News Article: Ranking Each Fanbases Confidence in Front Office

[PG Canuck]

Las Vegas has yet to name its management group! We won't make the top 30 next year.

Worst part is, what self respecting solid GM would want to walk into this hot mess once Benning is done. I am also concerned that ownership a prior meddling will allow this to continue longer then necessary due to the perceived optics of firing anouther GM and the ownership stake general involvement.

Sigh

The next GM just has to be half-competent and he'll be regarded as a saviour.

I think GM's will be jumping at the Canucks GM vacancy for that reason alone.

 

[quat]

yes sure?

widely known fact that 1.5 top9 top5 D and starting GK per year is considered good drafting.

in 3 drafts. Virtanen 2-3RW McCann 2C Demko 1GK Boeser 1-2RW Juolevi 1-2LD Tryamkin 5D Baertschi 2LW......would have to consider that excellent.....NO?

Ehlers and Nylander???? what about Fleury and Dal Colle and Ritchie.? you can say this every draft......Ehlers is gonna be an electrifying player for Wpg......its too bad....whatever..... should have drafted Karlsson or Kopitar??
Barbashev....now thats funny. McCann was a stud pick up.
lol on Tkachuk also.....without a doubt he's got some Hodgson skating issues and to boot his dad is Keith Tkachuk a widely known A hole.....probably dodged a bullet there despite the package of player he is. Lindros 2.0??? way too early to say went Rogue imo.

statistically were doing excellent at drafting. Development wise.....Markstrom Horvat Virtanen Hutton and Gaunce are progressing nicely and Travis Green is getting NHL considerations so he's obviously doing a good job.

Van fans are hilarious.

So, you've cherry picked the only positive things that have happened since Benning, and ignored the complete chaos he's been party to, and then you mock fans who don't find him competent?

Plus, out of the "good stuff", Horvat, Hutton and Gaunce were all drafted by Gillis and Green was brought in by him. I'm a fan who actually likes Virtanen and feel it's way to early to be dumping on him. The Juolevi pick is decent as well, but lauding a guy for picking at #5 is a bit over the top imo.

The Pedan trade was decent, but then coach Willie plays him at forward, you know, giving the kid a real confidence booster. It's like every positive move is met by four below average to out right poor moves.

I simply don't understand anyone who follows hockey finding this entire collection of management worthy of respect. Not talking about their personalities ... simply their abilities in their respective jobs.

 

[quat]

While we are at it, rank our media at 30th too.

Idiots.

Seriously. It's a day of "winning"

 

[Zarpan]

My guess the oiler fans were asked this question right after they gave away hall for a buck 99 and trading stamps

Yeah, that's why Montreal is ranked very low as well. Survey was after the Subban deal.

 

[Scurr]

How can you be so confident? He already did just 12 days ago with that awful contract handed out to Eriksson that even Boston wasn't stupid enough to give.

You like that Backes contract more?

I don't mind the Eriksson contract. He projects to age better than Burrows imo.

 

[y2kcanucks]

You like that Backes contract more?

I don't mind the Eriksson contract. He projects to age better than Burrows imo.

Because his 0.59PPG in the 3 years leading up to the 15-16 season inspires that kind of confidence?

No I don't like the Backes contract, but that doesn't mean the Eriksson contract wasn't completely idiotic.

 

[Raistlin]

Because his 0.59PPG in the 3 years leading up to the 15-16 season inspires that kind of confidence?

No I don't like the Backes contract, but that doesn't mean the Eriksson contract wasn't completely idiotic.

for all your doom-is-nigh talk of us missing out on Tkachuk, you're only expecting him to be a 30/30 guy? over a Dan Hamhuis floor guy? I'm disappointed. I was very vocal about Benning picking the wrong Knight also, but after all that has transpired, even I can see that Juolevi was the right move. Its gutsy too, he knows its not a sexy pick, he knows he's in hot water, its a long term pick. How many young defensemen are for sale at a reasonable price these days? After a while you got to realize you have to pay the price at current market value. Draft a 1A goalie in the early second round, and a top Defensemen in around 5-7.

Nothing wrong with Eriksson's contract, maybe a bit long, but its not egregious. We are retooling whether the fans like it or not, in that context, its a good move paying a pro's pro @6x6.

 

[MikeK]

Not sure how some can disagree with the list. Remove your Canuck Shielded glasses for a moment and tell us again that we're not near the bottom of just about every category... and yes, even drafting and development. This team is going near where with a bunch of buffoons driving the bus.

 

[oceanchild]

for all your doom-is-nigh talk of us missing out on Tkachuk, you're only expecting him to be a 30/30 guy? over a Dan Hamhuis floor guy? I'm disappointed. I was very vocal about Benning picking the wrong Knight also, but after all that has transpired, even I can see that Juolevi was the right move. Its gutsy too, he knows its not a sexy pick, he knows he's in hot water, its a long term pick. How many young defensemen are for sale at a reasonable price these days? After a while you got to realize you have to pay the price at current market value. Draft a 1A goalie in the early second round, and a top Defensemen in around 5-7.

Nothing wrong with Eriksson's contract, maybe a bit long, but its not egregious. We are retooling whether the fans like it or not, in that context, its a good move paying a pro's pro @6x6.

I think your romanticising it to call the pick gutsy. It's in like with the high risk behaviour we have seen with this GM constantly and we have yet to see a pay off. Trading a top 4 dman in Garrison for a second and then trading it for Vey with the thought he would pan out even though his waiver eligibility was up - Risky. Trading for Sutter even though Bonino had the better contract and had chemistry - risky. Trading young valuable assets for Gunderbranson thinking he had reached a point in his development to move forward risky (and desperate in the same way the oilers are): labelling Shinkarik a bust an trading him for a marginal 4th liner because they are so convinced he has no upside - risky.

This Managament group has done nothing but play the lotto since they got her and that's why the continue to bleed assets on trades. Instead of solid asset management they keep playing to be the smartest people in the room and making bold moves on high risk situations. In the many discussions on the forum i have read some really solid arguments that trying to outsmart other GMs on draft day usually is a poor move. I don't hate the pick, but it was the wrong pick. The better player went to Calgary and even if joulevi becomes a star this management continues to take unnecessary risk. It's not uncommon for a dman taking in the top 5 or so to bust it be an average NHLer. I would strongly prefer we load up on picks and draft dman by volume due to the volatility of there development. We passed on a likely first liner who is at his best in the dirty areas. Those are every bit as valuable as mid tier dman.

 

[tantalum]

200 people is perfectly fine for a meaningful survey. And really this survey is also likely filled out by people who follow hockey more than the norm and regularly read the hockey news and keep up with news around the league. It is representative of what people think of this management group around the league and, quite honestly, that includes the various experts and pundits. The mounting evidence of incompetence is damning.

I also get somewhat annoyed when people rattle off a handful of prospects to say "see he's doing a good job!". Well he better have some good prospects with a #6 and #5 overall pick the last 3 drafts. However just about every team can rattle off a handful of prospects that are really promising. The issue is what is after those handful of prospects that show this promise? For the canucks it's absolutely nothing and much of that is due to the number of picks that have been traded and the ones not gained that could have been. This is a problem, because as much as those handful of prospects look promising some are likely to bust. You do need volume or to be extremely lucky.

 

[iFan]

It has a lot to do with front office. These guys aren't making the moves for ole Jim and Trev, who have reminded us quite a few times they have full control

It doesn't matter who the GM is with the owners calling the shots, owners will over ride an GM, Gillies wanted to do a rebuild and right after he was on team1040 saying the team needs a rebuild he was let go shortly after.

 

[coldsteel79]

The next GM just has to be half-competent and he'll be regarded as a saviour.

I think GM's will be jumping at the Canucks GM vacancy for that reason alone.

They'll be jumping at it because of bennings drafting just like gillis benefitted from previous regimes drafting

 

[Hit the post]

They'll be jumping at it because of bennings drafting just like gillis benefitted from previous regimes drafting

As the cliche' goes, drafting is a means to an end but not an end in itself.

 

[digger18]

I'm a little surprised with the LA and Chicago rankings. How can you not be pleased with 3 cups in six seasons or 2 cups in 4 seasons? Chicago in particular manages to be a cup favourite every year even when a few of their bottom 9 forwards get picked clean almost every off season. Id say their management group has been hands down the best in the league for a while now.

 

[digger18]

Definitely agree with the Canucks 30th placement. I'm not certain this roster would even make the KHL playoffs at this point.

 

[Evolu7ion]

You can't look at one or two good picks and call it good drafting. You have to look at total yield adjusted for where the team finished in the standings.

In two of three seasons during Benning's drafting tenure the Canucks have been bottom 6 in the league, and what do they have to show for it? Virtanen, Juolevi, Demko, Tryamkin, Boeser, and then some mid to low grade prospects. The total yield should be a lot higher imo, that simply isn't good enough for three years, two of which the team was complete and utter ****. Now I don't think they deserve to be last in the league, but definitely bottom half of the league, which is unfortunate considering this team is in desperate need of a rebuild, and has a president who is preaching the importance of building through the draft.

 

[MS]

I also get somewhat annoyed when people rattle off a handful of prospects to say "see he's doing a good job!". Well he better have some good prospects with a #6 and #5 overall pick the last 3 drafts. However just about every team can rattle off a handful of prospects that are really promising. The issue is what is after those handful of prospects that show this promise? For the canucks it's absolutely nothing and much of that is due to the number of picks that have been traded and the ones not gained that could have been. This is a problem, because as much as those handful of prospects look promising some are likely to bust. You do need volume or to be extremely lucky.

You can't look at one or two good picks and call it good drafting. You have to look at total yield adjusted for where the team finished in the standings.

In two of three seasons during Benning's drafting tenure the Canucks have been bottom 6 in the league, and what do they have to show for it? Virtanen, Juolevi, Demko, Tryamkin, Boeser, and then some mid to low grade prospects. The total yield should be a lot higher imo, that simply isn't good enough for three years, two of which the team was complete and utter ****. Now I don't think they deserve to be last in the league, but definitely bottom half of the league, which is unfortunate considering this team is in desperate need of a rebuild, and has a president who is preaching the importance of building through the draft.

Yeah, exactly.

There seems to be this weird phenomenon where people list the prospects Benning has drafted as though he's made them appear out of thin air, as opposed to taken them with high picks that every team gets, every year. And that without Benning, we'd have no prospects at all from those drafts, somehow.

If we'd taken the preferred fan picks of Nylander/Konecny/Tkachuk over the past two years, is the team in any worse of a situation? Nope.

And have we really got much past the first round? A good goalie prospect and a Russian depth defensive prospect, and after that a whole lot of nothing.

I wouldn't say our drafting has been 'terrible' or anything, but when you factor in the amount of picks we've squandered it certainly hasn't been great, and doesn't show Benning to be some sort of drafting genius. At all.

 

[Jabba The Hutton]

You can't look at one or two good picks and call it good drafting. You have to look at total yield adjusted for where the team finished in the standings.

In two of three seasons during Benning's drafting tenure the Canucks have been bottom 6 in the league, and what do they have to show for it? Virtanen, Juolevi, Demko, Tryamkin, Boeser, and then some mid to low grade prospects. The total yield should be a lot higher imo, that simply isn't good enough for three years, two of which the team was complete and utter ****. Now I don't think they deserve to be last in the league, but definitely bottom half of the league, which is unfortunate considering this team is in desperate need of a rebuild, and has a president who is preaching the importance of building through the draft.

In 2014, we drafted Virtanen, McCann, and Tryamkin, who have all proven they can play in the NHL. I'm not even mentioning Demko, who everyone seems to love here. I think our draft haul is better there than most teams except for:
Florida, Buffalo, Edmonton, Bennett (top 4)
Toronto, Winnipeg (top 10)
Detroit, St. Louis, Boston (great pick in 1st round)

These 9 teams also have only one notable player in the NHL (albeit all of them are top 6 Fwd and Ekblad), whereas we drafted 3 (2 top 9 Fwds and a top 6 D).

I would conclude that with 2014 draft that we are definitely on par if not better than Nashville (Fiala and Arvidsson). So that makes us 10th/11th in draft haul, without "adjusting for position" as you said. How much would be adjust for the top 4/5 teams, since there was a clear tier (or two good tiers) of players there?

Kinda tough to evaluate 2015 right now, but Boeser seems like he in on pace with some of the greatest to come out of NoDak. We also made the playoffs that year and re-drafts have Boeser going higher in the draft now.

2016 had us pick 5th again, right outside of the top tier of 3 players, despite that we came 3rd last.

I think we have had good drafting and quite a bit of bad luck based on our draft position in lottery and how the eligible player tiers have fallen in the draft.

Now that we have built a better base of younger players, we can afford to trade a few vets on the team at the deadline for picks. It's too bad because I fear the expansion will actually bring down prices at the deadline since these players acquired are more pure rentals since contending teams do not have space to protect them. It could be the opposite effect however if they don't have the eligible players needed to be exposed....

 

[kurt]

Just came across an article in the Province suggesting that the results may be due to the weather. Good weather in Tampa = Support team. Poor summer weather in Vancouver = no team support.

lol Seems legit.

Haha, got a link? Probably has more to do with the franchise being statistically one of the biggest losers in the history of the NHL, and nothing but more losing on the horizon.

 

[VanJack]

Definitely agree with the Canucks 30th placement. I'm not certain this roster would even make the KHL playoffs at this point.

Wow!...30th...dead-last in terms of fan confidence in the front office...is the Aquaman listening?.....obviously this management tandem has to be on the shortest leash in entire NHL...no wonder Jimbo is in a "win-now" mode.....another 28th place melt-down and it's probably curtains for the current regime.

 

[quat]

Haha, got a link? Probably has more to do with the franchise being statistically one of the biggest losers in the history of the NHL, and nothing but more losing on the horizon.

With teams like the Lightning, who most would say are well run, and the Panthers, who many are watching to see if they are on the right course, landing at the top of the list, we could easily also say that the sunshine is giving people a better disposition. Certainly the so-far-rainy summer here in Vancouver could be used to further confirm this.

http://theprovince.com/sports/hockey/nhl/vancouver-canucks/do-canucks-fans-really-hate-their-front-office

While I guess the writer is hopefully being ironic, it's a pretty lame comparison ... not unlike the science writer from the Economist comparing the Fukushima disaster to radiation caused by dumping a lot of bananas into the ocean. (bananas have low levels of radiation due to the decay of potassium ...)

 

[Rotting Corpse*]

Pretty interesting. It's hard to disagree too much with this list aside from some weirdly wrong comments like on Garrison.

As far as confidence in our drafting goes, it's looking to me more and more like we had righted the ship after Eric Crawford was given full autonomy over picks in advance of the 2013 draft, so canning him and moving the drafting in another direction looks extremely questionable. The two drafts that were basically under Crawford are both looking excellent, while 2015 is off to a pretty meh start. Having said that, the one excellent pick of Boeser is probably enough that we shouldn't be 29th.

Boston though ...

 

[tantalum]

btw some opposition fans highjacked the Province poll and blasted it with 10s in the hopes the canucks never get rid of this management team....

 

[WTG]

btw some opposition fans highjacked the Province poll and blasted it with 10s in the hopes the canucks never get rid of this management team....

Ones are leading the a long way. Although I a, surprised by the number of 7s and 8s cap management is getting.

Management has been god awful at cap amazement

 

[canuckfan75]

It is my opinion that all though everyone thinks the Canucks are doomed this upcoming season.. if they stay healthy they will be in the running for a playoff spot in March / early April.


if they do not make the playoffs. or the season goes off the rails like this past year

I would say the Willie will be let go. But Jim Benning will get