Rumor: Troy Brouwer interested in Canucks

[TheWolf*]

In terms of UFA priorities:

1) Troy Brouwer - 4m range
2) Milan Lucic - 6m range
3) Keith Yandle - 7m range
4) Andrew Ladd - 5m range

I think every player on that list, except Yandle will get more than this on the UFA market. I'd inflate every guess by about $1M.

 

[TruGr1t]

Hansen is a decent player on a decent contract. If the Canucks have any hope of contending next year, trading him for picks is not the way to do it. Clearly this management group is trying to retool, not rebuild.

I'm not qualified to say really, but would we see any drop-off with Brouwer taking his spot? Same age, both RWers, etc. The thinking would be Hansen's value is through the roof this off-season. He's making relative peanuts and is signed through 2017-18, plus he's coming off a 20-goal season.

If you can flip him for a 1st rounder (or whatever the return would be) and sign Brouwer at ~$4 million to replace him I think you do it. Hansen will likely make in that ballpark on his next contract. He'll be 32 and look for some sort of pay-off after a few years on a value deal.

 

[slappipappi]

I'd take him for 5M easily.

That would be a horrible, horrible contract, unless for 1-2 years.

 

[Siludin]

If Brouwer wanted a three year deal at $5m I think the Canucks think long and hard but inevitably accept.

 

[arttk]

If Brouwer wanted a three year deal at $5m I think the Canucks think long and hard but inevitably accept.

Would rather pay more to get the term to 2 so that we can eat salary and trade him for something at year 2 when the twins retire.

 

[VC]

Would rather pay more to get the term to 2 so that we can eat salary and trade him for something at year 2 when the twins retire.

Something that should be kept in mind with any FA that is 30+ or has the wear and tear of one. The team should of been rebuild a couple of seasons back but if they are thinking of committing to elder player post Sedins then the team is even worse off then imagined.

 

[deckercky]

I think every player on that list, except Yandle will get more than this on the UFA market. I'd inflate every guess by about $1M.

With a static salary cap, I'd say it's not far off (not enough money to overpay those players). If the inflator is used again, it could be more than that.

 

[VC]

With a static salary cap, I'd say it's not far off (not enough money to overpay those players). If the inflator is used again, it could be more than that.

Lucic and Ladd I wouldn't be surprised to get a million more than that but yes I think Fa day will be tamed for a second year, at least I'm hoping as I will have zero access to internet. Happy to get the draft in but not to waste 6 hours to watch where a random #5 defensemen will sign [/rant]

 

[alternate]

Great post. Agree with everything. That bolded part has always confused me. I don't understand how anyone can enjoy a team with no hope. 2014 was one of the most pointless/boring season of all time. Now I'm not saying it only takes 2-3 years to have a great team after starting a rebuild but the faster you start the rebuild the faster the return to relevance will happen.

The rebuild is already well underway. Gillis started it when he traded Schneider for a 1st. Horvat, Hutton, Markstrom, Virtanen, Boeser, #5 this is the rebuild. You want a scorched earth tank, but it makes zero sense to do while you still have productive Sedin years ahead of you.

I really don't see how anyone can look at the group of prospects in the system and feel no hope for the future. More picks would obviously be better, but the picks that are dealt are being used to acquire players that can be with the team for 5-10 years if they hit. Argue about value all you want, but there's something to be said for getting the asset you covet. "Value" is really nothing but hypotheticals...sure you didn't overpay, but you also didn't acquire the piece that fit the puzzle you are assembling. Worry too much about "value" and your left with a bag full of magic beans but no cow in the barn.

It's also why Im jealous of what the Leafs are doing. They're rebuilding exactly how you should.

Would you trade the past decade with Leaf fans to switch places with them now? It's great to talk about how "all in" Toronto is on their rebuild, but it took them a decade to get here. That decade has been (sadly) the most successful decade in this franchise's storied history.

There's also no reason for us to go scorched earth right now. We can do that when the Sedins retire or stop being high level players, but right now I absolutely agree with trying to find a balance between vets and graduating/emerging prospects. Adding a guy like Brouwer who can play anywhere in the line up does that. Wouldn't say he's my first choice, but he'd certainly improve our team. Prefer a Vrbata type deal of 2 years, no more than 3, even if costs a bit of a premium.

 

[82Ninety42011]

Sign Brouwer to 4.5 x 4 draft Tkachuk 5th and sign Stamkos to 9x7. Then we need to dump or demote Higgins, Burrows, Dorsett (dreaming) and find taker for Sbisa. Re-sign Hamhuis for 3x3 if he wants to return or keep Sbisa I guess? The following group has a cap hit under 69 million. Maybe even 68 i rounded up a few times. It's a capable line up. I know Tkachuk is a stretch for the top 6 but he seems to be a natural fit along Stamkos to me. Aaaah to dream !!

Sedin Sedin Brouwer
Tkachuk Stamkos Hansen
Bae Horvat Virtanen
Gaunce Sutter Etem/Granlund

Edler Tanev
Hutton Gudbranson
Hamhuis Tryamkin
Pedan Biega

Miller
Markstrom

 

[ChilliBilly]

Sign Brouwer to 4.5 x 4 draft Tkachuk 5th and sign Stamkos to 9x7. Then we need to dump or demote Higgins, Burrows, Dorsett (dreaming) and find taker for Sbisa. Re-sign Hamhuis for 3x3 if he wants to return or keep Sbisa I guess? The following group has a cap hit under 69 million. Maybe even 68 i rounded up a few times. It's a capable line up. I know Tkachuk is a stretch for the top 6 but he seems to be a natural fit along Stamkos to me. Aaaah to dream !!

Sedin Sedin Brouwer
Tkachuk Stamkos Hansen
Bae Horvat Virtanen
Gaunce Sutter Etem/Granlund

Edler Tanev
Hutton Gudbranson
Hamhuis Tryamkin
Pedan Biega

Miller
Markstrom

As I have stated elsewhere - you retain salary of all but $1M of a contract if you send a one way contract to the AHL. Applies to Higgins, Burrows, Dorsett etc. At their contracts, no one want them. And Higgins and Burrows have NTC's. Sorry there are no easy quick fixes. Send these guys to the AHL, you get no Cap relief, and you have to pay to replace them. Sorry. Sbisa may have some very minor trade value, but no one is taking him without salary coming the other way.

 

[Regal]

Brouwer really isn't that good and one good playoff (his only one) shouldn't change that. He's exactly the type of player you avoid in free agency because someone is going to give him way more than he's worth. I'm not sure he's even worth the deal he's coming off of

 

[Bobby Digital]

The rebuild is already well underway. Gillis started it when he traded Schneider for a 1st. Horvat, Hutton, Markstrom, Virtanen, Boeser, #5 this is the rebuild. You want a scorched earth tank, but it makes zero sense to do while you still have productive Sedin years ahead of you.

I really don't see how anyone can look at the group of prospects in the system and feel no hope for the future. More picks would obviously be better, but the picks that are dealt are being used to acquire players that can be with the team for 5-10 years if they hit. Argue about value all you want, but there's something to be said for getting the asset you covet. "Value" is really nothing but hypotheticals...sure you didn't overpay, but you also didn't acquire the piece that fit the puzzle you are assembling. Worry too much about "value" and your left with a bag full of magic beans but no cow in the barn.



Would you trade the past decade with Leaf fans to switch places with them now? It's great to talk about how "all in" Toronto is on their rebuild, but it took them a decade to get here. That decade has been (sadly) the most successful decade in this franchise's storied history.

There's also no reason for us to go scorched earth right now. We can do that when the Sedins retire or stop being high level players, but right now I absolutely agree with trying to find a balance between vets and graduating/emerging prospects. Adding a guy like Brouwer who can play anywhere in the line up does that. Wouldn't say he's my first choice, but he'd certainly improve our team. Prefer a Vrbata type deal of 2 years, no more than 3, even if costs a bit of a premium.

So hold up you want to delay the scorched earth rebuild plan because of the Sedins? The same guys we finished 3rd last with? I've herd this EXACT same excuse for the last 3 offseason. "We shouldn't rebuild because we have the Sedins". What have we accomplished with these guys over the last 3 years? A 1st round loss to Calgary is our highlight. A series in which we were severely outclassed by team with significantly less playoff experience than us.

The Sedins aren't top 10 players anymore. They've been declining the past couple years and will only get worse. Just look at how much thier play declines over the course of a season. You really think they can lead us in the playoffs? Also what can we add over the next two years, without mortgaging our future, that will make us a contender? By continuing to delay the rebuild because of them is incredibly dumb. By your logic, it was dumb for the Leafs to start thier scorched earth rebuild because they had productive players in JVR and Kessel.

As for the Leafs and switching places? What are you talking about? Lol. The only way you can go scorched earth is if you suck for a decade? Someone forgot to tell the Sabres. You wanna know why the Leafs were that bad for that long? It's because they were following the same dumb plan we currently are.

Why do I feel no hope? It's not because of our small group of good prospects. It's because of this management group and the direction they're steering this team in. They're obviously trying to build a competitive roster. Not bad enough to get a good pick but at the same time not good enough to ever be a legit contender. We need to ADD more talent to our prospect group that is solid but doesn't compare to the leagues best like Toronto or Winnipeg.

