Photo Credit: Matthew Henderson

CanucksArmy Monday Mailbag: January 22nd

This team has so much invested in Jake Virtanen’s success. I can’t imagine any scenario where Canucks general manager Jim Benning trades Virtanen. It would have to be an absolutely amazing offer, and there’s just no way the Canucks are getting one of those for a player who has 24 points in over 100 NHL hockey games.

I’ll say this much though. I can definitely see a scenario where the Canucks don’t re-sign Benning as their general manager, and at that point, if Virtanen continues to have mixed results as a pro, perhaps the new boss will see a change of scenery as best for everyone.

There are streaming services out there if you do a little digging. I don’t know if you’re going to want to follow the SHL though. I say this under the assumption that you chose the SHL because of Canucks prospects like Elias Pettersson and Jonathan Dahlen, but I doubt either will be there next season. We have to allow for the possibility that the Canucks get another amazing Swedish prospect between now and next season, but it’s hardly a guarantee.

I’ve heard from a lot of people that the Canucks dream about Olli Juolevi playing with Chris Tanev — what a pair that would be. If that’s the case, there’s no way they’re trading Tanev. If they did try to move Tanev though Timothy Liljegren alone would be a coup, much less the first-rounder in there too.

It’s totally unrealistic, but I’d like to see Laurence Gilman get a shot. In terms of realistic options, Kyle Dubas would be a great hire.

This isn’t going to be a popular take, but I would do that trade in a heartbeat. And I say that as a huge fan of Brock Boeser’s game, and even Boeser as a person for that matter.

I can’t see the Canucks getting much more than a third-round pick for Ben Hutton. It’s part of the reason why the shouldn’t trade him.

From this list, I like the Pittsburgh Penguins. We know that their general manager Jim Rutherford isn’t shy about making moves, and this team desperately needs a third-line centre. I could see them starting the trade madness on the other side of the all-star break.

I have my doubts about whether Gilman is going to get back into the game as a general manager. You’d have to think that someone would have to hire him in an assistant’s capacity just to get him back in the game first at this point.

As for whether Gilman will come back to Vancouver, I can’t foresee a scenario where that happens. As much as I think the club would benefit from having someone with his skill set and his experience running the show, the fit isn’t there.

Sure, why not?

That’s a good question, but one I can’t answer, unfortunately. All I can say is that I understand your frustration.

I could see Virtanen and Markus Granlund getting fairly similar contract extensions. Something along the lines of a two or three year deal with an AAV near the $1.5-million mark.

Travis Dermott is a hell of a player based on everything I’ve read out of Toronto. If the Canucks are moving one of Tanev or Erik Gudbranson to the Maple Leafs, every indication is they’d be wise to make sure Dermott was a part of the return.

I would hope that it doesn’t get to that point. That’s just downright cruel. It’s really quite uncouth to advocate for someone to lose their job, especially as a mob in that setting. Do I see that as a distinct possibility though? Yes, unfortunately, I do.

Ben Hutton.

The soonest I can see this team being competitive again is two to three years out.

Yeesh, that’s a bit cruel. But also, probably Auston Matthews without legs.

I wouldn’t sign Evander Kane under any circumstances, regardless of term or cash value. You can read why here!

The NHL is a weird place. Who knows?

If I were in the Canucks ownership group, I’d probably give the reigns to someone new this off-season, like Dubas. Or someone a little more familiar, like Gilman. And I have my doubts about the Liljegren rumours.

I think it’d be best for Pettersson to get to play a year with the Sedins and learn as much as possible about how to be an NHL’er from them on a day-to-day basis. As for Dahlen, I’m less certain. I mean, who even knows if he’ll be NHL-ready as soon as next year? The AHL might be the best option by default.

Ask me this again in June.

Hey Y’alls and it isn’t even close. They’re super refreshing and the fact that they’re as good/bad warm or cold gives them added utility as a summer drink.

Lose Gudbranson for nothing.

Canucks head coach Travis Green has done a mostly solid job in his first year. Green isn’t perfect. Some of his deployment decisions are just baffling, but I don’t think there’s any coach in the NHL who doesn’t carry that baggage. One reason to be hopeful about Green as a coach? He sticks to his guns. Green wants this team playing fast, high-paced hockey no matter the situation.

CanucksArmy’s Jeremy Davis has been great on an almost weekly basis on the show, so I want him to at least get an honourable mention here. He’s as big a part of the show as Jon Abbott and myself, and deserves a tonne of credit for making it informative and fun to listen to.

