If Not Benning (Your GM Candidate)

[I am toxic]

Hold on.

There have been posts defending Benning for years now, and while it has been clear for over a half decade that Benning is incompetent and moving this club further and further away from contention, and now that even the dimmest casual is aware of it, there is some appeal to spilled milk?

No.

Garbage postings will be called out, garbage management will be called out.

Suppressing debate is bull shit.

 

[MS]

I dunno man. Somebody posted the trade history for 2 of them. Look at the lines underneath the yellow highlights.

You understand that when you go back in time, most players end up being released for nothing at some point, right?

Literally every star from 2002 has been released for nothing at this point. The fact that Mike Richardson was not re-signed by Arizona *5 years later* does not somehow mean he had no value in 2015.

 

[logan5]

Hold on.

There have been posts defending Benning for years now, and while it has been clear for over a half decade that Benning is incompetent and moving this club further and further away from contention, and now that even the dimmest casual is aware of it, there is some appeal to spilled milk?

No.

Garbage postings will be called out, garbage management will be called out.

Suppressing debate is bull shit.

Is that directed at me? I am not suppressing anything if that's what you are thinking.

 

[F A N]

Oh no, I know exactly what you are posting.

Ok. My apologies then. But what else do you suggest us Canucks fans do? We're not Aquilini who can make a change with a phone call.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

No argument from me that Benning knee capped the team with poor UFA signings..However, this season, and next season brings more financial flexibility...Not really buying in to your doomsday prophecies (but you're welcome to them)
Again, I'm fully expecting a rebound next season.

You've been saying this for years and we've been a bottom 10 team for years. Not everyone enjoys burying their head in the sand and waiting and seeing and then blaming everything on hindsight and repeating the process, over and over, year over year. Your rationalization seems like something that would come from a toddler, tbh.

 

[F A N]

You are projecting your own interpretation of things onto the polls choices. No where do the choices refer to "Benning Sucks" and instead the poll is to select "When did you want Benning fired as the Canucks GM".

So even in your long deflection of a response, you say "This will more than likely cost him his job, which would be justified". Saying something is justifiable is a far stretch from desiring that outcome yourself - which was clearly described in the poll as the choices.

After 7 years of knee capping this team - do you want Jim Benning fired as GM?

As well, if assembling young talent is his "greatest" achievement, what's the list of his other actual achievements?

Aren't you doing the same? The poll is clearly worded in the past tense and so does not clearly describe the type of choices you interpret it does. It's clearly a biased poll.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Seriously, what have you seen that gives you confidence Benning will act properly, any better with new cap space?

He still hasnt learned. Myers, Holtby, Pearson are all bad contracts, the more recent. He makes procedural blunders left and right. DiPietro playing 3 games in over a calender year.

Why on earth would you rush to sign Pearson at term over 3 million and give him NMC and promise to protect him in expansion draft?

We don't even know if it will be Benning next season...?...There's a lot of juggling balls in the air right now.

Could be Geoff Courtnall..?

 

[I am toxic]

Ok. My apologies then. But what else do you suggest us Canucks fans do? We're not Aquilini who can make a change with a phone call.

I suggest Canucks fans continue to analyze the past and current moves, transactions and situation of the team to establish the various probable outcomes for the next several years, using facts, reasoning and logic.

In other words, honest debate.

Instead of positions that try - and fail - to suppress debate, whether it is calls to wait and see, or disparaging and false remarks about spilled milk.

And I don't know why you use the term "us Canucks fans." It' just "Canucks fans", there is no "us".

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

I suggest Canucks fans continue to analyze the past and current moves, transactions and situation of the team to establish the various probable outcomes for the next several years, using facts, reasoning and logic.

In other words, honest debate.

Instead of positions that try - and fail - to suppress debate, whether it is calls to wait and see, or disparaging and false remarks about spilled milk.

YOU'RE A HATTER AND NOT A REAL FAN.

The gaslighting gatekeeping was easily the worst part of the Benning era discussions.

 

[Pavel96]

Aren't you doing the same? The poll is clearly worded in the past tense and so does not clearly describe the type of choices you interpret it does. It's clearly a biased poll.

No, I'm quoting the poll and post directly and using both of their specific language in reference to one another. The poll asks when you wanted something to happen. If you chose the final choice, you are not referencing the past in your choice as it would reflect your current support of Jim as the GM.

You don't have to respond to the poll or question, but why twist the answer, as per usual?

And how is the poll biased - it is asks when you wanted Jim fired - and then gives you a choice to say, no I support him as the GM.

If the poll was worded "Which year was Jim's best year as GM" and had each year of his tenure as a selection, and a final selection of "no year could be considered his best because they were all negative and hurt the franchise" - do you really think the poll would produce a significantly biased response in favor of Jim just because more choices (and the poll question) showed to support or the suggestion of him doing something positive?

