Post-Game Talk: 29 more games of this trash | Flames 4 @ Canucks 1

[Huggy43]

its 2016 guys

People need to stop taking about 2011 so much. We are already 5 years removed from it...

 

[ahmon]

its 2016 guys

People need to stop taking about 2011 so much. We are already 5 years removed from it...

unfortunately our main players are still from the 1999 draft..

 

[pahlsson]

uhh...yeah you start a rebuild by signing a big money contract to a past his prime goalie leaving developing goalies in your system to rot. Only reason Lack or Markstrom got starts was Miller getting injured.

that was clearly part of the rebuild plan

would you rather rebuild on the backs of good, promising young goalies or on the back of an old, below average goalie getting paid way too much leading you straight into the lottery

 

[The Drop]

its as cool as saying a team making the finals must have made "all the decisions" correctly- implying great management.

They were clearly different than the Blackhawks.

The Canucks were an older team which was prob identified by management. Thus the need to keep earlier picks to rebuild. Unfortunately they sucked at drafting.

The Hawks won a cup with their stars on ELCs. They could and still can afford to trade their high picks.

I don't think anyone is arguing that the Canucks draft as well as the Hawks.

 

[The Drop]

How do you retool when your most important players are already 33 years old? (Sedins)

The second Benning took over, we needed a rebuild.

And signed a 34 year old to a 3 year 18 mil deal. Solid rebuild plan.

 

[ahmon]

They were clearly different than the Blackhawks.

The Canucks were an older team which was prob identified by management. Thus the need to keep earlier picks to rebuild. Unfortunately they sucked at drafting.

The Hawks won a cup with their stars on ELCs. They could and still can afford to trade their high picks.

I don't think anyone is arguing that the Canucks draft as well as the Hawks.

which is my point.

 

[ahmon]

And signed a 34 year old to a 3 year 18 mil deal. Solid rebuild plan.

Benning screwing up doesn't mean we didn't need a rebuild, that's two different points.

 

[604]

considering the canucks never made it past the 1st round in the next 3 years.. should be telling about the core....

The thing is, the game is close.

One move COULD have been all the difference.

If we had traded Scneider and a 1st for Jeff Carter rather than hanging on to our two goalies, IMO we likely get past the Kings and make a run the year LAK won it (with Carter as the playoffs leading goal scorer).

People wanted a balance between looking at the future and going all-in and I disagree with that. If the teams key players are over 28, you just go for it and mortgage the entire future, the rebuild is going to be terrible either way. The "Detroit model" isn't a real thing.

 

[ahmon]

The thing is, the game is close.

One move COULD have been all the difference.

If we had traded Scneider for a 1st for Jeff Carter rather than hanging on to our two goalies, IMO we likely get past the Kings and make a run the year LAK won it (with Carter as the playoffs leading goal scorer).

People wanted a balance between looking at the future and going all-in and I disagree with that. If the teams key players are over 28, you just go for it and mortgage the entire future, the rebuild is going to be terrible either way. The "Detroit model" isn't a real thing.

If you really believe that, then how can you not feel the management dropped the ball?

who you mean management or fans? Most fans I know simply want 1 cup.

 

[CanaFan]

Seriously?

- targeted Sbisa in the Kesler trade
- gave up Garrison for a 2nd that they used on Vey
- out of the 4 candidates for the 6th overall pick they chose the worst one
- just straight up dumped a useful player in Santorelli
- wasted cap space on Miller
- almost lost Markstrom for nothing
- dumped Lack for a 3rd
- straight-up paid Montreal money AND assets to take Kassian

The notion that this team was poorly setup to retool is a complete myth. They were in an excellent position and Benning bungled every single transaction along the way.

And the way Benning managed to bungle things is somehow worse than what Gillis did with the ****ing goalie situation. At least we ended up with Horvat and Markstrom out of that, the two brightest looking young players on this team alongside Hutton.

The only move that has meaningfully set this team back in terms of a rebuild and converting declining assets into future building blocks is the Sbisa acquisition (should have been for a younger piece) and trading the Garrison 2nd for Vey instead of drafting with it.

Everything else is either unrelated to rebuild and in fact would have delayed the rebuild (Santorelli) or is a minor loss of value (Lack for a third instead of a 2nd, losing the 5th for Kassian). The last two are mistakes by Benning but they will be felt later, not today.

The myth is the notion that a team with a 7 year dry spell at the draft is somehow in a "good" position for a rebuild. Just because Benning has made a mess of what he was given doesn't mean he wasn't given a mess to begin with. NTC's all over, no prospect depth, significant portion of the team on the wrong side of 30. That is not a team that is well positioned for a rebuild, it's a team that is well positioned to eke out a couple of useless playoff losses and sinking into mediocrity.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

And signed a 34 year old to a 3 year 18 mil deal. Solid rebuild plan.

you are overlooking what he brings as a mentor. he keeps markstrom on the bench, teaching him the valuable lesson that there is more to life than playing hockey.

 

[arttk]

The only move that has meaningfully set this team back in terms of a rebuild and converting declining assets into future building blocks is the Sbisa acquisition (should have been for a younger piece) and trading the Garrison 2nd for Vey instead of drafting with it.

Everything else is either unrelated to rebuild and in fact would have delayed the rebuild (Santorelli) or is a minor loss of value (Lack for a third instead of a 2nd, losing the 5th for Kassian). The last two are mistakes by Benning but they will be felt later, not today.

The myth is the notion that a team with a 7 year dry spell at the draft is somehow in a "good" position for a rebuild. Just because Benning has made a mess of what he was given doesn't mean he wasn't given a mess to begin with. NTC's all over, no prospect depth, significant portion of the team on the wrong side of 30. That is not a team that is well positioned for a rebuild, it's a team that is well positioned to eke out a couple of useless playoff losses and sinking into mediocrity.

Well I think the difference is that if Benning didn't mess up all his moves, the team would still be competitive even though not a cup contender.

This is obviously not want you want , because you think we should just rebuild, but then that is still better than what we have right now which is accidentally steering the team into a rebuild while burning assets and cap in the process.

I think what some of us are arguing is not whether we should rebuild or not but that the team was in a position where we could be competitive while the Sedins are still here.

Is that better for the long term, I think that is another discussion.
But MG definitely left enough behind where we could just get by ala Detroir before they found Nyquist, Tartar and then Larkin.

 

[CanaFan]

Well I think the difference is that if Benning didn't mess up all his moves, the team would still be competitive even though not a cup contender.

This is obviously not want you want , because you think we should just rebuild, but then that is still better than what we have right now which is accidentally steering the team into a rebuild while burning assets and cap in the process.

I think what some of us are arguing is not whether we should rebuild or not but that the team was in a position where we could be competitive while the Sedins are still here.

Is that better for the long term, I think that is another discussion.
But MG definitely left enough behind where we could just get by ala Detroir before they found Nyquist, Tartar and then Larkin.

Sure, I can agree that if the goal was simply to repeat 2014-15 a few more times until the Sedins retire then sure, the Gillis pieces were probably enough to do that. I'm not saying Benning hasn't mucked that part up.

It's only the notion that he left great pieces for a rebuild that I disagree with. An almost empty pipeline of young talent that should be well into its early 20's instead of around 19 and 29 right now. That is where he left the cupboards bare and we are feeling its effects today and will for a while yet.

 

[arttk]

Sure, I can agree that if the goal was simply to repeat 2014-15 a few more times until the Sedins retire then sure, the Gillis pieces were probably enough to do that. I'm not saying Benning hasn't mucked that part up.

It's only the notion that he left great pieces for a rebuild that I disagree with. An almost empty pipeline of young talent that should be well into its early 20's instead of around 19 and 29 right now. That is where he left the cupboards bare and we are feeling its effects today and will for a while yet.

I would say he left enough for a retool not a rebuild. I think a rebuild would've naturally occurred when the Twins retired.

But if you look at the things he has set up, it does appear that at the end he did fix scouting and development so based on that its not a reach to think moving on, the quality of the pipeline would improve.

Look at Detroit, if the club is running efficiently in all areas, you only need like 1 or 2 lucky hits to bypass a rebuild.

 

[CanaFan]

I would say he left enough for a retool not a rebuild. I think a rebuild would've naturally occurred when the Twins retired.

But if you look at the things he has set up, it does appear that at the end he did fix scouting and development so based on that its not a reach to think moving on, the quality of the pipeline would improve.

Look at Detroit, if the club is running efficiently in all areas, you only need like 1 or 2 lucky hits to bypass a rebuild.