In terms of our best guest, I thought the interview we had with Adam Gaudette was just great. Have a listen!

As much as it pains me to say it, I think it’s much more the former of those options than the latter.

Philip Holm.

Not enough.

That’s a bit beyond my pay grade, but I’ll look into it!


  • Take a wild guess? the next player in the system to score their first NHL goal is _____?

    Adam Gaudette (although technically he’s not yet in the system). I see him with a giant fish on his jersey days after the college season ends.

    • Yeah, the Province today says that management wants to sign him this spring. Given that he’d get 2 years closer to free agency compared to completing his Sr season, it’s a smart move on his part too.

      • My bet is that its the same approach as Boeser. The moment his team is eliminated, and I mean the moment, he will be signed. The only issue is if NU makes it to the FF final. Same day as end of NHL season, and both games are in the evening.

  • I don’t use Twitter so I’ll ask this here again in hopes it ends up in the Part Deux: Why on earth do you think Edler is a buyout candidate?

    And I think *everyone* across the whole Nation Network wants an edit button.

  • Dubas as GM…Dubas as GM. Good god, can you imagine the angst – among non-pocket protector wearing fans – when the kid pulls out his corsis and fenwicks and all that goofy stuff when justifying a draft pick or trade? Can’t imagine a guy like John Chayka lasting six months in Vancouver. And so give the reins to Dubas? Yeah, not happening.

  • I am constantly confused by the Gilman love on this site. Now if I’m not mistaken his one real claim to fame was signing vets to lower priced long term deals allowing the Canucks to maximize their window.
    At the same time these contracts haunted the club for years after his departure all having no trade components. He was also assistant GM during the worst drafting period in Canuck history, which is amazing in itself considering the awful draft record of this club. He made such an impression on the rest of the league, he hasn’t had a single offer since.
    Someone please explain how he’s evenly remotely qualified to run the show?

    • This is such a fallacy when it comes to moving guys with NTC…it can be done! If an organization wants to move in a different direction and were to tell the player(s) that they are no longer part of the picture/plan, they can be traded. Why on earth would a player want to stick around if the organization doesnt want them? Are we worried about the players families? LOL…i can think of millions of reasons why their families will be ok. Its loyalty IMO that has hurt this organization, and that starts with TL.

      • Sure they can be moved, at 75 cents on the dollar because they decide where they go. See Kesler, Ryan, who gave the Canucks essentially 1 choice on destination. Or how about that Edler trade or Hamhuis with his 2 destinations or Vrbata (ya i know Benning signing) with his 5 non playoff teams? They are great in the short term but they eventually weaken your position.
        However, that wasn’t even close to my point. I was debating Gilman’s credentials, not no trade contracts. Those are a case by case scenario.

          • Not knowing what the alternatives were, i can’t answer that. Did Burrows need one and $4.5 mil? How bout Higgins? or Hansen? What were the options, internal & external? Gillis & Gilman did a great job trying to get the team over the top but they left scorched earth behind, their drafting was cover your eyes awful and their pro personnel decisions after 2011 were all terrible – David Booth, Jason Garrison, the whole Schneider/Luongo fiasco. Again, what in any of that qualifies him to lead a rebuild? Phil Jackson was the greatest coach in history – when he had great teams – he was a disaster trying to rebuild the Knicks. Like Jackson, I’ll take Gilman when trying to push my team over the top not direct my team from a disaster he helped mastermind.

          • The Burrows contract was terrible because it didn’t match performance to pay. Burrows was just hitting his prime and they underpaid him (hometown discount) from 2009 to 2013. But after that contract was completed, they tried to make up for his loyalty by giving him that 4 year deal that started off with $6M in the first year alone. So that created a mismatch where the player was getting paid a ton of money while past his prime. How do you trade that, especially when you also gave a NTC? It is another example of how terribly shortsighted Gillis (and Gilman) were.

            How could it have been better? If Gillis and Gilman ask for a hometown discount, that’s the player eating it for a better collective chance at the Cup. If Burrows had been signed to a contract that matched performance (which one had the opportunity to see in the last injury filled year of the $2M contract), then his contract wouldn’t have been so problematic. Example? If those contracts had been flipped ($4.5M in his prime, $2M after), then it would have made more sense.

          • I would say about 75% of any contract in any professional league are based on past (not future) performance.

          • @ Forever….you’re being a tad of a cherry picker about Burrows and $6m in the first year. His contract in 2013 was $4m plus $2m bonuses. His base salary dropped by $1m thru 2016/17 and his total salary by $1m/year, so he ended up making $3m/year in the final year of that contract. It DID start with a $6m total, but you made it sound like it started at that and worked up. And he waived his NTC np so no biggie, not problematic at all…that contract may have had a “repayment for past performance” ring to it, but your argument that reversing those contracts would have made $500k difference in his last year

          • crofton, that math doesn’t even make sense. If Burrows was making $6M in his first year and then it went up (which I never said, by the way, you said it), then the AAV would have been more than $6M. The signing bonus and salary count equally to the cap so it doesn’t matter for calculating the AAV.

            Your math also doesn’t work for reversing the contracts. The contracts had AAV’s of $2M and $4.5M respectively. That’s a difference of $2.5M, not $500k. If you flipped the contracts (and there was a year of performance to validate these numbers), then Burrows would have earned $4.5M (averaging 47 pts and 25 goals per year) and then $2.5M (averaging 22 pts and 10 goals per year).

            Now, that’s not to say that anyone would have had the foresight to negotiate those two contracts but it’s to illustrate in retrospect how those contracts better match performance to pay (thus making it easier to trade). It still points to the fact that when you cheap out on a player and try to make up for it later (which argues that the “hometown discount” wasn’t really a discount but merely a timing difference) then prepare to pay big and really hamstring yourself. Another example is the slingshot effect of PK Subban’s $2.875M contract (which ended up being $9M, higher than what analysts predicted he would have been paid if they skipped the bridge contract and went with the long term deal in 2012).

          • Back at ya, Forever….I didn’t say Burrows was making $6m/year and going up, and really, neither did you…what I said was you made it sound like that. Burrows was only making $3m total in his last year here, so we are both wrong on that, it’s not a difference of $500k as I said, or a difference of $2.5m, as you said. (anyone that said $1m gets the kewpie doll) But I suspect we are talking about salaries and AAV. My point was he was making just $3m in his last year, so that contract was not onerous. And I’m pretty sure (too lazy to go back and check again) that his previous contract was at $2m/year, not $2.5, running through 2013. And yes, flipping those 2 contracts would maybe have made more sense, but that’s in retrospect as well.

    • I think people throw out the name Gilman because it’s a familiar name associated with the Stanley Cup run. Ask a Gilman proponent to name other potential contenders and why Gilman is the better choice now and I’ll bet you’ll draw a lot of blank stares. At least with Dubas, you can point to the SSMG and how we improved the team’s win % from 0.412 to 0.809 in 4 years. Also, there was a generous article last year that showed that Dubas’ last draft year was a final gift that made SSM a contender this year: http://www.saultstar.com/2017/04/10/hounds-2014-draft-is-one-to-remember—-ruicci-column

      • Too many people think Gilman is a great choice because he is giving insight on what went on behind the scenes when he was working for the Canucks. If this ownership group fires Benning or does not resign him which ever way you look at it it will be another change in direction. I think Linden will be leaving the team at the end of the year and go back to his life before taking on the role running the team. Both Benning and Linden have not been to fully implement their plan, the owners have been impatient and were big at signing Erikssen and trying to just make the playoffs. When the owners were looking like they were selling seats this season they got on the radio and were praising Benning. Then the team suffered having key players out of the lineup for a long stretch, now they are silent and no talk of signing Benning. This season is done now is the time to start figuring out what next year is going to look like, to access some of the players in the system to see where they need to improve as a team.
        This ownership group is so obcessed on making money they are throwing money out the window and are getting further behind.
        When Pat Quinn was managing and coaching the team he talked about the stages the team needed to go through to get to the next level. I believe it was Quinn that really built and set the stage for the team becoming a winner for all those years. Now we are back to the ownership group flying by the seat of their pants and not being patient enough to keep with a plan and the pathway for success. The owners are wealthy no doubt about it and it is their right to make stupid decisions and have people below them to take the fall. Just as when I started to get optimistic I am now feeling we will become the next Oilers no direction and one thing separating us from Oilers is we don’t have the luck in the lottery.

    • The reason Gilman wasn’t hired right after being let go by the Canucks was because he was still on the payroll. The beginning of this season was when he was finally able to start looking for a new NHL job. You should definitely check out Gilman on TSN 1040 on Wednesdays. The guy is clearly wicked smart. That’s why he gets so much love.

  • The good thing about Lawrence Gilman is he was the voice of reason and second thought. His problem was he was smarter than his superiors and they didn’t like that. When it came to debating the pros and cons Gilam alsways won LOL. What Gilman did under the Gillis regime was to try and stretch the Salary Cap and ensuring the Canucks crammed as much skill as possible into the roster by giving away side benefits. The Canucks were on their way to the Cup and had they not suffered so many injuries I doubt many wouldn’t believe they would have done it. The 2011 roster was maybe the best we had seen for years. Strange how short peoples memories are

    • SCF game 7 at home…id do it all over again in a heart beat. Yeah drafting wasnt the best but that happens..i mean Ehlers looked unreal last night, what a pickup…how was JV last night??….oh wait… (SORRY someone had to!)

      • How do you feel about watching Erik Karlsson vs Cody Hodgson. …. I wonder which example is the larger disparity in skill? …. or so called blunder……See how easy drafting years later is??

    • Again, great at manipultaing deals for short term benefit. What else did he do? If he did such a gerat job wouldn’t teams be beating down the doors to hire him?
      I agree that 2011 team was the best in our history but he only helped put an outstanding team nearly over the top. Everything part of their long term was a mess. This team needs some strong long term planning. How does Gilman qualify?

        • Well, he was the AGM for the team that won the cup in 2011; and he has been dealing with the mess that Gillis and Gilman left. Yes, the team was successful (regular season at least) over the form 2009 to 2012, with 2011 representing “the year”. Due to (politely) bad luck, or (realistically) poor management; Gilman/Gillis ended up doing with half teh roster what most GMs do with one or two …pay based on past, not future performance.

          To think Gilman some masterful hockey mind is laughable and without proof. Sure, he is interesting taking minor pot shots on the radio, but was no superstar in contracts or cap management. With respect to the later, he thought he was cleaver and found a loop hole that was closed with penalty when everyone realized that this was not the intent.

          The biggest failing, which left former and current management with little choice, was the complete lack prospects developed or drafted under this six years —- Horvat being the only player of significance, and Tanev brought in via Free Agency.

        • Not the question. The answer to one is entirely unrelated to the other. Although I would give Benning 2 more years based on his ability to draft, I can see why he could be let go. Let me say, Gilman would not be anywhere near my short list to take his place.

      • Just as JB got his job through the Old Boys Network, Gilman won’t get a job through the same network. Unfortunately, and too often, its not what you know but who you know. And really, would JB have been hired if not for Linden and Linden hired if not for ownership needing someone who could win a popularity contest instead of hiring the best president available?

    • But prior to the Canucks, Gilman was a senior executive with the Coyotes and they were terrible during his tenure there as Assistant GM and Director of Hockey Operations. Recognizing that he wasn’t the GM but from 1998 to 2007, the Coyotes went from mediocre (~0.550 win %) to bad (~0.400 on average). And their draft record was just as bad as Gillis’ Canucks. They completely whiffed the 2003 draft (didn’t even have a 1st or 2nd in one of the deepest drafts in NHL history), missed out on a bunch of 1st round picks and only managed to pull 2 decent players (Yandle and Winnik) from beyond the 1st round.

  • Tend to strongly agree in regards to Tanev. The team clearly sees him as an important stabilizer during this transition to a younger D corps. They have him for 2 seasons after this. Plenty of time for Joulevi, Hutton, Stecher, Holm, Pouliot, and maybe their 1st rounder in 2018 to get their bearings. Well, most of them.

    The more interesting question may be Edler. Do they let him walk? I do not see this team signing him to a long-term extension, but may also want him around maybe a bit longer (unless they get Dahlin). He may go for a home discount, but who knows.

    • He’s got a year left on his contract after this one. Edler’s slowing down, but he still has some hockey in him – I’d be down for the Canucks keeping him around year-to-year as a 2nd/3rd pairing guy until he retires, if the money’s right.

    • The only way I see Edler leaving is if Vancouver can get a d-man that is at least as good, and by that I mean the Edler from about 3-4 years ago, and of course that he waives his NTC. As Goon says…he’s a 2nd/3rd pairing guy

    • I forgot to mention in my post game comment, Tanev was running the whole show last night. I mean he ussually is the best D man on our team and sometimes the ice, but last night he was elite (at playing his style of D). It seemed everyone was running around in our zone like chickens with no heads, and every time it’s tanev breaks it up and clears the zone (often at the cost of getting crunched), he really is underappreciated outside of Van and was near as important as Nilsson last night in keeping us in that one. Lilgren will probably be good, maybe great, but has yet to prove that in the bigs yet. Tanev is great and has consistenly been that for quite some time on a floundering team, so I’d consider the trade for rebuilding, but he’s worth more straight up.

      • Seems he’s under appreciated even here with all the people willing to let him go for ridiculously low value. Anyone who thinks all he’s worth is a top prospect who’s never played a single NHL game, clearly over values prospects and ignores the trade precedents for established NHL D men.

          • Certain people see the user name, get all emotional like the little babies that they are, and knee jerk thumb me down regardless of content.

            Fine by me though. I actually quite like the fact that I cause that reaction in them. Shows them to be the cowards they are.

            Pretty much any post I make, you can count on the usual 3 to 4 thumbs down just out of spite. lol.

    • Speaking of Tanev, it’s time he should get a shot on the PP…he has shown good offensive instincts at times and he’s they type of player that, when put in a sink or swim situation, will always swim…plus his trade value would go way up if he succeeds in that role.

      • I seem to remember him getting some PP time. Not sure if it was under AV, Torts or Willie. I also seem to remember he didn’t really do much with it.

        It does make you wonder though. He may not have the best shot, but his passing and puck control are pretty great. Now that we have Boeser as the “shooter” I would be interested to see what Tanev could do in a “distributor” role on the PP. Thing is, the canucks have a lot of those already.

      • Keep Tanev off the power play , he does not possess that skill set. Plus you would add to his minutes that would wear him down and make him more injury prone

    • Agree with your point, but always depends on what you get in return… Would you trade Tanev for 15th overall…? A first and a second from a bubble playoff team? Great player and definitely see the value in mentoring though…

  • The time has obviously come for a “Who should be the next G.M?” poll question on Canucks Army. 5 choices… Benning, Holland, Gilman, Dubas, or Other. Get on it, boys. My personal view is that based solely on his acquisition of young prospects, Benning should get 2 more years. He inherited a franchise almost entirely devoid of young players, and had to suffer the intrusion of an owner who thought he knew best. (Erickson contract!)

      • I agree. Dubas is an intriguing choice as a replacement but he doesn’t have the NHL track record yet. As mixed as Benning’s track record is, his ability to pull players outside of the 1st round looks to be a *major* advantage that the Canucks would have in the long run. But is ownership patient enough? That’s how Chicago thrived, they could find those players and have cheap depth rather than scraping the bottom of the free agency pool. Then Bowman handcuffed himself with big salaries and benefits for an aging core…sound familiar?

        • For any doubters to your handcuffed statement, ask yourselves where would Seabrook be if he didn’t carry that $6.8m contract? Or are you forgetting he was a healthy scratch just recently? I suggest he would be offered around the league

          • That’s exactly my point. Big salaries like Seabrook is weighing down the Blackhawks. It’s not like they haven’t traded big names to avoid cap crunches (e.g. Byfuglien?). And therr is a healthy market for good pending UFA’s (1st round pick, player and prospect).

        • Teams that have no prospects in their system as the Canucks were when Benning took over take time to build and stock the system with players that will make the NHL team or be good reliable replacements if one of NHL players is injured. To not sign Benning would be a mistake in my opinion and if I were the next guy that was being asked to come to Vancouver for an interview I would of course go to the interview but would hope to get a chance some where else as Canucks owners are now showing they don’t have any patience to follow a plan and I would see that these owners also have a record of doing things on their own which end up being blamed on someone else who holds the position such as the Tortirella hiring and in my opinion not trading Luongo were all ownership decisions. The owners should let the hockey people run the team and Benning has the track record he helped build Buffalo to when they were a powerhouse and Boston the Canucks ownership were so in love with the team when it needed tweaking they kept with the same old group that just got older. We had a great team but needed to trade players before they lost their value.
          Fans have hope with the upcoming prospects but if their is no patience or loyalty shown from the owners it will them go to the level of the players and no one will want to come here or want to stay here.

  • What’s the love in with Ken Holland all about. He had a great run with the Wings, but how are the wings doing now? I know he has been drafting later than most and it’s caught up with him . I could see him as a president if Linden goes back to his private business empire but not as a GM

    • People are tired of watching a terrible hockey team and want some direction instead of this circus. This organization is in desperate need to find people with hockey ops experience to try and get out of this sh*t storm. KH for president of hockey ops, see if they can pry Brisbois and Dubas for GM/AGM. This has now become at 10 year rebuild which is such a shame because if it had direction from the start it could’ve taken 5. Quotes like this “I like this team – I like the core players. This is a team we can turn around in a hurry.” – Benning, as well as stating Brandon Sutter is a what? “To me, he is a foundation piece for our group going forward,” JB. Statements like this should’ve set the alarms off from the beginning, but with an inexperienced President like TL..this is what we are stuck with. I have a quote for you Holly Wood and i hope you can pick up on it as well “And then he turned into a sh*t-bonfire and then driven by the winds of his monumental ignorance, he turned into a raging sh*t-firestorm. If I get to be married to Barb i’ll have total control of Sunnyvale, and then I can unleash a sh*tnami tidal wave that’ll engulf Ricky and extinguish his sh*t-flames forever.” (little hint Barb is Francesco Aquilini)

      • So you want people with hockey ops experience but you mention Kyle Dubas as a candidate for GM, wow. The rest of your post appears to be an alcohol induced rant. If your gonna swear at me at least buy a vowel, ya stiff

      • 10 year rebuild? Benning has only been GM for about 4.5 years. Oh wait, you’re also saying the prospects and possible trades/FA signings won’t enhance the rebuild, so it will now take another 5.5 years. Gotcha. And BTW it sounds like you’ve been in sh*t all your life

    • I agree, no Holland for GM, please. Go to Cap Friendly and review the large, long-term contracts with NMCs he’s given out for marginal talent. There’s a reason Detroit is in trouble and will be for some time.

  • Note to JD Burke. The NHL is run by an old boys club. Hammering on Benning to be fired is not a wise move on your part. I was given some sage advice 30 years ago, don’t get into a pissing contest with someone who buys ink by the barrel. There is a message in that quote for you and I hope you pick up on it.

  • The Barzal/Boeser debate is interesting. I ed watching Barzal as a junior, he controlled the play whenever he was on the ice and was very dominant. From the highlights I have watched, Barzal has translated those skills to the NHL and looks like a great player. He is a better playmaker than Boeser, although Boeser has impressed me in that regard as well.

    Boeser is a better sniper and pure scorers like Boeser are hard to find.

    The interesting debate is what would Boeser look lion the Islanders and what would Barzal look like on the Islanders. Barzal gets lots of time on the ice with Tavares and when he’s not, he gets easier match ups. Boeser plays with way less talent and gets way more attention from the other teams.

      • I get that difference, but Barzal can’t score like Boeser. They are different players, but what is harder to find, a playmaker or a goal scorer? Barzal is a natural centre that makes his position more valuable, but not many players in the league can shoot like Boeser.

        • Reminiscent of last years race between Mathews and Laine. Points being fairly equal the centerman is likely to win every time. Much more defensive responsibility at centre , that’s why some teams will break rookies in on the wing to ease them into the league. I’m gonna suggest that the majority of pro wingers were centres when they were younger but at some point a coach moved them to the wing

  • Surprised this hasn’t been discussed yet, but expect to see Ryan Johnson named new Canucks GM, if not at conclusion of season, then before the draft. Linden very high on him, his promotion to GM in Utica serves as his ‘apprenticeship’ in a GM position. Makes a lot of sense: Johnson is familiar with all prospects & players already in the system; he is much, much more ‘media-friendly’ & articulate in such settings than Benning; Canucks promoted Johnson to GM role in Utica to groom him for this very situation & his GM post in Utica can easily be filled again by Conacher, who has remained with the team.

        • The Vancouver Canucks formally introduced Jim Benning as their general manager in a press conference on May 23, 2014.
          2014-15 :101 points
          2015-16 :Competitive until the lack of organisational depth/injuries overrcame the team in January,2016.
          Two years.
          Prospect cupboards nearly replenished.
          Farm team (prospects) competitive.
          NHL club winning record 14-10-4 until major injuries ensued.
          I’ve beeen watching the Canucks since inception.
          A two year rebuild is a frigging miracle.
          This coming draft/TDL should help fill the prospect pipeline.

  • Just think if we had William Nylander or Ehlers on this team instead of ” Jake the Mistake” Virtanen ? Nylander would be our number 1 center with Bo Horvat as our number 2 center. What a drafting guru Benning is.