Confirmed with Link: Canucks extend Jim Benning’s contract

[tantalum]

My opinion on the Canucks making the playoffs means diddly squat (as a lone poster on a message board)...If Benning can turn the Canucks into an annual playoff team (not just a one off)..It would be very exciting for hockey in the city..

Who knows how far Pettersson ,Hughes,Demko,Horvat ,Boeser can take this team...?

If he can turn the team into a team that is annually playing more than 82 games a season you will find quite quickly find that the “Benning haters” will be more than willing to give him the credit.

I think that dream ends by Christmas.

 

[FroshaugFan2]

It's on both 100%. Why? because benning didn't need to accept the job and vision but he did. As soon as he took the job he fully endorsed the plan (if it came from ownership). Though I think it was probably similar to the Gillis hiring....Aquilini hired the guys who told him what he wanted to hear. Gillis happened to be correct and was able to execute. The others weren't. And really it wasn't even really that they were wrong, per se, it was 99% poor execution that led them to what we've seen the last handful of years. Not the overriding demand. Make no mistake, it doesn't matter what strategy you try to align with this group the only conclusion you will come to is it's a bad management group.

Retool? Bad
rebuild? bad
retool followed by rebuild? bad
etc....

This. The strategy discussion is a red herring. Benning's transactions have been overwhelming bad regardless of strategy.

6x6 for Eriksson is awful whether you are competing or rebuilding.

Same with McCann + 33rd for Gudbranson.

Same with a 2nd for Vey. And a 3rd for Pedan. And 5th for Larsen.

Same with the Sbisa, Gagner, Sutter, Bartkowski, etc contracts.

Poor strategy isn't the reason the Canucks were forced to start a 19 year old junior goalie against one of the best teams in the league. With no option of pulling him.

Poor strategy doesn't excuse tampering or not knowing how LTIR works or not knowing how long ELCs are.

It's doesn't excuse learning about draft odds by running a fan made online simulator.

When discussing what Benning has done, I don't care about the strategy. Because whatever the strategy, the execution in the form of transactions has been awful.

 

[krutovsdonut]

Huh?

Those 2017 deals were generally obvious short-term 'tradeable' contracts to patch over in a time of a rebuild, similar to what Toronto did. 2017 was literally the only offseason since Benning has been here where the team wasn't throwing huge trade/UFA offers for name players to compete now.

2017 saw us make actual deadline moves and most of that year saw actual talk of a rebuild. The tone in the summer of 2017 was very different from any other point here. Then the team had a surprisingly hot start that nobody expected and both Aquilini and Benning were suddenly talking playoffs.

Again, every bit of information we have - and this comes from multiple independent media sources - is that Linden started pushing for a full rebuild during 2016-17, that process was in place for a while, and then Benning and Aquilini pushed Linden out and the full rebuild was abandoned at some point in 17-18.

disagree.

there was no talk of a rebuild in 2016-2017 until the tdl when we moved hansen and burrows and, at the time and long after, a lot of people disputed those were rebuild moves as i recall.

to me the 2017 free agents were treated like somebody else's guys by benning after linden was fired and i think green must have had some backing to demote them the way he did even before then. gagner played well enough to make the team at camp in 2018 as a recent signing and vet and yet was banished. del zotto as a vet and recent signing also got a raw deal. it was like a regime change had occurred.

my take is that 2017-18 was the last try for the sedins and this was supported by linden and the ufas were tailored to that effort. when it failed, the sedins retired and linden tried to reinvent himself as a rebuilder but got fired anyway.

my take is that the only way benning has a job now and a 3 year extension is that the things benning wanted to do that he was allowed to do over the last few years have tended to work out.

it doesn't give him more job security if things do not work out again.

 

[Bojack Horvatman]

ButLinden is officially the new ButGillis.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

This. The strategy discussion is a red herring. Benning's transactions have been overwhelming bad regardless of strategy.

6x6 for Eriksson is awful whether you are competing or rebuilding.

Same with McCann + 33rd for Gudbranson.

Same with a 2nd for Vey. And a 3rd for Pedan. And 5th for Larsen.

Same with the Sbisa, Gagner, Sutter, Bartkowski, etc contracts.

Poor strategy isn't the reason the Canucks were forced to start a 19 year old junior goalie against one of the best teams in the league. With no option of pulling him.

Poor strategy doesn't excuse tampering or not knowing how LTIR works or not knowing how long ELCs are.

It's doesn't excuse learning about draft odds by running a fan made online simulator.

When discussing what Benning has done, I don't care about the strategy. Because whatever the strategy, the execution in the form of transactions has been awful.

Really......You brought up the simulator .?..You may not like Bennings moves, but clearly he was having a laugh with the media there...

 

[F A N]

People seem to discount how solid of a player Travis Konecny is too. The kid has put up back to back 20+ ESG 40+ ESP years in only 15:00 minutes of ice time and extremely limited PP time, has an excellent motor, and can play C in addition to wing.

Konecny is a good player and mostly ranked ahead of Boeser in the draft. I think that thus far Boeser has clearly been the superior offensive producer and goal scorer.

 

[Javaman]

I think he has a point, though. Given where the franchise was, the most important goal the GM had was to build a new young core for the team going forward. I dont plan on doing some kind of larger meta-analysis of the make-up of teams that do well and where they acquired their core from, but just anecdotally it feels like a majority of them do it through the draft. So, it follows that drafting would be the most important factor, beyond things like pro scouting, in a rebuild.

Now, naturally, there are other factors to consider, that can expedite a rebuild exponentially; in particular, good asset management can really help you turn around a franchise in rapid fashion, as we've seen with teams like NYR (granted we haven't seen the results of this scorched earth rebuild process yet), and I'm not going to pretend whatsoever that Benning is good at asset management. Failing to leverage the assets he had (although its worth considering the context of each of those assets. He wasn't getting anything for the Sedins, for instance.), and targeting poor pro players have been his two biggest faults easily.

I do have to question the validity of any analysis that evaluates the the drafting acumen of GMs based on such recent drafts. Boeser has been in the league for two years, Pettersson for one. Juolevi still hasn't played a game in the NHL. We wont see the results of the Podkolzin draft for another two years or so. Demko is just starting to work his way into the league. It's still pretty early to evaluate the careers of talent drafted within the past 5 years.

It's also worth considering that while the Canucks have been the worst team next to Buffalo over the past four years, they haven't drafted like it. And I dont mean that in a derogatory fashion towards Benning, I mean that literally the draft position of the Canucks has regularly dropped from where they finished in the standings due to the lottery. Speaking of analysis, I vaguely remember a draft analysis that speculated that the success of a pick drops off exponentially in regards to draft position: i.e. picks 1-3 are far better than 4-10. The Canucks, despite their abject failure over the past 4 seasons, have drafted, at the lowest, at 5.

Considering that, I find it hard to put much objective merit to the sentiment of "well of course the Canucks have a good young core, they've been the worst team in the league over the past 4 seasons. Anyone could luck into that kind of core." When you consider the context of the draft position of that core and the opportunities the Canucks were presented to draft with in the first place, it becomes pretty obvious that the Canucks did at the very least a somewhat admirable job at the draft table.

While I appreciate that you've attempted to provide reasons to support your opinion, your post is ultimately based on a flawed premise: that Benning has engaged in a rebuild of the Canucks.

I think you are overstating the importance of the "context" of their draft position relative to their luck in the draft lottery. In 2016, drafting Tkachuk ahead of Juolevi was clearly the right move. Drafting Tkachuk ahead of Matthew would clearly have been the wrong move if they had shifted the "context" by drafting 1st overall.

There's nothing admirable about drafting Juolevi with Tkachuk still on the board.

Benning's drafting is average.

 

[MS]

disagree.

there was no talk of a rebuild in 2016-2017 until the tdl when we moved hansen and burrows and, at the time and long after, a lot of people disputed those were rebuild moves as i recall.

to me the 2017 free agents were treated like somebody else's guys by benning after linden was fired and i think green must have had some backing to demote them the way he did even before then. gagner played well enough to make the team at camp in 2018 as a recent signing and vet and yet was banished. del zotto as a vet and recent signing also got a raw deal. it was like a regime change had occurred.

my take is that 2017-18 was the last try for the sedins and this was supported by linden and the ufas were tailored to that effort. when it failed, the sedins retired and linden tried to reinvent himself as a rebuilder but got fired anyway.

my take is that the only way benning has a job now and a 3 year extension is that the things benning wanted to do that he was allowed to do over the last few years have tended to work out.

it doesn't give him more job security if things do not work out again.

This is backed up by nothing.

Multiple extremely credible media sources (including Botchford and Friedman) have confirmed that Linden was trying to push a full rebuild in his last 18 months in charge and was then eventually pushed out by Aquilini and Benning. There is literally zero evidence to suggest what you're suggesting.

Linden may have been involved in the patchwork 2017 signings. No argument there. But those were pretty clearly not 'compete now' moves but were placeholders instead.

ButLinden is officially the new ButGillis.

It really is, isn't it?

Except it's worse. Benning at least had obvious faults and mistakes that were concrete things that could be linked to as obstacles to success for Benning. Not to the extent they were, but the drafting wasn't good enough and we were clearly a team coming down the curve after peaking.

The Linden thing is just a pure invention. A fantasy, with nothing to back it up at all. The actual evidence actually suggests the exact opposite, that Linden was the one putting the brakes on the mistakes and the rushed attempts at competing (at least during his last 18 months here) and that Benning has been the same Benning from Day 1. And that Linden saved the Pettersson pick.

It's just such an intellectually dishonest argument.

 

[TomP24684]

What on earth? This just gets weirder and weirder.

So your argument is this?

1) Benning was fully on-board with competing now around the Sedins in 14-15, coming off a non-playoff season.

2) After putting up 101 points, Benning realized the team couldn't compete but Evil Trevor kept forcing bad moves that didn't make sense.

3) After the 15-16 disaster, mid-way through 16-17 Linden realizes a longer-term rebuild is necessary. But after deciding a 101-point team needed rebuilding and then watching the team fail for two years since, Benning now thinks it's time to compete again? And so clashes with Linden and Linden is gone.

Like, the mental gymnastics here are astonishing even for you.




5 division titles in 6 years and nearly winning a Cup makes Gillis a demon in your eyes, but squeaking into the playoffs after 6 years makes Benning a God. Gotcha.

Do not disrespect dear leader JIM Jong Un.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Its bizarre how some posters are now painting Linden as the 'fall guy' who wanted the rebuild..and bad 'impatient' Benning who is desperately doing whatever it takes to save his job.

Linden was Bennings boss..Bennings job was to follow his directive..I'm speculating, but I think a lot of the crap deals that got forced through earlier on..were indeed Lindens directive...(I like TL..I think he truly had the best intentions, but he was way over his head).

Ownership were obviously' in the room' ..witnessed what was happening..Linden got marginalized, complained about it..Then relieved of his job..my.02 cents.

 

[Sergei Shirokov]

It's on both 100%. Why? because benning didn't need to accept the job and vision but he did. As soon as he took the job he fully endorsed the plan (if it came from ownership). Though I think it was probably similar to the Gillis hiring....Aquilini hired the guys who told him what he wanted to hear. Gillis happened to be correct and was able to execute. The others weren't. And really it wasn't even really that they were wrong, per se, it was 99% poor execution that led them to what we've seen the last handful of years. Not the overriding demand. Make no mistake, it doesn't matter what strategy you try to align with this group the only conclusion you will come to is it's a bad management group.

Retool? Bad
rebuild? bad
retool followed by rebuild? bad
etc....

The only thing I'll say, is I don't think anyone in their right mind is just going to turn down the opportunity to be a NHL general manager. You saying that is very easy.

I think more of the angst should be placed on Aquilini. He's the one denying the reality we've all seen since 2013. Benning has known this team needed to get younger, as did Linden & Gillis.

 

[Sergei Shirokov]

Its bizarre how some posters are now painting Linden as the 'fall guy' who wanted the rebuild..and bad 'impatient' Benning who is desperately doing whatever it takes to save his job.

Linden was Bennings boss..Bennings job was to follow his directive..I'm speculating, but I think a lot of the crap deals that got forced through earlier on..were indeed Lindens directive...(I like TL..I think he truly had the best intentions, but he was way over his head).

Ownership were obviously' in the room' ..witnessed what was happening..Linden got marginalized, complained about it..Then relieved of his job..my.02 cents.

