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

Status
Not open for further replies.

Pip

Registered User
Feb 2, 2012
69,198
8,537
Granduland
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.

Most prospects are longshots. He at least had enough skill and had shown enough at the college level to be interesting. Obviously we don't know for sure why they couldn't get a deal done but if it was because Benning thinks our current D prospects are better bets like he said, then that is another poor move on his part.
 

RandV

It's a wolf v2.0
Jul 29, 2003
26,871
4,982
Vancouver
Visit site
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.

:facepalm:

Patrick McNally is 23, turning 24 in December. Where the hell does this '25' nonsense come from and why does it keep getting repeated?

There was a point where there were legit questions about whether he was interested in actually playing hockey, where as fans we had no clue if he actually intended to sign or not. But the player himself put that question to rest when he immediately signed a contract with San Jose.

Now I'm not necessarily making an argument that he should have been kept, I'm just pointing out that here are two decent kids in that supposed age range that Benning simply discarded.
 

RandV

It's a wolf v2.0
Jul 29, 2003
26,871
4,982
Vancouver
Visit site
Oh sorry, I was off by a year (he's a late 91).

Point still remains, I don't think he's anything to cry over.

The point with McNally is why make it seem like we have a deficit in the organization to justify going out and spending youth & draft picks to acquire guys like Clendening and Pedan on one hand while on the other you have a pretty decent guy already there who's in that exact age range that gets tossed out with the trash.

None of these guys are anything to cry over, it's just a pure failure in execution. Also a quick glance on the San Jose board it's still early but McNally is looking pretty good and looks to be in competition for the #6/7 spot on the Sharks pro roster. Likely will never be anything significant but it could turn out he ends up better than both Clendening and Pedan.
 

RobertKron

Registered User
Sep 1, 2007
15,574
8,808
He fits perfectly into the age gap we have been trying so hard to fill.

Also, Benning cited Hutton and Subban as the reason they didn't have room for McNally, which kind of wonks out the whole age gap thing.
 

Balls Mahoney

2015-2016 HF Premier League World Champion
Aug 14, 2008
20,402
1,922
Legend
Also, Benning cited Hutton and Subban as the reason they didn't have room for McNally, which kind of wonks out the whole age gap thing.

The hell would I want another $100 bill for? I already got two.

I'm starting to get excited about McCann.
 

Verviticus

Registered User
Jul 23, 2010
12,664
592
maybe. but then maybe benning should have said "he didnt want to sign here" rather than "we didn't want him". im not really willing to give jim the benefit of the doubt, he hasnt earned it
 

me2

Go ahead foot
Jun 28, 2002
37,903
5,595
Make my day.
Speed has become the most important factor in the NHL, Chicago is the fastest team no argument

How the world has moved on from last year when all that mattered to Benning was goals. Apparently skating is the cool thing now. So next year's fashion be size, Lucic come on down.
 

vanuck

Now with 100% less Benning!
Dec 28, 2009
16,810
4,059
Also, Benning cited Hutton and Subban as the reason they didn't have room for McNally, which kind of wonks out the whole age gap thing.

Even more ironic when those 2 weren't even drafted by him at all. Such BS. :laugh:
 

Hammer79

Registered User
Jan 9, 2009
7,454
1,316
Kelowna
maybe. but then maybe benning should have said "he didnt want to sign here" rather than "we didn't want him". im not really willing to give jim the benefit of the doubt, he hasnt earned it

Maybe he didn't want to start a Canucks media circus over a 4th rounder from 2010?
 

Zaddy91

Respectful Handshake
Jul 22, 2014
9,700
758
Vancouver
How the world has moved on from last year when all that mattered to Benning was goals. Apparently skating is the cool thing now. So next year's fashion be size, Lucic come on down.

His hand were tied with nino

But every player he has tergeted is fast.

Dorsett
sutter
boeser
Virtanen
 

RandV

It's a wolf v2.0
Jul 29, 2003
26,871
4,982
Vancouver
Visit site
Maybe he didn't want to start a Canucks media circus over a 4th rounder from 2010?

This isn't anything that's going to pick up much steam in the media or with the general fanbase, but for a more detailed insight it paints a poor pictureof his method & execution.

Claims there is an 'age gap' of 21-23 year old players. Pays a 2nd rounder for Linden Vey, but doesn't qualify Jordan Schroeder. Gives up a 3rd rounder for Andrey Pedan and promising Gustav Forsling for Adam Clendening, but chooses not to sign Patrick McNally and instead trades him to San Jose for a 7th.

These moves work if Benning is able to find gold with them, and we've been sold on him being a master talent evaluator. But for all intents and purposes, Schroeder is filling in the same job in Minnesota that Vey does here, we've already given up on Clendening, and McNally is farther up San Jose's depth chart than Pedan is ours. With one hand he's trying to fix a perceived problem but with the other he's contributing to the very same problem. And tossing out 2nd and 3rd rounders to fix it, a lack of which has always been a big factor in our poor drafting over the years.

These types of things can always change but right now Vey, Pedan, and Clendening aren't an equal trade off for Schroeder, Forsling, McNally, a 2nd, a 3rd, and a throwaway Mallet. Like pretty much all his other moves it's extremely poor value in fact.
 

Pip

Registered User
Feb 2, 2012
69,198
8,537
Granduland
i'm not really willing to give jim the benefit of the doubt, he hasnt earned it

Would probably make a good signature

Maybe he didn't want to start a Canucks media circus over a 4th rounder from 2010?

Why would there be a media circus?

So Benning has a couple options. He either says that McNally didn't want to sign here for whatever reason, or that we didn't want to sign him. I think the latter has more potential to blow up in his face.
 

NoRaise4Brackett

But Brackett!!!
Mar 16, 2011
1,971
251
Lurking the Boards
McNally also had the 1 year suspension for cheating. Character may have been an issue, and Benning may have wished to avoid any questions about it/ didn't want to talk smack about McNally.... just ramble some nonsense like usual...? i dunno

I get the impression niether side were too keen on him signing here. Too bad, because I always thought he had decent potential.
 

ATypicalCanadian

Registered User
Apr 30, 2015
4,888
2,673
Canada
I could be mis-remembering here, but isn't there a rule now where a player you trade can't be re-signed by the team that traded him for at least one full season?

The example I can think of that serves to answer your question is Matt Moulson:

Oct 27th 2013 he gets dealt to Buffalo by the Islanders

March 5th 2014 he gets dealt to Minnesota by Buffalo

July 1st 2014 he as a free agent signs with Buffalo on a 5x5 deal.


So it is possible he(Hamhuis) could resign with the team if he/Benning wanted to sign another contract.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad