Management Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

Peen

Rejoicing in a Benning-free world
Oct 6, 2013
30,042
25,463
POM is being purposefully ignorant with the "his hockey takes suck so that means he doesn't have credible sources".

I think imac sucks as a hockey analyst but I never doubt his sources. I also don't really like JD's hockey takes much but again don't doubt his sources.
 

Bleach Clean

Registered User
Aug 9, 2006
27,049
6,615
At some point, a team needs to stop rebuilding. When you already have a 20 year old #1C, a 19 year old future #1D, a young #2C, a young 1st line winger and one of the better goalie prospects in the sport, the pieces are there to start adding to that core group. The Canucks are seen throughout the hockey world as having one of the best young cores in the NHL and you can't just keep playing the perpetual rebuild card.


How many teams are in that “best young core” descriptor, I wonder?

Anyway, I largely agree that when you have a 20 year old 1C, rebuild over, but they didn’t accrue enough assets to A) Call it a rebuild and B) Make it clear that they had enough stockpiled in order to switch gears.

So while yes, there is a time to stop rebuilding and start competing, had they not ended up with a thin core and weak pipeline, more people would say that this time is now.

As it is, it’s now whether people like it or not.
 

ProstheticConscience

Check dein Limit
Apr 30, 2010
18,459
10,107
Canuck Nation
At some point, a team needs to stop rebuilding. When you already have a 20 year old #1C, a 19 year old future #1D, a young #2C, a young 1st line winger and one of the better goalie prospects in the sport, the pieces are there to start adding to that core group. The Canucks are seen throughout the hockey world as having one of the best young cores in the NHL and they felt it was time to add to that core. I don't think they were wrong to do so.

The problem was that management had made so many mistakes prior and has a bunch of old bums that are essentially holding back this young core. Chicago added Hossa pretty early on into Toews/Kane's career but, since their roster was so well built, no one questioned the timing.

The Canucks have *never* tried to rebuild during Benning's tenure. He's failed his way into a few high draft picks. As has been mentioned like a million times here.
 
Last edited:

xtra

Registered User
May 19, 2002
8,323
4,765
Vancouver
Visit site
Awww my gif didn’t load
 

Attachments

  • 1B653AD8-E1AF-4FE0-948C-2BA9D04E5230.jpeg
    1B653AD8-E1AF-4FE0-948C-2BA9D04E5230.jpeg
    10.2 KB · Views: 4

Bourne Endeavor

Registered User
Apr 6, 2009
37,666
5,874
Montreal, Quebec
Miller was worth the trade value, but the timing of the trade was too soon, considering the development of our two stars. When Petey and Hughes are mature, and ready to truly compete for a Cup (likely 3 seasons from now) where will Miller be? He will be gone. Where would another top ten pick be? Very likely helping Petey and Hughes on the ice and for years after.
As Brett Heart put it, “Benning is the worst there is; the worst there was; and the worst there ever will be.”

Not necessarily. Miller is only 27. Why wouldn't we re-sign him at 30 unless he completely fell off a cliff? Edmonton tried the whole "lets keep failing" approach. It took them a decade and two of the best players in the modern era before they finally stopped sucking. And they only just started putting it together this year.

I'm not saying Benning is doing a good job or anything. He isn't. But getting someone like Miller to help younger players along does a lot more than people realize. Benning can still be an idiot while stumbling into a good trade or two. I'd say Miller fits that description.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MarkMM

Fatass

Registered User
Apr 17, 2017
22,129
14,053
Not necessarily. Miller is only 27. Why wouldn't we re-sign him at 30 unless he completely fell off a cliff? Edmonton tried the whole "lets keep failing" approach. It took them a decade and two of the best players in the modern era before they finally stopped sucking. And they only just started putting it together this year.

I'm not saying Benning is doing a good job or anything. He isn't. But getting someone like Miller to help younger players along does a lot more than people realize. Benning can still be an idiot while stumbling into a good trade or two. I'd say Miller fits that description.
We won’t have the cap space to resign Miller. What we will need though are younger guys who can play, while still on their ELC’s, like that first we gave up to get Miller would provide.
If we don’t get proper management, like Edmonton finally did hiring Holland, we will almost certainly follow their previous path of losing.
 

Bourne Endeavor

Registered User
Apr 6, 2009
37,666
5,874
Montreal, Quebec
We won’t have the cap space to resign Miller. What we will need though are younger guys who can play, while still on their ELC’s, like that first we gave up to get Miller would provide.
If we don’t get proper management, like Edmonton finally did hiring Holland, we will almost certainly follow their previous path of losing.

That is one massive assumption considering Miller's contract isn't up for another three years. By that point, literally all of our bad contracts except Myers will be long gone. We also have no idea what the cap will look like. And if it does drop significantly due to Covid-19, players aren't going to get the huge paydays they were because no team can afford that.

At this point you're just being pessimistic over nothing but assumptions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Luckylarry

Fatass

Registered User
Apr 17, 2017
22,129
14,053
That is one massive assumption considering Miller's contract isn't up for another three years. By that point, literally all of our bad contracts except Myers will be long gone. We also have no idea what the cap will look like. And if it does drop significantly due to Covid-19, players aren't going to get the huge paydays they were because no team can afford that.

At this point you're just being pessimistic over nothing but assumptions.
I agree. I’m very pessimistic of our team’s future, especially with Benn/Wisebrod leading the group.
Has Benning ever in his 6 years here not spent to the cap? From his history with us I think it’s a fair supposition that his overspending on UFA’s keeps us in continuing cap trouble.
 

ProstheticConscience

Check dein Limit
Apr 30, 2010
18,459
10,107
Canuck Nation
That is one massive assumption considering Miller's contract isn't up for another three years. By that point, literally all of our bad contracts except Myers will be long gone. We also have no idea what the cap will look like. And if it does drop significantly due to Covid-19, players aren't going to get the huge paydays they were because no team can afford that.

At this point you're just being pessimistic over nothing but assumptions.
Benning has splurged on UFAs literally every year he's been here. Why do you think he'll finally stop?
 
  • Like
Reactions: tyhee and Bubbles

Bleach Clean

Registered User
Aug 9, 2006
27,049
6,615
Not necessarily. Miller is only 27. Why wouldn't we re-sign him at 30 unless he completely fell off a cliff? Edmonton tried the whole "lets keep failing" approach. It took them a decade and two of the best players in the modern era before they finally stopped sucking. And they only just started putting it together this year.

I'm not saying Benning is doing a good job or anything. He isn't. But getting someone like Miller to help younger players along does a lot more than people realize. Benning can still be an idiot while stumbling into a good trade or two. I'd say Miller fits that description.


Hey BE, how does Miller help young players more than a good young player would help them? What is the net impact, in development, players like Pettersson gain from Miller that he would not gain from say, Boeser? I’m curious.
 

Sneezy

Registered User
Oct 25, 2019
533
340
... and more attacking the messenger.

As I’ve explained to you multiple times, hockey opinion takes from reporters and reports of information from reporters are two entirely different things.

The fact that JD Burke has bad hockey opinions has absolutely nothing to do with the credibility of his reporting.

Wow - did you just say this? It is hard to take opinion and determine that vs. fact or information.
 

MS

1%er
Mar 18, 2002
53,612
84,154
Vancouver, BC
Wow - did you just say this? It is hard to take opinion and determine that vs. fact or information.

What on earth are you talking about?

Information and opinions are two completely different things.

Telling the public you've learned from a source that the Canucks are about to table a UFA offer for Jay Beagle is information. There is no opinion involved. It's black and white.

Writing an opinion piece on why Jay Beagle will be a great signing for the Canucks is ... one person's opinion.

The fact that people are using the fact that a reporter had a bad opinion about hockey as evidence that their news reporting isn't credible is just total garbage.

I can't stand IMac. The guy is an idiot. But he clearly has good sources and what he reports is highly credible.
 

ProstheticConscience

Check dein Limit
Apr 30, 2010
18,459
10,107
Canuck Nation
What on earth are you talking about?

Information and opinions are two completely different things.

Telling the public you've learned from a source that the Canucks are about to table a UFA offer for Jay Beagle is information. There is no opinion involved. It's black and white.

Writing an opinion piece on why Jay Beagle will be a great signing for the Canucks is ... one person's opinion.

The fact that people are using the fact that a reporter had a bad opinion about hockey as evidence that their news reporting isn't credible is just total garbage.

I can't stand IMac. The guy is an idiot. But he clearly has good sources and what he reports is highly credible.
It's so infuriating how our generation has somehow lost the ability to tell the difference between journalism and opinion pieces.
 
  • Like
Reactions: I am toxic

Kryten

slightly regarded
Sponsor
Sep 29, 2011
15,306
12,630
Kootenays
Hey BE, how does Miller help young players more than a good young player would help them? What is the net impact, in development, players like Pettersson gain from Miller that he would not gain from say, Boeser? I’m curious.
Being a mentor, Miller took Virtanen under his wing this year. He is in a position to do that and wouldn’t likely happen with younger players fighting for the same job.
 

vanuck

Now with 100% less Benning!
Dec 28, 2009
16,800
4,019
Yeah it'd be funnier if I thought they were just being sarcastic or intentionally obtuse. But I don't think that's the case here.
 

Bleach Clean

Registered User
Aug 9, 2006
27,049
6,615
Just doing some digging back to the past in the light of Brackett/Benning. Here's some interesting material to revisit:

Trevor's interview in Feb 2020:

Trevor Linden on his relationship now with the Canucks & Jim Benning - Sportsnet.ca

I like that when after being fired, Linden gives an interview after being away for almost 2 years of silence, he gets prompted to talk about Benning and he refuses (Starts at the 7 min mark). Yup, no malice there.

1. Mixed feelings on having to go back for the Sedin retirement.
2. Important to give the guys who have seen him the most the right to make the decision. (7:00 min mark)
3. Trust the people you have in those positions. (9:00 min mark)
4. Every opinion matters, and don't feel bad for having an opposing opinion.
5. Judd is collaborative and open. Patient.
6. Keeps in touch with Stan Smyl and Travis Green. Benning, nope.
7. I haven't talked to Jim, he's busy and so am I. lol. (11:00 min mark)

Then this good hit by Iain MacIntyre:

Canucks GM Benning denies role in Linden's surprise exit - Sportsnet.ca

1. Grievance there between Benning and Linden.
2. Mixed reviews about Weisbrod before he joined.
3. Jim is very protective of Weisbrod.

"Several people close to Linden, inside and outside of hockey, confirmed to Sportsnet that the deposed president does indeed feel angry and betrayed by Benning. No one, however, could or would provide details or speak on the record."

Yup, no malice there. :)
 

ProstheticConscience

Check dein Limit
Apr 30, 2010
18,459
10,107
Canuck Nation
Just doing some digging back to the past in the light of Brackett/Benning. Here's some interesting material to revisit:

Trevor's interview in Feb 2020:

Trevor Linden on his relationship now with the Canucks & Jim Benning - Sportsnet.ca

I like that when after being fired, Linden gives an interview after being away for almost 2 years of silence, he gets prompted to talk about Benning and he refuses (Starts at the 7 min mark). Yup, no malice there.

1. Mixed feelings on having to go back for the Sedin retirement.
2. Important to give the guys who have seen him the most the right to make the decision. (7:00 min mark)
3. Trust the people you have in those positions. (9:00 min mark)
4. Every opinion matters, and don't feel bad for having an opposing opinion.
5. Judd is collaborative and open. Patient.
6. Keeps in touch with Stan Smyl and Travis Green. Benning, nope.
7. I haven't talked to Jim, he's busy and so am I. lol. (11:00 min mark)

Then this good hit by Iain MacIntyre:

Canucks GM Benning denies role in Linden's surprise exit - Sportsnet.ca

1. Grievance there between Benning and Linden.
2. Mixed reviews about Weisbrod before he joined.
3. Jim is very protective of Weisbrod.

"Several people close to Linden, inside and outside of hockey, confirmed to Sportsnet that the deposed president does indeed feel angry and betrayed by Benning. No one, however, could or would provide details or speak on the record."

Yup, no malice there. :)
Source? Don't see any.
 

vanuck

Now with 100% less Benning!
Dec 28, 2009
16,800
4,019
Just continuing my thoughts on this here because the Judd Brackett thread is closing:

Vancast Brackett Full Summary:

1 - Benning + Weisbrod were "short focused" On Juolevi. (Linden and other people in the org were "concerned with the process")

2 - EP40 Pick - Two factions - Jim's group vs Linden/Scouts
Linden ultimately decided to go with the scouts with the draft pick.
Jim "liked glass a lot" "Glass was to low on the list"
One person said "Jim came down and cleared the board, and wrote Cody Glass on the board"
Benning did not push as hard as Juolevi.
"Without Linden, the pick is glass"
Jim was also high on EP40, as was weisbrod, so he basically caved.

3 - "Did not want total autonomy"
(2019 day 2 draft day now)
"Brackett was stripped of his authority: Not exactly".
jim was "mythed"
"The way it was framed, Jim Really liked/vouched for Hoglander, the scouts wanted size and a D man with the 2nd round pick"
Jim took control and made the pick.
Drance: "I don't think it called a rift, due process"

4 - "Staff departures"
Chris McDonald joins arizona as director.
Club lets go of 3 scouts, + doug who left on his accord
Dan polango was a mike gillis hire, was agent for gillis firm, over the years he emerged as bracketts #1 guys.
"If the communication was buttoned up" AKA brackett in the decision making.
Instead Brackett was not involved, org hired 3 other scouts.
Brackett wanted troy ward.
Personally decisions made by org without brackett's input basically.

5 - Brackett's Offer

"Brackett's offer was rejected aggressively"
"They wanted a request for clarification on how they would function together"
"but how it went down, it was off-putting for both sides."
Both sides are basically pissed off.
After it went off the rails "It all started to blow up during interview, Pat asked a question, Jim said Judd is with us "for now"
"were talking still was lie, mis-characterization"

I think that's about it, phew that took awhile!

First off, thanks again to LB for transcribing this. I also listened to this, and want to go over some things about Drance's comments in the Vancast from June 1:

Brackett, who was up-jumped in terms of the responsibility he was granted back in 2015, he was a relatively low man on the totem pole and when Benning said that Weisbrod supported that promotion at the time, like, that's true. That is absolutely 100% the truth.
Since Linden and now Weisbrod are confirmed as being in favour of Brackett's promotion, it makes you wonder who the people being sour and going all "Who is this guy?" were. Perhaps Delorme? Ryan Kennedy said before that "there has always been tension between Benning and Brackett, with the scouting department separated into old-guard and new-school factions". Maybe our Dear Leader too?

It's said - and I've had a variety of corroboration internally on this - but it's said that Benning and Weisbrod got fixated on Juolevi. And they make that pick.
This supports what iMac already said: that Benning picked Juolevi in 2016. Nothing new here, but more confirmation nonetheless.

I do think Linden and some other senior members in the organization became concerned with the process, and became concerned that the organization had laser-focused - with too narrow a focus - on Juolevi and maybe hadn't dug deeper in terms of the process leading up to that.
This part seems like his own speculation, even if it makes total sense and fits with Linden's stepping in later at the 2017 draft.

What he says here is the real meat of this story:
Look, I can't really tell because again I think there's competing agendas here and I don't know exactly who I'm being spun by, you know - it's tough for me to know for sure 'cos I wasn't in the room, but based on what I think is the most credible sort of middle route as I can figure it, I mean I do think that Jim liked Glass a lot and thought that Glass was too low on their lists. And I've heard stories from people involved in the process who say Jim came in and wiped the board down and wrote 'Cody Glass' on the board. And look, I'm hearing from other people that that's not quite the case.

Ultimately, what I know is that Glass never surpassed Pettersson on the Canucks' list. And whether Jim was pushing to have Glass higher or whether it was a debate over one vs. the other, you know, I can't say with certainty how far it went. But certainly there are people who were with the organization at the time who say, "Without Linden, the pick is Glass. Like, if Linden doesn't step in, the pick is Glass". And on the other side there are people who insist that Jim was really high on Pettersson too, as was Weisbrod and on and on. So take that as you will, I don't know if we'll ever get the unvarnished story there, but it's clearly a part of it.

So after parsing this, how does Drance's hit corroborate other sources as part of the overall picture?

According to Botchford, there was a big debate in 2017 between two guys: Cody Glass and Elias Pettersson. Cam Robinson says this divided the front office into two camps; Ed Willes also reports there was a faction that wanted to take Glass. Kennedy's sources confirm that EP wasn't Benning's preference. This doesn't mean that Benning hated EP or anything - per Drance, he liked him as a prospect too (emphasis on "too"); it just means his preference was to take Glass as he liked him even more. Robinson says the camp pushing for EP demanded that they settle this debate before draft day.

In my view, this is possibly because Benning tried to move Glass higher up the list, was met with resistance and suggested they leave it till the big day to decide.

Hence Linden getting involved. Here Drance confirms that had he not stepped in, we would've taken Glass instead. Despite the fact that the scouts had EP higher on their lists. Robinson confirms that Linden gave a voice to the scouts who wanted EP, leading to the player we have today.

Like pieces of a puzzle - all taken from independent media members - everything fits together here. This shouldn't be particularly surprising to anybody who's been following all along.

The biggest takeaway I got was that there seem to be two competing factions who are telling different sides of the story, hence Drance's concern about being spun. This partisanship isn't surprising; Robinson even says the side pushing for Glass has systematically been removing the people who sided against them. Gilman, Henning, Linden, now Brackett... this is nothing new if you've been paying attention.

Though from what Drance said about Day 2 of the 2019 draft, funnily I think it's actually a good thing they decided to go with the BPA instead of prioritizing position in the 2nd round. This means in taking Hoglander they were actually following the list.

--------

To summarize what he says next about scouting hires:

VAN let go of three scouts in 2019. One of them was Dan Palango (a Gillis hire) who'd emerged as one of the staff who was closer to Brackett over the years. From what Drance heard, if Brackett had been more involved in the decision-making he might've pushed to retain Chris MacDonald to fill Palango's shoes, but instead ended up going to ARI. Drance thinks Brackett wasn't as involved in this decision as he would've liked to be. Willes confirms that Palango was let go without his input.

Three new scouts are hired, one of which is Troy Ward (who has ties to Weisbrod from their time in CGY) - in Drance's opinion the idea that Brackett would've hired him can be viewed with some skepticism. Edit: in fact, Willes outright confirmed Ward was hired without his input on Sunday.

Consider what Sekeras said a year ago:


Lastly, this would tie in with what Brackett said in his statement about "the level of the input going forward with regard to staff personnel".

Piecing it all together... what I gather from all the above is that Brackett never wanted complete, total freedom to do whatever he wanted, but wanted the autonomy to make his own personnel decisions. Which, as head of his own department, is completely normal. The idea that there's micromanagement going on continues...

--------

Again, the link to the Vancast is here for anyone who wants to listen:
‎The VANcast with JPat and Drancer - A show about the Vancouver Canucks: Brackett Busting on Apple Podcasts

Robinson's interview is here:
‎Canucks Conversation: Episode 82 "Juddbye" ft. Rachel Doerrie and Cam Robinson on Apple Podcasts
 
Last edited:

Mr. Canucklehead

Kitimat Canuck
Dec 14, 2002
40,437
31,034
Kitimat, BC
If anyone is expecting Linden or anyone close to him to spill any details, good luck. The guy has had almost 3 decades to air his feelings / version of events on the Messier/Keenan era and has refused to speak about it or let any information as to his side get out. I don’t see any reason that doesn’t happen here with respect to his relationship breakdown with Benning, too.
 

Jyrki21

2021-12-05
Sponsor
I will say this – I'm pleasantly surprised to learn that part of all this was Benning pushing hard for Höglander; I don't mind at all if he cites his "scouting acumen" in favor of skill players. My fear has always been in the other direction (i.e. being seduced by the "power forward" or the Coke machine defenseman), and he/Weisbrod have done that enough times to poor results that I wouldn't have expected the opposite.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad