Management Thread

[Vector]

Yes that is obvious.

 

[Fatass]

so it was “proven” here so that makes it true? Got ya, didn’t realize we had so many posters here that know all the inner workings of Canucks management.

you know what I think? And yes you do want to know. I think some posters here are birds of the same feather and they tend to support who ever provides a narrative that resembles what they want to hear. They then spout it off multiple times so that it becomes the “truth” in their mind.

if you want I can post a link to a study that shows a butterfly flapping its wings in Denmark can cause a Typhoon in Cuba. Does not make it true.

Believe what you wish, but clearly “true” Canuck’s fans come with all kinds of beliefs. There are even some who believe Benning/Wisebrod are responsible for the recent (2017) draft success.

 

[RobertKron]

Ah yes, the wheat fans.

 

[sandwichbird2023]

Absolutely I'm opposed to a huge contract for Tyler Toffoli.

The guy is a 45 point player. You don't win by giving $5 million + retirement UFA contracts to middling players like this. You win by developing high-value assets internally and having them out-produce their contracts.

Shift Adam Gaudette to wing and he'll produce the same 45 points that Toffoli does for $1 million.

Plus Toffoli is 28 and the last couple years of a 4-5 year contract are almost guaranteed to be a liability.

Signing a redundant asset like Toffoli to a huge UFA contract and then letting far more important players like Markstrom and Tanev walk is the height of terrible management.

Replace Markstrom and Tanev with Demko and Tryamkin last season and we're probably a bottom-5 team in the league.

On the other hand, I would feel equally uncomfortable giving Tanev a long term contract as well given his injury history. Of the 3 top UFAs from our team (Marky, Tanev, Toffoli), I probably would only be on board giving a long term contract to Markstrom.
Toffoli I'd be ok with 2-3 years.
Tanev probably 2 years max.
Both depending on cap hits of course.
If they get better offers elsewhere then best of luck to them.

 

[F A N]

Miller made us a bubble playoff team. Is that the ultimate goal; being a mediocre team? In three seasons, when Miller is gone, where will the first we gave up for him be playing? The timing of the Miller trade was too soon in our rebuilding (or however we define Benning’s plan) phase.
It’s like your connection of Covid 19 closures improving air quality. The air is still poor; this is only a temporary improvement to mediocrity. As people go back to commuting, they will choose to drive (instead of transit from fear of the virus) which will mean a lot more traffic. Hence a lot more pollution. In both the Miller trade and the Covid impact on air pollution they are only Temporary improvements to mediocre. And then things actually get worse than they were before.
Horrible trade by Benning/Wisebrod.

The goal is to win the Cup but you can't win a Cup without making the playoffs. The path that Chicago took with Kanes and Toews to win their first Cup and the Penguins took with Crosby and Malkin is not the norm and even they added core players early in their rebuild (albeit through free agency). In three seasons Horvat will be 28 and can be gone too. Look at the Jets. They completely followed the draft and develop model. Are they considered Cup contenders this season? They were last season. How long did that window last?

As for your COVID 19 comment. My comment was a response to a specific comment made. But to address your comment, while I agree that more people would choose to drive, you're making assumptions here. I can make similar assumptions in saying that there will be more people working from home than in the past and a greater commitment to reducing air pollution as there may be a link between air pollution and vulnerability to COVID 19. Continuing with your comparison, it may benefit the core group long term to experience the playoff stretch drive and playoffs. Benning would not be the first GM in Canucks history to believe that playoff experience and adding a player like Miller helps with the development of the team's young core. Both Gillis and Burke believed that. When the Canucks acquired Miller they wanted Miller to take on a greater leadership role. He did that and there are plenty of reports of the leadership he has brought to the team.

 

[Horse McHindu]

Shift Adam Gaudette to wing and he'll produce the same 45 points that Toffoli does for $1 million.

.

I noticed that this comment and post of yours received six likes. Congratulations. I’m not really sure what to say here.

If you and the six other posters that ‘liked’ your post truly believe that Adam Gaudette (on RW) can do what Tyler Toffoli was doing playing alongside Pettersson and Miller, then I’m not really sure what I can say here.......

I’ll agree with you on the importance of Markstrom however, but I do think Tanev can we replaced by Tryamkin. Edler can play with Stecher or Myers on that top pairing, and I think there was a stat out there that showed that Hughes actually had better underlying numbers playing with Myers than he did with Tanev.

