Management Thread | Inconceivable Edition

[Samzilla]

General Manager	Characteristics	Cult of personality?
Pat Quinn	Swings a series of trades that vault the Canucks into contender status for the first time in team history; makes the Canucks matter. Drafts guys like Mike Peca and Adrian Aucoin outside of the first round.	NO CULT OF PERSONALITY
Brian Burke	Salvages the Mike Keenan wreckage and undertakes an instant rebuild; swings innovative trades for both Sedins, spurns Mark Messier and turns the expiring Alex Mogilny deal into a critical asset.	NO CULT OF PERSONALITY
Mike Gillis	Oversees the best-performing seasons in team history, while under a cap constraint; signs a number of team-friendly deals and makes critical acquisitions that allow the Canucks to top the league twice and win their division multiple times over. Pulls out two crucial future pieces while dealing with a headache goalie situation.	NO CULT OF PERSONALITY
Jim Benning	Unintentionally fails into high draft position and uses the picks.	CULT OF PERSONALITY

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

I don't know if it's just the advancement of the Internet and social media or what, but I feel like this is a giant social experiment.

this post needs to go in the hfcanucks hall of fame

 

[Bojack Horvatman]

31 Thoughts: How the Dubois-Laine trade finally came together

Confirmation that Benning would have traded the 5th overall pick in 2016 for PK Subban. Yikes.

In hindsight it would of been a good trade for us by limiting Benning's cap space by almost 10m every year.

 

[Snatcher Demko]

There is no "cult of personality". Every GM has fans and detractors. Difference is now there are forums and ubiquitous media to foster more tribalism and to polarize views (and polarize impressions of other's views).

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

Some forums lament giving away players like Filip Forsberg, Seth Jones, William Karlsson, Jeff Petry, Nick Suzuki, Nazem Kadri, Taylor Hall, etc.

This forum laments giving away Ben Hutton, Zack Kassian, Brad Richardson, Eddie Lack, Alex Biega, Brendan Gaunce, Mike Santorelli, Hunter Shinkaruk, Dane Fox, Jordan Subban, Darren Archibald, etc.

Hmmm, I wonder what all these players have in common, beyond being barely NHL caliber.

I think you forgot about the team dropping the ball on easy picks like Matthew Tkachuk and Nylander/Ehlers. Those names fit your list better. I understand how you could lose sight of them given how many other mistakes Benning has made, though. Thankfully he was saved from himself in getting Pettersson over Glass.

 

[Sleepinghorse]

It is amusing how you're now describing Edler as an elite top pairing defenceman, when you previously argued he should have been waived in the season prior to Benning's arrival.

It's even more amusing that he thinks that they excelled for 6 seasons after Benning got here. I guess Loui Eriksson was at least above average for his first couple of seasons too.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

It's even more amusing that he thinks that they excelled for 6 seasons after Benning got here. I guess Loui Eriksson was at least above average for his first couple of seasons too.

Edler and Tanev were still quality top 4 dmen and I would say around an average top pairing. The main issue is the rest of the defence sucked, so we overrelied on them causing them to get injured so often. That’s not their problem though.

 

[bandwagonesque]

I think you forgot about the team dropping the ball on easy picks like Matthew Tkachuk and Nylander/Ehlers.

No, these are the ones virtually everyone agrees with and which at this point are rarely discussed. He listed the horseshit disingenuous ones that constantly start circular arguments.

 

[4Twenty]

i only count fowler, lindholm (i.e., the guys benning that accepted were untouchable for... reasons), vatanen (the flat out miss), theodore, montour (too young to fill the "age gap"), and manson (whom i think none of us knew about at the time). who am i missing? or are you counting the older guys too?

damn when i type all that out, that's an entire team's worth of legit 20+ minute dmen.

I forget now. But he was fading. We all thought he was salary Dump.

they botched the expansion hard losing Theodore.

 

[bandwagonesque]

I think you forgot about the team dropping the ball on easy picks like Matthew Tkachuk and Nylander/Ehlers. Those names fit your list better. I understand how you could lose sight of them given how many other mistakes Benning has made, though. Thankfully he was saved from himself in getting Pettersson over Glass.

Have you considered that he didn't list those because he doesn't hold the opinions about them you're implying he does?

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

No, these are the ones virtually everyone agrees with and which at this point are rarely discussed. He listed the horseshit disingenuous ones that constantly start circular arguments.

Have you considered that he didn't list those because he doesn't hold the opinions about them you're implying he does?

Did you read his post that I quoted? He's saying that other boards complain about more substantial players being lost by bad management. I brought up those names to show that this board also has the same issues. You've created a straw man here.

 

[CantStoptheBrock]

Did you read his post that I quoted? He's saying that other boards complain about more substantial players being lost by bad management. I brought up those names to show that this board also has the same issues. You've created a straw man here.

The discussion and my post was clearly in regard to player transactions, not drafting. Every team whiffs on draft picks.

 

[I am toxic]

It is pretty evident Benning was hired by Aquilini because he was willing to try a retool rather than a rebuild. When the owners' mandate is to push for the playoffs every year instead of trading assets for futures you lose those assets for nothing. Why do you think Benning hasn't been fired in his 6 1/2 years in Vancouver? It's because he's done exactly what the Canucks' meddling owners want him to do.

I'm not saying Benning has done a great job or shouldn't be fired.

Then say Benning has done a bad job and should be fired.

You can cut-n'-paste from my post, you don't even have to type it out, I don't mind.

 

[I am toxic]

There is no "cult of personality". Every GM has fans and detractors. Difference is now there are forums and ubiquitous media to foster more tribalism and to polarize views (and polarize impressions of other's views).

There have been forums and ubiquitous media since the late '90's, I have seen nothing of HFNonis or HFGillis.


Nothing.

 

[4Twenty]

Sad. Same sad conversation as 6 years ago after the Dorsett and Sbisa extensions and the Sutter trade. Followed by the Gudbranson trade and the Eriksson signing.

I’m just not sure Jim can do it. As painful as that may be to some.

 

[Lindgren]

31 Thoughts: How the Dubois-Laine trade finally came together

Confirmation that Benning would have traded the 5th overall pick in 2016 for PK Subban. Yikes.

Also from that edition of 31 thoughts:

10. There’ve been reports the Canucks have talked to former Los Angeles assistant GM Michael Futa. He works with Sportsnet now, so it’s not something I’m really comfortable talking about, but I don’t believe these conversations are new. There was contact several months ago with GM Jim Benning, but nothing available.

I wonder what "nothing available" means?

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

The discussion and my post was clearly in regard to player transactions, not drafting. Every team whiffs on draft picks.

You sure the discussion wasn't about Benning failing at the retool and being lousy at asset management for the first few years? I'd put the Tkachuk/Nylander whiffs as a part of asset management (draft picks are assets). I get what you're saying, but ultimately it still goes back to the discussion over the last few pages about how Benning didn't do a great job at trying to retool this team over the first few years. These players would have joined the roster in the first two years of Benning being on the job.

I actually agree with your point about every team missing on draft picks, though. In a vacuum, they shouldn't be an indictment on Benning's performance here. But when you look at the entire body of his work, then yeah, they're just another example of a long laundry list full of gaffes.

 

[mathonwy]

There is no "cult of personality". Every GM has fans and detractors. Difference is now there are forums and ubiquitous media to foster more tribalism and to polarize views (and polarize impressions of other's views).

Oh..

So its the forums and "ubiquitous media" fault for fostering "more tribalism" and "polarized views".

Not 7 years of incompetence.

That totally makes sense.

 

[Fire Benning]

Lack-Markstrom pairing! Ben Hutton is a top-4 defenceman! Rehabilitate Kassian! Keep Garrison! Resign Richardson, Santorelli, Gaunce, Archibald, and Hamhuis!

Is this a Mike Gillis fan fiction forum?

The funny part is you say this trying to be sarcastic but they’re all upgrades on their counterparts that our GM brought it.

Markstrom turned out to be a top 3 goalie in franchise history.
Ben Hutton is miles better than the guy Benning drafted with the highest pick the franchise has had in 15 years
Kassian ended up miles better than Prust
Richardson miles better than Beagle
Santorelli retained an asset at the deadline for Toronto

Jim Benning fan fiction involves catching lightning in a bottle in an unprecedented bubble and claims it overshadows the worst 3 year stretch in the franchises history despite actually trying to be good.

Like imagine mentioning those names as a “got you” when your idol is spending 30 million dollars on Myers, Beagle, Eriksson, Rousell, Baertschi, Ferland, Sam Gagner (buyout) Sutter etc

 

[xtra]

So how does that Jim Benning vs. Kyle Dubas comparison look right now?

I kinda know which roster I’d rather have and which gm

 

[4Twenty]

Also from that edition of 31 thoughts:

10. There’ve been reports the Canucks have talked to former Los Angeles assistant GM Michael Futa. He works with Sportsnet now, so it’s not something I’m really comfortable talking about, but I don’t believe these conversations are new. There was contact several months ago with GM Jim Benning, but nothing available.

I wonder what "nothing available" means?

It means like he’s not available to work FOR Jim Benning.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

So how does that Jim Benning vs. Kyle Dubas comparison look right now?

I kinda know which roster I’d rather have and which gm

he wears glasses and knows how to use a calculator. light him on fire, throw him in the lake and see if he doesn't sink

 

[RandV]

There is no "cult of personality". Every GM has fans and detractors. Difference is now there are forums and ubiquitous media to foster more tribalism and to polarize views (and polarize impressions of other's views).

There's something there but yeah it's not a cult of personality, more of a cognitive dissonance to continuously praise incompetence.

I don't think it's much different from years past though. I hate making broad generalizations but my long term impression is that the teams success from Gillis tenure brought in new full time fans from the bandwagon (as success does), who followed the media and turning on Gillis when the team started stumbling who bought in hard on Benning because he was supposedly a savant at what Gillis was 'bad' at: drafting. And Benning has always been able to maintain this facade over all his other shortcomings by the slimmest of margins.

 

[AwesomeInTheory]

It's no different than the folks who were fans of Dave Nonis (because he brought in Roberto Luongo) and critics of Nonis (who went apoplectic because he traded for Bryan Smolinski.)

Or folks who were fans of Burke (because he said funny things in pressers and offered to drive people to the airport) and critics of Burke (who couldn't fix the team's goaltending issues or mistreated RJ Umberger.)

Critics and fans of the team's management will always exist, and they just fluctuate depending on what is going on with the team. This is hardly a Gillis exclusive thing and I think there's a multitude of reasons why folks are so entrenched with Benning. On both sides.

But leave it to someone who is seemingly a fan of Benning to yet again invoke the ghost of Mike Gillis (fanfiction.) It's f***ing tiresome.

 

[Jyrki21]

There is no "cult of personality". Every GM has fans and detractors. Difference is now there are forums and ubiquitous media to foster more tribalism and to polarize views (and polarize impressions of other's views).

No, the difference is the ones with substantial fanship have generally done something to earn it, not just be "aw shucks" and seem like a friendly uncle. The fact that Benning has way more ardent support than his predecessors from this loud, devoted group despite his crowning achievement being botching a retool to draft high is what I find completely baffling.

A perfect example – the same sort of folks who regularly claim "the Canucks have never won a thing" under any of the other guys (despite winning literally everything a team can win but the 4th decision in the Finals) are the ones who are hooting and hollering over a tiny, summertime pandemic sample size that amounts to winning one playoff round and claiming it justifies everything.

"HFGillis", "HFBurke" or "HFQuinn" would actually make some sense given their records (I was very supportive of all three).

 

[AwesomeInTheory]

No, the difference is the ones with substantial fanship have generally done something to earn it, not just be "aw shucks" and seem like a friendly uncle. The fact that Benning has way more ardent support than his predecessors from this loud, devoted group despite his crowning achievement being botching a retool to draft high is what I find completely baffling.

"HFGillis", "HFBurke" or "HFQuinn" would actually make some sense given their records (I was very supportive of all three).

I think it comes down to a variety of things.

- 2011. There's a lot of baggage for Canucks fans from the SCF, and I think it goes for both sides. Those who look at Gillis positively see someone who came so bloody close to winning it all, while those who are critical of Gillis see him as a convenient scapegoat (never forget these idiots in their mobility scooters: https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/04p...chorus_image/image/31018311/fire_gillis.0.jpg ).

- Media portrayal. Gillis' relationship with the press was always thorny -- he was classified as being stand-offish and 'arrogant.' Meanwhile, media coverage of Benning has been ridiculously soft to the point where the press were singing his praises as a ~*~ talent whisperer ~*~ like he was some messiah descending from on high. Folks gobbled it up because they wanted to believe that the Canucks had someone who could outdraft a potato and the media never really got critical of him at all. I mean, compare Dubas in Toronto with Benning here in Vancouver.

- Laziness. A lot of the detractors on here (and elsewhere) have done the heavy lifting, have made projections and generally have done work in showcasing why Benning hasn't lived up to his hype. There's a real reluctance amongst those who are fans of Benning to do similar work to disprove the critics arguments or, gasp, come up with different arguments that support their case that Benning is a good GM. A lot of it comes down to quoting things in interviews or arguing minutiae, which isn't a hugely convincing argument for me when you have folks across the aisle who are looking at the big picture. Think about it: the average fan doesn't give a shit about fancy stats, a 3-5 (-7 to....well, you get the picture...) year salary cap projection/breakdown or the inner workings of the Canucks front office. The hockey geeks who have nothing better to do, however, do. It's much easier to just go "Elias Pettersson, lol" and handwave away everything else because there's no effort to go into it.

- Sunk cost fallacy and an unwillingness to admit to being wrong. We're all assholes and we're all creatures of ego. We don't like admitting that we're wrong, and seeing the abortion that has been the Canucks over going on 7 years makes it really hard for folks to walk back their praise for Jim Benning. There's too much invested in proving the 'haters' "wrong" that you have to be a contrarian and not give an inch in conceding anything bad that Daddy Benning has done. I think that there's a bit of this with those who are critical of Benning, too -- any success the team has seen has Benning's involvement minimalized and compartmentalized to the point of ridiculousness, which hasn't helped discourse on here and has led to the further entrenchment of both camps.