The Greatest General Managers in Canucks History (#5)

Who is the fifth greatest General Manager in Canucks’ History?


  • Total voters
    74
Status
Not open for further replies.

Jyrki21

2021-12-05
Sponsor
Harry Neale and Jack Gordon are the only two who can compete with Benning for the bottom.

I think Benning is probably stupider than Gordon, but unfortunately for Gordon the Neely trade went through while Benning's equivalent Lucic and Subban trades did not.
Every time someone scoffs at the idea that this is currently one of the (or the) worst period(s) in Canuck hockey, I always point to the fact that most of Benning's predecessors never had access to (1) salary cap parity, and (2) the reams and reams of information currently available through data tracking and modern communications infrastructure. It's just so much more forgivable to screw up when you're relying on one or two verbal accounts from some individual scout sending telegrams from Sweden than it is when you have hordes of data and video at your fingertips, much of which is being given away for free, and the availability of smart advisors to use/interpret it at the fraction of the cost of a fourth-liner.

In other words "yeah but the team is way better than it was in the '70s and '80s" is completely meaningless to me. It is so much harder to be that bad now if you're putting in any effort whatsoever, and I feel there is a lot more responsibility on an executive being negligent or wilfully blind than one who never had the option. I mean, we don't applaud a modern construction company because their leaky condo tower is better in a rainstorm than, like, the Parthenon.
 

ghostingtaro

Registered User
Nov 2, 2013
1,464
651
Dave Nonis era drafted us Cory Schneider and traded for that goaltender who was 1 win away from getting us to the promised land.
 

vadim sharifijanov

Registered User
Oct 10, 2007
28,784
16,233
Every time someone scoffs at the idea that this is currently one of the (or the) worst period(s) in Canuck hockey, I always point to the fact that most of Benning's predecessors never had access to (1) salary cap parity, and (2) the reams and reams of information currently available through data tracking and modern communications infrastructure. It's just so much more forgivable to screw up when you're relying on one or two verbal accounts from some individual scout sending telegrams from Sweden than it is when you have hordes of data and video at your fingertips, much of which is being given away for free, and the availability of smart advisors to use/interpret it at the fraction of the cost of a fourth-liner.

In other words "yeah but the team is way better than it was in the '70s and '80s" is completely meaningless to me. It is so much harder to be that bad now if you're putting in any effort whatsoever, and I feel there is a lot more responsibility on an executive being negligent or wilfully blind than one who never had the option. I mean, we don't applaud a modern construction company because their leaky condo tower is better in a rainstorm than, like, the Parthenon.

lol, you know the parthenon once did have a roof right?
 

RandV

It's a wolf v2.0
Jul 29, 2003
26,857
4,950
Vancouver
Visit site
While he was mediocre one thing I'll give to Nonis is off the 'modern day' GM's I'd say he had the toughest job. I wouldn't know what Quinn started with but he had the longest tenure and was able to take advantage of management still being a bit of a wild west. Both Burke and Gillis had to fix a floundering team but both had solid pieces in place to do it. Benning had the benefit of a solid organizational structure, low expectations, and time.

Nonis though got the job in year 1 of the salary cap, when it was at it's tightest squeeze starting at a $39 million ceiling, while at the same time our core players were hitting their most expensive prime UFA years. Outside of Luongo his list of additions looks bad but it's also that because while the team was bleeding good players to the cap the only option he to replace them was through dumpster diving. Taking the Luongo trade as a good example, adding him was a trade off where we lost both of our top six RW's, Bertuzzi and Carter, who scored 25 and 33 goals respectively, and were replaced in the lineup by Taylor Pyatt and Matt Cooke.

Not to say he was a good GM but personally I'm not critical of the work he did while here a a placeholder and before he could really put his stamp on the team he got replaced by someone far better.
 

Vector

Moderator
Feb 2, 2007
23,147
36,145
Junktown
I'm not going to defend Nonis too much since I just don't have any passion for it but he had a few good UFA signings. Not a lot but a few. People forget that Anson Carter and Willie Mitchell were both Nonis guys. I maintain that the Richard Park signing was outstanding but Crawford could not figure out how to use him. Jan Bulis was the same type of signing but AV used him correctly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Canucks5551 and PM

PM

Glass not 1/2 full
Apr 8, 2014
9,869
1,664
Had to read up on Maloney since way before my time but still going with Nonis. As mentioned here, he had some good signings in addition to a critical trade and I like that he showed some backbone which probably got him fired just like our last GM. I don’t consider the draft outside very high first rounders to be GM work so the really good and really bad draft under him is a wash for me. He also promoted AV which was a great move.

