Canucks Managerial Thread IV

[offbeatgravy]

Even last year we had Bonino Richardson and Matthias before Horvat. JB basically nuked that depth by allocating that money to 2 4th line wingers.
Doesn't matter if the 4th line looks alright, a ok looking 4th line is still a 4th line. Do they provide energy? Not really. Do they score? Not really. Are they good at hockey? Not really? Are they the most expensive 4th line in the league? Yah.

Exactly this, Benning wanted to add toughness but did it in the worse way possible. Shredded our center depth and added "toughness" on the fourth line to protect guys they aren't even playing with. Staged fights don't deter anything, at all. They could at least provide energy and they fail at even that. I don't like that they are on the team but since they are, the least they could do is run around hitting everything so they are even slightly contributing by wearing down the other team.

 

[Bleach Clean]

Jim Benning's been quoted as saying "he likes his team"....but after watching his 19-year centre McCann get victimized by the Ducks thuggery with no response, I wonder how he 'likes his team' now?

I like that he said that... and I wonder what the owners think of his assessment? This last game may have been what they needed to wake up a bit. Get wise. Realize what type of team Benning has actually put together here.

It sucks that they lose, and lose in such a deplorable fashion, but maybe this is the only way for ownership to clue into what is actually going on here.

 

[BROCK HUGHES]

Bottom line is-We are just plain bad from upper management to the coach,s to the rest of the over paid players .The only saving grace on this team are Daniel and Hank.Its really to bad these guys will never win a cup with this team.They really deserve a chance.But with Benning ,Linden,Willie,,there is no hope.

 

[VanillaCoke]

Benning likes bad players that skate hard.

 

[Wilch]

Benning likes bad players that skate hard.

In quicksand.

 

[Billy Kvcmu]

Benning likes bad players that skate hard.

Intentionally tank

 

[polarbearcub]

If you're trying to bring up kids in a steady environment , you need solid goaltending and solid d. This is one of the worst d cores in the nhl. It's a joke.

 

[Bleach Clean]

If you're trying to bring up kids in a steady environment , you need solid goaltending and solid d. This is one of the worst d cores in the nhl. It's a joke.

But remember, the latest word out of Benning is that he is prioritizing a "scorer".

 

[SillyRabbit]

If you're trying to bring up kids in a steady environment , you need solid goaltending and solid d. This is one of the worst d cores in the nhl. It's a joke.

The "winning environment" was nonsense from the start. A half-baked excuse to justify trying to put playoff money into the Aquilini's pockets.

With Benning at the helm, we basically need the 1st overall pick to ensure he doesn't pick another dud. We should be full tank mode.

 

[Jack Tripper]

I like that he said that... and I wonder what the owners think of his assessment? This last game may have been what they needed to wake up a bit. Get wise. Realize what type of team Benning has actually put together here.

It sucks that they lose, and lose in such a deplorable fashion, but maybe this is the only way for ownership to clue into what is actually going on here.

will that ducks game really be a wake up call, though? not the first time that's happened in anaheim recently...

i sense absolutely no urgency or discontent within the ownership group on the benning regime...probably too busy trying to find a buyer for the club

 

[tantalum]

But remember, the latest word out of Benning is that he is prioritizing a "scorer".

Of course he is. 4 out of 6 D-men that played last night were acquired, signed and/or re-signed by Benning. Obviously Tanev isn't a concern and it was also a no brainer. But the other 3 are guys Benning wanted on this blueline. 3 guys that have been completely outplayed by a rookie that management likely believed was going to be a casualty of the first or second round of cuts in camp. But this IS his blueline. It IS his goaltending.

And it's terrible.

In the thread yesterday I called Sbisa, Dorsett and Prust faux toughness....for $8.75 mil. And I do believe that. Prust has been OK and even exceeded expectations for play but his staged fights don't scare anyone. Him patrolling the 4th line for 10 minutes a game is not scary to any opposition player. Dorsett got his money and wow did he ever pack it in...and he wasn't good to begin with. He shouldn't be in the lineup. Sbisa...great he fought Peluso. But he's supposed to make the team hard to play against. Throwing a big hit every half dozen games while more often than not standing politely beside the guy putting the puck in the net or screening the goaltender is not a guy who is tough to play against. He can't pass. He can't shoot. He can't skate with the puck. He has one ability and it's being able to play a physical game and make people pay being in front of the net. He doesn't even do that on a near enough regular basis.

What a **** show.

An entirely predictable **** show.

And the cherry on top is this is somehow a cap team.

 

[arttk]

Of course he is. 4 out of 6 D-men that played last night were acquired, signed and/or re-signed by Benning. Obviously Tanev isn't a concern and it was also a no brainer. But the other 3 are guys Benning wanted on this blueline. 3 guys that have been completely outplayed by a rookie that management likely believed was going to be a casualty of the first or second round of cuts in camp. But this IS his blueline. It IS his goaltending.

And it's terrible.

In the thread yesterday I called Sbisa, Dorsett and Prust faux toughness....for $8.75 mil. And I do believe that. Prust has been OK and even exceeded expectations for play but his staged fights don't scare anyone. Him patrolling the 4th line for 10 minutes a game is not scary to any opposition player. Dorsett got his money and wow did he ever pack it in...and he wasn't good to begin with. He shouldn't be in the lineup. Sbisa...great he fought Peluso. But he's supposed to make the team hard to play against. Throwing a big hit every half dozen games while more often than not standing politely beside the guy putting the puck in the net or screening the goaltender is not a guy who is tough to play against. He can't pass. He can't shoot. He can't skate with the puck. He has one ability and it's being able to play a physical game and make people pay being in front of the net. He doesn't even do that on a near enough regular basis.

What a **** show.

An entirely predictable **** show.

And the cherry on top is this is somehow a cap team.

Pretty much this. The way this roster has been put together is a joke. It is rare even with Edmonton around to see such incompetence in both player evaluation and contract management.
I mean all the dman that he thought that would make it in the top 6 are barely top6 material but they are all paid like they are. The elite goalie he kept and is surely paying like one is playing nowhere even close to elite. We have zero center depth and if if we didn't "luck" out on Cracknell and McCann, we would have Vey and Jones on the roster right now.
Basically all the bright spots, Hutton and McCann, Benning lucked into.

Worst part is that he actually thought this roster is better than last year's.

I can't even imagine why some people would want this management team to be in charge of a rebuild. Do we want him to target more wrong players and hand out more terrible contracts? He can put us in such a bad position that we might actually have to trade the kids in the future because of all the **** ass contract he will saddle us with.

 

[ATypicalCanadian]

I like that he said that... and I wonder what the owners think of his assessment? This last game may have been what they needed to wake up a bit. Get wise. Realize what type of team Benning has actually put together here.

It sucks that they lose, and lose in such a deplorable fashion, but maybe this is the only way for ownership to clue into what is actually going on here.

I agree with what you say , but my thoughts is bad as Benning is they shouldn't fire him mid season no matter what(it doesn't usually happen anyway right?). The ownership can still "look" at candidates for a replacement over the season and then interview choices later. I just dont want to see Weisbrod as interim GM at deadline day. : If they support TL and he recognized there is something going wrong then it will hopefully go better.

 

[Jyrki21]

Never is it taken into account when some bash the Kesler trade that in fairness, Benning walked into a mess with Kesler demanding a trade to 2 teams, one of which was in salary cap hell so was no option at all.

This is literally always taken into account. I don't know how one could ever possibly conclude that it "never" is. No one ever says, like, "they should have flipped Kesler to Carolina". Everyone always says "they should have negotiated better or waited."

 

[Fat Tony]

Well apparently he should pull young cheap top 6-4 players out of his ass.

I was just hoping he wouldn't spend picks and increased the payroll to make the team worse. Oh well.

 

[absolute garbage]

And the cherry on top is this is somehow a cap team.

And the cherry on the top of that is that this is a cap team despite having 4 ELCs and 2 other contracts that are under 1M in the roster.

And the cherry on the top of that is that half of these cheap players have been surprisingly major contributors for this team (Horvat, Hutton, McCann).

This team is currently bottom 10 in the standings, 8th in the league in total player salaries, and 1st in the league in total cap hit. Despite the fact that 5-6 players are playing for peanuts, and with half of them clearly outvaluing their contracts.

This is a team that has been injected by around 20 million worth of veteran assets, with many of them long term. This is a team that has seen supposed "improvement" and "quick fixes" by using future assets like draft picks and young players/prospects.

This is not a team that was put together to "tread water" while waiting a year or two for better days.

This is a team that the management has stated not only to make the playoffs, but to go past first round. This team's goal is to be competitive, to have a winning environment, and to be a good playoff team.

Everything that has been done and said has been in line with that. But it's not happening because they suck at their jobs.

 

[Reign Nateo]

I was just hoping he wouldn't spend picks and increased the payroll to make the team worse. Oh well.

They were going to get worse no matter what. I don't know what people were expecting. Our window closed. Keeping Eddie Lack over Ryan Miller, Garrison over Sbisa and Santorelli over Vrbata wasn't going to change that. People want to go around in circles over every move in every thread, but it doesn't change where this team is and where it was headed fast. The best argument against Benning's moves I have heard on here is that we could have had a cheap team and properly tanked. But tanking was clearly never an option so all we get is complaining. Other than that we just see the same whining about Santorelli and Lack and our expensive 4th line. None of which would actually change the fate of this team.

It is possible to have a winning team without a top pick. Let's look at the NHL standings:

WEST:
1. Dallas - Highest pick was Seguin and they traded for him.
2. St. Louis - Pietrangelo is their lone lottery pick I believe.
3. LA - Doughty was 2nd overall, not many lottery picks after that.
4. Chicago - Their management has proven themselves elite many times over.
5. San Jose/Nashville - I don't know that either team has a lottery pick.

Last: Edmonton - About a 100 lottery picks.

EAST
1. Montreal - Galchenyuk was picked high but is not the reason they are where they are.
2. NYR - No lottery picks (I think).
3. Washington - Generational Talent
4. NYI - Tavares
5. Ottawa - No lottery picks leading the way.

Last: Sabres - Lots of high picks.

I just did that off the top of my head so not going to get into the nit-picking, the point is there is more than one way to build a team and if anything, tanking has proven to be a terrible idea recently. ESPECIALLY if your management is not among the best in the NHL and a bi-polar and out-to-lunch fan base with probably the most homers outside of Toronto. Teams like Tampa and Chicago didn't get good because they drafted high, they got good because they are very well run organizations.

I understand the frustration. The team decided to hire a rookie GM that made some mistakes and doesn't inspire confidence. But this team's story will be written in the next few seasons, not by letting Santorelli and Lack get away. Benning will either come through and build a winner the way the other teams on that list have, mostly through solid drafting and hitting some home runs with later picks, or he won't and we'll be at square one. Bickering about the current 4th line and payroll is a fruitless endeavor at this point. Benning will be judged after 4-5 years and will be given a good stretch of time to see if he can make it happen. No one should have been expecting much more than this at this point in the game. Definitely could have been better but getting that 5th back for Prust isn't going to change the fact that this team is re-building. They're just not re-building the way you do on NHL 16.

It's been the same complaints and whining for a year on here in every thread.

 

[JuniorNelson]

3 coaches in 3.5 years? Not even Edmonton would do that.

No, not change the coach. Change the coaching. My bad. New Canadians laugh when I say I struggle with English every day but I do.

 

[coldsteel79]

They were going to get worse no matter what. I don't know what people were expecting. Our window closed. Keeping Eddie Lack over Ryan Miller, Garrison over Sbisa and Santorelli over Vrbata wasn't going to change that. People want to go around in circles over every move in every thread, but it doesn't change where this team is and where it was headed fast. The best argument against Benning's moves I have heard on here is that we could have had a cheap team and properly tanked. But tanking was clearly never an option so all we get is complaining. Other than that we just see the same whining about Santorelli and Lack and our expensive 4th line. None of which would actually change the fate of this team.

