Speculation: Is the current core ready to become a perennial playoff team?

[me2]

With new management and a fresh philosophy, this offseason is shaping up to be critically important for the short and long term outlook of the current core. In this thread, I define the core to be Pettersson, Demko, Hughes, Miller and Horvat. Yes, some of the players may be on their way out. Let's say they aren't and this is the group of players we build around going forwards.

If so, what can they become next season and the seasons to follow?

This question appears to be the primary bone of contention in recent threads. Let's get everyone on record as it's obviously coloring what each poster would like management to do (degree of retooling, degree of rebuilding) and who should be coaching the team next year.

Where is the "How the hell do I know without seeing the offseason moves" option

 

[vancityluongo]

Would you feel that way if the core lost Miller and replaced him with a complementary player through free agency?

Depends on the player. If it's someone at the upper end of the available free agents this year (Gaudreau, Forsberg, Kadri) then yes. If it's someone like Max Domi, then slide that scale down, but not all that meaningfully - they should still be capable of making the playoffs.

Obviously depending on fluctuations in performance, for the most part we'd still be in line with the core of teams like:
- NYI (Barzal, Dobson, Nelson, Lee, Pulock, Pelech, Sorokin)
- Columbus (Laine, Voracek, Bjorkstrand, Werenski, Gavrikov, Merzlikins)
- Nashville (Duchene, Johansen, Forsberg, Granlund, Josi, Saros)
- Minnesota (Kaprizov, Fiala, Eriksson-Ek, Hartman, Spurgeon, Brodin, Dumba)
- New Jersey (Hughes, Hischier, Bratt, Severson, Hamilton)
- Dallas (Robertson, Hintz, Seguin, Heiskanen, Klingberg, Oettinger)

NYI is probably the most comparable positionally in terms of the three young building blocks. Nashville's is better right now but older. Jersey's is worse right now but younger. Any of these teams could make the playoffs next year IMO, and any of them could miss.

Without going through every team, I'd imagine our current group of Petterson, Hughes, Miller, Horvat, Boeser, Demko is somewhere between the top-10 and bottom-10, along with the teams above.

 

[BrentSopelsHair]

There's nothing wrong with the core. They have a #1 center, a #1 defensemen, and a #1 goaltender that are all among the best in the league at their position.

They have a train wreck of a defense, no 3rd line, and poor special teams coaching. They also could not win a game with Demko on the bench but hopefully Martin solves that.

Until they can get rid of the junk Benning accumulated and replace those players with solid pieces they'll be stuck somewhere between a bubble team and a low end playoff team. It's going to take time to undo all those absurd contracts handcuffing the team as most of them are unmovable.

Agreed on this, and the tough part is that the time that it takes to extricate the team from the baggage of the Benning era likely overlaps with the most effective years of the core pieces, effectively blunting the hypothetical cutting edge of this team

 

[Diversification]

Where is the "How the hell do I know without seeing the offseason moves" option

I just thought it’d be interesting to see where people are beforehand. I can post the same thread at the end of the offseason. Might make for a fun comparison.

 

[Melvin]

This is an impossible question to answer without at least knowing what happens with Miller.

This team minus Miller is clearly not good enough. If Miller is traded for the right pieces, and some other savvy moves are made, could it be good enough? Maybe. Hard maybe.

 

[Diversification]

Agreed on this, and the tough part is that the time that it takes to extricate the team from the baggage of the Benning era likely overlaps with the most effective years of the core pieces, effectively blunting the hypothetical cutting edge of this team

I wonder if that’s true. It’s plausible that you’re correct. But let’s say they turf Myers, Pearson for no salary coming back. Then they buy out Poolman and Dickinson. They’d still be stuck with OEL. No getting around that. But they’d have room to take back contracts on a Garland and/or Boeser trade. All of that could happen in a single offseason. Lots of moving parts and lots that could go wrong, but there’s some wiggle room if they’re aggressive.

 

[TruGr1t]

The broader issue, I voted lucky bubble, is that they show no pathway to getting better, let alone becoming a contender. None. The cap structure is upside down, the prospect pipeline is bottom of the league, and the defense isn’t even close.

Unfortunately, all the errors may have cost the core it’s prime anyway. Even if you somehow incrementally tackle the cap issues and improve this team over the next 4-5 years it isn’t winning a Cup.

 

[McDavid is too whiny]

I agree and you're 100% correct, I was just saying that you were being overly generous in your examples of exceptions.

Weegar was 8th in Norris voting last year and would have been on my 2022 Canadian Olympic Team.

Would you do the familiarity thing and bring Weegar/Ekblad, Toews/Makar, Theodore/Pietrangelo as your six D? I’m not sure if they all play together on their own teams, mind you. Anyone obvious that screws over?

 

[Javaman]

I just thought it’d be interesting to see where people are beforehand. I can post the same thread at the end of the offseason. Might make for a fun comparison.

In that case, I voted for "out of the playoffs" if we are voting based on how the Canucks are at this moment.

