Management Thread. A Fist Full of Dollars: Gunslinger Final Edition, Pt IlI

Status
Not open for further replies.

bossram

Registered User
Sep 25, 2013
15,324
14,391
Victoria
Benning hadn't bungled his off-season at all. He held firm with a lowball OEL offer, and didn't get sucked into giving bad deals to Tanev or Markstrom. He waited patiently to capitalize on a situation like the Schmidt one (what people have been demanding for him to do). McCrimmon phoned him up... why?

This is so obviously wrong. How was he "waiting patiently to capitalize" on a cap-dump type situation when his absolute #1 priority was to blow his cap space on OEL? How would that allow for "waiting to capitalize" on a cap-dump?

The Schmidt situation came together after Benning exhausted his other options (Tanev, Barrie, etc). Credit to him for making a good trade, but that was never the plan. It wasn't foresight. It's painfully obvious Benning was extremely fortunate that he had the opportunity to make that deal. If any of his other attempts actually worked (OEL, Tanev, Barrie) then he can't make the Schmidt trade.

Yes, it was a good deal. But Benning's offseason strategy and evaluation of players (OEL and Barrie were big no-nos for me) was just clearly wrong.
 

CantStoptheBrock

Registered User
Jun 26, 2020
176
138
This is so obviously wrong. How was he "waiting patiently to capitalize" on a cap-dump type situation when his absolute #1 priority was to blow his cap space on OEL? How would that allow for "waiting to capitalize" on a cap-dump?

The Schmidt situation came together after Benning exhausted his other options (Tanev, Barrie, etc). Credit to him for making a good trade, but that was never the plan. It wasn't foresight. It's painfully obvious Benning was extremely fortunate that he had the opportunity to make that deal. If any of his other attempts actually worked (OEL, Tanev, Barrie) then he can't make the Schmidt trade.

Yes, it was a good deal. But Benning's offseason strategy and evaluation of players (OEL and Barrie were big no-nos for me) was just clearly wrong.
You have no idea the order of priorities for Benning. The Canucks obviously needed a top-4 defenceman so it makes sense that there were multiple balls in the air. It's been reported that the Schmidt deal was in place before it actually transpired. I haven't seen any sources for this "Canucks offered more than Edmonton for Barrie" except for more conspiracy theory "connecting the dots."

Overall, it's amusing that Benning can acquire a top 10-15 defenceman in the game for a 3rd round pick, and still this forum finds a way to paint it as incompetence. Almost every GM in the history of the league would be picked apart to death by the method of evaluation on this forum.
 

ChilliBilly

Registered User
Aug 22, 2007
7,081
4,329
chilliwacki
You have no idea the order of priorities for Benning. The Canucks obviously needed a top-4 defenceman so it makes sense that there were multiple balls in the air. It's been reported that the Schmidt deal was in place before it actually transpired. I haven't seen any sources for this "Canucks offered more than Edmonton for Barrie" except for more conspiracy theory "connecting the dots."

Overall, it's amusing that Benning can acquire a top 10-15 defenceman in the game for a 3rd round pick, and still this forum finds a way to paint it as incompetence. Almost every GM in the history of the league would be picked apart to death by the method of evaluation on this forum.

The sad part is that teams are desperate for salary dumps, and if we had never signed one UFA we would be way ahead right now. JB gets credit for this one, though its not like Schmidt is on a cheap contract, the amount is fair. In hindsight Miller was a decent deal, though at the time (I was at the draft) I was peeved. Lotto team for 4 years are insane to trade 1st round picks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MarkMM

canuckking1

Registered User
Feb 8, 2015
12,641
13,569
Looking like a 48 game season and a mid January start is becoming more likely. Would this have any impact on contracts for Petey and Hughes? Let’s say they paced for 92 and 72 points respectively. How much weight would that hold in contract negotiations in Pace vs actual production? Pettersson has slowed down in the last 1/4
Of the season in back to back years.
 

Hodgy

Registered User
Feb 23, 2012
4,270
4,243
Do you always feel a need to go off on a hysterical rant over Jim Bennings comments..?...He starts off every season how he wants the team to be 'competitive', and like cantstopthebrock mentions, these quotes and 'positivity spins' are to create excitement for the fanbase.(and sell tickets, its a business)...I'll ask you again, what do you expect him to say?

I think that if he didn’t actually think we could compete with the top teams in four or so years from taking over, then he could have just said that he hoped they would but that there was a lot of work to do. The notion that he had to come out and set out what he believed were realistic expectations for public relations reasons is a total fiction. It’s also at odds with reality. Like, it’s really not surprising that Jim Benning thought this team would realistically compete with the top teams in four years. How many GMs realistically expect a “retool” to take more than four years? And all of his moves after this statement were consistent with his intention to compete with the top teams in the league in that four years. With that said, he obviously adjusted his expectations a few years in when his team was like literally the shittiest team in the league, but that’s not surprising nor deserving of any praise.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Peter10 and Peen

MS

1%er
Mar 18, 2002
53,367
83,458
Vancouver, BC
Benning hadn't bungled his off-season at all. He held firm with a lowball OEL offer, and didn't get sucked into giving bad deals to Tanev or Markstrom. He waited patiently to capitalize on a situation like the Schmidt one (what people have been demanding for him to do). McCrimmon phoned him up... why?

What on earth are you talking about?

Benning wasn't 'waiting patiently to capitalize on a situation'. He was flailing madly trying to make a high-profile move happen.

His main plan to make a huge deal for OEL. He tried very had to make that happen, and it wasn't a 'lowball offer' - apparently it was Demko plus high picks plus prospects, which is a mint for a guy whose contract should mean nobody should even want him on waivers. And the deal didn't fail because it was a lowball, it failed because it hinged on signing Markstrom. Arizona demanded Demko and we could only make that deal if Markstrom signed, and then when he didn't it fell apart.

Then he moved on to giving an absolutely stupid offer to a terrible fit in Tyson Barrie, and was saved because Barrie took a much lower offer from Edmonton.

Then he tried doubling back on Tanev, but Benning had pissed off one of our most character, longest-serving players so badly that Tanev had no interest in coming back.

Then, out of the blue, McCrimmon called him and offered him Schmidt for a mid-round pick.

That's not 'sitting on cap space and waiting for opportunities'. That's trying to make a string of terrible moves, failing at all of them, and then being saved at the last minute.

Just to get you on the record for posterity, would you have signed Tanev or Markstrom to those deals? I think they'll help Calgary for a year or two, but after that, they look horrific, and don't fit at all Vancouver's plan.

I would have had the team in a position where we could have afforded those contracts to veterans in key positions that we couldn't really afford to lose.

However, once your roster is filled with garbage signings already, then we weren't really in a position where we could take the risk (although Benning tried very hard in the end to sign both players for close to what Calgary gave).

Also I think that if we had been more proactive earlier rather than dicking these guys around, they probably could have been signed to more reasonable contracts than what Calgary gave them.
 

Peen

Rejoicing in a Benning-free world
Oct 6, 2013
29,640
24,984
Pulling from the around the league thread

This was the argument for bringing on someone "inside the club" after firing Gillis: that we'd have a GM with more access to deals and opportunities, and a better relationship with the league itself.

Completely ridiculous.
There were 7 main criticisms of Gillis in no order.

1. Didn't "go for it" enough.
2. Drafting/youth development.
3. NTC's
4. Mistakes at the pro level - specifically Booth and Ballard
5. Goalie mismanagement
6. Other GMs didn't like him
7. Trading picks

I just don't understand how people can hate on Gillis so much for criticisms 3 to 7 - which at the time were relatively valid criticisms because we should be holding the GM to a high standard in this market - but then not realize that Benning is doing infinitely worse in those categories?

3. Benning gives out more NTC's and to worse players with inflated caphits while Gillis gave his out to good players to sign to cheaper deals
4. We've had some of the worst pro scouting in the NHL
5. We lost a goalie who's roughly top five in the NHL for free and didn't trade Miller at the TDL (I don't really buy the 9th overall shit but regardless there was interest) while Gillis got Horvat, Markstrom, Matthias for Schneider/Luongo
6. If this mattered, why has Benning been incapable of getting ahead of other GM's on moves or unable to get one of his buddies to help him out of a mess? Only times he's been able to get ahead and "take advantage" were on Leivo and Schmidt which according to every report were offered to us specifically lol
7. Benning has a far bigger pick deficit than Gillis

My point here isn't that Gillis was some sort of mastermind who deserved to keep his job based on what we had in front of us at the end of the 13-14 season. A lot - if not all - of those criticisms were valid at the time and I understand the market's frustration with him in 2014 both at the time and still in hindsight. But why has the standard for the way we evaluate the GM gone from insanely high to "well yanno maybe in year 9 or 10 we might be competitive and if we disregard a few moves and a few years jimmy b has been yanno fairly ok?"
 

F A N

Registered User
Aug 12, 2005
18,630
5,893
Jesus christ, you missed the entire point. Benning's background was 13 years of scouting and he was only Director of Player Personnel for 1 year with the Bruins, and then replaced Gorton as AGM.

The fact that you are somehow contesting that Benning was brought into Boston due to his scouting background, and that he likely played a huge role working with the scouts in Boston, goes against all common sense and reasoning. The facts are all there, I'm surprised it's this hard for you to connect the dots.



Benning was brought into Boston due to his scouting background in much the same way Weisbrod was brought in due to his scouting background. Again, there's a difference between being an influential voice in the room and actually running the draft. Gilman was in charge of the amateur scouting staff. If you listen to Gilman talk, it sounded like he had the power to change the makeup of the amateur scouting staff. Consequently, I'm not arguing that he didn't have a huge role "working with the scouts" or having a huge voice in the room. Weisbrod is the AGM of the team and Brackett reported to him. I'm not arguing that Weisbrod didn't/doesn't have a huge influence or that he didn't/doesn't have a huge role "working with the scouts." But neither Gilman nor Weisbrod in their AGM roles are credited with drafting successes or blamed for drafting mistakes but it is somehow common sense that Benning as AGM should because of his scouting background?

Again, there is a Director of Amateur Scouting that was Chiarelli's friend and one of his first hires. I think it's common sense to assume that Chiarelli didn't just give his friend a fake title. Benning could have taken on that title in addition to being Director of Player Personnel or AGM if Chiarelli favoured him that much.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Bojack Horvatman

IAMGROOT
Jun 15, 2016
4,037
7,093
What on earth are you talking about?

Benning wasn't 'waiting patiently to capitalize on a situation'. He was flailing madly trying to make a high-profile move happen.

His main plan to make a huge deal for OEL. He tried very had to make that happen, and it wasn't a 'lowball offer' - apparently it was Demko plus high picks plus prospects, which is a mint for a guy whose contract should mean nobody should even want him on waivers. And the deal didn't fail because it was a lowball, it failed because it hinged on signing Markstrom. Arizona demanded Demko and we could only make that deal if Markstrom signed, and then when he didn't it fell apart.

Then he moved on to giving an absolutely stupid offer to a terrible fit in Tyson Barrie, and was saved because Barrie took a much lower offer from Edmonton.

Then he tried doubling back on Tanev, but Benning had pissed off one of our most character, longest-serving players so badly that Tanev had no interest in coming back.

Then, out of the blue, McCrimmon called him and offered him Schmidt for a mid-round pick.

That's not 'sitting on cap space and waiting for opportunities'. That's trying to make a string of terrible moves, failing at all of them, and then being saved at the last minute.



I would have had the team in a position where we could have afforded those contracts to veterans in key positions that we couldn't really afford to lose.

However, once your roster is filled with garbage signings already, then we weren't really in a position where we could take the risk (although Benning tried very hard in the end to sign both players for close to what Calgary gave).

Also I think that if we had been more proactive earlier rather than dicking these guys around, they probably could have been signed to more reasonable contracts than what Calgary gave them.

Before this gets replied with "We don't know if Benning offered more than the Oilers for Barrie", Colorado and Vancouver were the other teams in the running for Barrie. Also two teams offered more, with one team offering 6m.

Tyson Barrie reportedly turned down A LOT more money elsewhere to sign with the Oilers - Article - BARDOWN

If another team offered more for Barrie, they would of been included in the teams that are in the running for Barrie.
 

Peen

Rejoicing in a Benning-free world
Oct 6, 2013
29,640
24,984
I would have had the team in a position where we could have afforded those contracts to veterans in key positions that we couldn't really afford to lose.

However, once your roster is filled with garbage signings already, then we weren't really in a position where we could take the risk (although Benning tried very hard in the end to sign both players for close to what Calgary gave).

Also I think that if we had been more proactive earlier rather than dicking these guys around, they probably could have been signed to more reasonable contracts than what Calgary gave them.

And interesting that you would have signed Markstrom and Tanev to those contracts. Good to know for posterity!

?? where does it say that lmao

54609bf11e65f4ffa653b7627b33cdb2.png


the last 48 hours have seen some high level reading comprehension and mathematical abilities weow
 

Pastor Of Muppetz

Registered User
Oct 1, 2017
26,010
15,871
I think that if he didn’t actually think we could compete with the top teams in four or so years from taking over, then he could have just said that he hoped they would but that there was a lot of work to do. The notion that he had to come out and set out what he believed were realistic expectations for public relations reasons is a total fiction. It’s also at odds with reality. Like, it’s really not surprising that Jim Benning thought this team would realistically compete with the top teams in four years. How many GMs realistically expect a “retool” to take more than four years? And all of his moves after this statement were consistent with his intention to compete with the top teams in the league in that four years. With that said, he obviously adjusted his expectations a few years in when his team was like literally the shittiest team in the league, but that’s not surprising nor deserving of any praise.
He made that statement in year 2 correct,...?...I wouldn't say his moves were consistent with the top teams in the league..They never went completely 'all in' to make the playoffs in the next two years, because they would be sacrificing the future..It was a balancing act, that robbed them of being good at rebuilding, and simultaneously robbed them of being competitive.

I have no problems with the poor results from 2015-18..Either win big, or lose big..I'm well over it.

Benning is not a very good public speaker, but dissecting his quotes 'word by word' on his predictable pre season 'rah-rah speeches' (he says almost the same thing before each season)..or a throwaway quote of stylistically comparing Juolevi to Lidstrom..or his mispronunciation of Guillaume Brisebois..is frankly, irrelevant and boring.
 

Peen

Rejoicing in a Benning-free world
Oct 6, 2013
29,640
24,984
I was off by a year..shoot me.
on a serious note, i think it's a false equivalence to equate benning's start of the year pressers which i agree are mostly just PR driven say stuff to sell tickets to that first press conference where he said that the team can be turned around quickly and the 4th or 5th season target date stuff

not sure what gorton's press conferences looked like at the start of the past two years after he penned that letter to fans announcing the tank in 2018 but i'd assume he said the same "we hope to be competitive" type stuff and it's not really anything to take seriously
 

Frankie Blueberries

Allergic to draft picks
Jan 27, 2016
9,099
10,546
Benning was brought into Boston due to his scouting background in much the same way Weisbrod was brought in due to his scouting background. Again, there's a difference between being an influential voice in the room and actually running the draft. Gilman was in charge of the amateur scouting staff. If you listen to Gilman talk, it sounded like he had the power to change the makeup of the amateur scouting staff. Consequently, I'm not arguing that he didn't have a huge role "working with the scouts" or having a huge voice in the room. Weisbrod is the AGM of the team and Brackett reported to him. I'm not arguing that Weisbrod didn't/doesn't have a huge influence or that he didn't/doesn't have a huge role "working with the scouts." But neither Gilman nor Weisbrod in their AGM roles are credited with drafting successes or blamed for drafting mistakes but it is somehow common sense that Benning as AGM should because of his scouting background?

Again, there is a Director of Amateur Scouting that was Chiarelli's friend and one of his first hires. I think it's common sense to assume that Chiarelli didn't just give his friend a fake title. Benning could have taken on that title in addition to being Director of Player Personnel or AGM if Chiarelli favoured him that much.

If you want to believe that someone who had 95% of their work experience as a scout, who was hired for a position that plays a role in drafting and scouting, wasn’t hired to perform those duties, then that’s your prerogative. I’m just playing the odds and using common sense based on those factors. I don’t care to convince you though, you can believe the unlikely alternative that isn’t supported as well by the facts available.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Pastor Of Muppetz

Registered User
Oct 1, 2017
26,010
15,871
on a serious note, i think it's a false equivalence to equate benning's start of the year pressers which i agree are mostly just PR driven say stuff to sell tickets to that first press conference where he said that the team can be turned around quickly and the 4th or 5th season target date stuff

not sure what gorton's press conferences looked like at the start of the past two years after he penned that letter to fans announcing the tank in 2018 but i'd assume he said the same "we hope to be competitive type stuff"
I wish that Linden and Benning had done that' letter to the fans' in 2015....but buoyed by the team making the playoffs the previous year, that wasn't going to happen.
 