Now when the Sedins do eventually decline and or retire in 2 years there's no guarantee we end up as a bottom feeder. By then our younger guys will be better. It's why going with the scorched earth rebuild now makes so much sense.

Lastly, as for trading picks for guys who can help us for the next 5-10 years. These guys we're making trades for all have relatively low upside even if they're young. A rebuilding team shouldn't be trading one of thier top prospects and essentially a 1st round pick for a #4 or #5 Dman. They shouldn't be trading 2nds and 3rds for Linden Vey or Derek Dorsett or adding those picks to almost every deal like it's nothing. They shouldn't consistently have less picks than most teams going into the draft. This team isnt rebuilding they're obviously trying some half *** re tool which has resulted as us being the 3rd worst team in the leauge. Think about that, this management group thought last year's team was a 100 pt team going into the year. If that doesn't scream incompetence than I dont know what does. There's absolutely nothing to be optimistic about until these clown are fired.

 

[kanucks25]

The rebuild is already well underway.

Not really, look at our prospect and draft pick pool.

it makes zero sense to do while you still have productive Sedin years ahead of you.

If the Sedins were good enough to win the cup almost by themselves then this idea would have some merit.

Argue about value all you want, but there's something to be said for getting the asset you covet. "Value" is really nothing but hypotheticals...sure you didn't overpay, but you also didn't acquire the piece that fit the puzzle you are assembling. Worry too much about "value" and your left with a bag full of magic beans but no cow in the barn.

I don't know what this means except some sort of weird excuse for losing virtually every trade like Benning has.

Would you trade the past decade with Leaf fans to switch places with them now? It's great to talk about how "all in" Toronto is on their rebuild, but it took them a decade to get here. That decade has been (sadly) the most successful decade in this franchise's storied history.

Why do we have to be terrible for a decade to scorch the earth like them? That's what we should be trying to avoid and that decade of misery for Leafs fans should give us the inspiration to do so ASAP.

So hold up you want to delay the scorched earth rebuild plan because of the Sedins? The same guys we finished 3rd last with? I've herd this same excuse for the last 3 offseason. We shouldn't rebuild because we have the Sedins. What have we accomplished with these guys over the last 3 years? A 1st round loss to Calgary is our highlight. A team with significantly less playoff experience that us. Smh.

The Sedins aren't top 10 players anymore. They've been declining the past couple years and will only get worse. What can we add the next two years without mortgaging the future that will make us a contender? By continuing to delay the rebuild because of them is incredibly dumb. By your logic it was dumb for the Leafs to start thier scorched earth rebuild because they had productive players in JVR and Kessel.

As for the Leafs and switching places? What are you talking about? Lol. The only way you can go scorched earth is if you suck for a decade? Someone forgot to tell the Sabres. You wanna know why the Leafs were that bad for that long? It's because they were following this same dumb plan we currently are.

Why do I feel no hope? It's not because of our small group of good prospects. It's because of this management group and the direction they're steering this team in. They're obviously trying to build a competitive roster which will end up with us not being bad enough to finish low enough to acquire a top pick but at the same time not good enough to ever be a legit contender. Our current prospect group is solid but it doesn't compare to some of the teams around the leauge like Toronto or Winnipeg.

Now when the Sedins do eventually decline and or retire in 2 years there's no guarantee we end up as a bottom feeder. If this same management group is around we'll make some more deals to keep us competitive enough to sell tickets.

Lastly as for trading our picks for guys who can help us for the next 5-10 years. These guys we're making trades for all have relatively low upside even if thier young. A rebuilding team shouldn't be trading one of thier top prospects and essentially a 1st round pick for a #4 or #5 Dman. They shouldn't be trading 2nds and 3rds for Linden Vey or Derek Dorsett or adding those picks to almost every deal like it's nothing. They shouldn't consistently have less picks than most teams going into the draft. This team isnt rebuilding they're obviously trying some half *** re tool which has resulted as us being the 3rd worst team in the leauge. Think about that, this management group thought last year's team was a 100 pt team going into the year. If that doesn't scream incompetence than I dont know what does. There's nothing to be optimistic about until these clown are fired.

Thank you.

 

[kanucks25]

But we're also not sitting here with nothing to show for these years. We've got quite a few potential future core pieces to show for it. Even this year, we're getting ourselves a Dubois/Tkachuk cornerstone. They've been adding pieces to the pipeline for a few years now.

You're making it sound like the Canucks aren't drafting top-end talent in the last few years of "mediocrity". And accumulating later picks with some potential. Which isn't remotely true.

Refer to my response to FAN below regarding our prospect pool.

