Management Discussion v46 | Warning in OP (#834)

Status
Not open for further replies.

krutovsdonut

eeyore
Sep 25, 2016
16,870
9,555
I definitely think ownership has a hand in the state of the team. I don't however pretend to think that they're responsible for Jim acquiring bad players and signing them to bad contracts. Over and over and over. That's just willful ignorance.

i don't think benning blew the retool. i think he was given a kobayashi maru scenario that was never going to happen. his fate could only be avoided by getting unreasonably lucky on the draft. the sedins were never going to carry this team into the playoffs, and benning was not going to be able to acquire an entire second supporting line without giving up key rebuild assets. he had no chance except for hitting it big time in the draft

as it turns out he missed perhaps one player. arguably just one of ehlers and tkachuk in the line up right now would be the difference between this thread not existing and the current certainty people have benning is an idiot.

so i don't buy it. he can't be an idiot when he is within one decision of fine. he's like a lot of other gm's who have tried in similar spots with similar results.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hit the post

krutovsdonut

eeyore
Sep 25, 2016
16,870
9,555
I think ownership sets goals like 'spend to the cap' and 'try to make the playoffs', players avoid Vancouver like it's radioactive and demand massive over payment to sign here, Trevor Linden smiles and kisses babies, chef Jim works his magic in the kitchen and voila, a masterpiece. It's an only in Vancouver recipe, nouvelle dumbo gumbo call it.

way better answer than mine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Megaterio Llamas

2011 still hurts

imagine posting on a hockey forum
Feb 10, 2016
1,293
1,468
i judge what i see and common sense. i am comfortable in inferring that ownership has had a big hand in the past 4 years.

if you want to argue it's all benning all the time and every bad thing that has happened is on him, feel free to do so. there's plenty of threads where you can do that all day long here.
Why are you acting like I'm someone dense that has no common sense about the potential of ownership influence?

This is literally my second post in this thread:
To add to this, because of how non-transparent the ownership/management of the Canucks have been, I'll entertain the idea that Lindenning is at the mercy of the ownership.

That means:

1) They were okay with signing their contracts knowing they couldn't take the direction they wanted with the team but agreed regardless (a mistake they made).
2) They tried to secure their positions by promising ownership that they COULD rebuild on the fly and make this team competitive in ~2-3 years.
3) They actually HAVE been given the freedom and autonomy to do what they want but are just genuinely terrible at their jobs.

Let's say either three is a possibility, how would someone still want them around knowing they either have no spines, no direction or no idea how to manage a hockey team?

maybe tone down the deflection too
 
  • Like
Reactions: y2kcanucks

Bad Goalie

Registered User
Jan 2, 2014
20,091
8,776
Pretty sure he got quoted in year 2 that he felt if Sutter hadn't gotten injured they would have made the playoffs? Otherwise that's mostly true, but indirectly it's everyone around him that's making the excuses. It seems like whenever questions need to be asked about why the season went so poorly Benning is nowhere to be found and instead they trot out Trevor Linden.

Think he watches how Trump trots out Sara Huckabee Sanders and the rest of his flunkies after every one of his tweets blows up and they have to try and spin what he actually meant when the truth is obviously exactly what he said. Duh, that's why he said it.
 

Bleach Clean

Registered User
Aug 9, 2006
27,053
6,617
The "FIRE BENNING" thread has been merged into the management discussion thread. Content is starting to overlap, so please keep it one place here. This is subject to change at a later date given new information re: Benning's contract status. For now, keep it here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DownGoesMcDavid

Bleach Clean

Registered User
Aug 9, 2006
27,053
6,617
i don't think benning blew the retool. i think he was given a kobayashi maru scenario that was never going to happen. his fate could only be avoided by getting unreasonably lucky on the draft. the sedins were never going to carry this team into the playoffs, and benning was not going to be able to acquire an entire second supporting line without giving up key rebuild assets. he had no chance except for hitting it big time in the draft

as it turns out he missed perhaps one player. arguably just one of ehlers and tkachuk in the line up right now would be the difference between this thread not existing and the current certainty people have benning is an idiot.

so i don't buy it. he can't be an idiot when he is within one decision of fine. he's like a lot of other gm's who have tried in similar spots with similar results.


That is complete rubbish.

Benning absolutely screwed up the retool. You're assumption is that it was an impossible task, it's not. Other teams have done it to extend their competitive window. That it was not done here is by no means an indication that it could not have been done here.

