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.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.
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.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.
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.
Shift Adam Gaudette to wing and he'll produce the same 45 points that Toffoli does for $1 million.
.
There are even some who believe Benning/Wisebrod are responsible for the recent (2017) draft success.
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.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.
Benning couldn’t even say the word “rebuild”. And whenExcept 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).
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?Best of luck Judd
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.
2) The Canucks have drafted noticeably better since Linden left the organization (or at the very least, been on par Post Linden)
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.
Is that a joke?!
Myers was and is the weakest of the top 4 by a country mile
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.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.
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".
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 enough to take his game to a higher level in my opinion.
Is that a joke?!
Myers was and is the weakest of the top 4 by a country mile