Ah, shooting yourself in the foot. Classic Canadian hockey management maneuver.
this post was submitted on 13 Dec 2025
20 points (100.0% liked)
Hockey
3085 readers
2 users here now
Rules
- No bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia.
- Be respectful, especially when disagreeing. Everyone should feel welcome here.
- No porn.
- No Ads / Spamming.
List of Team-Specific Communities:
Metropolitan Division
- Carolina Hurricanes
- Washington Capitals
- Columbus Blue Jackets
- New Jersey Devils
- New York Islanders
- New York Rangers
- Pittsburgh Penguins
- Philadelphia Flyers
Atlantic Division
- Toronto Maple Leafs
- Montreal Canadiens
- Boston Bruins
- Ottawa Senators
- Tampa Bay Lightning
- Buffalo Sabres
- Detroit Red Wings
- Florida Panthers
Central Division
- Chicago Blackhawks
- Winnipeg Jets
- Nashville Predators
- Arizona Coyotes
- Dallas Stars
- St Louis Blues
- Minnesota Wild
- Colorado Avalanche
Pacific Division
- Los Angeles Kings
- Edmonton Oilers
- Calgary Flames
- Anaheim Ducks
- Vancouver Canucks
- San Jose Sharks
- Vegas Golden Knights
- Seattle Kraken
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Yeah, that was a surprise of a deal. It's like the Canucks just gave up after the Sedins retired.
The problem is they've been fighting to "stay competitive" despite missing the playoffs 9 times in 14 seasons since the 2011 final and winning no more than a single round when they have made it. Generational mediocrity.
The mushy middle is a tough place to hang out.
The Ottawa Senators once had what should have been one of the greatest lineups in hockey.
The 2005 lineup had Heatley, Chara, Alfredsson, Spezza, and Hasek in net.
https://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/leagues/seasons/teams/0000542006.html
The management got so bad there were billboards put up demanding the owner sell the team.
As you said , it's the owner. He is capable of supporting an up and coming team like Sedins era, but not so much trying to build a new era. Hoped he learned something from the past 1.5 decade. Or else just sell the team.
Do you guys want a guy who doesn't want to play there anymore?
The problem isn't the trade per se but the appalling asset management that's lead us to this point.
Imagine a team that's had to trade out 2 captains in 3 seasons, had to ship out their points leader one year because of a bullying problem that management encouraged, had 4 head coaches in 5 seasons.
Imagine Colorado turning themselves into such a tyre fire that Makar wanted out and they had to trade him out in a panic or risk losing him for nothing.
Yeah, that makes more sense now - I thought you were talking about the trade itself. Pretty good return considering he was going to walk away.
That's the vibe I've seen as someone who doesn't really follow the Canucks - they were in the classic position of, "move him now and get something in return or let him walk for free later."
It's either that or just lose him anyways 18 months from now for nothing. Sell when his value is as high as possible.