Well 2012 looks like a "success" and 2013 looks very good so perhaps he did leave it in good shape. On the other hand Nonis hit 3 gems in 2004 and stunk up the next 3 drafts so it's risky to project too much on a single draft. But even if one assumes it was being fixed, which is great, the damage is still done at that point as you can't easily make up for the 2005-2011 hole (which, btw, isn't on just Gillis but he owns some of it).

It's fine to have a single bad draft or maybe two in a row but we had 7 in a row. That isn't sustainable and the only reason we didn't feel it earlier was it was being masked by the drafting success of 1999-2004 which left enough good, young pieces that we were able to run with the same core from 2008 to 2014 (with some adds by Gillis but not many). It's only now that the pieces of that core are hitting their mid 30's that we are noticing that there is no "next wave" coming up behind to replace them. Unlike Detroit where the decline of Zetterberg, Datsyuk, etc is being softened by the rise of Nyquist, Tatar, Sheahan, Pullkinen, etc (not even talking about Larkin).

 

[arttk]

Well 2012 looks like a "success" and 2013 looks very good so perhaps he did leave it in good shape. On the other hand Nonis hit 3 gems in 2004 and stunk up the next 3 drafts so it's risky to project too much on a single draft. But even if one assumes it was being fixed, which is great, the damage is still done at that point as you can't easily make up for the 2005-2011 hole (which, btw, isn't on just Gillis but he owns some of it).

It's fine to have a single bad draft or maybe two in a row but we had 7 in a row. That isn't sustainable and the only reason we didn't feel it earlier was it was being masked by the drafting success of 1999-2004 which left enough good, young pieces that we were able to run with the same core from 2008 to 2014 (with some adds by Gillis but not many). It's only now that the pieces of that core are hitting their mid 30's that we are noticing that there is no "next wave" coming up behind to replace them. Unlike Detroit where the decline of Zetterberg, Datsyuk, etc is being softened by the rise of Nyquist, Tatar, Sheahan, Pullkinen, etc (not even talking about Larkin).

Well difference is Nonis was trending down and MG's drafting was trending up and that came with his scouting revamp as well.

Not to mention that he revamped the whole farm system which is something that was not done before.

It's especially concerning to see Benning "revamped" both of that for no good reason other than ego.

 

[Huggy43]

unfortunately our main players are still from the 1999 draft..

They have relevance as they are still here in 2016 & playing to a high level. care to tell me how the 2011 SCF has relevance to the game last night vs Calgary?

 

[CanaFan]

Well difference is Nonis was trending down and MG's drafting was trending up and that came with his scouting revamp as well.

Not to mention that he revamped the whole farm system which is something that was not done before.

It's especially concerning to see Benning "revamped" both of that for no good reason other than ego.

Time will tell. One draft isn't a "trend" so I don't put too much stock in 2013 marking any sort of Renaissance in our drafting. It might have but then if Nonis was fired after just 2004 we'd have drawn the same conclusion there too.

 

[ahmon]

Well 2012 looks like a "success" and 2013 looks very good so perhaps he did leave it in good shape. On the other hand Nonis hit 3 gems in 2004 and stunk up the next 3 drafts so it's risky to project too much on a single draft. But even if one assumes it was being fixed, which is great, the damage is still done at that point as you can't easily make up for the 2005-2011 hole (which, btw, isn't on just Gillis but he owns some of it).

exactly.

It's fine to have a single bad draft or maybe two in a row but we had 7 in a row. That isn't sustainable and the only reason we didn't feel it earlier was it was being masked by the drafting success of 1999-2004 which left enough good, young pieces that we were able to run with the same core from 2008 to 2014 (with some adds by Gillis but not many). It's only now that the pieces of that core are hitting their mid 30's that we are noticing that there is no "next wave" coming up behind to replace them. Unlike Detroit where the decline of Zetterberg, Datsyuk, etc is being softened by the rise of Nyquist, Tatar, Sheahan, Pullkinen, etc (not even talking about Larkin).

And even if Larkin becomes that top line star, they will still need to find more core pieces - especially that #1 D.

Detroit hasn't won a cup since Lidstrom retired.

There are simply too many talented players coming up. Many teams are building a core of great talent.

There are already teams with a young #1C and a young #1D.

 

[ahmon]

They have relevance as they are still here in 2016 & playing to a high level. care to tell me how the 2011 SCF has relevance to the game last night vs Calgary?

I agree what we are discussing is sort of in the wrong thread, but I was responding to a post. maybe you ask the poster who started this topic?

 

[arttk]

Time will tell. One draft isn't a "trend" so I don't put too much stock in 2013 marking any sort of Renaissance in our drafting. It might have but then if Nonis was fired after just 2004 we'd have drawn the same conclusion there too.

Well 2014 was done by the same scouts unless you really believe Benning came in and rip apart the draft list.

2012 is not bad when you compare it to the rest of the league. Just seems like a pretty down year overall.

Nonis' draft got worse and worse and worse.
I've already gone over this but drafting from 2011 has been getting better year over year and the development system is fully in place with Utica.

 

[604]

who you mean management or fans? Most fans I know simply want 1 cup.

I mean both.

I remember posting that we should trade Schneider and 1st for Carter and basically being told I was an idiot because Schneider was the Canucks future and we were on the Detroit model of being competitive.

What nobody seems to realize is that Detroit and Chicago are built on drafting top 10 and having a few key picks late come in and hit huge (Lidstrom, Fedorov, Datsyuk and Keith). Neither team is a powerhouse because of the 1st rounders they kept in the 20 range while they were competitive (they each only had one turn out really well, Zetterberg and Seabrook).

 

[Catamarca Livin]

I mean both.

I remember posting that we should trade Schneider and 1st for Carter and basically being told I was an idiot because Schneider was the Canucks future and we were on the Detroit model of being competitive.

What nobody seems to realize is that Detroit and Chicago are built on drafting top 10 and having a few key picks late come in and hit huge (Lidstrom, Fedorov, Datsyuk and Keith). Neither team is a powerhouse because of the 1st rounders they kept in the 20 range while they were competitive (they each only had one turn out really well, Zetterberg and Seabrook).

What would the cap consequences been from trading for Carter? Zetterberg was not first round pick.

 

[CanaFan]

Well 2014 was done by the same scouts unless you really believe Benning came in and rip apart the draft list.

2012 is not bad when you compare it to the rest of the league. Just seems like a pretty down year overall.

Can't say for sure buuuuut ...

Virtanen has Benning's DNA all over it.

There was a video clip of Benning talking about the upcoming pick (24) and how they're gonna take their guy, he can really rip the puck, etc. So we know McCann had his fingerprints all over.

Demko at 36 is hard to say.

Tryamkin in the 3rd is the first Russian drafted by the Canucks since 2007 and we know Gillis avoided the KHL like the plague so that seems to have Benning's influence on it.

Forsling in the 5th is hard to say.

Stewart and Pettit after that don't seem very Gillis-like and Benning's been ripped unendingly for those picks so it's probably safe to give those two to him as well.

So by my count at least 5 of the 7 2014 picks have a strong smell of Benning on them, so I'd lean towards believing he walked into Vancouver as a guy who was already tremendously familiar with the 2014 draft crop from his time in Boston and asserted his influence - good or bad - pretty much right away.

Nonis' draft got worse and worse and worse.
I've already gone over this but drafting from 2011 has been getting better year over year and the development system is fully in place with Utica.

Again you can say Nonis' drafting got worse because he stayed on the job 3 extra years to show that. Gillis didn't get to stick around after his own 2004 so we don't know that it would have gotten better or if it was just a blip like Nonis. You are assuming he maintains it but there is no way to know. Either way it shouldn't have taken him from 2008-2011 to fix a simple and obvious organizational problem.

As for Utica, I agree it finally got fixed right at the end of his time here but have we seen a big impact yet? Hutton largely developed in college independent of us, as did Horvat in London. The next wave of kids - Gaunce, Shinkaruk, Subban, etc - will benefit from having our own system but that hasn't been a factor yet outside of Biega and of course being able to assign our declining vets there.

*Edit: Forgot Markstrom. That's the first real tangible benefit to come out of Utica so far. More will come but like with our drafting we are catching up right now.

 

[M2Beezy]

you are overlooking what he brings as a mentor. he keeps markstrom on the bench, teaching him the valuable lesson that there is more to life than playing hockey.

I really hope your kidding as thats a terrible mentoring it makes no sense. Look the only good thing about miller is he helps the tank but if benning wants to go for it then whars the point at least then put in the better goalie whitch is obv Marky