Pedan and Subban are irrelevant to this conversation and I don't think many, if any advocated for Subban. Honestly, Pedan might be an upgrade on a couple of our defensemen so I don't know how bad that makes those fans look. Probably speaks to our poor defensive depth more than anything.
As for Shinkaruk and Gaunce. Shinkaruk clearly needed another year down in the minors. Some were hoping that he would surprise in camp like Hutton and McCann did this year but it didn't happen. Gaunce is ready for the NHL and would be a better option than Prust but somehow being old made Prust a better option.
Vey is not as much of a kid as the rest of them. Not at all. He's a fringe player at 24 years old and over 100 NHL games played. He is no longer a prospect and is unlikely to ever develop into a regular NHLer. This part of your argument is especially ridiculous. Of course it's also incredibly ironic when you talk about Kassian being "gifted" a spot right before talking about Vey.
And yet all of them have cited to play in various spots on the Canucks roster. Gaunce being better than Prust when the actual trade happened was certainly debatable, but you have to appreciate management being wary of another kid mking it out of training camp unless he blew it out of the water.
So is Baertschi, who just happens to be developing into one of our best players not named Sedin recently. How quickly were people to wave him off as yet another supposed failure? Age does not necessarily equate to experience. Granted, I don't think Vey will amount to anything noteworthy, but he is still considered a young player. The difference between him and the idolization over Zack Kassian is only one kept getting vaulted to the top line.
Ironic, yes. But my point was not to compare Vey's over-usage, but essentially an inherent bias. Certain players are deemed bad based on a few games and that narrative never changes. Take Sutter, who frankly, outplayed Horvat and Vrbata handedly at the beginning of the season. Nope, he still sucks.
Yet we threw a kid like Virtanen on the team when he CLEARLY wasn't ready. Couple that with Willie D's quote about developing kids by rushing them along and we are basically the opposite of the Detroit model. Higgins and Prust played themselves out of the NHL altogether, they were not beaten out by kids. Having your veterans play so badly that you have to waive them and no other team takes them doesn't mean that the kiddies have earned their spot.
Virtanen is a unique case where sending him back would mean going to junior, thus management kept him around the lockerroom-- an action that ultimately paid dividends. Had they been allowed to send him to the AHL, I suspect he would have been playing there most of this season. As for Higgins and Prust. It's a mixture of both. If we didn't have as many kids playing up and beyond expectations, we wouldn't have waived the aforementioned as we'd have no one to adequately fill the spot.
He takes up cap space and a roster spot. There is an opportunity cost to every move. As a follower of the Habs you should have been well aware of the fact that Prust's game had fallen off to the point where he was barely NHL caliber and was living off of his reputation from year ago. We acquired him to fight so Dorsett didn't have to as much, and as a mentor for the kids, not for his NHL ability. Obviously neither of us are in the room, but being waived because of throwing a hissy fit because of a scratch doesn't exactly scream the lockerroom mentor that our young players should look up to. It was a failure on all levels. Giving up on Kassian, ruining his value last season, trading for an overrated veteran who was way past his prime and overpaid for what he brings, and throwing in a 5th round pick just for *****.
Of which we required neither. You're right though, we acquired him to mentor the kids and fight. Perhaps not the best assortment of skills, but given the circumstances of
why the trade happened, Prust was basically all we could get. How is Benning supposed to know Prust would throw a hissy fit when every word out of Montreal is how much of a purported character guy he is? The Habs only made the move to clear salary after re-upping Plekanec. They never actually wanted to move him.
Zack Kassian ruined Zack Kassian's value. Can we stop this nonsense? The kid is an alcoholic who the team spent three years attempting to work with. Three different coaches threw their hands up and demoted him. Montreal quite literally threw him off the team after he had just been kicked out of Vancouver. At what point do we lay the fault of Kassian on Kassian's shoulders? Benning spent almost all of last season trying to trade him, but no one wanted him. There's a reason we ultimately got Prust. And there's further reason Montreal had to take back Ben friggin' Scrivens.
Kassian may be idolized on this board. Around the league? He's a fringe NHL players with far too much baggage.
and isn't that the problem
This move has completely blown up in Benning's face and he deserves to be criticized for it. While not a completely devastating move, it was a sequence of really poor decisions from our management team that really scares me as a fan.
Sadly, yes.
For me, it depends on how you evaluate the trade. Benning took a gamble on potentially flipping Prust, all whilst using him as a placeholder and mentor to a youthened line-up. Furthermore, he wanted to avoid the backlash associated with keeping Kassian, but couldn't find any takers. While it ultimately failed, the end result isn't a noteworthy loss.
At the end of the day who cares about the 5th? Losing Kassian was the biggest problem, that we gave up a 5th to do so was just insult to injury.
Kassian had no value, which is why we eventually got Prust in the first place. After his incidents, they just wanted him gone.