A retool is about execution. It's not just about getting lucky at the draft. It's about shrewed pro-scouting. It's about leveraging cap space to the hilt. It's about recognizing and exploiting weaknesses in other teams and market inefficiencies.

What stopped Benning from increasing his draft frequency to the maximum, in order to 'save' the retool? You say the draft was the only way he could have avoided this fate, then why did he devalue it?

I wished you had stopped there, but you delve further into this reductive rationale by saying that the opinion of Benning changed based an extra hit at the draft. Really? After all you've read, this is your summation? One decision away from being "fine"? Completely and utterly ridiculous. From the Kesler trade, to the Forsling deal, to Juolevi, to Eriksson to Gudbranson etc. etc... 1 draft decision from representing the everyday average GM? You've got to be having a laugh. That is inane reasoning.
 

valkynax

The LEEDAR
Sponsor
May 19, 2011
10,033
10,803
Burnaby
That is complete rubbish.

Benning absolutely screwed up the retool. You're assumption is that it was an impossible task, it's not. Other teams have done it to extend their competitive window. That it was not done here is by no means an indication that it could not have been done here.

A retool is about execution. It's not just about getting lucky at the draft. It's about shrewed pro-scouting. It's about leveraging cap space to the hilt. It's about recognizing and exploiting weaknesses in other teams and market inefficiencies.

What stopped Benning from increasing his draft frequency to the maximum, in order to 'save' the retool? You say the draft was the only way he could have avoided this fate, then why did he devalue it?

I wished you had stopped there, but you delve further into this reductive rationale by saying that the opinion of Benning changed based an extra hit at the draft. Really? After all you've read, this is your summation? One decision away from being "fine"? Completely and utterly ridiculous. From the Kesler trade, to the Forsling deal, to Juolevi, to Eriksson to Gudbranson etc. etc... 1 draft decision from representing the everyday average GM? You've got to be having a laugh. That is inane reasoning.

Agree with most of this.

There're just too many things Benning did that were...to put it modestly...sub-standard.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 0din

RandV

It's a wolf v2.0
Jul 29, 2003
26,859
4,951
Vancouver
Visit site
Adding to that, regardless of how 'bad' someone thinks the Canucks were before any team that's given the mandate to be competitive and is allowed to spend to the Cap should do better than back to back bottom 3 finishes. We've been losing to teams that have been spending $10-20 million less on their rosters.

If this was an impossible situation but Benning was at least modestly competent then we should be one of those hopeless playoff bubble teams.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2011 still hurts

RobertKron

Registered User
Sep 1, 2007
15,510
8,643
The sharks retooled their roster pretty well, Chicago has co sisterly retooled their roster.

And 1 bad desicion is ludicrous because common sense was take Ehlers/Nylander and take tkachuk and suddenly you don’t have to sign guys like gagner and vanek (though he’s been fine on the pp). Two major blunders that set us back years

Yeah, know who would have probably been helpful to weather these injuries? Nylander/Ehlers, Tkachuk/Sergachev. Hell, even just like McCann and Forsling. f***.
 

Peter10

Registered User
Dec 7, 2003
4,193
5,042
Germany
Not defending Benning but go back and watch the 2015 draft video. At pick 12 Benning says "we're not gonna get Boeser" when the Canucks weren't picking until 23. He definitely has a say in that pick. I'm sure Brackett was the one doing the leg work but they both zoned in on Boeser

Oh that is a good one, just rewatched...



However, it kind of proves that Benning is bad at math. After the 12th pick is done he tells Linden that they will take Brock Boeser, then he proceeds "There is no way Boeser is getting to us. We are still like thirteen more picks" (Is that even proper english? I dont know, I m not a native speaker). I could be wrong but I think the Canucks had the 23rd pick and not the 25th. ;)

Also, is it really common practice to openly discuss who you will pick with the other teams sitting next to them and all sorts of people walking by their table all the time? I mean after re-watching this, it doesnt even surprise me anymore how McPhee got wind of the Canucks desire to draft Pettersson and not Glass and consequently pulled the offer of their 6th ov and a 2nd for #5.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sunnyvale420

Bad Goalie

Registered User
Jan 2, 2014
20,091
8,776
One can discount slumps or hot streaks etc if they want. I'll look and see that after 30 games this team is remarkably similar to the past two seasons. Currently sitting 23rd in points percentage. I know the Benning defenders are pointing to injury but the injuries JUST happened. This was a bottom 10 team when healthy. And no Sutter and Gudbranson don't count as major injuries...or at least they shouldn't.

The twins, god help them they are trying but they don't have it anymore, are somehow managing a 50 point pace. Eriksson is on a mere 40 point pace for $6 mi and that may be a pace significantly swayed by a hot streak. As posted yesterday....Granlund, Vanek, and Gagner have 1 ES goal each in the last 20 games. Well 21 games now.

The team hasn't been injured that entire time. And even if they have these are the guys that were supposed to provide the offense! They aren't. IT's not because Horvat has been hurt for 2 freaking games that the team is where it is at. It's because there is NOTHING after Horvat, Boeser and hell even the twins. There is NOTHING on the blueline. There is NOTHING on the farm.

That's the issue. Not injuries. Which means after 4 off seasons the root cause is clearly management. There is literally no other conclusion that can be made.

And a couple of good prospects that pretty much every team can boast about does not change the fact that this team and management is bad. It does not change the fact that everytime management lays out a supposed direction or plan they completely and utterly fail to deliver on that plan. This years plan was to insulate the young guys with experienced and reliable vets. Lol.


They have built a team that relies COMPLETELY on a rookie straight out of college, 22 year old center, 27 year old D-man and getting a great goaltender performance on the night out of inconsistent goaltenders. That's embarrassing after 4 off seasons, consecutive bottom 3 finishes and 3 top 6 picks.

"There is NOTHING on the farm."

For 5 years including this one all I have heard from the same folks you guys are arguing/debating with here is, "Wait until next year. You guys haven't seen the prospects yet, but wait until you see what you have coming this year."

So when we report there is nothing here on the farm, we hear the farm is only for the parent club and it doesn't matter what happens there as long as prospects develop and Vancouver can call up players. I contend prospects can't develop in a vacuum. They have to have a solid support cast and the Vnacouver management has been very lacking on their end in that capacity. Since the Canucks have been here all the fan base has done is complain about the lack of talent that most of the call-ups reveal. Those call-ups are from that support cast and the better prospects.

It is the Vancouer management's job to draft their future and there are 7 rounds each season and there had been three functional drafts before that Iwill address beofre Benning and the 4 since he's been there. That's 7 years of drafting to eventually send to the farm. You combine these picks with previous picks still on the rise and up to 5 or 6 key positional vets and a few non-vet UFAs and you have a team.

First we heard you can't expect much right now because Gillis was a terrible drafter. Wait until you get Jim's picks.

The picks in Utica from those 3 non Benning years were: Jensen, Grenier, Labate, Corrado, Tommernes, Gaunce, Mallet, Shinkaruk, Cassels, Subban, Blomstrand, and Cederholm.
Horvat and Hutton made the Canucks out of camp. Good, that's what you hope for in your perfect plans.
Gaunce made it after the better part of 2 seasons in Utica.

Out of Benning's first year, Utica got one by default, Virtanen and Demko was the first actual Blue chip prospect to ever be assigned here to start his pro career. McCann was kept in Vancouver with Jake and then pissed away. We all know the Tryamkin and Forsling stories.Petit wasn't signed and Stewart has graced our presence for a brief moment in his first season and he's back again now due to our injury situation combined with Vancouver's and the new coach, Cull is acquiring ECHL PTOs to play in his stead due the 2 very poor outings he had when given a chance.

From year 2 nobody yet. Brock made the Canucks which you would want for a top prospect and Gaudette is still in college. Zhuukenov and Jasek are in Europe and neither is setting any worlds on fire. Both were eligible for the AHL this season. Neill and Olson were not signed.
He had no 2nd/3rd picks.

From year 3 Lockwood is in college. Juolevi is in Finland. Candella, Stukel and McKenzie are in Jrs. Abols is in Sweden. Stukel, Abols, and McKenzie were eligible for the AHL by age but 3 were sent back to Jrs and Abols to Sweden, so it's likely they are not considered high up on the prospect list or they would have been, as any other Canadian JR with high hopes, in the league at age 20.
He had no 2nd/4th picks.

Year 4 hasn't produce anything partly due to age, though Gunnarsson, Palmu, and Lakatos were eligible by age for the AHL. They are all in Europe. These 3 and Lind, Gadjovich, and Brassard will all be eligible next Fall. So we will see then.