They've been a non-playoff team for 2 consecutive seasons and there's no reason to think there will be any noticeable improvement to the roster at this point. They've got no cap space to work with and no prospects knocking at the door.

I reserve the right to change my vote as JR/PA makes moves to fix the many problems Benning left behind.

 

[ChilliBilly]

voted making the playoffs, because I think they are a bubble team, not needing luck. Really think they are between the two options. I can see them being 13 -19 for the next 3 years. And in that core I would include Podkolzin, the only significant player likely to seriously improve over the next 3 years. My core is Petey, Hughes, Demko and Pods. Everybody else is tradable for the right package. And that package had better be for the future, not quick fixes. For example, Myers for a 1st and a 1 yr salary dump. Which isn't going to happen.

I think their biggest problem, and I have been saying this for years, is the absolute inability to manage to have any cap space.

 

[kcunac]

Who’s the core? Depending on the answer, we may be able to contend for the SC with it, just depends who we replace players like OEL, Myers, and Dickinson with and what kind of entry level deals we have coming up. Unfortunately we are far from replacing the garbage on the team and have one of the shallowest prospect pools in the league.

 

[Diamonddog01]

Current core (which I view as Miller, Horvat, Petterson, Hughes, Demko) just isn’t good enough to consistently make the playoffs. Horvat is def a weak link here but they are all a bit overrated at this point.

 

[Fatass]

Current core (which I view as Miller, Horvat, Petterson, Hughes, Demko) just isn’t good enough to consistently make the playoffs. Horvat is def a weak link here but they are all a bit overrated at this point.

We have evidence from the Bubble playoffs that Petey, Hughes, and Demko are guys who can carry the club. To me, those three are our only core guys. We have a goalie, a top centre, and a top D. We need a checking centre, a shutdown D, and a scoring winger (at their levels) to fill out the core. Because our top three guys aren’t to the same level as other team’s top three we need the other parts of the core to be better. And we need all the support guys to be better than other teams have too. Basically if we expect to compete for Cups with our top three guys as the heart of the core, then we need better players everywhere else to compensate. Colorado, Toronto, Florida, Carolina, Tampa (off the top of my head) have better core three than us.

 

[MS]

Would you do the familiarity thing and bring Weegar/Ekblad, Toews/Makar, Theodore/Pietrangelo as your six D? I’m not sure if they all play together on their own teams, mind you. Anyone obvious that screws over?

Weegar/Ekblad and Toews/Makar for sure. Chris Tanev would have been on my 3rd pairing for matchup/PK reasons. Could go a few different ways on the 6th guy.

 

[tyhee]

Many, perhaps most, of the polls we see on this forum are biased in their wording or vague in such a way that the results don't mean much.

This is one of those polls, though not among the more flagrant ones.

The wording will deter some who think the team will be a bubble team next season from choosing bubble team in a couple of different ways. The most obvious is the "which will need some luck to sneak in" which will suit those that think the team is likely to be just out but doesn't suit those that think the team is as likely as not to make it. Some will consider they don't need luck, just not bad luck. Some will feel the team is good enough to be as likely as not to make it so won't be "sneaking" in.

Another issue is the timing is vague. The words "as early as next year" make it apparent the poll is set up expecting the team to change in the near future but with a view to allowing those that think it might improve to regular playoff status within a couple of years to make that choice. The addition of the words "as early as" permit someone who thinks the team will improve to become a regular playoff team in the future to choose a playoff team option even if the voter thinks it is quite possible, maybe even probable, that it will take longer, how much longer being in the mind of the individual voter.

It also as has already been pointed out is asking how a team will do when at this time all we can do is speculate about who will be on the team when there is speculation that there could be substantial change between the end of this season and the start of next season.

I voted but am of the opinion that the wording of the poll and options are too vague and too biased to give valid results.

 

[timw33]

Weegar/Ekblad and Toews/Makar for sure. Chris Tanev would have been on my 3rd pairing for matchup/PK reasons. Could go a few different ways on the 6th guy.

Pelech/Tanev would be a pretty insane matchup pairing.

 

[Diversification]

Many, perhaps most, of the polls we see on this forum are biased in their wording or vague in such a way that the results don't mean much.

This is one of those polls, though not among the more flagrant ones.

The wording will deter some who think the team will be a bubble team next season from choosing bubble team in a couple of different ways. The most obvious is the "which will need some luck to sneak in" which will suit those that think the team is likely to be just out but doesn't suit those that think the team is as likely as not to make it. Some will consider they don't need luck, just not bad luck. Some will feel the team is good enough to be as likely as not to make it so won't be "sneaking" in.

Another issue is the timing is vague. The words "as early as next year" make it apparent the poll is set up expecting the team to change in the near future but with a view to allowing those that think it might improve to regular playoff status within a couple of years to make that choice. The addition of the words "as early as" permit someone who thinks the team will improve to become a regular playoff team in the future to choose a playoff team option even if the voter thinks it is quite possible, maybe even probable, that it will take longer, how much longer being in the mind of the individual voter.

It also as has already been pointed out is asking how a team will do when at this time all we can do is speculate about who will be on the team when there is speculation that there could be substantial change between the end of this season and the start of next season.

I voted but am of the opinion that the wording of the poll and options are too vague and too biased to give valid results.

Thanks for the feedback. It wasn't my intention to be biased about the poll. However, I can understand why you see it that way. My intention was to try and focus the discussion on the core of the team, such as it is (I defined the core as EP, QH, TD, JTM and BH). Namely, do we have a core that is satisfactory to build around? I ask for 3 reasons. The first is the question of necessity - How necessary is each part of the core to the mission of building a contender? Second, what are the costs/benefits of replacing members of the core? Three, are we just deluding ourselves that this is a core that even worth proceeding with?

I wanted to know what posters here thought of this because it's perhaps the most vital question heading into the offseason. Cores pieces are hard to acquire and many teams find themselves unable to find a key piece and stall out as a result - TO and their goaltending woes, for instance. It's also the issue that needs to be settled before we can address the supporting cast in that it sets the table for what's possible in terms of cap space and ability to take on contracts, trade returns, etc.

Regardless, I thought it would be an interesting survey to revisit after the offseason to see whether we have changed our views on the matter.

 

[thenextone]

This is the same question/doubt we had about the Canucks in 2007-8 when we transitioned to Gillis. We all had our doubts, but the core was essentially what took us to 2 presidents trophies and a cup final. This team has good pieces but a few things have to go right before they can take the next step. Our top 6 is pretty good. Hughes and Demko are centerpieces. Our defense needs to have more cap efficient players and at least a solid defense-first guy that can play top 4. OEL could be that guy if he evolves his game according to his age and role. He’s smart enough, can skate and can make good zone exists even if he’s no longer the offensive guy. Myers has never shown to be consistent outside of a cluster of games after BB joined. Even then, in a 7 game series his inconsistent play could cost us big time.

The problem is what forward assets do we give up to figure out the D? We’ve pissed away tradeable players and picks over the last few years. The jury is out with what Rathbone will provide. If Juolevi could have at least downgraded himself to a playable 3rd pair D would have been a huge help, but that draft pick was a total complete write off.

 

[shottasasa]

I based my answer on the core defined in the OP, and assumed that Included Miller as being re-signed and the timeline implied by the question, answers, and OP as being the next 4-5 years. I also assumed that the new management group would improve the depth around the core at least marginally as I think that they are at least competent. I answered that they'd establish some consistency and regularly make the playoffs.

I think if that were the scenario they would make the playoffs as the 4-8 seed in the west and maybe make it to the second round or conference final in that time span, but ultimately would not be a top-tier contender. I think they could be something like the Sharks in Joe Thornton's prime. This of course is not a scenario I would be happy with and hope they can make some substantive changes.

I think a headline core of Pettersson, Hughes, Demko, Podkolzin, and Horvat would be good enough to be the basis of a true contender, but they'd need some significant depth and upgrades. I think they could even be a contender with OEL on the books if he plays at the level he showed this season for 4 more years. His contract would still be underwater but not too badly. We'll see tho

 

[Tomatoes11]

They aren’t doing Jack. They have no room to maneuver so technically they should be worse so I wouldn’t get your hopes up homers. There’s nothing quantifiable to suggest they will be better. Same team probably minus Boeser or Garland. You do the math….

 

[PuckMunchkin]

The team needs deconstructing and the way it has been setup this will be very difficult.

If you could wave a magic wand and sign EP40 long term, remove Myers and OEL from the roster, and cancel the two traded 1st rounders and use those picks to fill the void that is our prospect pool, sure.

Hughes, Pettersson and Demko are very good parts of a core.

We need way more.

 

[Fatass]

The team needs deconstructing and the way it has been setup this will be very difficult.

If you could wave a magic wand and sign EP40 long term, remove Myers and OEL from the roster, and cancel the two traded 1st rounders and use those picks to fill the void that is our prospect pool, sure.

Hughes, Pettersson and Demko are very good parts of a core.

We need way more.

With Demk, Hughes, and Petey as our current young core we need the supporting group to be better than other teams that have better top three guys. Pretty much to rebuild the club except for those three.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

With Demk, Hughes, and Petey as our current young core we need the supporting group to be better than other teams that have better top three guys. Pretty much to rebuild the club except for those three.

Yeah... Demko is as good as they come,

but as much as I love Hughes and Petey, they are no McKinnon & Makar or Barkov & Ekblad or Point & Hedman etc.

 

[December5th]

if we keep miller and make no big changes then we just tread water and make 8th seed next year. maybe again the year after that but i could see them giving up after that.

 

[MikeK]

We have the pieces in key positions to build around but the core as we have it today is not a perennial playoff team. Not even close. There needs to be changes. We as fans should stop pretending this team is close. We are far from it.