Management Thread III (MOD Warning Post # 67)

[sandwichbird2023]

One of the biggest head scratching deals is Tim Schaller...we overpaid for a useless body and doesn't contribute to anything...doesn't Benning know he has to pay Boeser this year right?
We waste money on spare parts where we should actually spend money on good money and pay scraps for warm bodies.
How the hell does Benning earn an extension for this kind of poor performance?

I honestly don't think Benning thinks ahead like that. He sees "4th liner that score 10+ goals and hits" and he can't help but throw a multi years term at him. 4th line shutdown center who has character? 4 years. Gritty winger with some offense? 4 years. 6'6" RHD? 6 years at 6m. Omg Ferland who destoryed us in the playoff 3 seasons ago? Done!
But Jim, what about Brock?
Benning: we'll worry about that when the time comes, right now I locked up 20m on long term contracts to go along with Eriksson, Sutter and Pearson, don't rain on my parade!

We don't have cap space to sign Brock long term, yet we should not worried about EP and Hughes in 2 summer because "we'll have 50-55m" by then?

 

[rypper]

One of the biggest head scratching deals is Tim Schaller...we overpaid for a useless body and doesn't contribute to anything...doesn't Benning know he has to pay Boeser this year right?
We waste money on spare parts where we should actually spend money on good money and pay scraps for warm bodies.
How the hell does Benning earn an extension for this kind of poor performance?

I wonder what Jim thought he was getting in Schaller? Or rather what Schaller brought that we didn't already have on the team already.

 

[MS]

I wonder what Jim thought he was getting in Schaller? Or rather what Schaller brought that we didn't already have on the team already.

10 GOALZ AND FOUGHT GUDDY

 

[sting101]

The stars are the ones driving the revenue in the NHL and the NBA. The bottom of the rosters make very good money in both league. In the NHL the cap is quite small between the elite and the average comparatively.

Those guys aren’t “taking haircuts” on most teams. It comes down to budgeting. I’d rather pay $10m for 90-100 points than pay $7m for 55-60.

This whole notion that these scoring players that are getting big pay days are just PP players come off as bitter, petty and ill informed.

The Three leafs making over $10m are all top 30 in EV points and Marner is the 15th best even strength producer in the entire league. These guys aren’t PP specialists they’re the elite players in the league. Seems weird to whine that their getting paid their market share earlier when their play actually warrants it. It’s like a backwards excuse for Jim Benning filling up his roster from the bottom up.

Yes they are but it doesn't change the fact that if you allocate 50% of your cap on 4 players that 5-23 have to fit into 40 million in a big giant marketplace where good players can go to get paid?

And dont give me all this crap about bitter, petty, ill informed whining and making up excuses for Benning... what a joke. I made my opinion and if you don't like it you can choose to counter or ignore it.. I am not one that keeps plugging negative crap on this site? If you address me like this in the future i will ignore you but i'm willing to give it a go and give this a chance if you want to converse like a big person.

I never said they are JUST PP players. I was alluding to the fact that certain players are put in positions to essentailly make money based on productivity that is easier to aquire on the PP vs 5v5 or playing defensive zone starts match up roles and killing penalties etc.

The stars are driving revenue but the existance of a salary cap tied to revenues dictates how much of the pie the players get and whats available for the players based on their very own marketability. 81 million dollars. Shifting the balance of that towards the stars by percentages as you say is negating what value the rest of the team has left to fight over. You may think this is the new way and a good thing but what evidence is there to support this being an effective or desirable way to move forward?

I said in my post that there was many analysts making comments about the teams in the final four of last years playoffs not having these type of big salary structures still alive and that the lack of good depth could be a big factor.

Krecji 10.15% Bergeron 9.96% Marchand 8.16% (coming off 39goals and 85pts) Pastrnak 8.88% (coming off 34g and 70pts) = 37.15%
Tavares 13.83% Matthews 14.27% (coming off 37g and 73pts) Marner 13.37% ( coming off 26g and 94pts) Nylander 8.76% (coming off 20g and 61pts) = 50.23%

You dont see a problem with that?

Basically what i see is a core locked up to add and compete and another that hasn't won even a playoff round and already about to lose another of their top defenseman and probaly Nylander to go along with the 1st rounder, Connor Brown and Kadri. I'm not whining i hate the Leafs so go ahead Dubas,,,,,,,,, i don't like the precedent

 

[Addison Rae]

You have to pay good players, high salaries why is that such a hard concept to understand?

Matthews has been the best even strength goal scorer in the NHL since joining the league and will likely be a top 5 player in the NHL going forward, with inflation he's absolutely going to be worth his contract. John Tavares was arguably the best post lockout free agent ever and multiple teams offered him more money than the Leafs did, if you have the opportunity to add a~45 goal ~85 point centre with just cap space, you make it happen. Marner just came off a season where he nearly cracked a 100 points at 22, again with inflation his contract will be just fine.

The Leafs are a cap strapped cup contender while the Canucks are a cap strapped bottom feeder.

 

[mathonwy]

And in the end he deserved to be fired. I guess when the team has never won a Stanley Cup, and my standard is to see this team win a Stanley Cup, you can argue that no I haven’t been happy with any one management regime through and through. Neither should you or anyone for that matter.

I’m happy with you Y2K

 

[Spur1]

You have to pay good players, high salaries why is that such a hard concept to understand?

Matthews has been the best even strength goal scorer in the NHL since joining the league and will likely be a top 5 player in the NHL going forward, with inflation he's absolutely going to be worth his contract. John Tavares was arguably the best post lockout free agent ever and multiple teams offered him more money than the Leafs did, if you have the opportunity to add a~45 goal ~85 point centre with just cap space, you make it happen. Marner just came off a season where he nearly cracked a 100 points at 22, again with inflation his contract will be just fine.

The Leafs are a cap strapped cup contender while the Canucks are a cap strapped bottom feeder.

Your last statement is false on many levels.
The Canucks were not cap strapped last season. The Leafs were not a cup contender.
As for this season the games have yet to be played. There is a reason they play the games.

 

[Addison Rae]

Your last statement is false on many levels.
The Canucks were not cap strapped last season. The Leafs were not a cup contender.
As for this season the games have yet to be played. There is a reason they play the games.

A 100 point team that took a cup finalist to 7 games is absolutely a cup contender.

The Canucks are a cap strapped bad team this year.

Jesus is that you in your profile picture?

 

[Hit the post]

Jesus is that you in your profile picture?

I don't think he's Jeebus.

 

[4Twenty]

Yes they are but it doesn't change the fact that if you allocate 50% of your cap on 4 players that 5-23 have to fit into 40 million in a big giant marketplace where good players can go to get paid?

And dont give me all this crap about bitter, petty, ill informed whining and making up excuses for Benning... what a joke. I made my opinion and if you don't like it you can choose to counter or ignore it.. I am not one that keeps plugging negative crap on this site? If you address me like this in the future i will ignore you but i'm willing to give it a go and give this a chance if you want to converse like a big person.

I never said they are JUST PP players. I was alluding to the fact that certain players are put in positions to essentailly make money based on productivity that is easier to aquire on the PP vs 5v5 or playing defensive zone starts match up roles and killing penalties etc.

The stars are driving revenue but the existance of a salary cap tied to revenues dictates how much of the pie the players get and whats available for the players based on their very own marketability. 81 million dollars. Shifting the balance of that towards the stars by percentages as you say is negating what value the rest of the team has left to fight over. You may think this is the new way and a good thing but what evidence is there to support this being an effective or desirable way to move forward?

I said in my post that there was many analysts making comments about the teams in the final four of last years playoffs not having these type of big salary structures still alive and that the lack of good depth could be a big factor.

Krecji 10.15% Bergeron 9.96% Marchand 8.16% (coming off 39goals and 85pts) Pastrnak 8.88% (coming off 34g and 70pts) = 37.15%
Tavares 13.83% Matthews 14.27% (coming off 37g and 73pts) Marner 13.37% ( coming off 26g and 94pts) Nylander 8.76% (coming off 20g and 61pts) = 50.23%

You dont see a problem with that?

Basically what i see is a core locked up to add and compete and another that hasn't won even a playoff round and already about to lose another of their top defenseman and probaly Nylander to go along with the 1st rounder, Connor Brown and Kadri. I'm not whining i hate the Leafs so go ahead Dubas,,,,,,,,, i don't like the precedent

To the bold: cute.

Why are you comparing boston to toronto, when you're listing contracts like Bergeron and Kreijci's that were signed before every Leaf on your list sans Tavares were even drafted.

It doesn't make a lick of sense to me to compare contracts signed so long ago for players who are 29-36 years old, not the 20 year old superstars coming off of their ELC's.
I personally like the strategy that Toronto has taken up. They're loaded with elite talents, they're paying them (and attracting them), they're adding young players to that elite group in the back half of their ELC's so they lack leverage of the high profile RFA and sign longer-term, then draft-develop and fill out your roster with cheap talented depth.

If we wanna talk about filling out the roster 5-23, they've got Kerfoot, Kapanen, and JOhnsson at $10.1m for the next 3 years, the Canucks have Beagle, Eriksson and Roussel at $12m.

I definitely won't be complaining when the Canucks are paying Pettersson and Hughes either...I think a top heavy salary structure is the best way to go.

 

[Spur1]

A 100 point team that took a cup finalist to 7 games is absolutely a cup contender.

The Canucks are a cap strapped bad team this year.

Jesus is that you in your profile picture?

Well I do walk on water in the winter. Do you like my gold hat just like Petey’s.
To bad the Leafs are even worse this year and gave away their first round pick for nothing in return.
Meanwhile the Canucks will be in the playoffs this year.
And yet somehow Dubas has an appreciation thread and JB is the worst GM ever. Ya right.

 

[Cheeks Clapinski]

Meanwhile the Canucks will be in the playoffs this year.

I am sure you will be around at the end of the season to own this when it is inevitably proven wrong.

 

[Spur1]

I am sure you will be around at the end of the season to own this when it is inevitably proven wrong.

Oh yes I will be here laughing at the naysayers.

 

[xtra]

Oh yes I will be here laughing at the naysayers.

Calm down RyanMiller* we know your gonna be banned in a month

 

[Peen]

My biggest point of curiousity for the season is what will happen if things go south early in the year.

Like, who the f*** can Benning even trade to improve the team to save his job?

Eriksson, Sutter, Ferland, Roussel, Beagle, Edler, Myers, Tanev all have some form of trade protection.

Horvat, Miller, Pettersson, Brock, Hughes, one of Demko/Markstrom are untouchables.

That leaves... Baertschi, Pearson, Schaller, Leivo, Virtanen, Motte, Goldobin, Benn, Stecher, Biega, and Fantenberg. None of those guys have any value remotely higher than a 3rd round pick.

And, we don't have any space to add any big salary.

 

[Melvin]

Calm down RyanMiller* we know your gonna be banned in a month

He can't even get past 2 days anymore.

 

[Mr. Canucklehead]

A reminder to all on the rules regarding Flaming and Trolling - the worst manager in franchise history thread was shut down largely because of the rampant disregard for these rules. I'd rather not have to dish out warnings or reply bans to folks, so please express your disagreements in a civil fashion.

1) Flaming: Critique the opinion, not the person. Personal attacks against members are not permitted. Report flaming, do not respond to it. Counter-flaming is also prohibited.
2) Trolling: Do not make posts that could be interpreted as though they were made to cause an argument or provoke others. Making generalizations about other posters is a common form of trolling. Posting questionable content on team boards, particularly those of rivals, is likely to be seen as trolling.

 

[4Twenty]

Post from doctor good vibes in the deleted thread:

"I said no. It's a tough question. I've been a Canucks fan since I was a wee lad. I was like five years old when I went to my first game and I remember Alex Mogilny was my favourite player. Sitting up in the nosebleeds he moved so fast and he was so exciting. I remember more about the WCE, the Sedins era, the Willie era, and now this, the Jim Benning era.

Here's the thing. I don't love Jim Benning. I'm not a supporter. I want him gone, actually, I believe there's better options out there, and I think trading our first for Miller has a very high chance of backfiring. It's a move that wreaks of desperation and I hate it.

I'd rate Jim's performance as about a 5/10.

The thing is, I remember how hopeless being a Canucks fan used to be. And maybe the Sedins era is too recent, but I haven't felt quite as hopeless during Jim's era. As many things as he ****s up, at least we're not missing on all our draft picks. In all fairness, this is the highest spat of picks in my existence as a Canucks fan so it's probably easier to hit on them. But I am thankful to Jim for picking Pettersson, he wasn't on my radar at all.

I think Nonis was worse, and that's just among the GMs I can remember. I can hardly remember Burke. The WCE were really disappointing. We had a great top line and Naslund was sick but no depth. We lost to Avs and Detroit over and over. Hopeless times. Before that, there were decades of dark eras.

So no, I don't think he's the worst GM ever, but he's up there. He's probably top five for worst all time but honestly I don't know enough about the guys who came before to say. He's worse than anyone besides Nonis in my memory."

My response:

How would you rate the job Jim has done if you completely disregard the draft?

What makes Nonis worse?

I have a hard time viewing the WCE as hopeless, especially coming out of the Messier years. I definitely don't recall feeling hopeless. They played one of the most exciting brands of hockey in the NHL, had the WCE, the Sedins in behind, some really good defensman....a vast amount of exciting youth like Schaefer, Druken and Cooke.

I honestly can't fathom how someone can watch the last 4 seasons of Canucks hockey and think that was less hopeless than being a regular playoff team....and the 2002-03 team had everything to win it all but a goalie who could make a save. Not saying your feelings are wrong, just that I can't imagine thinking that era was depressing and hopeless...maybe because we had a good team but the elites were paying triple for their rosters, but not for the product.

 

[4Twenty]

A reminder to all on the rules regarding Flaming and Trolling - the worst manager in franchise history thread was shut down largely because of the rampant disregard for these rules. I'd rather not have to dish out warnings or reply bans to folks, so please express your disagreements in a civil fashion.

1) Flaming: Critique the opinion, not the person. Personal attacks against members are not permitted. Report flaming, do not respond to it. Counter-flaming is also prohibited.
2) Trolling: Do not make posts that could be interpreted as though they were made to cause an argument or provoke others. Making generalizations about other posters is a common form of trolling. Posting questionable content on team boards, particularly those of rivals, is likely to be seen as trolling.

Question:

What about the constant complaints about the discourse/HFboards in general.....I'd argue these break the "off topic" rules.

 

[y2kcanucks]

@Canucko

Since the other thread got shut down I can't respond to your post there directly with a quote, but I will say this:

saying my statement is ridiculous without actually being able to show how my statement is ridiculous with actual evidence, really proves nothing. If anything, it proves me right because your lack of evidence to disprove my statement makes my statement even stronger.

 

[Mr. Canucklehead]

Question:

What about the constant complaints about the discourse/HFboards in general.....I'd argue these break the "off topic" rules.

If you see a post you feel violates the Site Rules, please report it so the moderators can review it.

 

[Canucko]

@Canucko

Since the other thread got shut down I can't respond to your post there directly with a quote, but I will say this:

saying my statement is ridiculous without actually being able to show how my statement is ridiculous with actual evidence, really proves nothing. If anything, it proves me right because your lack of evidence to disprove my statement makes my statement even stronger.

My evidence is the Canucks prospects and young players that are under contract. I don’t need any other evidence. Arguing that the general manager of the Canucks shares no responsibility for this is ridiculous in my opinion.

 

[geebaan]

My evidence is the Canucks prospects and young players that are under contract. I don’t need any other evidence. Arguing that the general manager of the Canucks shares no responsibility for this is ridiculous in my opinion.

Well Brock isn’t so strike one lol

 

[Canucko]

Well Brock isn’t so strike one lol

Lol fair enough.

 

[y2kcanucks]

My evidence is the Canucks prospects and young players that are under contract. I don’t need any other evidence. Arguing that the general manager of the Canucks shares no responsibility for this is ridiculous in my opinion.

So your evidence that there isn't a fact-based argument to support Jim Benning as being a good GM, is to point to a group of prospects that were drafted high in the NHL draft?