Jim Benning & Management Megathread -- Leadership Level is over 9000 Edition

[me2]

Out of all of the trades Benning has made the one I'm most worried about is the Forsling for Clendening trade. Not to mention Clendening has already been dealt away. That trade could potentially be one of his worst if Forsling continues to improve.

Considering they deemed Clendening unable to play an NHL level so quickly after getting him, WTF were they thinking. Maybe they were paying Chicago to take Forsling.....

 

[Canucker]

You can believe what you want, but if your "blow it up" plan involves:

1) Trading almost every single one of our vets all at once

2) Having 80-90% of our line-up full of kids aged between 18-23

Then it would be YOUR plan that would be misguided in my opinion.

Benning is doing things the right way. If the Canucks are not in playoff contention, Vrbata, being in his last year, will be moved for a 2016 1st + B level prospect. Prust will also be moved.

The Benning model involves moving veteran UFA's that are in the final year of their contract if the team is not playoff bound. The Benning model encourages a SLOW yet CONSISTENT injection of the RIGHT prospects (i.e. quality over quantity), that are surrounded by vets that have either played at an elite level, or are well known lockerroom leaders.

The "blow it up" model, is what leads to the Edmonton/Florida model where you

1) Likely miss the playoffs for 5+ years
2) Don't maximize your prospects due to the fact that there are no elite and/or "leader" vets showing them the ropes.


If the Canucks finish near the bottom of the standings this year, they should continue to stay on course with the current plan. Not only would they select extremely high in the draft (increasing their chance of landing a franchise player), but would also have the added benefits of their vets corralling the talents of their prospects.

A solid veteran presence full of current/former elites and lockerroom leaders CANNOT be overlooked......otherwise you end up like Edmonton and Florida.

"The Benning model", I like that.

My plan wouldn't be to have "80-90% players between 18-23", and it wouldn't be to "Blow it up"...However, it also certainly wouldn't include some of the stupid trades and signings this clown has made.

I'm also not sure how you think Benning is going to be able to lift a 1st and a prospect for Vrbata, he's already proven he has no ability to get value for his players....but hey, you can believe what you want, correct?

"The Benning Model" - The process of bleeding assets and overpaying trash in order to maintain a continued level of sub-mediocrity.

 

[RandV]

The current Canucks team + One more "good" defenseman

I look at this current Canuck line-up and don't think we're that bad up front:

Sedin-Sedin-Burrows
Baerstchi-Sutter-Vrbata (If Horvat shows he's capable, he moves up to 2nd line C)
Higgins-Horvat-Hansen (Sutter could drop down to this line if Horvat surpasses).
Prust-Vey-Dorsett

Edler-Tanev
Hamhuis-Weber
Sbisa-Bartkowski

Miller
Markstrom

Call me crazy, but I actually think an 'upgraded' Horvat playing with Vrbata might actually be on-par with Sedin-Sedin-Burrows in terms of offensive production.

In terms of defensive savviness, Sutter is a significant upgrade over Bonino and so I'd expect a line of Higgins-Sutter-Hansen to be an excellent shut down line.

The point I'm making is this: If Horvat truly has taken a "step forward" from last season, and he surpasses Sutter as the 2nd line C, then I think our forward group up front will actually be quite good. Add to the fact, that we have a solid group of prospects/vets "waiting in the wings" in case of injury. Virtanen, Kenins, Cassels, Gaunce, Adam Cracknell, etc.

Of course our forward group looks quite good, there's a lot left over there from the previous regime that made up the core of a regular 100+ point team. The team weakness is now in net where Benning downgraded and on D where an ejected Garrison and an aging Bieksa were not replaced.

Personally I like the idea of Horvat taking over the 2nd line center spot, and were he acquired and signed at an appropriate price like the idea of Sutter as our 3rd line C. Under a more shrewd GM our lineup could maybe look like:

Sedin-Sedin-Burrows
Baerstchi-Horvat-Vrbata
Higgins-Sutter-Hansen
Matthias-Richardson-Kassian

Edler-Tanev
Hamhuis-Weber
Garrison-Corrado

Lack
Markstrom

With Forsling still in the fold and a handful of extra draft picks. Along with the extra cap space you could maybe put that towards a legitimate top 4 RD, the team would keep rolling along and there would be a lot more optimism around here.

 

[DFAC]

Of course our forward group looks quite good, there's a lot left over there from the previous regime that made up the core of a regular 100+ point team. The team weakness is now in net where Benning downgraded and on D where an ejected Garrison and an aging Bieksa were not replaced.

Personally I like the idea of Horvat taking over the 2nd line center spot, and were he acquired and signed at an appropriate price like the idea of Sutter as our 3rd line C. Under a more shrewd GM our lineup could maybe look like:

Sedin-Sedin-Burrows
Baerstchi-Horvat-Vrbata
Higgins-Sutter-Hansen
Matthias-Richardson-Kassian

Edler-Tanev
Hamhuis-Weber
Garrison-Corrado

Lack
Markstrom

With Forsling still in the fold and a handful of extra draft picks. Along with the extra cap space you could maybe put that towards a legitimate top 4 RD, the team would keep rolling along and there would be a lot more optimism around here.

Not a bad lineup at all, but would it fit under the cap?

 

[me2]

Of course our forward group looks quite good, there's a lot left over there from the previous regime that made up the core of a regular 100+ point team. The team weakness is now in net where Benning downgraded and on D where an ejected Garrison and an aging Bieksa were not replaced.

Personally I like the idea of Horvat taking over the 2nd line center spot, and were he acquired and signed at an appropriate price like the idea of Sutter as our 3rd line C. Under a more shrewd GM our lineup could maybe look like:

Sedin-Sedin-Burrows
Baerstchi-Horvat-Vrbata
Higgins-Sutter-Hansen
Matthias-Richardson-Kassian

Edler-Tanev
Hamhuis-Weber
Garrison-Corrado

Lack
Markstrom

With Forsling still in the fold and a handful of extra draft picks. Along with the extra cap space you could maybe put that towards a legitimate top 4 RD, the team would keep rolling along and there would be a lot more optimism around here.

Putting up a couple of rebuild year or two then picking Sutter up as a UFA next year would have worked better. We paid him UFA money and a NTC anyway.

Not a bad lineup at all, but would it fit under the cap?

Easily, with money to spare on defensive upgrade.

 

[arsmaster*]

Out of all of the trades Benning has made the one I'm most worried about is the Forsling for Clendening trade. Not to mention Clendening has already been dealt away. That trade could potentially be one of his worst if Forsling continues to improve.

On this forum if Forsling became an NHL star, Benning would be praised for his keen eye for talent at the draft table for drafting him.

 

[RandV]

Not a bad lineup at all, but would it fit under the cap?

With the contracts Richardson and Matthias signed that 4th line is still cheaper than our current 4th line of Prust-Vey-Dorsett. Garrison doesn't make much more than Sbisa, and you get a huge saving going from Miller to Lack. So it not only would fit under the cap but it would be cheaper.

 

[Zaddy91]

Sutter needs to show this fan base what meat and taters are made of

 

[God]

Out of all of the trades Benning has made the one I'm most worried about is the Forsling for Clendening trade. Not to mention Clendening has already been dealt away. That trade could potentially be one of his worst if Forsling continues to improve.

I remember when the trade happened and a [MOD] were trying to argue with me by saying that it was a good trade. Yeah, ok guys.

Hire me now, Francesco.

 

[ProstheticConscience]

I remember when the trade happened and a [MOD] were trying to argue with me by saying that it was a good trade. Yeah, ok guys.

Hire me now, Francesco.

Well at the time, we were trading up a couple of years in the prospect pool. Here's a younger guy, freshly drafted, not ready for a while, but we have a gaping lack of prospects ready in a season or two. So kick him off for a guy a little older blocked by depth. That made sense. Throwing that guy in for no reason in another trade six months later...not so much.

 

[vanuck]

Bonino being soft is not the problem. the guy can't skate. he was getting over matched by anyone Calgary put on the ice because he couldn't keep up with them. Sutter would not have that problem.

the Ducks traded Bonino for the same reason. not a guy you want in the playoffs.

Even if Sutter can keep up in terms of skating, he'll also spend more time in his own zone overall compared to Bonino. Regardless of skating or physical play or any of those other traits, they're simply a means to an end: outscoring the opposition and the latter does more in that regard than the former.

I don't think the Ducks traded him for those reasons as much as it was Benning explicitly wanting him as part of the return.

 

[Zaddy91]

Even if Sutter can keep up in terms of skating, he'll also spend more time in his own zone overall compared to Bonino. Regardless of skating or physical play or any of those other traits, they're simply a means to an end: outscoring the opposition and the latter does more in that regard than the former.

I don't think the Ducks traded him for those reasons as much as it was Benning explicitly wanting him as part of the return.

Speed has become the most important factor in the NHL, Chicago is the fastest team no argument

 

[sandwichbird2023]

Speed has become the most important factor in the NHL, Chicago is the fastest team no argument

Which makes it all the more interesting why he targeted bonino and clendenning through trades to begin with. Those mistakes costed us kesler and a promising D prospect.

 

[Zaddy91]

Which makes it all the more interesting why he targeted bonino and clendenning through trades to begin with. Those mistakes costed us kesler and a promising D prospect.

"target" more like "deal with"

 

[sandwichbird2023]

You can believe what you want, but if your "blow it up" plan involves:

1) Trading almost every single one of our vets all at once

2) Having 80-90% of our line-up full of kids aged between 18-23

Then it would be YOUR plan that would be misguided in my opinion.

Benning is doing things the right way. If the Canucks are not in playoff contention, Vrbata, being in his last year, will be moved for a 2016 1st + B level prospect. Prust will also be moved.

The Benning model involves moving veteran UFA's that are in the final year of their contract if the team is not playoff bound. The Benning model encourages a SLOW yet CONSISTENT injection of the RIGHT prospects (i.e. quality over quantity), that are surrounded by vets that have either played at an elite level, or are well known lockerroom leaders.

The "blow it up" model, is what leads to the Edmonton/Florida model where you

1) Likely miss the playoffs for 5+ years
2) Don't maximize your prospects due to the fact that there are no elite and/or "leader" vets showing them the ropes.


If the Canucks finish near the bottom of the standings this year, they should continue to stay on course with the current plan. Not only would they select extremely high in the draft (increasing their chance of landing a franchise player), but would also have the added benefits of their vets corralling the talents of their prospects.

A solid veteran presence full of current/former elites and lockerroom leaders CANNOT be overlooked......otherwise you end up like Edmonton and Florida.

Anybody can trade away UFA if we are way out of a playoff position comes the TDL, but what if we are 8th-10th in the west leading up to the TDL, would be interesting to see if benning trade away vrbata/hamhuis during the race or trying to add to the team instead. My money is on him to stand pat and we let those 2 walk after missing the playoff. That would pretty much be the worst case scenario.
Btw the 'blow it up' model you are so afraid of is pretty much how Chicago, LA, and the late 90s Avs built their teams. Seems to work out if you have competent management. So in that sense I can understand your hesitation here.

 

[vanuck]

Speed has become the most important factor in the NHL, Chicago is the fastest team no argument

Speed is definitely a factor, but it has to lead to you being a good player in the end too. The Hawks are also probably the most dominant puck possession team of the last 5 years on aggregate (other than maybe LA). That's the gripe with Sutter here who has speed but isn't good in that area so it doesn't really end up being useful to a team considering his expected role.

 

[Bourne Endeavor]

"target" more like "deal with"

His own words and actions say otherwise. If Sbisa were just a cap dump, Benning wouldn't have offered him an extension.

 

[The Drop]

Sutter needs to show this fan base what meat and taters are made of

His meat and taters it butter and biscuits

 

[Horse McHindu]

The team weakness is now in net where Benning downgraded and on D where an ejected Garrison and an aging Bieksa were not replaced.

I might have to disagree with this. I think Miller will still be a "solid" goalie for us (not to be confused with "superstar", but Lack wasn't "superstar" calibre either). Both Miller and Lack are/were solid goalies at this stage in their careers, and I think Miller will continue to provide us with that.

The real question is Markstrom. How much has this guy really improved, and will it (finally) translate to the NHL level. Benning and Travis Green certainly seem to think so. Markstrom was "lights out" in Utica, and finally seems to be on the verge of maximizing his enormous potential (a potential that is significantly greater than Lack's by the way), after finally getting the proper coaching and attention down in Utica (something that he did NOT receive in Florida).

Long story short - I think our goaltending could pleasantly surprise many people.

On defense - lets face facts: Bieksa was T-E-R-R-I-B-L-E last season. Brain farts galore, very limited foot speed, and he allowed "that Ferkland kid or whatever" to completely get inside his head come playoff time.

Bartkowski is by no means, Duncan Keith, but I think Bartkowski is a better defenseman than Kevin Bieksa at this stage in their careers. Bieksa is nowhere near what he was in 2011........and I think Anaheim will soon discover that.

 

[Trelane]

On this forum if Forsling became an NHL star, Benning would be praised for his keen eye for talent at the draft table for drafting him.

That's the spirit. Though I think you misrepresent, just a tad, the order of battle arrayed for each side in the great Benning divide.

A GM can draft his way out of multitude of sins and him nailing mid round picks with some consistency should count for something.

Here Forsling has to become a) bit more than an average replacement level D any club can pick up almost every year (e.g: Bartkowski), and b) close the difference, if any, Sutter has over Bonino in production, intangibles, performance of linemates, etc., for this to go into Benning's loss column.

Assigning value to D is, I think, pretty straightforward when not talking elite players. You're either a top 4, not a sporadic multiple injuries caused necessity, or your not in which case the value is small. Nickel & dime stuff, or mid-late round pick, which while cumulatively important, still need to be considered in context of overall club performance. A consideration with Gillis enjoyed for the longest time, I might add.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

His meat and taters it butter and biscuits

fact of the matter is, he's too pretty to be a real sutter.

i mean, his uncle duane's nickname was "dog."

^ the young guy brett sutter, darryl's son. that face has also clearly never worked on a farm, or even been to viking, alberta.

 

[Trelane]

^ the young guy brett sutter, darryl's son. that face has also clearly never worked on a farm, or even been to viking, alberta.

So true. Can't raise tough, resilient, no-nonsense types in sterile, affluent concrete jungles and surrounding areas where "no judging" is state mandated edumacation policy, not nearly at the same rate anyway.

Dare I say Bo's stock is more promising?

 

[Pip]

Well at the time, we were trading up a couple of years in the prospect pool. Here's a younger guy, freshly drafted, not ready for a while, but we have a gaping lack of prospects ready in a season or two. So kick him off for a guy a little older blocked by depth. That made sense. Throwing that guy in for no reason in another trade six months later...not so much.

The issue was, at least in my opinion at the time, that we didn't need to fill that gap and we didn't need a Clendening which goes back to the misevaluation of what we already had in place. Management didn't know what they had in Weber. They also seemingly had no intention of working with Clendening to properly develop him even though his flaws were well known when we acquired him.

Unfortunately we took a young player with good upside and some flaws and traded him for an older player who didn't have the same kind of time to overcome his deficiencies. That's why I've been so against all of these acquisitions of older prospects. Teams dont give up on good prospects they think have any future as a real contributor so you end up betting against the team that's had the player in their system for years.

 

[RandV]

The issue was, at least in my opinion at the time, that we didn't need to fill that gap and we didn't need a Clendening which goes back to the misevaluation of what we already had in place. Management didn't know what they had in Weber. They also seemingly had no intention of working with Clendening to properly develop him even though his flaws were well known when we acquired him.

Unfortunately we took a young player with good upside and some flaws and traded him for an older player who didn't have the same kind of time to overcome his deficiencies. That's why I've been so against all of these acquisitions of older prospects. Teams dont give up on good prospects they think have any future as a real contributor so you end up betting against the team that's had the player in their system for years.

Also worth pointing out that we had both Schroeder and and McNally in this 'gap' that were discarded for nothing and a 7th respectively.

Basically the whole 'age gap' was nothing but ********. I always took it to be little more than a subtle jab at the previous management. That or these were guys Benning wanted to target regardless.

 

[thepuckmonster]

Also worth pointing out that we had both Schroeder and and McNally in this 'gap' that were discarded for nothing and a 7th respectively.

Basically the whole 'age gap' was nothing but ********. I always took it to be little more than a subtle jab at the previous management. That or these were guys Benning wanted to target regardless.

Schroeder I can see lamenting but McNally is 25 and hasn't played a single professional game in his career. The likelihood of him becoming anything is pretty damn slim.