in the car on this one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JTmillerForA1stLOL
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->