For what it is worth here's my comprehensive appraisal of Benning regime.
Drafting - Based on ability to play at NHL level and success compared to draft position. Does not include players who are still in the system and, as yet, untried at pro levels. Does include players drafted but left unsigned
Positives
Pettersson, Boeser, Gaudette, Tryamkin, Demko, McCann, Forsling
Negatives
Joulevi, Virtanen, Lind, Gadojovich, Brassard, Gunnersson, MacKenzie, Abols, Stukel, Candella, Olsen, Neill, Zhukenov, Stewart, Pettit,
Nothing much at all out of later picks
On the fence
Brisebois
Analysis
Could say the team has been right as much as they have been wrong in the higher picks, but you need to factor in that these were mostly very high picks and should end up good NHL players. After 5 years the only established players are Pettersson, McCann and Boeser. Should also be noted that getting players at lower draft positions is a struggle for all teams. Yet other organizations do this and the Benning has generally not. Lack of draft choices seems a factor here.
Trades (not considering minor leaguer for minor leaguer). Assessments could obviously change.
Positives
Garrison + 7th + Costello for 2nd
Bieksa for 2nd
Shinkaruk for Granlund
Hansen for Goldobin
Burrows for Dahlen
Subban for Dowd
Vanek for Motte
Holm for Leipsic
Carcone for Levio
Del Zotto for Schenn
Gudbranson for Pearson
Lack for 3rd
Negatives
2nd for Vey
Forsling for Clendenning
3rd + Mallet for Pedan
Kassian + 5th for Prust
Bonino + Glendenning + 2nd for Sutter
5th for Larsen
McCann + 2nd + 4th for Gudbranson
Pedan + 4th for Pouliot
7th for Mazanec
Open to Question
Dorsett for 3rd
Kesler for Bonino, 1st, and Sbisa
Jensen for Etem
Dahlen for Karlsson
Gagner for Spooner
2nd for Baertschi
Chaput for Kero
Nilsson + Archibald for McKenna, Pyatt and 6th.
Analysis
Overall works out about evenly between good and bad deals but really not much accomplished thru trade. With these types of trades, the team remains in a holding pattern. Moreover, these trades indicate just how many draft choices have been wasted on players that did little to nothing for the team and, given the need to rebuild, the team should been looking to pick up rather than losing draft choices. Ultimately, it seems, Benning has not been able to meaningful upgrade the team thru trades.
Players lost with no return – all of the following were let go for nothing and went on to have NHL careers elsewhere establishing that they had value
Hamhuis (Dallas)
Weber (Nashville)
Miller (Anahiem)
Dowd (Washington)
Vrbata (Arizona, etc)
Bartkowski (Calgary, etc)
Cracknell (Dallas, etc )
Matthais (Toronto, etc)
Richardson (Arizona)
Santorelli (Toronto, etc)
Sestito (Pittsburg)
Dalpe (Buffalo, Minnesota, etc)
Conacher (Tampa Bay)
*Fedun (Dallas)
*not sure he was ever officially signed but did play game for the team.
Others Assets that might have been used better
H. Sedin
D. Sedin
Higgins
Dorsett
Corrado
Leipsic
O’Reilly
Tryamkin
Analysis
Perhaps the worst aspect of Benning record has been his inability to get value for roster or NHL level players at or before the trade deadline. Beyond not acquiring assets that might have been very important to the rebuilding of the team, players not moved often contributed to useless late season wins that hurt draft position. Likelihood is that we will see others like Granlund have the same fate.
Contracts – not including minor league deals (Utica signed players, etc..) Does consider contracts of players that were traded and whether these players ultimately became NHL caliber players and thus whether the contracts, given their compensation, were justified .
Positives – compensation not badly out of line. Also considers what players contributed, potentially could contribute or, if retained could have contributed.
Vrbata
Tanev
Markstrom
Biega
Hutton
Vanek
Horvat
Roussel
McEwen
Stecher
Tryamkin
Gaudette
Sautner
Motte
Virtanen
Kassian
Bartkowski
Cracknell
Weber
Negatives –in hindsight paid too much and/or player never panned out for the team. In some cases may have seemed justified at the time but, in the end, were not. Some might be justified based on the need to get players for Utica.
Miller
Sbisa
Sutter
Eriksson
Larsen
Gudbranson
Gagner
Del Zotto
Schaller
Granlund
Beagle
Pouliot
Nilsson
Shore
Megna
Grenier
Vey
Burmistrov
Etem
Wiercoich
Rodin
Kenins
Cannata
LaBate
Pedan
Zelewski
Subban
Questionable
Baertschi
Gaunce
Dorsett
Archibald
Skille
Leighton
To Be Determined Contracts/Signings
Depietro
Brisebois
Dahlen
Lind
McEneny
Joulevi
Eliot
Carcone
Corrado
Rafferty
Teves
Keilly
Demko
Poor Prospect Signings – didn’t pan out at all.
LaPlante
Blumstrand
Lain
Molino
Chatfield
Cederholm
Garteig
Rendulic
Cassels
Stewart
Blain
Fox
Friesen
Jones
Holm
Palmu
Analysis
While the Horvat contract was excellent, there have been too few key re-signings, to date, to be overly positive about contract signings. Mostly the decent contracts have been simply been raises or decisions dictated, more or less, by the players agreement. And few have been absolute bargains. Beyond that, there have been some very bad contracts where players have been severely overpaid creating possible cap issues. In addition, some players signed as prospects have been amazingly awful (such as LaPlante and Stewart). These have taken up possible roster spots and call into question player assessment by the team. Finally the team has proven, too often, unable to pick up high end NCAA or overseas free agents.
Overall
I think it is hard to justify Benning’s record. It was clear the team needed to rebuild and Benning has simply passed up or messed up too many chances to do this. He was clearly unable or unwilling to take on that difficult task and in far too many cases bailed on the team and sought some quick fix to patch over situations. And in most cases these moves did nothing to make the team much better now while hurting long term chances for success. This is most patently indicated by his willingness to give up draft choices for immediate help (which often wasn’t even that ) and his unwillingness to move out people to gain prospects and draft choices seemingly b/c he wanted to eke out a few more late season wins to save face.
He has added a couple of pieces but the team is still very dependent on the players, such as Markstrom (a player Benning waived), Edler Tanev, and Horvat, that were here before Benning arrived.
And most important the team has made little progress under Benning. Even though Benning is into his fifth year, the team remains very much a bottom feeder. Moreover, there is every chance the team remains in the lower third of the League moving ahead. When you consider what could have been done – moving out players for drafts and prospects, making trades that did not sacrifice the future for the present, making better drafts, signing better free agents at better prices – it illustrates how far Benning has fallen short.
Finally, there have also been some glaring examples of what have to be described as foolish statements and actions by Benning. He has gotten into trouble with glib and unprofessional comments about players under contract to other teams, allowed clumsy and mean-spirited dismissals of people such as Gilman and Linden, used the age gap drivel and other meaningless justifications for obviously ill-conceived, short term moves, stated outrageous and silly comparisons of players like Sutter to Bergeron, and made the fumbling, frequently incoherent communication with the public and media. None of this did anything to improve the professional image of the team or make it more likely high level players would be attracted here
I think Benning has to be considered a failure at this point.