18/19 MGMT thread VII. WARNING POST #25

[Hollywood Burrows]

I replied "when are you going to fire Jim Benning?" to every one of his tweets until I suppose he had enough of me.

sometimes the brute force approach is the best one

 

[Foundational Player]

Hell of an assist on the Garland goal in the third period.

What can't this guy do on the backend?

Pro scouting strikes again!

 

[Megaterio Llamas]

"The late Jim Taylor once wrote the Canucks are in the middle of a 22-year rebuild that, considering the era, was a fairly accurate representation of the team’s direction."



Ed Willes: Adept at tanking, are Canucks on right track to escape rebuild train?

 

[Peter10]

Just to prove I belong to the cool folks too...

 

[Addison Rae]

Just to prove I belong to the cool folks too...

That’s awesome

 

[Jay Cee]

Just to prove I belong to the cool folks too...

Lol. He did you a favor. His Twitter feed is lame and cringe worthy by times.

 

[Peter10]

Lol. He did you a favor. His Twitter feed is lame and cringe worthy by times.

It is even more funny since he followed me for a very short time on my other account some years ago (probably by accident though).

 

[y2kcanucks]

Just to prove I belong to the cool folks too...

Frankie can't handle the truth.

 

[tyhee]

Posters who want to cheer for their team and think the rebuild is mostly done, helped by the summer's free agents signings, may want to avoid reading this post.

In the offseason the Canucks signed three forwards as unrestricted free agents. There’s been a good deal of discussion about it, much on hfb negative. Criticism surrounded the term given Roussel and more particularly Beagle, the cost of 4th liners and whether any signings for bottom 6 or depth forwards made sense at all. Supporters pointed out Beagle’s faceoffs and penalty killing and Roussel’s physical play.

I was among those that thought the signings the wrong kind of players to be signed for a rebuilding team that wasn’t short of depth forwards, but leaving that aside, this morning with over half a season's results to look at, I took a look at players put on waivers before or at the start of the season to see how the signings compared with who was available on waivers.

The free agents signings were

C Jay Beagle, 32 YO; 4 yrs @ $3 mm per=$ 12 million
LW Antoine Roussel, 29 YO; 4 yrs @ $ 3mm per =$ 12 million
LW Tim Schaller, 27 YO; 2 yrs @ $1.9 mm per = $3.8 million

At or before the beginning of this NHL season the following players were placed on waivers:

C Zack Smith, 30 YO; 3 yrs remaining @ $3.25 mm per =$9.75 million (not claimed)
LW Pontus Aberg, 24 YO; in final season of contract paying $650K per, will be RFA next summer
RW Dmitri Jaskin, 25 YO; in final season of contract paying $1.1 million per, will be RFA next summer.

Comparing the production and value of the players (point shares are from this season per hockey-reference.com; Player Value is from Corsica Hockey via NHL Numbers

Name	Gms	G	A	Pts	PS	Value
Beagle	22	1	3	4	0.1	67.4
Zack Smith	37	5	11	16	1.2	68.7
Roussel	41	4	14	18	1.5	70.8
Pontus Aberg	37	11	8	19	1.8	72.7
Schaller	32	0	5	5	-0.3	69.0
D Jaskin	27	1	6	7	0.3	71.3

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

So this choice is between:

-the combination of 30 YO Zack Smith, 24 YO Pontus Aberg and 25 YO Dmitri Jaskin, with 42 pts scored, 3.3 in point shares and 70.9 average player value for a total of $ 5 million this season with 2 players to be restricted free agents and one for another 2 years after this, versus

-the combination of 32 YO Jay Beagle, 29 YO Antoine Roussel and 27 YO Tim Schaller with 27 pts scored, 1.3 in point shares and average player value of 69.1 for a total of $7.9 million this season with 2 players @ $3 million for this and another 3 seasons and Schaller for this season and another at $1.9 million.

I know they aren’t the same KIND of players and they have different strengths and weaknesses, but the waiver players as a group are better and, more importantly, carry much less risk. If I had my choice of putting out a 4th line of Zack Smith, Pontus Aberg and Eriksson/Motte vs Jay Beagle, Tim Schaller and Eriksson or Motte, in my view there’s no comparison. The waiver players are better overall and there is much less future obligation and risk. None of them are as good at faceoffs as Beagle. On the other hand, Beagle's faceoff advantage over Smith would amount to about 1 faceoff win every 4 games, which would be much less than the difference in quality of their overall play.

It may or may not have made sense to to sign anyone and whether it would have made sense to claim the players I’ve mentioned, but if something was considered necessary imo it would have been better to have the lower cost, shorter term, younger, better players. (And yes, I’d rather pay 30 YO Zack Smith 3 x 3.25 million than 32 YO Jay Beagle 4 x 3 million.)

There’s also the question whether Gaunce, Gaudette and Gagner would have done a creditable job with no obligation beyond what the Canucks already had and Management could have concentrated their efforts on signing marginal players to assign to the Comets for depth and to play center for the Comets.

 

[VanJack]

Everybody is in agreement that a team in desperate need to upgrade its blueline in the off-season went out and dramatically overpaid for three veteran forwards instead. One of them, Schaller, can't get out of the press-box. Roussel has been somewhat effective in his role, but has a concussion history and certainly the term on his contract is ludicrous. Beagle may be decent now, but when he's 37? Yikes! Two of Jimbo's free-agent splurges from two seasons ago, Del Zotto and Gagner, are in the press-box and the minors.

I'm not sure if this is the reason Trevor Linden headed for the hills, but it might explain some of the reasoning.

 

[Hit the post]

One of them, Schaller, can't get out of the press-box..

Actually, seeing are we are stuck with him for a few years, it's better he doesn't get on the ice. One Eriksson on the roster bad enough already.

 

[Jyrki21]

Tweeting at Aquilini to fire management will probably only strengthen his defiant resolve, honestly.

Whereas we know that chanting in the arena basically works instantly with him.

 

[sting101]

Posters who want to cheer for their team and think the rebuild is mostly done, helped by the summer's free agents signings, may want to avoid reading this post.

In the offseason the Canucks signed three forwards as unrestricted free agents. There’s been a good deal of discussion about it, much on hfb negative. Criticism surrounded the term given Roussel and more particularly Beagle, the cost of 4th liners and whether any signings for bottom 6 or depth forwards made sense at all. Supporters pointed out Beagle’s faceoffs and penalty killing and Roussel’s physical play.

I was among those that thought the signings the wrong kind of players to be signed for a rebuilding team that wasn’t short of depth forwards, but leaving that aside, this morning with over half a season's results to look at, I took a look at players put on waivers before or at the start of the season to see how the signings compared with who was available on waivers.

The free agents signings were

C Jay Beagle, 32 YO; 4 yrs @ $3 mm per=$ 12 million
LW Antoine Roussel, 29 YO; 4 yrs @ $ 3mm per =$ 12 million
LW Tim Schaller, 27 YO; 2 yrs @ $1.9 mm per = $3.8 million

At or before the beginning of this NHL season the following players were placed on waivers:

C Zack Smith, 30 YO; 3 yrs remaining @ $3.25 mm per =$9.75 million (not claimed)
LW Pontus Aberg, 24 YO; in final season of contract paying $650K per, will be RFA next summer
RW Dmitri Jaskin, 25 YO; in final season of contract paying $1.1 million per, will be RFA next summer.

Comparing the production and value of the players (point shares are from this season per hockey-reference.com; Player Value is from Corsica Hockey via NHL Numbers

Name	Gms	G	A	Pts	PS	Value
Beagle	22	1	3	4	0.1	67.4
Zack Smith	37	5	11	16	1.2	68.7
Roussel	41	4	14	18	1.5	70.8
Pontus Aberg	37	11	8	19	1.8	72.7
Schaller	32	0	5	5	-0.3	69.0
D Jaskin	27	1	6	7	0.3	71.3

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

So this choice is between:

-the combination of 30 YO Zack Smith, 24 YO Pontus Aberg and 25 YO Dmitri Jaskin, with 42 pts scored, 3.3 in point shares and 70.9 average player value for a total of $ 5 million this season with 2 players to be restricted free agents and one for another 2 years after this, versus

-the combination of 32 YO Jay Beagle, 29 YO Antoine Roussel and 27 YO Tim Schaller with 27 pts scored, 1.3 in point shares and average player value of 69.1 for a total of $7.9 million this season with 2 players @ $3 million for this and another 3 seasons and Schaller for this season and another at $1.9 million.

I know they aren’t the same KIND of players and they have different strengths and weaknesses, but the waiver players as a group are better and, more importantly, carry much less risk. If I had my choice of putting out a 4th line of Zack Smith, Pontus Aberg and Eriksson/Motte vs Jay Beagle, Tim Schaller and Eriksson or Motte, in my view there’s no comparison. The waiver players are better overall and there is much less future obligation and risk. None of them are as good at faceoffs as Beagle. On the other hand, Beagle's faceoff advantage over Smith would amount to about 1 faceoff win every 4 games, which would be much less than the difference in quality of their overall play.

It may or may not have made sense to to sign anyone and whether it would have made sense to claim the players I’ve mentioned, but if something was considered necessary imo it would have been better to have the lower cost, shorter term, younger, better players. (And yes, I’d rather pay 30 YO Zack Smith 3 x 3.25 million than 32 YO Jay Beagle 4 x 3 million.)

There’s also the question whether Gaunce, Gaudette and Gagner would have done a creditable job with no obligation beyond what the Canucks already had and Management could have concentrated their efforts on signing marginal players to assign to the Comets for depth and to play center for the Comets.

Nice work and thanks for putting in the time.

4th liners to overpaid term contracts is always a poor decision and yes Gaunce Gaudette would be upgrades to Beagle and Schaller.....could have simply saved the 3/12 million contract by just letting Gaudette grow on the 4th line and in a couple years when ready jettisoned Sutter for futures

The thing with Benning is he puts too much emphasis in filling positional needs year to year instead of just focussing on getting what he really needs which is quality top6 top4 players. The best ways of doing that is A) Having as many draft picks possible to unearth a gem outside your lottery pick 1st rounder ..and B) Having cap space to aquire expensive pieces that have outgrown other teams budgets or UFA's that are actually willing to sign decent to fair contracts

He hasn't taken advantage of any of these things since Eriksson and Gudbranson which makes it pointless if you cant evaluate talent. So seeing him not understand what is worth spending your cap space on isn't that suprising

 

[rypper]

It sure seems like sometimes Jim gets tunnel vision or can't focus on more then one goal at once. With a lot of his moves the team would have been better off if he had just done nothing, or kept what he already had.

They should have never let Richardson go, keeping him would have (somewhat) prevented any need to trade for Sutter or signing Beagle. Keep Hamhuis, he wanted to be here and would have come cheap. He would be a better veteran presence on the blueline for young defenders to come up and play with.

If they were going to sign anyone this off season I wish they would have pursued Michael Grabner. He's a guy who can score, even when not in the top six, has some great wheels, and came at a reasonable price point.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

It sure seems like sometimes Jim gets tunnel vision or can't focus on more then one goal at once. With a lot of his moves the team would have been better off if he had just done nothing, or kept what he already had.

They should have never let Richardson go, keeping him would have (somewhat) prevented any need to trade for Sutter or signing Beagle. Keep Hamhuis, he wanted to be here and would have come cheap. He would be a better veteran presence on the blueline for young defenders to come up and play with.

If they were going to sign anyone this off season I wish they would have pursued Michael Grabner. He's a guy who can score, even when not in the top six, has some great wheels, and came at a reasonable price point.

6 goals in 25 games.... locked in at 3 years at $3.35 million for a 31 year old.... in the top 6...?

 

[mathonwy]

It sure seems like sometimes Jim gets tunnel vision or can't focus on more then one goal at once. With a lot of his moves the team would have been better off if he had just done nothing, or kept what he already had.

They should have never let Richardson go, keeping him would have (somewhat) prevented any need to trade for Sutter or signing Beagle. Keep Hamhuis, he wanted to be here and would have come cheap. He would be a better veteran presence on the blueline for young defenders to come up and play with.

If they were going to sign anyone this off season I wish they would have pursued Michael Grabner. He's a guy who can score, even when not in the top six, has some great wheels, and came at a reasonable price point.

Keeping Brad would have saved Brad a broken leg.

 

[rypper]

6 goals in 25 games.... locked in at 3 years at $3.35 million for a 31 year old.... in the top 6...?

Throughout his career he's been a middle six forward who can score goals. Maybe he's not lighting it up this year but Arizona is terrible. Last season with the Rangers he scored 25 goals with barely any powerplay time.

I'd easily take him at 3.35 for 3 years over Schaller at 1.9 for 2. At least he'll have an impact on games. I don't follow the coyotes but his ice time doesn't tell to me he's playing in their top six either. But with grabner that doesn't really matter.

 

[SillyRabbit]

How did Benning manage to build a team where Bo Horvat is the one who has to stand up to the other team's dirty players and challenge them to fight?

This wasn't even an "in the moment thing."

The Canucks had months to prepare for what they wanted to do to respond to Matheson and they settled on "let's have our second most valuable player Bo Horvat challenge him to a fight."

The "veteran, character players" on this team would probably have Pettersson fight Matheson himself if he were in the lineup.

What a complete joke.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

How did Benning manage to build a team where Bo Horvat is the one who has to stand up to the other team's dirty players and challenge them to fight?

This wasn't even an "in the moment thing."

The Canucks had months to prepare for what they wanted to do to respond to Matheson and they settled on "let's have our second most valuable player Bo Horvat challenge him to a fight."

The "veteran, character players" on this team would probably have Pettersson fight Matheson himself if he were in the lineup.

What a complete joke.

Maybe Bo wanted to..?..Or maybe you are trying (way too hard) to manufacture another fictional turd to blame on mismanagement...

 

[SillyRabbit]

Maybe Bo wanted to..?..Or maybe you are trying (way too hard) to manufacture another fictional turd to blame on mismanagement...

Believe me, no one has to manufacture anything when it comes to this management group.

And it doesn’t matter if Horvat wants to fight, it’s up to the “character guys” to stand up and say “no, we need you on the ice to help us win, I will take care of him.”

Such a spineless roster.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Believe me, no one has to manufacture anything when it comes to this management group.

And it doesn’t matter if Horvat wants to fight, it’s up to the “character guys” to stand up and say “no, we need you on the ice to help us win, I will take care of him.”

Such a spineless roster.

Obviously you feel you have to manufacture something..Last time i checked, Benning isn't on the hot seat....

There's 30 other teams with spine..feel free..

 

[F A N]

How did Benning manage to build a team where Bo Horvat is the one who has to stand up to the other team's dirty players and challenge them to fight?

This wasn't even an "in the moment thing."

The Canucks had months to prepare for what they wanted to do to respond to Matheson and they settled on "let's have our second most valuable player Bo Horvat challenge him to a fight."

The "veteran, character players" on this team would probably have Pettersson fight Matheson himself if he were in the lineup.

What a complete joke.

I seem to remember Gudbranson fighting Florida's most prolific fighter from last season. Did you not watch the game but decided to comment on it anyways?