It is possible to have a winning team without a top pick. Let's look at the NHL standings:

WEST:
1. Dallas - Highest pick was Seguin and they traded for him.
2. St. Louis - Pietrangelo is their lone lottery pick I believe.
3. LA - Doughty was 2nd overall, not many lottery picks after that.
4. Chicago - Their management has proven themselves elite many times over.
5. San Jose/Nashville - I don't know that either team has a lottery pick.

Last: Edmonton - About a 100 lottery picks.

EAST
1. Montreal - Galchenyuk was picked high but is not the reason they are where they are.
2. NYR - No lottery picks (I think).
3. Washington - Generational Talent
4. NYI - Tavares
5. Ottawa - No lottery picks leading the way.

Last: Sabres - Lots of high picks.

I just did that off the top of my head so not going to get into the nit-picking, the point is there is more than one way to build a team and if anything, tanking has proven to be a terrible idea recently. ESPECIALLY if your management is not among the best in the NHL and a bi-polar and out-to-lunch fan base with probably the most homers outside of Toronto. Teams like Tampa and Chicago didn't get good because they drafted high, they got good because they are very well run organizations.

I understand the frustration. The team decided to hire a rookie GM that made some mistakes and doesn't inspire confidence. But this team's story will be written in the next few seasons, not by letting Santorelli and Lack get away. Benning will either come through and build a winner the way the other teams on that list have, mostly through solid drafting and hitting some home runs with later picks, or he won't and we'll be at square one. Bickering about the current 4th line and payroll is a fruitless endeavor at this point. Benning will be judged after 4-5 years and will be given a good stretch of time to see if he can make it happen. No one should have been expecting much more than this at this point in the game. Definitely could have been better but getting that 5th back for Prust isn't going to change the fact that this team is re-building. They're just not re-building the way you do on NHL 16.

It's been the same complaints and whining for a year on here in every thread.

Great post

 

[tantalum]

I understand the frustration. The team decided to hire a rookie GM that made some mistakes and doesn't inspire confidence. But this team's story will be written in the next few seasons, not by letting Santorelli and Lack get away. Benning will either come through and build a winner the way the other teams on that list have, mostly through solid drafting and hitting some home runs with later picks, or he won't and we'll be at square one. Bickering about the current 4th line and payroll is a fruitless endeavor at this point. Benning will be judged after 4-5 years and will be given a good stretch of time to see if he can make it happen. No one should have been expecting much more than this at this point in the game. Definitely could have been better but getting that 5th back for Prust isn't going to change the fact that this team is re-building. They're just not re-building the way you do on NHL 16.

It's not a fruitless endeavor IMO. I think you are absolutely wrong that the story would be the same with Sanotrelli or Lack or both or whoever else. The story would be significantly different because they would have either ample cap space existing right now or, most likely, still be a cap team but with cap spent on actual good players (assuming Benning wasn't the GM of course). The hiring of Benning (and Linden) IS the fundamental problem. This team was set up very nicely for a new GM. Yes there are some NTCs etc but he had actually a lot of cap room and valued asset to move.

And let's not be insulting in throwing out a NHL 16 rebuild type thing. No one has said that. No one believes that. They've pointed out that the rebuild was done wrong form the get go (he had cap room and a valued asset coming into the job and he got a poor return and destroyed the cap position. He continues to destroy it. That the wrong player assessments are being made for pro acquisitions. That they've been wasteful with assets. They've pointed out that going by the management groups own descriptions of how they want to do things they are doing a lousy job of rebuilding. That the goals outlined by the management team are not being met 25 games into the season and it's not likely to change.

If in 4-5 years this team is at square 1 isn't a so be it type thing like your post seems to read as. That is precisely the thing I think will happen because nothing the GM has done so far suggests he actually knows how to build a team or has astute enough assessment of veteran players to do the job. That's a problem. A big one. Why? Because if in 4-5 years this team is at square 1, which again is what I believe, then this team IS the Oilers the league has laughed at for so long. How is that acceptable? To me it's not and I'll be vocal about it. I hope all are vocal about it. This GM performance should not be acceptable to any fan of the team. The sooner more people are vocal the sooner we turn the page on this, hopefully, short chapter.

 

[arttk]

They were going to get worse no matter what. I don't know what people were expecting. Our window closed. Keeping Eddie Lack over Ryan Miller, Garrison over Sbisa and Santorelli over Vrbata wasn't going to change that. People want to go around in circles over every move in every thread, but it doesn't change where this team is and where it was headed fast. The best argument against Benning's moves I have heard on here is that we could have had a cheap team and properly tanked. But tanking was clearly never an option so all we get is complaining. Other than that we just see the same whining about Santorelli and Lack and our expensive 4th line. None of which would actually change the fate of this team.

It is possible to have a winning team without a top pick. Let's look at the NHL standings:

WEST:
1. Dallas - Highest pick was Seguin and they traded for him.
2. St. Louis - Pietrangelo is their lone lottery pick I believe.
3. LA - Doughty was 2nd overall, not many lottery picks after that.
4. Chicago - Their management has proven themselves elite many times over.
5. San Jose/Nashville - I don't know that either team has a lottery pick.

Last: Edmonton - About a 100 lottery picks.

EAST
1. Montreal - Galchenyuk was picked high but is not the reason they are where they are.
2. NYR - No lottery picks (I think).
3. Washington - Generational Talent
4. NYI - Tavares
5. Ottawa - No lottery picks leading the way.

Last: Sabres - Lots of high picks.

I just did that off the top of my head so not going to get into the nit-picking, the point is there is more than one way to build a team and if anything, tanking has proven to be a terrible idea recently. ESPECIALLY if your management is not among the best in the NHL and a bi-polar and out-to-lunch fan base with probably the most homers outside of Toronto. Teams like Tampa and Chicago didn't get good because they drafted high, they got good because they are very well run organizations.

I understand the frustration. The team decided to hire a rookie GM that made some mistakes and doesn't inspire confidence. But this team's story will be written in the next few seasons, not by letting Santorelli and Lack get away. Benning will either come through and build a winner the way the other teams on that list have, mostly through solid drafting and hitting some home runs with later picks, or he won't and we'll be at square one. Bickering about the current 4th line and payroll is a fruitless endeavor at this point. Benning will be judged after 4-5 years and will be given a good stretch of time to see if he can make it happen. No one should have been expecting much more than this at this point in the game. Definitely could have been better but getting that 5th back for Prust isn't going to change the fact that this team is re-building. They're just not re-building the way you do on NHL 16.

It's been the same complaints and whining for a year on here in every thread.

Keeping Lack over Miller would give us more cap to spend on D.
Keeping Garrison over Sbisa is the logical thing to do no matter how you want to spin it.
Nobody argues for Santo over Vrbata, I have no idea where this BS came from. It was always, keep Santo and get future for Kesler. I guess this doesn't help us too right? Who needs futures.

The team is tanking because the GM ****ed up. This is not a guy without experience. He was an assistant for how long? His experience was suppose to be a plus and now you are spinning it as oh he is inexperienced? Biggest problem is this GM is a **** at talent evaluation and even more **** at contract negotiation.

All the guys he has identified as key pieces suck and are grossly overpaid. The 4th liners we have are paid like 3rd liners. The 3rd liner (Sutter) we have is paid like a 2nd liner. The 6-7 dman we have are all paid a level above what they should be paid. If we continue this trend, which is a pretty sure thing with Benning in charge, we will have a bunch of overpaid vets on long term contracts making it harder for us to transition.
We already lost players (Lack, Corrado) due to bad cap and roster management, it will only take a couple more bad long term contracts to ensure that we lose out on more talent.

To succeed in the cap era, the idea is to squeeze as much talent as possible within the cap. We are doing the opposite, we are overpaying players on every single contract ensuring that we can fit the least amount of talent within the cap.

