2018 Management Discussion, Pt. III - Now with Less Trevor and More Mutiny

Sell the Team Chant


  • Total voters
    83
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.

Fatass

Registered User
Apr 17, 2017
21,951
13,921
My biggest gripe (I know you addressed it to Y2K, and I'm not trying to speak for him, of course), is that if management had handled things properly, there'd be two to four more good prospects in the system right now, and several fewer bad contracts.

I think this issue is at the heart of much of the disagreement between management supporters and critics.

Supporters:
The prospect group is excellent and also sufficient to form the core of a contender. Continuing to draft well with the standard number of picks will get the job done.

Critics:
There are some good prospects coming along, but not enough to lead the Canucks to contention. Management has failed to recognize where the team is in its cycle and thus to acquire more picks, and continuing to rely on only the standard number will see the team top out as mediocre (see the Calgary Flames).
Excellent, and well explained post. I see us with one more top ten pick coming in 2019. However, with the arrival of Quinn Hughes in the 2019/2020 season, I see us moving into the playoffs then. We lucked out in these past two drafts. Pettersson will be a great forward. Hughes is a very special player. He is the key to us winning Cups.
 

Hit the post

I have your gold medal Zippy!
Oct 1, 2015
22,288
14,030
Hiding under WTG's bed...
However, with the arrival of Quinn Hughes in the 2019/2020 season, I see us moving into the playoffs then.
That's hardly much of a benchmark (eg., making the playoffs in a league where so many teams make the post-season). Even Dave Nonis managed to do that once with the Leafs. I hope Hughes will be as impactful as Tanev for the Canucks. However, even having Tanev in his prime didn't prevent us from lottery pick finishes. Perhaps Demko will hid enough weaknesses - we can only hope.
 

Lindgren

Registered User
Jun 30, 2005
5,948
3,850
Excellent, and well explained post. I see us with one more top ten pick coming in 2019. However, with the arrival of Quinn Hughes in the 2019/2020 season, I see us moving into the playoffs then. We lucked out in these past two drafts. Pettersson will be a great forward. Hughes is a very special player. He is the key to us winning Cups.

Thanks.
I'm in group two. Boesser is obviously a big hit. Peterson and Hughes look very promising. I think that's not enough. I'm dying for management to see an opportunity here and go all in on collecting more picks, so that before the group already in play are up for big contracts, we've got two or three more elite young players to go with them. Otherwise, I fear that Peterson and Hughes will only be the key to the Canucks winning a game in the first round of the playoffs before getting eliminated.

Which of us is right will play out in a few seasons. If things go as I expect, the team will start to improve in the standings, and things here will get even more polarized. Supporters will say the results show that management has done a good job. Critics will say they're on track to be mediocre before falling back. Each will attack the other.
 

Hit the post

I have your gold medal Zippy!
Oct 1, 2015
22,288
14,030
Hiding under WTG's bed...
Thanks.
I'm in group two. Boesser is obviously a big hit. Peterson and Hughes look very promising. I think that's not enough. I'm dying for management to see an opportunity here and go all in on collecting more picks, so that before the group already in play are up for big contracts, we've got two or three more elite young players to go with them. Otherwise, I fear that Peterson and Hughes will only be the key to the Canucks winning a game in the first round of the playoffs before getting eliminated.

Which of us is right will play out in a few seasons. If things go as I expect, the team will start to improve in the standings, and things here will get even more polarized. Supporters will say the results show that management has done a good job. Critics will say they're on track to be mediocre before falling back. Each will attack the other.
That's the problem. I fail to see how management has shown any ability to surround talent with a solid supporting cast. And no, paying $$$ & term to marginal 3rd liners/4th liners/3rd pairing guys isn't the way IMHO.
 

tyhee

Registered User
Feb 5, 2015
2,535
2,612
Or I can believe that people aren't static and that Jim Benning, who came in new, may just have done some growing on the job. I wanted Benning gone at the end of his contract, but I do love his last two first round picks. They are both who I wanted before the draft and that hasn't happened a lot in our history.

The problem, to me, is the meddling of the Aquillinis. Everything I hear is just negative about the way they choose to conduct themselves. You can't live in Vancouver and not hear some of these things.

You have a point in that essentially everybody grows on the job.

Otoh, Benning signed the Beagle contract this offseason. Now, Jay Beagle is a nice 4th line center to have for a season, maybe even two, but the contract he was signed to (front end loaded, signing bonuses such that here is only one time in the four years that it can help to buy him out, overpayment and a four year term for a player who will be 33 at the beginning of the first season) by itself is enough to show he has not become competent to hold his job. There are other smaller things that to some indicate the same thing, but that one is enough to clearly show his way of thinking and disqualify him from holding his current post.

If Beagle has a good season or two in Vancouver I expect to see posts laughing at all the nay-sayers who criticized the signing. Imo those posts would be misguided, failing to realize that to those of us who consider the Beagle contract ridiculously awful, how Beagle performs in his first two seasons is relatively unimportant.
 
