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

[Luck 6]

I picked those teams because they all won multiple Cups and their first Cups were with very young cores. These three teams have been the most dominant teams of the last decade. Yes they’ve also won Cups as their players have gotten older, but let’s not pretend that they had to get to that age before they were able to compete.

Right, but you pulled three exceptions which just so happen to be the three teams that have built legacy like success over the past number of years. Benning’s quote is as follows:

8:23 ...”you look at when teams get good and when they win, they win with 26 to 35 year old players.”

Does he say that you HAVE to be in that age range to win a cup? Or, is he suggesting that this seems to be more common? I took it as the latter, which seems to make sense, which is why I don’t understand why people are attacking Benning for that statement. And again, I do not think much of Benning, but I don’t understand why he is being bashed on misinterpretations. Trust me, there is enough to bash him on aside from that.

 

[VanJack]

Benning and by definition Green are basically on the clock. It's the playoffs or bust next year. Jimbo in the final year of his contract and how he goes, so goes Green in all probability.

Owner can't really sit on his hands any longer and tolerate a total of six out seven seasons with no playoff hockey in VanCity. So Jimbo's job is basically on the line, and he knows he can't possibly come back with the same lineup next season.

So it's either trades or UFA signings. Buckle up for a wild ride! Only hoping that if it all falls apart again next season, that the incoming GM isn't hamstrung by some of these trades/signings.

 

[Luck 6]

Benning and by definition Green are basically on the clock. It's the playoffs or bust next year. Jimbo in the final year of his contract and how he goes, so goes Green in all probability.

Owner can't really sit on his hands any longer and tolerate a total of six out seven seasons with no playoff hockey in VanCity. So Jimbo's job is basically on the line, and he knows he can't possibly come back with the same lineup next season.

So it's either trades or UFA signings. Buckle up for a wild ride! Only hoping that if it all falls apart again next season, that the incoming GM isn't hamstrung by some of these trades/signings.

I wonder if that’s true, I do hope so. I understand why, and most fans expected it, we haven’t had playoff hockey in the last 4 years. This has been a re-build, and despite some fans agreeing with the template, we have drafted very high in those 4 years. I wonder if Benning will get a final year should we miss the playoffs this year, a 1 year extension. I personally think it will be highly dependent on what GM options are available at the time. A good owner probably already has his “next in line planned”, or at least his first choice, so it will be interesting to see.

 

[Dab]

There is really nothing that requires either Jim Benning or Ryan Johnson to be in Vancouver to do their jobs.

Fair enough- if we had good management I wouldn’t want them spending time on the other side of the continent. Move it west where management can easier keep an eye on what’s happening and fans and media can hold them better accounts table for what’s going on l.

 

[RebuildinVan]

Benning and by definition Green are basically on the clock. It's the playoffs or bust next year. Jimbo in the final year of his contract and how he goes, so goes Green in all probability.

Owner can't really sit on his hands any longer and tolerate a total of six out seven seasons with no playoff hockey in VanCity. So Jimbo's job is basically on the line, and he knows he can't possibly come back with the same lineup next season.

So it's either trades or UFA signings. Buckle up for a wild ride! Only hoping that if it all falls apart again next season, that the incoming GM isn't hamstrung by some of these trades/signings.

Yup. Hate to say it but the rebuild is over. Bennings and Aquamans long term vision doesnt extend past next April, theyre going to make moves to win next season.....ugly,ugly moves

 

[vanuck]

Not one media member asked Benning about why he hasn’t added any picks and why he’s dealt away a bunch over the years....

Pretty disappointed he wasn’t even asked about it...

No surprises for me anymore. The Vancouver media for the most part (and I'm sure there are a few who are actually hard on this regime) is soft AF.

 

[xtra]

Also let’s point out the average players age range is 22 to about 37 so bennings age range is pretty much the entire spectrum of nhl players;

He may as well have said “most teams win the cup with nhl level players”

 

[Bleach Clean]

This is what irritates me too. I do not support Benning, and I think it is a fine idea to fire him IF his heir apparent is ready and available, but some of the blind hate on here is over the line.

This comes down to confusing blind hate with an informed critique. If the critique has homework, the eyes are open.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

It's because there's no accountability. I'd wager most of the fanbase doesn't even know that Utica is our farm team, let alone understand how our depth problems directly correlate to the players on our AHL affiliate.

Yep.

This organisation doesn't reward success or demote inept people.

 

[Bleach Clean]

Right, but you pulled three exceptions which just so happen to be the three teams that have built legacy like success over the past number of years. Benning’s quote is as follows:

8:23 ...”you look at when teams get good and when they win, they win with 26 to 35 year old players.”

Does he say that you HAVE to be in that age range to win a cup? Or, is he suggesting that this seems to be more common? I took it as the latter, which seems to make sense, which is why I don’t understand why people are attacking Benning for that statement. And again, I do not think much of Benning, but I don’t understand why he is being bashed on misinterpretations. Trust me, there is enough to bash him on aside from that.

I think you do not understand this because you have misinterpreted Benning's statement. It's not mere correlation. Benning is tying age, and by way of age, the development of his best players as a faux timeline to winning. This is faulty in logic. The tell here is when Travis Green references Benning's statement near the end of the presser. He says:

"When Jim said, when you look at teams that win and the age of their players, how many of teams have their best player be a 20 or 21 year old?"

He goes on:

"Can he be 22, 23, or 24 when you're ready to challenge? How much better is he going to be in 2 years?" He then specifically talks about WSH and how long it took them to win. Intimating how old Ovechkin and Backstrom were before they had finally won.

This is tying winning to age and not ability. That more cup winning teams represent the overall NHL average age in no way suggests that winning is a result of age. You've interpreted Benning's comments as being about correlation alone, but I think it's a mental exercise to have such an interpretation without any suggestions to cause.

Green even talks about his best players being better as they get older. The best players, not the support.



To go one step further, here's what Jim said when asked about Aquilini's letter. In that letter, Aquilini said that he wished the team was further along in the rebuild. Botchford then asks Benning "Why do you think the team is not further along in the rebuild program" [paraphrase]. Here's the response:

Benning talks about Pettersson, Boeser, Horvat and Hughes. He then references their age. He says "These are 20-21 year old players, Quinn is 19, and these are our best players. When you look at teams that win, their best players are 26 to 35 year old players and these are our best players..."

(Why did you leave out the part where he specifically references his young core?)

It's clear that he's referencing the age of his core in relation to the age of the core players on winning teams. He's not talking about making the team strong enough around that young core, and still winning in spite of their age. Instead, he's insinuating an arbitrary timeline by telling people his core is too young to win. He's wrong.

 

[bossram]

Right, but you pulled three exceptions which just so happen to be the three teams that have built legacy like success over the past number of years. Benning’s quote is as follows:

8:23 ...”you look at when teams get good and when they win, they win with 26 to 35 year old players.”

Does he say that you HAVE to be in that age range to win a cup? Or, is he suggesting that this seems to be more common? I took it as the latter, which seems to make sense, which is why I don’t understand why people are attacking Benning for that statement. And again, I do not think much of Benning, but I don’t understand why he is being bashed on misinterpretations. Trust me, there is enough to bash him on aside from that.

Even if we accept that it is more likely to be a competitive team with older players (it's not), Benning's statement is still so vacuous. The age band he cites is so wide. Might as well just say, "you win in the NHL with NHL players".

 

[Jay Cee]

The best was a little later on and he was trying to defend the work in Utica this season and touted Luke Schenn as a Utica success story.

Like What the f***..

 

[Motte and Bailey]

Yup. Hate to say it but the rebuild is over. Bennings and Aquamans long term vision doesnt extend past next April, theyre going to make moves to win next season.....ugly,ugly moves

As long as they can draft Boesers in the late 1st, Demkos and Woos in the 2nd round, Maddens and Tryamkins in the 3rd round, and Gaudettes in the 5th round, etc. the “rebuild” will be ongoing...

There’s a misconception that you have to sell off your older assets and stockpile picks to rebuild. You don’t.

 

[Motte and Bailey]

The best was a little later on and he was trying to defend the work in Utica this season and touted Luke Schenn as a Utica success story.

Like What the ****..

Why shouldn’t Utica get some credit for taking a player who was not playing at an NHL level and turning him into a good bottom pair NHL defender?

 

[Peter10]

As long as they can draft Boesers in the late 1st, Demkos and Woos in the 2nd round, Maddens and Tryamkins in the 3rd round, and Gaudettes in the 5th round, etc. the “rebuild” will be ongoing...

There’s a misconception that you have to sell off your older assets and stockpile picks to rebuild. You don’t.

After 5 years there were 2 1/2 regulars last season who were drafted by Benning. With that pace, the rebuild will be over in about 20 years.

 

[Motte and Bailey]

After 5 years there were 2 1/2 regulars last season who were drafted by Benning. With that pace, the rebuild will be over in about 20 years.

It’s misleading to cite 5 years when it’s not expected that players drafted within the last 2-3 years would be in the NHL by now.

A more honest and informative way to present the data would be to say that from his first 3 drafts there were 4 NHL regulars :
Virtanen, Gaudette, Boeser, Demko. Which is actually very good especially if you add Pearson and Baertshi to the list who were acquired with picks from those drafts. So that’s 6 quality roster players moving forward in 3 drafts. Which is 1/3rd of the team.

So you were quite off in your calculation. Assuming we don’t get any players from free agency the rate of drafting an entirely new team is more like 9 years. Which is a VERY GOOD rate of drafting.

 

[TruGr1t]

Utica fans: "Why does this team continually under perform and not have a lot of talent?"

*Jim Benning shows up and speaks in Utica*

Utica fans: "Ah, now it makes a lot of sense."

 

[Jay Cee]

Why shouldn’t Utica get some credit for taking a player who was not playing at an NHL level and turning him into a good bottom pair NHL defender?

LOL! Well I guess you're right. When you've had a full NHL career and you are suddenly sent to some hell hole that has no present or hope of a future it probably helped put things in perspective for him. Motivation of a different type.

 

[Hit the post]

LOL! Well I guess you're right. When you've had a full NHL career and you are suddenly sent to some hell hole that has no present or hope of a future it probably helped put things in perspective for him. Motivation of a different type.

Acquired Schenn for cheap. Better than trading for a #6 at the cost of a 19 goal scoring 22 year old center/winger and a high 2nd round pick. Motivation / Survival mode is a powerful thing. (might’ve been his last shot at sticking with a NHL club).

 

[xtra]

It’s misleading to cite 5 years when it’s not expected that players drafted within the last 2-3 years would be in the NHL by now.

A more honest and informative way to present the data would be to say that from his first 3 drafts there were 4 NHL regulars :
Virtanen, Gaudette, Boeser, Demko. Which is actually very good especially if you add Pearson and Baertshi to the list who were acquired with picks from those drafts. So that’s 6 quality roster players moving forward in 3 drafts. Which is 1/3rd of the team.

So you were quite off in your calculation. Assuming we don’t get any players from free agency the rate of drafting an entirely new team is more like 9 years. Which is a VERY GOOD rate of drafting.

Demko and gaudette aren’t nhl regulars; gaudette is close but spent time in the AHL this year and if our roster had been healthy wouldn’t have played much.

And once again woo, demko, Madden haven’t done anything at the nhl level so they can’t be counted as great picks. Tracking well sure...

 

[Peter10]

It’s misleading to cite 5 years when it’s not expected that players drafted within the last 2-3 years would be in the NHL by now.

A more honest and informative way to present the data would be to say that from his first 3 drafts there were 4 NHL regulars :
Virtanen, Gaudette, Boeser, Demko. Which is actually very good especially if you add Pearson and Baertshi to the list who were acquired with picks from those drafts. So that’s 6 quality roster players moving forward in 3 drafts. Which is 1/3rd of the team.

So you were quite off in your calculation. Assuming we don’t get any players from free agency the rate of drafting an entirely new team is more like 9 years. Which is a VERY GOOD rate of drafting.

Only one of the 4 drafted guys has proven to be an NHL regular so far. Pearson and Baertschi (whom you cant even spell correct once it seems) do nothing at all for this team, neither will play any significant role once the team gets good again. Keep living in your little dream world full of pink Bennings and rainbows of Weisbrods face.

Benning has yet to draft a player outside of the first round who is an impact player. And before you come shouting Woo, Madden in my face, let us see how they do once turning pro. Seems like highly touted Gaudette isnt as quickly becoming a dominating force as some here expected.

 

[RebuildinVan]

As long as they can draft Boesers in the late 1st, Demkos and Woos in the 2nd round, Maddens and Tryamkins in the 3rd round, and Gaudettes in the 5th round, etc. the “rebuild” will be ongoing...

There’s a misconception that you have to sell off your older assets and stockpile picks to rebuild. You don’t.

The point is... Bennings job is on the line and Aquillini wont accept missing the playoffs next year. Both are willing to do short term big moves to get in the playoffs next year. Desperation is in charge now

 

[I in the Eye]

Question: Why isn't the team farther along than it is?

Answer: Because we need more time.

 

[Hit the post]

Question: Why isn't the team farther along than it is?

Answer: Because we need more time.

 

[Motte and Bailey]

Question: Why isn't the team farther along than it is?

Answer: Because we need more time.

You know full well what the real answer to that question is.

The idea that “I gave up on the Sedins in 2012/2013 therefore I’m so much smarter than someone who gave up on them in 2016/2017” is disgusting.

It’s really easy to think that way when you see hockey players as people and not objects.