So thus far the Comets have primarily been comprised of Gillis picks, only 3 of which are in Vancouver.

I'm counting 3 Gillis drafts. 3 are Canucks. Those drafts also provided 8 everyday players for the Comets.

Benning has had 4 drafts and thus far 2 picks are in Vancouver. The Comets could by age eligibility have had 13 players already, but have had only 2 of which one is here now. I'm not certain of those 13 what number will actually end up in Utica as they are not all progressing as was hoped.

As stated above the farm is comprised of draft picks, ELCs meted out to undrafted prospects with promise, prospects still in development on ELCs, RFA extensions, non-vet free agents, and up to 6 key positional ex-NHL or AHL vets. A parent club has a variety of ways it can decide to man that team based on the number of prospects it has there, how ready they might be for top jobs, and what positions are missing among the prospects that need to be filled in to provide them with the best opportunities to grow and develop into NHL players as soon as possible. Also in the parent club's planning has to be having players available who can fill in at the NHL level for injured players.

All of this post has been to show how the prospect pool in Utica has not been populated by high level selections. The odds of most of them up to this point making the NHL has been low. Demko is the one Blue chip, most would say can't miss player in the Comets' 5 yr history. Therefore after Benning fired the acting GM Lorne Henning after the second season, the Comets have not been blessed in the team building beyond the Vancouver property assigned here and attention to positional needs seems to have been overlooked. There has only been one bona fide play making center acquired for this program in the last 3 seasons, Chaput, and he spent all but 10 games in Vancouver last year and is back up there again. The middle season the role was given to Gaunce and he spent half of the season in Vancouver. The centers after those 2 were not good at all from a play making position.

Anybody knows for wings to be successful they require play makers. If the Comets are going to be receiving some top level prospects as we are hearing once again, centers will once again be required. You need a solid defensive D-man. A #1 good defending and puck moving D-man to also QB the PP. A couple of high scoring wings. If these guys are not in the prospect group they have to be acquired outside of the system in the same manner the other 3o NHL teams stock their farms.

Jim hadn't paid enough attention to his duties here. One man can't oversee two teams at the same time. Henning had done it superbly for 2 seasons. Benning not so much for 2 seasons. He seemed to admit that and assigned GM Johnson to the job here and he has been equal to or worse than Jim at the job. Thus the Comets are currently a team in disarray being held together by one veteran D-man, a high scoring forward, a bunch of grinders, and some kids going out there every shift on a wing and a prayer hoping they don't get scored on again. The team really goes in the direction their goalie is going. Without headstanding goaltending this team has little chance. With their injuries compounded by Vancouver's the team has been decimated. Vancouver loses it's players and calls up a replacement. ALL they lost is the guy from their lineup who's hurt. When the Comet have 8 injuries, they lose 8 guys. Then they send up 3 more to replace the Canucks' losses and they are down 11. Trade one of their players and get no one back for them and they are down 12. Let another leave the team due to his dis pleasure at how he was being used or rather not being used and it's 13. You guys are feeling like your season may go down the tubes due to 4? injuries. Can you imagine the Canucks attempting to play games in the NHL while missing 13 of your game night 18 players???? It's unimaginable how this team is supposed to survive every night let alone compete. This team is about to sink into the abyss.

GM Johnson should be living on the phone, canvasing every AHL team, scouring the European rosters, looking for recent NHL/AHL releases and try to find 3 or 4 guys to become a part of his team for the remainder of this season. They need to be able to have some way to cobble together a team that can hold on until injured players return at both levels enabling them to put a full team back together and maybe put on a push for the final playoff spot. You know the line. "Once you get in, you never know what might happen!"
 

krutovsdonut

eeyore
Sep 25, 2016
16,870
9,555
That is complete rubbish.

Benning absolutely screwed up the retool. You're assumption is that it was an impossible task, it's not. Other teams have done it to extend their competitive window. That it was not done here is by no means an indication that it could not have been done here.

A retool is about execution. It's not just about getting lucky at the draft. It's about shrewed pro-scouting. It's about leveraging cap space to the hilt. It's about recognizing and exploiting weaknesses in other teams and market inefficiencies.

What stopped Benning from increasing his draft frequency to the maximum, in order to 'save' the retool? You say the draft was the only way he could have avoided this fate, then why did he devalue it?