 

[Fat Tony]

They were going to get worse no matter what. I don't know what people were expecting. Our window closed. Keeping Eddie Lack over Ryan Miller, Garrison over Sbisa and Santorelli over Vrbata wasn't going to change that. People want to go around in circles over every move in every thread, but it doesn't change where this team is and where it was headed fast. The best argument against Benning's moves I have heard on here is that we could have had a cheap team and properly tanked.

I agree. But wasting cap and losing picks is going to make thing all that more painful. He is tanking harder than if he had stood pat.

 

[Reign Nateo]

It's not a fruitless endeavor IMO. I think you are absolutely wrong that the story would be the same with Sanotrelli or Lack or both or whoever else. The story would be significantly different because they would have either ample cap space existing right now or, most likely, still be a cap team but with cap spent on actual good players (assuming Benning wasn't the GM of course).

Again, who are these "good players" we could have used the cap space on? Last time someone made this argument they mentioned Matt Beleskey and Cody Franson. Are we any better with Beleskey and Franson over Prust/Dorsett/Sbisa? I don't think so, if anything we're stuck further into purgatory than we currently are. And that's my point. At least we don't have much long term.

 

[coldsteel79]

It's not a fruitless endeavor IMO. I think you are absolutely wrong that the story would be the same with Sanotrelli or Lack or both or whoever else. The story would be significantly different because they would have either ample cap space existing right now or, most likely, still be a cap team but with cap spent on actual good players (assuming Benning wasn't the GM of course). The hiring of Benning (and Linden) IS the fundamental problem. This team was set up very nicely for a new GM. Yes there are some NTCs etc but he had actually a lot of cap room and valued asset to move.

And let's not be insulting in throwing out a NHL 16 rebuild type thing. No one has said that. No one believes that. They've pointed out that the rebuild was done wrong form the get go (he had cap room and a valued asset coming into the job and he got a poor return and destroyed the cap position. He continues to destroy it. That the wrong player assessments are being made for pro acquisitions. That they've been wasteful with assets. They've pointed out that going by the management groups own descriptions of how they want to do things they are doing a lousy job of rebuilding. That the goals outlined by the management team are not being met 25 games into the season and it's not likely to change.

If in 4-5 years this team is at square 1 isn't a so be it type thing like your post seems to read as. That is precisely the thing I think will happen because nothing the GM has done so far suggests he actually knows how to build a team or has astute enough assessment of veteran players to do the job. That's a problem. A big one. Why? Because if in 4-5 years this team is at square 1, which again is what I believe, then this team IS the Oilers the league has laughed at for so long. How is that acceptable? To me it's not and I'll be vocal about it. I hope all are vocal about it. This GM performance should not be acceptable to any fan of the team. The sooner more people are vocal the sooner we turn the page on this, hopefully, short chapter.

If you seriously think that this management walked into a good situation I don't know what to say. This team had literally 2? decent prospects in horvat and Hutton maybe gaunce or shink. The core is old, Kesler was a cancer and wanted out the future is in drafting and developing. this management group can do that. So this year if we had the cap space we could have franson playing d, sure that's an improvement but it won't make this team a contender so what would be the point.

 

[arttk]

Again, who are these "good players" we could have used the cap space on? Last time someone made this argument they mentioned Matt Beleskey and Cody Franson. Are we any better with Beleskey and Franson over Prust/Dorsett/Sbisa? I don't think so, if anything we're stuck further into purgatory than we currently are. And that's my point. At least we don't have much long term.

How are we not a better team with Belesky on the 2nd line and Cody Franson on the 2nd paring?

You do realize that having Belesky would bump Burrows to the 3rd line and Higgins to the 4th line.
Having Higgins on the 4th line is much better than having Prust on the 4th line. Not to mention how much that would help Horvat.

Franson and Hamhuis might actually make the 2nd paring workable compared to the tire fire d we have now. Unlike Sbisa, paying Franson that much will actually get you a dman that can play 18-19 minutes.