Post-Game Talk: Canucks lose 5-3 (Pearson PBP Roussell) (Hughes THREE Appies

[cave troll]

Demko/Holtby over Markstrom is not bad, but Toffoli really proved on the ice that Benning made a big mistake with him.

 

[Peter10]

What's with the name calling? And it happens all the time. Can people not be critical of management without resorting to what amounts to on line bullying. Jim Benning is a good person.

How do you know?

 

[tyhee]

I come in peace, not even to talk of the game itself.

I am just looking for info
Was there ever a reason given as to why Benning let both Toffoli and Markstrom walk away when combined their hit would be just 10.25 mil. ?

Im not sure I understand those decisions.

Sorry if its been answered

Canucks were in cap hell this summer, but Benning had choices and could have signed either or both of them.

1. Markstrom-most people think Benning realized that six years on a 30 year old goalie was too long to risk, but I don't think that was the reason Benning let Markstrom go.

I think what happened is that Markstrom wanted a no move contract but Benning wasn't willing to give it to him and risk giving up Demko, seen as the longer term goalie, to Seattle in the expansion draft. IIRC there was a report (whether credible or not I don't know or can't remember but think it was a report originating from a Markstrom comment) that Benning offered Markstrom at least as much money as he eventually took from the Flames. Obviously this would have been before he took on Schmidt's cap hit as even taking Holtby out of the picture they'd have had trouble finding the space to pay Markstrom otherwise.

2 Toffoli-That was a Benning choice. He was after OEL, then he was after Barrie and it likely appeared to him that together with paying for a goalie and at least one expensive defenceman he couldn't afford both Toffoli and Virtanen on the wing. He took the younger, faster guy ahead of the better hockey player, which most fans believe to be a mistake.

Again, though, I think there may have been more to it. The reports around the time Toffoli was signed seemed to be that Benning had various things he was trying to do and was asking Toffoli (and Stecher) to hold on a while longer while Benning tried to do things that had a higher priority to him-OEL and Barrie being things that were named. I'm not sure Benning really decided. He may still have intended to get around to signing Toffoli but found Toffoli unwilling to wait any longer. Alternatively, it may be that he chose Virtanen and the Nate Schmidt trade over signing Toffoli and hoping for a cheaper defenceman.

Toffoli was signed Oct 12, the Schmidt trade was announced Oct 12, Virtanen was signed Oct 22.

From the information available to the public it is hard to tell anything for sure, but I don't think it was just a matter of Toffoli vs Virtanen. I think it was juggling cap space and getting OEL or Barrie or Schmidt together with Virtanen, or Toffoli and looking for someone cheaper on defence.

 

[Suzuki x 14]

Canucks were in cap hell this summer, but Benning had choices and could have signed either or both of them.

1. Markstrom-most people think Benning realized that six years on a 30 year old goalie was too long to risk, but I don't think that was the reason Benning let Markstrom go.

I think what happened is that Markstrom wanted a no move contract but Benning wasn't willing to give it to him and risk giving up Demko, seen as the longer term goalie, to Seattle in the expansion draft. IIRC there was a report (whether credible or not I don't know or can't remember but think it was a report originating from a Markstrom comment) that Benning offered Markstrom at least as much money as he eventually took from the Flames. Obviously this would have been before he took on Schmidt's cap hit as even taking Holtby out of the picture they'd have had trouble finding the space to pay Markstrom otherwise.

2 Toffoli-That was a Benning choice. He was after OEL, then he was after Barrie and it likely appeared to him that together with paying for a goalie and at least one expensive defenceman he couldn't afford both Toffoli and Virtanen on the wing. He took the younger, faster guy ahead of the better hockey player, which most fans believe to be a mistake.

Again, though, I think there may have been more to it. The reports around the time Toffoli was signed seemed to be that Benning had various things he was trying to do and was asking Toffoli (and Stecher) to hold on a while longer while Benning tried to do things that had a higher priority to him-OEL and Barrie being things that were named. I'm not sure Benning really decided. He may still have intended to get around to signing Toffoli but found Toffoli unwilling to wait any longer. Alternatively, it may be that he chose Virtanen and the Nate Schmidt trade over signing Toffoli and hoping for a cheaper defenceman.

Toffoli was signed Oct 12, the Schmidt trade was announced Oct 12, Virtanen was signed Oct 22.

From the information available to the public it is hard to tell anything for sure, but I don't think it was just a matter of Toffoli vs Tanev. I think it was juggling cap space and getting OEL or Barrie or Schmidt together with Virtanen, or Toffoli and looking for someone cheaper on defence.

Great insight, thanks for the detailed response.

 

[likash]

Funy how people here are ok with lettting Marky go but when you look at Schmidt and Myers you see that both are signed until they are 34 with 6 mil a piece. It's a problem to give Marky a 6 years (until he is 36) contract and an NTC because he may suck in year 5 and 6 but it's ok to have Schmidt and Myers until they are 34. Myers contract already in untouchable with no NTC and if Schimdit will decline(normal with aging) nobody will touch him also.

Jimbo should have sent Jake with the Sutter's contract and Roussel's contract with some picks. He should have tried to keep the team he had last summer and not think about what will happen in 5-6 years with Marky. To me if we got 4 years of excellent goaltending from Markstrom it would have been worth keeping him.

It seems that age was not a factor when he signed 33 old Beagle at 4x3(does not need ntc to suck) but became a factor when signing a Vezina quality goaltender. Add that to the fact that he humiliated Tanev, Toffolli and Stecher by making them wait while he was chasing OEL and Barrie. Also to to complete his" masterpiece" Tanev and Marky went to the Flames , our fierce rival. You could not make this up if you tried. He should have been fired the moment he lost those players for nothing. I'll guess we will wait and see.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

It could have been worse. Jimbo also wanted to sign Lucic . Not just brother Loui. Imagine Lucic+Eriksson on the team.

Don’t forget PK Subban as well.
Benning has no idea how to manage a team lol.

 

[likash]

Don’t forget PK Subban as well.
Benning has no idea how to manage a team lol.

There are to may many blunders that could have happened but he was saved by other teams or the players saying no(Lucic) to keep count.

As i said before , i'm shocked that in an western society( who us eastern europeans always admired because competence was rewarded ) we have incompetent people for years leading a franchise. It's like going back to the comunist era, where being qualified to do something was not the first criteria of selection.

 

[mriswith]

It finally came back to bite us like all the critical fans were saying for half a decade.

Erikkson, Myers, Sutter over Toffoli and Tanev.

Mind boggling bad cap management.

Defended Benning for a long while but Tanev walking is absolute hot garbage.

How many goals does Toffoli have, just madness.

It bit us years ago. We had two superstar rookies on ELC's last year and a Vezina calibre goaltender at 3.66 mil. That's like being allowed to go over the cap by 20 million dollars, or like being allowed to be on a powerplay all game. A below average team would turn into a legit contender with those three contracts playing that well. Instead we barely scraped our way into playoffs as a fringe bubble team.

And we haven't truly paid the piper yet. The debt gets paid this summer when Petey, Hughes and Demko need new contracts. We're still getting a massive cap advantage inflating our on ice results right now. Next year, our massive cap advantage from the rookies will be gone.

And that's not even getting into what our farm should look like right now if we'd used our cap space when rebuilding like real rebuilding teams do, instead of using our cap space while rebuilding like a contender.

 

[iceburg]

Hot take, move Miller to 3C

Makes a lot of sense. Once Podkolzin gets here move Hoglander to LW on Pettersson's line and Podkolzin to Horvat's line.

 

[Lupuls Grit]

I come in peace, not even to talk of the game itself.

I am just looking for info
Was there ever a reason given as to why Benning let both Toffoli and Markstrom walk away when combined their hit would be just 10.25 mil. ?

Im not sure I understand those decisions.

Sorry if its been answered

I don't think anyone on this board will have an opinion on that matter.

 

[604]

Funy how people here are ok with lettting Marky go but when you look at Schmidt and Myers you see that both are signed until they are 34 with 6 mil a piece. It's a problem to give Marky a 6 years (until he is 36) contract and an NTC because he may suck in year 5 and 6 but it's ok to have Schmidt and Myers until they are 34. Myers contract already in untouchable with no NTC and if Schimdit will decline(normal with aging) nobody will touch him also.

Jimbo should have sent Jake with the Sutter's contract and Roussel's contract with some picks. He should have tried to keep the team he had last summer and not think about what will happen in 5-6 years with Marky. To me if we got 4 years of excellent goaltending from Markstrom it would have been worth keeping him.

It seems that age was not a factor when he signed 33 old Beagle at 4x3(does not need ntc to suck) but became a factor when signing a Vezina quality goaltender. Add that to the fact that he humiliated Tanev, Toffolli and Stecher by making them wait while he was chasing OEL and Barrie. Also to to complete his" masterpiece" Tanev and Marky went to the Flames , our fierce rival. You could not make this up if you tried. He should have been fired the moment he lost those players for nothing. I'll guess we will wait and see.

This always frustrates me.

Someone is allowed to not want to resign Markstrom while also hating Beagle, Eriksson, Myers, etc. contracts.

They don't need to mention those contracts every time they discuss Markstrom's.

Rest assured, virtually everybody hates those contracts.

 

[4Twenty]

This always frustrates me.

Someone is allowed to not want to resign Markstrom while also hating Beagle, Eriksson, Myers, etc. contracts.

They don't need to mention those contracts every time they discuss Markstrom's.

Rest assured, virtually everybody hates those contracts.

They do though. The idea of not wanting to re-sign Markstrom, Tanev et al comes from knowing the teams precarious cap predicament.

If Eriksson, Roussel, and Beagle’s deals expired this year I can bet many who didn’t want to keep the quality veterans leaders and strong players on the ice would change their tune.

This is clearly what’s frustrating the good players. They lost key pieces to return many expensive non key pieces.

 

[Mr. Canucklehead]

Since this has devolved into management discussion again, shutting down.

For those who wish to continue discussing the team's management, please do so here:

The Management Thread | Live, Play, Repeat Edition

Closed.