You can't just separate "process" and "player evaluation." You're not trading a pick for a random entity that meets a certain statistical criteria; you're trading for a specific individual. Judging "process" without allowing time to assess "evaluation" makes no sense.
IMO too much emphasis is put on the "franchise altering" potential of most picks. Sure, any pick could be the next Datsyuk, but by the same logic, any mid round pick dealt for a "fringe prospect" could be the next Patrick Sharp. Other than Dorsett, the picks traded by Benning have been for players who are still developing.
Benning has made 28 picks in four drafts. That's 7 per year, a full contingent. Some feel a rebuilding team should be making extra picks every year, not just the allotted 7. Fair enough, I don't necessarily disagree. Still, at least the acquired picks that Benning deals do still have "boom" potential...sure you've mostly given up the "franchise altering" upside of the pick, but you've also insulated yourself from zero organisational return on the investment.
Even some of Benning's most scrutinised "age gap" transactions are a good balance of short and long term needs. Vey didn't work out, but he was a PPG AHLer and is now a top scorer in the KHL...clearly there is some hockey ability there, he just didn't have the toolbox to stick in the NHL. More skill/IQ less toolbox is something people want to see more of.
The same process that brought in Vey also brought in Baertschi. If Benning drafted Baertschi with a 2nd, everyone would consider it a good pick. So Benning used 2 2nds to get Baertschi as a medium to long term piece, and Vey as a stop gap for two seasons. So basically a hit rate of 50%. Last time the Canucks drafted a Baertschi level player in the second round was Mason Raymond in 2005. Before that, Chubarov in 1998. That's two NHL quality players in 15 years of drafting (up to Demko in 2014). Of course a big part of that is how few 2nd rounders we've actually used over that time period, but Benning isn't trading them for Derek Roy or the like.
Same on defence. Offense from the blueline is so valuable. Clendenning was a miss, but he's played NHL games for four different organizations since he was here, so there's obviously something about his game worth looking at. Larsen (5th)/Pedan(3rd)/Pouliot(4th)...if that turns into one 30 point, top 4, strong transition defender, is it worth it? Pouliot still has to show his recent play is a development step and not just a hot streak, but I'd say it is. If hypothetically Benning had drafted with those third/fourth/fifth rounders and Pouliot had been the result, we're likely looking at that as a good draft for the Canucks.
That imo is what gets overlooked by this "process" talk. Benning has added medium to long term pieces with these deals that are contributing now as the new core takes shape, and could even be parts of it going forward.