Management Thread

[Mr. Canucklehead]

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.

I’m honestly not too fussed about the internal debates of who wanted who and who ended up being picked. I’m sure 100% of the teams in the league had arguments and disagreements before landing on guys with most of their picks, and I don’t see the Canucks being very different. At the end of the day the picks were made and sometimes we got the right guy and sometimes we didn’t.

What bothers me is Brackett was a cog in a successful machine that has now been ousted. It’d be like watching a key player on the Canucks walk as a free agent because he wasn’t happy here.

Also, it’s another relationship breakdown in what seems to be a pattern for Benning. Benning and Linden were on the same page until Linden suddenly left under clearly acrimonious circumstances. Benning hand picked Brackett as his new head of the scouting department in 2015, and their relationship was quite sunny until again, suddenly, it wasn’t. Benning is the common denominator, and I’m curious as to why some of his proudly touted professional relationships go so sour so suddenly.

 

[MS]

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.

One thing I've said a few times over the years is that Jimbo's lack of intelligence might actually work in his favour when it comes to scouting junior forwards.

Like, a huge percentage of the mistakes that come in amateur scouting come from rating down the most obviously talented guy because he 'isn't good defensively' or 'is lazy sometimes' or 'had a bad interview' and then rating up some schlub who oozes character and had great results in the fitness testing.

But if you're some moron who ignores all that and is just like 'DUH I LIKE THE GUY WHO SKATES FAST AND SHOOTS HARD AND SCORES GOALS AND STUFF' you might be avoiding a bunch of the traps that 'smarter' scouts fall into. It's basically the same principle as @Melvin and his potato which is almost anti-intellectually just taking the highest scoring guy and generating far better results than most NHL teams.

With forwards, anyway. Maybe.

With defenders, where just being big and skating well means nothing if you can't think and process the game, Jim Benning couldn't scout a competent blueliner if he kicked him in the face.

 

[Sneezy]

Brackett was one voice in a room full of many, the way people are talking about him you would think he could walk on water and heal the sick.

IMO - Linden was hired to be a mouth piece for the Canucks, just a publicity stunt as the Aquas were being roasted by fans and media, they were still charging high prices for a team that could not make the playoffs. It was not a good decision to hire him from the start and it went all down hill after that.

You can only have 1 head chef in the kitchen and regardless of what people think or say it is JB.

 

[Sneezy]

One thing I've said a few times over the years is that Jimbo's lack of intelligence might actually work in his favour when it comes to scouting junior forwards.

Like, a huge percentage of the mistakes that come in amateur scouting come from rating down the most obviously talented guy because he 'isn't good defensively' or 'is lazy sometimes' or 'had a bad interview' and then rating up some schlub who oozes character and had great results in the fitness testing.

But if you're some moron who ignores all that and is just like 'DUH I LIKE THE GUY WHO SKATES FAST AND SHOOTS HARD AND SCORES GOALS AND STUFF' you might be avoiding a bunch of the traps that 'smarter' scouts fall into. It's basically the same principle as @Melvin and his potato which is almost anti-intellectually just taking the highest scoring guy and generating far better results than most NHL teams.

With forwards, anyway. Maybe.

With defenders, where just being big and skating well means nothing if you can't think and process the game, Jim Benning couldn't scout a competent blueliner if he kicked him in the face.

So you said he cannot scout a defender, can you prove this over his many year career as a scout, head scout and now GM? I do not know you and I have been lurking here for a few years and only joined several months ago but you seem to be a poster who could not post anything without referencing something negative about JB. Did JB do something to you in your youth or previous life as the reason why you are so negative about him, really just curious as I know this will not stop you from posting the way you do?

I will give you JO has not turned out well but he was ranked high by many of the talking heads, I also agree that D prospects are not a current strength on this team but then you can say that about many teams. This is also interesting as Brackett has been here for years and rumours (or whispers) is that he had a lot of input into later round picks.

With the extremely high level talent up front, acquired or drafted, by JB that he can make a trade and move a forward to a team for an equivalent D man.

 

[MS]

So you said he cannot scout a defender, can you prove this over his many year career as a scout, head scout and now GM? I do not know you and I have been lurking here for a few years and only joined several months ago but you seem to be a poster who could not post anything without referencing something negative about JB. Did JB do something to you in your youth or previous life as the reason why you are so negative about him, really just curious as I know this will not stop you from posting the way you do?

