THE All Encompassing Jim Benning Thread Part II

[Wisp]

A bad deal is a bad deal. A loss is a loss. Paying Booth, Ballard and Luongo to not play hockey for us cost Aqua man money. Real money and future cap dollars. Lost. Forever.

caman, Scurr, you know this is horse ****. Missing the forest for the trees.

 

[Scurr]

caman, Scurr, you know this is horse ****. Missing the forest for the trees.

I see both… the forest looked better when Gillis wasn't paying so many dead trees

 

[vanuck]

I strongly disagree with that. He did have a good run with Hamhuis while playing the right side. Other than that… he wasn't effective at all on the right side.

He did struggle at times this year though you have to factor in the groin injury he played through as well. There's also too much evidence of good play from the previous 3 years for me to think that he's a completely bad player all of a sudden when switched over to the right. In terms of effectiveness he was very, very good together with Hamhuis.

I couldn't see it. Gillis lost his way imo.

I think that speaks more to the team's record in 2012-13 and 2013-14 than anything. IMO he always tried to get value in his moves, which I think is generally the right thing to do.

 

[Edo]

A bad deal is a bad deal. A loss is a loss. Paying Booth, Ballard and Luongo to not play hockey for us cost Aqua man money. Real money and future cap dollars. Lost. Forever.

 

[F A N]

Seriously? Did you come from the main boards or something?

Only reason Tanev came behind Garrison in total icetime per game because the later was gifted too many power play minutes (I'd call them 4a & 4b last season). Guy played well despite the chaos surrounding the team. That in itself is a notable accomplishment.

Oh I don't disagree. Tanev was probably the team's best defenseman last season. I certainly see him as a top 4 defenseman. But that's not Benning's thinking or argument isn't it? Benning wants to see a greater body of work (it's another way of saying that he doesn't think Tanev has established himself as the type of defenseman Tanev sees himself as). Even Tanev's agent says it's another prove it contract.

I don't expect a GM to come out and say anything but positive things after just acquiring him. I seem to recall Doug Wilson having positive things to say about Patrick White after getting him (note, I'm not comparing Sbisa to White - only giving an example of how a GM is going to try to put a positive spin on the players he received in any trade).

There's a difference between putting a positive spin and misrepresenting a player's potential. Benning seems pretty straight forward and talks about players like a scout would. There's been no evidence that he would go out of his way to justify an acquisition of his by making things up. Benning didn't need to make up projections at all. He could have ended by saying Sbisa is strong and plays a physical, heavy game, which is important in our division. With Bonino, Benning didn't talk about upside. With Dorsett, Benning just talked about him being a heart and soul energy player and penalty killer. I don't believe Benning said anything about Dorsett being a third line guy.

Honestly, I don't understand why you have such a hard time believing that there is someone out there who believes Sbisa has top 4 upside.

 

[Scurr]

He did struggle at times this year though you have to factor in the groin injury he played through as well. There's also too much evidence of good play from the previous 3 years for me to think that he's a completely bad player all of a sudden when switched over to the right. In terms of effectiveness he was very, very good together with Hamhuis.

You're still not getting me… the player wasn't the problem.

I think that speaks more to the team's record in 2012-13 and 2013-14 than anything. IMO he always tried to get value in his moves, which I think is generally the right thing to do.

No, it doesn't. When the team is clearly lacking up front for that long, with expensive assets at backup goalie and on the third pairing, it speaks to a lack of a plan or a poorly executed one. Either way, Gillis hadn't built any kind of "team" since 2011 and it showed. The wheels started falling off (and people here started to notice) before the record got bad.

 

[F A N]

When the team is clearly lacking up front for that long, with expensive assets at backup goalie and on the third pairing, it speaks to a lack of a plan or a poorly executed one. Either way, Gillis hadn't built any kind of "team" since 2011 and it showed. The wheels started falling off (and people here started to notice) before the record got bad.

Just how long did the team clearly "lack[ed] up front?" Three seasons ago the team finished 3rd in the league in scoring. And recognizing the potential "lack up front", Gillis sought to sign Shane Doan. Obviously the "plan" wasn't to keep Luongo and Schneider on the same team at the same time. But the lockout happened and it changed the landscape. Gillis' inability to pull the trigger also didn't help. But I don't think having an expensive #5 defenseman is a problem at all. If you look at the Kings, they actually spend more on the top 5 defenseman than the Canucks. The Canucks advanced to the Cup Finals with an even more expensive defense.

The reality is that the Canucks haven't had a good 2nd line for a long time. After the 70+ point Sedins, the best 2nd line we ever had was Sundin, Demitra, and Kesler and that lasted one year. Has Benning addressed the 2nd line problems? Not really. Like Gillis last season, Benning believes the coaching change would be the biggest factor to the team's increased scoring.

 

[Wisp]

He did struggle at times this year though you have to factor in the groin injury he played through as well. There's also too much evidence of good play from the previous 3 years for me to think that he's a completely bad player all of a sudden when switched over to the right. In terms of effectiveness he was very, very good together with Hamhuis.

Isn't everyone good together with Hamhuis?

I'll never call Garrison a bad player, but you mention the groin injury the last year (which I've bolded), and the fact he's been dealing with groin issues for years (years before the lockout!). Given all that, four years of liability is not a terrible contract to try and duck out of.

 

[Barney Gumble]

With Dorsett, Benning just talked about him being a heart and soul energy player and penalty killer. I don't believe Benning said anything about Dorsett being a third line guy.

A 27 year old forward ain't going to have much upside left.

Honestly, I don't understand why you have such a hard time believing that there is someone out there who believes Sbisa has top 4 upside.

I think there's a difference between saying top four 4 upside and realistically hitting that target. He's not going to get that chance here to show that given who he has to compete for those kind of minutes on the left side here (Hamhuis or Edler). Having a partner like Weber or Stanton (a sophmore playing on his unnatural side) isn't going to help him either.

Isn't everyone good together with Hamhuis?

Everyone except Edler.

 

[kanucks25]

Just how long did the team clearly "lack[ed] up front?" Three seasons ago the team finished 3rd in the league in scoring. And recognizing the potential "lack up front", Gillis sought to sign Shane Doan. Obviously the "plan" wasn't to keep Luongo and Schneider on the same team at the same time. But the lockout happened and it changed the landscape. Gillis' inability to pull the trigger also didn't help. But I don't think having an expensive #5 defenseman is a problem at all. If you look at the Kings, they actually spend more on the top 5 defenseman than the Canucks. The Canucks advanced to the Cup Finals with an even more expensive defense.

The reality is that the Canucks haven't had a good 2nd line for a long time. After the 70+ point Sedins, the best 2nd line we ever had was Sundin, Demitra, and Kesler and that lasted one year. Has Benning addressed the 2nd line problems? Not really. Like Gillis last season, Benning believes the coaching change would be the biggest factor to the team's increased scoring.

I agree the 2nd line hasn't been addressed yet but comparing the 2nd line under Gillis and Benning is not very fair. Benning has been on the job for just a few months and the team is halfway into rebuild mode. The only 2nd liner Benning inherited wanted a trade to one team and there aren't many (or any) fairly priced top-6 forwards on the trade market.

Just because the way things are, we probably won't have an actual 2nd line this year, and I don't see that as Benning's fault. We'll see what happens down the road.

 

[Lundface*]

I agree the 2nd line hasn't been addressed yet but comparing the 2nd line under Gillis and Benning is not very fair. Benning has been on the job for just a few months and the team is halfway into rebuild mode. The only 2nd liner Benning inherited wanted a trade to one team and there aren't many (or any) fairly priced top-6 forwards on the trade market.

Just because the way things are, we probably won't have an actual 2nd line this year, and I don't see that as Benning's fault. We'll see what happens down the road.

The team isn't in a rebuild. If so well then you're making excuses for Gillis too since they have been adding youth for 3 years now.

Gillis built Demitra Sundin Kesler, and then added Samuelsson and Higgins which allowed a rotation of Raymond/Higgins Kesler Samuelsson which was quite potent as well. He shot himself in the foot with long contracts and getting to the cup caused some guys to get overpaid so it's his fault but he didn't have room to wiggle much.

Benning had ALOT of cap space to work with to add pieces and had the teams most valuable trading chip in years as well. He had many different options to add but and with Booth's buyout and throwing Garrison away for nothing he had tons of cash to upgrade offence or d. He chose to throw money as Miller while weakening an already fragile defence and at best breaking even on offence. He had a meh off season but with all the media slogans and rah rah rah he's convinced people he's made sweeping improvements. The team will be in the 5-9 range like they were even with the idiot Tortorella in charge.

Benning also stepped in with a 6th overall pick, a budding Kassian (add that as a 2nd liner), Horvat, Jensen, Shinkaruk and whatever he could get from Kesler. Add in Gaunce and Fox and he isn't sitting in a bad position, he should have added another top 6 forward if his plan was to compete today to a similar contract as Vrbata (or even Miller)

 

[F A N]

A 27 year old forward ain't going to have much upside left.

The point is Benning didn't make **** up.

I think there's a difference between saying top four 4 upside and realistically hitting that target. He's not going to get that chance here to show that given who he has to compete for those kind of minutes on the left side here (Hamhuis or Edler). Having a partner like Weber or Stanton (a sophmore playing on his unnatural side) isn't going to help him either.

Just because a defenseman is playing bottom pairing minutes doesn't mean he can't "develop into a top 4 defenseman." Tanev is a perfect example. I think Sbisa is at his best if he keeps it simple as a physical shutdown defenseman. I don't think Weber and Stanton would be that terrible that Sbisa can't show what he is capable of.

I agree the 2nd line hasn't been addressed yet but comparing the 2nd line under Gillis and Benning is not very fair. Benning has been on the job for just a few months and the team is halfway into rebuild mode. The only 2nd liner Benning inherited wanted a trade to one team and there aren't many (or any) fairly priced top-6 forwards on the trade market.

Just because the way things are, we probably won't have an actual 2nd line this year, and I don't see that as Benning's fault. We'll see what happens down the road.

My point was not to criticize Benning. He went after Iginla and signed Vrbata, who was one of the best top 6 winger options available. I think we will have an actual second line this year.

My point is that the 2nd line has been a problem for a long time and Gillis actually addressed the 2nd line issue better than his predecessors or at least made a better effort. The second line was a problem under Burke and what did he do? Sign guys like Arvedson. Nonis tried with Anson Carter but that was it. The rest of the time it was the likes of Taylor Pyatt or Jan Bulis. Gillis? He at least signed Sundin, Demitra, Samuelsson and went after Shane Doan. These were clearly better attempts at finding a 2nd line solution than what Burke and Nonis came up with. Heck, even Higgins and Santorelli's produced decent 2nd line numbers and Kassian looks like he will take another step forward and establish himself as a top 6 forward. Again, the point is for all his faults, Gillis' idea of building a team is very similar to that of Benning's. It was about acquiring talented players who had the versatility to move up and down the lineup.

 

[Barney Gumble]

Just because a defenseman is playing bottom pairing minutes doesn't mean he can't "develop into a top 4 defenseman." Tanev is a perfect example. I think Sbisa is at his best if he keeps it simple as a physical shutdown defenseman. I don't think Weber and Stanton would be that terrible that Sbisa can't show what he is capable of.

Difference with Tanev is that I can't recall him having a single bad season overall (and that includes the cluster**** of season this past year). The one thing you can say about Sbisa is that he's been consistantly inconsistant in his career (and I'm probably being kind to the year he played this past season).

And there's the dearth of right side defensemen on this club that made it possible for Tanev to get those minutes.

The point is Benning didn't make **** up.

What can one possibly make up on the upside of a 27 year old winger anyhow?

 

[kanucks25]

The team isn't in a rebuild. If so well then you're making excuses for Gillis too since they have been adding youth for 3 years now.

Gillis built Demitra Sundin Kesler, and then added Samuelsson and Higgins which allowed a rotation of Raymond/Higgins Kesler Samuelsson which was quite potent as well. He shot himself in the foot with long contracts and getting to the cup caused some guys to get overpaid so it's his fault but he didn't have room to wiggle much.

Benning had ALOT of cap space to work with to add pieces and had the teams most valuable trading chip in years as well. He had many different options to add but and with Booth's buyout and throwing Garrison away for nothing he had tons of cash to upgrade offence or d. He chose to throw money as Miller while weakening an already fragile defence and at best breaking even on offence. He had a meh off season but with all the media slogans and rah rah rah he's convinced people he's made sweeping improvements. The team will be in the 5-9 range like they were even with the idiot Tortorella in charge.

Benning also stepped in with a 6th overall pick, a budding Kassian (add that as a 2nd liner), Horvat, Jensen, Shinkaruk and whatever he could get from Kesler. Add in Gaunce and Fox and he isn't sitting in a bad position, he should have added another top 6 forward if his plan was to compete today to a similar contract as Vrbata (or even Miller)

"Benning had ALOT of cap space to work with to add pieces"

"he should have added another top 6 forward if his plan was to compete today to a similar contract as Vrbata"

This isn't a video game. You can't just obtain players like Vrbata because you have the cap room. Plus, not many free-agents of his calibre would agree to a deal like he signed when scrubs were given ridiculous contracts elsewhere.

We are definitely in rebuild mode, or at least retool mode. Don't let the UFA signings mask that. If we were actually going for it, we'd trade away valuable prospects for help right now, but Benning isn't going to do that.

"and had the teams most valuable trading chip in years as well. He had many different options to add but and with Booth's buyout and throwing Garrison away for nothing"

How valuable was Kesler really? He had a two-team list and one of them didn't have the cap which made it a one-team list. Having a valuable chip means little when you have about zero leverage.

And it was the same situation with Garrison. He had a two-team list, one said no, then Benning took whatever he could from the other team. A 2nd/Vey for Garrison probably isn't enough today but when you consider the fact that he was signed for 4 more years @ 4.6M with Corrado coming up, it's not that big of a loss.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

I'm kind of perturbed it's been a couple months and we're already dividing into us vs them camps.

i recall the phrase "gillis fanboy" preceding benning's hire by one, maybe two, years. pretty sure many of the more polarized pro- and anti-benning positions are just a continuation of the existing "rift" in the fanbase.

 

[arsmaster*]

i recall the phrase "gillis fanboy" preceding benning's hire by one, maybe two, years. pretty sure many of the more polarized pro- and anti-benning positions are just a continuation of the existing "rift" in the fanbase.

It certainly is. A large proponent of the anti-gillis crowd is the same crowd eating up every benning move, rationalizing every decision and talking up each and every addition like its a master stroke of genius.

The defending of players like vey and sbisa at this point is become nauseating. Sbisa literally was a throw away. Vey is guilty until proven innocent for me and the fact he's basically been gifted a prime roster spot aggravates the heck out of me. I'm not saying he's worse than Schroeder but even he found the back of the net in the show.

Benning's best move so far is vrbata. Excellent value. Excellent term.

It's pretty much a wait and see on the rest.

Edit* and for someone to be declaring benning is entering a rebuild, then why aren't the additions of high priced veteran talent (vrbata and miller) being questioned by his adoring fans? These are half way measures similar to Toronto acquiring Kessel when they should have continued to stay young.

 

[ddawg1950]

i recall the phrase "gillis fanboy" preceding benning's hire by one, maybe two, years. pretty sure many of the more polarized pro- and anti-benning positions are just a continuation of the existing "rift" in the fanbase.

Really good point.


There is a rift in the fan base.

Maybe we can trade those "other fans" to Buffalo...

 

[mrmyheadhurts]

Benning hasn't even started his first season, I'm not ready to declare him a success or failure yet and won't be for a few seasons. Many on here wrote him off before he even made his first move because he was hired by Linden.

 

[Bourne Endeavor]

How valuable was Kesler really? He had a two-team list and one of them didn't have the cap which made it a one-team list. Having a valuable chip means little when you have about zero leverage.

And it was the same situation with Garrison. He had a two-team list, one said no, then Benning took whatever he could from the other team. A 2nd/Vey for Garrison probably isn't enough today but when you consider the fact that he was signed for 4 more years @ 4.6M with Corrado coming up, it's not that big of a loss.

Then don't trade him. You can argue Kesler had to be moved, but the Garrison trade was idiotic. If nothing else, keep him for a few months to see if his value improves once he has a few games under his belt. I would certainly rather Garrison than Stanton or Sbisa. Corrado struggled last year in his limited opportunity. Why should we gift him a spot? Let him come in when an inevitable injury occurs and have him earn the spot by pushing someone else out. Right now, say Tanev or Hamhuis goes down. Here's our defense..

Edler - Tanev
Sbisa - Bieksa
Stanton - Corrado
Weber

or

Hamhuis - Bieksa
Edler - Corrado
Sbisa - Weber
Stanton

Better hope Corrado and Sbisa pan out and/or we only have the one injury, otherwise we're screwed.

 

[BobbyJazzLegs]

Then don't trade him. You can argue Kesler had to be moved, but the Garrison trade was idiotic. If nothing else, keep him for a few months to see if his value improves once he has a few games under his belt. I would certainly rather Garrison than Stanton or Sbisa. Corrado struggled last year in his limited opportunity. Why should we gift him a spot? Let him come in when an inevitable injury occurs and have him earn the spot by pushing someone else out. Right now, say Tanev or Hamhuis goes down. Here's our defense..

Edler - Tanev
Sbisa - Bieksa
Stanton - Corrado
Weber

or

Hamhuis - Bieksa
Edler - Corrado
Sbisa - Weber
Stanton

Better hope Corrado and Sbisa pan out and/or we only have the one injury, otherwise we're screwed.

Yeah we are screwed. The reason he got Miller and Vrbata is so we're not super screwed. 2 and 3 year contracts give us more to work with if our kids start panning out, and don't hamstring us for years.

As far as I'm concerned, Benning can make "arbitrary" moves as much as he wants in the next 2 seasons as long as he keeps draft picks and does his best to get that missing future #1C and #1D.

 

[BobbyJazzLegs]

You don't just make a whole new team in one ****ing off season.

 

[The Stig]

Close to 1000. Continue HERE.