18/19 MGMT thread VII. WARNING POST #25

Status
Not open for further replies.

Canucks1096

Registered User
Feb 13, 2016
5,608
1,667
There are the picks Benning traded, the picks forgone by not trading good assets and the unwillingness to weaponize cap space to get more futures. That has been ultimately what has held back the progression of this re-tool at the bottom.

- Late 1st round picks can convert to core pieces: Pastrnak, Boeser etc...
- More depth picks offer a better chance to get core or complementary players: DeBrincat, Aho, Montour, Dvorak etc...
- Weaponizing cap space could have yielded deals like Datsyuk/1st.

To say that we would not have been further along regardless of the strategy and execution of that strategy is just... mind boggling. It's incorrect, and it comes as no surprise that there is a tidal wave against this faulty notion.

Why don't we break this down even more. From 2014 to 2018 Canucks had 35 non 1st round picks. As of this moment there is one regular non 1st roujd pick player in the nhl and that's Forsling. I will give you Tryamkin because most likely he would be in the nhl if he didn't go back. Realistically how many more 2nd to 7th pick would be in the nhl pkayers? Non are locks

Demko-with goalies, you really don't know what you are getting until they play a bunch nhl games.

Lind and Gadjovich are not looking good in the ahl.

Woo- it is a too little early.

Gaudette- he looks an nhl player however who knows if he would be an nhl player long term.

Let's just say another 2 to 3 players make it to the nhl. You are looking at at 5 out of 35 non 1st round pick. 1 out of 7. So the 6 to 8 picks that he traded, wouldn't that still be 1 out 7 nhl players?

Having extra 7 picks your drafting skin doesn't get better. You dont get all sudden becoming a better at drafting. As a salesperson if I closed 5 out of 35 calls. Chances are another 7 calls, I will be close another 1

I will say the reality of it is not going to make a much a difference. You are looking at having Montour instead of Baer. That's it.

Btw Datsyuk got a second round and pick and pho and Det swap 1st round pick.

Btw one more time. Jb didn't trade any 1st round pick
 

Melvin

21/12/05
Sep 29, 2017
15,198
28,055
Montreal, QC
Like it or not, the kids have saved Benning's job. It's probably never been more secure than it is now. No chance he gets fired with how Pettersson, Boeser, Horvat, Goldobin and Virtanen are performing. Plus Hughes coming in next year and you have to imagine he has at least a few years of job security

This might be true. How depressing.
 

Motte and Bailey

Registered User
Jun 21, 2017
3,692
1,556
What was so drastically different about the two teams that caused such a big drop in performance? It sounded like Benning's moves made the team worse off that offseason.

One drastic difference is when Benning took over he had 2/3rds of a good 1st line, signed Vrbata and then had a good first line.

The year after that Vrbata quit on the team and the Twins stopped producing like 1st liners so then he had 0/3rds of a first line.

Then injuries happened, like, a lot of them. Pretty understandable to me despite some of the garbage people will spout like “oh but Benning was in control of his destiny” as if any other person in the GM’s chair could’ve reasonably had no decline after losing a 1st line over the offseason due to the decline with barely any prospects coming up and injuries piling up to be the highest in the league.
 

TruGr1t

Proper Villain
Jun 26, 2003
22,906
6,497
Pettersson has saved Bennings job.

I actually never got the impression Benning's job was ever in much danger. He's clearly in Aquilini's pocket and ownership seems to very much like the current situation (i.e. basically co-managing the team with a scout and F.A. serving as unofficial president). I expect management's inability to assemble a pro-level roster (through trade, free agency, or virtually anyway outside of drafting) to prevent the current core from ever being a true contender. We'll basically waste the Pettersson/Horvat era with poor depth signings, inopportune and poorly conceived trades, and perpetual gaping holes on defense and in goal.
 

sandwichbird2023

Registered User
Aug 4, 2004
3,835
1,901
A few of you had said you guys are ok with the Baer trade. But why???? Your argument is keep your picks, there a chance you can get a better player.

So if you guys are ok with the Baer trade. That means you guys don't really believe in keeping your picks as long ad you get some results

Like I said pick one lane and stick with it. Keep changing lanes. Hard to have discussion
Are you going to do the same? You have no problem with a 2nd for Vey, a 5th for Etem, 4th for Pouliot, etc etc, therefore you have no problem trading non 1st round picks for reclaimantion projects. Lets go ahead and trade ALL non 1st round picks, lots of failing 21-24 years old former prospects out there to take flyers on. If all those 2nd-7th round picks became nothing anyways, why keep them?
Look at the results, Benning hasn't hit on any of those projects aside from a 35points small-ish forward who gets top 6 minutes.
Look at it from a probability prospective, Benning is lowing his probability of finding a top 4 D or top 6 F by trading away these picks.
Look at it from Benning's supposedly "skill" of drafting, how does less picks equal more good prospects?
Look at it from any angle and none of them make any sense!
 
  • Like
Reactions: daddyohsix

Motte and Bailey

Registered User
Jun 21, 2017
3,692
1,556
Ridiculous goal post moving aside, how exactly do you know this ?

On top of that, if Jim Benning is magically exempt from his comment now, then what in the world has he been doing since ? He signed Loui Eriksson and traded futures for Erik Gudbranson in 2016. He also signed Gagner and Del-Zotto to multi-year deals in 2017. He then signed multiple fourth line players to multi-year deals this offseason. Is he still not desperately trying to "turn the team around" ?


Also I do love the meaning behind what you've said. The team that Jim Benning inherited from Gillis was the team that could be turned around quickly. But not the team that he himself had started to put his mark on. Fantastic analysis and pretty spot on.

It’s perfectly legitimate to say something like “I’m physically attracted to person A” and within a couple short years of them aging things could change and you might not be physically attracted to person A after that period of time. Should you be held to your previous statement of being attracted to them? Of course not. Things change and any reasonable person would not hold such a statement against Benning. It’s not magic it’s just common sense.
 

sandwichbird2023

Registered User
Aug 4, 2004
3,835
1,901
I actually never got the impression Benning's job was ever in much danger. He's clearly in Aquilini's pocket and ownership seems to very much like the current situation (i.e. basically co-managing the team with a scout and F.A. serving as unofficial president). I expect management's inability to assemble a pro-level roster (through trade, free agency, or virtually anyway outside of drafting) to prevent the current core from ever being a true contender. We'll basically waste the Pettersson/Horvat era with poor depth signings, inopportune and poorly conceived trades, and perpetual gaping holes on defense and in goal.
Feeling like Aqualini wants to play "Be a GM" mode in real life, but needs a puppet to make it look less ridiculous. No respected GM in the league would let himself be used as a puppet (ie: Nonis said no to the Richards trade, Gillis wants a rebuild, nobody else interested in taking this job), therefore Benning gets to stay on.
Just speculation on my part.
 

MadaCanuckle

Registered User
Jun 25, 2012
2,092
921
Lisboa
Why don't we break this down even more. From 2014 to 2018 Canucks had 35 non 1st round picks. As of this moment there is one regular non 1st roujd pick player in the nhl and that's Forsling. I will give you Tryamkin because most likely he would be in the nhl if he didn't go back. Realistically how many more 2nd to 7th pick would be in the nhl pkayers? Non are locks

Demko-with goalies, you really don't know what you are getting until they play a bunch nhl games.

Lind and Gadjovich are not looking good in the ahl.

Woo- it is a too little early.

Gaudette- he looks an nhl player however who knows if he would be an nhl player long term.

Let's just say another 2 to 3 players make it to the nhl. You are looking at at 5 out of 35 non 1st round pick. 1 out of 7. So the 6 to 8 picks that he traded, wouldn't that still be 1 out 7 nhl players?

Having extra 7 picks your drafting skin doesn't get better. You dont get all sudden becoming a better at drafting. As a salesperson if I closed 5 out of 35 calls. Chances are another 7 calls, I will be close another 1

I will say the reality of it is not going to make a much a difference. You are looking at having Montour instead of Baer. That's it.

Btw Datsyuk got a second round and pick and pho and Det swap 1st round pick.

Btw one more time. Jb didn't trade any 1st round pick

Jared McCann wasn't traded? Probably I am missing something from trade history or draft history but I don't recall McCann being drafted by the Florida Panthers. You can argue that he didn't trade any top 10 1st rounder for the crap he targets but...
 

Canucks1096

Registered User
Feb 13, 2016
5,608
1,667
Are you going to do the same? You have no problem with a 2nd for Vey, a 5th for Etem, 4th for Pouliot, etc etc, therefore you have no problem trading non 1st round picks for reclaimantion projects. Lets go ahead and trade ALL non 1st round picks, lots of failing 21-24 years old former prospects out there to take flyers on. If all those 2nd-7th round picks became nothing anyways, why keep them?
Look at the results, Benning hasn't hit on any of those projects aside from a 35points small-ish forward who gets top 6 minutes.
Look at it from a probability prospective, Benning is lowing his probability of finding a top 4 D or top 6 F by trading away these picks.
Look at it from Benning's supposedly "skill" of drafting, how does less picks equal more good prospects?
Look at it from any angle and none of them make any sense!

Read my previous post
 

Canucks1096

Registered User
Feb 13, 2016
5,608
1,667
Jared McCann wasn't traded? Probably I am missing something from trade history or draft history but I don't recall McCann being drafted by the Florida Panthers. You can argue that he didn't trade any top 10 1st rounder for the crap he targets but...

Why do you cherry pick? The whole conversation was about trading picks for reclamation player. Gudbranson is not a reclamation player
 

bandwagonesque

I eat Kraft Dinner and I vote
Mar 5, 2014
7,108
5,416
Jared McCann wasn't traded? Probably I am missing something from trade history or draft history but I don't recall McCann being drafted by the Florida Panthers. You can argue that he didn't trade any top 10 1st rounder for the crap he targets but...
Jared McCann wasn't a draft pick, he was a hockey player who had played an entire season for the Canucks. Thus when the Canucks traded him they did not trade a draft pick.
 

Ryp37

Registered User
Nov 6, 2011
7,525
1,081
I actually never got the impression Benning's job was ever in much danger. He's clearly in Aquilini's pocket and ownership seems to very much like the current situation (i.e. basically co-managing the team with a scout and F.A. serving as unofficial president). I expect management's inability to assemble a pro-level roster (through trade, free agency, or virtually anyway outside of drafting) to prevent the current core from ever being a true contender. We'll basically waste the Pettersson/Horvat era with poor depth signings, inopportune and poorly conceived trades, and perpetual gaping holes on defense and in goal.

Botch said recently that Benning has two years and the reasoning was the Aqua's didn't want to can Linden and Benning so close together or something along those lines.
 

y2kcanucks

Le Sex God
Aug 3, 2006
71,229
10,319
Surrey, BC
We do have an overpaid bottom 6...I don't have a problem with it...The Canucks salary structure is not top heavy (the only big names we have signed is Horvat,and Eriksson)..Boeser is next year,and Petes contract is a few years out yet...Capspace is not going to an issue.

Beagle (along with Sutter) have worked out great in a shutdown centre roles..This has enabled Horvat to move up to a scoring line..Canucks have scored 17 goals in the last 5 games since Beagles return.

I'm glad you admit we have an overpaid bottom 6. What's sad is that you don't have a problem with it. You should. Overpaying anyone is never a good idea, whether it's your bottom 6 or not. And that's been a common theme under the Benning regime is that he overpays for everyone.

And that cap space will go quickly. Especially if you expect this team to actually get good. Boeser will most likely be in the $8M range. Pettersson is going to get $10M+.

Horvat was on a scoring line even without Beagle. As he should have been. They easily could have brought in someone else like Kyle Brodziak for much cheaper, or some other placeholder. Or even go with a combination of Gaudette/MacEwen/Gagner for that 4C spot. Since we're stuck with Sutter anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: daddyohsix

y2kcanucks

Le Sex God
Aug 3, 2006
71,229
10,319
Surrey, BC
Still think the most likely scenario is they eventually hire someone as president and Benning becomes a lame duck.

