The Jim Benning & Management Megathread Part III
- Thread starter hatterson
- Start date
- Status
Here is the thing about the Seahawks:
That team target rangy...
Athletic players first and foremost.
Then...
And only then...
Will the competition for jobs start.
Sure...
Competition is important...
But the management also realizes that they need to get good players...
Or at least players with the potential to be good...
In order to raise the competition.
That is not what the Canucks currently does...
Since Benning put an emphasis of grit...
Over skills.
That is what most of us has a problem with.
There is no way you can honestly say that Prust has more potential than Kassian.
Plus...
I think you also overstated that "competition" held by the Seahawks.
That only happened in the first or second year when Carrol got there...
When no job was truly safe.
Once he got his All-Pros at various positions though...
Everyone knows that these players' jobs are all but safe...
And that "competition" has merely become lip-service for these positions.
I may not know much about anything...
But I do know my Seahawks.
I have watched that team for over 10 years now...
And I have pretty much seen its rise...
To its fall...
And then to its accent to the top of the mountain.
Honestly...
When GMs use the phrases "create more competition" and "no job is safe"...
It honestly means that "the team is not good enough" or "I want to do everything in my power to improve the team".
When a team is a championship contender...
Or even a favourite to win it all...
Suddenly...
"Competition for jobs" becomes secondary.
Of course...
I am not saying that compete level is not important...
But it should not be focused over skills and talent.
No team that does that wins anything.
Skills is a far more important indicator of success.
One of these players is enough.
Two is really overkill.
They will only be hemmed in their own zone more often than not...
And the energy and grit they bring to the table...
Will all but be neutralized.
Last edited:
Did you read the quote?
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
"To Carroll, competition doesn't really mean beating an opponent or a teammate (for a roster spot or starting role), although that may be a part of it. Instead, competition, to Carroll, involves the constant (the "always" part of the expression) pursuit, characterized by scrapping and clawing, to get better and eventually to reach one's highest potential."
Having players with a lot of potential that aren't all that interested in achieving it undermines the kind of environment they're trying to create. Teams like the Seahawks and Blackhawks have a roster full of players achieving every year.
can someone justify why pete carroll's public opinions on 'compete' have any relevance to jim benning's obsession with giving free assets to the league in exchange for their spare parts?
Perhaps it's an attempt to explain Benning going after certain players with little or no unexplored potential..
geebaan
7th round busted
- Oct 27, 2012
- 10,231
- 8,810
Calling it now, Baertschi on the 4th line all year and Virtanen doesn't even get 9 games.
Hoping that the Seahawks success is emotional and not tactical and the Canucks will be the same?
I think the quote was probably more about Shinkaruk and Gaunce who they have talked about as prospects they like, but who (given the waiver eligibles ahead of them) won't see much, if any, NHL time.
Plus Pedan, Subban and Hutton. "Willie says it might be a year or two before the #Canucks get some of the guys from Utica". People see what they want to see.
Barney Gumble
Registered User
- Jan 2, 2007
- 22,711
- 1
I see you quoting a guy that made an extremely questionable call that cost him a 2nd Superbowl ring.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Ho Borvat
Registered User
- Sep 29, 2009
- 7,374
- 0
I see you quoting a guy that made an extremely questionable call that cost him a 2nd Superbowl ring.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Who, god?
I see you quoting a guy that made an extremely questionable call that cost him a 2nd Superbowl ring.
.
.
.
.
.
.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?id=4816051
Maybe this guy was right?
I in the Eye
Drop a ball it falls
- Dec 14, 2002
- 6,371
- 2,327
I'll try
Both Benning and Weisbrod got to where they are, on hard work alone. Very little competence... Very debatable and cloudy track record. Very little skill. Lots of hard work. Lots of long hours. Lots of sleepless nights. Perhaps Benning falls asleep at his desk, with red and blue marks all over his face (falling asleep with his whiteboard markers in his hand). They were able to rise above their incompetence, and ****** track records, to keep reaching higher levels of the game, on hard work, and support... from the right person, at the right time (a friend, in an environment full of friends). Friends and friends-of-friends keep hiring them from that tight network, and promoting them, before firing them... and starting again with another friend, or friend-of-a-friend... They'll be going the path of Feaster, soon enough. But, in the meantime, the thing they know is hard work... and support. They know how to support those who they like. They know what their definition of hard work (not smart work) looks like. They know nothing else. They certainly don't know team building skill... and they don't know how to put themselves in a position to be lucky. The ****ing GM spends the majority of his time on a task that, in the grand scheme of things, has a low % of impacting the team immediately, and a low % long term (outside the 1st round). Drafting is very important for an organization, and that's why this gets delegated to competent individuals with budgets and time. Research & Development is very important (and that's basically what drafting is... researching and developing for the long-term health of the organization), but day-to-day fires... that's the main job of the GM. To deal with the day-to-day fires. He's in the wrong position. He's in the wrong head space.