Maloney is probably next although I’m tempted to vote Keenan purely for the Linden trade considering how positively franchise changing that was for us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: I am toxic

Dab

Registered User
Apr 17, 2017
3,193
3,001
Every time someone scoffs at the idea that this is currently one of the (or the) worst period(s) in Canuck hockey, I always point to the fact that most of Benning's predecessors never had access to (1) salary cap parity, and (2) the reams and reams of information currently available through data tracking and modern communications infrastructure. It's just so much more forgivable to screw up when you're relying on one or two verbal accounts from some individual scout sending telegrams from Sweden than it is when you have hordes of data and video at your fingertips, much of which is being given away for free, and the availability of smart advisors to use/interpret it at the fraction of the cost of a fourth-liner.

In other words "yeah but the team is way better than it was in the '70s and '80s" is completely meaningless to me. It is so much harder to be that bad now if you're putting in any effort whatsoever, and I feel there is a lot more responsibility on an executive being negligent or wilfully blind than one who never had the option. I mean, we don't applaud a modern construction company because their leaky condo tower is better in a rainstorm than, like, the Parthenon.
You couldn’t even find vancouver on a map in the 70s and 80s
 

Canucks1096

Registered User
Feb 13, 2016
5,608
1,667
Trades

1 Quinn
2 Burke
3 Keenan/Nonis

Signings

1 Gillis
2 Burke
3 Nonis

Draft

1 Benning
2 Burke
3 Nonis

Not including everybody before Quinn.

About the greatest gm conversation, a lot of people are ranking GM based on team accomplishments instead of actual transactions the GM did. Not much of a point in debating.
 

Canucks1096

Registered User
Feb 13, 2016
5,608
1,667
Benning only having 6 votes in round 5 is a telling sign that his fanboys are decreasing in number.

I won't considered myself a Benning fan. I am kind of neutral, the reason why I didn't vote for Benning because I didn't know how to ranked him. Since most people on that list are GM and president which mean they had the final say. Benning was just the gm, Linden had the final say on player transaction. So I wasn't sure if I should rank Benning based on 2014 to now or just from 2018 to now when Benning had the final say since Linden left and Canucks still don't have president.
 

Javaman

Registered User
Jul 13, 2010
2,482
3,296
Vancouver
Trades

1 Quinn
2 Burke
3 Keenan/Nonis

Signings

1 Gillis
2 Burke
3 Nonis

Draft

1 Benning
2 Burke
3 Nonis

Not including everybody before Quinn.

About the greatest gm conversation, a lot of people are ranking GM based on team accomplishments instead of actual transactions the GM did. Not much of a point in debating.

There's no point in glorifying transactions if they don't lead to team accomplishments. You're presenting a false dichotomy by attempting to separate one from the other. Quinn and Benning both made transactions that brought the team closer to the Stanley Cup than any other GM in the team's history.

Even by your own standards, those two deserve to be ranked at the top.
 
  • Like
Reactions: racerjoe

Canucks1096

Registered User
Feb 13, 2016
5,608
1,667
There's no point in glorifying transactions if they don't lead to team accomplishments. You're presenting a false dichotomy by attempting to separate one from the other. Quinn and Benning both made transactions that brought the team closer to the Stanley Cup than any other GM in the team's history.

Even by your own standards, those two deserve to be ranked at the top.

It did lead to team accomplishments, Burke and Nonis just weren't there for it. Based on your theory, you should ranked Nonis/Burke ahead of Gillis because the players that they got were way more valuable in the cup run than the player Gillis got. Gillis was just at right place/right time.

Let me give you analogy, maybe you will understand better.

So pretend me and you we both developed this great smartphone. We developed all the softwares and the apps. It was like 80 to 90% done, for personal reason we had to leave the company. Another person come in and start finishing the product and all they really did pick the color and packaging. In your theory me and you shouldn't get credit for the smartphone
The person that is in the right place/ right time should get it. Is that right?

If your answer is yes, then we probably should end the conversation since we are having a conversations in two different languages.
 

Javaman

Registered User
Jul 13, 2010
2,482
3,296
Vancouver
It did lead to team accomplishments, Burke and Nonis just weren't there for it. Based on your theory, you should ranked Nonis/Burke ahead of Gillis because the players that they got were way more valuable in the cup run than the player Gillis got. Gillis was just at right place/right time.

Let me give you analogy, maybe you will understand better.

So pretend me and you we both developed this great smartphone. We developed all the softwares and the apps. It was like 80 to 90% done, for personal reason we had to leave the company. Another person come in and start finishing the product and all they really did pick the color and packaging. In your theory me and you shouldn't get credit for the smartphone
The person that is in the right place/ right time should get it. Is that right?

If your answer is yes, then we probably should end the conversation since we are having a conversations in two different languages.

Your analogy is flawed. Unless, of course, it's actually a veiled critique of ownership for firing Nonis just as he was on the cusp of turning the Canucks into a Cup contender. Nonis didn't decide to leave the Canucks for "personal reasons"... he was fired.

If your view of Gillis is that he just kinda floated in and rode Nonis's coattails to all sorts of regular and post-season success, then you are correct that we are having two entirely different conversations.
 

Canucks1096

Registered User
Feb 13, 2016
5,608
1,667
Your analogy is flawed. Unless, of course, it's actually a veiled critique of ownership for firing Nonis just as he was on the cusp of turning the Canucks into a Cup contender. Nonis didn't decide to leave the Canucks for "personal reasons"... he was fired.


If your view of Gillis is that he just kinda floated in and rode Nonis's coattails to all sorts of regular and post-season success, then you are correct that we are having two entirely different conversations.

Fired or personal reasons, it doesn't matter. It wasn't the point, when Gillis got hired, just a year ago Canucks were 1st in the division, 2nd round of the playoffs and had the best season in franchise history. 2007/2008 the reason why they missed the playoff is D was completely banged up and Luu was playing as well due to his wife having issues. They were definitely on the way to become cup contenders.

Nonis wasn't a FA Hired, JM hired him. When FA purchased the remaining 50 % to buy the Canucks. Most owners will want to bring in their own guy.

Regardless if you think my analogy flawed or not. You indirectly confirmed that Nonis/Burke had a big part of the Gillis team already. "You did write there is no point in glorifying transaction if it doesn't lead the team accomplishments" it did lead to team accomplishments since 8 out of top 10 players in the Gills era were all Nonis/Burke.

It does seem like you're just disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing.
 

Javaman

Registered User
Jul 13, 2010
2,482
3,296
Vancouver
Fired or personal reasons, it doesn't matter. It wasn't the point, when Gillis got hired, just a year ago Canucks were 1st in the division, 2nd round of the playoffs and had the best season in franchise history. 2007/2008 the reason why they missed the playoff is D was completely banged up and Luu was playing as well due to his wife having issues. They were definitely on the way to become cup contenders.

Nonis wasn't a FA Hired, JM hired him. When FA purchased the remaining 50 % to buy the Canucks. Most owners will want to bring in their own guy.

Regardless if you think my analogy flawed or not. You indirectly confirmed that Nonis/Burke had a big part of the Gillis team already. "You did write there is no point in glorifying transaction if it doesn't lead the team accomplishments" it did lead to team accomplishments since 8 out of top 10 players in the Gills era were all Nonis/Burke.

It does seem like you're just disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing.

Dude.

Gillis already won because way more people than me thought he was the best.

Why are you still tilting at windmills in the thread for the 5th best GM?

Just vote for Nonis, like I did.
 
  • Like
Reactions: racerjoe

Canucks1096

Registered User
Feb 13, 2016
5,608
1,667
Dude.

Gillis already won because way more people than me thought he was the best.

Why are you still tilting at windmills in the thread for the 5th best GM?

Just vote for Nonis, like I did.

Dude

Who started to debate with who? Let me remind you. It was you

I wrote I don't want to debate anymore about greatest gm since most people are voting based on team results. You wanted to start something. My head was like, okay bring it on.
 

Javaman

Registered User
Jul 13, 2010
2,482
3,296
Vancouver
Dude

Who started to debate with who? Let me remind you. It was you

I wrote I don't want to debate anymore about greatest gm since most people are voting based on team results. You wanted to start something. My head was like, okay bring it on.

Umm... okay?

I've lost track of what you're on about, to be honest.

Do you agree that Nonis is the best of the remaining options at this stage of the poll? Otherwise, I have no idea what you're griping about.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad