Vancouver Media Thread IV

[Peen]

Last one had 1000 posts.

Thought I'd start this one with quality.

Click to read more...

 

[Didalee Hed]

That video is way too good

 

[vanuck]

Wasn't Dayal simping for management just barely a day ago when free agency started???

 

[Peen]

Wasn't Dayal simping for management just barely a day ago when free agency started???

You've completely missed the point TBH. I'm not sure if you listened but it isn't contradicting in any way.

Passing on Tanev and Markstrom at their deals was the right decision.

The problems caused by the bad contracts meant the canucks were bystanders in a buyers market and this one year push just to take two steps back makes absolutely no sense and is indicative of no plan.

That was his point.

 

[F A N]

Wasn't Dayal simping for management just barely a day ago when free agency started???

Can't one call a spade a spade? If the reports of Canucks circling back on Stecher is right, this has been terrible mismanagement. I'm fine with not having prepared for the flat cap. The cap was going up every year prior to the pandemic. Even when players weren't happy with the escrow they were still choosing to raise the cap.

Going for OEL is fine especially if we were looking to move some salary. But we failed to acquire him and may have pissed off our own guys (which may be irrelevant). Not stepping up and signing Markstrom is fine. Calgary's offer is a huge commitment that I would be scared to make. Offering Tanev a 2 year contract is fine. I would have given him a more reasonable AAV but otherwise I'm fine with not giving him 4 years. I'm also fine with moving on from Tanev and Stecher because management decided to make a change. The fact is that even with Tanev, Stecher, and Edler, the Canucks D weren't good so I can be on board with a large scale makeover.

However, missing out on Stecher because we were chasing Barrie and ultimately missing out on both is not fine. If we were interested in having Stecher back, we should have made it a priority to secure Stecher at an affordable price first, especially after Tanev is off the board.

So now what? If Benning pulls off a Virtanen for Carlo trade and re-sign Tofolli then I'm fine. I'm also fine with pencilling in Juolevi, Rafferty, and or Rathbone as part of our bottom pairing. We need someone else not currently on the roster to be a top 4 D on the right side.

 

[vanuck]

You've completely missed the point TBH. I'm not sure if you listened but it isn't contradicting in any way.

Passing on Tanev and Markstrom at their deals was the right decision.

The problems caused by the bad contracts meant the canucks were bystanders in a buyers market and this one year push just to take two steps back makes absolutely no sense and is indicative of no plan.

That was his point.

Yes though this piece is a rather stark change in tone from what he said on Twitter when he was praising management for standing pat and not signing Markstrom/Tanev to the deals they got. Nonetheless he's still accusing them of being conservative when they made win-now moves last summer.

When he's saying there's a "lack of clarity in their thinking" that strikes me as a very different attitude from Friday.

But perhaps I don't know Dayal well enough to summarize his position. I just thought it was funny that's all.

 

[Peen]

Yes though this piece is a rather stark change in tone from what he said on Twitter when he was praising management for standing pat and not signing Markstrom/Tanev to the deals they got. Nonetheless he's still accusing them of being conservative when they made win-now moves last summer.

When he's saying there's a "lack of clarity in their thinking" that strikes me as a very different attitude from Friday.

But perhaps I don't know Dayal well enough to summarize his position. I just thought it was funny that's all.

Harman dayal in the comments on that reddit post

SAVE
Apex98Canucks Army Harman 236 points 21 hours ago*
I'm going to get ahead of this because I know my comments are going to get taken out of context:
I completely agree with the decision to let Tanev and Markstrom go. By and large, the big picture decisions they made this offseason in terms of letting them go have been prudent. I've said as much and credited Benning for having that discipline. Don't believe me? I had a tweet commending their patience yesterday that got over 1000 likes.
My question, however, is that if they were willing to take a step back and wait on their window then it contradicts and muddies the bigger picture strategy they've otherwise shown. Signing Tyler Myers to a 5 year deal, signing Micheal Ferland to a four year deal, trading premium assets for a rental -- those were win-now moves that contenders make. So if you wanted to be patient (which again, I think is the right direction), then why were those more aggressive decisions made?
I just think you need a crystal clear idea of when you envision the team being a Cup contender, pick that window and plan accordingly. I know this clip in a vacuum is very fiery, let me make it clear -- I'm not a Benning hater. They've done an excellent job on the draft floor and have improved their trade record over time. On the whole, this team obviously has a bright future and the bottom-six contracts are all off the books in two years. The sky is NOT falling down.
I just think now is the time to create a crystal clear blueprint of your window. Pick a year (say 2022 when the bottom-six contracts are off the books) to begin your Cup window and make every move with that vision in mind. With efficiency, clever undervalued signings/trades and a plan they can absolutely get there.

 

[Peter10]

Can't one call a spade a spade? If the reports of Canucks circling back on Stecher is right, this has been terrible mismanagement. I'm fine with not having prepared for the flat cap. The cap was going up every year prior to the pandemic. Even when players weren't happy with the escrow they were still choosing to raise the cap.

Going for OEL is fine especially if we were looking to move some salary. But we failed to acquire him and may have pissed off our own guys (which may be irrelevant). Not stepping up and signing Markstrom is fine. Calgary's offer is a huge commitment that I would be scared to make. Offering Tanev a 2 year contract is fine. I would have given him a more reasonable AAV but otherwise I'm fine with not giving him 4 years. I'm also fine with moving on from Tanev and Stecher because management decided to make a change. The fact is that even with Tanev, Stecher, and Edler, the Canucks D weren't good so I can be on board with a large scale makeover.

However, missing out on Stecher because we were chasing Barrie and ultimately missing out on both is not fine. If we were interested in having Stecher back, we should have made it a priority to secure Stecher at an affordable price first, especially after Tanev is off the board.

So now what? If Benning pulls off a Virtanen for Carlo trade and re-sign Tofolli then I'm fine. I'm also fine with pencilling in Juolevi, Rafferty, and or Rathbone as part of our bottom pairing. We need someone else not currently on the roster to be a top 4 D on the right side.

My main problem is that they apparently can't focus on more than one thing at a time. Having the Markstrom negotiations and the trade talks with Arizona seemed to overwhelm them and they couldn't do anything else until a decision was made there.

It's not like they were locked into a office with Markstroms agent trying to hammer out a deal. There is so much time in between the talks, what to they do? Of course you need to have internal meetings to adjust the strateeggy depending on how negotiations are going but what else keeps them away to check in with Tanev, Stecher, Barrie, Bogosian etc?

 

[MS]

Harman dayal in the comments on that reddit post

It's almost like the moves last season weren't about the good of the franchise but about the short-term BS goal of Fake Stanley Cup Playoffs 2020 to save their jobs, at the expense of competing in the future.

 

[vanuck]

Harman dayal in the comments on that reddit post

Thanks for sharing! I noticed that he wasn't afraid to be open on Twitter yesterday about questioning "the plan" (though not even being that harsh on them).

 

[Fatass]

My main problem is that they apparently can't focus on more than one thing at a time. Having the Markstrom negotiations and the trade talks with Arizona seemed to overwhelm them and they couldn't do anything else until a decision was made there.

It's not like they were locked into a office with Markstroms agent trying to hammer out a deal. There is so much time in between the talks, what to they do? Of course you need to have internal meetings to adjust the strateeggy depending on how negotiations are going but what else keeps them away to check in with Tanev, Stecher, Barrie, Bogosian etc?

This narrow minded focus is just another example of Benning’s need to be involved in everything. He clearly lacks the confidence to allow others to manage solutions.

 

[m9]

Dayal is a rare guy in the local media who shows up on both radio stations and I think sometimes he is cautious not to offend the Canucks/Sportsnet side of things.

And while he undoubtedly is extremely smart when it comes to analytics, I don't always agree with how he applies it to team-building. At this stage, he's a bit more book smart than street smart, if that makes sense.

 

[tantalum]

It’s almost like the confusion is stemming from the fact they don’t have a direction and just make shit up as they go along.

In a vacuum the decisions are “prudent” but this isn’t a vacuum. The decisions weren’t really prudent they were FORCED because of past actions.

It was forced because of how badly they screwed up outside the narrow view vacuum of now.

They screwed up primarily because the pro scouting talent assessments are awful and they don’t actually have a plan.

It’s not that they change plans..they’ve never had one. Or they’ve never had a detailed one that goes beyond we want to make playoffs. They have no road map developed so they get lost at every turn.

 

[Jay Cee]

Thanks for sharing! I noticed that he wasn't afraid to be open on Twitter yesterday about questioning "the plan" (though not even being that harsh on them).

It seems weird to criticize them for that at this stage in the game anyway. It has nothing to do with doing whatever they want at any given point in time now. Decisions of the past have led us to this situation and we especially spent our money poorly in free agency.

 

[Pavel96]

Last one had 1000 posts.

Thought I'd start this one with quality.

Pretty funny considering how horrible his ratings are doing (both before covid and relative to other stations drops after lol)- The King of Vancouver radio holds the 17/19th ratings spot for his timeslot. 0.6 market share and he acts like this? yikes.

 

[m9]

I don't mind Walker and I think you could make a highlight reel of my worst posts on this board and it would be pretty bad too. That said, he's been out to lunch on this cap situation for awhile.

 

[tradervik]

One of the reasons I miss Botchford was his lack of inhibition in going after Walker for a stupid take. Drance will occasionally push back but he just doesn't have it in him to give Walker the shellacking he deserves.

 

[I am toxic]

What tune was Dayal singing last year when mismanagement signed all those predictably poor to bad contracts and gave away essentially a draft's worth of picks to not really compete now, just to prolong Benning's disastrous tenure?

 

[Just A Bit Outside]

Benning and Co have always operated like they could just do whatever they wanted and it would work out.

Pile of shit contracts? We can move those out easy! Who cares if there’s a flat cap and pandemic.

Not talk to our 2 UFA RHD? No problem! If things don’t work out with OEL, we will give them a ST terrible contract offer and they will accept because they want to stay so bad.

Doesn’t work with OEL, Tanev or Stecher? No biggy! We’ve always loved Barrie and I’m sure he’ll come here if we send him an offer.

There is no actual plan.

It’s children in the front office who don’t have a f***ing clue outside the walls to their office.

We have a someone who likes to watch junior hockey games as a GM.

Cause it’s f***ing clear as day he doesn’t watch NHL games or pays attention to anything related to this team and any other NHL franchise.

 

[StreetHawk]

My main problem is that they apparently can't focus on more than one thing at a time. Having the Markstrom negotiations and the trade talks with Arizona seemed to overwhelm them and they couldn't do anything else until a decision was made there.

It's not like they were locked into a office with Markstroms agent trying to hammer out a deal. There is so much time in between the talks, what to they do? Of course you need to have internal meetings to adjust the strateeggy depending on how negotiations are going but what else keeps them away to check in with Tanev, Stecher, Barrie, Bogosian etc?

When you have limited cap space and need to fit an even more tight 21-22 season cap situation each decision impacts what you can do.

you pay Stecher his $1.7 mill then that eats into what else you can do. Canucks are capped out for 21-22 unless they move some money out which isn’t going to happen this off season. So they can’t be making moves with the hope that they can an off season from now. Just not smart.

whether Roussel or Beagle hold any type of value will depend on how they perform. Roussel is younger and if he does bounce back from acl injury has a chance to get moved. Beagle age will hurt . Would need a team looking for a pk C to try to get him.

more hope with Seattle since teams are prepared for the ED and they may need to take on contracts for picks.

but again can’t be making moves now hoping those things occur later.

 

[member 328930]

Delete.

 

[Peen]

What tune was Dayal singing last year when mismanagement signed all those predictably poor to bad contracts and gave away essentially a draft's worth of picks to not really compete now, just to prolong Benning's disastrous tenure?

Just went through his articles on the athletic regarding the most notable moves made 2019 summer onwards.

Ferland: He basically pointed out every concern about aging powerforwards, his concussion issues, his scoring being inflated by luck and his role offensively as a passenger on the lines he played on and how that may not necessarily translate. Oh, and he acknowledged the cap issues.

I have no qualms with the Ferland signing on its own, but it is important to recognize that between those players the Canucks will owe $21.5 million. Three of those five will likely either be fourth line or bottom pair material (Beagle, Eriksson, Myers) with Roussel and Ferland better bets, although each has a concerning injury history. Collectively, the group will probably be replacement level — that’s a lot of inefficient cap management for an organization that likely wants it’s Cup window to open in three years.

However, he still felt that it was a worthwhile gamble just to be clear.

Micheal Ferland is a great add for Canucks at a fair cost but the signing's not without cap questions

--

Myers: Not a fan. Short term upgrade as a 4-5 that will regress into a clear cut bottom pair guy by the time the team EP/QH are on their second deals.

Despite being a No. 4/5 quality blueliner, Myers’ $6-million cap hit makes him the 22nd highest paid NHL defencemen on an annual basis. No matter what way you slice it this is an overpayment.

What to make of the Tyler Myers contract and the Canucks' blue line overhaul

--

Toffoli: his thoughts on this trade summarized by this conclusion ->

Vancouver’s trade for Toffoli is the type you make when you’re one piece away from being a legitimate Cup contender, and while the Canucks could realistically go deep this year, the consensus among industry insiders The Athletic spoke to is that they’re probably still a piece or two away. If you don’t think the Canucks are a legitimate Cup contender this year, it’s hard to justify relinquishing currency that could have otherwise been used to bolster Vancouver’s long-term chances of becoming a powerhouse team unless Toffoli re-signs and contributes beyond this season.

There's no doubt Tyler Toffoli will make the Canucks' top six better, but was the hefty price worth it?

--

Miller: Probably the best of all to read because he provides pretty much every point regarding leverage in the trade, Miller being an elite player, the window to contend, opportunity cost, EVERYTHING we discussed last year. I can try and summarize his thoughts. He loved the player as a fit and projected he'd easily bounce back into a 55+ point player but thought we paid a high price to make the playoffs and everything.

The price paid, however, is a tough pill to swallow. You always have to give to get, but if prices were indeed set at a first and a third for Miller and waiting to negotiate lower wasn’t an option for whatever reason, then the Canucks needed to get creative to ensure that they were able to pay such a premium without sacrificing the future.

JT Miller is everything the Canucks need in a top-six winger -- but was the price worth it?

I provided a small snippet from each article as I'm not quite sure what the sites rules are on posting PPV content in full.

Boy genius.

 

[F A N]

My main problem is that they apparently can't focus on more than one thing at a time. Having the Markstrom negotiations and the trade talks with Arizona seemed to overwhelm them and they couldn't do anything else until a decision was made there.

It's not like they were locked into a office with Markstroms agent trying to hammer out a deal. There is so much time in between the talks, what to they do? Of course you need to have internal meetings to adjust the strateeggy depending on how negotiations are going but what else keeps them away to check in with Tanev, Stecher, Barrie, Bogosian etc?

You would think that a GM can multitask and have multiple negotiations going but it's actually not unusual for GMs to focus on one task at a time. Take the Flames, they told Brodie that they are focused on signing Markstrom first. Brodie then signs with TO and Flames shifted focus to Tanev.

In previous years teams were known to have waiting for an answer from a player and lost out on other free agent targets.

 

[Didalee Hed]

Just went through his articles on the athletic regarding the most notable moves made 2019 summer onwards.

Ferland: He basically pointed out every concern about aging powerforwards, his concussion issues, his scoring being inflated by luck and his role offensively as a passenger on the lines he played on and how that may not necessarily translate. Oh, and he acknowledged the cap issues.



However, he still felt that it was a worthwhile gamble just to be clear.

Micheal Ferland is a great add for Canucks at a fair cost but the signing's not without cap questions

--

Myers: Not a fan. Short term upgrade as a 4-5 that will regress into a clear cut bottom pair guy by the time the team EP/QH are on their second deals.


What to make of the Tyler Myers contract and the Canucks' blue line overhaul

--

Toffoli: his thoughts on this trade summarized by this conclusion ->



There's no doubt Tyler Toffoli will make the Canucks' top six better, but was the hefty price worth it?

--

Miller: Probably the best of all to read because he provides pretty much every point regarding leverage in the trade, Miller being an elite player, the window to contend, opportunity cost, EVERYTHING we discussed last year. I can try and summarize his thoughts. He loved the player as a fit and projected he'd easily bounce back into a 55+ point player but thought we paid a high price to make the playoffs and everything.


JT Miller is everything the Canucks need in a top-six winger -- but was the price worth it?

I provided a small snippet from each article as I'm not quite sure what the sites rules are on posting PPV content in full.

Boy genius.

Great post

 

[F A N]

Just went through his articles on the athletic regarding the most notable moves made 2019 summer onwards.

Ferland: He basically pointed out every concern about aging powerforwards, his concussion issues, his scoring being inflated by luck and his role offensively as a passenger on the lines he played on and how that may not necessarily translate. Oh, and he acknowledged the cap issues.

You must have missed the part where he said this:

" here’s definitely an argument to be made that Ferland is the type of clinical finisher that outperforms his shot metrics and I have a lot of time for that line of reasoning (even if it’s not to the drastic extent that we’ve seen the last couple years).
...
The 6-foot-1, 216 pounder is a true power forward who dominates below the hash marks and along the walls. He fights through traffic to find tips and deflections, is a puck recovery machine near the goalmouth on rebounds and has the sense and wherewithal to read off of skilled players and find soft spots in the opposition’s coverage.

Sportlogiq’s data affirms the eye test with Ferland grading as one of the league’s better forwards at receiving and firing pucks from within the slot and generating second-chance scoring opportunities.
...
The fit should be excellent for a Canucks team that struggled for most of the year to get to the front of the net and battle for chances in the not so glamorous ways.
...
It was evident that the Canucks needed to add skilled forwards who could also crash the net and cause some havoc and in since adding Tanner Pearson, JT Miller and now Ferland, Vancouver’s accomplished exactly that.
...
Looking at the Ferland signing independent of the other contracts on the team, there’s quite a lot to like. He doesn’t drive play or create much on his own, but pair him with elite talent and he’s proven to be very capable of shining below the hash marks as a complementary power forward."