I wished you had stopped there, but you delve further into this reductive rationale by saying that the opinion of Benning changed based an extra hit at the draft. Really? After all you've read, this is your summation? One decision away from being "fine"? Completely and utterly ridiculous. From the Kesler trade, to the Forsling deal, to Juolevi, to Eriksson to Gudbranson etc. etc... 1 draft decision from representing the everyday average GM? You've got to be having a laugh. That is inane reasoning.

and i wish you'd have stopped with a simple "i disagree". i find your endless dogged debating of someone whose position you usually don't understand, never agree with even a little, and constantly misstate to suit your counter-arguments to be silly. i am not interested in being recast into your molds all the time, and i dislike your need to tack on pointless provocative statements to your boring repetitions of old points. "that is insane reasoning" really didn't help your post there and neither did "that is complete rubbish". it's tiresome. grow up.

it is pretty clear by now that your expectations on results from signing free agents and trading and drafting and juggling cap space in benning's situation do not match mine. even if i hold benning fully accountable for decisions i think were pushed on him by ownership, i think that holds true. i look at other gm's attempts to do things and i look at results over years and it has always seemed to me like hockey managing consistently is hard, and it is especially hard when you have a bad team, let alone when you have a bad team with a declining core signed longterm. i find your attempts to argue otherwise by endlessly repeating the same grievances to be pedantic. you know full well we can break down all your many loaded interpretations of benning moves and debate each of them. yet still you persist in listing them off trumphantly in every post as if you have some unassailable facts at hand instead of a confection of inflated suppositions honed to perfection by a group of like minded grousers.

in my post that you allegedly find to be complete rubbish, but then spend 4 paragraphs disputing without actually answering, i'm simply saying that i think the retool was never realistically possible the way it turned out the sedins were going to play, and that if we had ehlers on this team instead of virtanen, and changed nothing else there's be no fire benning thread. that goes for nylander. or tkachuk. i am not even saying benning made the wrong picks by the way. i am just saying if he had any one of those players right now, he'd be fine jobwise. i am not sure what would slake the thirst of this thread i now find myself for his head, but i think the general level of fire benning discourse would be closer to after the previous nashville game than this one.

so far as i can tell your response doesn't answer or engage with either of those arguments other than throwing out a borderline rhetorical question on a random point tangentially related to one of them. you just repeat the official management thread dogma in shorthand and say i am wrong. whatever. thanks for responding. have a cookie.

anyway, it doesn't much matter what i think about benning. i prefer to evaluate talent i can see manifested in front of me rather than watch smoke signals to try to understand why management did things and whether they are good. as regard management, what we both think does not matter. what has always mattered is the owner and the zeitgeist among mainstream canuck fans and when the owner or fans' displeasure with benning gets strong enough he goes, regardless of whether this is all his "fault" or not. in that regard sucking this bad in year 4 is pushing his luck and getting a year 5 to try again is a stretch without something tangibly good to expect, regardless of whether that is his fault. so perhaps you guys are on the side of history on this. we'll see. what you guys probably need to hope for is more injuries to key young players and prospects, or a drop off in their performance. that will definitely help get benning fired. i don't hope for it myself.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Peter10

Registered User
Dec 7, 2003
4,193
5,042
Germany
"There is NOTHING on the farm."
too long to quote... :)

Well said Bad Goalie. I guess its all part of the "winning environment" Linden and Benning are creating since they took over 3 1/2 years ago. It is to be expected however, they cant even properly manage the big club so its no surprise they screw up the farm as well.

On a side note, I think it will become more and more difficult for AHL team to field attractive teams though (at least when it comes to exciting young players). There are more and more good players choosing the college route, euro players remain in Europe and often go straight to the NHL afterwards and with the NHL becoming a younger league as well you see junior players going skipping AHL and going straight to the NHL. The long glorified Wings way to cook prospects in the AHL for several years appears on its way to become outdated.
 

Megaterio Llamas

el rey del mambo
Oct 29, 2011
11,235
5,956
North Shore
I've just been told that a member of the Canucks alumni is considering joining the forum here to finally shed some light on the inner workings of the organization. We can speculate all we want to about who is responsible for what and how we should apportion blame but beyond the occasional leak we really don't know what goes on behind the curtain. Well perhaps now we may just finally have our eyewitness, somebody who has had the proverbial 'beer with Francesco', someone who knows how things work because he's been there in the engine room; at alumni charity games, barbecues and golf tournaments where the key decisions are made.

This is nowhere near a sure thing yet and probably more arm twisting will be needed but he seems poised to spill the beans, so to speak. He has already shared some juicy tidbits detailing the conversations that led to the Nic Dowd acquisition. I wish I could say more now, but, stay tuned ;)
 

Nuckles

_________
Apr 27, 2010
28,329
3,446
heck
According to reddit there's a season ticket holder event this Saturday

Season Ticket Member Exclusive Event on Saturday, December 16. 11:30AM as the coaching staff would like to extend the opportunity to watch the Canucks practice as they prepare for Sunday's game against the Calgary Flames.

Immediately following the practice you will get to hear directly from Canucks Assistant General Manager John Weisbrod as Sportsnet 650's Joey Kenward hosts a 20-minute segment.

You will then have an hour and a half to meet some of your favorite Canucks players. At our different stations you can challenge them to an interactive arcade game, have a fun photo opportunity, or get their autograph.

Our Hospitality team will provide family-friendly catered food for you to enjoy from 11:30AM to 2:30PM. Complimentary underground parking will be available at Rogers Arena starting at 11:30AM (accessible via Griffiths Way)

Since this is a live Canucks practice, we ask that you respect the players, coaching staff, and media and keep distractions to a minimum while viewing the drills.

Benning and Linden continue to avoid the STHs because they are spineless :laugh:
 

Megaterio Llamas

el rey del mambo
Oct 29, 2011
11,235
5,956
North Shore
According to reddit there's a season ticket holder event this Saturday



Benning and Linden continue to avoid the STHs because they are spineless :laugh:
Those things can be hilarious. At the one in the summer of 2016 Linden was trying to soft sell the need for a 'reset' and this big dumb as a sack of rocks Indo Canadian dude stands up and starts ranting about how he doesn't like the way everyone is talking about the future here and nobody's talking about the cup.

That guys cup rant in 2016 was one of the funniest things I have seen recently lol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ryp37

RobertKron

Registered User
Sep 1, 2007
15,510
8,643
and i wish you'd have stopped with a simple "i disagree". i find your endless dogged debating of someone whose position you usually don't understand, never agree with even a little, and constantly misstate to suit your counter-arguments to be silly. i am not interested in being recast into your molds all the time, and i dislike your need to tack on pointless provocative statements to your boring repetitions of old points. "that is insane reasoning" really didn't help your post there and neither did "that is complete rubbish". it's tiresome. grow up.

it is pretty clear by now that your expectations on results from signing free agents and trading and drafting and juggling cap space in benning's situation do not match mine. even if i hold benning fully accountable for decisions i think were pushed on him by ownership, i think that holds true. i look at other gm's attempts to do things and i look at results over years and it has always seemed to me like hockey managing consistently is hard, and it is especially hard when you have a bad team, let alone when you have a bad team with a declining core signed longterm. i find your attempts to argue otherwise by endlessly repeating the same grievances to be pedantic. you know full well we can break down all your many loaded interpretations of benning moves and debate each of them. yet still you persist in listing them off trumphantly in every post as if you have some unassailable facts at hand instead of a confection of inflated suppositions honed to perfection by a group of like minded grousers.

in my post that you allegedly find to be complete rubbish, but then spend 4 paragraphs disputing without actually answering, i'm simply saying that i think the retool was never realistically possible the way it turned out the sedins were going to play, and that if we had ehlers on this team instead of virtanen, and changed nothing else there's be no fire benning thread. that goes for nylander. or tkachuk. i am not even saying benning made the wrong picks by the way. i am just saying if he had any one of those players right now, he'd be fine jobwise. i am not sure what would slake the thirst of this thread i now find myself for his head, but i think the general level of fire benning discourse would be closer to after the previous nashville game than this one.

so far as i can tell your response doesn't answer or engage with either of those arguments other than throwing out a borderline rhetorical question on a random point tangentially related to one of them. you just repeat the official management thread dogma in shorthand and say i am wrong. whatever. thanks for responding. have a cookie.

anyway, it doesn't much matter what i think about benning. i prefer to evaluate talent i can see manifested in front of me rather than watch smoke signals to try to understand why management did things and whether they are good. as regard management, what we both think does not matter. what has always mattered is the owner and the zeitgeist among mainstream canuck fans and when the owner or fans' displeasure with benning gets strong enough he goes, regardless of whether this is all his "fault" or not. in that regard sucking this bad in year 4 is pushing his luck and getting a year 5 to try again is a stretch without something tangibly good to expect, regardless of whether that is his fault. so perhaps you guys are on the side of history on this. we'll see. what you guys probably need to hope for is more injuries to key young players and prospects, or a drop off in their performance. that will definitely help get benning fired. i don't hope for it myself.

Lol
 

Bleach Clean

Registered User
Aug 9, 2006
27,053
6,617
and i wish you'd have stopped with a simple "i disagree". i find your endless dogged debating of someone whose position you usually don't understand, never agree with even a little, and constantly misstate to suit your counter-arguments to be silly.
...

it is pretty clear by now that your expectations on results from signing free agents and trading and drafting and juggling cap space in benning's situation do not match mine. even if i hold benning fully accountable for decisions i think were pushed on him by ownership, i think that holds true. i look at other gm's attempts to do things and i look at results over years and it has always seemed to me like hockey managing consistently is hard, and it is especially hard when you have a bad team, let alone when you have a bad team with a declining core signed longterm. i find your attempts to argue otherwise by endlessly repeating the same grievances to be pedantic. you know full well we can break down all your many loaded interpretations of benning moves and debate each of them. yet still you persist in listing them off trumphantly in every post as if you have some unassailable facts at hand instead of a confection of inflated suppositions honed to perfection by a group of like minded grousers.


Please, break down my "loaded interpretations". I welcome it. I encourage it. It will not stop me from assailing your posts with full volley should I suspect them to be illogical. That will remain.

Please also point out how I have misstated your position. This I'd like to hear/read.

On Benning's accountability knowing that "decisions were pushed on him by ownership". What are you guessing at here? How do you know they were pushed upon him. What are these decisions? If the framework of a retool was insisted upon by ownership, it's still up to Benning to execute that vision how he sees fit. Agree/disagree?


in my post that you allegedly find to be complete rubbish, but then spend 4 paragraphs disputing without actually answering, i'm simply saying that i think the retool was never realistically possible the way it turned out the sedins were going to play, and that if we had ehlers on this team instead of virtanen, and changed nothing else there's be no fire benning thread. that goes for nylander. or tkachuk. i am not even saying benning made the wrong picks by the way. i am just saying if he had any one of those players right now, he'd be fine jobwise. i am not sure what would slake the thirst of this thread i now find myself for his head, but i think the general level of fire benning discourse would be closer to after the previous nashville game than this one.

so far as i can tell your response doesn't answer or engage with either of those arguments other than throwing out a borderline rhetorical question on a random point tangentially related to one of them. you just repeat the official management thread dogma in shorthand and say i am wrong. whatever. thanks for responding. have a cookie.


"A retool was never realistically possible". My answer: Retools are possible (in the obvious sense with examples around the league) and this Sedin situation is no different than what SJ has experienced with Marleau+Thornton. Over to you.

"If we had Nylander (for example) on this team, there'd be no fire Benning thread/his job would be fine. My answer: I disagree on both counts. His job would still be in jeopardy because the on-ice product does not dramatically change with Nylander here. Further, a 3rd year in the basement would likely result in a thread like this. Over to you.


anyway, it doesn't much matter what i think about benning. i prefer to evaluate talent i can see manifested in front of me rather than watch smoke signals to try to understand why management did things and whether they are good. ...


I'm repeating your words here so I don't "misstate" your argument: You evaluate the team as it is on the ice, and do not try to understand why management did things and whether they are good? Is this what you meant to say?
 
Last edited:

Jyrki21

2021-12-05
Sponsor
The Canucks rebuild arguably started in 2013 with the trading of Schneider, 2014 trading of Luongo and Kesler 25th finish. etc. We will be heading into year 6 with another top 5 pick from the 2018 draft.

They are currently on track for their 4th terrible year in the last 5 years. We are in the same territory as the intentionally bad tank teams, only we aren't trying to tank.
And spending to the cap, which is good for the economy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Megaterio Llamas

Melvin

21/12/05
Sep 29, 2017
15,198
28,055
Montreal, QC
Trade kesler for a high pick or a really good near NHL ready prospect, draft Ehlers, and the retool would have been successful. To argue that it couldn't have been is laughable. We botched it with the 2014 draft and the kesler trade. End of story.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad