Sedins in advisory roles.

Hire a President (again).

New assistant coaches.

Tweak.
- dbot

Re-Tool 3.0

He's a good choice if you need a fence built.
- A_SteamingLombardi

is russ still married to sarah vaughan's daughter? gotta give him credit for that!

Turns out everyone gets a mulligan.

No major changes.

Maybe Sedins in advisory roles.

And Hire a President (again).

New assistant coaches.

Tweak.
- dbot

i thought we were speculating who's joining FA as co-president of hockey ops? i'm going Rusty. Rus gets along with Geoff who gets along with FA who gets along with JB who gets along with Travis Green and they all get along with the sedins.

symbiosis.

The e-draft might have some opportunities for adding RSD/Center. For example Bolts and Wild could lose Cernack and Dumba if they don't payoff the Kraken. Could Canucks make better offers?

There are also lower profile players that could add value too. July may be wild. Good thing management and coaching is getting sorted out in time to figure out these off season opportunities.

Re-Tool 3.0
- A_SteamingLombardi

Gotta make a few changes.

The proverbial last chance for the heads.

i thought we were speculating who's joining FA as co-president of hockey ops? i'm going Rusty. Rus gets along with Geoff who gets along with FA who gets along with JB who gets along with Travis Green and they all get along with the sedins.

symbiosis.
- RealityChecker

Oh. My vote is hank and dank.

Dark horse is Nazzy.

Twitter:

after four years on job, #Canucks Travis Green is currently 7th in #NHL head coaching tenure. If extended, will be interesting to see how high up this list he can climb




I also believe Benning is top 10 amongst GM's in tenure, people rip on this organization and yes it's far from perfect, but stability is not an issue and may make it easier for the team to attract a big name for future coaching/management positions down the road. I'd rather work somewhere that I'll know I'll get the time to implement my long-term plan with a patient ownership group.

[quote=dbot]
Don’t think it’s coaches or managements fault when Milan Lucic out points Petey!

Twitter:

after four years on job, #Canucks Travis Green is currently 7th in #NHL head coaching tenure. If extended, will be interesting to see how high up this list he can climb




I also believe Benning is top 10 amongst GM's in tenure, people rip on this organization and yes it's far from perfect, but stability is not an issue and may make it easier for the team to attract a big name for future coaching/management positions down the road. I'd rather work somewhere that I'll know I'll get the time to implement my long-term plan with a patient ownership group.
- Nucker101

Twitter:

after four years on job, #Canucks Travis Green is currently 7th in #NHL head coaching tenure. If extended, will be interesting to see how high up this list he can climb




I also believe Benning is top 10 amongst GM's in tenure, people rip on this organization and yes it's far from perfect, but stability is not an issue and may make it easier for the team to attract a big name for future coaching/management positions down the road. I'd rather work somewhere that I'll know I'll get the time to implement my long-term plan with a patient ownership group.
- Nucker101

Change for the sake of making changes without a clear upgrade is t always the best move.

They get another year in a hopefully “normal” year to see what’s up.

[quote=K-man25]

Lucic had a good year.

- K-man25

I know it's tough to understand as a fan of a team that fires a coach every 2 years because of a bad core of players

Change for the sake of making changes without a clear upgrade is t always the best move.

They get another year in a hopefully “normal” year to see what’s up.
- dbot

I'd say next year is a bounce back, then the following season is a step forward. If not then you look to make changes but let's see next year and take it from there. But if they bounce back next season then keep the continuity going and see if they can add to the team with cap freed up in 2022 and improve the year after.

I know it's tough to understand as a fan of a team that fires a coach every 2 years because of a bad core of players
- Nucker101

That’s a stretch, don’t think they last that long.
Our goalie turnover is even more impressive.

Traded. Didn’t bother to show up for exit meetings, struggled this year anyway, bye bye
- Nucker101

I'd say next year is a bounce back, then the following season is a step forward. If not then you look to make changes but let's see next year and take it from there. But if they bounce back next season then keep the continuity going and see if they can add to the team with cap freed up in 2022 and improve the year after.
- Nucker101

I’d like to bring in some talent in mgmt tho.
Some heir apparents.

When is Burnaby Joes contract up?

That’s a stretch, don’t think they last that long.
Our goalie turnover is even more impressive.
- K-man25

Thankfully you have a declining Markstrom to bring some stability there

I’d like to bring in some talent in mgmt tho.
Some heir apparents.

When is Burnaby Joes contract up?
- dbot

Sedins will be groomed, but yes an experienced exec to help Benning and the Sedins would be a nice plus

Change for the sake of making changes without a clear upgrade is t always the best move.

They get another year in a hopefully “normal” year to see what’s up.
- dbot

i've never understood that.

it's like the reasoning is that you should already have someone hired before you fire someone.

i disagree. you evaluate someone's performance and decide whether it has been acceptable or not. if it hasn't, you devise a systematic approach to find someone who can implement the plan/structure you want.

you don't make change for the sake of change but you don't keep something just because you are afraid of change.

and some people ask, "well who would you hire?" that's kind of the point i'm making. you interview several people to find someone who is qualified. i'm not scared that there aren't qualified people out there. that justification for inaction is weaksauce because the firing process (why or why not someone is let go) should be separate from the hiring process.

I’d like to bring in some talent in mgmt tho.
Some heir apparents.

When is Burnaby Joes contract up?
- dbot

you know that nucker's trolling right?

i've never understood that.

it's like the reasoning is that you should already have someone hired before you fire someone.

i disagree. you evaluate someone's performance and decide whether it has been acceptable or not. if it hasn't, you devise a systematic approach to find someone who can implement the plan/structure you want.

you don't make change for the sake of change but you don't keep something just because you are afraid of change.

and some people ask, "well who would you hire?" that's kind of the point i'm making. you interview several people to find someone who is qualified. i'm not scared that there aren't qualified people out there. that justification for inaction is weaksauce because the firing process (why or why not someone is let go) should be separate from the hiring process.
- RealityChecker

Or you can go with another route and add in another solid voice to help the GM in the room or multiple voices which is what appears to be the plan. Already have Henrik and Daniel, looks like they may hire a President as well.

End of year stuff out of Calgary...Tanev was hit by Dubois. Broke two ribs and tore his pec muscle. Missed one practice.


People were upset about dumping this injury prone dman, imagine how well he's going to age into his 30's

i've never understood that.

it's like the reasoning is that you should already have someone hired before you fire someone.

i disagree. you evaluate someone's performance and decide whether it has been acceptable or not. if it hasn't, you devise a systematic approach to find someone who can implement the plan/structure you want.

you don't make change for the sake of change but you don't keep something just because you are afraid of change.

and some people ask, "well who would you hire?" that's kind of the point i'm making. you interview several people to find someone who is qualified. i'm not scared that there aren't qualified people out there. that justification for inaction is weaksauce because the firing process (why or why not someone is let go) should be separate from the hiring process.
- RealityChecker

I don’t think it’s necessarily afraid to make a change, but ownership wanted to give the heads a shot to see this through.

I don’t really have a strong opinion either way and am fine to see JB and Green have another year.

I want a clear upgrade if they’re cleaning house tho.
Not a Torts.
Not a Willy.
Not a Gillis.
Not a Nonis.

Or you can go with another route and add in another solid voice to help the GM in the room or multiple voices which is what appears to be the plan. Already have Henrik and Daniel, looks like they may hire a President as well.
- Nucker101

i'm sorry that you missed my point.

my point is that the decision to fire anyone should be an independent process. you evaluate the person's job performance and decide whether he should be fired or not.

evidently, FA thought that JB should not be fired but brought in some other voices.

fair enough.

i was responding to the notion that you don't fire someone unless you have someone better. that implies that the new hire has already been decided on before the firing. at the very least it means that the decision maker (in this case FA) already thinks the person should be fired.

glad i could clear that up for you.

you know that nucker's trolling right?
- RealityChecker

Oh yeah.