 

[I am toxic]

YOU'RE A HATTER AND NOT A REAL FAN.

The gaslighting gatekeeping was easily the worst part of the Benning era discussions.

It has really poisoned the forum for over a half decade now.

 

[Zippgunn]

We don't even know if it will be Benning next season...?...There's a lot of juggling balls in the air right now.

Could be Geoff Courtnall..?

Hmmmm, intriguing. How many years experience does he have again?

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

It has really poisoned the forum for over a half decade now.

It definitely has. But I don't know about you, but I don't mind being a hatter according to @Sneezy.

 

[Peen]

lol @ the brad richardson didn't get any assets for the five years he played for arizona. dude was a great player here and was a great player for them.

that's the funniest shit i've ever read.

 

[y2kcanucks]

No argument from me that Benning knee capped the team with poor UFA signings..However, this season, and next season brings more financial flexibility...Not really buying in to your doomsday prophecies (but you're welcome to them)
Again, I'm fully expecting a rebound next season.

It's a flat cap. There's not much financial flexibility in 2021-22. It eases off going into 22-23 but elite teams don't have that much wasted cap space.

If you're fully expecting a rebound next season you're flat out wrong. Just like anyone who thought this team was going to make the playoffs this year was wrong (and I said so back in December).

 

[logan5]

lol @ the brad richardson didn't get any assets for the five years he played for arizona. dude was a great player here and was a great player for them.

that's the funniest shit i've ever read.

Ah. More straw man arguments.

 

[Peen]

Ah. More straw man arguments.

you literally lied and now you're claiming strawman after you lied about asset management

that's sad from you man.

 

[logan5]

you literally lied and now you're claiming strawman after you lied about asset management

that's sad from you man.

Shawn Mathias after he left the Canucks - Avalanche let him walk for nothing. Winnipeg let him walk for nothing. He had just turned 30 when left Winnipeg. Mike Santorelli after he left the Canucks - Predators let him walk for nothing. the Ducks let him walk for nothing. He was only 30 when he left Anaheim.

 

[Peen]

Shawn Mathias after he left the Canucks - Avalanche let him walk for nothing. Winnipeg let him walk for nothing. He had just turned 30 when left Winnipeg. Mike Santorelli after he left the Canucks - Predators let him walk for nothing. the Ducks let him walk for nothing. He was only 30 when he left Anaheim.

lol

 

[F A N]

And how is the poll biased - it is asks when you wanted Jim fired - and then gives you a choice to say, no I support him as the GM.

Lol. If you don't see the bias then you don't.

You should read up on biased surveys and leading questions.

 

[MS]

Shawn Mathias after he left the Canucks - Avalanche let him walk for nothing. Winnipeg let him walk for nothing. He had just turned 30 when left Winnipeg. Mike Santorelli after he left the Canucks - Predators let him walk for nothing. the Ducks let him walk for nothing. He was only 30 when he left Anaheim.

Matthias had a shoulder reconstruction mid-way through his first season in Winnipeg, tried to come back the following season and wasn’t right and then retired at a young age.

Santorelli also retired due to significant injury issues.

Again, both were traded for substantial returns after Jim Benning let them and then after that developed injury problems and retired.

 

[F A N]

Shawn Mathias after he left the Canucks - Avalanche let him walk for nothing. Winnipeg let him walk for nothing. He had just turned 30 when left Winnipeg. Mike Santorelli after he left the Canucks - Predators let him walk for nothing. the Ducks let him walk for nothing. He was only 30 when he left Anaheim.

Walking for nothing is not allowed. If a player signs a contract without an NTC there is an implied condition that he will be traded before the end of trade deadline day in the last year of his deal. If he does have an NTC there is an implied condition that he would not handcuff the team by refusing to waive or not going to where the team wants to trade him to: that includes pending UFAs who will re-sign and retiring players.

 

[Bojack Horvatman]

Honestly I have no issues on not getting anything for Santorelli, Richardson, and Matthias as we made the playoffs that year. Even not getting something for Hamhuis as Aqua blocked the trade with Dallas. The problem for me is that we spent more money on worse players, and lost Bonino and other assets. We also had to keep Virtanen and McCann in the NHL because we had no cap space, and gave Horvat a role he wasn't ready for.

 

[Pavel96]

Lol. If you don't see the bias then you don't.

You should read up on biased surveys and leading questions.

Actually, I don't think I need to, but thanks for the suggestion. If you can't even respond to what I wrote with anything but 'lol' - you don't seem to be an authority on the matter. Thanks for coming out!

 

[I am toxic]

Actually, I don't think I need to, but thanks for the suggestion. If you can't even respond to what I wrote with anything but 'lol' - you don't seem to be an authority on the matter. Thanks for coming out!

It's quite telling, who won't state state their position on this subject of Benning's length of tenure, and the previous about whether Benning is a good or bad GM.

We all have our biases.

Mine is for honest debate.