Discussion in 'Vancouver Canucks' started by FacepalmBenning, Jan 23, 2019.
Ignoring the question and trolling instead isn't a good look
lmao this is such a FAN post, so pedantic
No they didn't use the word re-build. But they made more re-build moves in one season than Benning has his entire tenure.
to the classic Benning lines like
"this is a team we can turn around in a hurry"
" I like our core players. Our core players are, I feel, high-character people, so I am happy with that part of it"
"Our vision is we want to become a four-line team. You watch the playoffs now, the final four teams that are playing. They have four lines that contribute. We want our third and fourth lines to have an important role in the team winning. We want these guys to be an important part of the team. We have some work to do maybe in getting to that point but we want to be a four-line, six-D complete team."
"I would like to see a little more physicality from the third and fourth lines ... playing with a little more grit to take some of the heat off the first two lines. They are the skilled guys and let them play, but when the third and fourth lines play let’s get some offensive zone time and spend some time in the other team’s end ... Vancouver plays in maybe the toughest division in the league and to win our division and to keep going we are going to have to go through the LAs, the Anaheims and the San Joses. They are big, heavy teams. When we talk to our scouting staffs, one of our mandates will be let’s try to get a little bit bigger, let’s get a little more rugged so we can play both styles. We can play a skilled skating style when need be, but when it is a rugged physical game we can play that style, too."
Really the fact fans had to defend Benning by saying things like "he just has to say that" should tell you all you need to know
That last quote about wanting 2 skilled lines and 2 grinding lines makes me want to bang my head against the wall. That is why when injuries hit every year this team looks like AHL team. And, the pacific is usually the weakest division year after year.
That was from when he was hired
Flashback to this summer
~he's learning on the job guys!~
What did Linden's letter to the season ticket holders say last season? The season before?
Benning made the comment about turning things around in a hurry when he first signed on. No doubt his goal wasn't to "rebuild" but to return the Canucks back to the playoffs. That doesn't mean he didn't talk about getting younger, faster, more skilled, tougher to play against etc. and make moves to that effect. Obviously if you only have one definition of rebuild and that is that every move should be about maximizing the future (i.e. draft picks) then Benning isn't that guy from Day 1. That doesn't change the fact that in this recent interview that this thread was discussing his message is that he's focused on the future so don't expect them to be major buyers at the deadline.
The point I made in my last post was that Babcock wasn't the type of coach you go through a rebuild with either if you're expecting him to simply give the young guys an opportunity to play and develop them. Detroit fans told Leafs fans that from Day 1. The Babcock quote I posted reflects what Babcock is known for. Luckily for Babcock, the Leafs' timeline was accelerated.
The message from the Rangers is obviously different from the type of message the Canucks have been giving their fans. The Rangers are basically saying expect more of the players they are familiar with to be traded and they have certainly accumulated draft picks. The Canucks message is usually they won't be trading their core players or veterans like the Sedins. Even this recent interview he's basically saying it's up to the team to make the playoffs and don't expect the team to be buyers or sellers. My point about Sather was was that Sather wasn't a patient rebuilder either. So ya the Rangers are selling off and accumulating draft picks, but I say don't expect them to bottom feed a few years to accumulate a couple of bottom 5 picks / shot at #1. Then again, Sather isn't in charge.
I argued that until I was blue in the face last year. You can compare the moves to each and every strategy people have mentioned (re-tool, rebuild, stealth tank, intentional tank etc) and what you will find is a GM that has been completely inconsistent in whatever plan he is supposedly running with at the time and piss poor execution. Pat on the back for Boeser and Stecher. Less of a pat on the back for Pettersson (after all they were gifted a high pick because of the poor execution). But wow the rest is really just the hockey worlds illustration of the Dilbert principle.
I've dislike Benning for probably longer than anyone on this board but saying he deserves less on the pat of the back for the Peterssen pick is just being a hater.
Peterssen was an unreal pick and Benning deserves huge props for that.
He gets the props, but how much do you think he had to do with it? His scouts made a list and he changed it?
The problem with fans rating GM's is that for the most part we don't actually have a clue how it works. We can watch behind the scenes videos until the cows come home, but really we don't know.
I have a hard time reconciling the idea that a team pays people to scout amateurs as an occupation but ultimately the credit goes to the guy at the top.
The scouts obviously play a big role but Benning ultimately has to make the final decision. How he comes to his decision doesn't matter as the GM all that matters is the results.
Also your kidding yourself if you don't think Benning is watching tons of tape himself, especially on the top prospects.
That's the point I'm making.....the result is all that matters....to us.....because we don't know the process.
I also won't ever be confused as a Benning fan, but if we are to bash him for the Joulevi/Virtanen pick because "the result is all that matters", then turn around and not give him all the credit in the world for Petterson, well that seems contradictory to me.
How he landed the #5 pick, you can argue his incompetency there, but who he chose with that pick, I think he deserve to be praised for that.
Pettersson was an off the board move.
I don't like Benning but it was a good pick. Compared to Juolevi (who he picked based on need) and Virtanen (based on...home town factor? Size? I'm not really sure here) or even Hughes (definitely BPA) Pettersson was not an obvious choice and has so far paid incredible dividends.
This doesn't some how exonerate him from previous mistakes or where the team placed in order to get that pick or the previous picks but how blind to your narrative does one have to be to crap on his previous two picks as being his fault while saying it was his scouts that picked Petey?
The problem is that we have tons of media reports and evidence linking the scouting staff and specific scouts to Pettersson and Boeser and those look like staff picks the GM signed off on, while at the same time reports and evidence indicates the staff were overruled and management was driving the Virtanen/Juolevi picks.
Sources please...Oh right..you dont have any.
So I'm trying so look at the team as being half full and I'm trolling and you with your never ending benning hate are not.
This stuff has been linked here a ton of times. I’m not going to waste my time digging it up every time a Benning Bot doesn’t like hearing it.
Yawn.....and still doesn't hold any water...Pointless,as usual.
You post in every thread and have seen the stuff I’m talking about and know damned well it exists and is credible, but because you don’t want to have the discussion you just waste everyone’s time with the ‘SOURCE?’ crap.
31 Thoughts: Rogers wanted NHL trade deadline in primetime - Sportsnet.ca
Looking back at the 2015 draft, most teams concede the Canucks rated Boeser higher than anyone else. Regional scout Ted Hampson and current director of player development Ryan Johnson pushed hardest. Hampson handles Minnesota — where Boeser is from — and Johnson went to NCAA North Dakota, Boeser’s college choice. I’m not sure Vancouver was worried anyone would take him earlier than 23rd, but the Wild made them a bit nervous because it was his home state. This has turned out to be a huge steal for them.
Ben Kuzma: Delorme delivered first hard sell to get Pettersson on Canucks’ draft radar
“Ronnie saw him early and was a loud voice for him right from the start — even before any of us had seen him,” recalled Canucks general manager Jim Benning. “He was in my office and said ‘we’ve really got to watch this guy.’ He loved his skill and hockey sense.
PressReader.com - Connecting People Through News
Scroll a bit to find the quotes of Gradin thinking the world of Nylander but Benning wanting "meat and potato" players because playoffs
not hard stuff here pastor
Thanks. All this stuff (and a bunch more) have been linked countless times here and the usual suspects have seen all of it.
Nobody should have to list sources anymore for making the statement that Pettersson and Boeser were scout-driven picks.
All ‘SOURCE?’ is is a way to deflect from information they don’t want to hear and discussions they don’t want to have.
It was a statistical analysis pick. No way Jim had much of a hand in that.
Then he shouldn’t get blamed for the Virtanen / Juolevi picks
Quite the double standards, eh? If you say leivo was a good trade they say 'but they could have got him on waivers. Or 'JB's an idiot because there was a rumour he tried to trade Boeser"
He never wanted to trade Boeser... but he tried to trade the pick that was eventually used to draft Boeser.
Separate names with a comma.