Confirmed with Link: Jim Benning and Travis Green Meet with Media at 9:30am on SN 650 (OP summarizes Pg. 1)

[I in the Eye]

Almost like someone should make some tweaks to how we travel/sleep/train to try to prevent them.

Oh wait. That was one of the first programs scrapped if I remember correctly.

We didn't use sleep doctors in Boston. We didn't use analytics in Boston. What we did in Boston is employ the guy in charge of referees' and disciplines' son. It allowed us to win one more game over a team of science, and the cup. The Boston model was nepotism. It's what I was taught and brought to Vancouver.

 

[Mr. Canucklehead]

Friedman's 31 thoughts had some good Canuck nuggets in them. Biggest among them was that there is an understanding amongst ownership, management and the organization as a whole that a step backwards in 2019-2020 is "not an option".

I interpret that as this - if the Canucks' don't continue to improve in the standings, in their rebuild, etc., Benning will be gone. So I wouldn't expect Benning to be signing an extension this off-season. I think ownership waits until the season is well underway to either extend him or cut him loose.

 

[Cogburn]

We didn't use sleep doctors in Boston. We didn't use analytics in Boston. What we did in Boston is employ the guy in charge of referees' and disciplines' son. It allowed us to win one more game over a team of science, and the cup. The Boston model was nepotism. It's what I was taught and brought to Vancouver.

Bullspit.

We've had nepotism here since our inception! It's a time honoured tradition in Vancouver!

 

[justafan22]

Friedman's 31 thoughts had some good Canuck nuggets in them. Biggest among them was that there is an understanding amongst ownership, management and the organization as a whole that a step backwards in 2019-2020 is "not an option".

I interpret that as this - if the Canucks' don't continue to improve in the standings, in their rebuild, etc., Benning will be gone. So I wouldn't expect Benning to be signing an extension this off-season. I think ownership waits until the season is well underway to either extend him or cut him loose.

I agree that he's done if they miss the playoffs next year (or don't at least get close)

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Friedman's 31 thoughts had some good Canuck nuggets in them. Biggest among them was that there is an understanding amongst ownership, management and the organization as a whole that a step backwards in 2019-2020 is "not an option".

I interpret that as this - if the Canucks' don't continue to improve in the standings, in their rebuild, etc., Benning will be gone. So I wouldn't expect Benning to be signing an extension this off-season. I think ownership waits until the season is well underway to either extend him or cut him loose.

The Aqualini's seem to leave things to the last minute..I'm even sure that Benning himself knows that he's done if the team flatlines.

 

[polarbearcub]

I think it’s playoffs or Benning is gone now. Good news. Or bad.. he might do something stupid to save his job

 

[4Twenty]

One we didn't address mistakes made and continued to pile on to them (Lindenning).

Since Linden left the organization we have moved out bad contracts/players (even for others). Nilsson is out. Gagner is out. Gudbranson is out. Del Zotto is out. We didn't get all the sunk resources back for Gudbranson but we might have a top six winger from that trade. Del Zotto got us Schenn. Nilsson got a late pick. Gagner...got Spooner I guess. Lateral move. At least Spoons is not buried yet (although I don't know what Gagner was...different argument I suppose).

Beagle and Roussel have been better signings then I've been used to (they at least fill holes we needed filled). Schaller still sucks out loud but you don't win them all.

We didn't hemorrhage draft picks in trades and in fact acquired a few late picks.

This is not me condoning Benning. Fire him. Out of a cannon. In to the sun.

But his moves in the last year or so have had a different logic when I look at them.

I don't really see a difference. Same crap, same shuffling of deck chairs.

MDZ is actually a better player than Schenn....has better metrics etc. I actually have an issue with the Nilsson and MDZ trades, but it's rather minor....but these moves aren't wins. They're lateral.

That he gets credit for waiving Gagner is ridiculous to me. Sam is better than a half dozen forwards they ran out there this year and Spooner is considerably worse....but again all these moves are lateral and it's the same crap.

I'll give him Pearson, that lateral move actually looks solid so far.

 

[Jyrki21]

Friedman's 31 thoughts had some good Canuck nuggets in them. Biggest among them was that there is an understanding amongst ownership, management and the organization as a whole that a step backwards in 2019-2020 is "not an option".

I interpret that as this - if the Canucks' don't continue to improve in the standings, in their rebuild, etc., Benning will be gone. So I wouldn't expect Benning to be signing an extension this off-season. I think ownership waits until the season is well underway to either extend him or cut him loose.

Ugh, gradual advancement is the easiest thing in the world when you start bad and the league gives good players to bad teams. It really is no reflection of the GM if he's not doing anything to make it happen. That's basically a carte blanche to say Benning is adequate no matter what happens. (Ironically if there's a true "step back" it'll probably be due to a good player getting injured, which isn't particularly linked to his general managing).

To paraphrase @Melvin, with this standard, what would Benning have to do next year for them to determine he's not best suited as the team's GM if they haven't already been able to determine it?

Trade Pettersson for Lucic?
Kill a guy at center ice?

 

[ChilliBilly]

I think it’s playoffs or Benning is gone now. Good news. Or bad.. he might do something stupid to save his job

I'm pretty sure he has to get a approval for all trades that involve a pick in the first 3 rounds, or any of Pettersson, Boeser, Horvat and Hughes. Not that he should ever be trading those pieces to salvage next season at the cost of the future.

 

[Cogburn]

I don't really see a difference. Same crap, same shuffling of deck chairs.

MDZ is actually a better player than Schenn....has better metrics etc. I actually have an issue with the Nilsson and MDZ trades, but it's rather minor....but these moves aren't wins. They're lateral.

That he gets credit for waiving Gagner is ridiculous to me. Sam is better than a half dozen forwards they ran out there this year and Spooner is considerably worse....but again all these moves are lateral and it's the same crap.

I'll give him Pearson, that lateral move actually looks solid so far.

DZ has better metrics but I'd argue Schenns impact on the team has been a big plus, with Gud gone especially.

Credit for waiving Gagner? No sir, I think that was a stupid move. The coach seems to not like Sam's play, which is why he was waived and traded. I wanted to see him in the line up. But getting something for an asset were not using the only thing I'll give Benning credit for.

And yeah it's hard to not like the Pearson trade. Might be a big meh in the long run, but that's what we had, at best, on Gud.

Were trying different pieces rather than letting guys rot their value on bench or in the minors. I'm not saying that our players recieved are great acquisitions, but trying something different beats playing the same old song. It's an acknowledgement that the moves made didn't work.

 

[VanillaCoke]

Friedman's 31 thoughts had some good Canuck nuggets in them. Biggest among them was that there is an understanding amongst ownership, management and the organization as a whole that a step backwards in 2019-2020 is "not an option".

I interpret that as this - if the Canucks' don't continue to improve in the standings, in their rebuild, etc., Benning will be gone. So I wouldn't expect Benning to be signing an extension this off-season. I think ownership waits until the season is well underway to either extend him or cut him loose.

So we need to pray for a reeeeeeaaaally slow start to next season.

 

[Phenomenon13]

Friedman's 31 thoughts had some good Canuck nuggets in them. Biggest among them was that there is an understanding amongst ownership, management and the organization as a whole that a step backwards in 2019-2020 is "not an option".

I interpret that as this - if the Canucks' don't continue to improve in the standings, in their rebuild, etc., Benning will be gone. So I wouldn't expect Benning to be signing an extension this off-season. I think ownership waits until the season is well underway to either extend him or cut him loose.

Gms typically dont get extended unless it's the last year of their deal anyways.

 

[RandV]

Friedman's 31 thoughts had some good Canuck nuggets in them. Biggest among them was that there is an understanding amongst ownership, management and the organization as a whole that a step backwards in 2019-2020 is "not an option".

I interpret that as this - if the Canucks' don't continue to improve in the standings, in their rebuild, etc., Benning will be gone. So I wouldn't expect Benning to be signing an extension this off-season. I think ownership waits until the season is well underway to either extend him or cut him loose.

This has always been problematic to me. There's always a chance that things align right and we maybe squeak into a playoff spot. Does that mean ownership unfurls the "Mission Accomplished" banner and Benning gets an extension? What if we just get swept in the 1st round and this ends up being the teams peak, does Benning get another 5 years to try and build a team that can make it to the 2nd round?

 

[F A N]

Gms typically dont get extended unless it's the last year of their deal anyways.

The key is whether the GM starts the year being in the last year of his deal. Benning has done it before but it still isn't the usual practice.

This has always been problematic to me. There's always a chance that things align right and we maybe squeak into a playoff spot. Does that mean ownership unfurls the "Mission Accomplished" banner and Benning gets an extension? What if we just get swept in the 1st round and this ends up being the teams peak, does Benning get another 5 years to try and build a team that can make it to the 2nd round?

Benning is not getting a 5 year extension. Even if the Canucks win the Cup next season he's not getting 5. Regardless, having years left on your contract doesn't signify job security anyways. Gillis was fired with 4 years left on his contract.

 

[I am toxic]

The Aqualini's seem to leave things to the last minute..I'm even sure that Benning himself knows that he's done if the team flatlines.

It's not too late to delete your post.

 

[vancityluongo]

Friedman's 31 thoughts had some good Canuck nuggets in them. Biggest among them was that there is an understanding amongst ownership, management and the organization as a whole that a step backwards in 2019-2020 is "not an option".

I interpret that as this - if the Canucks' don't continue to improve in the standings, in their rebuild, etc., Benning will be gone. So I wouldn't expect Benning to be signing an extension this off-season. I think ownership waits until the season is well underway to either extend him or cut him loose.

Ugh. Yeah Jyrki21 nailed it.

The only hope is that the Western Conference regresses to the mean and isn't a tire fire from the 9th seed down. Hopefully a 13th place finish constitutes as a step back, even if it means more points than this season. That or Markstrom implodes (without getting injured, as that would be an obvious excuse) back to a sub .905.

Really need that President in place ASAP.

 

[hcg]

Wow

Benning saying that teams that win do so with 26-35 year olds. This idiot doesn't have a clue. Look at Chicago. Their core was young when they won. Look at Tampa. Their core is very young.

Stamkos is the old man on Tampa and he's 28.

 

[pitseleh]

Ugh, gradual advancement is the easiest thing in the world when you start bad and the league gives good players to bad teams. It really is no reflection of the GM if he's not doing anything to make it happen. That's basically a carte blanche to say Benning is adequate no matter what happens. (Ironically if there's a true "step back" it'll probably be due to a good player getting injured, which isn't particularly linked to his general managing).

Even worse, it encourages throwing away wins 3-4 years down the road, when the team should be in its competitive window, for immediate wins that won't matter in the grand scheme of things.

 

[Bleach Clean]

Ugh. Yeah Jyrki21 nailed it.

The only hope is that the Western Conference regresses to the mean and isn't a tire fire from the 9th seed down. Hopefully a 13th place finish constitutes as a step back, even if it means more points than this season. That or Markstrom implodes (without getting injured, as that would be an obvious excuse) back to a sub .905.

Really need that President in place ASAP.

Markstrom is a major variable for next year. As is Hughes.

The West also has to bounce back to historical points averages. The Canucks were ~14 points out from the usual bar and they finished 10th. About 10 points still out of the last playoff spot. Thus, not only do they have to get to 91 points, they have to expect that bar to change to 95~ points next year.

As it stands, this year looks like it may have been their best chance to get in.

 

[hcg]

In other words, when EP is 26, you should start watching again.

Just in time for him to walk away after he's pissed off he wasted the best years of his career with a shitty org.

 

[hcg]

The significant words from Benning that I've seen so far are:

-teams win with 26-35 year olds

-we're looking for a top 6 scorer and to upgrade our defence

That this means to me is:

1. He isn't looking to rebuild, he's looking for guys in the 26-35 year old range to win now with.

2. He's planning on spending on free agency, on a defenceman and a top 6 scorer.

Ferland, Myers and Simmonds leap off the page as guys he'll be targetting, though it's hard to say that Simmonds is still a top 6 scorer.

It all seems consistent with his past actions. He'll target, by hockey standards, middle age to older guys.

It seems to me the big problem with targetting this age group is that there are a good number of them whose production and usefulness declines rapidly. If you sign them for 4-6 years, then the chances are you're going to get decline. If you're lucky it's a little bit and you get some usefulness.. If you're unlucky they become completely useless or at least much, much less than they were previously.

When the average age of RETIREMENT in the NHL is 28 (What is the average retirement age for NHL players) it seems to me one should be wary of older players, not having that as the preferred age range for acquisitions.

In any event, it seems a confirmation of the thinking that led to signing 31 year old Loui Eriksson and 33 year old Radim Vrbata and trading 20 year old center Jared McCann (too young) and a couple of draft picks for a soon-to-turn 26 years of age Erik Gudbranson.

That's not what he said and reading it like this is completely unnecessary.

 

[hcg]

btw my wording in this was bad, this is guys 30 and over

and their over 30 guys are both really good and have been with the team for a long time, mostly.

 

[hcg]

I just wish we had media that asked questions like "You have used stated injuries for multiple years in row now, isn't 5 years enough time to add enough good players in your farm team to prepare for injuries? Was this a consequence of trading away all those picks?"

No, it's a consequence of decades of piss poor drafting and development.

 

[Bleach Clean]

No, it's a consequence of decades of piss poor drafting and development.

Please explain.

Also, multi-quote instead of posting four separate posts in succession.

 

[hcg]

Friedman's 31 thoughts had some good Canuck nuggets in them. Biggest among them was that there is an understanding amongst ownership, management and the organization as a whole that a step backwards in 2019-2020 is "not an option".

I interpret that as this - if the Canucks' don't continue to improve in the standings, in their rebuild, etc., Benning will be gone. So I wouldn't expect Benning to be signing an extension this off-season. I think ownership waits until the season is well underway to either extend him or cut him loose.

This makes a lot of sense though. This season should be the bottom. They jsut lost the Sedins, EP is a rookie, etc..

They should be back on the upswing soon.

What throws it out of wack is Markstrom becoming a legit starter and Petey being insanely good. Either of those change and this team is way down the standings. The west also sucked this year.