The thing is, success is a carefully crafted combination of (1) skill; (2) hard work; (3) support; and (4) luck. The careful hands of a surgeon can utilize and shape (1), (2) and (3), to put things in a better position to be (4) lucky. But these aren't surgeons... these are butchers.
Last edited:
Yeah...
But once the Seahawks becomes a contender and a favourite...
The competition really lessened.
No one believes that a fifth round cornerback...
Or a 7th round strong safety...
That got picked up this year...
Can truly unseat either Richard Sherman or Kam Chancellor...
Respectfully.
They are All-Pros for a reason.
That compete line rings hallow...
And is merely lip-service...
At this point.
Sure...
The Blackhawks might also embrace competition...
But at the end of the day...
Skill wins out...
And the team still ices the best team it can...
At its disposal.
The team won the Cup...
Because their best players...
Were their best players.
I also do not think skilled players would look to Dorsett or Prust for inspiration.
They might respect the Dorsetts and the Prusts...
But because they know they play a different game...
And they too work hard to get to this level...
They would probably continue to do what they have done thus far in their career.
Young skill guys would also probably look up to the Sedins...
And probably even Higgins and Burrows...
Before they look towards Dorsett or Prust.
The only guys who will want to emulate Dorsett or Prust...
Will be people slated for the bottom of the lineup.
I really do not see the use of a team full of bottom line hear-and-soul kind of players...
If they would only inspire part of the roster.
Mainly...
I just think the Seahawks is not the best example for what you want to illustrate.
Yes...
Competition is important...
But everyone knows that a sport team is a business...
And the reason why a player makes the team over another...
Is not that simple...
And not always straightforward.
Often...
There are other factors to consider.
One cannot deny that even if a couple of young guys out-competes Dorsett and Prust...
They will likely start in the minors...
Because their contract can slide.
Like what I have written in the last post...
Phrases such as "always compete" and "no job is safe"...
Are only used when a team is not good enough...
And a GM wants to show that he is here to make changes.
It is nothing more than a publicity stunt...
And they get drummed out very quickly...
When a team becomes a true contender.
Last edited:
What does a piece that questions Carroll's hiring...
Has to do with anything?
Yes...
It is proven now that the writer was incorrect in his assessment...
But without the benefit of hindsight...
There is actually very little inherently wrong with his article...
Since he just gave his opinion...
Backed by reasons and evidences.
We have all been wrong with our predictions...
One way or another.
It is not fair to hold that against someone's head...
When he actually made an intelligent...
And thoughtful...
Analysis.
Last edited:
Bourne Endeavor
Registered User
Sadly, he's right. After Baertschi, all our roster spots are filled with veterans. I wouldn't all be surprised to them try to sneak Clendening through waivers.
Sedin - Sedin - Burrows
Baertschi - Bonino - Vrbata
Higgins - Horvat - Hansen
Prust - Vey - Dorsett
Kenins
Edler - Tanev
Hamhuis - Sbisa
Bartkowski - Weber
Corrado
Miller
Markstrom
That's what I expect to go into the season with.
They've already committed to 8 D.
"Well, I've said it many times that a competitive team like ours, if you want to build a team that has a chance you've got to have depth on the blueline. When we set out to build the team we billed our model with 8 defenseman on the NHL side, but we also sought out players who were going to be 9th, 10th, 11th guys who had the ability to play in the NHL."
http://canucksarmy.com/2015/5/25/ji...r-blue-line-group-that-s-better-in-transition
So that's 3 rookies next year (Baertschi, Corrado, Clendening) and 3 last year (Vey, Horvat, Kenins). Hopefully 3 more the year after that (Pedan, Virtanen?, Gaunce?, McCann?, Subban?, Hutton?) Seems reasonable.
youth for youth's sake is such a silly approximation of cap savings and long-term convenience. id take a 28 year old with 5 great years left than ten linden veys
Gaunce is ready for the NHL. Shinkaruk is ready to get a look. In a year or two, McCann and Virtanen will both be ready to go.
It pisses me off that we're not putting youth into our lineup because we want to try and fight for 9th place in the conference. So stupid.
Ho Borvat
Registered User
- Sep 29, 2009
- 7,374
- 0
The tricky part is, usually 28 year olds are looking to cash in (if they are half decent at least), whereas younger players are typically cost controlled.
Chris Higgins is a guy we acquired at age 28 I believe and is in his 5th season with the team... so you can get a lot of usefulness out of these players, I don't disagree with this assessment.
Having a player like Tarasenko putting up 73 points last year while making 1.75 million is a pretty ideal situation for any team. *Not saying we have a Tarasenko caliber prospect*
Pip
Registered User
I don't see Gaunce or Shinkaruk as NHL ready. Neither were impact AHLers and should both be in Utica this year hopefully taking on more prominent roles with the Comets.
I don't believe in playing youth just for the sake of playing youth. There's no need to rush either prospect.
I don't believe in playing youth just for the sake of playing youth. There's no need to rush either prospect.
Agreed , but say for example a Cassels or McCan have a crazy impressive training camp and look ready for the NHL you have to make room. Wether that's trading Higgins or someone you gotta do it.
- Status
