Jim Elmer Benning on Sportsnet 650 Today (Jan. 23) around 4 PM

Pastor Of Muppetz

Registered User
Oct 1, 2017
25,983
15,854
EP should be stronger and more experienced, Boeser won't be coming off a brutal injury, and Horvat will be Horvat....
Many rookies including Bazral who had an incredible rookie season regressed in year 2, even Brock has regressed. Pettersson and his 25% shooting will regress as well; there’s as much precedent for him to regress as there is to improve.

A trade or UFA signing will have to be made for a top 6 winger.and if we don’t get this? We haven’t signed one in a few years

Sutter,I believe will be traded in the off season..Why would Beagle be worse ?..He wiped the floor with the rest of the players as far as fitness was concerned..
That’s great that he’s a beast in the gym however his on ice production is more important and we’ve have to agree to disagree on his worth.

Other solid bottom 6 players like Motte,Leivo,Roussel,Gaudette will continue where they left off..Granlund,I dont think will be re-signed.
Rousell is going to be 30 next year and leivo isn’t really a bottom 6type player but sure

On D,..Hughes will push players down the depth chart, and help the PP..Edler still has a few more years in him,and Tanev is 30 (not ancient)..A UFA d-man will have to be signed (Myers..?,Gardiner.?)..Along with Hutton and Stecher,Gudbranson..and young players -
Hughes is going to be sheltered big time next year at even strength, what history of pro scouting gives you confidence that benning can sign a good dman?
If you said gudbrandson was traded as a reason to improve the defense I’d agree but the fact that you think the worst dman in the league is a positive (or you wouldn’t have mentioned him) is mind numbing


Juolevi,Woo,Brisbois,Sautner,Rathbone all knocking at the door.juloevi, woo Rathbone are no where near ready and won’t be of help next year; briesbois and saunter if your expecting to come in as more than 6/7 is crazy talk.

We now have an established #1 goalie, and hopefully Demko has an injury free season.

I beg to differ on the WC teams not regressing..All of the California teams have older cores, and LA and Anaheim in particular are due for rebuilds..Same goes for the Hawks and the Wild...The Canucks are a scrappy team that does not give up, and are well coached....They will make the playoffs next year.

You also ignored the fact that they have all been historically bad this year and the canucks are barely keeping pace. As well all those teams also have young guys that can come in and improve or get a bounce back season from their stars. Writing them off is crazy.
Many players have a tough time in their 2nd year..I don't see that with EP,I see him going to another level, quite honestly..Boeser had a tough first part of the year..could not train properly, which then led to groin issues..I look to see him rebound with a proper healthy off season...You're saying they will regress,I'm not.

This off season JB will sign a winger and a D-man...my .02 cents..Watch and wait...The landscape of this team has changed with the emergence of EP (and possibly Hughes)..They will attract UFA's

I'm assuming you think the Canucks are going to go full Oilers (circus) next season?
 
Last edited:

4Twenty

Registered User
Dec 18, 2018
9,987
11,831
I see him as a 3rd line winger..I dont see him in the top 6 eventually..even though he can slot into that role.
This is the same problem you had with your evaluations of Granlund. You project them as good 3rd liners when they need 1st line or top 6 usage to put up reasonable 3rd line numbers.

I think you'll find the same thing with Leivo.

I had another post in here asking you about being on the right track. Would love to read your response.
 

Pastor Of Muppetz

Registered User
Oct 1, 2017
25,983
15,854
This is the same problem you had with your evaluations of Granlund. You project them as good 3rd liners when they need 1st line or top 6 usage to put up reasonable 3rd line numbers.

I think you'll find the same thing with Leivo.

I had another post in here asking you about being on the right track. Would love to read your response.
Yes they are on the right track, but when you are missing both top pairing D-men,a top 6 winger, a top 9 forward, a shutdown centre,..and your backup goaltender..You have to assume a bit of context in the results.
 

me2

Go ahead foot
Jun 28, 2002
37,903
5,595
Make my day.
It's naive to thing that a GM change would have no effect on the Canucks scouting/drafting. As I explained in my post, there's no guarantee that that is the case.

And Benning staying could also impact the draft for worse going forward as help at it. It is a weak argument for keeping him.

A GM can certainly impact the draft. Like I said, I wouldn't underestimate the impact a GM can make to the team's drafting. It's illogical to assume that there would be no effect.

The only reason people push scouting hard as a reason to keep Benning is he fails every other GM metric, and fails them badly. Scouting is last refuge of desperate Benning backers, they have nothing else they can put forward.
 

F A N

Registered User
Aug 12, 2005
18,626
5,890
This is the same problem you had with your evaluations of Granlund. You project them as good 3rd liners when they need 1st line or top 6 usage to put up reasonable 3rd line numbers.

I think you'll find the same thing with Leivo.

I had another post in here asking you about being on the right track. Would love to read your response.

The reverse is also true though. There is a certain poster here who thinks that if you simply gave Brendan Gaunce top6 minutes and PP time he will score 20 goals.

But I agree with your points. At the end of the day, it also depends on who is on your 3rd line and deployment. If Leivo is playing with Gaudette and say Roussel or Virtanen, I think Leivo can put up decent 3rd line numbers, provided that they aren't deployed as a defensive line with over 65% defensive zone starts. Although it is a small sample size, Leivo has produced offensively in limited minutes with the Leafs and with expanded minutes here.
 

dwarf

Registered User
Feb 13, 2007
1,942
229
Victoria, B.C.
Was there any discussion about acquiring draft picks this trade deadline? Or was that too tough a question for them to ask?
 

Melvin

21/12/05
Sep 29, 2017
15,198
28,055
Montreal, QC
And Benning staying could also impact the draft for worse going forward as help at it. It is a weak argument for keeping him.



The only reason people push scouting hard as a reason to keep Benning is he fails every other GM metric, and fails them badly. Scouting is last refuge of desperate Benning backers, they have nothing else they can put forward.

I don’t even know if that’s true, to be honest. These people just seem to be absolutely obsessed with the draft to the expense of literally everything else that happens. Note that there is a near 100% overlap between these posters and the ones who hate Gillis because he failed to draft superstars with the 29th overall pick.

I don’t really know how to describe it, but it like drafting good players is more important to them than building an NHL team, regardless of all context. Like if we were an elite team right now but benning had traded away all our picks I suspect they would hate him (and we would probably like him.)
 

y2kcanucks

Le Sex God
Aug 3, 2006
71,229
10,319
Surrey, BC
Many players have a tough time in their 2nd year..I don't see that with EP,I see him going to another level, quite honestly..Boeser had a tough first part of the year..could not train properly, which then led to groin issues..I look to see him rebound with a proper healthy off season...You're saying they will regress,I'm not.

This off season JB will sign a winger and a D-man...my .02 cents..Watch and wait...The landscape of this team has changed with the emergence of EP (and possibly Hughes)..They will attract UFA's

I'm assuming you think the Canucks are going to go full Oilers (circus) next season?

Pettersson is already shooting at a historically high SH%. If you don't think that will come down I don't know what to say to you.
 

xtra

Registered User
May 19, 2002
8,323
4,765
Vancouver
Visit site
Many players have a tough time in their 2nd year..I don't see that with EP,I see him going to another level, quite honestly..Boeser had a tough first part of the year..could not train properly, which then led to groin issues..I look to see him rebound with a proper healthy off season...You're saying they will regress,I'm not.

This off season JB will sign a winger and a D-man...my .02 cents..Watch and wait...The landscape of this team has changed with the emergence of EP (and possibly Hughes)..They will attract UFA's

I'm assuming you think the Canucks are going to go full Oilers (circus) next season?

I believe we are already a circus with signing 4th liners to 4year contracts to win one additional faceoff every 2 games.

JB signing which winger And dman makes a difference. But even if he signed a dman which dman can you use as evidence he knows what to look for in a pro dman?

I do expect Petterssons shooting to regress as I don’t expect him to be able to double his shots on goal and maintain a 17%shooting pace or get roughly 4 times as many shots of his shooting falls to 12% which is still good.
 

rypper

21-12-05 it's finally over.
Dec 22, 2006
16,200
19,946
Was there any discussion about acquiring draft picks this trade deadline? Or was that too tough a question for them to ask?

Jim said that teams weren't really trading draft picks last deadline, and then there were a record (hyperbole) number of picks moved. He seemed to be stuck in the mindset of doing "hockey trades" much like he's been saying this year.
 

Peen

Rejoicing in a Benning-free world
Oct 6, 2013
29,639
24,983
This is the same problem you had with your evaluations of Granlund. You project them as good 3rd liners when they need 1st line or top 6 usage to put up reasonable 3rd line numbers.

I think you'll find the same thing with Leivo.

I had another post in here asking you about being on the right track. Would love to read your response.
I don't think Leivo will need the same.

I remember his advanced stats in lower minute roles were quite good. Will have to dig up later.
 

Bleach Clean

Registered User
Aug 9, 2006
26,994
6,571
I don’t even know if that’s true, to be honest. These people just seem to be absolutely obsessed with the draft to the expense of literally everything else that happens. Note that there is a near 100% overlap between these posters and the ones who hate Gillis because he failed to draft superstars with the 29th overall pick.

I don’t really know how to describe it, but it like drafting good players is more important to them than building an NHL team, regardless of all context. Like if we were an elite team right now but benning had traded away all our picks I suspect they would hate him (and we would probably like him.)


I think me2 has the right interpretation here.

Scouting is the last bastion of the Benning backer because there really isn't anything else that can be put forward. I had remarked on this earlier, using PoM's form of argument as an example.

Here's the tell: When talking about pick accrual and the proper methodology to a rebuild, where are these supposedly obsessed draftists? They often (not always) adopt the position of supporting Benning's reticence to accrue picks in order to support his retool methodology. That's the big reveal. If these same posters were draft zealots, pick accrual would be of the highest priority. Bar none. However, such a position pits them against Benning's pick aversion. Hence, the position switch.

Attacking Gillis' drafting is a natural byproduct of supporting Benning's draft work. A lot of the same posters that hate Benning's work overall are/were Gillis supporters. Makes sense on that front.
 
Last edited:

geebaan

7th round busted
Oct 27, 2012
10,180
8,747
Steps forward and steps back are meaningless when talking about 2-3 spots in the relative standings. In the absolute standings they are still well shy of a 95 point pace. (What they will probably need next year to make it).

Their underlying metrics suck. So far, they have relied heavily on conversion to stay around their pace of the prior 3 years.... To repeat: At the 50 game mark their points pace was the same/similar to what had happened before.

A regression will take place. Conversion will again follow shot rates. For them and for the teams around them.

Oh I’m with you, it was certainly a question for POM. Just wondering what it would take for him to realize what this team actually is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jack Burton

geebaan

7th round busted
Oct 27, 2012
10,180
8,747
Then..I'm completely wrong....But why would they take a step back.?....why would they regress?..Are they old?.(while numerous teams in the Western Conference are on a 'down' cycle).Do they have a ****ty coach..?..Are there internal problems within the team?...At this point.they are adding layer upon layer of young talent...Sorry,but not seeing this go backwards...They are on the ascendant.

Of course you can be like' Melvin' who truly believes the Canucks are missing the playoffs (and becoming the Oilers) for the next 5 years....Your call?

Okay better question, would what they are doing now also be acceptable for next year?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jack Burton

Melvin

21/12/05
Sep 29, 2017
15,198
28,055
Montreal, QC
I think me2 has the right interpretation here.

Scouting is the last bastion of the Benning backer because there really isn't anything else that can be put forward. I had remarked on this earlier, using PoM's form of argument as an example.

Here's the tell: When talking about pick accrual and the proper methodology to a rebuild, where are these supposedly obsessed draftists? They often (not always) adopt the position of supporting Benning's reticence to accrue picks in order to support his retool methodology. That's the big reveal. If these same posters were draft zealots, pick accrual would be of the highest priority. Bar none. However, such a position pits them against Benning's pick aversion. Hence, the position switch.

Attacking Gillis' drafting is a natural byproduct of supporting Benning's draft work. A lot of the same posters that hate Benning's work overall are/were Gillis supporters. Makes sense on that front.

Are they? I can think of one: FAN. The rest all think Gillis was crap and relentlessly slam him because drafting. Almost all of them go out of their way to attack Gillis players like Markstrom, Hutton, Biega in every gdt and were clearly not supportive of him as a GM because drafting.

I don't think any of them participate in such discussions about the proper strategy to retool / rebuild, because they are only focused on the draft. They tend not to express an opinion on those topics but only try to bring the discussion back to drafting and how Benning is better than Gillis because Pettersson is better than Gaunce and what is context?

I don't think they obsess over drafting because they have some need to defend Benning (which would he borne of what, exactly?) Rather, I think they are obsessed with drafting because they have some need to cling to the ephereal magic of draft "ability," hated Gillis because most of his picks busted and like Benning because "he got us Pettersson."
 
Last edited:

me2

Go ahead foot
Jun 28, 2002
37,903
5,595
Make my day.
Yes and no. Scoring is going up...I think we're going to start to see a lot of 100+ point players again. You have 7-10 guys who could reach that level this year. Pettersson is on a 90 point pace in his rookie year. If things remain I expect that 120 point pace isn't out of the question. Likely not next year though.

On Horvat I agree...he's at a 60+ pace right now this year and I struggle to see much more than a 60-70 point two-way beast.

Boeser is the curious one. He's a 37 goal pace scorer through his first 100 some odd games. I don't think a consistent 45-50 goal scorer is out of the question. That's prrety significant offense wise...raising team output 0.1 G/G on his own. That said his biggest impat will be if he figures out the defensive side of the puck (or puts in the effort). That could be huge with a 100+ point center with Datsyuk Selke abilities.

Ovechkin scored 65 goals in 07-08 and still only got 112 points. Kucherov is on track for 120-130 and but the two guys flanking him are on track 98 and 108 point.

The problem with Pettersson scoring 120 is that he will need two 80+ point guys flanking him. Even if he scores 40 goals himself he still needs assists on another 80, if he scores 30 he needs 90 assists. Boeser could get 40+, and Pettersson will get assists on ~75+% most of those, but I'm not sure were the other 50-60 goals are going to come from based on the current roster.

I agree on Horvat. He is a classic 60 point guy, decent skill set and size but he lacks the passing game/high end vision to really dominate the scoreboard.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jack Burton

Bleach Clean

Registered User
Aug 9, 2006
26,994
6,571
Are they? I can think of one: FAN. The rest all think Gillis was crap and relentlessly slam him because drafting. Almost all of them go out of their way to attack Gillis players like Markstrom, Hutton, Biega in every gdt and were clearly not supportive of him as a GM because drafting.

I don't think any of them participate in such discussions about the proper strategy to retool / rebuild, because they are only focused on the draft. They tend not to express an opinion on those topics but only try to bring the discussion back to drafting and how Benning is better than Gillis because Pettersson is better than Gaunce and what is context?

I don't think they obsess over drafting because they have some need to defend Benning (which would he borne of what, exactly?) Rather, I think they are obsessed with drafting because they have some need to cling to the ephereal magic of draft "ability," hated Gillis because most of his picks busted and like Benning because "he got us Pettersson."


Not sure what your point is about FAN?

Doesn't the fact that posters attack Markstrom and Biega mean that poster opinion (of the ones you mention) is not solely isolated to or borne from the draft?

I've seen Benning backers post about how there's not one way to rebuild, that pick surplus not necessary and that Benning's success rates are good enough despite a lack of picks. You have not?

The need to defend Benning is borne from witnessing and approving of his overall body of work. That's the initial take. However, that take runs anathema to the general opinion here. And so, when the defense of Benning's overall body of work is expressed, and undoubtedly fails, the last refuge becomes the draft. Mostly because it's so difficult to prove/disprove baselines in this area.

Here's a question for you: If someone could accurately defend Benning's trade work, and could properly marry this work to his pro scouting decisions overall, would you expect the conversation to be isolated to the draft alone or would trade work get more air time?

The idiot savant theory is not mutually exclusive to the draft as a last refuge either. They work together rather well, actually.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Jack Burton

Melvin

21/12/05
Sep 29, 2017
15,198
28,055
Montreal, QC
Not sure what your point is about FAN?

Doesn't the fact that posters attack Markstrom and Biega mean that poster opinion (of the ones you mention) is not solely isolated to or borne from the draft?

I've seen Benning backers post about how there's no one way to rebuild, that pick surplus not necessary and that Benning's success rates are good enough despite a lack of picks. You have not?

The need to defend Benning is borne from witnessing and approving of his overall body of work. That's the initial take. However, that take runs anathema to the general opinion here. And so, when the defense of Benning's overall body of work is expressed, and undoubtedly fails, the last refuge is the draft. Mostly because it's so difficult to prove/disprove baselines in this area.

Here's a question for you: If someone could accurately defend Benning's trade work, and could properly marry this work to his pro scouting decisions overall, would you expect the conversation to be isolated to the draft alone or would trade work get more air time?

The idiot savant theory is not mutually exclusive to the draft as a last refuge either. They work together rather well, actually.

Fan is the only one I know who claims to like both Benning and Gillis. All of the rest of the Benning crowd loathe Gillis.

Perhaps I have it wrong and their loathing of Gillis is why they are so desperate to defend all of Benning's moves. Maybe they would have acted the same regardless of who came after. I would honestly like to understand their perspective but it is difficult. Benning has done such an objectively terrible job to this point, that a bizarre fixation on drafting irrespective of all else is all I could think of.
 

Bleach Clean

Registered User
Aug 9, 2006
26,994
6,571
Fan is the only one I know who claims to like both Benning and Gillis. All of the rest of the Benning crowd loathe Gillis.

Perhaps I have it wrong and their loathing of Gillis is why they are so desperate to defend all of Benning's moves. Maybe they would have acted the same regardless of who came after. I would honestly like to understand their perspective but it is difficult. Benning has done such an objectively terrible job to this point, that a bizarre fixation on drafting irrespective of all else is all I could think of.


Well, that's FAN's claim anyway. Regardless, he's written enough here where that overarching parallel is rendered quite meaningless IMO. Gillis and Benning could not be more different from one another.

To the drafting: I would say, the motivation to defend or promote the drafting really is besides the point. Initially, it could be anything. Poster X could hate Gillis. Poster Y could actually think Benning is a drafting savant. It could just be a position adopted in opposition to the majority opinion here... Whatever. I'm talking about why it persists. The drafting talk has found purchase because it's the hardest area to baseline. The development terms are long and the bar for success/failure is debatable. As a result, it's far easier to obfuscate the matter at hand.

I mean, DTS even made the case that he wanted Benning removed as GM, but wanted him around for his drafting in some capacity. Bad enough to be fired/let go, but good enough somehow to be recognized as integral.
 

Pastor Of Muppetz

Registered User
Oct 1, 2017
25,983
15,854
Funny, some of the posters here getting their panties in a bunch because I predicted the Canucks to make the playoffs next season..Bottom line, they either will or they won't,..I've outlined why I think they will, and I'm sticking to it...

It will be very interesting to see where the experts in the media predict the Canucks to finish next season?
 

Melvin

21/12/05
Sep 29, 2017
15,198
28,055
Montreal, QC
Well, that's FAN's claim anyway. Regardless, he's written enough here where that overarching parallel is rendered quite meaningless IMO. Gillis and Benning could not be more different from one another.

To the drafting: I would say, the motivation to defend or promote the drafting really is besides the point. Initially, it could be anything. Poster X could hate Gillis. Poster Y could actually think Benning is a drafting savant. It could just be a position adopted in opposition to the majority opinion here... Whatever. I'm talking about why it persists. The drafting talk has found purchase because it's the hardest area to baseline. The development terms are long and the bar for success/failure is debatable. As a result, it's far easier to obfuscate the matter at hand.

I mean, DTS even made the case that he wanted Benning removed as GM, but wanted him around for his drafting in some capacity. Bad enough to be fired/let go, but good enough somehow to be recognized as integral.

I just don't agree that they are so focused on drafting because they have some need to prop up Benning as a GM. That doesn't make much sense to me.

Regardless it is continuously depressing thst the man can literally f*** everything else up, but as long as he keeps his first round pick and uses it to select one of the five players that everyone on the planet has identified as a reasonable selection, he's golden.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rypper

Bleach Clean

Registered User
Aug 9, 2006
26,994
6,571
I just don't agree that they are so focused on drafting because they have some need to prop up Benning as a GM. That doesn't make much sense to me.

Regardless it is continuously depressing thst the man can literally **** everything else up, but as long as he keeps his first round pick and uses it to select one of the five players that everyone on the planet has identified as a reasonable selection, he's golden.


Essentially... yeah.
 

mathonwy

Positively #toxic
Jan 21, 2008
19,022
9,942
The decision to originally support Benning wasn’t one that was rooted in logic. It was rooted in faith.

5 years later and a team full of garbage, that root cause hasn’t changed.

Why does the pro-Benning crowd fixate on drafting?

Because drafting is their last Alamo in arguments that are vague enough (in their minds) to continue to support a certifiable moron as GM.

And lucking into Petey provides all the miracle belief evidence that they require to justify their original faith-based decision to support Benning.

This is actually a pretty significant event in Canuck history and very clearly delineates the type of sports fan one is.

Pro-Benning fans believe in faith. Con-Benning fans believe in logic.

And unlike Melnyk who has pissed off both camps by taking a machete to the team by trading away consensus fan favourites, Benning has only bled the team little by little which the logic-based sports fan are complaining to high heaven about because this consistent bleeding represents a core incompetence in this team's management and ownership while on the other hand faith-based sports fan see it all as meaningless, one-ofs, little impact and whiny because... "anything can happen in the playoffs."

Imo.
 
Last edited:

tantalum

Hope for the best. Expect the worst
Sponsor
Apr 2, 2002
25,087
13,874
Missouri
Ovechkin scored 65 goals in 07-08 and still only got 112 points. Kucherov is on track for 120-130 and but the two guys flanking him are on track 98 and 108 point.

The problem with Pettersson scoring 120 is that he will need two 80+ point guys flanking him. Even if he scores 40 goals himself he still needs assists on another 80, if he scores 30 he needs 90 assists. Boeser could get 40+, and Pettersson will get assists on ~75+% most of those, but I'm not sure were the other 50-60 goals are going to come from based on the current roster.

I agree on Horvat. He is a classic 60 point guy, decent skill set and size but he lacks the passing game/high end vision to really dominate the scoreboard.

Current roster I agree. I’m talking more ceiling rather than next year type of thing.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->