I will give you JO has not turned out well but he was ranked high by many of the talking heads, I also agree that D prospects are not a current strength on this team but then you can say that about many teams. This is also interesting as Brackett has been here for years and rumours (or whispers) is that he had a lot of input into later round picks.

With the extremely high level talent up front, acquired or drafted, by JB that he can make a trade and move a forward to a team for an equivalent D man.

Yes, I strongly dislike Jim Benning because he's a totally incompetent GM who has done a disastrous job running my favourite hockey team.

I'm not just talking about amateur scouting. Go have a look at the list of pro-scouting defender acquisitions during Jim Benning's time here. It is absolutely catastrophic. Endlessly dazzled by guys who have raw tools (skate fast! shoot hard! make boards go bang!) but can't actually play hockey with any real competency.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

Source? Don't see any.

It's hard to see the sources when some have their heads so deep in the sand.
The tl;dr of this whole debate is that people should be Positive Petes about management otherwise they're wrong because reasons.

 

[MS]

It's hard to see the sources when some have their heads so deep in the sand.
The tl;dr of this whole debate is that people should be Positive Petes about management otherwise they're wrong because reasons.

My tl:dr of this whole thing is that people are so deeply entrenched in defending Benning that they will invent elaborate conspiracy theories and unsubstantiated narratives to try and explain away the obvious rather than just looking at the evidence and assuming the most obvious conclusion is probably correct.

 

[Fatass]

My tl:dr of this whole thing is that people are so deeply entrenched in defending Benning that they will invent elaborate conspiracy theories and unsubstantiated narratives to try and explain away the obvious rather than just looking at the evidence and assuming the most obvious conclusion is probably correct.

My view on Bracket getting forced out is we are doomed. Who is most likely to take over Bracket’s duties? Wisebrod, right? Our owner must be nuts or something to allow Benning/Wisebrod to control his 700 million dollar asset. If the Bracket scenario didn’t have Aquilini step in, what will?

 

[vanuck]

Brackett was one voice in a room full of many, the way people are talking about him you would think he could walk on water and heal the sick.

Show me one instance where people have talked about him like he's the second coming of Christ.

 

[vancityluongo]

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.

Yeah, same.

If Hoglander turns out to be a stud, as with Hughes we can attribute this to Benning. Great! That's the guy leading the scouting department right now. I'm a Canucks fan who hopes he makes good picks!!

And that's pretty much most of the posters in the threads here. Mr. C. nailed it on why losing Brackett sucks - and it doesn't seem like too many people disagree. Anything else being discussed is a strawman.

It is still just so odd that the pro-Benning camp isn't trying to pull the "wait and see" card the one time it may actually apply. If you think Benning is a good scout, let's see how he does now that he has the reigns. Instead of arguing about the validity of JD Burke as a source or zooming in on Trevor Linden's draft table list to see if he scribbled "Ronnie and Jim's fave!! " next to Pettersson - why not let Jim's future performance clear up any questions regarding his track record?

Any takers on "Jim Benning will outperform the Judd Brackett-era of drafting"?

 

[Horse McHindu]

Yeah, same.

If Hoglander turns out to be a stud, as with Hughes we can attribute this to Benning. Great! That's the guy leading the scouting department right now. I'm a Canucks fan who hopes he makes good picks!!

And that's pretty much most of the posters in the threads here. Mr. C. nailed it on why losing Brackett sucks - and it doesn't seem like too many people disagree. Anything else being discussed is a strawman.

It is still just so odd that the pro-Benning camp isn't trying to pull the "wait and see" card the one time it may actually apply. If you think Benning is a good scout, let's see how he does now that he has the reigns. Instead of arguing about the validity of JD Burke as a source or zooming in on Trevor Linden's draft table list to see if he scribbled "Ronnie and Jim's fave!! " next to Pettersson - why not let Jim's future performance clear up any questions regarding his track record?

Any takers on "Jim Benning will outperform the Judd Brackett-era of drafting"?

I’m going to making more responses later on this evening, but I’ll quickly address your last statement:

I can’t speak for others, but the reason why I don’t care about if “Benning outperforms Brackett” or whoever, is because it’s a very childish and irrelevant game. Drafting is always a collaborative effort, and teams win together and lose together.

Here is what’s really happening:

1) Back in 2015 when Benning started making moves that were perceived to be questionable, many folks lost their minds and started crucifying this management group. They started saying stuff like, “we won’t make the playoffs for another 7-10 years.”