This idea that we could be "bad for 2-3 years" then "great for 7-8" is just absurd and detached from the reality of what happens with NHL franchises. You can knock 2-3 drafts out of the park, and still be a bad team...in fact, that's very likely the result. It takes 5+ years of drafting and follow-on development to really turn things around as an actual "great team" with true depth of prospects and real balance.

There are no shortcuts. And that includes tanking for 2-3 years. That isn't a real shortcut.

I agree that it'd take 5+ years to become a true contender.

By tank for "2-3 years" I mean that we try to accumulate the most amount of picks and prospects as possible and draft as high as possible.

In years 4 and 5 we sign UFAs while our current young players are hitting their primes and we start to push:

- Horvat, Hutton, Baertschi, Virtanen, Tryamkin will all start to enter their primes
- Tanev, Edler, Gudbranson will still be effective veterans
- Prospects like Boeser and Demko will start to push for spots
- 27-31 year-old UFAs can be signed at this point to supplement and insulate the roster and their contracts will run through the duration of the primes of the young players mentioned above (signing these UFAs now means they will begin to decline when we are ready to push and eat valuable cap)
- Prospects we draft with those high (top-5) picks will be 18, 19 or 20 years-old giving us a great pool and players to push for spots 7, 8, 9 years down the line when guys like Horvat are at the end of their primes.

This is obviously a "best-case scenario" type thing but 100% plausible. People will refute it by saying "well it's not that easy, you have to draft well too!" but that's a requirement for success with any type of plan, rebuild or not.

The goal is real, sustainable contention for a long period of time. Not mortgaging some to all of the future hoping for a quick fix that never works.

As for the rest of your post, I guess we can agree to disagree on the philosophical differences between tanking and not.

It's not as simple as you describe. The Oilers unquestionably drafted the consensus BPA with their first overall picks and they did spend some high picks on defence. Like you said. "A rebuild needs balance." You can't just accumulate draft picks. You need to draft well. At some point, you got to turn those prospects into players and fill holes. Take the Jets' rebuild. All they did was accumulate draft picks, draft, and patiently wait for them to develop. That led to one playoff year.

Jets are a budget team and have a much better prospect pool with younger core players. They aren't a comparable for us.

Because there are no guarantees. How many teams have drafted in the top 3 two consecutive years? As we witnessed at the lottery it may be even harder to do so now.

You don't need top-3 picks to rebuild or draft star players. It helps but it's not necessary and if you tank well enough there's a good chance you'll get a top-3 pick in one of your 2-3 terrible years.

I'm pretty hopeful. The 5th overall pick, the past 3 drafts, Hutton's emergence, and Markstrom and Tanev gives me hope that there are some young building blocks in place.

Anti-rebuilders keep bringing up our small group of prospects as if they are something special. Look around the league: pretty much every team has just as many if not more quality prospects than us and the ones that don't are either contending or are in store for a terrible future just like us.

No. The point of a rebuild is to put building blocks in place. One strategy is to stockpile prospects and picks. When you have a chance to grab a young player that fills a hole you do so. Sometimes you succeed sometimes you don't. Sometimes you fail by trading two 2nds and a 3rd for Anders Lindback and sometimes you trade much less for a Ben Bishop.

That trade for Lindback was terrible when it happened, not just in hindsight. Terrible trades and gambles shouldn't be used as a guideline for rebuilding.

If the Canucks can get Stamkos or Okposo+Lucic they'll be a pretty damn good team imo. A lot of it will rest on the development of Hutton, Horvat and Virtanen and the emergence of Rodin

Those are some giant "if"s.

We really are not like the Sharks at all. Our defense is one of the worst puck-moving groups in the league and I'm pretty sure if you add all of our defense points together they still score less than just Brent Burns. They have two top notch defensemen in Vlasic and Burns and then some other solid guys like Braun and Martin. We have no one as good as Vlasic or Burns.

It won't matter how good our forwards are if our defense can't get them the puck. Edler and Tanev are great but they are shouldering a heavy load and both have had their fair share of injuries. And yet all I see are lineups with the same defense core as last year but with one more defence-first guy in Gudbranson and a few more older expensive forwards added. Unless we acquire a 1st-pairing elite offensive dman or Hutton turns into one by October we are going to still stink even if we add Lucic and Stamkos.

All of this.

 

[valkynax]

If Brouwer wanted a three year deal at $5m I think the Canucks think long and hard but inevitably accept.

What? No no no. When Brouwer requests...nay, DEMANDS, a three year 5M per deal, Benning will give him five years 6M per.

Because Benning loves his foundational meat and potatoes.

 

[alternate]

So hold up you want to delay the scorched earth rebuild plan because of the Sedins? The same guys we finished 3rd last with? I've herd this EXACT same excuse for the last 3 offseason. "We shouldn't rebuild because we have the Sedins". What have we accomplished with these guys over the last 3 years? A 1st round loss to Calgary is our highlight. A series in which we were severely outclassed by team with significantly less playoff experience than us.

Daniel finished #38 overall in scoring this season with 61 points. Third last wasn't because the Sedins can't play at a high level anymore, it was because we are transitioning to a new core and had some injury issues.

The Sedins aren't top 10 players anymore. They've been declining the past couple years and will only get worse. Just look at how much thier play declines over the course of a season. You really think they can lead us in the playoffs? Also what can we add over the next two years, without mortgaging our future, that will make us a contender? By continuing to delay the rebuild because of them is incredibly dumb. By your logic, it was dumb for the Leafs to start thier scorched earth rebuild because they had productive players in JVR and Kessel.

Of course the Sedins are declining, but at the same time Horvat, Hutton, Virtanen, Baertschi, Boeser are ascending. The goal is that as the Sedin's decline into 2nd line players, the developing youth will surpass them. Much like Little Joe surpassed Big Joe. The Sedins can still contribute to a winning team without being top 10 players.

What can we add...well there are lots of options listed throughout this thread...Brouwer, Lucic, Erikson, Yandle, Stamkos...some pipe dreams, some possibilities. But the real improvement comes from the maturing of our current young players, with an astute UFA signing or two complementing that development. A good UFA, better health, and continued progression by Horvat, Hutton et al, and things can be turned around over night.

As for the Leafs and switching places? What are you talking about? Lol. The only way you can go scorched earth is if you suck for a decade? Someone forgot to tell the Sabres. You wanna know why the Leafs were that bad for that long? It's because they were following the same dumb plan we currently are.

Over a 2 year period we had 2 top 9 picks and four 1st rounders in total. When did the Leafs do that?

Why do I feel no hope? It's not because of our small group of good prospects. It's because of this management group and the direction they're steering this team in. They're obviously trying to build a competitive roster. Not bad enough to get a good pick but at the same time not good enough to ever be a legit contender. We need to ADD more talent to our prospect group that is solid but doesn't compare to the leagues best like Toronto or Winnipeg.

We finished 3rd worse this season. How is that "not bad enough to get a good pick"?

Now when the Sedins do eventually decline and or retire in 2 years there's no guarantee we end up as a bottom feeder. By then our younger guys will be better. It's why going with the scorched earth rebuild now makes so much sense.

Yeah, lets all hope our younger players don't get better.

Lastly, as for trading picks for guys who can help us for the next 5-10 years. These guys we're making trades for all have relatively low upside even if they're young. A rebuilding team shouldn't be trading one of thier top prospects and essentially a 1st round pick for a #4 or #5 Dman. They shouldn't be trading 2nds and 3rds for Linden Vey or Derek Dorsett or adding those picks to almost every deal like it's nothing. They shouldn't consistently have less picks than most teams going into the draft. This team isnt rebuilding they're obviously trying some half *** re tool which has resulted as us being the 3rd worst team in the leauge. Think about that, this management group thought last year's team was a 100 pt team going into the year. If that doesn't scream incompetence than I dont know what does. There's absolutely nothing to be optimistic about until these clown are fired.

This all reminds me of what it was like in Bronco Nation a few years ago when the despised Josh McDaniels traded away Jay Cutler, Brandon Marshall, Tony Scheffler and Payton Hillis. The overwhelming majority felt it was a huge mistake, all the team needed was a defence, losing these players was setting the franchise back a decade yada yada yada. I was one of the handful of contrarians that said it was time to move on from the mediocrity of that group, and the short term pain would be worth the long term gain. Well, 5 straight division titles, two conference championships, and reigning Superbowl champs, it's been one heck of a lost decade I tell ya.

I see the same thing happening here. Benning is putting together a 200 ft puck pressure team that will have an element of toughness. If the hockey gods favour us, our emerging core will ripen while the Sedins are still productive NHLers. Better health, continued development, and a smart UFA pick up or two and we're back in the hunt.

 

[F A N]

Jets are a budget team and have a much better prospect pool with younger core players. They aren't a comparable for us.

Umm... you were suggesting the Canucks should rebuild by simply accumulating draft picks. You said the Oilers screwed up their rebuild because they were dumb and only drafted skilled forwards. I debunked your assertion that they screwed up their rebuild by simply drafting skilled forward and suggested that the Jets' rebuild also failed despite essentially doing nothing but drafting and developing.

You don't need top-3 picks to rebuild or draft star players. It helps but it's not necessary and if you tank well enough there's a good chance you'll get a top-3 pick in one of your 2-3 terrible years.

