Jim Benning Discussion -- Part II

[Barney Gumble]

Not when, like every other year, you are ravaged with injuries

Benning didn't think we needed such insurance enough to re-sign a ex-Canuck for a few years term.

If you think Vey is top 6 or bust, Jensen and Baertschi are way more bustable than Vey.

Fail to see how Jensen and Baertschi are comparable. One guy hasn't even proven himself at the AHL level (unlike the other guy). Vey got schooled by J. Schroeder of all people - he's not suited for a bottom six role. I'll give Baertschi the benefit of the doubt (given how well he's played at the AHL level) until I see him in a Canuck uniform.

 

[Proto]

He's a player that we invested significant assets in and (unlike Ballard) the coach loves him.

The player might not be exactly the same, but the circumstances are - a move is clearly a mistake a year after making it, and the GM can either show some balls, make the tough decision and wear the mistake ... or keep hoping things turn around, to the detriment of the team.

Miller is another comparable situation, but with the NTC in place there I think he'll be nearly impossible to move whether Benning wants to make the tough decision or not.

I'd give Vey until the end of training camp next year before I waive him. No real risk in doing that, and it gives him an off-season to see what he can do in terms of training.

 

[VanJack]

I'm not comparing the players....and I don't disagree (CF% are nearly identical for the two players and CF for teammates I believe go up without them but for Santorelli it appears that the lines are better defensively with him unlike Vey). My comment was simply one that similar to the Ehrhoff situation this wasn't really a case of the organization choosing Vey over Santorelli. The choice they made along with 29 other teams was not to offer a 2 year deal.

Regardless of Santorelli being on the roster or not, I think Benning makes the deal for Vey. He wanted to bring guys in that fit in that age group. Guys like Vey and Clendenning were always going to be added for the pieces given up to get them. It was part of the strategy. It, btw, is not a strategy I particularly like. I don't believe teams ever have "too many" young players to incorporate into the lineup. If a younger guy is good enough he'll be on the team because he's cheaper, typically healthier etc. So guys like Vey and Clendenning are concerns because they have failed to force their way onto a roster and the teams they are on have decided that player+waiver eligible = burden. Sometimes I'm sure you can hit gold (hopefully Baertschi) but it's going to be an outlier.

My comment on Santorelli's production was perhaps a bit of a reality check that he isn't some overlooked messiah. He is what he is. The canucks have several guys like him (Higgins, Burrows, Hansen...though they all have a better fancy stats I believe). A decent NHL player but likely an NHL player that again might have trouble finding a multi-year deal if he continues to put up goose eggs down the stretch and in the playoffs.

Santorelli isn't doing a thing in Nashville...wondering if he's one of those guys who plays his best when the team he's on is a bottom-feeder like the Panthers and Preds of past years, and the Leafs-Canucks last year?...since he and Franson joined the Preds they've imploded....is it the dreaded Leafs' virus?

 

[Scurr]

Aren't those two statements contradictory?

No. It would be foolish to assume everyone is going to be healthy. Never happens.

 

[Barney Gumble]

Santorelli isn't doing a thing in Nashville...wondering if he's one of those guys who plays his best when the team he's on is a bottom-feeder like that Panthers and Preds of past years, and the Leafs-Canucks last year?...since he and Franson joined the Preds they've imploded....is it the dreaded Leafs' virus?

Their coach isn't using Franson on the power play. Sure he might have better options but their power play stinks anyhow - wouldn't do any harm to use Franson on the power play (which IS his strength - offensive ability).

 

[Scurr]

I'd give Vey until the end of training camp next year before I waive him. No real risk in doing that, and it gives him an off-season to see what he can do in terms of training.

How much better would it make the team overall to improve on the 13th forward? I don't see any reason he can't come back for a season and try to earn his place while providing depth.

 

[thepuckmonster]

How much better would it make the team overall to improve on the 13th forward? I don't see any reason he can't come back for a season and try to earn his place while providing depth.

I agree with this.

 

[mrmyheadhurts]

Benning didn't think we needed such insurance enough to re-sign a ex-Canuck for a few years term.



Fail to see how Jense and Baertschi are comparable. One guy hasn't even proven himself at the AHL level (unlike the other guy). Vey got schooled by J. Schroeder of all people - he's not suited for a bottom six role.

I wasn't comparing them, I was saying I would rather have Vey (a far better AHL player than either) in the lineup over them. We've only had Baertschi for a few weeks but the point still stands.

I'm not going to use one game for the argument for Vey, but he's certainly had some good ones. If you think Schroeder is a better player, so be it. I wouldn't swap them personally. You say he's not suited for a bottom six role, I am not comfortable making such a defiant statement on a young player in his rookie season.

The Santo thing is so silly. They offered him a one year deal, he thought he could do better, the Canucks moved on and then Santo found out that the Canucks were right. Would be happy to sign him in the off-season if he can get it through his head what his actual value is.

 

[VanJack]

I'd give Vey until the end of training camp next year before I waive him. No real risk in doing that, and it gives him an off-season to see what he can do in terms of training.

Not sure you can "physically train" your way into winning faceoffs and puck battles, not to mention neutral zone turnovers....Nucks are boxing themselves into a corner with guys like Vey, Clendening and Baertschi...can't risk waivers, considering what they gave up

 

[RandV]

At this point there's really no reason to cut Vey loose. May as well keep him around as the 13th forward, and if injuries happen see what he can do. If he gets forced off the roster, then you waive/trade him. It's what we should have done with Schroeder.

 

[alternate]

He's a player that we invested significant assets in and (unlike Ballard) the coach loves him.

The player might not be exactly the same, but the circumstances are - a move is clearly a mistake a year after making it, and the GM can either show some balls, make the tough decision and wear the mistake ... or keep hoping things turn around, to the detriment of the team.

Miller is another comparable situation, but with the NTC in place there I think he'll be nearly impossible to move whether Benning wants to make the tough decision or not.

What significant assetS did we give up for Vey? We gave up A pick, one asset. And it's debatable how "significant" a second is, especially considering the guy the anti-Vey/Benning crowd wanted has already been traded and had a season that (on this board) would have him written off as a bust.

Vey has had ups and downs but overall it hasn't been nearly the disaster some claim. If he'd been a Canuck draft pick I guarantee the perception would be different.

 

[PM]

What significant assetS did we give up for Vey? We gave up A pick, one asset. And it's debatable how "significant" a second is, especially considering the guy the anti-Vey/Benning crowd wanted has already been traded and had a season that (on this board) would have him written off as a bust.

Vey has had ups and downs but overall it hasn't been nearly the disaster some claim. If he'd been a Canuck draft pick I guarantee the perception would be different.

Was Mckeown's season really all that bad? His offensive production dropped but he was voted the third best defensive dman in the OHL coaches poll. I'd still gladly take him over Vey or JG over both.

Not a fan of having three AHL-calibre waiver eligible players on the roster next year in Vey, Clendening and Baertschi. I'm still intrigued by Baertschi but I hope the other two aren't playing significant minutes which won't be good for their development given their waiver status.

 

[Intoewsables]

Was Mckeown's season really all that bad? His offensive production dropped but he was voted the third best defensive dman in the OHL coaches poll. I'd still gladly take him over Vey or JG over both.

No. His team as a whole scored over 100 goals less than the previous season (301 GF -> 190 GF), so it's kind of ridiculous to expect him to maintain/improve on last year's production.

 

[VanJack]

No. His team as a whole scored over 100 goals less than the previous season (301 GF -> 190 GF), so it's kind of ridiculous to expect him to maintain/improve on last year's production.

Kings sure gave up on him in a hurry....dealt to Carolina in the Sekac deal....maybe they finally saw what some scouts saw in his draft year....wasn't McKeown originally rated in the second half of the first round, but fell to 50th overall?....McEneny on the other hand has had a nice season in Kingston and is just outside the top-10 in OHL d-man scoring

 

[PM]

Kings sure gave up on him in a hurry....dealt to Carolina in the Sekac deal....maybe they finally saw what some scouts saw in his draft year....wasn't McKeown originally rated in the second half of the first round, but fell to 50th overall?....McEneny on the other hand has had a nice season in Kingston and is just outside the top-10 in OHL d-man scoring

He was traded in a package for a very solid dman in Sekera. It's not like they threw him away for nothing.

 

[Proto]

How much better would it make the team overall to improve on the 13th forward? I don't see any reason he can't come back for a season and try to earn his place while providing depth.

I don't think Vey is used as a 13th forward, though. He's been give 1st unit PP time and etc. etc. (this has been beaten to death). I have no issue with Vey coming to camp, but if the Canucks are also going to try to remain competitive and also find space for Baertschi, and Dorsett (I presume), and so on, there are only so many roster spots available.

Mind you, I'm not suggesting Vey needs to be a heck of a lot better to warrant sticking on the roster. But he needs to show some improvement. Right now he thinks the game fine and his effort level is fine, but he doesn't have any outstanding characteristics as a player and lacks the strength to exist as a player that simply thinks the game okay and puts in an honest effort. He needs to do something to become a contributor at the NHL level.

 

[me2]

How much better would it make the team overall to improve on the 13th forward? I don't see any reason he can't come back for a season and try to earn his place while providing depth.

As a cheaper waiver fodder level guy I think that is good idea that he isca 13/14th forward. You want someone who is cheap and can play at NHL even if he nothing much he warms a bench or a pressbox adequately for the money. Who knows, he might surprise, and he is already here.

 

[Scurr]

I don't think Vey is used as a 13th forward, though. He's been give 1st unit PP time and etc. etc. (this has been beaten to death). I have no issue with Vey coming to camp, but if the Canucks are also going to try to remain competitive and also find space for Baertschi, and Dorsett (I presume), and so on, there are only so many roster spots available.

Sedin, Sedin, Vrbata, Bonino, Higgins, Burrows, Hansen, Richardson, Matthias, Kassian, Dorsett, Horvat. I don't think one of those guys comes out for Vey. Kenins has probably made him 14.

WD likes him on the PP. IDK what to say about that except that it would be a weak reason to cut the kid lose.

Mind you, I'm not suggesting Vey needs to be a heck of a lot better to warrant sticking on the roster. But he needs to show some improvement. Right now he thinks the game fine and his effort level is fine, but he doesn't have any outstanding characteristics as a player and lacks the strength to exist as a player that simply thinks the game okay and puts in an honest effort. He needs to do something to become a contributor at the NHL level.

Ya. He doesn't help generate enough shots. At some point those little plays he makes in traffic that I like have to start turning into something worth while. Still, it's a little early to be talking about Benning 'fixing his mistake'.

 

[Rey]

I never thought Vey was a long term solution since Bonino is signed to a long term at a fair price and they are similar type players. I get the feel like Vey was gifted time from the start of the season and what they were trying to do is higher his value and try to flip him for better assets. We'll have to wait and see what he is worth, but there just isn't enough room for him next year. You got to believe that Beartschi will be given a Vey type opportunity for next year. Virtanen maybe the Horvat treatment.

Just looking at Bennings time with the Bruins. Every trade is exactly like what the Canucks are doing now. http://www.nhltradetracker.com/user/trade_list_by_team/Boston_Bruins/4 2006 and above. Look at all that youth they are acquiring and trading. Nokelainen, Chistov, Bochenski..who knows how involved he was though, but they had much better luck with the dmans

 

[F A N]

Not sure you can "physically train" your way into winning faceoffs and puck battles, not to mention neutral zone turnovers....Nucks are boxing themselves into a corner with guys like Vey, Clendening and Baertschi...can't risk waivers, considering what they gave up

You can physically train yourself to win puck battles (lower body and upper body strength). Players who were good at faceoffs in juniors tend to be good in the NHL. Horvat is actually a rarity. Very few rookies, especially one that is Horvat's age are over 50% in faceoffs in their rookie year. Kesler was at like 40% in his rookie year, Malhotra was at like 44%. I have no idea whether Vey was ever good in faceoffs improve in the NHL. But if he was good, he can improve. If he wasn't then he'll never be good.

