logo
CanucksArmy has no direct affiliation to the Vancouver Canucks, Canucks Sports & Entertainment, NHL, or NHLPA
Monday Morning Musings: February 15th
alt
J.D. Burke
Feb 15, 2016, 11:00 ESTUpdated:
Comments
I’m of the belief that even the most inconsequential of transactions, events and whatever you may have leaguewide affects every team, at every level, to some extent. Newton’s law and so on.
With that in mind, there just simply isn’t enough time or resources to give them all the attention they deserve in this space. Ideally, though, one can scratch the surface of these events – linked directly to the Vancouver Canucks or otherwise – and examine their far-reaching impact to Roger’s Arena and beyond.
With that, here are my Monday Morning Musings for the week that was.
Alex Burrows willing to waive NTC:
News broke in the second intermission of the Saturday’s game between the Canucks and Maple Leafs that Burrows would, if approached, waive his full NTC. This kind of came out of nowhere, especially given all the trade talk in this town surrounding the likes of Radim Vrbata and Dan Hamhuis.
Elliotte Friedman broke this development, then doused the fire just a few short hours later…
I would suggest that you take Burrows comments with a grain of salt. I still remember Ryan Kesler adamantly denying that he had any desire to be traded, in spite of the fact that everyone and their dog had known he wanted out for months at a time. Of course, this isn’t a perfect comparison, but I’m sure you catches my drift.
If Burrows is willing to waive his NTC – and based on everything I know, I lean towards him being open to it – then there should be no shortage of suitors – in theory, anyways. The Canucks still have the ability to retain salary on two player transactions. They can more than afford to chew on half of Burrows salary for this season and next. Burrows contract is also of the back diving variety, which makes him especially appealing to teams with an internal budget. The Florida Panthers come to mind.
Will the Vancouver Canucks pursue Steven Stamkos in free agency?
The national media has been pouring gasoline on this fire for a few weeks now. In their defence, all they’re saying is that the Canucks would be interested in pursuing Stamkos in free agency if he were to make it to July 1st without an extension. Then again, is there a team that wouldn’t be?
Jeremy Davis delved into this topic at length yesterday and did a great job highlighting why the Canucks have as good a shot as any team at landing the elite forward. If the Canucks can sign Stamkos, though, is it really so obvious that they leap at the opportunity? Anze Kopitar (who is probably better than Stamkos, just saying) was just re-signed for about $10-million a season and is slightly older. Makes one wonder what Stamkos will go for.
Here’s the thing: does Stamkos turn the Canucks into a Stanley Cup contender overnight? If the answer is no, there’s immediate reason for pause. The thing about signing a player in free agency is that you’re generally paying for what they’ve already done. Stamkos is younger than your average unrestricted free agent, but a cursory glance at his counting stats reveals that he might already be stepping out of his prime.
There isn’t a point per game season to Stamkos’ credit in two years – coincidentally, right as Martin St. Louis left town. If the Canucks can’t contend for another two-three years and they’re still suffering the expenses of such a highly coveted free agent price tag once Stamkos is well out of his prime, is his contract not a hindrance?
I lean towards no, but there is some serious food for thought here.
Mike Yeo fired by the Minnesota Wild:
In the midst of an eight-game losing streak, the Wild fired their head coach, Mike Yeo. This is just the third firing of the season, which seems like a low number. Can’t help but wonder what Willie Desjardins’ future holds assuming the Canucks don’t make the playoffs – they won’t. 
Back to Yeo, though. This move seems perhaps a bit reactionary. No denying the results leave much to be desired, but more than anything, this is just terrible puck luck running it’s course in Minnesota. For most of Yeo’s tenure, the Wild have been a relatively strong puck possession team.
I’m not sure Yeo is a good coach, but if pressed, I lean much further towards good than bad. Were there an opening with the Canucks, his is a name I wouldn’t hate as a suggested replacement.
Meddling ownership:
Saturday night’s edition of The Provies was equal parts revelatory and horrifying. In that post-game article, Jason Botchford reveals just how meddling ownership has been since the 2011 Stanley Cup Final – among other things.
I’ve long thought, and talked about, how people in this town underestimate ownership’s involvement and influence.
It’s pervasive and, if someone were to let it, it would trickle all the way down to the team’s lines and TOI.
The relationship between ownership and the president and the GM is a complicated one, a really difficult one, and it will be that until the team is sold.
If it’s not, then it will be this way forever.
It can not be explained in an intermission segment or here in The Provies.
Continued… 
The Aquilinis involvement in hockey ops is the stuff of legends in back channels.
Mythical stories ooze from the city’s elite and from the city’s in-the-know hockey community, about trades which were vetoed , trades which were demanded, and supposedly that time all the defencemen were to be moved.
All of them.
If we dip into the not-too distant past, the former regime had final say and total control of all hockey decisions until the 2011 Game 7 loss in the Cup finals.
After that, power was whittled away, one shaving at a time.
Before tonight, however, no one had ever put ownership on one side and management on the other in terms of what should be the direction of the Canucks.
Sure, it was strongly hinted at on more than one occasion.
The most memorably public was probably Gilly’s final 1040 interview where he said the team had strayed from the style of hockey which had made them successful.
But it has never been black-and-white and on a stage like tonight.
There were some jaws-that-met-floors around this city and the NHL with this one.
If this is true – and I’m of the belief that where there is smoke, there’s fire – this is terrible news on a number of levels. Ownership is always involved to some extent in the day-to-day operations of running a hockey club. This goes well beyond that, though.
I’m reading a book on the New England Patriots, called “The Blueprint”. One of the turning points for that franchise was when Robert Kraft relinquished his say in any involvement in personnel decisions. Not exactly a coincidence.
This is not good.

Breaking News