Welcome to the final installment of my Rebuilding on the Fly series, where I’ve examined how the Vancouver Canucks could balance their short-term goals of being a successful team in the near future with their long-term ones of acquiring enough talent to compete for a Stanley Cup some time down the road.

I’ve argued that the Canucks need to be aggressive and proactive to be successful in their plan. They need to move veteran players immediately while they still have value and receive draft picks in return. They need to fill in vacant roster spaces with shrewd free agent signings. And finally, they need to identify talented young prospects that can form the core of a contending team in the future.

For some parting thoughts on this plan heading in to the most critical month of the offseason, join me after the jump.

As we know, management has made it clear why they want to go down the road of rebuilding on the fly. Here are our best guesses at their key assumptions: 

– It is better to develop prospects in a winning environment: In recent years, we’ve seen teams like Tampa and Florida consistently sign over-30 defensive veterans like Sami Salo, Willie Mitchell, and Matthias Ohlund to help mentor their young prospects, and they’re seeing the success in that strategy with the development of players like Aaron Ekblad and Victor Hedman. 

– A fully rebuilding team can’t exploit the free agent market or re-sign their own key free agents: When was the last quality veteran free agent that choose to play in Edmonton? Is Eddie Lack really interested in being the next Ben Scrivens?

– Canucks fans will not support a rebuild: As a Canucks fan, I’ve always found this argument the most insulting, but after seeing fan interest wane and seats at Rogers Arena left empty over the last year and a half there may be more validity to this argument than I’d like to admit.

You can argue against the legitimacy of their position, but its a somewhat futile exercise. They’ve charted their course, and clearly they are plan on executing against this strategy. 

Throughout the course of this series, I’ve tried to tackle what I think is the central question for this Canucks administration: Is it possible to rebuild on the fly, and if so how do you do it?

When you go down this path it invariably leads to the questions I expect are the topics of the day for the Canucks management group. What should we do with the 2016 UFAs, Eddie Lack, Dan Hamhuis, Kevin Bieksa and Radim Vrbata? If we moved some of them, what would be the return? Could they be replaced from the UFA market?  Then there is the question of who should be selected at the draft. 

Most fans seem happy with the thought of Kevin Bieksa moving on, but simply suggesting moving Dan Hamhuis or Radim Vrbata sent many over the edge.

As of today, Dan Hamhuis and Radim Vrbata are both worth 1st round picks in the 2015 or 2016 drafts based the trades of similar players in recent years. On July 1, 2016 they will be worth exactly nothing to the Vancouver Canucks, unless they re-sign. 

Of course, both players may decide to re-sign with the Canucks. Hamhuis may have a bounce-back year. Vrbata may have his third 30 goal season of his 16 year NHL career. These scenarios are both possible, but the question for management isn’t whether they’re possible; it’s whether they’re probable.

Some have argued that one or both of these players could receive a higher return if they were moved closer to the deadline. Sure, it’s possible they would yield higher returns then. Some genius in the Flames’ front office managed to ship out a 33 year old Curtis Glencross who was three years removed from his last 20 goal, 30 point season to the Capitals for a 2nd and 3rd round draft choice, so a higher return is entirely possible. 

However, moving players at the deadline has drawbacks that need to be considered. First, the draft picks would be from 2016 versus 2015, and this team desperately needs high caliber prospects contributing to the roster sooner rather than later. Second, moving them now allows you to shop through the pool of available UFAs to find a reasonable short-term solution to replace them without giving up an asset in return (other than a truckload of cash). Third, if the Canucks somehow find themselves on bubble of the playoffs, how can they possibly sell to ownership (who loves playoff revenue), or the fan base move a core piece of the puzzle like Vrbata or Hamhuis? 

Remember, this was a team who wouldn’t move bottom six forward Shawn Matthias at the deadline because of their playoff aspirations and are no holding a valueless asset as he prepares to have another team make him rich on July 1. 

It seems that many would prefer to stay the course with Vrbata and Hamhuis, rather than moving them for a pair of first round picks and the cap space which would allow you to replace them with UFAs. The question the Canucks have to ask themselves is whether staying the course with fan favorites is worth the risk that they’ll walk for nothing in a year’s time.

Counting on the UFA market to refill key roster positions is an inherently risky move. Recently, Jason Botchford touched on the possibility of moving Bieksa or Hamhuis to free up room to sign Cody Franson, a player I highlighted in my post on defensemen to target. News 1130 recently reported the Canucks had interest in Joel Ward, a player I highlighted in my post on forwards. Neither of these signings are possible unless the Canucks free up a significant amount of cap space. 

It would absolutely make sense for Franson and Ward to be on the Canucks radar in the event Bieksa, Hamhuis and Vrbata are moved. However, the UFA market is extremely competitive, and you can’t always get what you want. This team doesn’t have the same appeal they did a few years ago when Dan Hamhuis decided to take the home town discount to join a Canucks team poised to be a legitimate Cup contender. 

With this in mind, management can’t just look at their first choices like Ward and Franson. They’d have to look at plan B, C, D, as part of their planning process, just like last year when they failed to land Jarome Iginla and wound up with their second choice, Radim Vrbata, instead. 

Following this logic through, I was very curious how people would react to the thought of signing an effective, but decidedly un-sexy defensemen like Zbynek Michalek to replace Hamhuis? How would people feel about a useful utility forward like Sean Bergenheim in the top 9? 

The results were fascinating. While many saw the logic in replacing soon-to-be UFAs with draft picks and the best you can find on the 2015 UFA market, the feedback I received indicated that many apparently would rather wear their Hamhuis jerseys, crack a beer, and watch the slow decline of the best Canucks era that ever was.

The tough part about not going for a full rebuild is the drop off of elite talent available outside of the top 3 to 5 selections in any given draft. If you’re going to build a new contender with picks without top 3 to 5 selections, you need to draft exponentially better than your competitors, have a ton of bullets in the chamber in the form of draft picks, and get a bit lucky. Trading the 2016 UFAs would give the Canucks the picks they need. Parts 4 and 5 of the series identified high potential prospects the Canucks scouting department should look at. The rest is up to the hockey gods (and Canucks management of course). 

It remains to be seen which direction management will go this offseason. On the one hand, Benning was among the most active GM’s in the league last summer, and he likely understands the necessity of getting value for the team’s declining assets rather than risking having them walk next summer for nothing. But on the other hand, he rightly questions this market’s appetite for a rebuild. Fear of a negative fan response may play into him keeping a player like Hamhuis, especially if he thinks he could be re-signed. 

There will be moves this summer, some of which will be good, some bad, and some ugly. Looking at this administration’s track record so far, we can probably expect a Ryan Miller free agent signing for every Radim Vrbata. For every Chris Tanev extension, there has been a Luca Sbisa extension. For every Gustav Forsling draft pick, there has been a Nikita Tryamkin, Kyle Pettit or a Mackenze Stewart.

At the very least, it should give the team at Canucks Army plenty of material to write about. 

Thanks for reading along through this series. I hope you’ve enjoyed reading and commenting on the series as much as I have in putting it together. Here’s to a productive and successful offseason!