2) A lot of the Benning crew told folks to stay patient, and that a true rebuild often takes 5-7 years, and that despite what people were seeing in front of them (I.e Eriksson singing, Suter trade, etc.), this management group had a solid idea of where this team was at in 2014, and that the real rebuild had started in 2014 with the Luongo deal.

3) After a rough stretch from 2016-2019, the Canucks started to trend upwards and are now knocking on the doors of the playoffs. During this time, they have managed to draft and/or develop

-a franchise center
-a franchise defenseman
-a goalie with lots of promise into a superstar goalie
-a 1st line RW sniper
-an excellent leader and a 2nd line two way center
-other key prospects such as Gaudette, Virtanen (who was appearing to be a lost cause but was salavagd due to the leadership group that Benning created here), Demko, and Tryamkin.
-We also have guys like MacEwen and Rafferty in our system that are on the cusp of being NHL regulars.

All in all, we have a very solid collection of vets, prospects, and young talent, and appear to be coming out of our rebuild (which took us about 5-6 years, which is an extremely reasonable time frame).

Instead of being excited by this, many posters are trying to save face by making passive aggressive attacks. These attacks include comments such as,

“If it wasn’t for Markstrom, we’d be a bottom 5 team.”

Or the recent stuff that we’ve been seeing with the whole Brackett stuff (ie if it wasn’t for Brackett, we wouldn’t have drafted anyone good outside of Hughes and Hoglander).

It’s all just extremely childish and petty in my eyes, but it does make for excellent and fiery debates.

 

[F A N]

Consider what Sekeras said a year ago:

Pretty sure that tweet was from last month?

 

[sting101]

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.

Isn't all this a good thing?

Linden is a better speaker more presentable popular etc....but he literally came back to hockey with zero training education and experience to be in charge of a extremely complex multi dimensional business. He may have been better 7-10yrs down the road but without Benning he would have been more confused and clueless then he already was.

Him having his feelings hurt after he decided he was getting bulldozed and no one was listening to him because (lets face it) he mostly was clueless is a good thing. Benning didn't fire him Trevor just didn't have the owners ear over Benning and he couldn't and didn't want to accept that. That's on him not JB.

I think what happened was good for both sides. Trevor got his life/image back and lost the stress and Aquilini and Benning have been able to streamline the decision making processes without another big ego in the room having his feelings hurt

Losing Brackett may prove to be a big loss but that's assuming he made that much of a difference to the outcomes of the scouts work and end selections? And will his impact be noticeable vs the next head scout?

 

[MS]

I’m going to making more responses later on this evening, but I’ll quickly address your last statement:

I can’t speak for others, but the reason why I don’t care about if “Benning outperforms Brackett” or whoever, is because it’s a very childish and irrelevant game. Drafting is always a collaborative effort, and teams win together and lose together.

Here is what’s really happening:

1) Back in 2015 when Benning started making moves that were perceived to be questionable, many folks lost their minds and started crucifying this management group. They started saying stuff like, “we won’t make the playoffs for another 7-10 years.”

2) A lot of the Benning crew told folks to stay patient, and that a true rebuild often takes 5-7 years, and that despite what people were seeing in front of them (I.e Eriksson singing, Suter trade, etc.), this management group had a solid idea of where this team was at in 2014, and that the real rebuild had started in 2014 with the Luongo deal.

3) After a rough stretch from 2016-2019, the Canucks started to trend upwards and are now knocking on the doors of the playoffs. During this time, they have managed to draft and/or develop

-a franchise center
-a franchise defenseman
-a goalie with lots of promise into a superstar goalie
-a 1st line RW sniper
-an excellent leader and a 2nd line two way center
-other key prospects such as Gaudette, Virtanen (who was appearing to be a lost cause but was salavagd due to the leadership group that Benning created here), Demko, and Tryamkin.
-We also have guys like MacEwen and Rafferty in our system that are on the cusp of being NHL regulars.

All in all, we have a very solid collection of vets, prospects, and young talent, and appear to be coming out of our rebuild (which took us about 5-6 years, which is an extremely reasonable time frame).

Instead of being excited by this, many posters are trying to save face by making passive aggressive attacks. These attacks include comments such as,

“If it wasn’t for Markstrom, we’d be a bottom 5 team.”

Or the recent stuff that we’ve been seeing with the whole Brackett stuff (ie if it wasn’t for Brackett, we wouldn’t have drafted anyone good outside of Hughes and Hoglander).

It’s all just extremely childish and petty in my eyes, but it does make for excellent and fiery debates.

Yes, we all know that accidentally finishing at the bottom of the standings and being rewarded with high draft picks will eventually lead to any team collecting a fair bit of good young talent. Nobody has ever denied this. It doesn't mean that the team was managed well to get to that point, any more than the Edmonton Oilers were managed well when they collected McDavid/Draisaitl/Nurse/RHL/Klefbom or whatever. And it doesn't mean that the incompetent managers who got the team to that point have the intelligence or skills to actually turn that young talent into a consistent contender.

If you hired a crackhead off Main/Hastings to run this team since 2014 and all they did was drop the team to the bottom of the standings with a series of terrible moves and then take the consensus highest-rated player with their #1 pick ... we'd be absolutely loaded with young talent right now. That doesn't mean that the crackhead is a good GM who is going to bring a Cup to Vancouver. It means that the NHL drafting system is set up so that the worse you do at your job as a GM, the better the young players the league gives you to compensate.

We're already in a position where the team which was basically carried by their goalie last year might not be able to sign him because of all the other stupid contracts this team has given out. And we've essentially just fired the person most responsible for most of the draft picks you listed.

At least, I think we can all agree that *THANK GOD* Benning didn't get his way and trade our #1 picks in 2015 and 2016 + Bo Horvat for Lucic and Subban. And sign Dave Bolland. And draft Cody Glass. Can you imagine what this team would look like if that was the case and Benning's preferred plan came to fruition? Yikes!

 

[sting101]

Yeah, same.

If Hoglander turns out to be a stud, as with Hughes we can attribute this to Benning. Great! That's the guy leading the scouting department right now. I'm a Canucks fan who hopes he makes good picks!!

And that's pretty much most of the posters in the threads here. Mr. C. nailed it on why losing Brackett sucks - and it doesn't seem like too many people disagree. Anything else being discussed is a strawman.

It is still just so odd that the pro-Benning camp isn't trying to pull the "wait and see" card the one time it may actually apply. If you think Benning is a good scout, let's see how he does now that he has the reigns. Instead of arguing about the validity of JD Burke as a source or zooming in on Trevor Linden's draft table list to see if he scribbled "Ronnie and Jim's fave!! " next to Pettersson - why not let Jim's future performance clear up any questions regarding his track record?

Any takers on "Jim Benning will outperform the Judd Brackett-era of drafting"?

Safe to say he wont get any chance to prove this one.

Not only is Benning on borrowed time we wont be drafting lottery selections like we were.

 

[Horse McHindu]

Yes, we all know that accidentally finishing at the bottom of the standings and being rewarded with high draft picks will eventually lead to any team collecting a fair bit of good young talent. Nobody has ever denied this. It doesn't mean that the team was managed well to get to that point, any more than the Edmonton Oilers were managed well when they collected McDavid/Draisaitl/Nurse/RHL/Klefbom or whatever. And it doesn't mean that the incompetent managers who got the team to that point have the intelligence or skills to actually turn that young talent into a consistent contender.

If you hired a crackhead off Main/Hastings to run this team since 2014 and all they did was drop the team to the bottom of the standings with a series of terrible moves and then take the consensus highest-rated player with their #1 pick ... we'd be absolutely loaded with young talent right now. That doesn't mean that the crackhead is a good GM who is going to bring a Cup to Vancouver. It means that the NHL drafting system is set up so that the worse you do at your job as a GM, the better the young players the league gives you to compensate.

We're already in a position where the team which was basically carried by their goalie last year might not be able to sign him because of all the other stupid contracts this team has given out. And we've essentially just fired the person most responsible for most of the draft picks you listed.

At least, I think we can all agree that *THANK GOD* Benning didn't get his way and trade our #1 picks in 2015 and 2016 + Bo Horvat for Lucic and Subban. And sign Dave Bolland. And draft Cody Glass. Can you imagine what this team would look like if that was the case and Benning's preferred plan came to fruition? Yikes!

.........

Yep. That’s all it takes to rebuild.

Just sink to the bottom, don’t create a culture, and accumulate top picks. It’s that simple. Edmonton and Buffalo say hi, as does Florida.

 

[WonderTwinsUnite]

.........

Yep. That’s all it takes to rebuild.

Just sink to the bottom, don’t create a culture, and accumulate top picks. It’s that simple. Edmonton and Buffalo say hi, as does Florida.

