Canucks will be the most improved team next year - Benning GM of the Year?

Status
Not open for further replies.

garbageteam

Registered User
Jan 7, 2010
1,403
641
The premise of the thread is clickbait. Benning dragged and wasted seven years of a team and fan attention's history with no results and back to square one, or arguably worse than the team he had inherited. There is no "squeaking into the playoffs" from a near bottom of the table finish that will undo this sort of historical black mark. The award would be completely invalid if given to a GM who "improved" his team from a disaster entirely of his own doing and no one would care.

You know what would wipe the smug look off the Benning haters' faces, mine included: a Stanley Cup. I'll even throw my hands up in the air if his roster management somehow gets this team into a Cup finals and loses in respectable (i.e. not Montreal like) fashion.

After wasting 7 years of time and money, mortgaging the future just to get into the playoffs and even muster a second round exit while anchored by more stiffs to weigh the team down isn't going to cut it. No one's opinion will change.
 

racerjoe

Registered User
Jun 3, 2012
12,154
5,850
Vancouver
The premise of the thread is clickbait. Benning dragged and wasted seven years of a team and fan attention's history with no results and back to square one, or arguably worse than the team he had inherited. There is no "squeaking into the playoffs" from a near bottom of the table finish that will undo this sort of historical black mark. The award would be completely invalid if given to a GM who "improved" his team from a disaster entirely of his own doing and no one would care.

You know what would wipe the smug look off the Benning haters' faces, mine included: a Stanley Cup. I'll even throw my hands up in the air if his roster management somehow gets this team into a Cup finals and loses in respectable (i.e. not Montreal like) fashion.

After wasting 7 years of time and money, mortgaging the future just to get into the playoffs and even muster a second round exit while anchored by more stiffs to weigh the team down isn't going to cut it. No one's opinion will change.


It can’t be click bait because he doesn’t have a kraken avatar…
 

Rick Rocket

Regetstred User
May 22, 2008
1,370
297
In:
OEL, Garland, Dickinson, Halak, Poolman, Schenn, Di Giuseppe, Petan, Klimovich, Hunt, most of an AHL team (I only listed guys that have a shot at regular duty)

Out:
Edler, Eriksson, Beagle, Roussel, Holtby, Virtanen, Schmidt (by apparent request), Spooner's cap hit, 3/4s of Sutter's cap hit, our 9th overall pick in a weird, randomized draft, Benn, Boyd, Chatfield, Gaudette (?), Lind, Rafferty, Vesey

I'd say we did improve, significantly. Our depth will be tested, but I think the guys further down the roster will hold up ok. I don't think the improvement will vault us into a guaranteed playoff spot or anything, given how low we sunk, but better is better.

Benning isn't GM of the year spending valuable assets to fix his mess.

this sums it up
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cogburn

logan5

Registered User
May 24, 2011
5,953
4,135
Vancouver - Mt. Pleasant
It can’t be click bait because he doesn’t have a kraken avatar…
Most things we say here are click bait, or provocative. Like what you just said. Canucks being the most improved team is a realistic possibility, so as a side to that, I said maybe Benning gets consideration for gm of the year. Nothing wrong with that. You guys are just looking for ways to censor positive things about the team. Like when you guys plead to the mods about alleged trolling. And now click bait.
 

AwesomeInTheory

A Christmas miracle
Aug 21, 2015
4,201
4,367
If the Canucks do well and have a dominant season, it is entirely in the realm of possibility that Benning would be considered for GM of the year, given that the people who vote on the award are fellow GMs and members of the (more than likely) east coast media.

I am skeptical of the Canucks being a hugely improved team, though, and maintain they're most likely to be a bubble team.

Like when you guys plead to the mods about alleged trolling. And now click bait.

Yeah, why on earth would people think you're trolling when you routinely make low effort posts, admit you're not interested in doing any work to support your points, and disengage from folks who make an effort of addressing your silly positions?
 

WetcoastOrca

Registered User
Jun 3, 2011
38,142
21,937
Vancouver, BC
We traded our last two first round picks and next years second round pick. The expectation at a bare minimum should be an improvement over a dismal last season. I wouldn’t give management much credit for that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 82Ninety42011

iceburg

Don't ask why
Aug 31, 2003
7,603
3,959
The thread title should be changed to “Grading the GMs off-season moves” and a poll add with a 1 to 5 grading.
 

Rick Rocket

Regetstred User
May 22, 2008
1,370
297
If the Canucks do well and have a dominant season, it is entirely in the realm of possibility that Benning would be considered for GM of the year, given that the people who vote on the award are fellow GMs and members of the (more than likely) east coast media.

I am skeptical of the Canucks being a hugely improved team, though, and maintain they're most likely to be a bubble team.



Yeah, why on earth would people think you're trolling when you routinely make low effort posts, admit you're not interested in doing any work to support your points, and disengage from folks who make an effort of addressing your silly positions?

this sums it up
 

logan5

Registered User
May 24, 2011
5,953
4,135
Vancouver - Mt. Pleasant
Yeah, why on earth would people think you're trolling when you routinely make low effort posts, admit you're not interested in doing any work to support your points, and disengage from folks who make an effort of addressing your silly positions?

A different viewpoint is not trolling, and I answer back to most posts, but after awhile there is no point debating something. I mean I put a bit of work compiling stats on non playoff teams, which is pure fact, and I got ridiculed for that and accused of trolling. You guys are full of it.
 

AwesomeInTheory

A Christmas miracle
Aug 21, 2015
4,201
4,367
A different viewpoint is not trolling,

Show me where I said that.

I mean I put a bit of work compiling stats on non playoff teams,

Which I've taken the time to point out the problems at least twice now. This isn't really something you should be holding up as proof of anything.

which is pure fact,

Aside from all the examples I posted where it isn't. I would also state that the issue is not with 'stating facts', but the conclusions you arrive at from said 'facts.'

and I got ridiculed for that and accused of trolling. You guys are full of it.

I'm pointing out how lazy, low effort posting could be construed as trolling. I'm not ridiculing you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: geebaan

Samzilla

Prust & Dorsett are
Apr 2, 2011
15,297
2,151
I can’t imagine having a losing culture and being objectively and statistically one of the bottom five team over a prolonged seven year stretch… what would that look like?

Benning was so smart to bring in the likes of Dorsett and Sutter so that our losing had a winning culture while teams like Buffalo and Edmonton had a losing culture while losing.
 

logan5

Registered User
May 24, 2011
5,953
4,135
Vancouver - Mt. Pleasant
Show me where I said that.



Which I've taken the time to point out the problems at least twice now. This isn't really something you should be holding up as proof of anything.



Aside from all the examples I posted where it isn't. I would also state that the issue is not with 'stating facts', but the conclusions you arrive at from said 'facts.'



I'm pointing out how lazy, low effort posting could be construed as trolling. I'm not ridiculing you.
My posts are far better than the ones that are - “Benning is a moron”. And that’s the whole post. Do you get on people for those types of posts? You should if you are so worried about the integrity of the site.
 

AwesomeInTheory

A Christmas miracle
Aug 21, 2015
4,201
4,367
My posts are far better than the ones that are - “Benning is a moron”. And that’s the whole post. Do you get on people for those types of posts? You should if you are so worried about the integrity of the site.

"There's a reason why people may think you're trolling."
"Stop attacking me. I made an argument once."
"I'm not attacking you. Also, your argument has been debunked."
"Why aren't you policing everyone on this site?"


???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

To answer your question, no, I don't find those sorts of one liner posts to be productive.

I don't see those folks who do a one liner drive-by post like you described starting multiple threads, though, or trying to create arguments.
 
  • Like
Reactions: racerjoe

PuckMunchkin

Very Nice, Very Evil!
Dec 13, 2006
12,219
9,932
Lapland
Most things we say here are click bait, or provocative. Like what you just said. Canucks being the most improved team is a realistic possibility, so as a side to that, I said maybe Benning gets consideration for gm of the year. Nothing wrong with that. You guys are just looking for ways to censor positive things about the team. Like when you guys plead to the mods about alleged trolling. And now click bait.

They totally are trying to stop positivity!

I dont get why they want to believe the team is bad when obviously its not bad. And if it is, its not Jim Benning's fault.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lonny Bohonos

sting101

Registered User
Feb 8, 2012
15,707
14,510
Well lets just look at the team because Benning obviously is willing to scorch the earth to get his playoff teams vs astutely building a contender and im not gonna talk about GM of the year....way too many variables and the cost the Aquilinis paid to make this off season happen is unreal considering that many of the moves were fixing past mistakes with futures and a boat load of cash.

Will they be the most improved team?

Who is back starting with forwards...

Elias Pettersson - If he's healthy and hits that peak that we expect this will be a massive addition vs mostly a non factor and disappointment being hurt and his awful start. (Big +++)
JT Miller - Should be happy to be competitive and not spend the large portion of the season like last year disgruntled. (+)
Bo Horvat - Having a playmaker like Garland and internal competition for his left side should make for a big year for Bo. (Small +)
Brock Boeser - Like Bo having a key linemate like Petey healthy should help. He was pretty good last year and expect more of the same with some push considering they should be a lot more competitive. (Small +)
Tanner Pearson, Nils Hoglander, Brandon Sutter Tyler Motte- Should improve with the competitiveness of the team and better suited roles. (Small +)

summary - probably inevitable that someone will get hurt so cannot be too bullish on the improvements from Petey but he is a massive piece and adding competitiveness and depth to the group of top forwards should make for an improved performance. Also expect that the PPs will be better as last year was a disaster considering the talent and loss of Pettersson and lack of a 2nd unit

Whos out and who is in.

out - Jake Virtanen, Adam Gaudette, Antoine Roussel, Jayce Hawryluk, Jay Beagle, Jimmy Vesey, Travis Boyd, Loui Eriksson
in - Conor Garland, Jason Dickinson, Vasily Podkolzin, Matthew Highmore, Justin Dowling, Philip Di Guiseppe, Nic Petan

summary -considering every out piece was basically a disaster or completely out of their depth other than Hawryluk and Beagle i would consider this a massive upgrade on our roster. Garland alone should be an injection but i fully expect Pod and Dickinson to emerge as very important players also for this team. (Big +++)

Returning Defense

Quinn Hughes - After the bubble we though we were watching the 2nd coming of Eric Karlsson after last year were questioning if he can be effective 5v5. The sophomore slump is real and while its fair to say players and coaches have figured out how to break Hughes down and he has some rather large deficiencies defending i think it's also fair to say he had a horrendous year with mental gaffs, coverage and puck management. Quinn's best attribute is his smarts and i fully expect he will figure out a lot of his mistakes. He will get back to being a Corsi and possession beast and a PP wizard. (Expect++)
Tyler Myers, Travis Hamonic, Olli Juolevi - Hoping that Hamonic can stay healthy and Olli can keep improving. Expecting mostly the same and potentially some age related decline. (Small -)

summary - Expect marginal improvement overall with Hughes and Myers having to eat less minutes and having better support group from the forwards and in the depth of the defensive group.

Who's out and who is in.

Out - Alex Edler, Nate Schmidt, Jordie Benn, Jalen Chatfield
In - Oliver Ekman-Larsson, Jack Rathbone, Tucker Poolman, Luke Schenn,

summary - A lot of this will hinge on OEL. If he can get back to being motivated and playing as a legit top4 that can be relied upon in all situations then him vs Edler should be a nice upgrade. I'm not gonna get too worked up about his last few yrs in Arizona it's clear he played with hot garbage in a hot garbage system and was fed up and tuned out. Have to give him a chance and see. Massive X factor here because if he's legit top pair like Benning seems to think we could see a big injection to the group.

As far as Schmidt Benn Chatfield vs Rathbone Poolman and Schenn your basically replacing 2 non NHLers with 2 serviceable guys and the X factor here is can Rathbone be nearly as effective as Nate Schmidt was? If not then we lost a good #3 defenseman and will be patching it together with lesser player which wont bode well. If Rathbone builds on his confident and impressive start to his pro career then we may look back and be happy about moving on and allocating the cap elsewhere and being a deeper group. Huge wait and see here with it relying heavily on OEL and Rathbone. (A small +) for ridding ourselves of unhappy and poor players and adding a more balance prime aged competitive group and a huge dose of hope and faith. Lots of ??????

Goaltending should be interesting. Demko for me is a star on the horizon in the league. But he was outstanding last year just wasn't getting results with the tire fire in front of him. Expect more of the same from him with more wins and Halak would have to really play poorly for him to play worse than the shit effort Holtby gave us last year. Small improvement in the back up situation and looking forward to DiPietro coming along at some point and turning a few heads. (Small+)

Note that Halak is 5'11" and that he may have a big influence on Mikey Dipietro and helping him grow his game as a smaller goalie himself.

Coaching - Shaw should be a good add and i fully expect better from Travis with a camp and internal competition and competent depth. (Big ++) if they can figure out gap control and get better support from the forwards in possession scoring and positional play.

The farm being in Abbotsford should also be a help for call ups and assisting the growth of the kids. (Small+)

Absolutely we could be the most improved team but a lot of it will hinge on chemistry coaching and young players taking big steps in the right direction and our top forwards staying relatively healthy. A lot will have to go right and every off season bring this type of optimism if your looking for it. Reality is there will be unforeseen failures and players will get hurt and how will others adapt to new roles and pressure and the Rathbone OEL vs Schmidt Edler impacts will have a lot to say about it.

Depth wise we are definitely better and an uptick in Hughes and Peteys impacts should reflect in a team fighting for playoffs at least
 

Ita

Registered User
Mar 11, 2019
749
914
A different viewpoint is not trolling, and I answer back to most posts, but after awhile there is no point debating something..

It's not about you having a different viewpoint, it's the way you interact with other posters. I have seen you make comments like "you all need to apologize to Benning" etc in a context to get people riled up. You also tend to either ignore or intentionally act obtuse (like what you were doing just now) when people are trying to explain why they disagree with you.

I think at this point, most who are familiar with you know what your intentions are. There's really no need to play dumb and play the "I share a different view" card.
 

logan5

Registered User
May 24, 2011
5,953
4,135
Vancouver - Mt. Pleasant
It's not about you having a different viewpoint, it's the way you interact with other posters. I have seen you make comments like "you all need to apologize to Benning" etc in a context to get people riled up. You also tend to either ignore or intentionally act obtuse (like what you were doing just now) when people are trying to explain why they disagree with you.

I think at this point, most who are familiar with you know what your intentions are. There's really no need to play dumb and play the "I share a different view" card.
If I say I feel the team is about to become elite because of the young talent we have, then someone says our young talent is no better than any other team, that’s a difference of opinion. You are not going to convince me otherwise. That’s not being obtuse if I don’t buy into your or anybody else’s opinion (if that’s what you mean by being obtuse). You could say obtuse if I was disregarding straight facts, like how many years a certain team has missed the playoffs.
 

logan5

Registered User
May 24, 2011
5,953
4,135
Vancouver - Mt. Pleasant
It's not about you having a different viewpoint, it's the way you interact with other posters. I have seen you make comments like "you all need to apologize to Benning" etc in a context to get people riled up. You also tend to either ignore or intentionally act obtuse (like what you were doing just now) when people are trying to explain why they disagree with you.

I think at this point, most who are familiar with you know what your intentions are. There's really no need to play dumb and play the "I share a different view" card.
That sort of apology to Benning type thing I have brought up a few times out of over 1000 posts. That stems from the personal attacks against him, which I don’t like, and that has nothing to do with his job performance one way or the other.

Having a different view on things is not some card I’m playing, its 100% fact. Not sure what that is suppose to mean.
You guys rely heavily on personal attacks, so you are not innocent here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chaputonyou

logan5

Registered User
May 24, 2011
5,953
4,135
Vancouver - Mt. Pleasant
HO HUM JUST INNOCUOUSLY EXPRESSING MY OPINION WHY WOULD YOU THINK THIS IS INTENDED TO GARNER SOME KIND OF REACTION OR ANYTHING

In a forum where so much vitriol is directed at someone on a personal level, yes, it would be poetic.
You guys want to treat someone like garbage, but you don’t want to hear from someone who would defend him in any way whatsoever. You like to fight people that have their hands tied behind their back.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chaputonyou

AwesomeInTheory

A Christmas miracle
Aug 21, 2015
4,201
4,367
You could say obtuse if I was disregarding straight facts, like how many years a certain team has missed the playoffs.

Or, if, say, someone provided a roughly 18 team list who failed to become "consistent playoff teams."

But that hasn't happened, thankfully.
 
  • Like
Reactions: racerjoe

Bleach Clean

Registered User
Aug 9, 2006
27,000
6,572
In a forum where so much vitriol is directed at someone on a personal level, yes, it would be poetic.
You guys want to treat someone like garbage, but you don’t want to hear from someone who would defend him in any way whatsoever. You like to fight people that have their hands tied behind their back.


If you provide a defense that has been logically rebutted, does it remain a defense? I think not.

This happens sometimes when information is presented by the OP, multiple counter-arguments are presented causing one to question the initial information, but then the OP decides to remain resolute instead of shifting position. This creates an impasse. What results is both sides accusing the other of biased tactics. When in reality, the OP failed to properly address the counter-arguments to a sufficient level.

Could you be wrong here? Is that possible?
 
  • Like
Reactions: racerjoe

Zippgunn

Registered User
May 15, 2011
3,929
1,628
Lhuntshi
Which is why he should have been fired immediately at the end of last season.

FAQ also should have placed a moratorium on all transactions* once it was clear the Canucks were likely going to miss the playoffs again.

*Edit: transactions that increased cap commitments (like signing Pearson) or decreased draft picks (like the Arizona trade).

Hey I totally agree; he AND Green should have been handed their walking papers after the catastrophe that was last season. But they weren't, quite possibly because no superior alternative presented itself to FAQ, especially one that would take orders from the boss. So he re-upped his yes man and gave him two more years to get 'er done. The recent moves might just do it but it could also be a very long 24 months...
 

Canucker

Go Hawks!
Oct 5, 2002
25,428
4,635
Oak Point, Texas
In a forum where so much vitriol is directed at someone on a personal level, yes, it would be poetic.
You guys want to treat someone like garbage, but you don’t want to hear from someone who would defend him in any way whatsoever. You like to fight people that have their hands tied behind their back.

I don't think we like to fight people with their "hands tied behind their back"...I think we're baffled why people with their hands tied behind their back are so eager to look for a fight with the people who aren't tied up.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->