Jim Bennings Draft Record as Assistant GM in Boston

[Wilch]

He was clearly heavily involved in Boston's drafting.

Go through post-draft articles and videos throughout his time there, and he's the primary media go-to for explaining picks and draft strategy, etc. He wouldn't be put in that role if he wasn't in the thick of things.

And yeah, Boston stunk. Probably the worst drafting team in the NHL during his time there.

I honestly have no idea how he succeeded in Buffalo. He took over after Jack Bowman (Scotty's brother) died, and you have to wonder if Bowman - who was regarded as one of the best talent evaluators around - just had such a good group of scouts in place that things kept ticking over well.

It sucks to think about the how Benning and Weisbrod pillaged the seemingly revamped scouting system in Vancouver set up by Gillis and co.

 

[drax0s]

I honestly have no idea how he succeeded in Buffalo. He took over after Jack Bowman (Scotty's brother) died, and you have to wonder if Bowman - who was regarded as one of the best talent evaluators around - just had such a good group of scouts in place that things kept ticking over well.

Yeah, this argument is definitely feasible. If you wanted to dig into this, I'd look at comparing the scouts staff list and the draft hits in the years before Benning joined and see if there was any change once he took control. If it's statistically similar and the staff remained roughly the same your previously built scouting dept theory may actually be valid.

 

[Intangibos]

He finds a Gem in the 5th round who makes some noise around the league at the WJC, he is all of sudden on everyone's radar and he trades that said person for Clendening who fell out of favor.

What annoys me most about the Clendening trade is what was said about it. We went out and traded a good prospect to fill the magical age gap, while shipping out other players inside that age range like Kassian and Lack (older, but in goalie years). I guess he had reasons for shipping out Kassian, but still we got older as a result of these moves. So it's like they're doing one thing and saying another, which makes me feel as if they're either extreme incompetent, or outright lying to the fans, or both.

Then when they trade Clendening, they say it's because he doesn't have NHL level skating. They had just acquired him a few months prior. Did nobody actually scout him before they traded for him? I don't understand. This isn't a guy who didn't progress the way you wanted him to, this is a guy we traded for, and then 5 months later claim he can't skate and dumped him not nothing.

 

[Jay Cee]

We don't know of his real impact with any drafting for any team besides where he was the head scout, and if people wanted to (which they probably will) they can even say that was the secret Buffalo super scout's doing.

He was clearly heavily involved in Boston's drafting.

Go through post-draft articles and videos throughout his time there, and he's the primary media go-to for explaining picks and draft strategy, etc. He wouldn't be put in that role if he wasn't in the thick of things.

And yeah, Boston stunk. Probably the worst drafting team in the NHL during his time there.

I honestly have no idea how he succeeded in Buffalo. He took over after Jack Bowman (Scotty's brother) died, and you have to wonder if Bowman - who was regarded as one of the best talent evaluators around - just had such a good group of scouts in place that things kept ticking over well.

If you sound reasoned and passionate enough I guess anything can be true.

 

[RandV]

No my arguement it that just judging by games playes is utterly stupid. And while i am exaggerating here, I rather have one top guy playing 800 games than 5 guys playing 2000 games but are nothing more than then career 3rd-4th liners which you can easily grab via free agency or for a 5th or 6th round draft pick.

It's an okay way to quickly pass a judgement on drafting, but I'd say it's the equivalent of a +/- stat, there's a whole lot more context you can apply here. Buffalo's drafting did well under Benning but they weren't considered draft geniuses like a Detroit.

 

[RandV]

Where did the myth about Benning being a genius drafter begin?

Personally I think it was a long term conspiracy by the Eastern media to build up Benning as the ideal replacement once they tore down Gillis, to completely screw us over even further.

 

[Peter10]

It's an okay way to quickly pass a judgement on drafting, but I'd say it's the equivalent of a +/- stat, there's a whole lot more context you can apply here. Buffalo's drafting did well under Benning but they weren't considered draft geniuses like a Detroit.

Well at least someone got my point.

 

[MarkMM]

He was the best in the league at finding NHL players, i.e. got the most NHL GP out of his draft picks. As seen in that article. You know your example's silly, I know you do.

What's silly is proclaiming there's only one way to measure a scout's track record. Can't judge a goalie by GAA alone, or a forward by points or a defenseman by +/-, and games played by players drafted is only one thing. His analogy is fair, getting lots of games of low quality play compared to some fewer games at higher impact is a fair debating point about which speaks more loudly to a scout's effectiveness, as well as how many picks it took to get those many NHL games. IIRC, the Canucks have had one of the fewest number of picks for quite some time, going back to Burke/Nonis we tend to trade away picks like candy. That seems to be getting a bit better under Benning.

People are debating Benning draft record, but should be more concerned about his 'trading record' imo.....I have a bad feeling the 'Nucks are going to linger around the playoff bar thanks to the incompetence of the Pacific Division, and they'll go over the clliff with UFA guys like Hamhuis, Vrbata, Weber and Bartkdowski rather than deal them for futures at the deadline.

Yeah, I think it's because his drafting record is the only defense/hope people who like him have to throw out there. His trading and signing record is just about indefensible, so if we start to question his scouting record, well, what's left? (No, meat and potatoes don't count.)

This thread is exactly what the forum needed - another excuse to pile on/defend Benning.

Refreshing!

I know, it sucks to discuss facts that shed light on how much Benning is a terrible GM when some people would rather bask in his Kool-Aid.

Everyone says they would have drafted him later like they knew this would happen.

But I agree with Bob Mackenzie when he said that is just ignorant. He said although he was drafted too high, he was still going to be picked top 10 regardless.

It just sucks that we got him.

Really? Might want to go back to threads dating back from BEFORE the draft when there were in fact many people on this board who did predict this.

 

[Jimson Hogarth*]

When Benning comes in he fires everyone except when he's in Buffalo where he kept everyone. Got it. #hflogic

 

[banme*]

His analogy is fair, getting lots of games of low quality play compared to some fewer games at higher impact is a fair debating point

Yes but that's not what happened. And that measures GP/pick btw, not total GP.

 

[arttk]

When Benning comes in he fires everyone except when he's in Buffalo where he kept everyone. Got it. #hflogic

Can't fire people when you are not the boss.
Difference between being a GM and head scout.

 

[drax0s]

I'd love it if someone could come up with supporting data for this theory about the existing Sabres scouting staff being the drivers of their success instead of Benning. Stuff like their hit rate before and after he was in charge to compare to their hit rate during...

Or we can just keep taking about how it "could be possible", I guess...

 

[WhoseLainesItAnyway]

I'd love it if someone could come up with supporting data for this theory about the existing Sabres scouting staff being the drivers of their success instead of Benning. Stuff like their hit rate before and after he was in charge to compare to their hit rate during...

Or we can just keep taking about how it "could be possible", I guess...

It's not about facts or supporting data, it's about the narrative. Benning no good, Benning bad, Benning dumb, hurp durp. He's playing the role of the scapegoat. Anything positive about him will be minimized, downplayed, and ignored while anything negative will be magnified, blown out of proportion, and even fabricated.

Just accept it, his job is pretty safe for now anyway. There's no point in trying to be the voice of reason, it's too late for that, just wait for something that'll shut them up like enough of his draft picks/acquisitions making an impact or him getting fired. In any case be prepared for the long haul. This market is just as much of a GM graveyard now as it was a goalie graveyard pre-Luongo, see what happened with Gillis, Nonis, Burke, etc. (notice a pattern?)

 

[Havre]

I'd love it if someone could come up with supporting data for this theory about the existing Sabres scouting staff being the drivers of their success instead of Benning. Stuff like their hit rate before and after he was in charge to compare to their hit rate during...

Or we can just keep taking about how it "could be possible", I guess...

Doesn't really matter. The data won't be even close to statistically significant either way.

I guess at best you could with several years of data say that someone might have 51-52% chance of actually being better than the other team at making picks.

You certainly wouldn't be able to conclude on anything by any sort of scientific standard.

It would have been fun to compare every single NHL team against let's say the "average" of a group of "experts"/magazines. My guess is that around 15 teams would have done slightly worse and about 15 teams would have done slightly better than what they would have done if they had stopped scouting and just made their picks based on those averages.

 

[coldsteel79]

It's not about facts or supporting data, it's about the narrative. Benning no good, Benning bad, Benning dumb, hurp durp. He's playing the role of the scapegoat. Anything positive about him will be minimized, downplayed, and ignored while anything negative will be magnified, blown out of proportion, and even fabricated.

Just accept it, his job is pretty safe for now anyway. There's no point in trying to be the voice of reason, it's too late for that, just wait for something that'll shut them up like enough of his draft picks/acquisitions making an impact or him getting fired. In any case be prepared for the long haul. This market is just as much of a GM graveyard now as it was a goalie graveyard pre-Luongo, see what happened with Gillis, Nonis, Burke, etc. (notice a pattern?)

Pretty much right on the money

 

[ATypicalCanadian]

He was the director of Amateur Scouting in Sept 98-2004(not sure which month it ended)

So he wasn't there in the 98 draft for them so it's from 99-2004

Here's an actual draft board.

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/draft/teams/dr00005054.html

 

[drax0s]

Doesn't really matter. The data won't be even close to statistically significant either way.

Most likely. The only reason I figured there might be a something to look for is that reported double the league average chance of finding a player during Benning's time that seemed significant. Then again, I haven't verified that figure.

It would have been fun to compare every single NHL team against let's say the "average" of a group of "experts"/magazines. My guess is that around 15 teams would have done slightly worse and about 15 teams would have done slightly better than what they would have done if they had stopped scouting and just made their picks based on those averages.

Heheh, just like mutual fund managers. . Either way, it was someone else's theory and the burden of proof lies on he who asserts. I'm not going to do the legwork on trying to disprove some unfounded claim.

 

[Ho Borvat]

The reason I believe Benning had more input in McCann is because Boston was a great team that year and thus would only be picking from 20-30. We can see Boston held the 25th pick and Vancouver traded Kesler to get the 24th pick. I don't think this was a coincidence. Instead, Benning was scouting prospects that whole year looking for guys that will fall in that position.

Jared McCann was a prospect who was very highly regarded throughout the year, and wasn't projected to make it into the 20's though. He was a player who fell on draft day. I am sure they had done their due diligence with McCann, but getting him at 24 was a steal and I doubt Benning expected him to be available in the 20's.

TSN had him ranked 16th at the draft, and Mackenzie has him at 12 in his mid-season rankings (immediately after Virtanen/Nylander).

http://www2.tsn.ca/draftcentre/feature/?id=9593

 

[pitseleh]

I can't seem to find when Benning became head of amateur scouting for the Bruins in 1998, so ignoring that draft, the Sabres drafted seven players the three years prior, 11 the five years prior and 22 players in the ten years prior who played 500+ games. Basically 2.2-2.3 players per year that turned into long time NHLers at any interval.

Without crunching numbers for other teams, that seems pretty outstanding. The Canucks drafted 15 players over the same stretch with 500+ GP, and that's with the benefit of two #2 picks (Buffalo only drafted above 11 once, at 7).

From 1999 to 2006, while Benning was definitely in charge, they drafted 13 players with 500+ games, plus Mike Weber and Nathan Gerbe, who are both about two seasons of games away, but have a shot. If you give Benning credit for both, that gets you to 2.1 players per year, which is roughly the same, and 1.8 without them. Giving Benning 1998 doesn't appreciably change the outcome.

The top end talent level was a higher under Benning, but its closer if you exclude top-5 pick Vanek, which the previous regime didn't have the benefit of.

That's a simplistic analysis, for sure, but interesting nonetheless.

 

[Ho Borvat]

I think the biggest concern is the fact that Benning is overseeing a rebuilding team, and hes not accumulating draft picks.

We've had 6 top-100 picks these past 2 seasons despite losing Kesler/Lack/Garrison/Forsling/Bieksa/Matthias/Richardson/Santorelli/Corrado

When you look at his seasons in Buffalo where he had success, he had like 10-12 picks every year (mind you this was when there was 9 rounds, but regardless).

If Bennings biggest strength is scouting, I want him to have 5-6 picks in the top-100 every season. Having 2 top-100 picks last season is an absolute failure on his part, and I consider last years draft a huge fail organizationally.

 

[RandV]

I think the biggest concern is the fact that Benning is overseeing a rebuilding team, and hes not accumulating draft picks.

We've had 6 top-100 picks these past 2 seasons despite losing Kesler/Lack/Garrison/Forsling/Bieksa/Matthias/Richardson/Santorelli/Corrado

When you look at his seasons in Buffalo where he had success, he had like 10-12 picks every year (mind you this was when there was 9 rounds, but regardless).

If Bennings biggest strength is scouting, I want him to have 5-6 picks in the top-100 every season. Having 2 top-100 picks last season is an absolute failure on his part, and I consider last years draft a huge fail organizationally.

I've come to the opinion that Benning is arrogant enough in his supposed drafting prowess that he feels he can do just as well as other teams with less picks and later in the rounds.

 

[Ho Borvat]

I've come to the opinion that Benning is arrogant enough in his supposed drafting prowess that he feels he can do just as well as other teams with less picks and later in the rounds.

I mean, Hockeys Future even considered us losers last draft (#2 after Boston). Its embarrassing to be a rebuilding team, with a master scout and be a draft day loser.

http://www.hockeysfuture.com/articles/125799/2015-nhl-draft-winner-losers-weekends-draft/2/

It really reminds me of Burke/Nonis time in Toronto when he thought he could shortcut a rebuild and it failed horrendously.

 

[topheavyhookjaw]

He was clearly heavily involved in Boston's drafting.

Go through post-draft articles and videos throughout his time there, and he's the primary media go-to for explaining picks and draft strategy, etc. He wouldn't be put in that role if he wasn't in the thick of things.

And yeah, Boston stunk. Probably the worst drafting team in the NHL during his time there.

I honestly have no idea how he succeeded in Buffalo. He took over after Jack Bowman (Scotty's brother) died, and you have to wonder if Bowman - who was regarded as one of the best talent evaluators around - just had such a good group of scouts in place that things kept ticking over well.

I don't know about the conjecture re: Bowman, however I think you're hitting on something key, which is that very few GMs seem to be able to duplicate drafting success on their own. Scouting staff are crucial and it underscores how much of the actual management of your staff matters to running a good drafting/development program.

Benning may in fact be a great scout, but if he's a bad manager it won't matter much. It's also worth considering that scouting/development/drafting is a zero sum game, and as the league adapts methodologies that were once successful no longer are. It's highly likely that his methods were great in the early 2000s, and are simply mediocre now as organizations improve and access to information about players/video/stats etc is easier to get.

 

[drax0s]

I guess if we're talking possibilities, it's also possible that he traded his soul for 6 years of good drafting in Buffalo. He could also have had access to a drafting genie who he has since lost somewhere in his cupboard. Finally, it's possible that his father Elmer was the drafting guru and they've been feuding since his Bruins days because Elmer's favorite team is Montreal.

 

[Toxic0n]

It's not about facts or supporting data, it's about the narrative. Benning no good, Benning bad, Benning dumb, hurp durp. He's playing the role of the scapegoat. Anything positive about him will be minimized, downplayed, and ignored while anything negative will be magnified, blown out of proportion, and even fabricated.

Yeah, nobody gave Benning any credit for the Vrbata signing, the Bieksa trade or McCann pick. It was totally ignored and downplayed by everyone.
Oh, poor Benning.

Herp derp indeed

Benning