18/19 MGMT thread VII. WARNING POST #25

[xtra]

Juolevi at 20 is not a complete product however at 19 it’s guaranteed that Pettersson is a better player than glass/vlaradi etc.

Are these facts consistent? Can only Canuck players develop further? Is it not possible for Pettersson to top out at a Ppg player and glass/vlardi to become 1.2 ppg players?

I mean it’s not like we have seen a rookie come in at over a ppg rate and then struggle correct

Mathew Barzal Stats and News

 

[Cheeks Clapinski]

Do we have the NHLe charts from years previous? Would be neat to see how the top players on these lists end up turning out. I have a sneaking suspicion that it is a lot more disappointing than this particular poster is suggesting.

 

[Cheeks Clapinski]

Juolevi at 20 is not a complete product however at 19 it’s guaranteed that Pettersson is a better player than glass/vlaradi etc.

Are these facts consistent? Can only Canuck players develop further? Is it not possible for Pettersson to top out at a Ppg player and glass/vlardi to become 1.2 ppg players?

I mean it’s not like we have seen a rookie come in at over a ppg rate and then struggle correct

Mathew Barzal Stats and News

It only took us 4 games to "win" the Leivo trade

 

[valkynax]

Juolevi at 20 is not a complete product however at 19 it’s guaranteed that Pettersson is a better player than glass/vlaradi etc.

Are these facts consistent? Can only Canuck players develop further? Is it not possible for Pettersson to top out at a Ppg player and glass/vlardi to become 1.2 ppg players?

I mean it’s not like we have seen a rookie come in at over a ppg rate and then struggle correct

Mathew Barzal Stats and News

It's called double standard/hypocrisy, usually used as a pale and pathetic attempt to justify arguments that crumble as soon as someone takes a fart.

 

[sting101]

Yes @Melvin there is plenty of artillary to back up a firing of Benning. He has made a lot of mistakes and cost us potentially a couple years with Gudbranson and maybe Juolevi and Virtanen and the potential return on Kesler. Other than that he has taken a lot of picks ( a drafts worth plus) but he has re stocked the depth of the prospect pool and depth of the team in the process and the picks are debatable because every team has a few that dont meet the ceilings they hoped for. But lets not pretend Baertshi Dahlen Sutter Goldobin Leivo Gudbranson Motte are not useful players and would be good returns on 2nd round and beyond if we drafted them ourselves.

The 14/15 season was a success given what he was hired to do and the direction he had to go given Aquilini and Linden were adamant they try and "win now with an eye on the future" this is what the plan was. Most experts and people here knew the core was done and as each day passed it was more and more obvious Daniel and Henrik were never going to ramp up their tired and old legs and win games when it mattered most against good teams. Aquilini wanted playoffs and that seasons success was a detriment and the plan had little chance to work long term but the off season didnt have a different one yet so we took our late 1st round pick and a 53rd in the 2nd round and turned those into Boeser and Baertschi. They couldn't trade Miller or others yet because the owner wanted more playoffs. So they addressed the roster. Added Sutter to try and get quicker down the middle and made some moves to clean up a few issues (Kassian)

The 2015/16 season things started to unravel. Willie D started doing Willie D things. long term injury to Sutter forced Horvat to play 2C and he ended the year a minus 30. Vrbata packed it in after Willie pulled him off the Sedins line and he had to play with McCann and Horvat. The other 2 top6 forwards Higgins 3 goals in 33 games and Burrows 9 in 79 games were done . In the bottom 6 they tried to implement youth but Virtanen and McCann were far from ready...........the season was a disaster and it would get worse as they clung to a playoff dream and lost out on returns for Hamhuis. The trade dealine on we were unstoppable in our quest for 1st overall....loss after loss after loss and then to rub salt in our wounds in typical Canuck fashion we went from 3rd to 5th in the lottery with Laine and Matthews. JB added a brutal trade for Erik Gudbranson and signed Eriksson and drafted Juolevi to basically put a cherry on top of one of the worst seasons on many levels for this organization. Gut wrenching

2016/17 was finally a turning point in directions. The Sedins were basically offensive situational only. There were no young players to save them and the team was obviously shifting from retool to rebuild. The deadline saw Hansen and Burrows go for Goldobin and Dahlen and the draft would yield Elias Pettersson our future #1c . Dorsett unfortunately was forced to retire. Internally it seems that Linden and Benning were at odds with different messages and despite some good moves the fanbase continued to be confused as to exactly what the plan was. People were pissed and it showed in the stands and all over these boards with good reason.

2017/18 drew in a new Coach and some players that he could use until the next crop of prospects were good enough to surpass them. Burmistrov Gagner Del Zotto Nilsson Vanek Pouliot...Rodin and Gaunce were given auditions.....it finally seemed like we were in rebuild mode and even used the word. Green was doing his best to develop Virtanen Hutton and and Goldobin with tough love. At the conclusion of the season we added Motte Leipsic Beagle Roussel drafted Hughes and Linden stepped away.

By the start of this season you could see a succession in place and the Canucks were rated as a top5 prospect pool. People said a potato could have done as well or better but what else did JB do.

C - Aquired Sutter to play Shut down and allow his top scoring lines to flourish. Signed Beagle to a inflated contract to play 4c for 4 yrs while the team tries to develop someone to replace him.(not a great move) In Adam Gaudette he has a guy who is learning and improving and if he can continue to develop will allow them to move Sutter without creating a hole in the lineup. You have to admit we look really good going forward at the most important position. Madden is nice looking prospect also.

LW- Aquired Baertschi Goldobin Dahlen Leivo for what amounted to 2nd 3rd round and less pick values. signed Roussel Schaller to muck it up as the organization has no one ready for these roles for a few years and yes Granlund is still around providing utility until we get better. Gadjovich is a long shot. Some mostly 2nd tier guys but definitely some complimentary scorers who should be able to get 40-50pts if healthy.

RW- Eriksson....Ugggh. Yes thts a terribad move that i'm sure they would like to bury. He's not a terrible 3rd liner though. You have to give some huge credit for Boeser here at his draft position. Motte has been good utility and MacEwen looks to be heading for a look soon. Lind is long shot with his poor transition to pro hockey.....man it would have been nice to grab Jokiharju or Timmins at that pick. Lockwood is interesting

LD - You have to give Green some credit for Hutton here. Pouliot and Del Zotto will be gone once Hughes and Juolevi can play. No easy fix on defense. Sure would be nice if they can work something out with Edler to get another 1st for this years draft in Van. Rathbone is interesting

RD - Gudbranson was a flop move but at least looks like he can play most nights this year. Stecher has been under the radar good. Tryamkin and Woo hopefully can help soon. RD is an area of concern. Not a single guy that screams top4 anywhere unless Hughes plays his off side.

GK - Nilsson is a capable back up and his contract aligns nicely to Demko starting his career. DiPietro is a interesting prospect. I think were aligned about as well as can be hoped here. Goalies are tough to figure

 

[Fire Benning]

If we had a different GM everything would likely be very similar, maybe a little worse or maybe a little better but very similar. It all comes down to expectations. You guys can throw around the Canucks record the last 4 years but the vast majority of people were expecting the losing considering the state of the team when Benning took over. What most people expected was that the GM build a new elite core through drafting which Benning has done a good job of.

Most people have the expectation that pro scouting is will likely be bad when you are in the process of building a new core, because you are not a hot destination for UFAs and you don't have the quality assets to bring in quality players through trade.

The new GM (if Benning is fired) will have different expectations of good pro scouting and winning games similar to when Gillis arrived.

The expectation from the people in charge 4 years ago was that they would be a competitive team and that the team could be right on track to be a perennial playoff team in a few years, and that it could be accomplished without bottoming out, Jim Benning said it the day he was hired.

They p***yfooted around the idea of truly stripping the organization down and rebuilding it back up. Instead they committed big money and draft capital to older players with the goal of closing the so-called age gap, which effectively hampered the prospect pipeline and farm system.

They avoided the obvious path to rebuild the team, they opted for a more quick fix route and ended up with a team earning the least amount of points over the past 4 seasons.

So yes when you sell a quick turnaround and invest draft picks and cap space in players that are allegedly able to help the team in the present, you should be held to the expectation of good pro scouting, and that has been a catastrophic failure. By that standard alone, Benning should be fired.

 

[y2kcanucks]

If we had a different GM everything would likely be very similar, maybe a little worse or maybe a little better but very similar. It all comes down to expectations. You guys can throw around the Canucks record the last 4 years but the vast majority of people were expecting the losing considering the state of the team when Benning took over. What most people expected was that the GM build a new elite core through drafting which Benning has done a good job of.

Most people have the expectation that pro scouting is will likely be bad when you are in the process of building a new core, because you are not a hot destination for UFAs and you don't have the quality assets to bring in quality players through trade.

The new GM (if Benning is fired) will have different expectations of good pro scouting and winning games similar to when Gillis arrived.

It depends who that GM is. If Aquilini hires another idiot then you're probably right. If he hires someone who's intelligent then things would be much different.

First of all: an intelligent GM would be stockpiling draft picks and not trading away his picks.
Secondly: an intelligent GM wouldn't be targeting 4th line veterans and locking them up long-term with bloated salaries.

Most people expected losing because a lot of us understood how bad the team Benning put together really was, even while Benning was saying they're pushing for the playoffs.

Benning has done a piss poor job of building a new core through the draft when you consider how long this team has been bad. He's had 5 picks in the top 7, and yet we only have 2 core players that he's drafted (possibly a third IF Hughes pans out). The other core player is a Gillis holdover.

The new GM is going to have a difficult job rebuilding this team because he'll be stuck with a lot of bad contracts that Benning will have left behind.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Oh yeah..Were the Edmonton Oilers..you know.. recently I saw EP and BB knockin' back a few pints at the Roxy.,everybody on the team just tunes out the useless vet players and the coach.......total ****show...gotta be....derp.

After whats come to light about that dysfunctional Oilers squad,I'm surprised you can even make such a daft comment?

Daft comment? I'm looking at the results. You might want to try looking at the facts sometime to formulate your opinion. It helps.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Who cares what people in here wanted. You wanted Vilardi instead of Pettersson.

It's clearly important to the discussion at hand when you accuse people of using hindsight to judge the pick. It clearly wasn't hindsight. But it doesn't surprise me you're deflecting when proven wrong.

For the 4 millionth time, like it or not, Juolevi was generally regarded as the premiere d man in that draft. McKenzie tells you so in that article ive posted about 50 times already. He also says that Juoelvi was ranked in a tier of players that included Tkachuk. His assessment of what scouts around the league were thinking holds a little more weight than what some wannabe gms in here think.

When it comes to the draft, you win some and you lose some. Normal, educated, fans who understand the odds of top 10 picks working out give the GM some rope and realize not every pick is going to be a home run. When I say normal I mean not the entitled gratify me know it all crowd that dominates these third rate forums. I'm sorry you all (actually not really) have to endure a downswing, half of the spoiled brats in here probably started watching the team in the 2000's and know nothing about the normal cycles teams go through.

He was not "generally regarded as the premiere d man in that draft." He was among a group of 3 defensemen who were regarded as being the top 3 in the draft (along with Sergachev and Chychrun). Don't act as if he was in anyone's top 5.

I've asked you numerous times to show me one draft ranking that has Juolevi ahead of Tkachuk. You can't do it, and thus you haven't done it.

Normal, educated fans who aren't trying to come up with lame excuses to defend their hero who f***s up almost everything he does, understand that Juolevi over Tkachuk was yet another massive blunder. The only pick we should have made in 2016 at 5 was Matthew Tkachuk. I knew it. Most people here knew it. The London Knights knew it. Most scouts around the league knew it. Jim Benning didn't, and that's why people are pissed.

 

[sting101]

The Canucks had no chance to draft MDC, Bennett, or Puljujarvi. But if they all fell to the Canucks, and the Canucks drafted them I wouldn't be complaining. They would have drafted the consensus BPA and missed. That happens. But like I said, when you go away from the consensus and you're wrong, you deserve a hailstorm of criticism.

I wanted Brendan Lemieux, not Barbashev. If you're going to call me out on something at least be right about it. And I was perfectly happy with Boeser. I had Konecny ranked above him, but made it clear that I would be happy with either. Ritchie I was extremely high on, and was wrong to prefer him over Nylander or Ehlers. And Vilardi...I had no idea he would develop a serious back problem after being drafted. If I had that information I wouldn't have been high on him, obviously. I still think, if healthy, he could be a dominant player. I just hope the missed development time so far doesn't hurt him too much.

But this is about management, not about me. I get you like to deflect whenever it's proven management blundered, but let's try to keep things on topic, mmmkay?

I look at Benning's body of work and can pick things I like and things I dislike. One list is extremely lopsided, while the other has maybe 3-4 things on it. I'll let you put together which list is which.

See i differ from most in this regard.

If you analyze the history of draft success. A average drafting team requires 3 players every 2 years to maintain a roster with adequate NHL players. There is about 15 really good NHlers every year and about a half dozen of those are impact players. If i have to go off the board a little to get an impact guy i would 100p be all over that. And you only have to look at Reinhart Yakupov Dal Colle Puljujaarvi recently to realize that BPA by scouts isn't that trustworthy either. Look at Kekalainen and Dubois vs Puljujarvi that was brilliant. Or the Karlsson pick in 2008. Getting an impact player like Boeser at his draft positrion is a huge win for this organization. Pettersson is already being heralded as the best player of 2017. You gotta have your convictions and i will judge those harshly without the excuse of other scouits thought he was BPA. No one even should care about that when they do their own homework....maybe as a guideline.

Virtanen and Juolevi were both on that cusp in relation to history and numbers. Absolutely Tkachuk should have been considered as an impact player and that was a mistake. Juolevi could still be a good one and defense are hard to come by....but you are right they messed up and will never gain back that traction.(unless of course Juolevi becomes an all star when he's 23 then no one will care as having Tkachuk step in wouldn't have made a difference other than some numbers and potentially falling back a position or 2 in the draft)

Virtanen's position is a little trickier because both Ehlers and Nylander were not considered impactful enough to be up with the top grouping of 5 and were probably considered good one's but not true impact one's. The Canucks liked Virtanens tools enough to think he could have an impact once fully developed and we're seeing some of that now but absolutely they conceeded production and that typically is seen as a mistake. Jake's one of my favorites so i'm biased.

Your a good poster Y2K and i appreciate your convictions. I am apathetic when it comes to the higher ups at Rogers Arena. Benning comes off as a bumpkin and i dont hold that against him but when he makes so many damn stupid statements and follows it up with mind numbing moves at times i see full reasoning for canning his ass. On the other hand i also see a young exciting team coming together and whether through dumb ass luck or calculaed moves i believe he deserves credit just like i would hold him in complete responsibility if he fails to build a roster that can contend. i have lower expectations when his oldest drafted players are 22 and i feel like Aquilini is giving him leeway due to expectations with the Twins and playoffs which was just a complete waste of time.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Why scouts like Juolevi over Chychrun in NHL draft - Sportsnet.ca

"According to three scouts surveyed this week, all see Juolevi in the top eight in the NHL draft in June and say that he’s in the mix to be the fourth or fifth player selected. (The first three picks are conceded to be Auston Matthews, Patrik Laine and Jesse Puljujarvi.) And barring injury and with an expected deep run by the Knights, Juolevi figures to have more of an opportunity to raise his stock than Chychrun and Sergachev. Which even he didn’t see coming."

 

[Motte and Bailey]

I didn't say that.
How about you answer my question, do you think Benning has scouted Gaudette/Tryamkin/Forsling more than 2 games?

Must a good drafting GM scout every player he drafts at least 3 times?

 

[THE Green Man]

You're downplaying Virtanen and Juolevi's projections. Actually you're straight up fudging the data. Virtanen's more than a bottom 6 forward and Juolevi will be more than a 3rd pairing defenseman.

It IS absolutely GREAT drafting to get the following with 4 top 10 picks: An elite franchise 1C, an elite puck carrying offensive top 2D (being conservative) , an elite forechecking 2nd line winger, and a (being conservative) smart, good transition and good PP QB of a top 4 D.

You call this conservative, I call it optimistic. EP40 I will give you franchise 1C easy. Hughes may reach that top 2 level you have listed however it remains to be seen. Like another poster mentioned he could end up being a Barrie/Ellis player- very good but not a franchise guy that will be in Norris conversations. Very optimistic evaluation for Hughes and he's tracking exceptionally well, but until he plays pro we really won't know how his game is going to translate. Elite forechecking top 6 winger is not how I would describe Virtanen. Could he get there sure, but at this point it is a long stretch of optimism for that to pan out. Juolevi again you have a ridiculously optimistic view at the moment. How he's tracking if he turns into Jake Gardiner I'd be content but it would still sting that we could have had Tkachuck.

For the record, at the time I didn't hate the JV pick as I remember Bob Mackenzie saying he thought we would go with him as we were walking to the podium. As much as in hindsight I would really like Ehlers, that pick I can't hate on as much as some as at the time I was indifferent to the pick.

On the other hand, OJ was a terrible pick right from the get go, was off board in comparison to player tiers in which Tkachuk was clearly the BPA and most logical pick to have been made. Picking by position really bit them in the ass on this one. Additionally what bugged me even more about this is that a division rival in Calgary picked right after us, and it was universal knowledge they wanted a forward over a d-man. Had we been so set on OJ and squeezed them for a 4th rounder to not take Tkachuk it would have been better in my eyes but still would not have been happy with the result.

As for EP40 I am completely transparent in saying I was wrong, that being said Glass who I wanted at the time had a 1.59 PPG season last year and this year is 2.07PPG. At this stage EP40 looks like the best player in the draft but I am still intruiged to see in say 2-3 years the comparison between the 2. For the Hughes pick, I wanted Bouchard, but both not playing pro yet needs a wait and see approach. Hughes is having an incredible season but Bouchard also is over a PPG in the OHL this year and that is with them adding Adam Boqvist this season who more than likely is taking some of the ice-time away from Bouchard compared to last year when he was putting up 30 minute nights. These 2 prospects are incredibly encouraging but the others that I would have preferred at the time of the draft aren't exactly disappointing either.

All the recent whinging in here reminds me of when Benning signed Beagle, Schaller and Roussel. "Oh no they are going to block the youth"....i remember all the frothing at the mouth posts stating that the newly signed "plugs" were going to take ice time away from the young players.

So which young player has been blocked that deserves to be in the NHL?

Most people weren't completely worried about this year. Some, myself included had Gaudette and Dahlen on the team going into camp- which we were worried about 3 UFA rosters blocking them. In any case they were both sent to Utica and their play at camp warranted it. However, moving forward even as early as next year those contract could definitely block deserving players making the opening night roster. Not to mention 4 year deals to bottom 6 players is extremely short-sighted.

Ill repeat this one more time because I think you have problems connecting the dots. Gillis was a good GM, but he left an abhorrent cupboard of talent for this current regime. You can continue to stick your head in the sand and pretend that this has not hindered the current team.

Gillis was not a good GM- he was average at best. Great negotiations on contracts for a contending team- poor with long term aspirations in mind. Average trader, some were great like the Ehrhoff deal, others were poor like Booth and Ballard. Drafting was terrible. It's honestly the fact that Benning his been so bad for half a decade that in hind-sight Gillis doens't look that bad because the bar is so ridiculously low for this franchise right now.

 

[valkynax]

See i differ from most in this regard.

If you analyze the history of draft success. A average drafting team requires 3 players every 2 years to maintain a roster with adequate NHL players. There is about 15 really good NHlers every year and about a half dozen of those are impact players. If i have to go off the board a little to get an impact guy i would 100p be all over that. And you only have to look at Reinhart Yakupov Dal Colle Puljujaarvi recently to realize that BPA by scouts isn't that trustworthy either. Look at Kekalainen and Dubois vs Puljujarvi that was brilliant. Or the Karlsson pick in 2008. Getting an impact player like Boeser at his draft positrion is a huge win for this organization. Pettersson is already being heralded as the best player of 2017. You gotta have your convictions and i will judge those harshly without the excuse of other scouits thought he was BPA. No one even should care about that when they do their own homework....maybe as a guideline.

Virtanen and Juolevi were both on that cusp in relation to history and numbers. Absolutely Tkachuk should have been considered as an impact player and that was a mistake. Juolevi could still be a good one and defense are hard to come by....but you are right they messed up and will never gain back that traction.(unless of course Juolevi becomes an all star when he's 23 then no one will care as having Tkachuk step in wouldn't have made a difference other than some numbers and potentially falling back a position or 2 in the draft)

Virtanen's position is a little trickier because both Ehlers and Nylander were not considered impactful enough to be up with the top grouping of 5 and were probably considered good one's but not true impact one's. The Canucks liked Virtanens tools enough to think he could have an impact once fully developed and we're seeing some of that now but absolutely they conceeded production and that typically is seen as a mistake. Jake's one of my favorites so i'm biased.

Your a good poster Y2K and i appreciate your convictions. I am apathetic when it comes to the higher ups at Rogers Arena. Benning comes off as a bumpkin and i dont hold that against him but when he makes so many damn stupid statements and follows it up with mind numbing moves at times i see full reasoning for canning his ass. On the other hand i also see a young exciting team coming together and whether through dumb ass luck or calculaed moves i believe he deserves credit just like i would hold him in complete responsibility if he fails to build a roster that can contend. i have lower expectations when his oldest drafted players are 22 and i feel like Aquilini is giving him leeway due to expectations with the Twins and playoffs which was just a complete waste of time.

This is the kind of post I respect, regardless of my opinion of the poster or whether I agree with all of what you said. I can read it without my brain wanting to hang itself, I can see the logic flowing fairly smoothly, and I can see the acknowledgement of others with different views and how one subject is observed from more than a singular narrow angle. And as far as I can tell there's no bullshit.

I would like to add that, this is just my opinion, btw, I care not how the results are achieved. This is why I try to not get into debates on HOW EP and BB are drafted. All I care about is that we got two great players. If the method used is starting to affect our future results, however, that's a different matter.

JV is slowly making progress, I don't see him being worthy of a 6th overall but progress is never a bad thing; I'm hoping OJ can turn things around but watching him play makes me doubt that, his flaws are still very much the same so at this point whether he can be an NHLer is starting to become a serious question;

I will give Benning full credit for picking out BB and EP, job well done for sure. But he will also bear the scrutiny of blow picks in JV and OJ (three if we count McCann). Although to some Benning bros it seems customary to apply delusional BS logic mixed with double standards to absolve Benning's responsibility of his lunacies.

 

[WTG]

Must a good drafting GM scout every player he drafts at least 3 times?

How do you evaluate a player on 3 games?
If he even watches 3 games, do you not understand the sheer amount of games one would need to watch to scout every player in the draft?

 

[y2kcanucks]

Juolevi at 20 is not a complete product however at 19 it’s guaranteed that Pettersson is a better player than glass/vlaradi etc.

Are these facts consistent? Can only Canuck players develop further? Is it not possible for Pettersson to top out at a Ppg player and glass/vlardi to become 1.2 ppg players?

I mean it’s not like we have seen a rookie come in at over a ppg rate and then struggle correct

Mathew Barzal Stats and News

If it works in favour of Benning then he gets huge praise and the move is called a home run. But if it works against Benning then it's too early to tell and we should wait and see. And when enough time has passed they play the hindsight card.

 

[Melvin]

Yes thank you @sting101 for an actual response. I will have to respond when I get home as I only post glib remarks from my phone during work hours.

 

[tyhee]

Yes @Melvin there is plenty of artillary to back up a firing of Benning. ...

I generally liked this carefully thought out post and agreed with quite a bit of it. A few of the places I emphatically disagree are:

...
But lets not pretend Baertshi Dahlen Sutter Goldobin Leivo Gudbranson Motte are not useful players and would be good returns on 2nd round and beyond if we drafted them ourselves.

Dahlen still has to improve considerably at 5 on 5 to become a useful NHL player. He was very useful in the Allsvenskan last season and is useful on the power play in the AHL this season, but I doubt that's what you meant.

The 2015/16 season things started to unravel. Willie D started doing Willie D things. long term injury to Sutter forced Horvat to play 2C and he ended the year a minus 30. Vrbata packed it in after Willie pulled him off the Sedins line and he had to play with McCann and Horvat.

While most seem to forget it, Vrbata was pulled off the Sedins line the season before, in 2014-15, and played most of that season with Bonino except of course on the power play. He deal with it professionally. In the preseason of 2015-16 he complained that the line juggling continued too late for him to form chemistry with whomever his center was going to be, but when he was put with Horvat expressed pleasure to finally know whose line he was on and that he was looked forward to working with Bo. Then during the season he was placed with McCann, was clearly unhappy and appeared, as you say, to pack it in.

I thought Horvat's defensive problems went beyond having to play 2nd line minutes that season. His offensive game arrived at NHL level well ahead of his defensive game.