So you agree that the Canucks don't need to go through 2-3 terrible years because you don't need top 3 picks to rebuild or draft star players?

Anti-rebuilders keep bringing up our small group of prospects as if they are something special. Look around the league: pretty much every team has just as many if not more quality prospects than us and the ones that don't are either contending or are in store for a terrible future just like us.

It takes time. The Canucks have been a playoff team for many years and failed to accumulate quality prospects without drafting high. Benning, like Gillis, like Nonis, like Burke etc. pretty much start from scratch as far as filling up the cupboards.

How do you think it would have worked with Gillis' no asking a player to waive NTC policy?

I asked YOU that question.

 

[Bobby Digital]

Daniel finished #38 overall in scoring this season with 61 points. Third last wasn't because the Sedins can't play at a high level anymore, it was because we are transitioning to a new core and had some injury issues.



Of course the Sedins are declining, but at the same time Horvat, Hutton, Virtanen, Baertschi, Boeser are ascending. The goal is that as the Sedin's decline into 2nd line players, the developing youth will surpass them. Much like Little Joe surpassed Big Joe. The Sedins can still contribute to a winning team without being top 10 players.

What can we add...well there are lots of options listed throughout this thread...Brouwer, Lucic, Erikson, Yandle, Stamkos...some pipe dreams, some possibilities. But the real improvement comes from the maturing of our current young players, with an astute UFA signing or two complementing that development. A good UFA, better health, and continued progression by Horvat, Hutton et al, and things can be turned around over night.



Over a 2 year period we had 2 top 9 picks and four 1st rounders in total. When did the Leafs do that?




We finished 3rd worse this season. How is that "not bad enough to get a good pick"?



Yeah, lets all hope our younger players don't get better.



This all reminds me of what it was like in Bronco Nation a few years ago when the despised Josh McDaniels traded away Jay Cutler, Brandon Marshall, Tony Scheffler and Payton Hillis. The overwhelming majority felt it was a huge mistake, all the team needed was a defence, losing these players was setting the franchise back a decade yada yada yada. I was one of the handful of contrarians that said it was time to move on from the mediocrity of that group, and the short term pain would be worth the long term gain. Well, 5 straight division titles, two conference championships, and reigning Superbowl champs, it's been one heck of a lost decade I tell ya.

I see the same thing happening here. Benning is putting together a 200 ft puck pressure team that will have an element of toughness. If the hockey gods favour us, our emerging core will ripen while the Sedins are still productive NHLers. Better health, continued development, and a smart UFA pick up or two and we're back in the hunt.

First off most of the replies completely miss the point of my responses. So I'm not even going to bother responding back to most of your post.

As for the bolded: Are you kidding me? The Broncos moved away from a stale core and decided to build through the draft. How is that anything like this regime is doing? If the Broncos followed our managments plan then they would have kept Cutler and Marshall who were both "productive players" (like the Sedins although alot younger) and arguably top 10 at thier positions at the time they were traded and decided to continue to build around them even though it was obvious they weren't going anywhere. What the Broncos actually did is what Kanucks25 and I are saying. Let's move on from this stale core, accumulate picks and build through the draft.


As for how the the Broncos we're built afterwards. For those who don't know they:

Moved on from a stale core by either trading players for picks or straight up releasing players they couldn't get anything back for (it's alot harder to trade for picks in the NFL than the NHL).

They then acquired most of their core through the draft: Von Miller, DT, Derek Wolfe, Malik Jackson, Ryan Clady, Danny Trevathean, Brandon Marshall, Julius Thomas, Orlando Franklin, and Chris Harris Jr (UDFA).

Because of thier rookie deals (NFLs equivalent to the NHLs entry level contracts) they were able to sign top tier FAs in Peyton Manning, Demarcus Ware, Aquib Talib and secondary guys in TJ Ward and Emmanuel Sanders to supplement the core.

Does that sound at all like what we're doing? Hell no!

If you really want to use a football example you can look at the Seahawks who went with a scorched earth rebuild even more so then the Broncos which set them up for long term sustained success.

However football is kind of a weird example to use as your drafting older players so it's easier to turn a team around a lot quicker and it's alot easier to hit on later picks. But the team building philosophy remains the same. Build through the draft by loading up on picks then sign FAs to supplement the core once it starts taking shape is the best way to build a team. It's NOT at all what the Canucks are doing. If you want to compare the Canucks to a NFL team the Saints are a good example.

 

[82Ninety42011]

As I have stated elsewhere - you retain salary of all but $1M of a contract if you send a one way contract to the AHL. Applies to Higgins, Burrows, Dorsett etc. At their contracts, no one want them. And Higgins and Burrows have NTC's. Sorry there are no easy quick fixes. Send these guys to the AHL, you get no Cap relief, and you have to pay to replace them. Sorry. Sbisa may have some very minor trade value, but no one is taking him without salary coming the other way.

Did not know this thank you for enlightening me. Wow this sucks man Benning signing Dorsett, Sbisa and giving Miller the 3rd year is gong to be brutal. 12 million tied up ouch!!

 

[kanucks25]

Umm... you were suggesting the Canucks should rebuild by simply accumulating draft picks. You said the Oilers screwed up their rebuild because they were dumb and only drafted skilled forwards. I debunked your assertion that they screwed up their rebuild by simply drafting skilled forward and suggested that the Jets' rebuild also failed despite essentially doing nothing but drafting and developing.

How did you debunk what I said? The only high pick they used on a D-man was Nurse and he's still developing. Other than developing Klefbom they did very little to build their back-end including trading away Petry who was like their only decent D-man.

And as for the Jets:

1. Their rebuild hasn't failed, at least not yet. Most of their main pieces are young and their good veteran players are not too old.

2. If their rebuild fails it'll probably be because they'll lose their good young players to free agency because they are a budget team, and we don't have that problem in Vancouver.

So you agree that the Canucks don't need to go through 2-3 terrible years because you don't need top 3 picks to rebuild or draft star players?

What I meant was you don't have to win the lottery (1, 2 or 3) every year because something in the top 6-7 is good enough.

Despite being an advocate of an intense, bottom-out rebuild in our case, I don't think it's truly essential to do it this way in all cases. It is definitely important to draft well late in the 1st round and in every other round and a team can turn things around "on the fly" by doing this without totally scorching the earth.

However, we are not in that position. Our organization is in terrible shape right now just like the Leafs were and bottoming-out is the best way to do it, in our specific case.

It takes time. The Canucks have been a playoff team for many years and failed to accumulate quality prospects without drafting high. Benning, like Gillis, like Nonis, like Burke etc. pretty much start from scratch as far as filling up the cupboards.

Don't know what previous GMs have to do with our current circumstances.

I know it takes time. I just rather we start now than in 2 years.

I asked YOU that question.

Editing error on my part. I believe you were having that conversation about Gillis/NTCs with someone else, not me. I just accidentally included it in my response.

 

[F A N]

How did you debunk what I said? The only high pick they used on a D-man was Nurse and he's still developing. Other than developing Klefbom they did very little to build their back-end including trading away Petry who was like their only decent D-man.

You said the problem was that the only thing they drafted were skilled forwards. I said that the Oilers pretty much drafted the consensus BPA (which was the right thing to do in of itself) with their first pick and then did use some high picks on Dmen. The problem wasn't the fact that they drafted skilled forwards with their first pick.

And as for the Jets:

1. Their rebuild hasn't failed, at least not yet. Most of their main pieces are young and their good veteran players are not too old.

2. If their rebuild fails it'll probably be because they'll lose their good young players to free agency because they are a budget team, and we don't have that problem in Vancouver.

Their rebuild failed because after 5 years in Winnipeg they made the playoffs last season and then finished 6th this past season. Can you honestly say that the core that ended this past season is significantly better than what it was 5 years ago? They failed to build around their young core and now Ladd is gone and Wheeler and Byfuglien will be 30+ and Little will turn 29. Meanwhile, Enstrom will be 32 and isn't the same player and there's no goaltending.

Despite being an advocate of an intense, bottom-out rebuild in our case, I don't think it's truly essential to do it this way in all cases. It is definitely important to draft well late in the 1st round and in every other round and a team can turn things around "on the fly" by doing this without totally scorching the earth.

However, we are not in that position. Our organization is in terrible shape right now just like the Leafs were and bottoming-out is the best way to do it, in our specific case.

Since the 2008-2009 season how many times have the Leafs missed the playoffs and how many times have the Canucks missed the playoffs? The Leafs aren't comparable to the Canucks. If anything, the Leafs have failed in rebuilding so many times. I think the Canucks are different in that the Canucks are still in the position to make the playoffs and retooling while the Leafs simply couldn't make the playoffs.

Don't know what previous GMs have to do with our current circumstances.

You said other team's prospect pool is equal or greater than ours. I said it takes time because previous GMs didn't do a good job of filing the cupboards. Benning has had two drafts. We have gotten something to show from his first draft already but we will have to wait for last year's draft to contribute but it's looking good.

 

[ginner classic]

How did you debunk what I said? The only high pick they used on a D-man was Nurse and he's still developing. Other than developing Klefbom they did very little to build their back-end including trading away Petry who was like their only decent D-man.

You said the problem was that the only thing they drafted were skilled forwards. I said that the Oilers pretty much drafted the consensus BPA (which was the right thing to do in of itself) with their first pick and then did use some high picks on Dmen. The problem wasn't the fact that they drafted skilled forwards with their first pick.



Their rebuild failed because after 5 years in Winnipeg they made the playoffs last season and then finished 6th this past season. Can you honestly say that the core that ended this past season is significantly better than what it was 5 years ago? They failed to build around their young core and now Ladd is gone and Wheeler and Byfuglien will be 30+ and Little will turn 29. Meanwhile, Enstrom will be 32 and isn't the same player and there's no goaltending.



Since the 2008-2009 season how many times have the Leafs missed the playoffs and how many times have the Canucks missed the playoffs? The Leafs aren't comparable to the Canucks. If anything, the Leafs have failed in rebuilding so many times. I think the Canucks are different in that the Canucks are still in the position to make the playoffs and retooling while the Leafs simply couldn't make the playoffs.



You said other team's prospect pool is equal or greater than ours. I said it takes time because previous GMs didn't do a good job of filing the cupboards. Benning has had two drafts. We have gotten something to show from his first draft already but we will have to wait for last year's draft to contribute but it's looking good.

Benning has given himself fewer picks to work with than Gillis and Nonis did.
Benning has traded young prospects for suspects
Benning thought he'd be drafting at 16-22 this year leaving us with a much less enticing prospect
Benning compounds abhorent pro scouting with equally brutal negotiation skills
Benning is in denial about the true state of the team and the real damage his short tenure has done
Gillis was usually drafting in the mid to late 20's because the team enjoyed its greatest ever achievements under his leadership

 

[Mad Brills*]

I have no clue what this team wants to do long term.

 

[kanucks25]

You said the problem was that the only thing they drafted were skilled forwards. I said that the Oilers pretty much drafted the consensus BPA (which was the right thing to do in of itself) with their first pick and then did use some high picks on Dmen. The problem wasn't the fact that they drafted skilled forwards with their first pick.

The problem is they didn't use those picks and convert them into assets they really needed. Taking the BPA is fine but you still need to address your needs.

If you had 10 draft picks in one draft and at every pick a goalie was the BPA, are you going to draft 10 goalies? Well I guess you could if you believed in BPA that much, but you would still need to trade most of them away to acquire forwards and D-men that you desperately need.

And that's where the Oilers failed.

Their rebuild failed because after 5 years in Winnipeg they made the playoffs last season and then finished 6th this past season. Can you honestly say that the core that ended this past season is significantly better than what it was 5 years ago? They failed to build around their young core and now Ladd is gone and Wheeler and Byfuglien will be 30+ and Little will turn 29. Meanwhile, Enstrom will be 32 and isn't the same player and there's no goaltending.

Again, you're comparing Winnipeg to us when they are simply run very differently.

1. They weren't a great team when it came to the NHL roster when they came over from Atlanta. Yes I can say that their team is much better today than it was when they came over:

- Wheeler is a top RW and much better than his first year in Winnipeg
- Little is arguably a 1C and better than his first year in Winnipeg
- Schiefele looks like he might become a 1C soon
- Stafford has replaced Kane's production since the trade even though it seems like a big downgrade on paper

In their first year they had a better/younger Ladd and a better/younger Enstrom. Other than that they had very little going for them.

2. Their GM barely touched the roster for almost 4 years until he made that Myers trade.

3. They are a budget team so they don't have the resources to do everything they want, like sign good UFAs or make trades that bring in salary.

4. Again, they have an elite prospect pool and still are not done the rebuild.

Since the 2008-2009 season how many times have the Leafs missed the playoffs and how many times have the Canucks missed the playoffs? The Leafs aren't comparable to the Canucks. If anything, the Leafs have failed in rebuilding so many times. I think the Canucks are different in that the Canucks are still in the position to make the playoffs and retooling while the Leafs simply couldn't make the playoffs.

That time-span is completely irrelevant. The Canucks and Leafs were in totally different positions during all of those years. I'm comparing the Canucks now to what the Leafs were before (their new management). Burke pretty much tried to do the same thing Benning is trying to do now: fast-forward the rebuild because of impatience and/or incompetence.

The Leafs chose not to make the playoffs. They could have kept Kessel and Phaneuf and acquired a few big-names like some Canucks fans want to and try to go for it.

You said other team's prospect pool is equal or greater than ours. I said it takes time because previous GMs didn't do a good job of filing the cupboards. Benning has had two drafts. We have gotten something to show from his first draft already but we will have to wait for last year's draft to contribute but it's looking good.

I'm sure you've seen the picks in/out chart.

Benning is probably doing a good job with the picks he's actually used but volume drafting is the way to go because we know the draft requires a lot of luck.