Jim Benning TSN1040 - 6:10PM TODAY!

[RandV]

Take away Sbisa, is there a softer , less physical D unit in the league ??

Tanev
Hamhuis
Edler
Webber
Biksa
Stanton
Corrado
Clendenning

Sometimes some of us look at our roster and make broad sweeping statements about how bad we are... but really to answer your question we're probably around the middle of the pack. I mean sure it's not an ideal situation for physicality if that's what you're going for, but do you actually know what else is out there around the league? I mean as a general rule of thumb if you want to look at the bottom there's always Edmonton . But even Calgary who beat us, the only 'physical' guy they have on D is Deryk Engelland.

 

[Drop the Sopel]

I'd trade two 2nds to have Garrison on the team and Sbisa not on the team. How about that? .

Don't like it at all. Another 30 year old defensive defenseman isn't going to make or break anything with this group. Holding onto him, or Bieksa for that matter is a futile exercise, one that takes you further away from trying to assemble the next wave of talent to find success beyond the Sedin window.

If Jason Garrison was a UFA this summer and could be had at no acquisition cost and a healthy salary, I would have zero interest in signing him. Another veteran, defensive defenseman is the last thing the Canucks need going forward.

 

[y2kcanucks]

We didn't lose because our core guys got 'rattled'.

We lost because we had 3 playable defenders and 1 good defensive pairing, and our coach made no attempt to shelter the weak links and played them as much as our shutdown pairing. And not surprisingly, those bottom guys were ventilated.

If we had a Jason Garrison on the 2nd pairing and the minutes to Sbieksa were appropriately limited (or if Sbisa was scratched in favour of a better player in Stanton) we're still playing. We absolutely gave away games 1 and 6 on the back of terrible coaching and roster management.

Our core guys (Sedin line, Edler/Tanev) won their matchups in that series.

Also didn't help that our coach went back to a broken goalie who couldn't move after one bad period from Lack.

The team played poorly on the road, so I could see how one could conclude we were rattled. I just think that this team doesn't have the personnel to play well in the playoffs, and we've seen that year after year.

No, the Sedin line didn't win their matchups, but I suppose people will just continue to modify the stats any way they want to slant it in their favour. The Edler/Tanev pairing was OK, but it was far from a shutdown pairing.

You can blame coaching all you want but we're on our 3rd coach in as many years. At some point you have to blame the playoffs because quite clearly blaming the coaching hasn't changed anything.

 

[MS]

That doesn't explain why the team looked night and day from being at home the 1st 2 games, to being on the road for games 3 and 4. Desjardins didn't line match in Vancouver, and he didn't line match in Calgary.

Save the Sedins, the majority of the team was running around like a bunch of scared rookies, surrendering scoring chances at will. Something that didn't happen in the comfort of our own building, or on the road during the regular season, when Willie again wasn't matching lines.

The team has consistently folded in the face of pressure and adversity over the last few years and this playoff ended in similar fashion. Bieksa is the face of that group and I think Benning knows it.

Bob Hartley said again today that his team REALLY feeds off the energy at home. They play a much more aggressive, confident and fast game in the Saddledome and it was apparent pretty early on in our series that this was a completely different team in their own barn.

Benning was alluding to the fact the Canucks didn't match the Flames energy and speed in Calgary. Nor did the group show they were capable or willing to get to the net to score goals. All of these areas were obvious weaknesses IMO and things that have plagued this team in recent years. I had nothing wrong with him essentially saying this group just isn't good enough - and some difficult decisions will need to be made in the coming weeks. I for one welcome change.

Bieksa might have been rattled but he stinks right now whether he's rattled or not. And that should have been obvious to management and coaches well before the playoffs.

He's a part of that bottom 3 on defense, and playing those guys 2/3 at the time at ES without attempting to shelter them is why we lost. It's difficult to match the speed and physicality of another team when you're constantly in your own zone on the back of your lousy blueline.

 

[I in the Eye]

What a depressing interview.

We lost in Calgary because the crowd rattled us, not because our coach was destroyed by Hartley in terms of line matching.

We're 'simplifying' our scouting.

Sbisa is 'real good'.

Optimism on signing Subban seems to be waning.

The guy just sounds so freaking DUMB, all the time. It hurts to listen to.

Input > Process > Output

Input #1: Canucks enter 1st Calgary Game
Process #1: The 1st Calgary Games
Output #1: Canucks lose Calgary Game

Input #2: Canucks enter 2nd Calgary Game
Process #2: The 2nd Calgary Games
Output #2: Canucks lose Calgary Game

Detailed analysis of the systems...

Willie's analysis: The 1st series game in Vancouver was the reason for the output.
Benning's analysis: The team was rattled in Calgary because of the crowd, was the reason for the output.

That's it? Those are the reasons? A game multiple games past, and a crowd that isn't even on the ice dictating the score. This seems more like fluff than substance to me. If it is substance, this is pretty groundbreaking stuff, and a eureka moment for me. I always thought that past games and crowd noise had little impact on the current game at hand. I've seen lots of teams win over the years (across sports) in buildings that were colour co-ordinated and loud, and where they lost to the team prior. I always thought that what was happening in the game had much more of an important impact to the outcome of the game. Jesus Christ, if a game prior and the crowd can dictate a playoff series to such a degree... and this results in Aquilini earning millions of dollars in the balance, or not, bring in a hypnotist to erase the players memories of the prior game... bring in the common colours at Rogers, blast cheering and intimidating sounds over the speakers. The difference is millions of dollars. And this would only cost a fraction of the benefit. If sameness of colour and loudness is the key to success or failure, if I'm Aquilini, my #1 priority is making Rogers colour co-ordinated and loud... I bring a hypnotist in so that the players can focus on the game at hand, and I give Benning and Willie a raise.

Drafting system:

Input: Player selection planning
Process: Player selection
Output: select player

Gillis makes changes to the drafting system, after a detailed analysis based on research and statistics (i.e. substance) determines that the input was the problem in the system. 2013 draft is the result. One of the most promising drafts (so far, knock on wood) in years.

Benning comes in and with his analysis, determines that Gillis' new drafting system was too complicated. He came to this conclusion talking to Delorme and other long-time scouts. Things that are difficult for someone to understand, are often deemed complicated. If something is understood, and the immediate results show it's working, it's not too complicated. It might just be complicated enough. But not enough data was there, to give it a chance. Lot's of data that the old way didn't work, but only 1-year of excellent results to determine the new way was better or not. Maybe Benning meant it was unnecessarily complicated? Relying too much on research and statistics? The 2013 results were there, but it's not the way traditional scouting works. So, reset the system to the prior system, reset the changes that Gillis made, and uncomplicate the system. The 2013 results can be emulated with an easier to understand system. The old system, with a new resource added for the input: Benning the Scout! Don't need fancy pansy statistics and research, investment into science and technology, when you've got Benning the Scout! who just knows the right player when he sees it! Research and statistics have been replaced by feeling and belief, for better or worse.

 

[Reign Nateo]

That hurt my brain. Anything short of an amazing draft and I will grab my anti-Benning pitch-fork and join the rest of you.

 

[Proto]

Wouldn't know it listening to fans around here. They're already setting the table to blame current management for what seems like a pretty inevitable decline, due to 'going for it' and poor drafting.

I take it you agreed that 'cap hell' isn't what this team needs to worry about going forward? There probably won't even be enough quality in this organization to be near the cap in 24 months.

You're one of the few people here I see obsessing about Mike Gillis. This is more about Benning's ludicrous player evaluation and plan to compete moving forward, which looks, frankly, awful. That part is fine, because the team will accidentally tank (as it needs to). It's just a shame that in the meantime, Benning will be throwing a bunch of money around on bad deals. Maybe it'll be enough to get him fired before the team is competitive again.

I expect Benning to keep this team at the cap with bad deals for the next 3-4 years. It will be mandated by ownership and Benning has shown little or no eye for spending that money wisely, with the exception of Vrbata, who he is rumoured to have soured on based on a 6-game sample. I'm not sure how to take that.

Bingo. I would peg Garrison's value right around that 2nd Rd pick. Maybe a 3rd on top of it if you have a few teams in the bidding.

Matt Carle returned two 2nds.

What would you peg Sbisa's value at on his current contract? I'd guess he'd clear waivers, myself. What about Linden Vey? What do you think you'd fetch for him on the open market? A 2nd? The team gave away a 2nd-pairing defenseman for a sub-replacement level forward who now has zero trade value and yet you're trying to spin it into some kind of positive move by Benning. Hilarious.

 

[tantalum]

The Garrison contract was never a bargain deal. It was market value money.

But he is a legitimate 20 minute a night, 30 point D-man and has been on three teams now. Playoff teams the last couple of teams. His current coach said the other day that somehow people have no idea just how good Garrison is.

I won't say a reasonable second is a terrible return given the NTC. I think it should be better for a legitimate top 4 guy and if he didn't have a NTC I can all but guarantee a first round pick would be necessary. But in the end it doesn't matter. I don't believe he should have ever have been traded to begin with. Certainly not to make room for such lunacy as $6 mil to Miller, $3.6 mil to Sbisa and $2.65 mil to Dorsett.


I like the question above....what is Sbisa's value? My guess is about a negative 2.7 million dollars because that is about the cap hit that wouldn't be forgiven when he was buried in the minors.

 

[ugghhh]

Sometimes some of us look at our roster and make broad sweeping statements about how bad we are... but really to answer your question we're probably around the middle of the pack. I mean sure it's not an ideal situation for physicality if that's what you're going for, but do you actually know what else is out there around the league? I mean as a general rule of thumb if you want to look at the bottom there's always Edmonton . But even Calgary who beat us, the only 'physical' guy they have on D is Deryk Engelland.

or Anaheim:

Fowler (40 hits)
Lindholm (52)
Vatanen (58)
Stoner (110 hits in 69 games, led the team)
Beauchemin (86)
Despres

---

The difference is they play solid team defence and move the puck very well.

 

[Drop the Sopel]

He hit on Vrbata, but now doesn't like Vrbata.
Hit on Bonino.
He sort of hit on Dorsett, then ruined it with a bad contract.

Missed atrociously on Sbisa
Missed on Vey
Missed on Garrison
Missed on Santorelli, then tried to get him back
Missed on Lack
Missed on Miller

Not exactly a good track record so far.

Hit on Weber.

Hit on keeping Edler over Garrison.

Sort of hit on Dorsett? He had a career year and was voted unsung hero by his teammates. There is no sort of.

He 'missed' on Santorelli, being 1 of 30 GM's that refused to give him term? There was what, 1 other GM in the league that valued Santo more than Benning?

He didn't miss on Garrison. He saw an opportunity to shed salary, get younger and add a valuable pick.

In 1 year, Benning has done 1 thing that would raise eyebrows around the league and be considered a 'what the he'll are you thinking' move. The Sbisa extension. That's it. 1 move. When you make decisions on 20+ players in 1 year, there will be some hits and some misses. That's where we're at today.

Let's not forget the team went from 28th in goals for to 8th in one offseason. And that's with the teams only goal scoring threat demanding a trade! That in itself was a terrific accomplishment - one that took an unwatchable group back to respectability and improved the entertainment value significantly.

He even managed to do it while stockpiling a lot of skilled youth into the organization as well. He's not the shoe-in for GM of the year candidate like he was one third of the way into this season, but it sure wouldn't surprise me if he still gets consideration.

 

[ArtG]

Hit on Weber.

Hit on keeping Edler over Garrison.

Sort of hit on Dorsett? He had a career year and was voted unsung hero by his teammates. There is no sort of.

He 'missed' on Santorelli, being 1 of 30 GM's that refused to give him term? There was what, 1 other GM in the league that valued Santo more than Benning?

He didn't miss on Garrison. He saw an opportunity to shed salary, get younger and add a valuable pick.

In 1 year, Benning has done 1 thing that would raise eyebrows around the league and be considered a 'what the he'll are you thinking' move. The Sbisa extension. That's it. 1 move. When you make decisions on 20+ players in 1 year, there will be some hits and some misses. That's where we're at today.

Let's not forget the team went from 28th in goals for to 8th in one offseason. And that's with the teams only goal scoring threat demanding a trade! That in itself was a terrific accomplishment - one that took an unwatchable group back to respectability and improved the entertainment value significantly.

He even managed to do it while stockpiling a lot of skilled youth into the organization as well. He's not the shoe-in for GM of the year candidate like he was one third of the way into this season, but it sure wouldn't surprise me if he still gets consideration.

Well said. The Sbisa + Dorsett thing can basically be summed up with this:

 

[Drop the Sopel]

The team gave away a 2nd-pairing defenseman for a sub-replacement level forward who now has zero trade value and yet you're trying to spin it into some kind of positive move by Benning. Hilarious.

The team targeted skiled youth that was excelling at the AHL level, in organizations that are littered with depth, keeping these players from cracking the NHL roster. The thought process behind the Vey, Baerstchi, Clendening and Pedan deals is sound IMO - of course they're not all going to work out. If even 1 of the 4 become good players, you're doing well.

We didn't draft a single player under the previous management group that outscored Vey this season. Hopefully that little tidbit helps put in perspective why they felt it was worth the gamble on a highly skilled young pro that looked close to being NHL ready.

Then again, I'm a firm believer in high end AHL production translating to the NHL. I've never been one to get too excited about a prospect until they've shown they can be an impact player at the AHL level.

 

[ugghhh]

Hit on Weber.

Hit on keeping Edler over Garrison.

Sort of hit on Dorsett? He had a career year and was voted unsung hero by his teammates. There is no sort of.

He 'missed' on Santorelli, being 1 of 30 GM's that refused to give him term? There was what, 1 other GM in the league that valued Santo more than Benning?

He didn't miss on Garrison. He saw an opportunity to shed salary, get younger and add a valuable pick.

In 1 year, Benning has done 1 thing that would raise eyebrows around the league and be considered a 'what the he'll are you thinking' move. The Sbisa extension. That's it. 1 move. When you make decisions on 20+ players in 1 year, there will be some hits and some misses. That's where we're at today.

Let's not forget the team went from 28th in goals for to 8th in one offseason. And that's with the teams only goal scoring threat demanding a trade! That in itself was a terrific accomplishment - one that took an unwatchable group back to respectability and improved the entertainment value significantly.

He even managed to do it while stockpiling a lot of skilled youth into the organization as well. He's not the shoe-in for GM of the year candidate like he was one third of the way into this season, but it sure wouldn't surprise me if he still gets consideration.

The issue with Santorelli (and Stanton) is that he could have gotten players that filled actual needs for us in the Kesler deal instead of Bonino and Sbisa. IE, if you get Vatanen instead of Bonino+Sbisa, this team looks much better right now.

In the end, all of the positive moves he's made (and he has made some) get wiped out by the Dorsett/Sbisa/Miller signings.

 

[RandV]

or Anaheim:

Fowler (40 hits)
Lindholm (52)
Vatanen (58)
Stoner (110 hits in 69 games, led the team)
Beauchemin (86)
Despres

---

The difference is they play solid team defence and move the puck very well.

Yes, the point is while we're not Winnipeg if you actually look around the league it's not really an area we're deficient in.

In a similar manner we've been moaning about our inability to get it done in the playoffs for a few years now. What about teams like Nashville? St. Louis? San Jose? Maybe Minnesota? Considering we made the finals 4 years ago, there are other top teams more lackluster than us in the playoffs.

 

[Proto]

Hit on Weber.

Gillis acquired Weber.

Hit on keeping Edler over Garrison.

This isn't a thing. He could have kept both. How is this a hit by any reasonable measure? Laughable.

Sort of hit on Dorsett? He had a career year and was voted unsung hero by his teammates. There is no sort of.

Possession black hole who made every player on his line worse. He fell of a cliff relative to previous performance but scored a career high in points with a bunch of ice time. Almost certainly not sustainable, then signed him to at/above UFA market value. I'd call it "sort of" a hit because he's not objectively bad, but the contract will look unmoveable within 12-24 months

He 'missed' on Santorelli, being 1 of 30 GM's that refused to give him term? There was what, 1 other GM in the league that valued Santo more than Benning?

Yes, he missed.

He didn't miss on Garrison. He saw an opportunity to shed salary, get younger and add a valuable pick.

He could have kept him, or moved another defenseman, or tried to get more than a 2nd. Oh, and what happened to that "valuable pick"? Oh, right, he traded it for Linden Vey, a sub-replacement level player who is waiver eligible and showed zero improvement throughout the season. Even if you think a pick around 50 is "valuable" (it returns an NHLer about 30% of the time), he turned it into an asset with zero value. You're calling that not a miss?

In 1 year, Benning has done 1 thing that would raise eyebrows around the league and be considered a 'what the he'll are you thinking' move. The Sbisa extension. That's it. 1 move. When you make decisions on 20+ players in 1 year, there will be some hits and some misses. That's where we're at today.

Lol. No.

Let's not forget the team went from 28th in goals for to 8th in one offseason. And that's with the teams only goal scoring threat demanding a trade! That in itself was a terrific accomplishment - one that took an unwatchable group back to respectability and improved the entertainment value significantly.

The team didn't improve offensively. They scored a bunch of EN goals and the Sedins bounced back. Period. Besides, you just spend two weeks deriding Gillis for the teams anemic offense in the playoffs: can't have it both ways in terms of the offense of this team.

The team was not more entertaining, which is probably why attendance continued to flag and the team couldn't sell out playoff games, despite dropping ticket prices by 40%.

He even managed to do it while stockpiling a lot of skilled youth into the organization as well. He's not the shoe-in for GM of the year candidate like he was one third of the way into this season, but it sure wouldn't surprise me if he still gets consideration.

We'll see if that's true or not. I'm glad you're happy with the team though, because there's no room under the cap to make significant improvements, nor is there any indication they are interested in making additions to the defense over the next 12 months. That's why Sbisa is here: for when Hamhuis and Bieksa leave!

 

[VanJack]

Hit on Weber.

Hit on keeping Edler over Garrison.

Sort of hit on Dorsett? He had a career year and was voted unsung hero by his teammates. There is no sort of.

He 'missed' on Santorelli, being 1 of 30 GM's that refused to give him term? There was what, 1 other GM in the league that valued Santo more than Benning?

He didn't miss on Garrison. He saw an opportunity to shed salary, get younger and add a valuable pick.

In 1 year, Benning has done 1 thing that would raise eyebrows around the league and be considered a 'what the he'll are you thinking' move. The Sbisa extension. That's it. 1 move. When you make decisions on 20+ players in 1 year, there will be some hits and some misses. That's where we're at today.

Let's not forget the team went from 28th in goals for to 8th in one offseason. And that's with the teams only goal scoring threat demanding a trade! That in itself was a terrific accomplishment - one that took an unwatchable group back to respectability and improved the entertainment value significantly.

He even managed to do it while stockpiling a lot of skilled youth into the organization as well. He's not the shoe-in for GM of the year candidate like he was one third of the way into this season, but it sure wouldn't surprise me if he still gets consideration.

So now he has Sbisa, who is making just under $1m a year less than Garrison, but brings zero offense to the table and will never get any pp time...and the 'valuable pick' turned into Linden Vey....not liking the way this turned out...can't blame posters for being upset.

 

[Barney Gumble]

He's not the shoe-in for GM of the year candidate like he was one third of the way into this season

One third into the last season, we were in a solid playoff spot.

He even managed to do it while stockpiling a lot of skilled youth into the organization as well.

Ryan Miller in......Markstrom out, Ericsson out, and probably Lack out.

 

[Proto]

We didn't draft a single player under the previous management group that outscored Vey this season. Hopefully that little tidbit helps put in perspective why they felt it was worth the gamble on a highly skilled young pro that looked close to being NHL ready.

Horvat did. Connauton scored at a similar rate despite being a defenseman. It's also irrelevant since nobody is arguing Gillis was good at drafting. Does that mean Benning can acquire mediocre young players repeatedly with impunity? It's a disingenuous way to assess roster decisions.

Then again, I'm a firm believer in high end AHL production translating to the NHL. I've never been one to get too excited about a prospect until they've shown they can be an impact player at the AHL level.

I'm not disagreeing with this, but most of the issues people have are pretty clearly the NHL roster evaluations that Benning is making. If he can draft well to add some young roster pieces, great, but I don't see any evidence thus far to suggest he has any idea how to build a winning roster at the NHL level.

 

[Diamonddog01]

Don't like it at all. Another 30 year old defensive defenseman isn't going to make or break anything with this group. Holding onto him, or Bieksa for that matter is a futile exercise, one that takes you further away from trying to assemble the next wave of talent to find success beyond the Sedin window.

If Jason Garrison was a UFA this summer and could be had at no acquisition cost and a healthy salary, I would have zero interest in signing him. Another veteran, defensive defenseman is the last thing the Canucks need going forward.

Agreed. While the Sbisa contract stinks, it doesn't somehow make Garrison more attractive. I've watched several Tampa games this playoffs and he's still as soft, weak and passive as ever when dealing with incoming forwards. Not interested in him or Santorelli, who again disappeared down the stretch. With a very solid team in Nashville no less.

 

[Diamonddog01]

I can't wait for 12-24 months for now when this team is in cap hell with dumb signings and everyone who loves Benning right now is like, "we could never have seen this coming!!!"

You can't wait...wow, you are an amazing fan. Go cheer for another team if you are actively hoping this management group fails so you can gloat on an internet forum.

 

[MS]

Hit on Weber.

Hit on keeping Edler over Garrison.

Sort of hit on Dorsett? He had a career year and was voted unsung hero by his teammates. There is no sort of.

He 'missed' on Santorelli, being 1 of 30 GM's that refused to give him term? There was what, 1 other GM in the league that valued Santo more than Benning?

He didn't miss on Garrison. He saw an opportunity to shed salary, get younger and add a valuable pick.

In 1 year, Benning has done 1 thing that would raise eyebrows around the league and be considered a 'what the he'll are you thinking' move. The Sbisa extension. That's it. 1 move. When you make decisions on 20+ players in 1 year, there will be some hits and some misses. That's where we're at today.

Let's not forget the team went from 28th in goals for to 8th in one offseason. And that's with the teams only goal scoring threat demanding a trade! That in itself was a terrific accomplishment - one that took an unwatchable group back to respectability and improved the entertainment value significantly.

He even managed to do it while stockpiling a lot of skilled youth into the organization as well. He's not the shoe-in for GM of the year candidate like he was one third of the way into this season, but it sure wouldn't surprise me if he still gets consideration.

He made a terrible decision on Garrison. Good player on a great contract that would have filled the biggest hole on our roster this postseason.

And hell yeah he missed on Santorelli. A 30-40 point ES scorer would could have been had for 1/4 the normal market value for that level of player? Yeah, oops. Then tried to spend assets to get him back.

Yeah he made a good decision to keep Weber.

We went from 28th to 8th on the back of a huge Sedin bounce-back and a league record 21 EN goals. Wait and see where we are next year.

What youth has he 'stockpiled'? He got back a #1 pick in the Kesler deal which was a fait accompli no matter who the GM was. And traded some high-ish picks for some 'meh' prospects approaching their waiver cutoff. The team actually was older this year than the one that closed out last year.

One colossally terrible decision/year isn't good. At all. Especially mixed in with several other kinda bad ones and not many good ones.

And it isn't 'one terrible decision'. The mis-read on Lack and Miller is a disaster. $6 million down the tubes for a lesser goaltending option is atrocious (and was completely predictable) and will probably force the trade of our excellent young starter, who was one of the best assets long-term that the organization had.

If your barometer for 'good GM' is making two BRUTAL decisions that cost the team $10 million/year for nothing moving forward while forcing the trade of good young assets, I'm not really sure what to say. If he keeps that up every year, we'll be Buffalo/Edmonton by 2017.

 

[Proto]

You can't wait...wow, you are an amazing fan. Go cheer for another team if you are actively hoping this management group fails so you can gloat on an internet forum.

It has nothing to do with gloating. I just can't see this team being competitive with management that's incapable of a modern approach to the game. Thus, the faster they fail (I expect an accidental tank will begin as soon as next year), the faster they're removed and the organization can move back towards fielding a top club.

The result on here will just be fun to watch. You take pleasure where you can.

 

[Drop the Sopel]

The team didn't improve offensively. They scored a bunch of EN goals and the Sedins bounced back. Period. Besides, you just spend two weeks deriding Gillis for the teams anemic offense in the playoffs: can't have it both ways in terms of the offense of this team.

And what about Vrbata producing 50% more points than the 3rd highest point producer on the team last season? That wasn't a factor? From player 1 through 20, in a straight across, year to year comparison, every single guy this season put up more points than their comparable from a year ago. That's right, 1 through 20. Might want to re-think that period.

And yes, when 2 of the top 4 point producers were brought in in one offseason, while none of the teams best forwards were brought in by Gillis, even though we're 7 years removed from his hiring, yes I absolutely can deride Gillis for what he did to the forward corps.

This offseason we had a team with no 2nd line centre, no 3rd line centre, it needed a 2nd line RW, a 2nd line LW, had a defense that fit together poorly with not enough offensive push from the backend, while having the most inexperienced, questionable duo between the pipes of any team in the league. To sit here and pretend it wasn't going to take an absolute miracle to turn this team into anything resembling a contender would be an argument not worth listening to. The fact they topped the 100 point mark and made the playoffs was a major success - doing it while trading a couple quality vets with draft picks being the most valuable assets received in return was just icing on the cake.

 

[Diamonddog01]

It has nothing to do with gloating. I just can't see this team being competitive with management that's incapable of a modern approach to the game. Thus, the faster they fail (I expect an accidental tank will begin as soon as next year), the faster they're removed and the organization can move back towards fielding a top club.

The result on here will just be fun to watch. You take pleasure where you can.

That's sad. I'll take pleasure from cheering on the team, watching youngsters like Horvat and Baertschi take the next step forward and enjoying my team winning against hated rivals. Maybe even have a few beers while doing so.

 

[RandV]

The team targeted skiled youth that was excelling at the AHL level, in organizations that are littered with depth, keeping these players from cracking the NHL roster. The thought process behind the Vey, Baerstchi, Clendening and Pedan deals is sound IMO - of course they're not all going to work out. If even 1 of the 4 become good players, you're doing well.

We didn't draft a single player under the previous management group that outscored Vey this season. Hopefully that little tidbit helps put in perspective why they felt it was worth the gamble on a highly skilled young pro that looked close to being NHL ready.

Then again, I'm a firm believer in high end AHL production translating to the NHL. I've never been one to get too excited about a prospect until they've shown they can be an impact player at the AHL level.

The thought process is sound, but the method is questionable, or at the very least the price payed makes it a neutral net gain. Last draft we took Thatcher Demko and Nikita Tryamkin in the 2nd and 3rd rounds. You gain a Baertschi and Pedan for the AHL team now, guys that are a step away from waivers, but lose a Demko and Tryamkin for your prospect pipeline the next year.

That's not fixing the prospect pipeline, it's taking out a payday loan. Even if Benning recoups the picks by trading pro roster players that's still only getting us back up to par on our number of draft picks, when the vets could have been traded to give us extra picks.

This is one strategy where I'm really not that bothered with what Benning's doing. These players may be close to waivers, but if they did hit the wire there's going to be x number of teams with a free shot ahead of us. For a team in our position (middle of the pack) if the player is worthwhile you more or less have to trade to acquire them.

But lets not pretend that Benning is effectively increasing our prospect depth with his 4 acquisitions. That type of praise belongs to kids like Tanev, Lack, Kenins, Stanton, and Fox, where the players were literally acquired for free.