2019/20 Pro-Tank Thread - Part II (Mod note in Post #154)

[Hoghandler]

Some people see alot of things that arent there, or only choose to see what they want to see.

Completely agree.

Like when you hear this team sucks and is only winning because of Markstrom, or the 'big 3'. Then you dive into the data and see 10 players scoring over a half point/game on the season. Even the best offensive team in Canuck history, the '10-11 club only had 8 players produce at that rate.

Then it starts to sink in. Like, holy shit, more than half the roster is over a half point per game. Where did this tremendous depth and skill even come from anyway? No wonder it's the 2nd highest scoring team in the Western conference.

Just because people don't see something, doesn't mean it's not there. You hit the nail on the head.

 

[rypper]

Then we will agree to disagree. I see a lot of improvements over the course of Benning's tenure.

The one area where he was absolutely dreadful was in negotiating contracts. On that front, he's decided to step away from the table and allow Chris Gear to handle those duties. If you haven't heard Chris speak, I recommend listening to an interview with him. He gives off the Gillis/Gilman vibe and the impression he's suited to not only fill the role, but excel in it. The potential payoff of that decision cannot be overstated IMO.

Chris Gear has been with the team for nine years, the last four of which has been on the hockey operations side of things handling contracts and managing the salary cap.

From 15/16 to today, have the Canucks been a glowing example of contract negotiations and/or salary cap maneuvering?

Gear might have a larger voice now, but let's not pretend he's a brand new voice. Let's see how he handles the upcoming contract re-signings before we anoint him savior.

 

[Hoghandler]

Chris Gear has been with the team for nine years, the last four of which has been on the hockey operations side of things handling contracts and managing the salary cap.

From 15/16 to today, have the Canucks been a glowing example of contract negotiations and/or salary cap maneuvering?

Gear might have a larger voice now, but let's not pretend he's a brand new voice. Let's see how he handles the upcoming contract re-signings before we anoint him savior.

Based on Gear's recent interview it sounded like him taking over contract negotiations was a recent change. Didn't get the impression he was signing deals in 2015.

I was working under the assumption the crappy contract work was because Benning was the man at the helm of those negotiations. ..

Did you catch the Chris Gear radio interview from around 10 days ago?

 

[Pavel96]

Completely agree.

Like when you hear this team sucks and is only winning because of Markstrom, or the 'big 3'. Then you dive into the data and see 10 players scoring over a half point/game on the season. Even the best offensive team in Canuck history, the '10-11 club only had 8 players produce at that rate.

Then it starts to sink in. Like, holy ****, more than half the roster is over a half point per game. Where did this tremendous depth and skill even come from anyway? No wonder it's the 2nd highest scoring team in the Western conference.

Just because people don't see something, doesn't mean it's not there. You hit the nail on the head.

Speaking of nails in the head, you're in favor of tanking right?

 

[kanuck87]

Then we will agree to disagree. I see a lot of improvements over the course of Benning's tenure.

The one area where he was absolutely dreadful was in negotiating contracts. On that front, he's decided to step away from the table and allow Chris Gear to handle those duties. If you haven't heard Chris speak, I recommend listening to an interview with him. He gives off the Gillis/Gilman vibe and the impression he's suited to not only fill the role, but excel in it. The potential payoff of that decision cannot be overstated IMO.

Benning had the humility and self awareness to see where his strength's and weaknesses lay and stepped up to make moves to mitigate those shortcomings. He's moved away from negotiating, where he was a complete mess, and back into a heavy focus on the amateur side of drafting, where his experience and connections are ore likely to reap benefits for the club.

He's also done a great job with his coaching hires. Another worry with Benning was that he wasn't equipped to round out his coaching/management positions. With some time to look at his body of work, we have seen a savvy promotion of Judd Brackett, quality hire of Travis Green, as well as a shrewd move to bring in Manny Malhotra. To top it off, he may have signed the best goalie coach in the business, Ian Clark.

