Rumor: Bob McKenzie on Canucks interest in Ryan O'Reilly.

Discussion in 'Vancouver Canucks' started by F A N, Jun 6, 2018.

View Users: View Users
  1. jd22

    jd22 Registered User

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2008
    Messages:
    1,294
    Likes Received:
    166
    Trophy Points:
    111
    Location:
    Ísafjörður, Iceland
    This thread has taught me that I, in my late 20's, am pretty close to useless. Ugh. Pity ROR. And me.
     
    Canadian Canuck likes this.
  2. CanaFan

    CanaFan Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2010
    Messages:
    19,419
    Likes Received:
    4,929
    Trophy Points:
    156
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    BC
    You might be, if your skills were going to drop off hard at 32-33 and worked for a company that wasn’t really going to benefit from these skills for at least 3-4 years.

    You might end up being close to useless.
     
    jd22 and geebaan like this.
  3. I in the Eye

    I in the Eye Drop a ball it falls

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2002
    Messages:
    5,694
    Likes Received:
    920
    Trophy Points:
    184
    In your post, where would you say your argument is weak?
     
  4. VancouverJagger

    VancouverJagger Not trying to fit in

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2017
    Messages:
    499
    Likes Received:
    245
    Trophy Points:
    46
    Occupation:
    Business Owner
    Location:
    Vancouver - Yaletown
    I don't disagree your reasoning. There is a solid argument for that that I could get onboard with. However I tend to think that we could be a decent team in 3 years........and very good in 4-5 - at which point you would hope he would still be a part of that as you are not having to give up anyone near his talent level in order to land him - cap isn't going to be a concern for us for a while - if we can get him for decently under his value - which is most likely what would happen under my proposal above - then yeah we hands down win the trade and gain an A grade player without giving up much - I still take it - regardless of your reasoned argument.
     
  5. CanaFan

    CanaFan Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2010
    Messages:
    19,419
    Likes Received:
    4,929
    Trophy Points:
    156
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    BC
    I don’t think we get him for Sutter or even Sutter+. ROR is 2 years younger and a FAR better scorer than Sutter. If we can then hell ya do it but I don’t think that has any chance of happening. And if it costs young assets at all then it can’t happen.
     
  6. ProstheticConscience

    ProstheticConscience Happy Chappy

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2010
    Messages:
    15,298
    Likes Received:
    3,319
    Trophy Points:
    156
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Canuck Nation
    I honestly think it would make about as much sense as going after O'Reilly. In what world should a team in the Canucks' situation be chasing a big money vet? It's just bad all around on general principles and for what O'Reilly's said about how things have been going in Buffalo for him. He's clearly a defeated, depressed player and ffs, how will being here help him? Is he someone we want to pay for, and especially at the price Benning would probably pay? The team just cleared some cap space, now we're going to start filling it already?

    And I would think anyone on this forum familiar with my posting history knows my feelings toward Benning.
     
  7. Canucks1096

    Canucks1096 Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2016
    Messages:
    2,889
    Likes Received:
    656
    Trophy Points:
    94
    Of course it matters. My main point is with a legit second line center you make the younger players play better and they develope faster. If they get better faster chances are the rebuild will be over faster. Sure Buf didn't do well in the standings But he definitely made Reinhart a better player. With ROR it take pressure off of Eichel to play the easier minutes. Ari is rebuilding and they traded 7th overall for Stepan. No Stephan, Keller wouldn't if had that great rookie season.

    The stop gaps ufa are not that high quality. There not going to young players that much better.

    2016 Leafs didn't have really have any young players on the roster. You can definitely make an argument that Bozak is a number 2 center. But also the Leafs didn't trade any of Kadri, Bozak, JVR away because You need those type of players to help the younger players. The following year Matthews, Nylander and Marner came. Having Kadri and Bozak behind Matthews. Definitely helped Matthews played easier Matchup. Marner played with Bozak and JVR. Marner playing with 2 top 6 guys definitely helped Marner developed faster. The main reasons why Leafs rebuild only took a few years aside from winning the draft lottery was because they had great secondary players of Bozak, JVR and Kadri to support all the young players that were coming in. Canucks don't even have a Kadri or JVR right type of players that can support the younger players so they need to trade for one.

