Is the "Retool" or "Rebuild on the Fly" Over?

[timw33]

Then what, we have a terrible 3rd and 4th line so we can accommodate another top end player?

Did you know that you can fill your bottom-6 with cheap short term replacement level players and don't actually have to pay them all $3-4.375MM?

Like do you think our bottom 6 is good because they currently take up like $22MM of cap space?

Your argument is maybe one of the stupidest of the offseason: we should stop acquiring elite talent cause we might have the best problems possible and instead should continue our line of overpaying absolutely trash players and sitting around in the basement.

 

[F A N]

Did you know that you can fill your bottom-6 with cheap short term replacement level players and don't actually have to pay them all $3-4.375MM?

Like do you think our bottom 6 is good because they currently take up like $22MM of cap space?

Your argument is maybe one of the stupidest of the offseason: we should stop acquiring elite talent cause we might have the best problems possible and instead should continue our line of overpaying absolutely trash players and sitting around in the basement.

The blueprint is to have 3 lines that could score with a 4th line C anchoring cheap wingers.

 

[Jack Burton]

I really like the young guys, I really do, but can we stop with some of this? We just had a core that had a NHL MVP, Selke award winner, a Vezina quality goalie. That team will have multiple Hall of famers on it. We would be more than blessed to see that again in our life time.

I honestly don't think we have enough young pieces yet and don't think we will with the way this team has been constructed, we will probably waste Horvats prime, and may eat up into BB and Peterson.

And we should have sold everything. November 1st 2013 changed everything.
And I agree, we don't have enough young talent but that's truly on Benning and ownership.

 

[Pip]

Come the **** on. This is a ridiculous take. Absolutely ridiculous.

When I watched EP and Boeser last year I was definitely thinking, “Yeah, I don’t want anymore or this”

Lmao

 

[Jack Burton]

Wha

The blueprint is to have 3 lines that could score with a 4th line C anchoring cheap wingers.

What?

I've had a few beers but does this make any sense to anybody else?

 

[F A N]

Wha

What?

I've had a few beers but does this make any sense to anybody else?

Mmm... beer...

What doesn't make sense? Having 3 lines that can score?

 

[Orr4Norris]

It’s like when people think it’s better to make less money so as not to cross into the next tax bracket.

You’re forgetting about opportunity cost though. People realize they still get more money...the question is often is the extra work required to make the extra money worth it, as you lose a higher % to tax? Of coarse if no extra work is required, then you are better off making more.

So yeah, getting another elite talent...it’s ridiculous to say no...if it were free. But throwing another season isn’t free. There’s the mental toll on our good young players. There’s the missed opportunity for development by playing meaningful games down the stretch. And even if they finish at the very bottom they still aren’t guaranteed a top 3 pick. And then there is the possibility of picking a ‘can’t miss’ prospect who busts.

 

[logan5]

Did you know that you can fill your bottom-6 with cheap short term replacement level players and don't actually have to pay them all $3-4.375MM?

Like do you think our bottom 6 is good because they currently take up like $22MM of cap space?

Your argument is maybe one of the stupidest of the offseason: we should stop acquiring elite talent cause we might have the best problems possible and instead should continue our line of overpaying absolutely trash players and sitting around in the basement.

I'm saying we have a good young core to build around. The time for tanking is over. It sounds like you want to follow the Oilers model of getting high draft picks year after year, and going nowhere. You don't seem to understand the concept of salary cap management either, so I'll leave it at that.

 

[Jack Burton]

Mmm... beer...

What doesn't make sense? Having 3 lines that can score?

Do you think the Canucks have 3 lines that can score?

 

[Jack Burton]

Another option...beginning of a death spiral to a decade of mediocrity.

This is exactly what we're headed for.

We've had 6 offseasons to predict this.

 

[CpatainCanuck]

Do you think the Canucks have 3 lines that can score?

The canucks have 6 forwards 27 or younger who have scored 40 points in the nhl (Pettersson, Boeser, Horvat, Miller, Pearson, and Ferland). Add in a healthy Baertschi, wildcards like Virtanen and Goldobin, and a veteran like Sutter, and yeah, the canucks have a pretty deep forward group this year.

 

[Jack Burton]

The canucks have 6 forwards 27 or younger who have scored 40 points in the nhl (Pettersson, Boeser, Horvat, Miller, Pearson, and Ferland). Add in a healthy Baertschi, wildcards like Virtanen and Goldobin, and a veteran like Sutter, and yeah, the canucks have a pretty deep forward group this year.

Add up the points you expect.

Does that that fall in range of playoff teams last year?

 

[Jack Burton]

Bottom line...we need our D to produce.

It's going to completely resolve around Quinn Hughes.

This kid better come in big or this regime is sunk.

 

[timw33]

I'm saying we have a good young core to build around. The time for tanking is over. It sounds like you want to follow the Oilers model of getting high draft picks year after year, and going nowhere. You don't seem to understand the concept of salary cap management either, so I'll leave it at that.

Believe it or not, but we're already following the Oilers model by a) overpaying for terrible veterans that do nothing to insulate the limited young talent or move the needle b) said veterans push the team to the cap limit and remove all flexibility c) have botched multiple gifted top-10 picks d) have been unable to add good NHL players outside of the first round e) are unable to extract surplus value from trading assets and f) are unable to extract surplus value from trading for assets.

Yes, there's a cap, and you have to get the absolute most value and talent for every $$ allocated. We aren't doing that—we can barely sneak one of our 4 good young players under the cap right now. That's frankly ****ing embarrassing.

Would you rather use the cap we have on more elite players or on mediocre, replacement level players?

**** I'll take as many elite level players as we can get through whatever means. Load this team up, and deal with good problems instead. Trade from a place of power and surplus to address our roster needs or load up on futures for once.

 

[CpatainCanuck]

Add up the points you expect.

Does that that fall in range of playoff teams last year?

Umm, pretty sure yeah. The canucks had more goals than Dallas last year and add Ferland, Miller, Hughes and Myers. Not to mention the serious injury problems they dealt with last year.

Just in the Western Conference last year:

Dallas: 3 forwards with 40+ points
Nashville: 3 forwards with 40+ points.
St. Louis: 4 fowards with 40+ points.


Obviously success requires good goaltending, good d as well as timely scoring from the forwards, but the canucks forward depth is absolutely fine next year.

 

[F A N]

Do you think the Canucks have 3 lines that can score?

I said that's the blueprint. I don't think you can win by having stars in your top 6 but filling your bottom 6 with cheap replacement level players.

But to answer you question, I do think the Canucks potentially have 3 lines that can score. At the very least I would say they are more offensively inclined than defensive.

Obviously, EP and Horvat are our top 2 Cs. The 3rd line C role is either going to be Sutter or Gaudette. On the wings you have Boeser, Miller, Ferland, Pearson, Baertschi, Roussel (when he comes back), Leivo, Virtanen, Goldobin, and dare I say Eriksson. It's not hard to see that the 3rd line can be filled with players who have some offensive ability.

 

[F A N]

Believe it or not, but we're already following the Oilers model by a) overpaying for terrible veterans that do nothing to insulate the limited young talent or move the needle b) said veterans push the team to the cap limit and remove all flexibility c) have botched multiple gifted top-10 picks d) have been unable to add good NHL players outside of the first round e) are unable to extract surplus value from trading assets and f) are unable to extract surplus value from trading for assets.

A big problem with the Oilers is that they didn't build a team / a team that competes well in today's NHL. They also didn't draft well and paid a big price for bad acquisitions. The best established NHL Dmen they drafted since 2003 were Petry (whom they traded early), Klefbom, Erik Gustafsson (who they didn't bother to sign), and Nurse (who was drafted because the Oilers desperately needed help on D). They also paid a big price for Reinhart and Larsson. Not that the Canucks did a better job drafting Dmen during that time frame, but then again the Canucks have had a weak D the past few years. In goal they also traded Dubnyk.

This season, the Oilers' projected lineup up front has 3 former Canucks players: Kassian, Gagner, and Granlund. Kassian is projected as one of their top 6 RWers and Granlund and Gagner projects to be their 3rd line players. Did you look at their left side after Draisaitl? Do you prefer their present and future in goal?

For all the talk about "Boston model," Chiarelli built a slow team. Benning didn't.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

Sure it can work, DET did it with Datsyuk and Zetterberg. The issue has always been: How does it _best_ work? That's where the definition of a rebuild becomes more grounded: It best works when you liquidate assets to procure future assets in order to grow the _best_ possible future core. Not just future core, but the best possible future core.

That's what prevents this from being categorized as a rebuild.

Detroit had a cheat code: Nick Lidström. He averaged 26:54 TOI through out his career according to https://www.hockey-reference.com

So in essence they had (In my unpopular opinion) the best player in the history of the game on the ice for half a game for 20 seasons. Retooling on the fly around a piece like that is very possible. And the moment Lidström, first looked like a mortal playing his last season, and then subsequently retired, the Detroit dynasty was no more.

The reason the retool failed so miserably here is that our cornerstone piece(s), the Sedin's were never built for the fast game that the NHL has turned in to. Also I dont think they were anywhere near as good a piece to build around as Lidström, but that neither here nor there.

 

[F A N]

Detroit had a cheat code: Nick Lidström. He averaged 26:54 TOI through out his career according to https://www.hockey-reference.com

So in essence they had (In my unpopular opinion) the best player in the history of the game on the ice for half a game for 20 seasons. Retooling on the fly around a piece like that is very possible. And the moment Lidström, first looked like a mortal playing his last season, and then subsequently retired, the Detroit dynasty was no more.

The reason the retool failed so miserably here is that our cornerstone piece(s), the Sedin's were never built for the fast game that the NHL has turned in to. Also I dont think they were anywhere near as good a piece to build around as Lidström, but that neither here nor there.

Trying to sustain success in the short term while achieving long term success is always going to be more difficult than breaking up the pieces and building from the ground up.

I agree that you need the core players to do it. Teams that successfully "retool" tend to win their first Cup with the same core players when their core players are young. Lidstrom won his first Cup when he was 26 to start the year. Sedins were 29 during the Cup run, Kesler was 26 and the next youngest top scorers that year were Raymond and Hansen at 24. In comparison, Boston's top 4 scorers were 25 and under. Bergeron last season was 33. Sedins at 34 were still capable of producing 70+ points and leading the Canucks to the playoffs.

 

[logan5]

In the 2020/2021 season, there is a good window to maybe go for a good play-off run. Pettersson will be in his 3rd year and Hughes will be in his 2nd, with both still being under their elc. If they are both producing at a high rate at that point, the team could add a few more key pieces, given the super low salary of their 2 best players (presumably). Just have to dump some dead weight before that season starts.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

This is exactly what we're headed for.

We've had 6 offseasons to predict this.

Yep. All of the shortcuts that Benning has made that have failed have set this team back too much. Maybe if we're lucky we will have a fluke run like what Carolina did last season going to the ECF. But Benning's missteps have absolutely destroyed the supporting cast of the team considering who else could have been on our roster at this point.

We could have easily had a roster like:

Tkachuk - Pettersson - Boeser
DeBrincat - Horvat - Nylander
Goldobin - McCann

Edler - Tanev
Theodore - Andersson
Hughes - Forsling/Hutton

Markstrom
Demko

^The above roster is what we could easily have had if Benning was more competent. It doesn't even factor in free agent signings, which is insane. It also doesn't factor in moves Benning did not make (Hamhuis, Vrbata, Miller, etc.) that would have boosted our assets.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Yep. All of the shortcuts that Benning has made that have failed have set this team back too much. Maybe if we're lucky we will have a fluke run like what Carolina did last season going to the ECF. But Benning's missteps have absolutely destroyed the supporting cast of the team considering who else could have been on our roster at this point.

We could have easily had a roster like:

Tkachuk - Pettersson - Boeser
DeBrincat - Horvat - Nylander
Goldobin - McCann

Edler - Tanev
Theodore - Andersson
Hughes - Forsling/Hutton

Markstrom
Demko

^The above roster is what we could easily have had if Benning was more competent. It doesn't even factor in free agent signings, which is insane. It also doesn't factor in moves Benning did not make (Hamhuis, Vrbata, Miller, etc.) that would have boosted our assets.

Yawn...!..the fantasy roster again..?.(if only Dim Jim had nailed 100% of his pixx)....Tkachuk,Nylander ,Horvat and the Sedins would have put us well out of the Pettersson range...let alone the Hughes range..Just stop already.

You forgot Pasternak.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

Yawn...!..the fantasy roster again..?.(if only Dim Jim had nailed 100% of his pixx)....Tkachuk,Nylander ,Horvat and the Sedins would have put us well out of the Pettersson range...let alone the Hughes range..Just stop already.

You forgot Pasternak.

That's mainly just consensus draft rankings and who our scouting department wanted (Tkachuk as a consensus pick; Nylander and DeBrincat for scouting department - I'll give you Andersson though, that might be a stretch). I didn't even include all the potential targets that we missed because Benning traded away too many draft picks (all the downgrades, and 2nd/3rd/4th/5th round picks for busts like Vey, Pedan, and Larsen).

This is actually a conservative view of what things would look like if we had a competent GM. It does not factor in free agent signings, other draft picks Benning traded, or hindsight arguments where our 2nd round picks (like Lind/Gadjovich) could have been used on better players. It is pretty depressing though, so I can see why you'd want me to stop.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

That's mainly just consensus draft rankings and who our scouting department wanted (Tkachuk as a consensus pick; Nylander and DeBrincat for scouting department - I'll give you Andersson though, that might be a stretch). I didn't even include all the potential targets that we missed because Benning traded away too many draft picks (all the downgrades, and 2nd/3rd/4th/5th round picks for busts like Vey, Pedan, and Larsen).

This is actually a conservative view of what things would look like if we had a competent GM. It does not factor in free agent signings, other draft picks Benning traded, or hindsight arguments where our 2nd round picks (like Lind/Gadjovich) could have been used on better players. It is pretty depressing though, so I can see why you'd want me to stop.

Tkachuk-Horvat-Boeser
Sedin-Sedin-Nylander


With that top 6 you are not going to be picking at the top of the draft, or finishing as one of the worst teams in the league....(Pettersson and Hughes..forget it)..Also, don't forget..every time you inevitably lose the lottery ..you drop back two spots..

You can write up a fantasy /all star team for every other team in the league if you like..If only they drafted this guy, or traded that pick...etc.....Its crystal ball stuff..

After some thought..don't stop....carry on by all means.

 

[lawrence]

What say you?

I think it is.

Looks like this is the roster that this organization is going all in with and if Pettersson and Hughes really work out then some serious salary has to be shed to be able to pay them.

That money will most likely come from walking away from UFA's over the next few seasons and those players being replaced from within the system.

is this all you can talk about? I'm not a fan of Benning either but your nonsense is unreal.

wether people like him or not, there were some factors in Benning's job. Not trying to defend him right now, but it was rumored that he actually to rebuild but was turned down by owner ship. Mike Gillis wanted to rebuild and was turned down, Benning wanted to, so do we at least see a pattern here? It's that ownership is instruction his employees either wise even, at the expert advice of his employees, which was Mike Gillis and Jim Benning.