Is Jim Benning the worst GM in franchise history?

[MS]

You're right. What does Bennings time in Boston have anything to do with his time here. It's irrelevant.

The entire narrative Benning’s defenders have around him is that he’s some sort of great scouting GM, and that that justifies his obvious weaknesses in other areas. Unlike Mike ‘Can’t Draft’ Gillis.

So you’d expect that when heading up the scouting department of another team just before coming here, he’d have great results if this was true.

Instead, the scouting department he was leading in Boston had the worst results in the NHL, even worse than what Gillis did over the same period.

That completely destroys the ‘great scout’ narrative so yes, it’s pretty relevant.

 

[Balls Mahoney]

I'm confused about where this draft guru myth is even founded? They drafted a great overager out of Russia then promptly ran him off from sheer mental Pejorative Sluration. They drafted Gaudette who's struggling to break through. What else am I supposed to be impressed with?

 

[logan5]

Does going 50% (and I'm gifting you Hughes) in the top ten over five years and doing worse than virtually any veteran HFCanucks poster who does draft lists make you a draft guru?

No, but it makes him better than Jack Gordon and Harry Neale and a few of the other GM's that had the Canucks mired in losing for 20 years. Don't forget, this thread asks if he is the worst GM of all time. He's not close to that.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

You’ve been presented with :

- links confirming he was heading Boston’s amateur scouting department.

- quotes from Chiarelli describing how he was his right hand man in charge of player development.

- endless quotes from Benning from when he was - every year - Boston’s media point man for the draft.

- the fact that he was the only guy with a scouting background in Boston’s front office.

- evidence that he was consistently interviewing players alongside Boston’s DOS.

- evidence that he was consistently on amateur scouting missions while with Boston, even missing Cup Final games.

- evidence that nobody else in Boston’s front office was doing any of these things.

... and yet refuse to admit those bad Boston drafts are largely a product of Jim Benning. It’s just hilarious.

I do believe they deferred to Benning on his scouting (obviously, he was the DOS in Buffalo..did a great job)...but to claim that the Boston selections are' his' picks (he was not the DOS, or the GM),is false.

I'm sure, as Chiarelli's main right hand man, he had other pressing things to take care of...like winning the SC.

 

[Balls Mahoney]

I miss Wetcoaster. Wish he was about to spend paragraphs and paragraphs complaining about Benning and comparing him to the Burke Administration.

 

[logan5]

So I've said that Jack Gordon and Harry Neale were worse GM's than Benning. Can a Benning hater make a good argument that they did a better job than Benning. Jack Gordon who made the Cam Neely trade, combined with Harry Neale, made the Canucks the worst team of the 80's, despite getting high draft pick after high draft pick. It was so bad that it took 5 years for Pat Quinn (best GM in Canucks history) to make the Canucks a winner.

 

[rypper]

I'm sure, as Chiarelli's main right hand man, he had other pressing things to take care of...like winning the SC.

His role in Boston as AGM has been described a few times as entirely on the player evaluation side of things. He wasn't there for parts of the Stanley Cup final in Vancouver.

What other pressing things could he have to take care of? What do you think his job entailed?

 

[rypper]

Everything the Canucks do is a team effort. That's very convenient that you can give Benning no credit for drafting but put all the blame on Benning for free agent signings, or not making the play-offs the last 4 years, which is a spill over effect from the last GM in charge giving him nothing to work with except 2 aging stars close to retirement.

You lose credibility with blanket statements like this that exaggerate the situation Jim came into.

 

[logan5]

You lose credibility with blanket statements like this that exaggerate the situation Jim came into.

A lot of older declining players on that team.

Do you think Jack Gordon was a better GM than Jim? How about Harry Neale?

 

[rypper]

A lot of older declining players on that team.

Do you think Jack Gordon was a better GM than Jim? How about Harry Neale?

There was also a lot of tradeable pieces that he squandered. And Horvat. and the 6th overall pick. It wasn't the situation you make it out to be, Jim made it harder on himself with some of his decisions.

