Management Thread

[Mr. Canucklehead]

For the most part, you guys have managed to keep this debate civil - but one thing that needs to stop is the “pro / anti Benning fans aren’t real fans” nonsense. Both sides of this dispute are guilty of it, and you need to knock it off.

 

[MS]

Benning: “Dahlen played a part” in Drafting Elias Pettersson

I will admit that I jumped the gun here.

I skimmed this article (yes, I realize the irony of me reading CanucksArmy here) and accidentally misinterpreted Benning trading for Dahlen for the specific purpose of drafting Pettersson. Drafting Pettersson was partly related to Dahlen being here.

I got carried away by the statement, “The Canucks took the first step when they acquired Pettersson’s teammate, Jonathan Dahlen, from the Ottawa Senators at the trade deadline.”

I made a mistake, and have owned up to it. I would certainly hope that you and a few others that are attempting to “connect the dots” from speculation and trying to pass this off as fact,” can do the same one day.

Thank you for that.

But there is a massive difference between taking a pile of independent data and inferring a logical conclusion (the ONLY logical conclusion) from that data, versus taking a single data piece of data, misinterpreting it, and getting carried away and creating an unsubstantiated narrative off it. You've done the latter about 4 times in this discussion.

 

[Horse McHindu]

This season's best free agent might end up being Vancouver's Judd Brackett - TheHockeyNews

Or just look at all the links Bleach posted above. That’s actually a more comprehensive view of everything.

Point #1: Ryan Kennedy cites Brackett as being responsible for Petey, Boeser, and Hughes when everyone has suggested (including all/most anti-Benning guys) that Hughes was a Benning/Weisbrod pick.

Point ##2: “My understanding, said the scout (who is not a part of the Canucks’ organization) is that Pettersson is never a guy that Benning wanted.” Again, this is false. While it’s debatable that Benning may have wanted Glass over Pettersson, there is ZERO evidence to support the notion that, “Pettersson is never a guy that Benning wanted.” Multiple sources have reported that Benning was extremely high on Pettersson.

This is all speculation.

Anyways, I’m done arguing this. It’s pointless and stupid. The bottom line is that the Canucks have some excellent young talent in front of them and appear to be trending upwards. We’ll know in a few years as to how much of a negative impact Brackett’s impact will have.

If Benning and Weisbrod truly are as incompetent as some folks would have you believe, then the onus should be (and should have been) on the Aqua’s to keep Linden and Brackett while moving on from Benning and Weisbrod.

Anyways, I’m done with this.

 

[MS]

How do you know they are not talking about 'early on'?...or what the timeline of these discussions are..?
I'm also not denying that Linden intervened on behalf of the scouts when the other players names came up..They debated, and Benning listened to his scouts and took EP (no hard feelings)...The points I disagree with is the 'overruled' bit and the over dramatizing..Thats why Linden mentioned 'it was a good honest debate' right after saying he gave the scouts autonomy..Its not an irrelevant statement at all...

It was a great draft...One the organization took pride in.

You could have a 1000 stories of what happens behind the scenes at any NHL scouting meetings ...We just happen to be in a market where there is a market for 'clickbait'...and rumours that get twisted into facts.

OK, we're making some progress here.

You admit that Linden 'intervened' on behalf of Brackett against the Benning faction who wanted Glass.

But then you jump to the conclusion that Benning … changed his mind and then totally backed the pick? What is your evidence of this?

If Benning changed his mind and was now siding with Brackett and backing the pick … why would Linden have to 'give autonomy' to Brackett?

And regardless of any of that, if Linden had to 'intervene' in favour of Brackett (whether Benning was 'overruled' or not), what happens if Linden did not intervene? Which player did Benning want, and which player would we have selected?

 

[Sneezy]

Sorry, but if you think Canucks will be successful with JB in charge, you are delusional.

Those people are Canucks fans. I am a Canucks fan. You can't say someone who was awake at 3 am to see his Canucks as a pretend fan.

The simple fact that you defend a person (or two) instead of the future of this club just says "I don't have anything to prove they are competent, I am desperate so I have to personally attack those who don't see my hockey world the way I see it". To even say something here like this shows that you are far from a Canuck fan. It is like some people who were fan of Real Madrid and hate Juventus because of Cristiano Ronaldo and then, when he switched sides, started to hate Real and love Juventus. You can say it: you are a fan of Jim Benning, and when Aquilini fires him, you will disappear from Canucks HFBoards. Because "your job" is done.

Do you know why this group wants to tank? Because JB is the wrong man for the job. And people love Canucks so much that they prefer to endure some pain of losing for a few years than to see this club become the Sabres or the Oilers. Clear enough?

IN YOUR OPINION he is the wrong man, do the vast majority he is doing a good job. Show me ONE GM who has not made mistakes and want a couple do overs.

Wait I already know the response and please pick the appropriate number when responding as it will save time:

1 - JB has made more mistakes than other GM
2 - No one likes JB
3 - JB cannot draft
4 - JB cannot properly negotiate a contract and always over pays
5 - other please feel free to provide your own response here

Anyway you have your thoughts and rest have ours, just the majority of us here are tired of watching so many threads get taken down a I hate JB tunnel.

I am done with responding but will just say stay safe, be calm and remember to be nice!

 

[carrotshirt]

I mean, I do get where he’s coming from in “trying to put the pieces together,” but what he fails to realize is that it’s all speculation. Period.

He talks about Linden “having to step in,” but Linden himself never said that he quote unquote “stepped in.” To anything. There’s a quote from Linden stating that he thought it was important for scouts to have autonomy to make picks, but that in no way ties Benning to wanting Glass over Pettersson, and we simply can’t make that leap in logic because we want to paint Benning in the worst light possible.

Every single report and source that I’ve read out there, indicates the following:

1) Benning was extremely high on Pettersson.
2) The *only* guy that Benning may have wanted more than Pettersson, was Cale Makar.
3) Absolutely no credible source out there implied that Benning preferred Glass to Pettersson.

Out of all the sources out there that have SPECULATED about things, here is one link where you can find a direct quote from Benning:

Draft notebook: If Makar was available, Canucks could have been sweating

This is the *only* link where Benning openly talks about possibly wanting and selecting another player over Pettersson if the option was there.

“That would have been a hard decision with his (Makar’s) mobility but we kind of had a feeling that both defensemen (Makar and Heiskanen) would be gone. We were checking out a couple guys and Pettersson was the one we wanted.”

Taking all of this into account, this is what prompted me to come up with my OWN theory and speculation (speculation and theory being the operative words here). @carrotshirt

“Perhaps there was an internal heated debate between the scouts and Benning/Weisbrod, but perhaps it was Benning and Weisbrod advocating the idea of moving up in the draft so that they could draft Makar, while maybe the scouts felt that attempting to trade up from Pettersson to Makar wasn’t worth it due to the negligible differences.”

Again - speculation......just as I had originally prefaced it.

All of the sources at CanucksArmy and The Athletic also prefaced their statements as speculation.

Unfortunately, what made all of this a very toxic (and disturbing) experience was certain people decided to link to sources (that were openly speculating and said as such), and tried to pass it off as “fact” or inappropriately attempt to connect the dots (based off the speculation), and then present it as fact.......all in a deliberate attempt to make Benning look bad.

We are all Canucks.

“Without Linden, the pick is Glass.”

 

[carrotshirt]

In a roundabout way, you are basically agreeing with me that this is all speculation.

Since there is far more evidence out there to support that Benning’s number one choice was actually Cale Makar, I think it’s actually more likely that Benning may have been pushing hard behind the scenes to trade for Makar (which is what may have caused an internal debate if there ever was one). Again - SPECULATION.

Unfortunately, many posters do not want to consider this theory because Benning wanting to move up and select Makar doesn’t really paint Benning into too bad of a light. The Glass thing however would paint a terrible light on Benning.......which is why certain posters on here have gone as far as deliberately misquoting the sources that they’ve cited while attempting to pass off their speculation as fact. It’s a tired act. I’m tired of it and most other positive Canuck fans that want to cheer this team after 5 long years are tired of it. And we don’t appreciate it.

There are zero rumours or reports of Canucks trading up for Makar.

There are many rumours and reports that Benning wanted to draft Glass.

What’s more probable? The one you made up out of nowhere, apparently.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

"A narrative has since emerged that suggests the hockey department was divided on Pettersson. Brackett was in favour of taking the Swede. Benning was leaning toward Glass.
Benning rejects that version of events and while he isn’t exactly expansive on the subject, he said: “(Pettersson) was a unanimous decision.”..Ed Willes..Province

 

[Hit the post]

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

The fact remains that Glass was never ahead of Pettersson on the Canucks draft list ,though both players were highly regarded.

 

[Hodgy]

"A narrative has since emerged that suggests the hockey department was divided on Pettersson. Brackett was in favour of taking the Swede. Benning was leaning toward Glass.
Benning rejects that version of events and while he isn’t exactly expansive on the subject, he said: “(Pettersson) was a unanimous decision.”..Ed Willes..Province

Can you address my and MS’ comments. Also, why would we give more weight to an Ed Willis quote than words from Linden himself.

 

[Hit the post]

Can you address my and MS’ comments. Also, why would we give more weight to an Ed Willis quote than words from Linden himself.

Because it doesn't add any weight to his narrative.

heh, "name one GM that wouldn't want any 'do-overs'". This franchise would be crippled with another Loui 'useless from day one' Eriksson contract.

 

[Hodgy]

"A narrative has since emerged that suggests the hockey department was divided on Pettersson. Brackett was in favour of taking the Swede. Benning was leaning toward Glass.
Benning rejects that version of events and while he isn’t exactly expansive on the subject, he said: “(Pettersson) was a unanimous decision.”..Ed Willes..Province

Also, assuming both Linden and Benning telling the truth, I think the only way to reconcile the comments is the below interpretation:

1. Scouts chose Pettersson as their pick;
2. Benning wants to overrule them and pick someone else;
3. Linden steps in and overrules Benning to ensure the autonomy of the scouts so that they can make the pick; and
4. Benning accepts (begrudgingly or not) that the scouts should make the pick.l, and therefore, lists are adjusted and the pick is technically unanimous.

This is the only way I see it working and I don’t think it paints Benning in a good light. Ultimately, at step four, what is Jim really going to do other than accept Linden overruling him? Quit? In the end Benning won the larger battle and Linden left, but he lost this one. Also, without Linden stepping in, and if it was up to Jim, Pettersson isn’t picked which is kind of the crux of the issue. The fact that Benning conceded to Linden, and therefore, the pick was unanimous seems to be rather irrelevant to me given that the crux of the issue is whether Pettersson is drafted without Linden’s intervention.

 

[y2kcanucks]

“Without Linden, the pick is Glass.”

It’s this simple

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Linden is talking about ensuring the scouts have autonomy to make the pick. That’s basically his words. He wasnt talking about early on, he was literally referencing making the pick. So it’s clear he was talking about draft day. Plus, interpreting it to mean that Linden just wanted them to have open discussion early on, as you have tried to do, is clearly at odds with the definition of autonomy which means allowing someone to self govern (I.e., make decisions within their purview). No decisions are being made early on, so it’s a bizarre interpretation.

You keep on advancing this argument that the scouts and Benning debated and then Benning listened to them. If this was the case, why did Linden feel that it was important to give the scouts autonomy to make the pick? Every single time you try to give some bizarre interpretation to linden’s words you utterly fail to explain this part of the quote. The fact that Linden said it was a good honest debate is not inconsistent with him intervening to ensure the autonomy of the scouts to make the pick. That could have happened as Linden says, and also, before that, there could have been good honest debate. I am sure there is good and honest debate about every player selected. That doesn’t mean anything here.

Again ,you have zero proof of the timeline of Lindens comments..Also,by draft day..EP had already been interviewed by the Canucks,..It was 'unanimous'..I believe Benning on that (and Ed Willes)...

EP was a risky pick..other names were discussed (as they should have been)..Linden wanted to empower the scouts by 'giving them a voice'.and thats all Linden said,...regardless of the use of the word autonomy,....a good honest debate ensued,and they collectively agreed on EP..and this all happened 'early on' in the proceedings.

No feathers were ruffled..It was a great pick for the organization..Soon after this..Linden lobbied FA to get Bennings contract extended

 

[Horse McHindu]

"A narrative has since emerged that suggests the hockey department was divided on Pettersson. Brackett was in favour of taking the Swede. Benning was leaning toward Glass.
Benning rejects that version of events and while he isn’t exactly expansive on the subject, he said: “(Pettersson) was a unanimous decision.”..Ed Willes..Province

#GuiltyUntilProvenInnocent

 

[Fatass]

The fact remains that Glass was never ahead of Pettersson on the Canucks draft list ,though both players were highly regarded.

Then why did Benning want Glass over the choice of his scouting department-Pettersson? Benning likely with Glass so close in Portland saw him play live, but did Benning see Pettersson play?

 

[Fatass]

Also, assuming both Linden and Benning telling the truth, I think the only way to reconcile the comments is the below interpretation:

1. Scouts chose Pettersson as their pick;
2. Benning wants to overrule them and pick someone else;
3. Linden steps in and overrules Benning to ensure the autonomy of the scouts so that they can make the pick; and
4. Benning accepts (begrudgingly or not) that the scouts should make the pick.l, and therefore, lists are adjusted and the pick is technically unanimous.

This is the only way I see it working and I don’t think it paints Benning in a good light. Ultimately, at step four, what is Jim really going to do other than accept Linden overruling him? Quit? In the end Benning won the larger battle and Linden left, but he lost this one. Also, without Linden stepping in, and if it was up to Jim, Pettersson isn’t picked which is kind of the crux of the issue. The fact that Benning conceded to Linden, and therefore, the pick was unanimous seems to be rather irrelevant to me given that the crux of the issue is whether Pettersson is drafted without Linden’s intervention.

Maybe, after Benning/Wisebrod over ruled their scouting department and picking Juiolevi the previous year, is why Linden stepped in with the Pettersson pick?

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Then why did Benning want Glass over the choice of his scouting department-Pettersson? Benning likely with Glass so close in Portland saw him play live, but did Benning see Pettersson play?

"Canucks general manager Jim Benning first saw Pettersson at the 2017 world junior championship. And even though he only had one assist in six games (Sweden placed fourth), Benning couldn’t take his eyes off him.
“Every time he touched the puck, he made something happen,” recalled Benning. “That’s the first thing that jumped out at me — his ability and vision to see where everybody was. And with the accurate release on his shot, he didn’t take much time and could rip it.”..The province.

 

[Fatass]

Again ,you have zero proof of the timeline of Lindens comments..Also,by draft day..EP had already been interviewed by the Canucks,..It was 'unanimous'..I believe Benning on that (and Ed Willes)...

EP was a risky pick..other names were discussed (as they should have been)..Linden wanted to empower the scouts by 'giving them a voice'.and thats all Linden said,...regardless of the use of the word autonomy,....a good honest debate ensued,and they collectively agreed on EP..and this all happened 'early on' in the proceedings.

No feathers were ruffled..It was a great pick for the organization..Soon after this..Linden lobbied FA to get Bennings contract extended

Linden lobbied for Benning to be extended? Do you have evidence of this?

 

[Hit the post]

I dunno. Buck stops with the GM. As such, I'm willing to give Benning credit for drafting Pettersson. Mind you, he DID own the 5th overall pick (the second year in a row he's had a pick that high). Not like he had to do all of the groundwork like Burke had to do to draft both Sedins.

But no matter how good Petterson is, you still have to be able to build a team around him. Look at Marcel Dionne. One of the best players in NHL history. But management failed to build a team around him. They really couldn't get beyond that one "super line".

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Linden lobbied for Benning to be extended? Do you have evidence of this?

"I had a good relationship with Trevor. We always worked together on things. He was my boss. He hired me as a GM and he extended my contract. I’m grateful to Trevor". ...Benning

 

[m9]

Just my interpretation after reading all of the reports about that time period.

I think the Juolevi pick (which by all indications was 100% on Benning) is way more of a factor than some people are realizing.

It seems Linden & the scouts deferred to Benning for that Juolevi pick when it is likely the majority of people including scouts would have picked Matthew Tkachuk.

By the time it came down to finalize the draft board in 2017, Matthew Tkachuk had a very good rookie season while Juolevi did not. It was already obvious they made a mistake with that pick, though it was too early to tell how big. Because of this misstep by Benning, Linden gave a bigger voice to Brackett and the scouts this time around so the same mistake wouldn't happen again. It is likely those voices preferred Tkachuk the year before. Those scouts preferred EP while Benning preferred Glass as their 5th ranked prospect.

And yes I believe Benning was high on EP as well and the scouts probably liked Glass too. But the thing is, that doesn't really matter. When you are picking 5th and then not again for 30 picks it is little relevance who you have ranked between #6 and #20 other than if you are going to trade down or trade up. Who you have ranked in that top 5 and in what order is all that really matters.

Obviously there are some assumptions in there, but I think that is the most obvious chain of events for those drafts.

 

[Hodgy]

Again ,you have zero proof of the timeline of Lindens comments..Also,by draft day..EP had already been interviewed by the Canucks,..It was 'unanimous'..I believe Benning on that (and Ed Willes)...

EP was a risky pick..other names were discussed (as they should have been)..Linden wanted to empower the scouts by 'giving them a voice'.and thats all Linden said,...regardless of the use of the word autonomy,....a good honest debate ensued,and they collectively agreed on EP..and this all happened 'early on' in the proceedings.

No feathers were ruffled..It was a great pick for the organization..Soon after this..Linden lobbied FA to get Bennings contract extended

Again, you are just ignoring the use of the word “autonomy”. Please stop doing this. Please also see my other post and address it.

 

[VanJack]

The fact remains that Glass was never ahead of Pettersson on the Canucks draft list ,though both players were highly regarded.

I always thought it was common knowledge that the Canucks were always going to take Pettersson with the 5th overall pick? But when they learned that Vegas was set on Glass, they tried to swing a deal to move back from fifth to sixth and pry an extra draft pick out of the Knights.

But somehow the Canucks interest in Pettersson leaked out, and George McPhee decided they could just sit tight and draft Glass, the kid they wanted anyway, at 6th overall.