 

[Jimbo57]

It's clearly important to the discussion at hand when you accuse people of using hindsight to judge the pick. It clearly wasn't hindsight. But it doesn't surprise me you're deflecting when proven wrong.

Sure whateve you say. Just like how your foresight saw Vilardi. What you dont understand is that there is a large element of crapshoot involved here. Im sure most fans wanted Tkachuk. Its like flipping a coin when you are picking 4,5,6,7 at who is going to end up being better in 5 years. Dont pretend you have a crystal ball.

He was not "generally regarded as the premiere d man in that draft."

Yes he was: for the millionth time

"For example, the first layer beyond the Big Three is a four-man grouping that includes three different types of wingers — Tkachuk, who is strong from the top of the circles down; Dubois, who has a strong 200-foot game; and Nylander, whose skill and hockey sense are considered elite — and the one defenceman Juolevi, who's viewed as the best all-around blueliner in the draft."
-Bob Mckenzie June 2016

I've asked you numerous times to show me one draft ranking that has Juolevi ahead of Tkachuk. You can't do it, and thus you haven't done it.

Ive never claimed that Juolevi was ranked ahead of Tkachuk. Is your comprehension that bad? I claim that Juolevi was not the reach that some of the angry crowd in here make him out to be. He was considered to be in the same echelon as the three to four guys picked beyond the top 3. Bob McKenzie tells you this above. But of course if I quote one of the most respected hockey writers in the country I am appealing to authority, as if the words of some angry guys in a basement message board carry more weight.

Normal, educated fans who aren't trying to come up with lame excuses to defend their hero who ****s up almost everything he does, understand that Juolevi over Tkachuk was yet another massive blunder.

Benning is not my hero. In fact im not as vested as you in this argument. I have said dozens of times he has made mistakes. If after next year they are floundering in the basement I would agree that he should be fired. I havent spent countless hours posting tens of thousands of diatribes in the form of whining posts taking one side of the argument like you have. Your position is so pathetic you hope guys like Boeser and Pettersson do not score.

You are not a normal fan, your position is pathetic.

The only pick we should have made in 2016 at 5 was Matthew Tkachuk. I knew it. Most people here knew it. The London Knights knew it. Most scouts around the league knew it. Jim Benning didn't, and that's why people are pissed.

Just like you were so sure of Vilardi. What you need to do is get over your anger that motivates you to post thousands of times per year. The sooner you realize that a GM not hitting every pick is normal operating procedure the better it will be for you.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Sure whateve you say. Just like how your foresight saw Vilardi. What you dont understand is that there is a large element of crapshoot involved here. Im sure most fans wanted Tkachuk. Its like flipping a coin when you are picking 4,5,6,7 at who is going to end up being better in 5 years. Dont pretend you have a crystal ball.

Again you're deflecting.

What YOU don't understand is you can't say people are judging this in hindsight when people had the foresight to prefer Tkachuk over Juolevi. That's all there is to it. But you insist on bending logic to do whatever you can to defend your hero.

And in 2016 it wasn't like flipping a coin. There was a clear top 3, then a clear top 5. Benning went against that and looks completely foolish.

Yes he was: for the millionth time

"For example, the first layer beyond the Big Three is a four-man grouping that includes three different types of wingers — Tkachuk, who is strong from the top of the circles down; Dubois, who has a strong 200-foot game; and Nylander, whose skill and hockey sense are considered elite — and the one defenceman Juolevi, who's viewed as the best all-around blueliner in the draft."
-Bob Mckenzie June 2016

Looking at the consensus rankings: 2016 NHL Draft Consensus Rankings

Tkachuk ranked 4th, Juolevi ranked 7th.

You can look here at 13 different sources that went into those rankings: 2016 NHL Draft Rankings

Notice how in 8 of them, Juolevi is NOT the top ranked defenseman.

Ive never claimed that Juolevi was ranked ahead of Tkachuk. Is your comprehension that bad? I claim that Juolevi was not the reach that some of the angry crowd in here make him out to be. He was considered to be in the same echelon as the three to four guys picked beyond the top 3. Bob McKenzie tells you this above. But of course if I quote one of the most respected hockey writers in the country I am appealing to authority, as if the words of some angry guys in a basement message board carry more weight.

Depends on which rankings you look at. ISS has Juolevi ranked 11th, which is a huge reach. Craig Button has Juolevi 9th, which is also a reach.

Point is: Juolevi's rankings were all over the place, while Tkachuk was firmly a top 5 pick in every ranking.

Benning is not my hero. In fact im not as vested as you in this argument. I have said dozens of times he has made mistakes. I havent spent countless hours posting tens of thousands of diatribes in the form of whining posts taking one side of the argument like you have. Your position is so pathetic you hope guys like Boeser and Pettersson do not score.

You are not a normal fan, you are not an educated fan, your position is pathetic.

Benning most certainly is your hero based on your post history. You spend countless hours defending him on here, twist logic to the point where what you're saying makes no sense just to defend him.

My opinion is based on the facts, but coming from someone who doesn't value facts at all your opinion of me is meaningless.

Just like you were so sure of Vilardi. What you need to do is get over your anger that motivates you to post thousands of times per year. The sooner you realize that a GM not hitting every pick is normal operating procedure the better it will be for you.

Another deflection.

Didn't know Vilardi was going to suffer a serious back injury. Perhaps you did?

 

[rypper]

The 14/15 season was a success given what he was hired to do and the direction he had to go given Aquilini and Linden were adamant they try and "win now with an eye on the future" this is what the plan was.

Is that what the plan is now? To shift blame of the win now approach to Linden and Aquilini and exclude Benning from that?

Also posters can continue to link to articles stating that scouts believe Juolevi will be the best defender in the draft etc. The point is that he was not the best player available. Tkachuk was. That's what makes it a miss.

 

[valkynax]

Is that what the plan is now? To shift blame of the win now approach to Linden and Aquilini and exclude Benning from that?

Also posters can continue to link to articles stating that scouts believe Juolevi will be the best defender in the draft etc. The point is that he was not the best player available. Tkachuk was. That's what makes it a miss.

I made this point abundantly clear, yet there will always be two posters will continues to screech how OJ is the best D and completely ignoring this point.

Basically by their logic, if Hanifin and McDavid are in the same draft you should never ever EVER pick McDavid if defense is needed.

 

[xtra]

I made this point abundantly clear, yet there will always be two posters will continues to screech how OJ is the best D and completely ignoring this point.

Basically by their logic, if Hanifin and McDavid are in the same draft you should never ever EVER pick McDavid if defense is needed.

@Jimbo57 @RonningMorrisonBooth will obviously ignore the main point that drafting for need (OJ over Tkachuk) BPA is the bigger issue

 

[Motte and Bailey]

@Jimbo57 @RonningMorrisonBooth will obviously ignore the main point that drafting for need (OJ over Tkachuk) BPA is the bigger issue

It’s not when the need is as desperately high as it was. Gillis left zero good defensive prospects or young defensemen so Benning can’t be faulted for drafting need with the Juolevi pick.

They probably figured Tkachuk would be a 60 point winger and Juolevi would be a top 2 or top 4 defenseman which are very valuable and you generally can’t acquire young ones by trade because teams don’t want to let them go. Tkachuk has exceeded draft expectations and Juolevi hasn’t played in the NHL yet so we really don’t know how good he will be yet.

It’s not a big issue in light of the fact that Juolevi can still contribute comparable value given he’s a defensemen are valued much higher.

Plus drafting Tkachuk would probably mean no Pettersson or Hughes and I think Pettersson outweighs any perceived mistakes Benning might have made at the draft table by far.

 

[Bleach Clean]

Do we have the NHLe charts from years previous? Would be neat to see how the top players on these lists end up turning out. I have a sneaking suspicion that it is a lot more disappointing than this particular poster is suggesting.

I have been looking for this recently as I had just learned about pNHLe. I have also downloaded the app. From what I gather, there is too much fluctuation year to year for pNHLe to be relatively predictive. Also, short samples fluctuate a great deal. I'm not sure how much @Jimbo57 knows about pNHLe, but that chart he keeps re-posting (the one I referenced here before he posted about it), is based upon a 20~ game sample. Now, if he knows anything about data noise in short samples...

To provide some context: Last year, Pettersson finished 1st in pNHLe and his ratio was 84. Right now, Adam Fox leads the pNHLe projections with a ratio of 117. Obviously, some error correction will occur here as the season progresses.