Not a fan of having three AHL-calibre waiver eligible players on the roster next year in Vey, Clendening and Baertschi.

Clendening is safe. He will at least be a 7th defenseman. I don't see Sbisa, Weber, and Stanton all coming back next season. As for Vey and Baertschi, who knows if Benning will re-sign all his UFAs. Personally, I think that if Vey can't crack the Canucks next season, he can be sent down and nobody will claim him.

I never thought Vey was a long term solution since Bonino is signed to a long term at a fair price and they are similar type players.

Linden Vey is 23 about to turn 24. Bonino is signed for 2 more years after this season. Hardly a long term contract. Besides, neither Vey nor Bonino are center position only players. They can play wing.

 

[vanuck]

I've always found it counterintuitive to measure whether a player is top 6 calibre based on points tbh, putting up 25 points in a bottom 6 role playing weaker competition shouldn't qualify as a top 6 forward imo (not saying that's what Hansen is necessarily doing this year, but he hasn't faced the same competition as, say, Bonino). By established, I meant doing it on a consistent basis btw. Also, sorry if my post came off as an attack, wasn't meant that way but now that I reread it it seemed a little harsh.

Thing is these guys (Higgins, Hansen, Kassian) put up these totals against tough competition, so it's not like they're just feeding off soft minutes and tons of O-zone starts. Just look at Hansen in 2010-11 and Higgins last year. If you can put up 25+ ES pts/82 over several seasons, that should be a large enough sample to qualify you as a top 6 forward and each of those 3 players do.

And no worries, that didn't come off as harsh or anything at all (I'm used to far, far worse).

Don't disagree. But I've made the point before, as have others, that the strategy to bring in 23 year olds is all about filling a major hole in the organization. The chances of getting a serviceable NHL forward are better (I would argue much better) by acquiring a player farther along in his development. Less likely to hit a homerun, more likely to hit a double. It comes down to team needs at any given point. I think you'll see JB start holding on to picks more tightly once he feels he has filled the gap.

Then the question becomes whether that hole isn't more easily fixed by just acquiring players for free. Given where the Canucks are at in their competitive cycle (i.e on the downswing after those Presidents' Trophy years with the Sedins getting older) sooner or later they're going to have to rebuild the prospect pool through keeping their draft picks. There's a reason not a lot of these older AHL prospects turn out, because the odds of them becoming successful NHL players are now low if they can't graduate from that league quickly. If you look at the links posted by tc23 earlier you'll see the odds for yourself. I think you'll find it quite informative.

 

[vanuck]

Again, Higgins has 1 goal in the last a million games. If the GM of the team thinks that's fine for top 6 production on a contending team, then surely we need a new GM.

As much as everyone on this board (including myself) love Kassian, he simply is not a top 6 forward at this time. AV (Jack Adams winner), Torts (Cup Winner) and Desjardins (won at every level) all have the same train of thought. This isn't 1 coach being against Kassian, but several. In fact, his teammates (Henrik and Richardson) have subtly called him out too. Sometimes you have to call a spade a spade. Kassian has a ways to go with consistency before being a legit top 6.

How are goals the only measure of a player? Higgins's simply going through a cold streak where the puck isn't going in because of bad luck. It happens in hockey.

It's funny you mention Torts, because he actually played Kassian a lot down the stretch last year (in "garbage time" I dare say) and ZK produced like a top 6 forward, leading the team in ES over his last 35 games or so. He's carried his production over to this year too...

 

[The Jesus*]

Didn't WillyD personally request Vey?

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

Didn't WillyD personally request Vey?

i've never heard anyone definitively say this, but obviously it's not unlikely.

i said in the offseason: don't give our rookie coach the familiar guys he's asking for. force him to immediately work with the group he's given so he gives every guy an honest shot and doesn't fall back on old favourites, and by extension old patterns. that way you minimize the torts/square peg tendency of decidinhg how the team is going to play with no regard to the actual makeup of the team, its core, their strengths and weaknesses.

after he works with what he has, then slowly buy him the toys he wants.

 

[vanuck]

Didn't WillyD personally request Vey?

I think he said he had some input on it, though it's certainly not impossible.