 

[Horse McHindu]

There are even some who believe Benning/Wisebrod are responsible for the recent (2017) draft success.

Consider the following:

1) Linden was at odds with Benning/Weisbrod
2) The Canucks have drafted noticeably better since Linden left the organization (or at the very least, been on par Post Linden).

And lastly, there is video proof of Benning wanting Pettersson over Cody Glass on the draft floor........a video that I posted multiple times back in January.

At this point, it’s just comical.

“every good draft pick the Canucks ever made was due to Brackett or someone non-Benning, and every bad pick that the Canucks have made *sans Quinn Hughes* was Benning related.”

It’s just pure comedy at this point. It’s on par with Donald Trump in America.

 

[Fatass]

Consider the following:

1) Linden was at odds with Benning/Weisbrod
2) The Canucks have drafted noticeably better since Linden left the organization (or at the very least, been on par Post Linden).

And lastly, there is video proof of Benning wanting Pettersson over Cody Glass on the draft floor........a video that I posted multiple times back in January.

At this point, it’s just comical.

“every good draft pick the Canucks ever made was due to Brackett or someone non-Benning, and every bad pick that the Canucks have made *sans Quinn Hughes* was Benning related.”

It’s just pure comedy at this point. It’s on par with Donald Trump in America.

Way too much evidence supporting Bracket as the key person in our recent (since 2017) draft success, and it has been posted here on many occasions.
Fact is the worst team in the NHL by points over the last four years is Benning/Wisebrod.

 

[Horse McHindu]

Way too much evidence supporting Bracket as the key person in our recent (since 2017) draft success, and it has been posted here on many occasions.

Except the people and/or media posting this “evidence” are people with biased agendas that want to see Benning fail. Why? Because - Benning’s interpretation of rebuilding is different from what many others believe.

Fact is the worst team in the NHL by points over the last four years is Benning/Wisebrod.

#Rebuild

The *only* year in the Benning era where the Canucks weren’t in rebuild mode, was their first year when management decided to give that old core one last kick at the can. After the Canucks lost to the Flames, significant moves were made........the idea being that the young players within our system would be protected by certain vets, while said kids could play in roles that would allow them to grow without being overexerted (ie forced into roles that were too much for their games).

 

[Fatass]

Except the people and/or media posting this “evidence” are people with biased agendas that want to see Benning fail. Why? Because - Benning’s interpretation of rebuilding is different from what many others believe.



#Rebuild

The *only* year in the Benning era where the Canucks weren’t in rebuild mode, was their first year when management decided to give that old core one last kick at the can. After the Canucks lost to the Flames, significant moves were made........the idea being that the young players within our system would be protected by certain vets, while said kids could play in roles that would allow them to grow without being overexerted (ie forced into roles that were too much for their games).

Benning couldn’t even say the word “rebuild”. And when
Trevor finally said “rebuild” was needed, he got fired. Not a chance Benning was rebuilding. All he did was “turn over” the roster. And any new young stars we have are of Bracket’s doing.

 

[Billy Kvcmu]

Best of luck Judd

 

[Fatass]

Best of luck Judd

Another great move by Benning/Wisebrod. Lose the guy responsible for our recent draft success. Maybe we get lucky and Wisebrod takes over the draft?
Even Ian Macintyre can’t explain losing Bracket after (finally) drafting well.

 

[Horse McHindu]

Best of luck Judd.



Thank you for your contributions.

 

[MS]

On the other hand, I would feel equally uncomfortable giving Tanev a long term contract as well given his injury history. Of the 3 top UFAs from our team (Marky, Tanev, Toffoli), I probably would only be on board giving a long term contract to Markstrom.
Toffoli I'd be ok with 2-3 years.
Tanev probably 2 years max.
Both depending on cap hits of course.
If they get better offers elsewhere then best of luck to them.

I'm not entirely comfortable giving Tanev a long-term deal either.

But in the situation we're in with a team that's a defensive trainwreck who relies on the goalie to bail them out on a nightly basis, where we're painfully thin on the right side, and where we have literally no other defensive defenders on the roster ... I don't really see what choice we have other than to sign him if we don't want to take a step backward in the short term. The notion that Tryamkin could replace what he brings is ... comical.

Also I suspect Tanev's AAV will be substantially smaller than Toffoli's despite being a better player.

 

[Peter10]

2) The Canucks have drafted noticeably better since Linden left the organization (or at the very least, been on par Post Linden)

Dude, there was ONE draft since Linden left.

 

[Ernie]

I'm not entirely comfortable giving Tanev a long-term deal either.

But in the situation we're in with a team that's a defensive trainwreck who relies on the goalie to bail them out on a nightly basis, where we're painfully thin on the right side, and where we have literally no other defensive defenders on the roster ... I don't really see what choice we have other than to sign him if we don't want to take a step backward in the short term. The notion that Tryamkin could replace what he brings is ... comical.

Also I suspect Tanev's AAV will be substantially smaller than Toffoli's despite being a better player.

The problem is that the team is a defensive trainwreck yet nobody wants to move on from any of the top 4 defenceman of Hughes, Edler, Myers, and Tanev.

Tanev was the weakest member of that group this season and his performance has degraded steadily over the past few years. You don't fix things by signing "your guy" at an above value contract, and you don't fix things by replacing third pairing guys like Benn and Stecher who play about 15 mins per night.

You can make the argument that the Canuck's needs on defence outweigh their needs at forward. But that still doesn't mean Tanev should be re-signed. The Canucks could instead sign a more durable and younger player like Vatanen or Hamonic or leverage a trade with someone like Virtanen to acquire a younger defenceman under contract.

 

[VanillaCoke]

Is that a joke?!

Myers was and is the weakest of the top 4 by a country mile

 

[Horse McHindu]

Is that a joke?!

Myers was and is the weakest of the top 4 by a country mile

No he wasn’t. The underlying numbers and all discernible eye tests say otherwise. Myers wasn’t great, but he wasn’t bad either. His performance was average.

 

[Fatass]

No he wasn’t. The underlying numbers and all discernible eye tests say otherwise. Myers wasn’t great, but he wasn’t bad either. His performance was average.

Okay, but Myers is not even close to worth his contract. As with the Miller trade, and (recently) the Tofoli trade, it was too soon in the development of our top stars to make these moves.

 

[Horse McHindu]

Okay, but Myers is not even close to worth his contract. As with the Miller trade, and (recently) the Tofoli trade, it was too soon in the development of our top stars to make these moves.

Given the trend of recent signings to defensemen, it’s quite common place to offer 2nd pairing dmen around 6 million dollars. Given where the Canucks were at as a team and as an organization (ie a team on the cusp of leaving the bottom 4th of the league), slightly overpaying a UFA in an effort to lure him is expected. I know it’s not ideal or what armchair GM’s at home want to hear, but it’s the truth.

 

[MS]

I noticed that this comment and post of yours received six likes. Congratulations. I’m not really sure what to say here.

If you and the six other posters that ‘liked’ your post truly believe that Adam Gaudette (on RW) can do what Tyler Toffoli was doing playing alongside Pettersson and Miller, then I’m not really sure what I can say here.......

I’ll agree with you on the importance of Markstrom however, but I do think Tanev can we replaced by Tryamkin. Edler can play with Stecher or Myers on that top pairing, and I think there was a stat out there that showed that Hughes actually had better underlying numbers playing with Myers than he did with Tanev.

Gaudette scored at a 47-point pace from garbage minutes as the #3 center + 2nd unit PP minutes. You think he'd score less if he was given more icetime with better players and less defensive responsibility?

I like Tyler Toffoli. I think he was a good target at the deadline (although we badly overpaid). If we were a big-budget team in a non-capped league, I'd be all for re-signing him. However, in a capped league you don't win by signing older middling players to huge contracts when you have far cheaper internal options who can do exactly the same thing. It's the same principle as Beagle vs. Gaunce. Even if Beagle is a slightly better player, there's no way that difference is even close to enough to justify the difference in cap hit and the opportunity cost created by Beagle's huge salary.

Tryamkin was a middling #6 defender type when he was here 3 years ago. He isn't replacing one of the better RS defensive defenders in the NHL, or anything close. It's insane how overrated he is just because he's 6'7".

 

[Horse McHindu]

Gaudette scored at a 47-point pace from garbage minutes as the #3 center + 2nd unit PP minutes. You think he'd score less if he was given more icetime with better players and less defensive responsibility?

I like Tyler Toffoli. I think he was a good target at the deadline (although we badly overpaid). If we were a big-budget team in a non-capped league, I'd be all for re-signing him. However, in a capped league you don't win by signing older middling players to huge contracts when you have far cheaper internal options who can do exactly the same thing. It's the same principle as Beagle vs. Gaunce. Even if Beagle is a slightly better player, there's no way that difference is even close to enough to justify the difference in cap hit and the opportunity cost created by Beagle's huge salary.

Tryamkin was a middling #6 defender type when he was here 3 years ago. He isn't replacing one of the better RS defensive defenders in the NHL, or anything close. It's insane how overrated he is just because he's 6'7".

I get your Beagle/Gaunce analogy (good analogy by the way), but I don’t think that’s analogous to Toffoli/Gaudette as I don’t think Toffoli is just “slightly” better than Gaudette.

I might be wrong here, but I don’t think Gaudette even feels comfortable playing wing at the NHL level. It’s one of the reasons why the Canucks haven’t trade it so far (that, and the Canucks really want Gaudette to continue getting experience as a center).

As far as Toffoli goes, he’s not THAT old. He’s what? 27/28? Even on a 5 year deal, the Canucks should be able to get pretty good value out of Toffoli without seeing much of a decline if any. Having Toffoli and Boeser on that right side would be a huge advantage.

I get your point about Toffoli from a cap perspective (ie spending cautiously given where we’re at with the cap), but I think the Canucks can make it work.

You and I must have different memories of Tryamkin. From what I saw, Tryamkin was a little green, but had some significant potential. The guy was a smooth skater and was effortlessly knocking people off the puck and into the boards. He’s still young enough to take his game to a higher level in my opinion.

 

[MS]

I get your Beagle/Gaunce analogy (good analogy by the way), but I don’t think that’s analogous to Toffoli/Gaudette as I don’t think Toffoli is just “slightly” better than Gaudette.

Tyler Toffoli has one season in his career, 5 years ago, where he scored at a better clip than what Gaudette did last year in his first proper NHL season, playing mainly garbage minutes.

I know Toffoli looked great for 10 games here when he was on a hot streak, but this isn't what you're going to get every night over a full season.

I might be wrong here, but I don’t think Gaudette even feels comfortable playing wing at the NHL level. It’s one of the reasons why the Canucks haven’t trade it so far (that, and the Canucks really want Gaudette to continue getting experience as a center).

Playing wing is easier than playing C, and most players find it easier. He plays wing on the PP and does well.

Defensively, he just doesn't cut it at C. And what's the long-term plan there? Petterson and Horvat are locked in as your top two guys for the next half-decade, and Gaudette just isn't a bottom-6 type you want to give defensive responsibility to. What's the end game here if you don't convert him to wing?

As far as Toffoli goes, he’s not THAT old. He’s what? 27/28? Even on a 5 year deal, the Canucks should be able to get pretty good value out of Toffoli without seeing much of a decline if any. Having Toffoli and Boeser on that right side would be a huge advantage.

I get your point about Toffoli from a cap perspective (ie spending cautiously given where we’re at with the cap), but I think the Canucks can make it work.

Most of these 40-50 point type 2nd line wingers are done barely past age 30. Toffoli is already a below-average skater and I doubt he'll look great at age 32-33.

But again, it's the opportunity cost. Gaudette on wing and Markstrom in goal? Or Toffoli in that position and Demko-Greiss or something in net? Which is a better team?

You and I must have different memories of Tryamkin. From what I saw, Tryamkin was a little green, but had some significant potential. The guy was a smooth skater and was effortlessly knocking people off the puck and into the boards. He’s still enough to take his game to a higher level in my opinion.

Again, I like Tryamkin. He's a nice, simple, pretty effective 3rd pairing type who is fun to watch and does some cool things given his size. But he's gotten absurdly overrated because of that size.

His puck skills, IQ, and transition game simply aren't that great and aren't good enough to be playing heavy minutes in the NHL. He's basically a bigger, faster version of Oscar Fantenberg. Which is nice, at the right salary. Until you start thinking he can replace possibly the highest-IQ defensive defender in the NHL in Chris Tanev.

 

[Ernie]

Is that a joke?!

Myers was and is the weakest of the top 4 by a country mile

well..

a) he wasn't
b) couldn't move him even if he was

As bad as that contract is going to look down the road, he's still an effective 2nd pairing defenceman now. Seems like the people who have the most hate for Myers want to double down on making the same mistake with Tanev.

 

[polloqpiu]

The underlying numbers and all discernible eye tests say Benning is a bad GM. Even lying about his draft succes won't make him a good GM so go on.