July 07 2015 03:10PM
So far this offseason, we've had a ton of questions surrounding the state of the Canucks. We've wondered about their drafting, we've wondered about their trading, we've wondered about their front office, and we've wondered about the overall direction of the franchise. All this is big picture stuff that will have a huge effect on the team's long-term future, but the short term future of this franchise bears some examination too.
Going into the 2015-16 season, we have a pretty good idea of what the Canucks are going to look like, so we can wonder about how this team will do when the first puck drops in October. And, of course, we'll have questions we'll want answered. We always do.
Today's question: just who is going to score the goals next year?
July 05 2015 03:00PM
I've spent a lot of my time trying to dig through the Benning administration's first year at the helm of the Canucks, trying to find a sign of underlying genius, or at the very least a semblance of a realistic strategy the Canucks fan base can feel comfortable and confident believing in and getting behind.
However, as the organization's missteps mount, from bad contracts to bad trades, the undercurrent of front office unrest has slowly bubbled to the surface. This culminated in the termination of Laurence Gilman, Lorne Henning, and Eric Crawford - the some of the last remaining builders of the greatest Canucks team that ever was.
It's hard to blame Trevor Linden too much for this debacle. With no operational hockey experience, it was always clear Linden was hired because he's a local legend and ownership was in dire need of a PR win. No one in Vancouver should have been fooled into believing he's actually been hired to run an NHL hockey team. While this episode seems destined to tarnish Linden's legacy in this city, he's not really the problem here. This is Jim Benning's team - full stop.
July 04 2015 10:00AM
Image Courtesy: UticaComets.com
While we have been busy covering all the latest additions to the Vancouver Canucks, we have been giving less coverage to some of the depth players signings with other teams. We cannot forget the baby Canucks down in Utica as that franchise's role with Vancouver has continued to be stronger every year.
Without further ado, here are some of the roster changes down in Utica we've seen in the past two days.
July 03 2015 02:00PM
Well, whatever confidence I still had that the current regime running the Canucks actually knew what they were doing just walked out the door yesterday. And it was escorted by security.
As Thom laid out in his level headed take on the matter, the Canucks unceremoniously turfed Laurence Gilman, Lorne Henning and Eric Crawford. So if it's well documented, informative writing you want on the subject, go read that. But if it's raw, visceral, facepalming you're looking for, you've come to the right place.
Because based on the comments and interviews that came out yesterday, the Canucks' brain trust just lost what brains they had left. All in the name of efficiency, apparently.
Yes, according to Trevor Linden, it was *boohoo* just too hard to make decisions, presumably because there were a lot of differences in opinion around the room:
Linden says size of #Canucks front office made it "cumbersome" to make decisions. Some of their duties will be absorbed by existing execs— Matthew Sekeres (@mattsekeres) July 2, 2015
Yes, I'm sure that must be hard. Having to think things through. Overcome doubts. Talk through different perspectives. Tough, I know. But you know what decisions are easy to make? Bad ones.
July 03 2015 12:33PM
Throughout the course of the last year, the team at CanucksArmy and Jets Nation have been working on the development of a prospect evaluation tool called Prospect Cohort Success Percentage, or PCS for short. The basic premise is that by finding the closest comparables to a prospect in terms of age, size, league, and point production, we can gain insight into the prospect's likelihood of success at the NHL level.
At it's essence, the tool tries to mathematically answer the following questions:
- Who are a given players' closest pre-NHL comparables?
- What percentage of a players' closest comparables went on to become successful NHLers as defined by playing in excess of 200 NHL games (PCS%)?
- Of the comparables who went on to play in the NHL what was the average NHL point-per-game (PCS PPG) of these players?
There is a fair amount of advancements we're currently working on for PCS, including quality of teamates and era adjustments, but we thought it would be fun to see how teams did at the 2015 draft when using PCS as a benchmark.