Last edited:

Javaman

Registered User
Jul 13, 2010
2,457
3,243
Vancouver
Wow! There is actually visceral hatred of Canuck’s management here. Don’t you guys think we have the best under 23 prospect pool ever? All those guys, excepting Bo, were brought here by current management.

I don't know if we have "the best under 23 prospect pool ever", but it's irrelevant. Having a strong prospect pool after the crappy performances by Benning's Canucks ought to pretty much be a minimum expectation.

If we didn't have an impressive collection of prospects, I'd think one could fairly argue that Benning was actively sabotaging the Canucks' chances, rather than merely being incompetent.

Either way, the whole "strong prospect pool" is a rather weak gambit by Benning supporters.
 

MarkusNaslund19

Registered User
Dec 28, 2005
5,415
7,645
“learning on the job”

imagine treating a 55 year old manager of a 700 million dollar organization to the standard of a 15 year old walmart cashier
You're right, once someone is an adult they should stop learning or improving. The world will be so much better that way.

Of course he's learning on the job. First time coaches and GMs in the NHL are always learning on the job. Most coaches do a lot better during their second tour of duty, for example, because the NHL is a different beast. Just like walmart cashiers, I guess.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lousy

Hit the post

I have your gold medal Zippy!
Oct 1, 2015
22,288
14,030
Hiding under WTG's bed...
Of course he's learning on the job. First time coaches and GMs in the NHL are always learning on the job. Most coaches do a lot better during their second tour of duty, for example, because the NHL is a different beast. Just like walmart cashiers, I guess.
Probably not a recipe for success hiring a 1st time GM, 1st time coach, 1st time President all at the same time. You can get away with that at low-level positions in an organization like Wallyworld.
 
  • Like
Reactions: valkynax

y2kcanucks

Le Sex God
Aug 3, 2006
71,229
10,319
Surrey, BC
I agree. Higher picks = better (odds) of good players. Is your biggest gripe with our current regime their insistence to state publicly they are building a team to compete for the playoffs, while (obviously) the team was clearly bottom five? I guess we were either lying, or tanking by accident. Either way, we have a really good group of young players now.

I wouldn't say tanking by accident. I'd say they have been so bad at their jobs that they failed miserably at what they attempted to accomplish and the team has been the worst team in the NHL over the last 3 year period.
 

valkynax

The LEEDAR
Sponsor
May 19, 2011
9,888
10,549
Burnaby
I wouldn't say tanking by accident. I'd say they have been so bad at their jobs that they failed miserably at what they attempted to accomplish and the team has been the worst team in the NHL over the last 3 year period.

Pretty much, these tards went in to every season with VERY clearly stated intention of *giant air quotes* competing. And the team in front came out every season looking like horse vomit and pig excrement.

And this is not just them saying they wanna compete for the sake of PR (I don't expect to say anything different), many of the off-season moves reflects on that.

Just look at all these dumb shit FA's we brought in.

EDIT: ok MAYBE I will cut a bit of a slack for Eriksson, as most if not all the big name FA's from that off-season were unmitigated disasters. Still, just because everyone else's jumping off a cliff doesn't mean you have to.
:facepalm:
 
  • Like
Reactions: y2kcanucks

Javaman

Registered User
Jul 13, 2010
2,457
3,243
Vancouver
You're right, once someone is an adult they should stop learning or improving. The world will be so much better that way.

Of course he's learning on the job. First time coaches and GMs in the NHL are always learning on the job. Most coaches do a lot better during their second tour of duty, for example, because the NHL is a different beast. Just like walmart cashiers, I guess.

Holy Misrepresentation Batman!

He won a Stanley Cup in his previous management role --- he got to hoist the Cup and everything! He garnered the descriptor of "drafting guru" in his role before that with the Sabres.

He's now entering his 5th year as the GM of possibly the worst team over that time span. How much more time do you figure he needs to demonstrate his competence?

How many more seasons of crappiness by the Canucks do you need to be convinced he's nothing more than the embodiment of the Peter Principle?
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Drop

Peter10

Registered User
Dec 7, 2003
4,193
5,042
Germany
Of course he's learning on the job. First time coaches and GMs in the NHL are always learning on the job. Most coaches do a lot better during their second tour of duty, for example, because the NHL is a different beast. Just like walmart cashiers, I guess.

Well, I certainly hope Benning will be soon in a position to be eligible for a secound tour of duty...
 

valkynax

The LEEDAR
Sponsor
May 19, 2011
9,888
10,549
Burnaby
Well, I certainly hope Benning will be soon in a position to be eligible for a secound tour of duty...

People make it sound like oh no poor Jimmy is the only GM in history to have to deal this, wah wah wah.

Dim Jim hasn't learn a thing on his job, he's still signing ridiculous contracts, still thinking this team is a playoff team, and probably won't shy away to make stupid trade at the drop of a hat.

How much f***ing longer does this waste of human flesh need to "learn on the job"?
 

CanaFan

Registered User
Feb 19, 2010
19,887
5,849
BC
You're right, once someone is an adult they should stop learning or improving. The world will be so much better that way.

Of course he's learning on the job. First time coaches and GMs in the NHL are always learning on the job. Most coaches do a lot better during their second tour of duty, for example, because the NHL is a different beast. Just like walmart cashiers, I guess.

Learning is fine. Excusing incompetence with “But he’s still learning” is not.
 

lousy

Registered User
Jul 20, 2004
936
341
Calgary
How much ****ing longer does this waste of human flesh need to "learn on the job"?

Why do you always post such childish name calling towards Jim Benning? I understand that you do not like his work. But why do you have to act like a 5 year old when posting? Your act is tiresome at best. Use your words like an adult.
 

Javaman

Registered User
Jul 13, 2010
2,457
3,243
Vancouver
Why do you always post such childish name calling towards Jim Benning? I understand that you do not like his work. But why do you have to act like a 5 year old when posting? Your act is tiresome at best. Use your words like an adult.

Deflection 101
 

Javaman

Registered User
Jul 13, 2010
2,457
3,243
Vancouver
Civility while letting your opinion be known is a sign of maturity. I am sorry you do not get that.

Primping oneself about civility while deliberately ignoring the point is hardly a sign of maturity either.

I am sorry you do not get that.
 

lousy

Registered User
Jul 20, 2004
936
341
Calgary
Primping oneself about civility while deliberately ignoring the point is hardly a sign of maturity either.

I am sorry you do not get that.

I am not ignoring anything. Shall we move on to childish name calling because I do no agree with you? Maybe that will solve something?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Luckylarry

Javaman

Registered User
Jul 13, 2010
2,457
3,243
Vancouver
I am not ignoring anything. Shall we move on to childish name calling because I do no agree with you? Maybe that will solve something?

If you were truly 'mature and civil' you would respond to the point the poster was trying to make about Benning's incompetence. Rather, you seem fixated on his "uncivil" vocabulary choices. If you were truly as mature and civil as you're attempting to convince me you are, you'd look past said poster's immature and uncivil language and respond to the critique of Benning's performance.

Instead, you're engaging with me.

Like I said, Deflection 101.
 

valkynax

The LEEDAR
Sponsor
May 19, 2011
9,888
10,549
Burnaby
Why do you always post such childish name calling towards Jim Benning? I understand that you do not like his work. But why do you have to act like a 5 year old when posting? Your act is tiresome at best. Use your words like an adult.

What else is he suppose to be?

What has he done to make a convincing stance that he's not just a waste of human flesh dragging this team through the dirt and turned a once proud franchise into the butt end of NHL executive jokes?

I once supported him, I patiently waited for this idiot to turn his head around see reality. All he did was doubling down on his mistakes and made one dumb move on top of another.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pomorick

Curmudgeon

Registered User
Aug 18, 2018
279
169
Probably not a recipe for success hiring a 1st time GM, 1st time coach, 1st time President all at the same time. You can get away with that at low-level positions in an organization like Wallyworld.

I don't believe in this case there could be any mulligans for "1st times", especially given Benning's history in Boston and Desjardins' as an AHL head coach, and they may not have been the right calls for this team for various reasons but Linden on the other hand was completely unqualified to run anything.

External hiring considerations for senior management or leadership roles typically revolves around the candidate's previous experience in the same capacity with competing organizations with latitude for candidates who have paid their dues and were being groomed over a period of time for the role in an equally or ideally more succesful organization but got tired of waiting. The success of external hires is always predicated on having a sound foundation and team to work with, clear and realistic direction, and a working environment where people have the room to do what they've been hired to within the corporate mandate. Benning and Desjardins at the very least appeared to have paid their dues and were candidates for like positions with other organizations in addition to the Canucks.

You have to wonder how the same management team would have performed with a Gaglardi ownership group or with a Burke or Lamoriello type between Benning's level and Aquilini. As fans, all we have is conjecture and speculation, and the rare accurate tidbit from the media, but it certainly seems like a solid bet that anybody pitching a 5 year playoff-less teardown and rebuild stood no chance of getting hired in the first place.
 

Curmudgeon

Registered User
Aug 18, 2018
279
169
“learning on the job”

imagine treating a 55 year old manager of a 700 million dollar organization to the standard of a 15 year old walmart cashier

Well, as a 55 year old that just wrapped up running a lower nine figure business (e.g. not 700 million), I can attest to this but is it really necessary to use "dim jim" as a moniker or as another member posted earlier, use the term "tard"?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Luckylarry

valkynax

The LEEDAR
Sponsor
May 19, 2011
9,888
10,549
Burnaby
Well, as a 55 year old that just wrapped up running a lower nine figure business (e.g. not 700 million), I can attest to this but is it really necessary to use "dim jim" as a moniker or as another member posted earlier, use the term "tard"?

Different people have different views.

I honestly cannot think of a more deserving title - and like I said, I tried my best to support this management regime. I mean...who in their right minds WANTS their team turned into a joke across the league? Some saw through their idiocy quite early, and made predictions that held true to this day. I held on to hope, only to have it stomped and pissed on again, and again, and again, and again by our beloved Dim Jim and his cronies.

Absolutely not expecting anyone to agree with me, as this is just my opinion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->