The Picks that were Traded/Acquired

[CanaFan]

it was a shuffle and a gamble for edmonton, who had nothing to lose by taking on kassian

edmonton and kassian are both rehab projects so its a poetic fit

why was Edmonton willing to "gamble" when it was Montreal making the trade but no one was willing to "gamble" when it was Benning 6 months earlier?

Still waiting for a half-sensible explanation for why Kassian had negative value when he was "only" in stage 1 rehab but had more value after a highly publicized MVA and stage 2 rehab.

Until I hear one it simply looks like another (of many) cases where Benning got schooled by another GM who dictated the terms of the trade and Benning blinked.

Not the worst trade of all time mind you - the 5th is after all just a 5th - but it is emblematic of a much larger problem with Benning's ability to execute trades.

 

[RandV]

You are conveniently neglecting more than a few things:

- Dorsett was coming off a solid season, especially by his standards. I wouldn't have offered in as long a term, however the contract itself is scarily an overpaidment. Sbisa was a silly gamble, I'll concede.

Derek Dorsett: 79-7-18-25, signed contract: 4 years @ 2.65M
Shawn Matthias: 78-18-9-27, signed contract: 1 year @ $2.3M
Brad Richardson: 45-8-13-21, signed contract: 3 years @ $2.08M
Mike Santorelli*: 49-10-18-28, signed contract: 1 year @ $1.5M

At the time we signed him Dorsett was temporarily our 4th highest paid forward, and there's a handful of better 3rd line players that Jimbo let walk to far better contracts. Whether or not it's scarcely an over payment, it was a dumb move to let a bunch of decent 3rd liners walk to overpay a 4th liner.

I'd refute the scarcely part as well, simply because while it has the same overall effect on the cap you're missing by a much bigger margin if you overpay your 4th liner by $650K+ than if you overpay a top 6 guy by that amount.

 

[F A N]

Derek Dorsett: 79-7-18-25, signed contract: 4 years @ 2.65M
Shawn Matthias: 78-18-9-27, signed contract: 1 year @ $2.3M
Brad Richardson: 45-8-13-21, signed contract: 3 years @ $2.08M
Mike Santorelli*: 49-10-18-28, signed contract: 1 year @ $1.5M

At the time we signed him Dorsett was temporarily our 4th highest paid forward, and there's a handful of better 3rd line players that Jimbo let walk to far better contracts. Whether or not it's scarcely an over payment, it was a dumb move to let a bunch of decent 3rd liners walk to overpay a 4th liner.

Dorsett was never our 4th highest paid forward: Henrik, Daniel, Vrbata, and Burrows were far ahead. But your point still stands, it's not really wise to spend so much on a Dorsett type player and I hope Benning has learned his lesson.

As for the guys you listed, none of those guys can be said to have established themselves as 3rd line players. Matthias had a career year but he has never established himself as a 3rd line player in any season. Richardson had a career year too but he too has been bouncing around the 3rd and 4th line. Furthermore, he was 30 and injury prone. Ya he played 82 games last season, but you can't expect that given his injury troubles the previous few seasons. As for Santorelli. Benning did offer him a contract. He just didn't offer Santorelli the two year contract Santorelli wanted. At the end of the day Santorelli didn't get a two year contract.

 

[James Underbuss*]

why was Edmonton willing to "gamble" when it was Montreal making the trade but no one was willing to "gamble" when it was Benning 6 months earlier?

Still waiting for a half-sensible explanation for why Kassian had negative value when he was "only" in stage 1 rehab but had more value after a highly publicized MVA and stage 2 rehab.

Until I hear one it simply looks like another (of many) cases where Benning got schooled by another GM who dictated the terms of the trade and Benning blinked.

Not the worst trade of all time mind you - the 5th is after all just a 5th - but it is emblematic of a much larger problem with Benning's ability to execute trades.

Who knows? Maybe Benning didn't want to trade Kassian within the division? Benning was obviously looking to get some sandpaper into the lineup maybe edmonton didn't have what he wanted? I could go on and on with the speculation.

To sit here for months on end looking in the rearview is not healthy though. Nobody knows the infinite variations that play into a teams management, let alone all the teams. Then factor in the timing, needs, wants, rivalries.....nobody knows dude.

 

[CanaFan]

Who knows? Maybe Benning didn't want to trade Kassian within the division? Benning was obviously looking to get some sandpaper into the lineup maybe edmonton didn't have what he wanted? I could go on and on with the speculation.

To sit here for months on end looking in the rearview is not healthy though. Nobody knows the infinite variations that play into a teams management, let alone all the teams. Then factor in the timing, needs, wants, rivalries.....nobody knows dude.

Sure, I buy both of those as possibilities. But then I hear it parroted around here as some sort of gospel fact that *no one wanted Kassian* whenever the trade is critiqued. Which to me is a denial of evidence argument and shifts the onus off of Benning and his track record of misvaluing trades. Like I say it isn't the biggest waste of assets ever however it was most definitely a waste and the fact that people still do mental gymnastics to justify it is baffling.

 

[mathonwy]

Who knows? Maybe Benning didn't want to trade Kassian within the division? Benning was obviously looking to get some sandpaper into the lineup maybe edmonton didn't have what he wanted? I could go on and on with the speculation.

To sit here for months on end looking in the rearview is not healthy though. Nobody knows the infinite variations that play into a teams management, let alone all the teams. Then factor in the timing, needs, wants, rivalries.....nobody knows dude.

So your final argument is...

"Nobody knows"

Very apt considering your username.

The problem with your argument is that it's wrong and all one needs to do is analyze the chain of events together with management's general decision making disabilities and make an intelligent deduction from that analysis.

There aren't infinite variations as Jimbo and company aren't all that sophisticated. There's at best three.... and that would be generous.

And with regards to timing, needs, wants, rivalries...

Timing - Jimbo doesn't care about timing which is why he's trading Shinkaruk for Granlund at the goddamn TDL and giving Dorsett and Sbisa raises without seeing 1 minute of playoff action from either player.

Needs - Jimbo doesn't care about needs. Jimbo cares about getting players that are good in scrums, can rip the puck and are culture carriers.

Wants - Everyone already knows first hand what Jimbo wants because all you gotta do is ask him.

Rivalries - The only rivalry that seems to be something is the one between Franky A and Tom G in Dallas. We're trading with Edmonton and Calgary like it's no thing and Jimbo paid Bergevin off to take Kass off our hands so there's no previous Boston/Montreal rivalry.

The one thing I do agree with you is that it's unhealthy looking in the rearview mirror. The main caveat I would add is that it's equally unhealthy to DISCOUNT everything that has happened in the rearview mirror because everything that's happened so far would have been more than enough to fire an executive in a publicly traded company.

 

[James Underbuss*]

Iff ju sayso, mang.

The guy that thinks he knows everything and how simple it all is lol

Only 3 variables go into management decisions hey? That's super duper.

 

[Jimson Hogarth*]

it was a shuffle and a gamble for edmonton, who had nothing to lose by taking on kassian

edmonton and kassian are both rehab projects so its a poetic fit

Exactly lol.

 

[Jimson Hogarth*]

why was Edmonton willing to "gamble" when it was Montreal making the trade but no one was willing to "gamble" when it was Benning 6 months earlier?

Still waiting for a half-sensible explanation for why Kassian had negative value when he was "only" in stage 1 rehab but had more value after a highly publicized MVA and stage 2 rehab.

Until I hear one it simply looks like another (of many) cases where Benning got schooled by another GM who dictated the terms of the trade and Benning blinked.

Not the worst trade of all time mind you - the 5th is after all just a 5th - but it is emblematic of a much larger problem with Benning's ability to execute trades.

Your definition of schooled Centers around a trade for Ben Scrivens

 

[James Underbuss*]

why was Edmonton willing to "gamble" when it was Montreal making the trade but no one was willing to "gamble" when it was Benning 6 months earlier?

Ok here is some more theory and conjecture based on nothing, just like every other post on these boards.

Montreal needed goaltending support, Edmonton was flush with third rate goalies and took a flyer on kassian by trading one away, which didn't hurt them in any way.

6mos earlier, Benning did not want or need a goalie like scrivens, he did want a journeyman with grit. Even though Prust was a bust in Vancouver, you can see the line of reasoning behind the trades if you really want to. If ou don't want to, then carry on with the hysterics.

As you were...

 

[Jimson Hogarth*]

Ok here is some more theory and conjecture based on nothing, just like every other post on these boards.

Montreal needed goaltending support, Edmonton was flush with third rate goalies and took a flyer on kassian by trading one away, which didn't hurt them in any way.

6mos earlier, Benning did not want or need a goalie like scrivens, he did want a journeyman with grit. Even though Prust was a bust in Vancouver, you can see the line of reasoning behind the trades if you really want to. If ou don't want to, then carry on with the hysterics.

As you were...

If only Benning had traded Kassian for Scrivens he would have been the one doin the "schooling"


Can't even say it with a straight face.

 

[mathonwy]

Iff ju sayso, mang.

The guy that thinks he knows everything and how simple it all is lol

Only 3 variables go into management decisions hey? That's super duper.

Present some logical arguments if you want to debate.

And the only thing simple is Jimbo and his team.

 

[opendoor]

If only Benning had traded Kassian for Scrivens he would have been the one doin the "schooling"


Can't even say it with a straight face.

Yep, just shows how awful that trade was. When a laughable return is still miles better than the one Benning negotiated from a stronger position, there's really no defending it. A year later and Kassian is still in the NHL while Prust is publicly begging for an NHL contract:

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/brandon-prust-on-return-right-now-id-take-a-job-anywhere-202728127.html

 

[MS]

And you know this how exactly? Because Benning and Linden said so?

Funny then that after being involved in his MVA and undergoing stage 2 treatment while with Montreal they were then able to trade Kassian to Edmonton straight up for Ben Scrivens, a marginal but nominally useful AHL/NHL goalie. No kicker or throw in to convince Edmonton to take their unwanted player, just a straight up swap of marginal assets. Edmonton even retained salary on Scrivens so it ended up being a cap neutral move rather than a dump. And this is AFTER the public embarrassment Kassian suffered while with Montreal. Yet you're buying the story that no one would take Kassian without extra payment back when he was only in Stage 1 and his "issue" was not a widespread PR nightmare?

Man, the Canucks PR / spin dept must think they've got the easiest job in the world with this market.

Yeah, it's just insane. That anyone can believe this line of logic is just ... nuts.

The real problem with this deal that, for the 2nd time in a year (Sbisa the other), Benning was such a terrible scout that he thought a garbage player/cap dump was actually a useful player that he should have value and he should target, and such a terrible manager that he didn't even realize that player he was targeting was a cap dump.

"But no team wanted/valued [Canuck player name here] and we had to pay extra/accept their low offer/offer more to take our player for us!"

- Zack Kassian
- Eddie Lack
- Chris Higgins
- Dan Hamhuis
- Radim Vrbata


The Canucks must have that excuse built into their press releases by now.

This.

After the Kesler deal, I thought: "Well, he had a full NTC, only wanted to go to one team with the cap space to get him, wanted out...oh well. We got what we got." But it's happened just about every single damn time this team makes a trade now. Clarkson can be dealt. Datsyuk's dead cap space can be dealt. Our guys? No way, we're all delusional thinking anyone on our team has any objective value whatsoever...yeah right. At what point does one finally bow to the brick wall obvious and just accept Lindenningbrod as the abysmally terrible negotiating team it is?

It's particularly funny when a team like Calgary got three 2nds, a 3rd, a 4th, Jokkipakka, and Pollack for three guys (Glencross, Hudler, and Russell) are currently without NHL contracts.

Yup. It sure is funny how - from the moment Benning arrived - all of a sudden nobody wants to trade for or give value for any of our players and we overpay horrendously for every player we acquire ... while other organizations continue to have little trouble getting value back for similar or worse assets.

Derek Dorsett: 79-7-18-25, signed contract: 4 years @ 2.65M
Shawn Matthias: 78-18-9-27, signed contract: 1 year @ $2.3M
Brad Richardson: 45-8-13-21, signed contract: 3 years @ $2.08M
Mike Santorelli*: 49-10-18-28, signed contract: 1 year @ $1.5M

At the time we signed him Dorsett was temporarily our 4th highest paid forward, and there's a handful of better 3rd line players that Jimbo let walk to far better contracts. Whether or not it's scarcely an over payment, it was a dumb move to let a bunch of decent 3rd liners walk to overpay a 4th liner.

I'd refute the scarcely part as well, simply because while it has the same overall effect on the cap you're missing by a much bigger margin if you overpay your 4th liner by $650K+ than if you overpay a top 6 guy by that amount.

This is Benning in a nutshell.

$5 million for Dorsett and Prust to be lousy hockey players because FIGHTING! in a league where fighting is dead, while all of the depth players on the team who are actually quality two-way players on decent-value deals are gutted from the roster to make room for those mini-goons. And then we finish 30th in the league offensively while getting 6 goals for that $5 million. Oops!

 

[CanaFan]

Iff ju sayso, mang.

The guy that thinks he knows everything and how simple it all is lol

Only 3 variables go into management decisions hey? That's super duper.

3 is still more than "I believe it cause management tells me so".

 

[CanaFan]

Your definition of schooled Centers around a trade for Ben Scrivens

My definition of schooled actually centres around Kassian, Prust, and a draft pick. The fact that Montreal didn't have to "pay" another team to take Kassian off there hands as the Vancouver narrative goes is just the cherry on top really.

 

[CanaFan]

Ok here is some more theory and conjecture based on nothing, just like every other post on these boards.

Montreal needed goaltending support, Edmonton was flush with third rate goalies and took a flyer on kassian by trading one away, which didn't hurt them in any way.

6mos earlier, Benning did not want or need a goalie like scrivens, he did want a journeyman with grit. Even though Prust was a bust in Vancouver, you can see the line of reasoning behind the trades if you really want to. If ou don't want to, then carry on with the hysterics.

As you were...

But, but nobody "wanted" Kassian is the narrative around here, remember? It isn't what Benning wanted back, it was just that he needed to get rid of Kassian (without waiving him apparently) and no single team in the entire NHL wanted Kassian without the extra pick thrown in.

This is the narrative been pushed forward in this thread. I'm hardly hysterical but certainly do find the mental gymnastics this crowd does to justify a poor trade to *be* hysterical.

 

[Jimson Hogarth*]

But, but nobody "wanted" Kassian is the narrative around here, remember? It isn't what Benning wanted back, it was just that he needed to get rid of Kassian (without waiving him apparently) and no single team in the entire NHL wanted Kassian without the extra pick thrown in.

This is the narrative been pushed forward in this thread. I'm hardly hysterical but certainly do find the mental gymnastics this crowd does to justify a poor trade to *be* hysterical.

Who wanted Kassian when the Canucks traded him?

 

[VanJack]

Who wanted Kassian when the Canucks traded him?

Probably nobody....but the Canucks could have put him on waivers and lost him for nothing, which would still have been a lot cheaper than what they traded him for...apparently 'forced' to cough up a fifth rounder to the Habs and still had to pay Prust for a largely useless year....another Jimbo special.

 

[CanaFan]

Who wanted Kassian when the Canucks traded him?

Boston, San Jose, Pittsburgh, Winnipeg, and Dallas. Also Nashville aaaaand (just for kicks) the Islanders, Buffalo, and Toronto.

Happy now?

 

[Scurr]

Prust was a nightmare for the team. The exact opposite of the good skating energy guy that's a great teammate. I was actually pretty surprised by Prust's puck skills but he couldn't get around the ice at all. Another colossal failure by our pro scouting. His antics later put egg all over managements face. Easily the second worst move by management after the Sbisa extension.

 

[MS]

Prust was a nightmare for the team. The exact opposite of the good skating energy guy that's a great teammate. I was actually pretty surprised by Prust's puck skills but he couldn't get around the ice at all. Another colossal failure by our pro scouting. His antics later put egg all over managements face. Easily the second worst move by management after the Sbisa extension.

I'd say it's the 2nd dumbest but not the 2nd worst, in the same way that lighting a $100 bill on fire for no reason might be dumber than paying $4000 for a $2000 car, but the car purchase is a worse result.

Benning's biggest moves have been his worst moves because of the damage they've done, even if they aren't quite as hopelessly incompetent as the scouting/trading for Prust.

__________

Edit - as an aside, one good thing about Jim Benning is that he's helped make me terrific at coming up with analogies for stupidity. Thanks, Jim!

 

[RandV]

Dorsett was never our 4th highest paid forward: Henrik, Daniel, Vrbata, and Burrows were far ahead. But your point still stands, it's not really wise to spend so much on a Dorsett type player and I hope Benning has learned his lesson.

As for the guys you listed, none of those guys can be said to have established themselves as 3rd line players. Matthias had a career year but he has never established himself as a 3rd line player in any season. Richardson had a career year too but he too has been bouncing around the 3rd and 4th line. Furthermore, he was 30 and injury prone. Ya he played 82 games last season, but you can't expect that given his injury troubles the previous few seasons. As for Santorelli. Benning did offer him a contract. He just didn't offer Santorelli the two year contract Santorelli wanted. At the end of the day Santorelli didn't get a two year contract.

Oops right I missed Vrbata, but the point still stands that at the time of the signing he was set to be our 5th highest paid forwards ahead of 2nd and 3rd liners Bonino, Higgins, and Hansen.

This is horrible optics when it comes time to resign the other guys, and shows a completely clueless approach by Benning. Okay overpay Dorsett if he's all that important, but at least draw the line that you're not going to pay him over the $2.5M that Higgins & Hansen are making.

 

[James Underbuss*]

Yep, just shows how awful that trade was. When a laughable return is still miles better than the one Benning negotiated from a stronger position, there's really no defending it. A year later and Kassian is still in the NHL while Prust is publicly begging for an NHL contract:

Scrivens wasn't even in the NHL when he was traded for Kassian and is now in Europe so based on the number of games actually played for us by Prust and Marchand getting it in the junk, I'd actually call this whole scenario a win for the canucks.

My definition of schooled actually centres around Kassian, Prust, and a draft pick. The fact that Montreal didn't have to "pay" another team to take Kassian off there hands as the Vancouver narrative goes is just the cherry on top really.

Montreal took all the risk and unloaded a journeyman who was also a fan favourite. Rehab+5th seems perfectly reasonable.

But, but nobody "wanted" Kassian is the narrative around here, remember? It isn't what Benning wanted back, it was just that he needed to get rid of Kassian (without waiving him apparently) and no single team in the entire NHL wanted Kassian without the extra pick thrown in.

This is the narrative been pushed forward in this thread. I'm hardly hysterical but certainly do find the mental gymnastics this crowd does to justify a poor trade to *be* hysterical.

Boston, San Jose, Pittsburgh, Winnipeg, and Dallas. Also Nashville aaaaand (just for kicks) the Islanders, Buffalo, and Toronto.

Happy now?

Maybe out of all those 33 teams that wanted Kassian, maybe Montreal actually had the best offer? Everyone else wanted Kassian but either had no room on their roster, cap space, couldn't offer the same value as Montreal. Like who would have been offered that was better? Out of all those teams who definitely wanted Kassian. They still want Kassian. Vancouver still wants Kassian.

 

[RandV]

But, but nobody "wanted" Kassian is the narrative around here, remember? It isn't what Benning wanted back, it was just that he needed to get rid of Kassian (without waiving him apparently) and no single team in the entire NHL wanted Kassian without the extra pick thrown in.

This is the narrative been pushed forward in this thread. I'm hardly hysterical but certainly do find the mental gymnastics this crowd does to justify a poor trade to *be* hysterical.

Yeah I never really bought that, and I don't think management ever clarified the specifics of the Prust/Kassian trade.

The Kassian fiasco had seemed to settle and everything looked to be on track, then suddenly he was traded. The previous year Benning had traded a 3rd rounder for Derek Dorsett, and they didn't want him to be the only fighter on the team. So in my opinion the Kassian trade was more about acquiring Prust than it was dumping Kassian. Management has never really said otherwise, the rest is all just fan speculation.