HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

The Armchair GM Thread - Part L

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-23-2013, 11:24 AM
  #776
ddawg1950
Registered User
 
ddawg1950's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,995
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJOpus View Post
Hindsight...we were a top 5 favorite to win the Cup based on every agency, betting site, news site.

We didn't get it done in a 1st round sweep but that doesn't mean we didn't have a chance.
A number of sources did have us as a favourite, but honestly, with the way we were playing, the way we were winning, was cause for concern. The big hope, particularly after we took Chicago apart late in the season, had many of us hoping that we were capable of turning on the switch.

Turns out it was a false hope.

ddawg1950 is offline  
Old
08-23-2013, 11:37 AM
  #777
Proto
Registered User
 
Proto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,976
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by King of the ES View Post
Yes or no: did the Canucks accumulate more points from their own division than the other division leaders?
Wrong question. Teams played their own division 24 times and other divisions in their conference 20 times. Is that a "large" difference, as you suggested? Of course not.

Sure, the Central had better top teams. It also had a team (Columbus) than went 5-17-2 in its own division.

I think we're talking about differences in strength of schedule that are small enough they might account for 2-4 points. I think someone could conceivably argue that if you flipped the divisions around, the Blues might have won the President's Trophy by a point or two.

Which is not anywhere near the "in large part" that you said it was.

Proto is offline  
Old
08-23-2013, 11:46 AM
  #778
tantalum
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Missouri
Posts: 10,823
vCash: 500
The problem when arguing about a few points here and there is that various nebulous items can affect things just as much. Something like how motivated is a team to win the second game of a back to back against a non-rival (in every other season it could be a team not even in the conference). How many back to backs were played. How many 3 in 4? The only real FACT, and yes I'm going to use that word despite having no data is that a spread of a few points is pretty darn meaningless at the top and bottom of the standings.

tantalum is offline  
Old
08-23-2013, 12:39 PM
  #779
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 48,903
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJOpus View Post
Hindsight...we were a top 5 favorite to win the Cup based on every agency, betting site, news site.

We didn't get it done in a 1st round sweep but that doesn't mean we didn't have a chance.
Except I predicted our demise because it was clear as day. Just like this year is going to end up with another very disappointing finish.

__________________
http://www.vancitynitetours.com
y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
08-23-2013, 12:48 PM
  #780
Wisp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 5,301
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Except I predicted our demise because it was clear as day. Just like this year is going to end up with another very disappointing finish.
Given that 29/30 teams will suffer 'demise' every year, you're not getting a pat on the back for predicting that.

Cynicism isn't actually wisdom.


Last edited by Wisp: 08-23-2013 at 12:53 PM.
Wisp is offline  
Old
08-23-2013, 01:04 PM
  #781
Christina Woloski
Registered Something
 
Christina Woloski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Narnia
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,774
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Except I predicted our demise because it was clear as day. Just like this year is going to end up with another very disappointing finish.
You were right on a 16 to 1 bet. How daring.

I don't view making the playoffs as very disappointing. Spoiled fan is spoiled.

Christina Woloski is offline  
Old
08-23-2013, 01:20 PM
  #782
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
HFBoards: Night's Watch
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,800
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Proto View Post
Pretty sure I said a month ago I'd offer Grabovski a one year 3m deal to play with Kesler, and people said I was crazy and he'd never do that.

Too bad. I don't think anything Gillis has done has been bad this off-season, but he certainly hasn't made a few bold moves that I think the team needed to reset the lineup.

I still wish they'd moved Edler.
I suspect he is waiting to evaluate what we have. Do we need a top six forward or can Booth shoulder the load? Same for Kassian. If both are doing well, we may not even need to look elsewhere. Fortunately, Cammalleri and Vanek are on the market. So we do have possibilities if things take a wrong turn for us.

Bourne Endeavor is online now  
Old
08-23-2013, 01:32 PM
  #783
Cogburn
Registered User
 
Cogburn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,137
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by biturbo19 View Post
Or alternatively to spending every last dime on season opening day...We could sit tight, let the various rookies show us what they can do and see if a Gaunce/Horvat/Corrado/Jensen brings it and nullifies one of our 'needs improvement' areas? If we spend an entire 82 game season with ~$2M in annual cap hit in space accruing every day until the deadline...You're talking about the sort of 'accumulated' pro-rated space on an AAV basis, to add a legitimate 1st line player if that's the desire. Or a few nice mid-level pieces. As opposed to rummaging through the bargain bin to kick off the season with an extra washed-up/reclamation project/castaway type 3rd line tweener. Without knowing exactly where we stand.

Having cap space to work with and a rookie or two filling important roles and potentially exceeding expectations, say Gaunce at #3C and Corrado as a top-4D...is about as an ideal a situation as you can get heading into a trade deadline if we want to 'load up' for a run during our 'window'. If those rookies don't pan out...sure, make some moves. But i'm not opposed to giving them a chance at least.

Basically...i'm not opposed to what looks like Gillis' strategy of waiting to see what the holes are, before he starts patching them.
Biturbo, I would LOVE for that situation to unfurl. I am a huge fan of our top forward prospects, and if you notice, I have got Corrado on the roster, probably cycling in with Alberts and Weber.

My worry is that one, or two, or all of them, might not be ready, and I am simply hoping for an alternative. My preference is for a couple of guys whose salaries we can dump A.) if they falter too, or better yet, B.) if some of our greenhorns impress everyone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DJOpus View Post
It's quite a bit of space for a deadline acquisition.
Biturbo agrees with you here, as do I in principle, but again, a few of these rookie contracts are higher then the minimum wage-ish kind of deals I'd be hoping for (sub-900k/season). They would impact this somewhat as well.

Plus, who can guarantee we'd have a top line winger to pick up? Cost to us aside (I'd rather keep our young guys then any deadline pick up I can see being available), I just don't see us getting a Hossa or a Kovalchuk or a Carter, the Peverly/Handzus/Kelly examples are likely far more apt.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vajakki View Post
Gillis was pretty disappointed with the whole Roy experience and hinted towards NOT making any deadline acquisitions in the future after the season ended. Last 2 deadlines have been a disaster for the team and judging from what was said after the season, I wouldn't be surprised if they do nothing. And I'm more than fine with that.

I'm guessing this coming year will be more wait and see with new coach and all, and next summer we will have much better understanding about the team and what young guys like Kassian, Schroeder and Tanev bring to the team and where the team needs improvements. Next summer the Canucks will also have massive amounts of cap space (especially if Booth flops again and this time is eligible for compliance buyout) when the cap goes up.
I am disappointed we didn't try to sign him. If we kept him, the cost to acquire him and the cap hit would have been manageable. My perception is the Canucks let him walk after a disappointing playoff series (to which EVERYONE is to blame).

Deadline acquisitions are great, the rental idea I don't care for. The major pieces we've gotten at the deadline are Alberts (parts of 5 seasons now), Lapierre (parts of 3?), Higgins (starting his 4th), Kassian (project rookie for project rookie...we have his rights for a few years, plus the 3 he will have played), Gragnani (fodder after he didn't adjust well) and Roy. I think Roy is the exception, not the rule.

And I have to disagree...I don't care about next season, I want a cup, I want a strong playoffs, I want to move past where we have been stuck the last two seasons. Screw the near future, I want to see this team do what we all know it's capable of. I want to see Luongo get a Vezina, I want to see Hamhuis, or Garrison, or Edler, or less likely, Bieksa, have a Norris calibre of season. I want Kesler back in Selke consideration. I want our Art Ross, Hart and Ted Lindsay winning top line forwards back in form, I want Hansen, and Kassian, and Tanev, and Schroeder, and any young players we've got to have break out seasons.

It's a lot to ask, and I'm not expecting it, but I really can't keep focus on a year from now. I went through withdrawal during both hockey strikes, and may have during the one in the 90s.

Vajakki, I hear you loud and clear, and I went off on a bit of a side rant, and if our boys falter, then we look forward, but until we're out of contention, I expect the best from my blue and kelly green wearing dopes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
I'd want us to make a deadline acquisition as well, but it seems like a lot of people here see giving up any sort of prospect/pick as "sacrificing the future"

Personally I think letting the Sedins, Luongo, etc play out the rest of their prime with a subpar roster, is a far worse case of sacrificing the now.
Until Horvat, Jensen, Shinkaruk, Gaunce and the rest of the gang actually surpass the Sedins, Kesler, Burrows and our current core, I can't just assume they will be better then what we have now, as highly as I think of them. I think there is middle ground here, that we can field the best roster possible without giving up our top rookies.

As I said above, deadline deals can work very well, but it's the rental idea I'd have a hard time with if we gave one of our solid prospects up.

As for Lu, everything I said in those Lu to Toronto threads I meant. I can see him playing at a high level until the end of his contract is a lot closer.

Cogburn is offline  
Old
08-23-2013, 02:32 PM
  #784
Reverend Mayhem
Registered Nurse
 
Reverend Mayhem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Port Coquitlam, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,503
vCash: 500
Send a message via Skype™ to Reverend Mayhem
Quote:
Originally Posted by ddawg1950 View Post
A number of sources did have us as a favourite, but honestly, with the way we were playing, the way we were winning, was cause for concern. The big hope, particularly after we took Chicago apart late in the season, had many of us hoping that we were capable of turning on the switch.

Turns out it was a false hope.
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Except I predicted our demise because it was clear as day. Just like this year is going to end up with another very disappointing finish.
I don't see much difference between these two posts.

Except of course one is a bit more negative than the other.

Reverend Mayhem is offline  
Old
08-23-2013, 02:45 PM
  #785
ddawg1950
Registered User
 
ddawg1950's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,995
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reverend Mayhem View Post
I don't see much difference between these two posts.

Except of course one is a bit more negative than the other.
And to be truthful, I was taking pretty hardy quaffs of the Kool Aid at the end of the season last year, and did not predict a disappointing finish.

I never predict disappointment, but I'm always willing to cope with it.

ddawg1950 is offline  
Old
08-23-2013, 02:51 PM
  #786
Virtanen2Horvat
BoHorvat53
 
Virtanen2Horvat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,166
vCash: 647
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourne Endeavor View Post
I suspect he is waiting to evaluate what we have. Do we need a top six forward or can Booth shoulder the load? Same for Kassian. If both are doing well, we may not even need to look elsewhere. Fortunately, Cammalleri and Vanek are on the market. So we do have possibilities if things take a wrong turn for us.
I would go Cammelleri over Vanek because Vanek is just too expensive. But then Cammelleri with that 7M contract.

Virtanen2Horvat is offline  
Old
08-23-2013, 03:12 PM
  #787
DJOpus
Registered User
 
DJOpus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,921
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Except I predicted our demise because it was clear as day. Just like this year is going to end up with another very disappointing finish.
Right, and your "I told you so." attitude is not all that appreciated.

It's pretty easy to feel that a team is going to fail because most do but to say you are being a realist because a team that, even as a top 5 favorite, was given about a 10% chance of winning, didn't get lucky and actually win, just kind of makes you an ass.


Last edited by DJOpus: 08-23-2013 at 03:19 PM.
DJOpus is online now  
Old
08-23-2013, 03:30 PM
  #788
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
HFBoards: Night's Watch
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,800
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanucksRollin View Post
I would go Cammelleri over Vanek because Vanek is just too expensive. But then Cammelleri with that 7M contract.
Ditto. And at the deadline teams typically have cap to spare. Hell, Booth could be on injury reserve.

If Calgary held some salary. I think we could make it work.

Bourne Endeavor is online now  
Old
08-23-2013, 03:52 PM
  #789
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 48,903
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wisp View Post
Given that 29/30 teams will suffer 'demise' every year, you're not getting a pat on the back for predicting that.

Cynicism isn't actually wisdom.
I didn't just say that we wouldn't win the Cup. I predicted an early exit. It was blatantly obvious. This team doesn't have the talent.

y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
08-23-2013, 03:54 PM
  #790
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 48,903
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJOpus View Post
Right, and your "I told you so." attitude is not all that appreciated.

It's pretty easy to feel that a team is going to fail because most do but to say you are being a realist because a team that, even as a top 5 favorite, was given about a 10% chance of winning, didn't get lucky and actually win, just kind of makes you an ass.
What infuriates me is that these problems with the team are so blatantly obvious and have existed for years now, yet they aren't addressed.

This team as is, right now, won't make it out of the first round again either. And then in May I'll be saying I told you so again, and that part makes me angry. I want to see this team succeed, but I haven't liked this team or the moves this idiotic GM has made (or hasn't made) since the 2011 trade deadline.

y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
08-23-2013, 03:58 PM
  #791
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 48,903
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourne Endeavor View Post
Ditto. And at the deadline teams typically have cap to spare. Hell, Booth could be on injury reserve.

If Calgary held some salary. I think we could make it work.
Calgary ownership apparently thinks they can make the playoffs this year, at least according to an interview from April. IMO their best bet now is an Edmonton rebuild.

Cammalleri would be an excellent addition. At 50% salary perhaps it would cost a 1st round pick and a B prospect.

y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
08-23-2013, 04:42 PM
  #792
Vankiller Whale
Spread the love
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,676
vCash: 1212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cogburn View Post
Until Horvat, Jensen, Shinkaruk, Gaunce and the rest of the gang actually surpass the Sedins, Kesler, Burrows and our current core, I can't just assume they will be better then what we have now, as highly as I think of them. I think there is middle ground here, that we can field the best roster possible without giving up our top rookies.

As I said above, deadline deals can work very well, but it's the rental idea I'd have a hard time with if we gave one of our solid prospects up.

As for Lu, everything I said in those Lu to Toronto threads I meant. I can see him playing at a high level until the end of his contract is a lot closer.
Oh absolutely, I wouldn't want to give up any of our solid prospects for someone we have no intention of re-signing.

I know some people were upset with the Roy trade, but all Gillis had to do was dump Booth and we could have re-signed Roy with cap space to spare, which would help make that trade look a lot better.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
08-23-2013, 04:49 PM
  #793
GrogZilla
Registered User
 
GrogZilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 288
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
What infuriates me is that these problems with the team are so blatantly obvious and have existed for years now, yet they aren't addressed.

This team as is, right now, won't make it out of the first round again either. And then in May I'll be saying I told you so again, and that part makes me angry. I want to see this team succeed, but I haven't liked this team or the moves this idiotic GM has made (or hasn't made) since the 2011 trade deadline.
22 out of 30 teams don't make it past the first round.

There are probably 4 teams that would be widely considered safe bets to play at least 2 playoff rounds in Chicago, Boston, L.A. & Pittsburgh

So you are predicting the Canucks will be one of the 22 out of the 26 teams left, that won't make it past the first round.

Way to go out on a limb there with your predictions of doom.
You have like an 85% chance of being able to say I told you so.

Good for you.

Predicting failure is easy & pointless.

GrogZilla is online now  
Old
08-23-2013, 04:57 PM
  #794
doobie604
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 705
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrogZilla View Post
22 out of 30 teams don't make it past the first round.

There are probably 4 teams that would be widely considered safe bets to play at least 2 playoff rounds in Chicago, Boston, L.A. & Pittsburgh

So you are predicting the Canucks will be one of the 22 out of the 26 teams left, that won't make it past the first round.

Way to go out on a limb there with your predictions of doom.
You have like an 85% chance of being able to say I told you so.

Good for you.

Predicting failure is easy & pointless.
I wonder what his prediction was back in 2010 or 2011. I'm sure Sedin bashing and Lu praising will come up somewhere.

doobie604 is offline  
Old
08-23-2013, 05:30 PM
  #795
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
HFBoards: Night's Watch
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,800
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Calgary ownership apparently thinks they can make the playoffs this year, at least according to an interview from April. IMO their best bet now is an Edmonton rebuild.

Cammalleri would be an excellent addition. At 50% salary perhaps it would cost a 1st round pick and a B prospect.
By the deadline reality will likely have settled in and ruined the owner's hopes and dreams. Barring a miracle, an Edmonton rebuild may not be a choice so much as an inevitability for Calgary.

Aye. Fortunately, we have a slew of prospects now and could swing that price. Gillis also has a decent track record of retaining players we trade for. So if Cammalleri worked out. It might be for a longer term than a rental.

Bourne Endeavor is online now  
Old
08-23-2013, 05:37 PM
  #796
ddawg1950
Registered User
 
ddawg1950's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,995
vCash: 500
We're back to Cammi again, Y2K?

Oh please, the guy's best before date was two years ago.

He's going to start to smell pretty soon now.

ddawg1950 is offline  
Old
08-23-2013, 06:38 PM
  #797
WonderTwinsUnite
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: North Delta, B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,771
vCash: 500
I can't wait for Gillis patented bargain FA pickup. Who will get nervous close to training camp? Prospal, hopefully.

WonderTwinsUnite is offline  
Old
08-23-2013, 06:48 PM
  #798
Castle1*
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Victoria BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,670
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Except I predicted our demise because it was clear as day. Just like this year is going to end up with another very disappointing finish.
Was it your crystal balls or weegie board that told you this? Or....are you the first real psychic?

Alot of opinions out there and a couple people are bound to be right. Obviously those who choose to say the Canucks will not win the cup are bound to be right much more often than those that choose to be optimistic because only 1 team out of 30 will win.

Wonder how many LA fans said the kings would win the cup the year they did? Not many I bet lmao

edit: oh you predict an early exit. How early? Not make the playoffs? Exit after 1st round? Call it Kreskin!!

2nd edit: now it is losing in the 1st round. I'll save this post to see if your 70% chance of being right comes true. Way to go out on a limb.


Last edited by Castle1*: 08-23-2013 at 06:55 PM.
Castle1* is offline  
Old
08-23-2013, 07:24 PM
  #799
vanuck
Griffiths Way Goons
 
vanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Hong Kong
Posts: 11,151
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJOpus View Post
Given that every team that won the Cup lately had key deadline acquisitions, I wouldn't be that fine with it:

-Chicago last year paid the least (4th) but still acquired a key player in Handzus who played 2nd line centre for them winning key face-offs and playing good minutes both 5 on 5 and on the PK.

-LAK bought huge at the deadline in playoff leading goal scorer Jeff Carter for JJ + 1st.

-BOS spent through the nose giving up a good young player (Wheeler) mutiple 2nds + 1st + top prospect (Colborne) for Peverly, Kelly, and Kaberle at the deadline.

If the deadline is approaching and we need to acquire a piece (i.e. likely a scoring forward), I hope we do it...that being said, I'd rather we go for it now but there aren't many key players available.
Carter wasn't just a rental though.

vanuck is offline  
Old
08-23-2013, 07:31 PM
  #800
doobie604
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 705
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Castle1 View Post
Was it your crystal balls or weegie board that told you this? Or....are you the first real psychic?

Alot of opinions out there and a couple people are bound to be right. Obviously those who choose to say the Canucks will not win the cup are bound to be right much more often than those that choose to be optimistic because only 1 team out of 30 will win.

Wonder how many LA fans said the kings would win the cup the year they did? Not many I bet lmao

edit: oh you predict an early exit. How early? Not make the playoffs? Exit after 1st round? Call it Kreskin!!

2nd edit: now it is losing in the 1st round. I'll save this post to see if your 70% chance of being right comes true. Way to go out on a limb.
don't forget tight games or blowouts. oh and goalie issue or lack of scoring.

doobie604 is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:53 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.