I think Linden was as much a publicity stunt for Aqua & the Canucks brand.

Linden had the boss title, but I think he relied on Benning aswell & they mostly made decisions together. If there was a disagreement perhaps they lean on the rest of the staff as any brass would.

But either way the directive behind those decisions was laid down from ownership. I'm sure Linden & Benning both spearheaded certain decisions.

At some point Linden knew things weren't being done properly since he put his foot down & split. Personally I think managing up was an issue for him much earlier than his departure.

 

[MS]

Its bizarre how some posters are now painting Linden as the 'fall guy' who wanted the rebuild..and bad 'impatient' Benning who is desperately doing whatever it takes to save his job.

Linden was Bennings boss..Bennings job was to follow his directive..I'm speculating, but I think a lot of the crap deals that got forced through earlier on..were indeed Lindens directive...(I like TL..I think he truly had the best intentions, but he was way over his head).

Ownership were obviously' in the room' ..witnessed what was happening..Linden got marginalized, complained about it..Then relieved of his job..my.02 cents.

It's not 'bizarre'. It's exactly what extremely credible people like Freidman and Botchford have reported, and it lines up completely with the evidence.

2014-2016 - all parties on same page. Compete now.

early 2017-2018 - Linden pushing for full rebuild and it actually sticking for awhile. Benning toes line on moves, much more pro-rebuild tone for the franchise.

2018-2019 - Linden marginalized and forced out, back to compete now under Aquilini and Benning. Back to big-spash moves and big UFA contracts.

'Bizarre' is ignoring all the evidence and credible published reports to come up with some fantasy scenario supported by nothing where Dear Leader is the hero.

 

[Foundational Player]

A few takes from Benning's interview with Matt and Blake on 1040.

Jim says "the heavy lifting is over." Ummmmm yes sure, just like you planned back in 2014.

Jim believes Juolevi will play in the league for 10-12 years. Mentions his exceptional vision and passing ability.

Bad Goalie, please remind us of his defensive game again, seems as though Jim forgets to mention this aspect of his game. As if it's irrelevant and won't matter once he makes the big club.

Confirmed the guys at the top are all yes man with the exception of Johnathon Wall who disagrees with Jim from time to time. He's on the analytical side of course.

Also relying on the 'steamer' more than ever, which fills me with very little confidence.

And on it goes.

I need to stop being so toxic, right?

 

[F A N]

It's not 'bizarre'. It's exactly what extremely credible people like Freidman and Botchford have reported, and it lines up completely with the evidence.

2014-2016 - all parties on same page. Compete now.

early 2017-2018 - Linden pushing for full rebuild and it actually sticking for awhile. Benning toes line on moves, much more pro-rebuild tone for the franchise.

2018-2019 - Linden marginalized and forced out, back to compete now under Aquilini and Benning. Back to big-spash moves and big UFA contracts.

'Bizarre' is ignoring all the evidence and credible published reports to come up with some fantasy scenario supported by nothing where Dear Leader is the hero.

My understanding of the reports is that Linden wanted the "rebuild" to last longer. At that point he was not on the same page as Benning and Aquilini.

 

[nazzy_012]

Benning on presidents week on 1040 right now called our prospect “Jack Rathbourne”

Why does he always sound like he knows less than the average fan?

 

[krutovsdonut]

The Linden thing is just a pure invention. A fantasy, with nothing to back it up at all. The actual evidence actually suggests the exact opposite, that Linden was the one putting the brakes on the mistakes and the rushed attempts at competing (at least during his last 18 months here) and that Benning has been the same Benning from Day 1. And that Linden saved the Pettersson pick.

It's just such an intellectually dishonest argument.

so your conjecture is better than my conjecture? i was literally answering you.

to summarize, the gillis on a pedestal crowd puts linden on a pedestal and when someone responds skeptically accuses them of "butlinden"

seems legit.

 

[tradervik]

I have no doubt Benning thought his moves in the 2015 off-season were "rebuilding moves". The problem is that Benning's idea of rebuilding didn't consist of "accumulate draft picks / exploit cap space to acquire more assets -> improved prospect pool -> young core -> sign expensive complimentary vets when compete window opens up". Instead it was "fill in age gap -> force rookies into the line up before they're ready -> trade futures for bad players -> waste cap space -> hit on a couple of 1st rounders -> sign expensive vets prematurely".

 

[Lenerdosy]

This would have been just before San Jose acquired Jones.

Jones went to SJS in 2015 and Miller left the Canucks after the 16/17 season.

 

[Lenerdosy]

I believe he said that prior to signing with the Canucks (just going by my memory though).

Ok I thought this was just at the deadline that last season when they were trying to trade him away.

 

[MS]

My understanding of the reports is that Linden wanted the "rebuild" to last longer. At that point he was not on the same page as Benning and Aquilini.

Yes?

It seems like Linden realized mid-way through 16-17 that the whole 'compete now' thing wasn't working and was pushing for a longer, full rebuild. And it looks like that had traction for awhile but eventually Benning and Aquilini overruled that plan and we went back to pushing hard to turn things around as quickly as possible.

Again, my take (and this is just conjecture based on the evidence) is that the quick start in 17-18 when we were in the playoff hunt for the first 30-40 games convinced Aquilini and Benning (who were both doing gung-ho interviews about how great the team was) that Linden was wrong and a longer rebuild wasn't needed. And then he was forced out.

so your conjecture is better than my conjecture? i was literally answering you.

to summarize, the gillis on a pedestal crowd puts linden on a pedestal and when someone responds skeptically accuses them of "butlinden"

seems legit.

My take was based on actual evidence and reports. Yours was not and was pure conjecture which went against the known facts.

Nobody is putting Linden on a pedestal. He sucked. But of the management team we've had, at least he seems to have 'got it' for a bit. And when he's being unfairly scapegoated in an attempt to prevent Benning with arguments that go completely against the facts and published reports, people will call you on that.

To summarize : the BUT GILLIS crowd has had that liferaft sink as Gillis goes further and further into the past and the team still sucks, so they've latched onto a new scapegoat in Linden in an attempt to convince themselves that Benning is just great.

Nothing is ever Benning's fault, is it? It's incredible how so many things are conspiring against someone doing such a great job.

 

[krutovsdonut]

A few takes from Benning's interview with Matt and Blake on 1040.

Jim says "the heavy lifting is over." Ummmmm yes sure, just like you planned back in 2014.

Jim believes Juolevi will play in the league for 10-12 years. Mentions his exceptional vision and passing ability.

Bad Goalie, please remind us of his defensive game again, seems as though Jim forgets to mention this aspect of his game. As if it's irrelevant and won't matter once he makes the big club.

Confirmed the guys at the top are all yes man with the exception of Johnathon Wall who disagrees with Jim from time to time. He's on the analytical side of course.

Also relying on the 'steamer' more than ever, which fills me with very little confidence.

And on it goes.

I need to stop being so toxic, right?

if you are quoting him fairly, that level of confidence about juolevi is pretty astounding.

 

[MS]

Also relying on the 'steamer' more than ever, which fills me with very little confidence.

Jesus. You can't help but laugh, really.

Screw the Raptors, this is the real Jurassic Park. How people are betting on these dinosaurs who can't even form coherent sentences or pronounce the names of their own players correctly to build a contender in this league is beyond me.

 

[krutovsdonut]

My take was based on actual evidence and reports. Yours was not and was pure conjecture which went against the known facts.

your take is based on self serving hearsay accounts of what linden told friedman and botchford. at least i am drawing inferences based on what i see.

i loved linden as a player. but he's given me a queasy feeling since he joined management. he reminds me of a certain type of clueless guy i have encountered all too often.

 

[F A N]

Yes?

It seems like Linden realized mid-way through 16-17 that the whole 'compete now' thing wasn't working and was pushing for a longer, full rebuild. And it looks like that had traction for awhile but eventually Benning and Aquilini overruled that plan and we went back to pushing hard to turn things around as quickly as possible.

No I mean my understanding of the reports is that the "rebuild" that Linden, Benning, and Aquilini were on the same page with had a timeline that they agreed on. Along the way Linden felt that that timeline should be extended and that made him out of sync with Benning and Aquilini who still believed in the earlier agreed upon timeline. That was my understanding of the reports. You seem to take a different view?