Canucks Managerial Thread IV

Status
Not open for further replies.

Reign Nateo

Registered User
Apr 28, 2003
13,561
59
Canada
Visit site
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?

can fit the least amount of talent within the cap.

Again, who are these defenceman we are going to sign with the cap space?

I just don't think any GM was going to take this team coming off the Tortarella season and turn it into a contender in 16 months. This team is tanking because their window closed. Going back on every move Benning ever made wouldn't change that.

Honestly I just don't have the desire to have these same arguments over and over. This place is embarrassing lately.
 

Billy Kvcmu

Registered User
Dec 5, 2014
27,609
16,099
West Vancouver
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.

Wait wut? Drafting is the only thing that Benning is good at. Buffalo and Boston both had pretty good drafting record when Benning was involved. Don't let the hate blind your mind.
 

coldsteel79

Registered User
Sep 28, 2015
1,967
70
sask
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.

Exactly this, you gotta see the forest for the trees
 

Pip

Registered User
Feb 2, 2012
69,191
8,522
Granduland
Wait wut? Drafting is the only hug that Benning is good at. Buffalo and Boston both had pretty good drafting record when Benning was involved. Don't let the hate blind your mind.

Boston has a good drafting record with Benning?
 

y2kcanucks

Le Sex God
Aug 3, 2006
71,229
10,319
Surrey, BC
Boston has a good drafting record with Benning?

It's a complete myth. When you actually look at their drafting record they haven't been very good for almost a decade. And I'm not counting their success with a 2nd overall pick because that's just a gimme.
 

Reign Nateo

Registered User
Apr 28, 2003
13,561
59
Canada
Visit site
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.

Beleskey has 2 goals and you want him on our 2nd line? On a 5 year contract at about 4 million a season? You guys would lose your minds if Benning signed that deal.

And Cody Franson would be a whipping boy here. There's a reason no one signs him every year and he settled for a 1-year deal in Buffalo.

This is kind of my point as well though. Round and round with these revisionist theories that don't even make us a better team...
 

Billy Kvcmu

Registered User
Dec 5, 2014
27,609
16,099
West Vancouver
Beleskey has 2 goals and you want him on our 2nd line? On a 5 year contract at about 4 million a season? You guys would lose your minds if Benning signed that deal.

And Cody Franson would be a whipping boy here. There's a reason no one signs him every year and he settled for a 1-year deal in Buffalo.

This is kind of my point as well though. Round and round with these revisionist theories that don't even make us a better team...

Well said, imagine we have Beleaky and Franson. This place would explode.
 

Huggy

Respectful Handshake
Jul 22, 2014
9,665
649
Vancouver
"Wed be a contender with belesky and franson"
"Beleskey has 2 goals"
"No response"

Ill agree dorsett and miller are looking pretty bad but id rather tank with them then sign belesky and franson and really be ****ed with the cap
 

y2kcanucks

Le Sex God
Aug 3, 2006
71,229
10,319
Surrey, BC
"Wed be a contender with belesky and franson"
"Beleskey has 2 goals"
"No response"

Ill agree dorsett and miller are looking pretty bad but id rather tank with them then sign belesky and franson and really be ****ed with the cap

Usually quotations are used when you're citing something that was said by someone. I don't recall ever hearing or seeing someone say we would be a contender with Beleskey and Franson.

Furthermore, we are ****ed with the cap because of long-term bad contracts Benning has signed. Guys like Sbisa, Dorsett, Sutter. Even the Miller contract is awful. Rather than those 4 at $16.65M we could have had: Garrison, Gaunce, Richardson, Lack at $10.46M going forward and had an extra $6.2M to spend. But hey, "cap space means nothing when you're not a contender" apparently. And THAT is definitely something I've seen said on here.
 

StIllmatic

Registered User
Mar 27, 2010
4,754
0
Vancouver
Wait wut? Drafting is the only thing that Benning is good at. Buffalo and Boston both had pretty good drafting record when Benning was involved. Don't let the hate blind your mind.

Boston was horrible at drafting during Benning's tenure there...
 

arttk

Registered User
Feb 16, 2006
17,502
9,285
Los Angeles
Beleskey has 2 goals and you want him on our 2nd line? On a 5 year contract at about 4 million a season? You guys would lose your minds if Benning signed that deal.

And Cody Franson would be a whipping boy here. There's a reason no one signs him every year and he settled for a 1-year deal in Buffalo.

This is kind of my point as well though. Round and round with these revisionist theories that don't even make us a better team...

2 goals and 8 assists for 10 points at 3.8M. Basically puts up the same amount of points Dorsett and Prust combined and earns less than those 2 combined. And somehow that doesn't make our team better?

We have ****ing Sbisa earning more than Franson and on a longer contract. Are you going to advocate that having Sbisa > anyone is a good thing?
 

MS

1%er
Mar 18, 2002
53,683
84,506
Vancouver, BC
Wait wut? Drafting is the only thing that Benning is good at. Buffalo and Boston both had pretty good drafting record when Benning was involved. Don't let the hate blind your mind.

Boston was literally the worst drafting team in the NHL during Benning's time there. Worse than us under Gillis.

Beleskey has 2 goals and you want him on our 2nd line? On a 5 year contract at about 4 million a season? You guys would lose your minds if Benning signed that deal.

And Cody Franson would be a whipping boy here. There's a reason no one signs him every year and he settled for a 1-year deal in Buffalo.

This is kind of my point as well though. Round and round with these revisionist theories that don't even make us a better team...

Beleskey on pace for 40 points at $3.8 million? I'd take it over pretty much every contract Benning has signed.

The argument isn't that Beleskey and Franson are great. It's that they're better than the dreck Benning has brought in here at absurd prices.
 

JuniorNelson

Registered User
Jan 21, 2010
8,631
320
E.Vancouver
Canucks haven't been a destination team for career minded players for years. Benning at least managed to bring in some helpful free agents. Again, just like veteran turnover, he didn't go far enough. This is obvious in hindsight. The depth management argument is sound and damning. He had to burn a lot of fuel to make incremental gains.

It is noted that Benning tried to do more last Summer but was shut out by a poor market. So, to be fair, he seems to have had grander ideas than he was able to bring to fruition. I think that is a positive. I think Benning sees the fail and will try to do a couple of tweaks but he has exhausted his tradeable assets.

A real, giant outstanding mistake Benning made was dealing Kassian. The optics of this across the league are atrocious. How cold is it to trade away a struggling person? Benning appears to have dumped him and even paid extra to get rid of him. That's reptilian appearing. These optics have damaged the Canucks more than mickey-mousing the line-up. Who wants to play for a team that treats players like that?
 

tantalum

Hope for the best. Expect the worst
Sponsor
Apr 2, 2002
25,127
13,973
Missouri
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.

Or you know...A blueline consisting of Edler, Tanev, Hamhuis, Garrison as a nice collection of top 4 guys. 5,6 and 7 guys as good or better than the guys who last night played in the 4, 5, 6 spots. Yes prospects like Hutton and Horvat. And some others even. The NHL depth wasn't great...no one has said it was I don't think. Somehow Benning has made it worse. His additions have been lacklustre to downright laughable yet called "foundational" and important pieces moving forward. McCann is his bright spot in the NHL after two offseason on the job. Looks to be a great pick.

The team had cap flexibility. A good amount in fact when everything was taken into account. $6 million was spent on precisely the wrong guy for instance. And while wanting out, Kesler was still a good asset with apparently more than two teams on his list. No leverage was even attempted to be gained over the Kesler camp. It's part and parcel with a history of poor asset management he has displayed to this point.

You don't get the point of cap space? The point of cap space is to give you flexibility to maneuver and help you make the most of your assets as you make moves. Honestly, I don't think it's a good argument to say who was moved or signed that is better. That's part of it...the other part of it is who could have been moved or signed or whatever if you had that extra flexibility to bury a bad contract in the minors or do something with that cap space. For every player that is traded there are countless others who could have been moved and were discussed being moved. Removing a valuable asset such as available cap space ham strings a team on the rebuild. And just because a guy may not make the team a contender doesn't mean you ignore making incremental improvements. Of course the real problem is that Benning believes he has been making those incremental improvements and quite frankly he just hasn't been.
 
Last edited:

arttk

Registered User
Feb 16, 2006
17,502
9,285
Los Angeles
Canucks haven't been a destination team for career minded players for years. Benning at least managed to bring in some helpful free agents. Again, just like veteran turnover, he didn't go far enough. This is obvious in hindsight. The depth management argument is sound and damning. He had to burn a lot of fuel to make incremental gains.

It is noted that Benning tried to do more last Summer but was shut out by a poor market. So, to be fair, he seems to have had grander ideas than he was able to bring to fruition. I think that is a positive. I think Benning sees the fail and will try to do a couple of tweaks but he has exhausted his tradeable assets.

A real, giant outstanding mistake Benning made was dealing Kassian. The optics of this across the league are atrocious. How cold is it to trade away a struggling person? Benning appears to have dumped him and even paid extra to get rid of him. That's reptilian appearing. These optics have damaged the Canucks more than mickey-mousing the line-up. Who wants to play for a team that treats players like that?

Yeah, we had a lot of problems brining in UFA. Explains how we only got Hamhuis, Garrison, Malholtra, Demitra, Sundin in the past couple of years. Nobody of quality wants to come here unless we overpay like crazy right? /s
 

JuniorNelson

Registered User
Jan 21, 2010
8,631
320
E.Vancouver
Yeah, we had a lot of problems brining in UFA. Explains how we only got Hamhuis, Garrison, Malholtra, Demitra, Sundin in the past couple of years. Nobody of quality wants to come here unless we overpay like crazy right? /s

Hamhuis and Garrison are the only guys who came here (and not for hockey reasons). The others took a (very high paying) job.
 

Reign Nateo

Registered User
Apr 28, 2003
13,561
59
Canada
Visit site
Hamhuis and Garrison are the only guys who came here. The others took a job.

The issue for me is that people consider UFA a viable way to win in today's league. I don't agree at all. There are rarely game-changing UFAs available anymore and the ones that are signed are generally given too much term and are regretted. The NHL's top teams were not built through UFA. Far from it in fact. Saying we could have saved money and made our team better via UFA is a terrible idea in my opinion.
 

arttk

Registered User
Feb 16, 2006
17,502
9,285
Los Angeles
Hamhuis and Garrison are the only guys who came here (and not for hockey reasons). The others took a (very high paying) job.

Sundin ended up taking a cut, Richardson signed a bargain of a contract really, Malholtra and Demitra took market rate (not overpaid).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad