Canucks Managerial Thread IV

[y2kcanucks]

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?

What useful free agents has Benning brought in?

 

[arttk]

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.

UFA is a viable way to bring in support for what you have. Nobody is saying we should assemble our core via UFA, we should bring in support for our core via UFA.

 

[MS]

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

This narrative is completely ridiculous.

Outside of years where we had literally zero cap space (2011, 2013), Gillis was able to add quality impact veterans on good contracts every year he was here. And even Benning was able to bring in Vrbata in his first year here.

This market has no problem attracting quality free agents. We're not NY or LA, but we're not even remotely a bad/unattractive destination.

 

[MS]

Please tell me with a straight face that Canucks fans would be happy if Benning signed Beleskey to that deal right now.

In a vacuum, maybe not. But relative to spending $15 million on Miller/Sbisa/Dorsett/Prust, that would look like a hell of a deal.

It's not a great deal but $3.8 million isn't terrible at all for a ~35 point youngish middle-6 forward who adds size and grit.

 

[Intangibos]

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.

Nobody says this. Free agency is a tool for managers to use to help build their team. I don't think anyone is suggesting going out and signing all the top stars for massive contracts. UFAs are an excellent way to acquire depth. Santorelli, Malhotra, Torres, Samuelsson, Richardson, Vrbata, Hamhuis, and Garrison. All FA pickups that were important to the team, and worth their money. I don't like teams going out and paying top dollar for top free agents, but you can get some solid players on good contracts in free agency.

Amateur FA can be great as well with players like Tanev and Lack for the Canucks.