People see what they want to see. If you have seen no improvements in Benning's management over the past 6 years, I'm certainly not going to convince you otherwise. Can't say I have many complaints with Benning since his boss was asked to leave town. Trevor Linden was an empty suit. Getting rid of him has unsurprisingly not come back to bite us.

I think it's cute that you can say all of that with a straight face now that the team's about to have their first winning seasons after 4 disastrous ones.

 

[Pavel96]

I think it's cute that you can say all of that with a straight face now that the team's about to have their first winning seasons after 4 disastrous ones.

The team is on a winning streak so just roll into the tank thread and go on about how great Benning/this season is. One laughable difference between this season and 10/11 are the two highest paid players off of each. Off the top of my head are they the Sedins vs Eriksonn and Myers?

 

[rypper]

Based on Gear's recent interview it sounded like him taking over contract negotiations was a recent change. Didn't get the impression he was signing deals in 2015.

I was working under the assumption the crappy contract work was because Benning was the man at the helm of those negotiations. ..

Did you catch the Chris Gear radio interview from around 10 days ago?

I missed the interviewed was it on 650 or 1040?

Here's a quote from a Patrick Johnson article on the province:

Gear was hired as a vice-president and general counsel before the 2010-11 season, initially focused more on the business side of team operations. For the last four seasons he has assisted on the hockey operations side, dealing with player contracts and salary-cap concerns as well as management issues related to the Utica Comets.

 

[Hoghandler]

I missed the interviewed was it on 650 or 1040?

Here's a quote from a Patrick Johnson article on the province:

Chris Gear discusses his new role as assistant GM for the Vancouver Canucks - Sportsnet.ca

Here it is.

 

[Bleach Clean]

I see an improving record with Benning over his tenure. There isn’t a single area he oversee’s where I think we are regressing the longer he is on board. The drafting is trending exceptionally well, the trade body of work has gotten significantly better, the decision to have Chris Gear do all the contract negotiations is an excellent one, the coaches Benning has brought in to the organization I’m a fan of - Green, Ian Clark, Malhotra etc...

Mike Gillis on the other hand came out strong making good decisions, then really faded over time to the point where it was tough to give him the benefit of the doubt any longer. Didn’t install much confidence in the 2nd half of his tenure.

Everyone likes black and white answers like Benning bad, Gillis good, or vice versa. I see it more along the lines of first half Benning bad, 2nd half good. First half Gillis good, 2nd half bad. Obviously not all moves fall into these blanket terms, but that’s the crux of how I’ve seen things.

I know how you see it, I just disagree with your perception. It’s not a black or white thing, it’s a right or wrong thing. You’re wrong and recency bias isn’t a shield, it’s a fallacy.

Here’s the tell: What would Benning have to regress to in order to be worse than where he began? Milbury levels?

 

[Hoghandler]

I missed the interviewed was it on 650 or 1040?

Here's a quote from a Patrick Johnson article on the province:

Did you check out the interview? Paraphrasing; Gear said he was moved to the hockey side 4 years ago. Was only drafting up paperwork after negotiations with players were already finished. Recently promoted to being the guy negotiating the deals. That was what I took out of it the first time around listening, though it was over 3 weeks ago, so the details were somewhat murky.

The guy certainly instills a lot more confidence in handling negotiations than Benning did. Some of the contact work early on in Benning's tenure were as bad as anything I've ever seen. Specifically around the Sbisa/Dorsett extension time.

 

[Hoghandler]

I know how you see it, I just disagree with you perception. It’s not a black or white thing, it’s a right or wrong thing. You’re wrong and recency bias isn’t

Here’s the tell: What would Benning have to regress to in order to be worse than where he began? Milbury levels?

I'm wrong because you say so? That wasn't very convincing...

Here's the tell; Benning is being almost universally praised, outside a select few vocal fans on this board.

Or is the tell the team he built? Yeah, that could be the tell as well.

 

[Jack Burton]

 

[Jack Burton]

Finally a L

Mind you, They also picked up a point.

Adversity. That's what I want this team to go through.

If they can't handle it by now then they probably never will.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

I'm wrong because you say so? That wasn't very convincing...

Here's the tell; Benning is being almost universally praised, outside a select few vocal fans on this board.

Or is the tell the team he built? Yeah, that could be the tell as well.

Benning did fairly poorly from 2014 - 2018 in asset management, trades, and UFA signings. That's 5 out of the 6 years that he's been here. I realize recency bias is a thing, and "what have you done for me lately" is a huge factor in sports, but let's not pretend like his first 5 years of trading, UFA signings, and asset management were anything other than a failure (more bad than good).

 

[Jack Burton]

Benning did fairly poorly from 2014 - 2018 in asset management, trades, and UFA signings. That's 5 out of the 6 years that he's been here. I realize recency bias is a thing, and "what have you done for me lately" is a huge factor in sports, but let's not pretend like his first 5 years of trading, UFA signings, and asset management were anything other than a failure (more bad than good).

The Sedin years.

 

[lousy]

Benning did fairly poorly from 2014 - 2018 in asset management, trades, and UFA signings. That's 5 out of the 6 years that he's been here. I realize recency bias is a thing, and "what have you done for me lately" is a huge factor in sports, but let's not pretend like his first 5 years of trading, UFA signings, and asset management were anything other than a failure (more bad than good).

Recency bias? Do you mean how things have turned out? So far I am pretty happy with it. Made up future hand wringing excluded of course. Which may or may not happen.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

Recency bias? Do you mean how things have turned out? So far I am pretty happy with it. Made up future hand wringing excluded of course. Which may or may not happen.

No, I mean the moves and decisions that Benning has made recently. His recent trades and signings have been better than previous years.
It's not overly surprising that a team that has drafted high for six years (dating back to Horvat in 2013) and spends to the cap is doing well.

 

[Jack Burton]

Wow! Zers.

Nice LOSE.​

 

[Jack Burton]

This team will collapse.

 

[Bleach Clean]

Completely agree.

Like when you hear this team sucks and is only winning because of Markstrom, or the 'big 3'. Then you dive into the data and see 10 players scoring over a half point/game on the season. Even the best offensive team in Canuck history, the '10-11 club only had 8 players produce at that rate.

Then it starts to sink in. Like, holy ****, more than half the roster is over a half point per game. Where did this tremendous depth and skill even come from anyway? No wonder it's the 2nd highest scoring team in the Western conference.

Just because people don't see something, doesn't mean it's not there. You hit the nail on the head.

Did you see it before this season? Are you saying it will persist after this season?

The timing of your post and the answers to those questions will prove whether your position carries weight. As it is, it just seems like disingenuous recency and selection bias. Not for everyone of course, but to the more discerning poster? I think yes.

 

[Bleach Clean]

I'm wrong because you say so? That wasn't very convincing...

Here's the tell; Benning is being almost universally praised, outside a select few vocal fans on this board.

Or is the tell the team he built? Yeah, that could be the tell as well.

Notice that you didn’t answer my question? That’s the tell people.

You’re wrong because of the bias you show in your analysis. I can show it to you, I don’t mind? Let me know.

Now, everyone has bias of course, that’s not unique, but when you ignore information to the contrary and you prop up your view with illogical stretches, it’s easy to pinpoint how this skews your opinion. Leading to inaccurate conclusions. Not for every argument, of course, but the obviously dubious ones.

Before this year, I didn’t think you propped up Benning to this degree. Your opinion has turned because of recency bias and a vendetta against anti-Benning rhetoric. True or false?

 

[Jack Burton]

Jacob Markstrom.
.Neff said.

 

[Jack Burton]

Notice that you didn’t answer my question?

You’re wrong because of the bias you show in your analysis. I can show it to you, I don’t mind.

Your tripping.

 

[Jack Burton]

Did you see it before this season? Are you saying it will persist after this season?

The timing of your post and the answers to those questions will prove whether your position carries weight. As it is, it just seems like disingenuous recency and selection bias. Not for everyone of course, but to the more discerning poster? I think yes.

Yep.

Your still tripping.

 

[Jack Burton]

Photoshop!