The Management Thread | We live Page to Page here

[logan5]

Jim Benning getting a lot of positive reviews for his recent moves. - 650

 

[GetFocht]

I peeked over at Canucks.com forun for the first time 6 years, their activity is 10x more than here and most of it is pro-Benning and optimistic for next season.

It's a brand new slate next season and it's nice to see the broad fanbase renergized.

 

[m9]

I peeked over at Canucks.com forun for the first time 6 years, their activity is 10x more than here and most of it is pro-Benning and optimistic for next season.

It's a brand new slate next season and it's nice to see the broad fanbase renergized.

Well you can peek back the last 6 years there and you'll see the exact same optimism. How has that worked out?

 

[timw33]

I peeked over at Canucks.com forun for the first time 6 years, their activity is 10x more than here and most of it is pro-Benning and optimistic for next season.

It's a brand new slate next season and it's nice to see the broad fanbase renergized.

As a moderator there 15 years ago, you definitely don't understand the purpose or vibe of that forum.

 

[GetFocht]

John Garrett saying he has never seen such a roster turnover and transformation like the Canucks did in a span of 10 days


John Garrett on all the Canucks transactions this offseason, improved roster - Sportsnet.ca

 

[Samzilla]

You could literally see the shift about the OEL trade happen in real time on CDC. The first few pages people were like "uggh, bad deal" which slowly became "well if OEL can bounce back it could be okay" to "Benning got us a top pairing dman and top 6 forward by trading away our worst contracts! Legend!"

 

[JAK]

I think some fans have been too hard on Benning over the years because the desire to win the cup right at that season.

Benning was brought in to keep pushing for the Cup for the Sedins's last years.

After, a proper rebuild started. Now, people can complain about the cap and contracts all they want, but we must realize that the team was never meant to win the cup in the past 5 years.

The mandate was always to build a long term sustainable effort to challenge for the cup year in and year out.

So they had to build a solid foundation first, sucking, getting picks, developing prospects.

Eriksson's contract was to think he can help the Sedins until they retire, after that? It didn't matter.

If you consider that as the base line, then it doesn't matter what the contracts signed were up until the core and window starts opening.

The thing that disrupted this all, was an unforseen amount of draft picks that developed so fast into the core, making those contracts that were suppose to expire by the time the team compete, into bad contracts.

Boeser, Pettersson, Hughes, Hoglander.
You cannot possibly think that you could get 4 impact rookies 4 years in a row. Nevermind the Calder level of the first 3, but Pettersson and Hughes turning into what they are.

So the team brought in Miller and Garland to join this sped up process, because Benning saw that the team is now ready to take the next step.

Mistakes happen, but it's how you face up to it and adjust.

Some may call me blind optimist.

I say they were short sighted every year and took the successful development of the kids as granted.

Had those kids not develop as fast, we would not be in this situation.

 

[Love]

Ryan Murray is still available somehow. If we signed him (we won’t), it would actually change the entire outlook of this off-season for me. He’s basically a 27 year old left handed Tanev and we desperately need a lefty who can take the hard minutes Edler played because at this point nobody in the roster can do that.

 

[F A N]

Ryan Murray is still available somehow. If we signed him (we won’t), it would actually change the entire outlook of this off-season for me. He’s basically a 27 year old left handed Tanev and we desperately need a lefty who can take the hard minutes Edler played because at this point nobody in the roster can do that.

I like Ryan Murray but I want to see if Rathbone and or Juolevi can develop further.

 

[Love]

I like Ryan Murray but I want to see if Rathbone and or Juolevi can develop further.

Rathbone can still play if we sign Murray. Juolevi, imo, is a nothing player and can be a depth defender for us. If he shows more than that great, but I wouldn’t bank on it. Regardless more depth is a good thing.

Either way even if Rathbone and Juolevi are getting minutes we still have the same issue. Once again, who the hell is playing the hard minutes on this team? Who can PK? Who can actually defend? Certainly none of our left side defenceman can, and our right side isn’t much better.

 

[4th line culture]

I think some fans have been too hard on Benning over the years because the desire to win the cup right at that season.

Benning was brought in to keep pushing for the Cup for the Sedins's last years.

After, a proper rebuild started. Now, people can complain about the cap and contracts all they want, but we must realize that the team was never meant to win the cup in the past 5 years.

The mandate was always to build a long term sustainable effort to challenge for the cup year in and year out.

So they had to build a solid foundation first, sucking, getting picks, developing prospects.

Eriksson's contract was to think he can help the Sedins until they retire, after that? It didn't matter.

If you consider that as the base line, then it doesn't matter what the contracts signed were up until the core and window starts opening.

The thing that disrupted this all, was an unforseen amount of draft picks that developed so fast into the core, making those contracts that were suppose to expire by the time the team compete, into bad contracts.

Boeser, Pettersson, Hughes, Hoglander.
You cannot possibly think that you could get 4 impact rookies 4 years in a row. Nevermind the Calder level of the first 3, but Pettersson and Hughes turning into what they are.

So the team brought in Miller and Garland to join this sped up process, because Benning saw that the team is now ready to take the next step.

Mistakes happen, but it's how you face up to it and adjust.

Some may call me blind optimist.

I say they were short sighted every year and took the successful development of the kids as granted.

Had those kids not develop as fast, we would not be in this situation.

When did they get picks?

 

[rypper]

After, a proper rebuild started.

I'm sorry, when was this again?

 

[vanuck]

Titles that could work:

"If we have cap problems again in a few years we'll just trade top 10 picks to get rid of them"

Or

"If this defence doesn't work out YOLO best of luck Nuckleheads I'm gone after this season anyways peace out "

 

[Andy Dufresne]

When you fail to plan......You plan to fail

 

[Wo Yorfat]

I'll gladly pay you a 300% surcharge Tuesday for a hamburger today.

 

[F A N]

Rathbone can still play if we sign Murray. Juolevi, imo, is a nothing player and can be a depth defender for us. If he shows more than that great, but I wouldn’t bank on it. Regardless more depth is a good thing.

Either way even if Rathbone and Juolevi are getting minutes we still have the same issue. Once again, who the hell is playing the hard minutes on this team? Who can PK? Who can actually defend? Certainly none of our left side defenceman can, and our right side isn’t much better.

Like it or not, OEL is expected to handle the hard minutes. He's going to spend some time on the PK. You can expect OEL's partner to play the tough minutes with him. Myers was Green's #1 PK Dman on the right side so he's getting PK minutes regardless of where he plays on the roster. There are PK options on the right side.

Right now, the projected left side is OEL, Hughes, and Rathbone with Juolevi and Hunt? outside looking in. So the "issue" you are talking about isn't going to be solved without removing Hughes and Rathbone from the roster which I would bet 90+% of Canucks fans would be against. So like I said, I like Murray but I don't see the fit unless you are moving one of Hughes or Rathbone over to the right or you're taking Rathbone off the roster. I am obviously going to assume that Hughes isn't going anywhere.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

Ryan Murray is still available somehow. If we signed him (we won’t), it would actually change the entire outlook of this off-season for me. He’s basically a 27 year old left handed Tanev and we desperately need a lefty who can take the hard minutes Edler played because at this point nobody in the roster can do that.

i am very high on ryan murray, but you just know that if he came here he would suffer a career ending injury by november

 

[Three On Zero]

I like Ryan Murray but I want to see if Rathbone and or Juolevi can develop further.

OJ is cooked, I wouldn’t mind a bear like trade to send him out for a middle 6er

 

[StickShift]

OJ is cooked, I wouldn’t mind a bear like trade to send him out for a middle 6er

Bear has played 132 games and shown he can stick in the league. Juolevi has only played 22 games and has not proven that he can stick in the NHL yet. I don’t think he has nearly that much (if any) trade value.

 

[Love]

Like it or not, OEL is expected to handle the hard minutes. He's going to spend some time on the PK. You can expect OEL's partner to play the tough minutes with him. Myers was Green's #1 PK Dman on the right side so he's getting PK minutes regardless of where he plays on the roster. There are PK options on the right side.

Right now, the projected left side is OEL, Hughes, and Rathbone with Juolevi and Hunt? outside looking in. So the "issue" you are talking about isn't going to be solved without removing Hughes and Rathbone from the roster which I would bet 90+% of Canucks fans would be against. So like I said, I like Murray but I don't see the fit unless you are moving one of Hughes or Rathbone over to the right or you're taking Rathbone off the roster. I am obviously going to assume that Hughes isn't going anywhere.

I would move OEL to the right side and do a Murray-OEL pairing because IIRC OEL has played the right side before. In an ideal world we would see:

Hughes-Hamonic
Murray-OEL
Rathbone-Myers/Poolman

 

[GreatSaveLuongo]

Would have traded back for Tanev instead of signing Hamonic/Poolman

 

[Three On Zero]

Bear has played 132 games and shown he can stick in the league. Juolevi has only played 22 games and has not proven that he can stick in the NHL yet. I don’t think he has nearly that much (if any) trade value.

Both will be fringe bottom pairing guys

 

[arttk]

Like it or not, OEL is expected to handle the hard minutes. He's going to spend some time on the PK. You can expect OEL's partner to play the tough minutes with him. Myers was Green's #1 PK Dman on the right side so he's getting PK minutes regardless of where he plays on the roster. There are PK options on the right side.

Right now, the projected left side is OEL, Hughes, and Rathbone with Juolevi and Hunt? outside looking in. So the "issue" you are talking about isn't going to be solved without removing Hughes and Rathbone from the roster which I would bet 90+% of Canucks fans would be against. So like I said, I like Murray but I don't see the fit unless you are moving one of Hughes or Rathbone over to the right or you're taking Rathbone off the roster. I am obviously going to assume that Hughes isn't going anywhere.

I don’t think the discussion is around whether we like or dislike OEL handling the hard minutes. It’s about can he handle it or not. Our cap and D will be f***ed if he can’t, it’s as simple as that.

 

[Javaman]

I think some fans have been too hard on Benning over the years because the desire to win the cup right at that season.

Benning was brought in to keep pushing for the Cup for the Sedins's last years.

After, a proper rebuild started. Now, people can complain about the cap and contracts all they want, but we must realize that the team was never meant to win the cup in the past 5 years.

The mandate was always to build a long term sustainable effort to challenge for the cup year in and year out.

So they had to build a solid foundation first, sucking, getting picks, developing prospects.

Eriksson's contract was to think he can help the Sedins until they retire, after that? It didn't matter.

If you consider that as the base line, then it doesn't matter what the contracts signed were up until the core and window starts opening.

The thing that disrupted this all, was an unforseen amount of draft picks that developed so fast into the core, making those contracts that were suppose to expire by the time the team compete, into bad contracts.

Boeser, Pettersson, Hughes, Hoglander.
You cannot possibly think that you could get 4 impact rookies 4 years in a row. Nevermind the Calder level of the first 3, but Pettersson and Hughes turning into what they are.

So the team brought in Miller and Garland to join this sped up process, because Benning saw that the team is now ready to take the next step.

Mistakes happen, but it's how you face up to it and adjust.

Some may call me blind optimist.

I say they were short sighted every year and took the successful development of the kids as granted.

Had those kids not develop as fast, we would not be in this situation.

RE: the bolded: There has never been a rebuild during Benning's tenure. Therefore, your post is pure bunk.

You're not a blind optimist --- you're a purveyor of misinformation. Seriously, you end with "Canucks suck becuz young players got good too fast." Like, in what universe are young players vastly outperforming their ELCs considered a hindrance to success?

 

[Catamarca Livin]

This year is the litmus test. If team wins then this team is like Winnipeg in 2017 after Laine draft. A team on the rise with a better location If they lose then they are just like Arizona last year with more resources. I believe they will be greatly improved and can win a round in the playoffs