 

[VanJack]

I realize it's hard to compare eras in the NHL history, but if the Canucks fail to make the playoffs for the fifth consecutive season, then it will officially be the worst such stretch in franchise history. And considering how many bad teams the Canucks have had in their 50-year history, that's saying something.

So 'yes, if the Canucks falter again, then you could argue that the current GM is the worst in franchise history, as least in terms of on-ice results. But again, it's a lot tougher to make the playoffs now than it was in the 70's and 80's, so who really knows where Jimbo stacks up?

 

[Canucko]

I realize it's hard to compare eras in the NHL history, but if the Canucks fail to make the playoffs for the fifth consecutive season, then it will officially be the worst such stretch in franchise history. And considering how many bad teams the Canucks have had in their 50-year history, that's saying something.

So 'yes, if the Canucks falter again, then you could argue that the current GM is the worst in franchise history, as least in terms of on-ice results. But again, it's a lot tougher to make the playoffs now than it was in the 70's and 80's, so who really knows where Jimbo stacks up?

You don’t think playing in a league where 4 of the top 5 teams from the Smythe making the playoffs skew things a bit?

1986 Smythe Standings: 23-44-13 59 points. Made the playoffs.

Hoorah.

 

[Seattle Totems]

Not a fair comparison at all. It was much easier to make the playoffs in the 80s than it is today.

8 out 16 teams made the playoffs from 1972-74.

16 out of 31 teams made the playoffs last year.

Do the math

 

[Canucko]

8 out 16 teams made the playoffs from 1972-74.

16 out of 31 teams made the playoffs last year.

Do the math

Math? I don’t need to do math to know that 1972-1974 does not equal the 80s.

 

[Spur1]

Wow... I am new to the HFboards and was just in the Leafs board. The have a Dubas appreciation thread while we have a “Is Benning the worst”.
That tells me there is a lot of Leaf fans and other teams in the Canucks board trolling to get those poll numbers.

 

[Pavel96]

Wow... I am new to the HFboards and was just in the Leafs board. The have a Dubas appreciation thread while we have a “Is Benning the worst”.
That tells me there is a lot of Leaf fans and other teams in the Canucks board trolling to get those poll numbers.

Lol is this for real?

 

[MS]

Lol is this for real?

Brand new join date claiming Jim Benning is the best GM in franchise history?

Checks out!

 

[Pavel96]

Brand new join date claiming Jim Benning is the best GM in franchise history?

Checks out!

Such a cute little shtick and avatar to boot!

 

[y2kcanucks]

This is a ridiculous position to take. Benning is the general manager and is responsible for all hockey operations related activity. The fact that you need to qualify your question with such a disclaimer points to the fact that the Canucks have been decently successful and such an acknowledgement destroys your argument. Consequently you make an absurd claim in an attempt to discount recent successes.

Buffalo’s draft record during Benning’s employment was good. The Bruins drafting record was poor, and the Canucks drafting record has been good.

Benning is widely considered to be a strong scout in the hockey industry and I believe that is being illustrated in the last few years. Your “evidence” is all circumstantial whereby everything needs to be wrapped up just right to fit your narrative.

Since Benning has been the GM of the Canucks, and is solely responsible for hockey operations activity, their farm system has improved.

So your evidence is simply to say that my claim is ridiculous, without actually explaining how or why.

When I last checked, which was a year ago, every amateur scout the Canucks employed except for two, were here before Benning. One of the two new guys is his son, who previously worked as a security guard. Nepotism at its finest.

Buffalo’s draft record while Benning was head of scouting there wasn’t bad, I’ll give you that. But like you mention, Boston’s draft record while Benning was AGM there was abysmal. And the Canucks drafting outside of the first round during his tenure hasn’t been very good either. Also, it doesn’t take a genius to draft some good young players when you’re drafting high every year. And despite that the Canucks have screwed up a 5th and 6th overall pick.

So yeah, still waiting.

And is that it? Is that all you have to defend Benning? If so, then I guess you prove my point.

 

[Seattle Totems]

Math? I don’t need to do math to know that 1972-1974 does not equal the 80s.

Stop moving the goalposts.

The only GM to come close to Bennings incompetent record was the first GM of the Canucks during the expansion period. The odds of making the playoffs was virtually the same. If you dare argue about the 80s you lose on that front too because the Canucks have been the 2nd worst team in the league while missing the playoffs.

 

[SillyRabbit]

I'm confused about where this draft guru myth is even founded? They drafted a great overager out of Russia then promptly ran him off from sheer mental ******ation. They drafted Gaudette who's struggling to break through. What else am I supposed to be impressed with?

The “Benning is a draft guru” myth was brought forward because he was so weak in every other area of being a GM that his supporters needed something to cling onto to justify why he was still a good choice to be GM.

Think of it like a guy who’s not very attractive, but still dating a beautiful woman.

You’d instantly assume that he must have money, why else would she pick him?

The assumption was made that if Benning is so bad in all areas of being a GM, he must be a drafting genius to justify his employment.

It just so happens that drafting is something that can take years to assess and therefore it’s very convenient to make arguments to “wait and see” opposed to judging him for clearly awful picks such as Virtanen and Juolevi.

Hopefully by the time people figure out that they’re busts, he will have new promising draft picks that they can also cry to “wait and see” and the cycle continues.

 

[Canucko]

So your evidence is simply to say that my claim is ridiculous, without actually explaining how or why.

When I last checked, which was a year ago, every amateur scout the Canucks employed except for two, were here before Benning. One of the two new guys is his son, who previously worked as a security guard. Nepotism at its finest.

Buffalo’s draft record while Benning was head of scouting there wasn’t bad, I’ll give you that. But like you mention, Boston’s draft record while Benning was AGM there was abysmal. And the Canucks drafting outside of the first round during his tenure hasn’t been very good either. Also, it doesn’t take a genius to draft some good young players when you’re drafting high every year. And despite that the Canucks have screwed up a 5th and 6th overall pick.

So yeah, still waiting.

And is that it? Is that all you have to defend Benning? If so, then I guess you prove my point.

Still ridiculous. My evidence is the state of the Canucks current youth. I do not need anything beyond that to prove you wrong. You are the one who is adding all of these qualifiers in an attempt to dismiss.

Benning is the GM, and as a result is responsible for those who work for him. It is the same in any management position.

Whatever you say does not change this.

 

[Canucko]

Stop moving the goalposts.

The only GM to come close to Bennings incompetent record was the first GM of the Canucks during the expansion period. The odds of making the playoffs was virtually the same. If you dare argue about the 80s you lose on that front too because the Canucks have been the 2nd worst team in the league while missing the playoffs.

Not moving the goalposts. You “randomly” select 2 seasons, and ignore the rest.

And believe it or not, I do dare argue about the 80s. Are you going to double-dog dare me now?

 

[MS]

Still ridiculous. My evidence is the state of the Canucks current youth. I do not need anything beyond that to prove you wrong. You are the one who is adding all of these qualifiers in an attempt to dismiss.

Benning is the GM, and as a result is responsible for those who work for him. It is the same in any management position.

You can huff and puff about this and that, doesn’t change a thing.

If the team had hired a crackhead from the corner of Main/Hastings in 2014, that crackhead had run the team into the ground with a series of terrible trades and signings, and then taken the highest-rated player in the THN Draft Preview with the free high draft pick given to him by the league as a reward for sucking ... the state of our youth would be basically identical.

This is evidence of nothing. Are McDavid/Draisaitl/Nurse/RNH evidence that Edmonton has been a well-managed team?

 

[Canucko]

If the team had hired a crackhead from the corner of Main/Hastings in 2014, that crackhead had run the team into the ground with a series of terrible trades and signings, and then taken the highest-rated player in the THN Draft Preview with the free high draft pick given to him by the league as a reward for sucking ... the state of our youth would be basically identical.

This is evidence of nothing. Are McDavid/Draisaitl/Nurse/RNH evidence that Edmonton has been a well-managed team?

And this post illustrates the level of absurdity you have reached. You have equated Benning’s job performance to that of a junky, and those who do not despise him as flat earthers.

You are not interested in discussion. Bye.