If Doug Armstrong gets fired in St. Louis, things here could get interesting since Armstrong was supposedly the only other guy Aquilini talked to before hiring Mike Gillis.
 

HankNDank

Registered User
Oct 25, 2013
1,614
520
Medicine Hat
I'm glad you admit we have an overpaid bottom 6. What's sad is that you don't have a problem with it. You should. Overpaying anyone is never a good idea, whether it's your bottom 6 or not. And that's been a common theme under the Benning regime is that he overpays for everyone.

And that cap space will go quickly. Especially if you expect this team to actually get good. Boeser will most likely be in the $8M range. Pettersson is going to get $10M+.

Horvat was on a scoring line even without Beagle. As he should have been. They easily could have brought in someone else like Kyle Brodziak for much cheaper, or some other placeholder. Or even go with a combination of Gaudette/MacEwen/Gagner for that 4C spot. Since we're stuck with Sutter anyway.
By the time Pettersson is up for a new deal, Gudbranson, Sutter, and Baertchi's contract will have expired. Then just one year after that until we get another 13M off the books in Roussel, Beagle, Eriksson, and Luongo. That one year could potentially tie the hands of what ever GM we have in place. If Luongo decided to retire with one year left, that would add another 8.5M cap hit in the same year we have to resign Pettersson, which could get really ugly. But so long as we don't sign anymore garbage UFA's to long term deals anymore, we are most likely not going to have cap issues until we assemble a substantial pool of elite players, ala Chicago after their cup, soon to be Winnipeg, etc.

Now what I would love to see is more utilization of that cap space, buying bad contracts with tangible assets, so long as they are not longer than 3 years.
 

Black Noise

Flavourtown
Aug 7, 2014
3,704
946
North Vancouver
So it's pretty much Montour vs Baer. I probably want Montour. But does that make the Canucks cup contender with Montour instead Baer? No it doesn't. People acting like because we traded all the picks, Canucks are not cup contenders.

Reality of that didn't make much of a difference.

This two quote are complete garbage. No one thinks the Canucks should be contenders like Winnipeg or Tampa right now, but we should be in a much better position.

Honestly add Montour and Debrincat to this team and it makes a HUGE difference. Do you honestly think adding a 30 goal 60 point 20 year old forward and a 30-40 point 24 year old defenceman wouldn't make a difference? What are the two of the main things the Canucks lack right now? Depth scoring and scoring from the back end. Montour and Debrincat fit that perfectly. Adding those two would be huge.
 
  • Like
Reactions: daddyohsix

TruGr1t

Proper Villain
Jun 26, 2003
22,906
6,497
Botch said recently that Benning has two years and the reasoning was the Aqua's didn't want to can Linden and Benning so close together or something along those lines.

That's great and all. But it won't particularly matter. As noted, it's going to be hard to attract really top-tier management talent when it's pretty much common knowledge that ownership runs hockey ops.
 

Canucks1096

Registered User
Feb 13, 2016
5,608
1,667
This two quote are complete garbage. No one thinks the Canucks should be contenders like Winnipeg or Tampa right now, but we should be in a much better position.

Honestly add Montour and Debrincat to this team and it makes a HUGE difference. Do you honestly think adding a 30 goal 60 point 20 year old forward and a 30-40 point 24 year old defenceman wouldn't make a difference? What are the two of the main things the Canucks lack right now? Depth scoring and scoring from the back end. Montour and Debrincat fit that perfectly. Adding those two would be huge.

So right now there is only one non 1st round pick that's has a regular spot in the nhl and it's not because of injuries. That is Forsling. One out to so many picks, Jb got one nhl player so far so if JB didn't trade the 6 to 8 picks. We would of had two extra nhl player.

So something doesn't add up. Pretend you are at a salesperson. You closed 1 sales out of 30 something call so far. Your manager tells you, you need work ot and make another 7 calls. All of Sudden you became an elite sales persons and you made two out seven sales.(Montour and Debrincat)Does that make sense to you?

Reality of it is Canucks might get one. So Debrincat replaces Baer. They would still be about the same position.
 

valkynax

The LEEDAR
Sponsor
May 19, 2011
9,888
10,549
Burnaby
By the time Pettersson is up for a new deal, Gudbranson, Sutter, and Baertchi's contract will have expired. Then just one year after that until we get another 13M off the books in Roussel, Beagle, Eriksson, and Luongo. That one year could potentially tie the hands of what ever GM we have in place. If Luongo decided to retire with one year left, that would add another 8.5M cap hit in the same year we have to resign Pettersson, which could get really ugly. But so long as we don't sign anymore garbage UFA's to long term deals anymore, we are most likely not going to have cap issues until we assemble a substantial pool of elite players, ala Chicago after their cup, soon to be Winnipeg, etc.

Now what I would love to see is more utilization of that cap space, buying bad contracts with tangible assets, so long as they are not longer than 3 years.

The problem is, we tied ourselves with these horrific contracts and limited our cap options during this time. The contracts will run out eventually, no one's disputing that. But if we left a good chunk of cap space, it CAN be utilized in a way to eat in other teams' bad contracts in exchange for some assets. I'm not saying this will definitely happen, but with these overpaid players we essentially eliminated a viable option of asset acquisition.

There are teams that will run into serious cap issues very soon, and this could be used as leverage if our cap space is a little more generous.
 

Melvin

21/12/05
Sep 29, 2017
15,198
28,055
Montreal, QC
This two quote are complete garbage. No one thinks the Canucks should be contenders like Winnipeg or Tampa right now, but we should be in a much better position.

Oh, I know one guy who thought we'd be up there with the elite teams by now. A guy who isn't patient and hates watching losing hockey, who believes that if you're bad for three years it damages your culture.
 

Black Noise

Flavourtown
Aug 7, 2014
3,704
946
North Vancouver
So right now there is only one non 1st round pick that's has a regular spot in the nhl and it's not because of injuries. That is Forsling. One out to so many picks, Jb got one nhl player so far so if JB didn't trade the 6 to 8 picks. We would of had two extra nhl player.

So something doesn't add up. Pretend you are at a salesperson. You closed 1 sales out of 30 something call so far. Your manager tells you, you need work ot and make another 7 calls. All of Sudden you became an elite sales persons and you made two out seven sales.(Montour and Debrincat)Does that make sense to you?

Reality of it is Canucks might get one. So Debrincat replaces Baer. They would still be about the same position.
So you admit that Benning isn't that good a scout? So whats the point of having him then if that's literally the only positive to him?

Also if you think having Debrincat on Horvat's wing this season wouldn't make a difference you're delusional. Debrincat had 28 goals as a 19 year old and is on pace for 60 points this season. Baertschi's career high in points (35) is almost as many as Debrincat's rookie goal total. He would make a huge difference.
 

tyhee

Registered User
Feb 5, 2015
2,535
2,612
I wasn't sure where to put this comment so apologize if this is a bad place for it.

Last night Horvat, who had progressed offensively earlier in his career, was used as a shutdown center against McDavid and did a good job.

Many Canucks fans knew with certainty in the summer of 2015 that the Canucks had in 2013 drafted their future McDavid shutdown center

and that his name was Cole Cassels.
 

HankNDank

Registered User
Oct 25, 2013
1,614
520
Medicine Hat
The problem is, we tied ourselves with these horrific contracts and limited our cap options during this time. The contracts will run out eventually, no one's disputing that. But if we left a good chunk of cap space, it CAN be utilized in a way to eat in other teams' bad contracts in exchange for some assets. I'm not saying this will definitely happen, but with these overpaid players we essentially eliminated a viable option of asset acquisition.

There are teams that will run into serious cap issues very soon, and this could be used as leverage if our cap space is a little more generous.
But we haven't tied ourselves. That's the point. Only 5 teams have more cap space than we do. It's only going to be a one year window where we might be tight to the cap, assuming we don't trade any or all of Eriksson, Beagle, and Rousell. Plus, the cap is only going to go up between now and then.

We have 35 million in cap space next year, with only Boeser and Edler in line to get a big chunk of that. Of all the things to crap on this current roster composition, having a lack of cap space should be at the bottom of the list.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->