Ranking the worst moves by Benning - #4

[ginner classic]

HF boards has spoken and drafting Juolevi over higher ranked options was Benning's 3rd worst move.

#1 Erik Gudbranson Trade (In) (35.2%)
#2 Loui Eriksson Contract (41.6%)
#3 Drafting Juolevi (41.3%)

Click to read more...

 

[Lupuls Grit]

I would have voted for the Gudbranson contract but somehow, miraculously, the Canucks were actually able to obtain a somewhat useful asset for that contract. As much as I respect Gilman's abilities, a front office has to work well together and I don't know to what extent that could have been possible with Jim at the helm. So many good (bad?) options here but I went with the Sutter contract. Far too long for far too much for far too little production.

 

[Foundational Player]

So many solid choices. Went with the pink slip that Benning issued Laurence Gilman.

Most organizations would keep one if not the brightest mind in their front office.

Benning decides to cut bait as he probably couldn't interpret half of what Gilman was saying.

Par for the course.

 

[THE Green Man]

This one was hard, the Miller trade has the potential to catapult itself into the #1 spot if we look at this trade 2 years from now so I went with that. But at this time it would have to be the Kesler trade. The fact that there is this much to choose from is actually pathetic.

 

[Intangibos]

Gudbranson contract was somewhat of a non-issue. Had trade value and his contract didn't really screw us in any way. Sbisa's was worse anyway.

I voted not trading Miller, but trading Hamhuis was costly as it may have cost us Matthews.

 

[PetterssonSimp]

How is the Sutter trade not already chosen? Bonino produced at a better rate on a lesser team with a cheaper contract. Was great with Vrbata who’d just put up 30 goals for Vancouver and until Horvat/Petey combo at centre was easily our best 2C of the past like 5 years.
Sutter was coming off surgery and looking down the barrel of a final year before UFA while the team he was playing for didn’t want to extend him. Then proceeding to overpay in salary and term for a player who has never eclipsed 40 points in a season, only to watch Bonino go on to be 4th leading scorer in the playoffs on a Cup winning team and huge part of that success!

 

[ginner classic]

Gudbranson contract was somewhat of a non-issue. Had trade value and his contract didn't really screw us in any way. Sbisa's was worse anyway.

I voted not trading Miller, but trading Hamhuis was costly as it may have cost us Matthews.

You could make a case the better choice was to trade him prior to contract expiry than to double down on a mistake. Second best choice was to let him go UFA. After that contract was signed, it's really debatable if you could consider him having positive value. I think both Pearson and Gudbranson had negative value at their full contracts.

 

[Melvin]

Gudbranson contract was somewhat of a non-issue. Had trade value and his contract didn't really screw us in any way. Sbisa's was worse anyway.

I voted not trading Miller, but trading Hamhuis was costly as it may have cost us Matthews.

What? Pearson taking up space at 4m is a direct result of the gudbranson contract.

 

[Disappointed EP40]

I dont even know how the Ericsson contract can even be ahead of the Kesler or Sutter trades.

We knew immediately when the trades went down they were terrible. Benning could not have foreseen Ericsson under producing to this level and in theory getting a decent swede through free agency wasn't a bad idea. even if having to overpay a bit.

Whereas, the Sutter trade was pure garbage the moment it went down. Same thing with the Gundbranson trade; it was trash on paper, from the get-go.

Those things are much more condemning than things that just didn't work out due to unknown variables.

 

[Lupuls Grit]

It's hilarious (well, tragic) that there is such variance in the opinions offered in this thread and yet each one seems equally valid.

 

[Melvin]

I dont even know how the Ericsson contract can even be ahead of the Kesler or Sutter trades.

We knew immediately when the trades went down they were terrible. Benning could not have foreseen Ericsson under producing to this level and in theory getting a decent swede through free agency wasn't a bad idea. even if having to overpay a bit.

Whereas, the Sutter trade was pure garbage the moment it went down. Same thing with the Gundbranson trade; it was trash on paper, from the get-go.

Those things are much more condemning than things that just didn't work out due to unknown variables.

Eriksson signing was also garbage the moment it was signed imo. I didn't hate the Sutter trade nearly as much, if we're going by "at the time."

Signing a 31 year old coming off a fluke year to a six year deal what could go wrong?

 

[tantalum]

Gudbranson extension...the gift that kept on giving.

That or Kesler trade. I chose the contract extension because I was so flabbergasted. Also, because while Sbisa was a clear error and the first not high enough, it was at least a first a Bonino should have been a useful asset. It's definitely #5 though because it was bad... Amazing that it was bad and summed up Benning in one move (inability to create leverage, poor appraisal of D-men, age-gap strategy instead of rebuild) and it's #5 on my list!

 

[Seatoo]

Surprised that the Virtanen pick isn’t higher than it is right now in the voting...we could’ve had Nylander or Ehlers :/

And for the record I was advocating Ehlers @ 6 from the start

 

[Jyrki21]

I dont even know how the Ericsson contract can even be ahead of the Kesler or Sutter trades.

We knew immediately when the trades went down they were terrible. Benning could not have foreseen Ericsson under producing to this level and in theory getting a decent swede through free agency wasn't a bad idea. even if having to overpay a bit.

Whereas, the Sutter trade was pure garbage the moment it went down. Same thing with the Gundbranson trade; it was trash on paper, from the get-go.

Eriksson signing was also garbage the moment it was signed imo. I didn't hate the Sutter trade nearly as much, if we're going by "at the time."

Signing a 31 year old coming off a fluke year to a six year deal what could go wrong?

Yeah, in real time, I was more put off by the Eriksson signing (which was nonsense for a bottom feeder) than I was for the Gudbranson trade, where there was at least some relative youth and (to my understanding at the time) some inconclusive evidence.

 

[brokenblade1990]

i expected eriksson to be a 20-25 kinda guy coming into vancouver after a 30-33 point season i dont think anyone expected him to be a under 30 point player if he was a 40-45 point player atleast over the past 3 years with two way game we wouldnt be talking about him. i would say the sutter contract is the worst 4.5 million a couple years ago for a 30 point third line center is a bit much even by todays standards and higher cap. the kesler trade was a good deal at the time with a player asking to be traded to one team and at that point he wanted 7 milion a year which he got with anaheim when we did not have the cap space for anything over 5m while the sedins made 7m

 

[Canucks5551]

I don’t understand people voting for the Kesler trade. Given the fact that there was only one viable trade partner, Benning did alright in picking up Bonino and a 1st rounder. Sure, he could have targeted a different defender than Sbisa, but that’s still an okay return given the circumstances.

Now, that doesn’t in any way excuse the fact that he then pissed those assets away in subsequent trades, but I think that’s irrelevant when looking at the Kesler trade in isolation.

 

[Intangibos]

What? Pearson taking up space at 4m is a direct result of the gudbranson contract.

I think you're looking at Pearson as a cap dump when in reality he was likely a target. Friedman reported at least one other GM saying he would have signed Gudbranson to that contract "in a heartbeat". He sucks but so do tons of managers in this league.

 

[DL44]

I would have gone:

1) Willie D hire
2) Eriksson contract

 

[ginner classic]

I don’t understand people voting for the Kesler trade. Given the fact that there was only one viable trade partner, Benning did alright in picking up Bonino and a 1st rounder. Sure, he could have targeted a different defender than Sbisa, but that’s still an okay return given the circumstances.

Now, that doesn’t in any way excuse the fact that he then pissed those assets away in subsequent trades, but I think that’s irrelevant when looking at the Kesler trade in isolation.

The clear issue with the Kesler trade was the prioritization of near term results instead of long term. That and the Vey deal set the tone for everything else Benning did after. The second aspect of the Kesler deal was the terrible pro scouting on Bonino and Sbisa. Canucks management was surprised by Bonino's poor skating (a non-issue given what he has accomplished) and had a complete miss on Sbisa as a core member of a top 4 blueline crew. The bolded above are two of the persistent themes for this management team.

 

[FroshaugFan2]

Voted for the Kesler trade.

Add the hiring of Mike Addesa to the next poll.

 

[Phenomenon13]

How is tampering not number 1? At least, with the other moves you could justify a reasoning however poor for it. Tampering was just flat out bad and we're lucky that only he got fined. There was zero reason to do that...

 

[Canucks5551]

The clear issue with the Kesler trade was the prioritization of near term results instead of long term. That and the Vey deal set the tone for everything else Benning did after. The second aspect of the Kesler deal was the terrible pro scouting on Bonino and Sbisa. Canucks management was surprised by Bonino's poor skating (a non-issue given what he has accomplished) and had a complete miss on Sbisa as a core member of a top 4 blueline crew. The bolded above are two of the persistent themes for this management team.

Well, yeah. But pretty much every single move Benning has made has prioritized near-term results and shown an atrocious level of pro scouting. I don't see how that's justification for voting for one of the few trades Benning made that brought back okay value. It's also the only time in his tenure here that Benning brought in a 1st round pick via trade. Why not vote for the Vey trade, the Sutter trade, or any of the other trades where Benning dumped futures for garbage and showed even more disregard for long-term planning and pro scouting?

 

[RebuildinVan]

Had to the Gudbranson contract. The guy played exactly half the previous two seasons and Benning saw fit to extend him at $4 mil. Like usual Benning saw it necessary to outbid himself

 

[LaVar]

add hiring his son to be a scout @ginner classic

 

[Megaterio Llamas]