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

[vancityluongo]

They just need some sort of cohesive plan.

If the plan is to add some dry powder for a stretch from 2023-26 - get all the value you can now to align with that window. Move Edler at the deadline for any picks. Figure out soon if guys like Gaudette, Rathbone and Hoglander are "core" pieces in 3 years - if they aren't, move them. Don't just lose them like we did with Stecher and Hutton. Gaudette would net a sweet return from a team like Tampa that is currently cap strapped to the brim, but need cost controlled contributors.

Or if the plan is to "compete" before the 2023 season when all the cap is on the line (assuming two year bridges to at least two of Petey, Hughes and Demko) - cash in now, aggressively, while the market is soft. Attach Pod + 2nd to Loui and send him to Detroit. Get rid of Sutter by strapping Juolevi and a 3rd to him, hell maybe even get rid of Myers somehow (with a 1st+?). Sign Granlund, Hoffman, Vatanen. Go in on Anthony Cirelli. Try to win a Cup in the next three years. If it fails, use Horvat + Miller at the 2022-23 deadline to recuperate the picks lost going for it, and try again in two years.

Half-assing it both ways (bridging Petey and Hughes, using the savings on a player not nearly good enough to push things forward, losing one of Miller or Horvat and then getting cap strapped by the second Petey/Hughes extensions) is the way to ensure this core never comes close to winning. Hope that isn't how it goes.

 

[Fatass]

They just need some sort of cohesive plan.

If the plan is to add some dry powder for a stretch from 2023-26 - get all the value you can now to align with that window. Move Edler at the deadline for any picks. Figure out soon if guys like Gaudette, Rathbone and Hoglander are "core" pieces in 3 years - if they aren't, move them. Don't just lose them like we did with Stecher and Hutton. Gaudette would net a sweet return from a team like Tampa that is currently cap strapped to the brim, but need cost controlled contributors.

Or if the plan is to "compete" before the 2023 season when all the cap is on the line (assuming two year bridges to at least two of Petey, Hughes and Demko) - cash in now, aggressively, while the market is soft. Attach Pod + 2nd to Loui and send him to Detroit. Get rid of Sutter by strapping Juolevi and a 3rd to him, hell maybe even get rid of Myers somehow (with a 1st+?). Sign Granlund, Hoffman, Vatanen. Go in on Anthony Cirelli. Try to win a Cup in the next three years. If it fails, use Horvat + Miller at the 2022-23 deadline to recuperate the picks lost going for it, and try again in two years.

Half-assing it both ways (bridging Petey and Hughes, using the savings on a player not nearly good enough to push things forward, losing one of Miller or Horvat and then getting cap strapped by the second Petey/Hughes extensions) is the way to ensure this core never comes close to winning. Hope that isn't how it goes.

Are you suggesting Benning has been married to two plans, and that’s created the cap hell, and loss of UFAs we are seeing?

 

[ChilliBilly]

They just need some sort of cohesive plan.

If the plan is to add some dry powder for a stretch from 2023-26 - get all the value you can now to align with that window. Move Edler at the deadline for any picks. Figure out soon if guys like Gaudette, Rathbone and Hoglander are "core" pieces in 3 years - if they aren't, move them. Don't just lose them like we did with Stecher and Hutton. Gaudette would net a sweet return from a team like Tampa that is currently cap strapped to the brim, but need cost controlled contributors.

Or if the plan is to "compete" before the 2023 season when all the cap is on the line (assuming two year bridges to at least two of Petey, Hughes and Demko) - cash in now, aggressively, while the market is soft. Attach Pod + 2nd to Loui and send him to Detroit. Get rid of Sutter by strapping Juolevi and a 3rd to him, hell maybe even get rid of Myers somehow (with a 1st+?). Sign Granlund, Hoffman, Vatanen. Go in on Anthony Cirelli. Try to win a Cup in the next three years. If it fails, use Horvat + Miller at the 2022-23 deadline to recuperate the picks lost going for it, and try again in two years.

Half-assing it both ways (bridging Petey and Hughes, using the savings on a player not nearly good enough to push things forward, losing one of Miller or Horvat and then getting cap strapped by the second Petey/Hughes extensions) is the way to ensure this core never comes close to winning. Hope that isn't how it goes.

Agree with some of what you said (try to get 8 year deals on EP and Hughes) but just live with the 1 -2 years you have with Loui and Sutter. a 2nd and Pod is ridiculous. Juolevi and a 3rd to get rid of 1 year of Sutter? Insane.

I am hoping our "core" in 21 - 22 is Bo, Demko, EP, Hughes,Boeser, Miller, Podkolzin, Schmidt and Tryamkin. We can hope that Hoglander, juolevi Dipietro and Rathbone are solid middle players, or even more. Then hope that someone like Lind turns into a good 3rd line scorer. Who knows. But thats one hell of a base to build around, you could fill it out pretty well with waiver fodder. And a few like Virtanen and MacEwan for depth.

 

[F A N]

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.

See answers from other posters below. I'll play around with your logic and "common sense" some more. Lorne Henning spent 19 years as a coach (mostly in the NHL) before being hired as a pro scout here in Vancouver. After a year, he became the Director of Player Personnel (the same position Benning held in Boston). Did Henning run the amateur draft or played an enormous role in drafting and scouting for the Canucks then? Was he responsible for the Canucks drafting Patrick White?

Henning then became an AGM alongside Gillis. Now using your flawed logic, do you believe that someone who had 95% of their work experience as a coach in the NHL would not have a role coaching the team? Did he determine AV's fate? Responsible for all the coaching hires? Draw up plays in the dressing room? Took charge of the PP or PK? Hard to believe that the bulk of his work would actually be AGM-related such as being in charge of the Comets? That can't make sense could it? How could an AGM with 95% of his work experience in coaching in the NHL not be coaching and influencing how the team is being coached?

Oh and just because you call something "fact" doesn't make it so.

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.

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.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

See answers from other posters below. I'll play around with your logic and "common sense" some more. Lorne Henning spent 19 years as a coach (mostly in the NHL) before being hired as a pro scout here in Vancouver. After a year, he became the Director of Player Personnel (the same position Benning held in Boston). Did Henning run the amateur draft or played an enormous role in drafting and scouting for the Canucks then? Was he responsible for the Canucks drafting Patrick White?

Henning then became an AGM alongside Gillis. Now using your flawed logic, do you believe that someone who had 95% of their work experience as a coach in the NHL would not have a role coaching the team? Did he determine AV's fate? Responsible for all the coaching hires? Draw up plays in the dressing room? Took charge of the PP or PK? Hard to believe that the bulk of his work would actually be AGM-related such as being in charge of the Comets? That can't make sense could it? How could an AGM with 95% of his work experience in coaching in the NHL not be coaching and influencing how the team is being coached?

Oh and just because you call something "fact" doesn't make it so.

Assistant GMs have multiple job duties and its common for them to work with the scouts and help prepare for the draft. Benning has an extensive background scouting and took a job that included this as a job duty. I’m not saying that’s all he did as AGM, but if you deny that he had any role in those duties, then we’re done here.

Also lol @ using the most biased posters as authorities for your argument (or using any posters as if they’re credible authorities, it makes no sense)

 

[M2Beezy]

Please continue here

Ok

 

[timw33]

Is it good that one of your best players feels the team is "in a reboot"?

 

[Fatass]

Is it good that one of your best players feels the team is "in a reboot"?

Good point. Miller, like th3 vast majority of hockey players, are careful with their public comments, but this clearly shows he’s not happy losing our all star goalie, top pairing D man, and first line right winger. That’s all on Benning for giving out too much money and term to old guys who stink. Miller, like all the core guys on our team, know why we lost those three key UFAs, and that we are a lesser team now.

 

[StreetHawk]

Is it good that one of your best players feels the team is "in a reboot"?

It’s reality. Guys are not blind they know the cap situation and who in the roster is not pulling their weight. But one rule about pro athletes is not to complain about another guy getting his. Worry about your own contract.

was it disappointing for the guys to not see cash moved out to keep a guy or two? Yes. But that’s the hand that is being dealt to them.

Next season is a reboot in the sense that they have to develop 2 or more young Dmen in the NHL due to salary cap.

 

[Fatass]

It’s reality. Guys are not blind they know the cap situation and who in the roster is not pulling their weight. But one rule about pro athletes is not to complain about another guy getting his. Worry about your own contract.

was it disappointing for the guys to not see cash moved out to keep a guy or two? Yes. But that’s the hand that is being dealt to them.

Next season is a reboot in the sense that they have to develop 2 or more young Dmen in the NHL due to salary cap.

And we need our goalies to play to Marky’s level. And we need a first line right winger. Number one all star goalie. Number one pair D man. First line right winger. That’s three HUGE pieces we lost because Benning can’t manage the salary cap. Clearly we are a far worse team right now than we were before we lost those three key pieces. Oh, and Stecher was important too. He wasn’t a core piece, but he filled a role.

 

[nowhereman]

Is it good that one of your best players feels the team is "in a reboot"?

Losing Toffoli hurts, particularly because of the contract he ended up signing. But the organization was right to move on from Tanev and Markstrom. It's hard to complain about Benning having signed so many ugly contracts in the past, while also claiming that they should have re-upped a 31 year old goaltender until he's 37 or an injury-prone 2nd pairing-quality defenseman whose numbers looked pretty sub-standard whenever he wasn't playing with Hughes.

People can complain all they want about cap management, based on general principle (and it's perfectly valid), but let's not pretend as though breaking the bank on these players was the indefensible "right" move.

 

[Peen]

Losing Toffoli hurts, particularly because of the contract he ended up signing. But the organization was right to move on from Tanev and Markstrom. It's hard to complain about Benning having signed so many ugly contracts in the past, while also claiming that they should have re-upped a 31 year old goaltender until he's 37 or an injury-prone 2nd pairing-quality defenseman whose numbers looked pretty sub-standard whenever he wasn't playing with Hughes.

People can complain all they want about cap management, based on general principle (and it's perfectly valid), but let's not pretend as though breaking the bank on these players was the indefensible "right" move.

I don't think many on this board - if any - would have signed the exact same deal that Markstrom and Tanev received.

However, I think it's fair to say that if they hadn't mismanaged the cap and had the ability to say to players "we're going to bring back all the guys and also have the space to get one or two new pieces" - then I think there's probably a lot of leeway to be had in terms of what deals these guys would have taken.

Maybe Markstrom does take the reported 6x4 or 5.5x5 reported offers or whatever. Maybe Tanev takes the 4x2 or we just use that + Myers money and put it into Pietrangelo. Benn, Roussel, Beagle = Hall's one year price. So many options at the high end or mid range.

I know the easy response that I usually get from POM here would be "it's stupid to engage in hypotheticals" but it really isn't considering some of the players clearly would have taken a discount to stay. How big the discount is was probably limited based on the clunk of shit on the roster but point stands.

I often see the argument of "well if you ignore the stuff that happened up until the end of the 16-17 season, it's not that bad" - it's pretty crazy the amount of stuff we could have done this off-season had we not made the signings we did in the 2018 + 2019 free agencies that cost us dearly in the biggest buyers market ever seen.

 

[rypper]

Oh, and Stecher was important too. He wasn’t a core piece, but he filled a role.

Definitely. I've seen far too many people glossing over losing Stecher as a depth option. And even more saying with confidence that Rathbone, Juolevi, or Rafferty are going to step in and replace him seamlessly.

 

[Hit the post]

Definitely. I've seen far too many people glossing over losing Stecher as a depth option. And even more saying with confidence that Rathbone, Juolevi, or Rafferty are going to step in and replace him seamlessly.

They might be able to fill that third pairing role adequately.

Problem occurs when you have more than one injury on the blueline. Stecher at least has shown the ability to play top 4 icetime minutes for a limited time *at the NHL level*. Not those other guys. Not by a longshot.

 

[Rumsfeld]

This thread is just consistently hilarious. Like the kind of issues people would have to be dealing with internally to *still* be making the same stupid excuses for this unmitigated disaster window-licking mouthbreather of a GM after all these years... and with the situation he's put the team in now, SIX years later?

It's really just pathetic. Unless it's disingenuous trolling, in which case it's far more pathetic.

 

[I am toxic]

Is it good that one of your best players feels the team is "in a reboot"?

I would have thought Miller to be delighted that we have mentors like Sutter, Beagle, and . . . and . . . was there someone else?

 

[I am toxic]

This thread is just consistently hilarious. Like the kind of issues people would have to be dealing with internally to *still* be making the same stupid excuses for this unmitigated disaster window-licking mouthbreather of a GM after all these years... and with the situation he's put the team in now, SIX years later?

It's really just pathetic. Unless it's disingenuous trolling, in which case it's far more pathetic.

That's not fair . . .







. . . to disingenuous trolls.

 

[bandwagonesque]

That's not fair . . .







. . . to disingenuous trolls.

You know, thanks for speaking up. It's not easy.

 

[I am toxic]

You know, thanks for speaking up. It's not easy.

You are most welcome bandy.

If I don't stick up for you, who will?

 

[bossram]

Losing Toffoli hurts, particularly because of the contract he ended up signing. But the organization was right to move on from Tanev and Markstrom. It's hard to complain about Benning having signed so many ugly contracts in the past, while also claiming that they should have re-upped a 31 year old goaltender until he's 37 or an injury-prone 2nd pairing-quality defenseman whose numbers looked pretty sub-standard whenever he wasn't playing with Hughes.

People can complain all they want about cap management, based on general principle (and it's perfectly valid), but let's not pretend as though breaking the bank on these players was the indefensible "right" move.

Your opinion is exactly right here. No, Benning shouldn't have re-signed Markstrom and Tanev to those prices. Clearly not. On the other and, Benning's incompetent cap management left him unable to match perfectly reasonable deals to Toffoli and Stecher, who were valuable contributors.

The issue is that Benning's been very inconsistent in terms of his evaluation and judgement of UFAs. I don't think his evaluation is accurate. Seemingly, he only restricts himself when cap space is scarce. When cap space is plentiful, he blows it on marginal players (endless examples). If there were consistent evidence that Benning could evaluate players accurately, there would be less criticism.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

Your opinion is exactly right here. No, Benning shouldn't have re-signed Markstrom and Tanev to those prices. Clearly not. On the other and, Benning's incompetent cap management left him unable to match perfectly reasonable deals to Toffoli and Stecher, who were valuable contributors.

The issue is that Benning's been very inconsistent in terms of his evaluation and judgement of UFAs. I don't think his evaluation is accurate. Seemingly, he only restricts himself when cap space is scarce. When cap space is plentiful, he blows it on marginal players (endless examples). If there were consistent evidence that Benning could evaluate players accurately, there would be less criticism.

His UFA signings indicate impulse buying (or panic signings) in a knee jerk reaction to compete, never looking beyond the next season. When taken as a whole, the theme is that not much planning goes into the cap structure in terms of the long-term projection of the team. Eriksson, Sutter, Beagle, Roussel, Ferland, and Myers are all examples to a certain extent.

 

[VanJack]

Miller is only saying what most people already know.....this COVID shortened season with the likelihood of no fans in the building, and a hybrid Canadian division that will last for only one season, is shaping up as a 'development year' for the Canucks. Wouldn't shock me at all that when the smoke clears, they're back in the lottery.

At the end of next season, a lot of contracts are coming off the books. Sutter, Benn, Baertschi, Edler and possibly Holtby if he's exposed in the expansion draft, could all depart. And the backbreaking contract for Eriksson, along with Beagle and Roussel would only have one year left to run. Surely they can buy out at least one or possibly even all three of those contracts. Wouldn't save much cap space, but would clear out some deadwood and open up the roster.

Of course they'll need a lot of that money to re-up Pettersson and Hughes....but at least they'd be in a position to 'take advantage' of some capped out teams like they did when they acquired Nate Schmidt. Right now they just have too many bad contracts--which really is the reason why they lost so many UFA's this off-season.

 

[timw33]

And the backbreaking contract for Eriksson, along with Beagle and Roussel would only have one year left to run. Surely they can buy out at least one or possibly even all three of those contracts.

The problem is that the way these contracts were structured, a buyout next offseason of their final years barely helps the cap picture.

We would save $2MM on Eriksson and then have to replace with at least a 750k player. So 1.25MM there

Beagle we would save 800k, and then spend almost all of that on a league minimum replacement. 50k saved at best.

Roussel would save 1.25MM, then replace with 750k league minimum player. 500k saved.

So ditching all three via buyout saves a grand total of 1.755MM.

 

[deckercky]

Miller is only saying what most people already know.....this COVID shortened season with the likelihood of no fans in the building, and a hybrid Canadian division that will last for only one season, is shaping up as a 'development year' for the Canucks. Wouldn't shock me at all that when the smoke clears, they're back in the lottery.

Definitely a possibility, particularly if goaltending doesn't hold up and they suffer an injury or two to the top 4 defencemen.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Good point. Miller, like th3 vast majority of hockey players, are careful with their public comments, but this clearly shows he’s not happy losing our all star goalie, top pairing D man, and first line right winger. That’s all on Benning for giving out too much money and term to old guys who stink. Miller, like all the core guys on our team, know why we lost those three key UFAs, and that we are a lesser team now.

It obviously sucks to lose teammates to a cap crunch, but if anybody understands the 'name of the game' .....its Miller... , who himself was moved for cap reasons.