    Any type of rebuild you need some quality Vets around to support the younger players. ROR is 27, if Canucks compete within a few years. He is 29 and he can still important piece on the team.
     
  8. CanaFan

    CanaFan Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2010
    Messages:
    19,419
    Likes Received:
    4,929
    Trophy Points:
    156
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    BC
    How does a better 2nd line centre develop young players faster?

    Are you saying Pettersson plays with this player on the 2nd line? Because then you aren’t sheltering him. And if you do shelter him and play him on the 3rd line like Horvat’s rookie season, then it doesn’t matter who the 2C.

    You don’t know this. Reinhart has actually developed slower than expected for a #2 overall. You have know idea what impact having ROR has had.

    As for ending the rebuild faster, you are also hurting it as well by trading 18-21 year old assets for a 27 year old asset that is already past his peak and in 3-4 years will be going into a decline.

    That doesn’t change the quality of player that Keller is. It just allows him to put more points on the board. Just like Bo would have put more points up playing with a better winger than Baertschi, but it wouldn’t make Bo “develop” better.

    Of course not, but the point is they are free. You use your assets to bring in another talented young player rather than a 2C with a 4-5 year window.

    What “young players” do you think the Canucks are gonna be loaded with next year anyway? Pettersson probably, anyone else? The Canucks are gonna be just like the 15-16 Leafs with a few ‘youngish’ players (Bo, Boeser, Jake, Stecher), maybe one rookie (Pettersson) and the rest guys in their mid-20’s and older. When the Leaf’s improved in 2016-17, it wasn’t because they brought in an expensive 1C or 2C to shelter or develop Matthews, Marner, and Nylander. Those guys BECAME the top line themselves, as rookies no less. They didn’t get sheltered or have a vet brought in to prop them up as you are suggesting.

    It’s less important to bring in “quality vets” than it is to acquire some bloody talent to develop in the first place. We aren’t even close to having this part down so it’s a tad premature to worry about bringing in vets to help it develop.
     
    Catbug likes this.
  9. Canucker

    Canucker Go Hawks!

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2002
    Messages:
    21,514
    Likes Received:
    252
    Trophy Points:
    186
    Location:
    Oak Point, Texas
    I like O'Reilly, but I'd rather take a run at Stastny for likely less money and similar term that O'Reilly is getting paid, and not give up any assets. If he wants more than that, search the bargain bin...Try and get Boone Jenner on the cheap, or even sign Riley Nash...don't be giving up prime rebuilding assets.
     
    Catbug likes this.
  10. racerjoe

    racerjoe Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2012
    Messages:
    7,509
    Likes Received:
    767
    Trophy Points:
    109
    Occupation:
    I drive an Olympia
    Location:
    Vancouver
    honestly, with what has been speculated we would need to offer (Tanev plus or a prime prospect or a first) I would rather sign Bozak to an over inflated Contract and I don't even want him, it would at least protect us from making a bad trade for where this franchise is.
     
    I in the Eye and CanaFan like this.
  11. Canucks1096

    Canucks1096 Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2016
    Messages:
    2,889
    Likes Received:
    656
    Trophy Points:
    94
    If you bring in second line player. Pettersson can produce more, become an offensive player quicker. Shelter means you are playing easier minutes. Or getting more offensive zone starts/easier compeition. Pettersson on the 2nd line he can still get more offensive starts and doesn't have play against top D pairing That is still considered getting sheltered minutes.

    We might agree to disagree on the developing faster statement. If you play with better players. You have opportunities to use your skill and hockey sense to put up more points. If you keep getting those opportunities, therefore you become a better impact player faster. Horvat didn't put up points until the second half of his second season. If Horvat Was put in a better offensive situation and better players Horvat will probably better offensive player now.

    Think about Staal. He played behind Crosby and Malkin in Pits. Staal never had offensive opportunities and played with Grinders. Because of his he never developed his offensive game. Most young players still need to be put in a good position to develope their offensive game at the nhl level.

    As for Kellar and Rinhart. If they play with Gagner. they wouldn't of had those seasons

    Canucks will not be like 2015/2016 leafs. That Leafs team had most of their future core not even in the nhl yet. Canucks 2018/2019 will have future core Pettersson, Boeser, Horvat on the roster, also young players like Virtanen, Goldobin, Gaudette, Leipsic, Stecher. Maybe Dahlen. Half of the roster won't be mid 20 and older.

    Leafs didn't need to bring in vets be cause they had guys like Kadri, JVR and Bozak to support Marner, Nylander and Matthews. Do you really think if you replace those 3 vets with 3 Gagner type of player? Do you really think those 3 young players will become big impact players right away? I sure don't, with those 3 Vets I don't even think Leafs make playoff last couple of years without those 3 vets. Without those 3 Matthews wouldn't had close 65% offensive zone starts. He would gotten a lot tougher minutes. Marner is a great player but don't he can get 60 plus point with Gagner type player.

    The future F core is pretty much set. We just need it to develope. They are probably missing one more quality more F. It's the backend that is thin.

    Dahlen Pettersson Boeser
    Goldobin Horvat Lind
    Baer Gaudette Virtanen
    Gad Jasek

    If it takes 2 young players thst are not Horvat Boeser Pettersson and Maybe Dahlen and a 2nd for ROR. Does it really make that much impact on the future?
     
  12. VanJack

    VanJack Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2014
    Messages:
    9,979
    Likes Received:
    967
    Trophy Points:
    94
    A valid point....I'd be a loss less concerned about O'Reilly even in his late 20's or early 30's....the guy was drafted by the Av's and then signed in Buffalo....therefore has virtually no playoff games on his resume and so still a 'relatively low mileage' player, given his age. His contract is a bit of a concern, but will look better as the salary cap continues to go up.

    If he's available, he is a logical target for the Canucks. It's just too bad they don't have the assets they can afford to part with, in order to make it happen.
     
  13. CanaFan

    CanaFan Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2010
    Messages:
    19,419
    Likes Received:
    4,929
    Trophy Points:
    156
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    BC

    We disagree on too many things to make this a productive discussion. Fundamentally I disagree that Pettersson will develop any better playing with ROR than without. ROR is a complimentary player himself, not a line driver. While he would help boost Pettersson’s production, that’s not the same thing as helping him develop. Development can come from challenges as well as successes. His own skill set, work ethic, and drive will determine how well he develops, not whether he plays with Gagner or ROR. Much like Horvat playing on the 4th and 3rd line in his rookie season and didn’t hurt his development any. Since we disagree on this most fundamental thing, I don’t think we can get any further no matter how much we type.
     
  14. CanaFan

    CanaFan Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2010
    Messages:
    19,419
    Likes Received:
    4,929
    Trophy Points:
    156
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    BC

    I’d counter that his skating and style of play (puck possession, high effort) will result in him losing effectiveness at a younger age than most forwards. Similar to Burrows.
     
  15. Canadian Canuck

    Canadian Canuck Lose for Hughes #2

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    9,844
    Likes Received:
    555
    Trophy Points:
    110
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Kamloops BC
    Not sure how hard it is to understand that cameras don’t give everyone the big picture. Everyone in the Canucks front office knows what is recorded and posted on their YouTube channel. They’re not going to reveal everything.
     
  16. VanJack

    VanJack Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2014
    Messages:
    9,979
    Likes Received:
    967
    Trophy Points:
    94
    Burrows?...not getting that connection....has a DOB of 1981, which means he was 30-33 during his glory years with the Canucks....and played in a ton of playoff games. If O'Reilly could match what Burrows did after he turned 30, NHL teams would be happy.

    I haven't seen O'Reilly play much, and as a high-energy, physical player he might slow down some as he ages. But there's no doubt that the struggle just to get to the playoffs and then the post-season grind takes a toll on the body. O'Reilly has has a remarkably stable career to date, plays between 71-80 games a season and consistently 50-60 points.

    I'd be more concerned about Bo Horvat and Brandon Sutter in their early 30's than O'Reilly.
     
  17. CanaFan

    CanaFan Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2010
    Messages:
    19,419
    Likes Received:
    4,929
    Trophy Points:
    156
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    BC
    Burrows dropped off a cliff at 32/33 and I believe ROR is a similar type of player, namely smart but lacks high end physical tools (skating, shot) and so relies heavily on effort and work ethic. That type of game becomes harder to play in your 30’s and so I think ROR will drop off earlier than most forwards.

    You’re overrating the impact of playoff games. Outside of perennial playoff champs like Chicago or Pittsburgh, most players don’t play meaningfully more games because of playoffs. Certainly not enough to matter.
     
  18. I in the Eye

    I in the Eye Drop a ball it falls

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2002
    Messages:
    5,694
    Likes Received:
    920
    Trophy Points:
    184
    Right... They are only going to reveal the parts on their YouTube channel that make Benning look like an incompetent dweeb. They edited out the parts where Benning rag dolled McPhee during the negotiation. The big picture is that the negotiation was more even than the YouTube channel suggests. You cannot, and we should always take with a grain of salt, video as a source of evidence because of Adobe Premiere Pro.

    Now do you see where your argument is weak? Obviously, what happens in the real world is more in depth than what is captured on video. But the point of video, is to record what happened at periods of time... I do not think that video was doctored with, nor do I think that parts were edited out that would have made Benning look better (it's the Canucks video... I'd think they would want to put Benning in the best light possible). What happened at periods of time during that negotiation is that Benning was completely schooled. Maybe the Canucks front office edited out the part where Benning asked McPhee if he could suck his ****.
     
    Last edited: Jun 9, 2018
    timw33 and vancityluongo like this.
  19. Canadian Canuck

    Canadian Canuck Lose for Hughes #2

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    9,844
    Likes Received:
    555
    Trophy Points:
    110
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Kamloops BC
    I don’t see how you can interpret the video as Benning being schooled? He didn’t get schooled at all...
     
  20. I in the Eye

    I in the Eye Drop a ball it falls

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2002
    Messages:
    5,694
    Likes Received:
    920
    Trophy Points:
    184
    In your post, where would you say your argument is incomplete?
     
    Last edited: Jun 9, 2018
  21. Canadian Canuck

    Canadian Canuck Lose for Hughes #2

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    9,844
    Likes Received:
    555
    Trophy Points:
    110
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Kamloops BC
    I won't waste my time with you.
     
  22. Canadian Canuck

    Canadian Canuck Lose for Hughes #2

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    9,844
    Likes Received:
    555
    Trophy Points:
    110
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Kamloops BC
    Even if you think the video isn't edited, Benning did nothing wrong in the negotiation.
     
  23. I in the Eye

    I in the Eye Drop a ball it falls

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2002
    Messages:
    5,694
    Likes Received:
    920
    Trophy Points:
    184
    You're not wasting time... You are literally putting in no time. Put in effort... put in time... explain why you think or declare something... or **** off.

    Again, explain why, or piss off. Saying Benning did nothing wrong in the negotiation without explaining why you think so... is completely useless.
     
  24. Canadian Canuck

    Canadian Canuck Lose for Hughes #2

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    9,844
    Likes Received:
    555
    Trophy Points:
    110
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Kamloops BC
    I literally said why twice. You stated that Benning should come out guns a blazing and set the bar. Benning is the one who approached Mcphee for him to trade up. If Benning comes out too strong demanding a starting price Mcphee will immediately look elsewhere. Instead he did the right thing and asked Mcphee what value he would put on the pick. GMs are professsionals. They dont just change their mind depending on what you make the asking price. They meet with their staff and discuss just like Benning and co. did. So he did not get schooled, he did his job. Who knows if he gave a counter offer or not, they would not show that on camera if they did it is common sense.
     
  25. Dab

    Dab Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2017
    Messages:
    472
    Likes Received:
    126
    Trophy Points:
    46
    This sums it up [​IMG]
     
    geebaan likes this.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"