The Management Thread | We live Page to Page here

[mathonwy]

And here I thought, based on other guys, that arrogance was an undesirable trait to have as a GM of the Vancouver Canucks.

Oh how the tables turn

 

[vanuck]

Your description makes Benning out to be either arrogant or a moron. Maybe he’s an arrogant moron? No wonder this is the worst era in our history.

If Benning was actually humble, at least he could've learned from people who were smarter than him. This way, over time, he could've become a lot better than the current version of himself.

But naaaah.

Guy chose to go "my way or the highway" and proceeded to push out anyone and everyone who disagreed with his view on things. Thinking that he knew it all and didn't need to listen to others. The quintessential hockey man who paid his dues on his way up and now sees himself as knowing everything it takes to build a championship team. In his mind, he's already reached his final form.

Newsflash: Jimbo thinks the game is still played like it was in the 80's.

The tragedy doesn't stop there too. Instead of accepting his failures like a man and taking a good hard look in the mirror, he basically chose to blame everything but himself: COVID, injuries, the schedule etc.

This only stems from the arrogance of a man who thinks that he alone knows what winning teams look like. Therefore, he cannot be wrong or faulted when asked why the Canucks aren't where he thought they'd be. After all, it's not like anyone else would've known better... right?

And that's really the pitfall of this type of leadership/management: you end up with too many blind spots because you don't tolerate differences of opinion in the office. When you get rid of all the dissenters, you limit your exposure to different viewpoints and ways of thinking. For instance who's gonna be there to tell you that drafting a guy with poor IQ at 6th OA is a bad idea? Like it wasn't already enough that Benning is pretty much a dinosaur in terms of hockey thought, but for him to be this conceited as well? F*** me... That's the absolute worst combination of traits you can possibly have. Gee, 50 years with no Cups and we really lucked out on this guy eh!

One day, when people look back on this era they'll see it for what it is: a regime run by an incompetent moron flying by the seat of his pants with no long-term plan/strategy whatsoever. But until then... cue the shills.

 

[F A N]

Newsflash: Jimbo thinks the game is still played like it was in the 80's.

Are Hughes, Hoglander, and Garland 80s style players?

 

[MS]

Are Hughes, Hoglander, and Garland 80s style players?

Actually yes. ‘80s were run-and-gun with tons of smaller talented players. Hughes is the closest thing to Phil Housley the NHL has ever seen.

‘90s are a different story.

 

[F A N]

Actually yes. ‘80s were run-and-gun with tons of smaller talented players. Hughes is the closest thing to Phil Housley the NHL has ever seen.

‘90s are a different story.

So would those '80s guys, the smaller talented players you refer to, be successful in today's NHL? I would imagine that Tony Tanti would be a pretty effective player in today's NHL (with modern training, nutrition, equipment etc).

 

[tantalum]

So would those '80s guys, the smaller talented players you refer to, be successful in today's NHL? I would imagine that Tony Tanti would be a pretty effective player in today's NHL (with modern training, nutrition, equipment etc).

Hear, hear!

 

[timw33]

The models do not like our D core, unsurprisingly enough.

 

[Petey But Really Jim]

I don't want to get into it man, I've debunked this so many times. It's a dumb thing people parrot because they need to latch on to something to hate Weisbrod for (as if being besties with Benning isn't enough.) If you really want me to get into it again, ping me in the management thread, I won't take this thread even further off the rails.

@Melvin I am genuinely very curious to hear this, and we are in the proper thread here. Appreciate it.

 

[Bleach Clean]

The models do not like our D core, unsurprisingly enough.

16th overall is exactly in bubble territory. A few things standing out to me:

- 22nd ranked offense... This is ES so it's understandable, but that's not going to get it done.
- 3rd line is ranked 9th... Interesting.
- 1st ranked back up goaltending. Ok.

 

[MS]

#1 backup in the NHL!

For a 36 y/o with below-average stats last year on a good team, because he was good in 2018.

Blech.

 

[carrotshirt]

It's 34% chance, but there is 32 picks.
So realistically, your team's chances of picking a player in the second round is about 1 in 100 each draft.

For lower rounds say 10%, it's about 1 in 300 picks.

If you ask me, in a large picture, they are pretty much the same odds.

What? Can you elaborate on this? It comes across as complete nonsense

 

[F A N]

The models do not like our D core, unsurprisingly enough.

I'm not really good at reading JFresh's graphs. Does that mean that our projected 3rd D pairing is the projected best pairing?

 

[Peter10]

I'm not really good at reading JFresh's graphs. Does that mean that our projected 3rd D pairing is the projected best pairing?

It position league wide, so the 3rd d pairing is projected to be 18th in the league.

 

[Hammer79]

'Based on 3 year weighted stats' We're running with a sophomore in Hogs, Hughes hasn't played 3 full seasons yet and Podz is a rookie. I wouldn't read too much into this. Also, OEL was run into the ground on a bad Phoenix team over the past 3 years, we're banking on a rebound there.

 

[AppleHoneySauce]

#1 backup in the NHL!

For a 36 y/o with below-average stats last year on a good team, because he was good in 2018.

Blech.

Its based off of him being projected as playing way more games than he should be. Put him at like 20 games and he craters back to reality. No idea why jfresh decided to set halaks game time up like he did.

 

[Melvin]

@Melvin I am genuinely very curious to hear this, and we are in the proper thread here. Appreciate it.

There are two things going on here. One is roles and responsibilities and the other is interpretation of the CBA.

On 1: Different AGM's have different roles. There has never been anything to indicate that Weisbrod was in charge of legal interpretations of the CBA. With the Canucks, that is Chris Gear's job. With the Flames, I don't know very much but since Feaster is literally a lawyer, I would more or less expect him to have that covered.

On 2: I am not going to Google to find the exact wording again but essentially the CBA is often ambiguous and open to interpretation until tested, and in this case it had to do with whether an unsigned RFA counted as being on the team's "Reserve List" according to that particular CBA's wording. This is unclear and I think Calgary was reasonable to interpret it the way they did. Most people choose not to interpret it that way because, well, because it's funny, and thinking about the worse case scenario makes a lot of people happy, but Bill Daly declined to comment on it and the rules/wording has been changed in subsequent CBA's so we will literally never know.

I personally believe that the NHL would have never allowed that to happen, and "hur dur Weisbrod almost signed a player he would have had to put on waivers" is a bottom take with zero critical analysis, but at this point it, like most myths (such as Burke saying he "didn't know what Weisbrod did," another myth,) is a runaway freight train because people just copy/paste it everywhere and sources become self-referential.

 

[Melvin]

'Based on 3 year weighted stats' We're running with a sophomore in Hogs, Hughes hasn't played 3 full seasons yet and Podz is a rookie. I wouldn't read too much into this. Also, OEL was run into the ground on a bad Phoenix team over the past 3 years, we're banking on a rebound there.

Phoenix finished 4 points ahead of Vancouver last year, and no, it wasn't because of COVID. It was because we suck as hard as they do, if not harder.

 

[Melvin]

I really wish we would move away from the terms "starter" and "backup" as they propogate a falsehood in terms of how NHL teams operate these days (with limited exceptions like TBay.) Most teams are doing either like 65/35 usage or 50/50 or something in between and saying that a team has a "starter" and a "backup" has not been true for a very long time. What matters is how good the tandem is as a unit.

 

[AwesomeInTheory]

Phoenix finished 4 points ahead of Vancouver last year, and no, it wasn't because of COVID. It was because we suck as hard as they do, if not harder.

They've basically been within a few points of each other and alternating finishing above the other going back to like 2014-15. IE, pretty much the duration of the current regime.

I know the hope is that Vancouver is a drastically changed team going into this season, but...

 

[Love]

The models do not like our D core, unsurprisingly enough.

Seems very accurate to me. Great forwards and goaltending with a horrible defence.

 

[F A N]

Phoenix finished 4 points ahead of Vancouver last year, and no, it wasn't because of COVID. It was because we suck as hard as they do, if not harder.

They were in a division with Sharks, Kings, and Ducks. But they actually got some good seasons out of their players.

 

[AwesomeInTheory]

They were in a division with Sharks, Kings, and Ducks. But they actually got some good seasons out of their players.

19/20 - Vancouver finished 4 points ahead of Arizona
18/19 - Arizona finished 5 points ahead of Vancouver
17/18 - Vancouver finished 3 points ahead of Arizona
16/17 - Arizona finished 1 point ahead of Vancouver
15/16 - Arizona finished 3 points ahead of Vancouver

You have to go back to 14/15 to get some real disparity between Arizona and Vancouver. They've been similarly bad for a number of years now. Which is funny because IIRC, Arizona doesn't spent to the cap and has an internal budget whereas Vancouver is routinely tapped out year after year.

 

[kanucks25]

Mojo 1 x 1.75M

Good thing we jumped on the Pearson signing early...

 

[kanucks25]

The models do not like our D core, unsurprisingly enough.

I'd be wary of any model that is optimistic about our defence.

 

[F A N]

19/20 - Vancouver finished 4 points ahead of Arizona
18/19 - Arizona finished 5 points ahead of Vancouver
17/18 - Vancouver finished 3 points ahead of Arizona
16/17 - Arizona finished 1 point ahead of Vancouver
15/16 - Arizona finished 3 points ahead of Vancouver

You have to go back to 14/15 to get some real disparity between Arizona and Vancouver. They've been similarly bad for a number of years now. Which is funny because IIRC, Arizona doesn't spent to the cap and has an internal budget whereas Vancouver is routinely tapped out year after year.

A lot of that was Dave Tippett hockey though and they had a prime OEL. The Canucks might have gotten better results employing the trap. Certainly, I think Tippett is a much better coach than Green at getting regular season results with a bad roster. Tippett is like AV in his first season here.

I don't mean to take anything away from Arizona. They actually made moves to improve the team during those years such as trading a 1st for Stepan. But they are an example of a team that failed to build around their core. Of course, missing on a few high picks can make all the difference (just look at Canucks in 2014 and 2016).