Peen

Rejoicing in a Benning-free world
Oct 6, 2013
29,640
24,984
I wish that Linden and Benning had done that' letter to the fans' in 2015....but buoyed by the team making the playoffs the previous year, that wasn't going to happen.
Well, it's clear they thought the 15/16 team was better than the 14/15 one with what they said in the media and felt "good" about the 16/17 one too.

I've never been much of a believer in building based on other teams models or how many years it took X team so I never really cared for them picking a retool over a rebuild and never understood why people cared for it so much initially.

However, that 2017 deadline where they acquired Goldobin and Dahlen should have been the time where they did what Gorton did in 2018.

That 2017 offseason should have seen them deal every non-core player with value. Edler, Baertschi, Sutter, and Tanev would have been good guys to move out that summer. If they could have gotten something for 20 goal Granlund, him as well.

Should have also had a better opportunity cost type summer and just bargain hunted rather than go for Del Zotto and Gagner on contracts with term.

I really want to engage with someone around the topic of what they do for the next three years because the next three years are going to dictate the whole decade for this franchise.
 

Pastor Of Muppetz

Registered User
Oct 1, 2017
26,010
15,871
Benning was brought into Boston due to his scouting background in much the same way Weisbrod was brought in due to his scouting background. Again, there's a difference between being an influential voice in the room and actually running the draft. Gilman was in charge of the amateur scouting staff. If you listen to Gilman talk, it sounded like he had the power to change the makeup of the amateur scouting staff. Consequently, I'm not arguing that he didn't have a huge role "working with the scouts" or having a huge voice in the room. Weisbrod is the AGM of the team and Brackett reported to him. I'm not arguing that Weisbrod didn't/doesn't have a huge influence or that he didn't/doesn't have a huge role "working with the scouts." But neither Gilman nor Weisbrod in their AGM roles are credited with drafting successes or blamed for drafting mistakes but it is somehow common sense that Benning as AGM should because of his scouting background?

Again, there is a Director of Amateur Scouting that was Chiarelli's friend and one of his first hires. I think it's common sense to assume that Chiarelli didn't just give his friend a fake title. Benning could have taken on that title in addition to being Director of Player Personnel or AGM if Chiarelli favoured him that much.
I agree with this..you dont hire your 'right hand man' to scout, or do player personnel work..A lot of posters here take liberties with 'Benning drafted these guys in Boston', or "Benning traded Tyler Seguin'..The truth is, is that Benning was moving up the executive ladder....Along with Chiarelli, they created a template for a team that won the SC, and a decade later, is still a SC contender.

Mike Gillis was an agent...what experience did he have in scouting , or player evaluation?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

iloovRMB

Paul Feyerabend is my spirit animal
Aug 22, 2020
236
155
In Boston, Benning was learning the executive/management side of the job. The fact that people pretend he went to Boston to be the shadow director of scouting is asinine and baseless.
 

Peen

Rejoicing in a Benning-free world
Oct 6, 2013
29,640
24,984
Mike Gillis was an agent...what experience did he have in scouting , or player evaluation?

I've made this point before

Watch from 8:20-9:40

The raptors director of scouting through a period that's seen them be the best drafting/developing organization in the league and possibly in professional north american sports was a guy working in the PR department who would constantly email Ujiri with random thoughts.

Ujiri who's probably the best executive in professional north american sports never played at a high level and started as a youth coach in Nigeria before impressing people.

Their head coach who's basically seen as at worst a top three coach in the league was a guy who coached at low levels for decades.

These are guys who are at the top of their sport who came from nothing where most would mock them at the start.

The idea that you have to be someone who's played or have done it before at a high level means you're automatically a better option than the inexperienced alternative is IMO a huge problem in hockey relative to other North American sports.
 

Frankie Blueberries

Allergic to draft picks
Jan 27, 2016
9,099
10,546
I agree with this..you dont hire your 'right hand man' to scout, or do player personnel work..A lot of posters here take liberties with 'Benning drafted these guys in Boston', or "Benning traded Tyler Seguin'..The truth is, is that Benning was moving up the executive ladder....Along with Chiarelli, they created a template for a team that won the SC, and a decade later, is still a SC contender.

Mike Gillis was an agent...what experience did he have in scouting , or player evaluation?

Both AGM and GMs have a variety of job duties. Meeting with the scouts and collaborating to prepare for the draft is certainly one of those duties, especially when said AGM has 13 years of scouting experience. I’m not saying that’s all Benning would have done in this role, but to deny it outright is laughable (as F A N has argued).

Your Mike Gillis example is a great one! He was a player agent and had connections which he used in his GM position (signing Demitra, for example) as well as using his work experience to negotiate good contracts. This actually proves my point that since Benning had a lot of scouting experience (and it was his only executive experience prior to working for Boston), he would have helped in the draft and scouting based on said work experience.

The fact that this is even in dispute shows how bad the divide on here has become. It’s only because Boston’s drafting record sucked while Benning was there that this is an issue. If they had a good record (like his time in Buffalo), then you guys would agree with me.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: rypper

Hodgy

Registered User
Feb 23, 2012
4,270
4,243
He made that statement in year 2 correct,...?...I wouldn't say his moves were consistent with the top teams in the league..They never went completely 'all in' to make the playoffs in the next two years, because they would be sacrificing the future..It was a balancing act, that robbed them of being good at rebuilding, and simultaneously robbed them of being competitive.

You are applying the wrong standard. The question isn’t whether his moves were consistent with the moves of top teams, but whether his moves were consistent with a team trying to be competitive with the top teams in three to four years. And they certainly were, as he spent to the cap during these years and traded picks and very young prospects for players that were thought to be able to contribute immediately, and obviously improve over the near future. This really isn’t debatable. And again, the question isn’t whether he thought we could compete with the top teams in year four after being like the worst team in the NHL in years 2 and 3.

As for the balancing act, obviously it failed miserably. But team’s have been able to rebuild on the fly in the past, and there was nothing inevitable about the total destruction brought on by Benning as you seem to suggest. Hell, it literally goes against what Benning himself had said.

I have no problems with the poor results from 2015-18..Either win big, or lose big..I'm well over it.

Process is critical. If you try to compete and utterly fail, that is important. If you intend to proceed with a full on rebuild and your team sucks, then that’s obviously a much different matter. Dismissing as you seem to be doing is foolish.

Benning is not a very good public speaker, but dissecting his quotes 'word by word' on his predictable pre season 'rah-rah speeches' (he says almost the same thing before each season)..or a throwaway quote of stylistically comparing Juolevi to Lidstrom..or his mispronunciation of Guillaume Brisebois..is frankly, irrelevant and boring.

Lol. You are the one who “dissected” his quote and provided an obviously wrong interpretation of it. It’s hilariously ironic that you now criticize me for posting the whole quote and literally interpreting words in the most obvious and plain way. But yet I am the one improperly dissecting his words? Hilarious.

The meaning of his quote is plain as day and was totally reasonable and expected when he said it. Like, no one at the time would have been like “I don’t think Jim actually expects to compete in 4 years with the top teams”. That would be absurd. For him to actually not expect would be totally f***ing absurd. GMs don’t expect their teams to be shit for that long and incapable of at least “competing” with top teams that late into their tenures.
 
  • Like
Reactions: I am toxic

Peen

Rejoicing in a Benning-free world
Oct 6, 2013
29,640
24,984
Another point. I often see people overvalue the ability to get players on their ELC's signed to steal contracts.

Pretty much every good young player on an ELC gets signed to a steal deal or - at worst - a fair deal because no one is willing to offersheet and rarely do these guys sign 6+ year deals.

I don't think Tampa really deserves any pats on the back for signing Sergachev to that contract nor do I really think any teams deserve big pats for this shit. Basically have all the leverage and all the comparables are "steals" lol.

The real strength is what you can do with those who aren't coming off their ELC. That Bonino 3x1.9 that we traded for, Blake Coleman's contract, Burrows' 4x2 are the types of deals that really deserve the biggest praise.
 

I am toxic

. . . even in small doses
Oct 24, 2014
9,352
14,635
Vancouver
Well, it's clear they thought the 15/16 team was better than the 14/15 one with what they said in the media and felt "good" about the 16/17 one too.

I've never been much of a believer in building based on other teams models or how many years it took X team so I never really cared for them picking a retool over a rebuild and never understood why people cared for it so much initially.

However, that 2017 deadline where they acquired Goldobin and Dahlen should have been the time where they did what Gorton did in 2018.

That 2017 offseason should have seen them deal every non-core player with value. Edler, Baertschi, Sutter, and Tanev would have been good guys to move out that summer. If they could have gotten something for 20 goal Granlund, him as well.

Should have also had a better opportunity cost type summer and just bargain hunted rather than go for Del Zotto and Gagner on contracts with term.

I really want to engage with someone around the topic of what they do for the next three years because the next three years are going to dictate the whole decade for this franchise.

They will need to begin by firing Benning, and getting someone like Futa

Retain the core of (roughly oldest to youngest) Bo, Demko, Brock, Petterson, Hughes - this is what we will be using to contend in 2025-2026 through the end of the roaring '20's.

Trade Miller for a 1st asap, build up Scmidt's value this season and trade him at the TDL for picks.

When cap space opens up, acquire undervalued league minimum salary players like Gaunce to fill out the bottom 6 for now. Also acquire undervalued D like Hutton and Stecher.

Finish the next couple seasons with lottery picks, ignore whoever Benning wants to pick in the top 10, and the Terminator's your uncle.
 

nowhereman

Registered User
Jan 24, 2010
9,231
7,567
Los Angeles
They will need to begin by firing Benning, and getting someone like Futa

Retain the core of (roughly oldest to youngest) Bo, Demko, Brock, Petterson, Hughes - this is what we will be using to contend in 2025-2026 through the end of the roaring '20's.

Trade Miller for a 1st asap, build up Scmidt's value this season and trade him at the TDL for picks.

When cap space opens up, acquire undervalued league minimum salary players like Gaunce to fill out the bottom 6 for now. Also acquire undervalued D like Hutton and Stecher.

Finish the next couple seasons with lottery picks, ignore whoever Benning wants to pick in the top 10, and the Terminator's your uncle.
The first thing you would have to do is find a way to get the team sold to someone else, as Aquillini would never let this happen. I don't think any owner would.
 

Peen

Rejoicing in a Benning-free world
Oct 6, 2013
29,640
24,984

I've made the point before that certain posters like to talk as if it's inevitable that we will compete for 10-15 years.

The logic is as followed:

20-21 is the step back year where we make sure we can sign EP, Hughes and Demko. OK cool, but we don't have the space to sign those guys long term and seem more likely for bridges. Let's say we bridge them for 2 or 3 years.

21-22 is the integrate Podkolzin/Hoglander years (it's not as if they are automatic guarantees to be impact players in the top nine) because we'll still be capped out so we can't make the multiple key additions we would need to.

Okay so here comes the big year where all the garbage outside of Myers and Ferland who will probably be LTIR'd so it's likely just Myers. Cool. This is the big 2022 summer. Time to set the team to compete for the next 8 years. Tons of capspace projected for that summer with only $23MM on the books assuming Ferland will be LTIR'd. 2022-2023 is the first of many big competing years.

Here's why - at this moment - the logic of assuming that we'll be in a great spot for sure - is ridiculous.

Boeser is an RFA this summer because we didn't have the capspace to sign him long term in 2019.

If we bridged EP/Hughes for 2 years, they're already eligible for contract extensions. You know who else is eligible for a contract extension in two years for the supposed entry to our long term window year?

27 year old Bo Horvat and a 29 year old JT Miller who will be 28 and 30 respectively when they expire in 2023. The two biggest steals we have on the roster who if they play at their current levels in the same roles, those guys are probably getting - at minimum - a 25-30% raise.

Haven't even mentioned sorting out Demko yet but I'd bet they bridge him because people are scared of giving young goalies long term deals.

As of now, the only guarantee is that we will have a 31 year old Nate Schmidt signed for three years more in 2022's summer.

If they don't start figuring out the long term future so that they can limit the pressures of having to sign every core player outside of Schmidt in basically a two year window, they're going to be f***ed.

If you don't think you're going to be a top ten team in 2021-2022, trading Miller in the next 8-9 months with high value is absolutely the right move. At the very minimum, they could double their initial investment.

I think they have to figure out a way to sign EP and Hughes to eight year deals because the value of a short term deal would be if you've got a bunch of really good veterans signed short term to compete. They'll only have one year like that (2022-2023) as things stand and I'm not sure how comfortable anyone will be with giving both Horvat and Miller 6+ years.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->