Rumor: Benning has interest in re-signing Sutter and Hamonic

[m9]

I think anyone advocating Sutter as even a "9th forward" given his injury history is out to lunch. As I said previously, I'm fine with him as a 4th line RW for a cheapest contract. He gives you a RH faceoff guy that can kill penalties and gives you roster flexibility as then your 13th forward doesn't need to be a center.

I also agree that there are tons of players that fill the same role as Sutter that should all be cheap.

 

[Samzilla]

Two seasons out of seven where the team finished with higher a regular season than the one season of Tortorella that got Gillis fired. That *IS* the definition of a losing culture.

Nope, I have it on good authority that a losing culture only begins after missing the playoffs 5 seasons in a row and we only missed 4 seasons in a row. Checkmate atheists.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Yes there are many imaginary situations you can envision someone about being mad about. However, we are talking about what happened, in reality, on planet earth.

Yes, one the scrubs was going to get to play in the top 6...this is what happened...in reality.

"especially when Benning's acquisitions are babied and fed every chance to succeed (top 6 Highmore LOL), while others are forced to grind up (Horvat)"

and claiming that Highmore is getting spoon-fed because he's a Benning acquisition, over Horvat (who is not) is even more crackpot thinking ... prevalent in HF Canucks.

 

[AwesomeInTheory]

and claiming that Highmore is getting spoon-fed because he's a Benning acquisition, over Horvat (who is not) is even more crackpot thinking ... prevalent in HF Canucks.

I am inclined to agree with you regarding Highmore given that his situation was a result of circumstances. But it is the utter height of denial to think that they weren't trying to force Horvat into a defined role as a 'checking forward' kind of guy. Whether that was a directive from on high or a coaching decision is certainly up for debate, but you really can't argue with what literally happened in terms of deployment/usage/etc.

 

[RobertKron]

So he's so worthless that we don't want him for anything BUT somehow Benning should have got useful assets for him when he conceivably had the chance. Gotcha.

I mean, yes, it makes sense that someone can dislike a player and think that they are a detriment to the team, but also understand that there was a time when this player held value in the eyes of others around the league and should have been moved while it was still possible. I’m not sure what’s wrong with that?

 

[Zippgunn]

I mean, yes, it makes sense that someone can dislike a player and think that they are a detriment to the team, but also understand that there was a time when this player held value in the eyes of others around the league and should have been moved while it was still possible. I’m not sure what’s wrong with that?

It suggests that our team can't make any use out of a player that other teams think that they can. The Holtby situation is a great example of this; all the haters here are proclaiming him to be completely worthless yet apparently there were as many as eight teams interested in him which proves my point that he was seriously mis-used by our gawdaful coaching staff. All the hate Benning gets on this board versus the literal absence of criticism of Green et al makes me wonder if people here actually watch the games...

 

[supercanuck]

Because decent 4th line players are useful.

Also dime a dozen. You could bring back Boyd for 700k and it would make zero difference on ice. Why suffer through another year of Sutter?

 

[AwesomeInTheory]

It suggests that our team can't make any use out of a player that other teams think that they can. The Holtby situation is a great example of this; all the haters here are proclaiming him to be completely worthless yet apparently there were as many as eight teams interested in him which proves my point that he was seriously mis-used by our gawdaful coaching staff. All the hate Benning gets on this board versus the literal absence of criticism of Green et al makes me wonder if people here actually watch the games...

Holtby would be far from the first player who falls into the 'aging veteran teams think can be reclaimed' mold and will certainly not be the last.

It's possible Holtby is an ugly duckling that could be turned back into a beautiful swan and teams are intrigued with the notion of having him regain top form. It's also possible that teams are blinded by prior success and are ignoring warning signs/bells.

I really don't think that coaching really used him wrong or that his decline (which started well before he arrived in Vancouver) was really exacerbated by usage, but I'm curious why you think that's the case.

 

[tantalum]

Jimbo is totally hung up on the notion of having 'character in the room'. But if the 'character players' can't play, then it becomes just a waste of cap space.

As the old saying goes.....you don't play games in the dressing-room, you play them on an 85 x 200 sheet of ice.

The other thing is ultimately the team doesn't go anywhere unless the "character in the room" is coming primarily from the "core in the room". The team doesn't succeed because Beagle or Sutter or their ilk are leaders. They succeed because Pettersson, Hughes, Boeser etc become leaders..and I don't believe guys like Sutter and Beagle are some sort of magical answer as teachers.

 

[F A N]

Holtby would be far from the first player who falls into the 'aging veteran teams think can be reclaimed' mold and will certainly not be the last.

It's possible Holtby is an ugly duckling that could be turned back into a beautiful swan and teams are intrigued with the notion of having him regain top form. It's also possible that teams are blinded by prior success and are ignoring warning signs/bells.

I really don't think that coaching really used him wrong or that his decline (which started well before he arrived in Vancouver) was really exacerbated by usage, but I'm curious why you think that's the case.

Holtby will only be 32 next season. In 7 years time he can still sign a 2 year contract with Edmonton.

 

[Zippgunn]

Holtby would be far from the first player who falls into the 'aging veteran teams think can be reclaimed' mold and will certainly not be the last.

It's possible Holtby is an ugly duckling that could be turned back into a beautiful swan and teams are intrigued with the notion of having him regain top form. It's also possible that teams are blinded by prior success and are ignoring warning signs/bells.

I really don't think that coaching really used him wrong or that his decline (which started well before he arrived in Vancouver) was really exacerbated by usage, but I'm curious why you think that's the case.

If you look carefully at the first dozen or so games of last season you will see that Holtby and Demko split the starts pretty much evenly and had almost identical stats. It was only when the Canucks started to play Demko every night and reserved the crap games for Holtby that his numbers started to tank. He actually played pretty well even in games that were unmitigated disasters for the team (that 6-2 loss against Montreal where he stopped something like 4 breakaways but still had something like a .860 save % comes to mind) and far too often he was hung out to dry by his teammates so badly that no goalie could have done well. IIRC we played 11 2nd of back to back games last year and Holtby played 7 of them...

 

[tantalum]

Holtby will only be 32 next season. In 7 years time he can still sign a 2 year contract with Edmonton.

We disagree on most everything but this right here is funny.

 

[AwesomeInTheory]

If you look carefully at the first dozen or so games of last season you will see that Holtby and Demko split the starts pretty much evenly and had almost identical stats. It was only when the Canucks started to play Demko every night and reserved the crap games for Holtby that his numbers started to tank. He actually played pretty well even in games that were unmitigated disasters for the team (that 6-2 loss against Montreal where he stopped something like 4 breakaways but still had something like a .860 save % comes to mind) and far too often he was hung out to dry by his teammates so badly that no goalie could have done well. IIRC we played 11 2nd of back to back games last year and Holtby played 7 of them...

There are some goalies who do better when they're being consistently used, so that may have been factor. The Canucks being garbage definitely played a factor.

Could also be argued that he was fading as the season went on (which is totally paradoxical given that he saw less action as the season progressed, I acknowledge.)

But yeah, fair enough. That's definitely one way of interpreting his situation.

 

[nowhereman]

We've literally been waiting years for this guy to get shown the door and now Benning wants to extend him? Why?

 

[bandwagonesque]

Also dime a dozen. You could bring back Boyd for 700k and it would make zero difference on ice. Why suffer through another year of Sutter?

Because the notion that his presence somehow causes “suffering” is irrational.

 

[bandwagonesque]

We've literally been waiting years for this guy to get shown the door and now Benning wants to extend him? Why?

Because he’s a useful player.

 

[SeawaterOnIce]

Because he’s a useful player.

I'm a useful player. Not an NHL player, but a useful player.

 

[AwesomeInTheory]

Because the notion that his presence somehow causes “suffering” is irrational.

I really like how you're trying to ascribe some sort of higher spiritual meaning to someone just saying the dude sucks and they don't want him back (because they think he sucks.)

 

[bandwagonesque]

I'm a useful player. Not an NHL player, but a useful player.

Sutter is mediocre, but is an NHL player and would play on the 4th line of most teams.

 

[bandwagonesque]

Again, the attitude I’m calling out, which is present in this thread, is that Sutter should be abandoned irrespective of whether of not he’s able to contribute in a limited role.

 

[MS]

Because he’s a useful player.

Again :

1) He's only very marginally useful. At this point he's a declining 4th liner who is constantly hurt.

2) There are countless other players who can fill the same role for cheap and be equally or more useful. He does not have any special skills or value.

3) People not liking him is a legitimate thing and reason to not want him here. There are guys like Keith and Lucic who at the right price are 'useful players' but people would feel it would be an insult to the jersey for those players to wear it given past history.

4) You yourself say you don't like watching him play. Why would you stump for a guy you don't like watching when that player could be so easily replaced with countless guys who don't annoy you?

 

[RobertKron]

It suggests that our team can't make any use out of a player that other teams think that they can. The Holtby situation is a great example of this; all the haters here are proclaiming him to be completely worthless yet apparently there were as many as eight teams interested in him which proves my point that he was seriously mis-used by our gawdaful coaching staff. All the hate Benning gets on this board versus the literal absence of criticism of Green et al makes me wonder if people here actually watch the games...

the f*** are you talking about? Half this board can’t stand green.

 

[RobertKron]

Again, the attitude I’m calling out, which is present in this thread, is that Sutter should be abandoned irrespective of whether of not he’s able to contribute in a limited role.

what’s wrong with that attitude? If there are seven cars available of the same model, but different colours, it’s okay to not want the turquoise one.

At some point the team has to be willing to change something if it wants to achieve improved results.

 

[AwesomeInTheory]

Again, the attitude I’m calling out, which is present in this thread, is that Sutter should be abandoned irrespective of whether of not he’s able to contribute in a limited role.

I'm really struggling to understand what the problem is here. Yes, Sutter meets the very bare minimum threshold of what could constitute an NHL forward. Why should fans be accepting of such?

 

[rypper]

So he's so worthless that we don't want him for anything BUT somehow Benning should have got useful assets for him when he conceivably had the chance. Gotcha.

Does he have value now? No probably not. He definitely did when 4-5 teams were calling about him a few years ago. Missed opportunity.