Did you not read what he wrote, like at all? MS said that the NHL's draft system rewards teams for being incompetent with the ability to select good players (which it does). He never said that all you needed was to draft good players in order to compete.

I especially like that list, as if we're significantly better off than Edmonton, Buffalo, or Florida - especially the former two.

 

[ProstheticConscience]

I’m going to making more responses later on this evening, but I’ll quickly address your last statement:

I can’t speak for others, but the reason why I don’t care about if “Benning outperforms Brackett” or whoever, is because it’s a very childish and irrelevant game. Drafting is always a collaborative effort, and teams win together and lose together.

Here is what’s really happening:

1) Back in 2015 when Benning started making moves that were perceived to be questionable, many folks lost their minds and started crucifying this management group. They started saying stuff like, “we won’t make the playoffs for another 7-10 years.”

Find me one person who said this in 2015.

2) A lot of the Benning crew told folks to stay patient, and that a true rebuild often takes 5-7 years, and that despite what people were seeing in front of them (I.e Eriksson singing, Suter trade, etc.), this management group had a solid idea of where this team was at in 2014, and that the real rebuild had started in 2014 with the Luongo deal.

No. Not even close. What actually happened is that the Benning bots all told us how we couldn't rebuild with the Sedins around. Nobody in the CSE corporation would ever use the word rebuild for years after 2014. Every move the team made was consistent with competing for the present. The only transactions the Canucks ever made that were even consistent with rebuilding were the Hansen and Burrows trades, both of which have ended up yielding nothing. The management team has tried and failed to compete literally every year it's been here and the results are missing the playoffs four years in a row, while teetering on the brink of missing this year until the season was shut down.

3) After a rough stretch from 2016-2019, the Canucks started to trend upwards and are now knocking on the doors of the playoffs. During this time, they have managed to draft and/or develop

-a franchise center
-a franchise defenseman
-a goalie with lots of promise into a superstar goalie
-a 1st line RW sniper
-an excellent leader and a 2nd line two way center
-other key prospects such as Gaudette, Virtanen (who was appearing to be a lost cause but was salavagd due to the leadership group that Benning created here), Demko, and Tryamkin.
-We also have guys like MacEwen and Rafferty in our system that are on the cusp of being NHL regulars.

All in all, we have a very solid collection of vets, prospects, and young talent, and appear to be coming out of our rebuild (which took us about 5-6 years, which is an extremely reasonable time frame).

Finish in the bottom and you get the high draft picks. That's how it works. All these amazing players you're hyping didn't come from some brilliant transactions or maneuvering at the draft to move up, they're just the rewards the NHL gives teams for being terrible. Eventually, give them enough cracks at high picks and even Benning can pick good players. I mean, by your standards the Oilers must be an amazingly well managed team for the last decade. Look at McDavid! Draisaitl! The Nuge! Nurse!

Instead of being excited by this, many posters are trying to save face by making passive aggressive attacks. These attacks include comments such as,

“If it wasn’t for Markstrom, we’d be a bottom 5 team.”

Did you actually watch the games at all? Oh wait...you get youtube highlight packages in China or wherever, don't you. If you'd been watching, you'd have noticed that the team's slide down the standings coincided with Markstrom getting hurt.

Here's a team that's missed the playoffs four years in a row and was just hanging on to the last wild card spot in the west by the skin of its teeth while spending to the cap with its two best players on ELCs. We're not excited because the people running the team are just doing the same thing they've always done really hard this year, and the best they can do is slightly better than they've always done. Half the payroll is dead weight locked up for years. And for all the amazing young talent you're slobbering all over...why isn't the team actually good? Why was it getting buried in its own zone night after night after night? Why couldn't it cope with the loss of its #1 goalie for a couple of weeks? Why do people keep leaving the management team acrimoniously and not being replaced? Or is that all just "the media"?

Or the recent stuff that we’ve been seeing with the whole Brackett stuff (ie if it wasn’t for Brackett, we wouldn’t have drafted anyone good outside of Hughes and Hoglander).

It’s all just extremely childish and petty in my eyes, but it does make for excellent and fiery debates.

Just one more red herring. Brackett indisputably did well in his job, and now he's gone. The latest in a continuing purge of competence. One wonders what your standards are for well-run teams.

 

[Jay Cee]

I’m honestly not too fussed about the internal debates of who wanted who and who ended up being picked. I’m sure 100% of the teams in the league had arguments and disagreements before landing on guys with most of their picks, and I don’t see the Canucks being very different. At the end of the day the picks were made and sometimes we got the right guy and sometimes we didn’t.

What bothers me is Brackett was a cog in a successful machine that has now been ousted. It’d be like watching a key player on the Canucks walk as a free agent because he wasn’t happy here.

Also, it’s another relationship breakdown in what seems to be a pattern for Benning. Benning and Linden were on the same page until Linden suddenly left under clearly acrimonious circumstances. Benning hand picked Brackett as his new head of the scouting department in 2015, and their relationship was quite sunny until again, suddenly, it wasn’t. Benning is the common denominator, and I’m curious as to why some of his proudly touted professional relationships go so sour so suddenly.

I feel the exact same way about everything you said.

I would be very happy to move on from our management, but the hostility is so over the top. Sometimes your sports team is just in a shitty spot. It is what it is, we don't need to rehash OMG who such and such said such and such picked and who is really responsible for every pick ever. OMG it is so tired. Benning is at the point now that he is not even going to get to prove himself either way on the draft going forward. His time is up in the next couple of years for sure.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Did you not read what he wrote, like at all? MS said that the NHL's draft system rewards teams for being incompetent with the ability to select good players (which it does). He never said that all you needed was to draft good players in order to compete.

I especially like that list, as if we're significantly better off than Edmonton, Buffalo, or Florida - especially the former two.

Oilers..1 playoff appearance in 13 years
Sabres..8 years no playoffs and counting
Panthers..2 playoff appearances in 18 years

losing cultures...

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

.........

Yep. That’s all it takes to rebuild.

Just sink to the bottom, don’t create a culture, and accumulate top picks. It’s that simple. Edmonton and Buffalo say hi, as does Florida.

Edmonton isn't a great example of a classic rebuild as they sabotaged the process in trading away Hall, Eberle, Schultz, 16th overall (Barzal/Chabot/Connor/Boeser/Konecny available), 33rd overall (Aho, Carlo, and Cernak all available) for Larsson, Talbot, G. Reinhart, Strome (then Spooner, and now Gagner), and a 3rd. That's not how you rebuild a team.

Florida was also really mismanaged. They totally botched the expansion draft in losing Marchessault and Reilly Smith. The Bolland deal set them back - requiring them to package Crouse to get rid of the contract - and now they face a similar issue with Bob. The Trocheck trade looks pretty bad already, along with the McCann/Bjugstad trade as well. Having an internal cap/budget in previous seasons is also a limitation that is unique to the team.

For every failed rebuild team you mention, there is likely double that amount in successful rebuilds. Just because you can pick out 1-2 teams that have been stuck rebuilding, doesn't make your argument a strong one. You're literally relying on the exception to the rule. The funny thing is that two out of the three teams you have named are currently in the playoffs, with Edmonton having won a playoff round in 2017 despite having incompetent management.

 

[timw33]

Oilers..1 playoff appearance in 13 years
Sabres..8 years no playoffs and counting
Panthers..2 playoff appearances in 18 years

losing cultures...

Any GM's for those loser franchises keep their jobs for 6 years straight? 5?

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Any GM's for those loser franchises keep their jobs for 6 years straight? 5?

Having a revolving door of GM’s (and coaches) usually demonstrates no stability within an organization.

 

[timw33]

Having a revolving door of GM’s (and coaches) usually demonstrates no stability within an organization.

The 1995-2006 Mike Milbury-led Islanders were extremely stabile, and therefore there results must have been good.

 

[Bleach Clean]

I feel the exact same way about everything you said.

I would be very happy to move on from our management, but the hostility is so over the top. Sometimes your sports team is just in a shitty spot. It is what it is, we don't need to rehash OMG who such and such said such and such picked and who is really responsible for every pick ever. OMG it is so tired. Benning is at the point now that he is not even going to get to prove himself either way on the draft going forward. His time is up in the next couple of years for sure.

We don’t know how many years he’s still going to be here. And so, the more we learn about his actual impact, the better.

How is something that has just been confirmed old and tired? It’s just come out. We didn’t know that he had minimal impact on picking the best drafted players. The one part of his job that was going ok, perceptually, just got stripped away from him by the media. And the person actually responsible just left. How common is that around the NHL?

Arguments behind the scenes may be normal, sure, but the context here is that this manager is riding these picks to remain employed. Everything else he’s done is poor overall. Now, _everything_ he’s done is poor overall.

The story about the Jim Benning era Canucks has just changed in a major way.