I don't think that the Vey signing or the Bieksa trade were terrible... but I don't think they were great. They were within some sort of standard deviation of value, IMO, so they were "good" or "good enough" (compared to what was possible for Benning to do, IMO). Some will say I'm nitpicking, but to me, the Canucks can't afford to waste. While "good enough" in some ways, it's still not "good enough" in others.
I wish there was someone with a bucket that could follow Benning around... and scoop up that value he clumsily spilled practically every time he made a move over the course of an entire year (I think I can count on three fingers moves that, to me, he didn't waste value (either in asset exchange or cap space). I wish this guy who scoops up the value behind Benning, can place this value back in the value jar, and put it in the cupboard, for a rainy day, or for a later opportunity. Let the value jar accumulate, and fill, over time. It's not like the Canucks have so much value that they can afford to waste it. If I was a NYI fan, to me, it would be nitpicking. If I was a LA or Anaheim fan, to me, it would be nitpicking. Teams like this, can afford to waste.
Teams like the NYI, LA, Anaheim have an embarrassment of riches. Look at Edmonton's riches. The riches Calgary is starting to accumulate. The list goes on. These teams can jump on opportunities that Benning would love to last draft because of these riches, but Benning can't. Lots of teams around the league are deep in assets compared to the Canucks (a benefit of the majority of teams being mediocre to terrible for years upon years (can't get out of their holes)... they get to accumulate better assets instead of accumulate wins... better drafting teams than the Canucks get to accumulate better assets also, and the Canucks have been amongst the worst drafting teams since I can recall). If we're ranking teams on assets, where do the Canucks rank around the league? I'd think bottom 10 in valuable assets? This isn't an asset rich team.
If the Canucks are expected to reasonably compete in this league, as soon as possible or practical, they have to be extra-smart, and extra-careful on the value tipping, IMHO. It's just not reasonable for wanting them to be successful sooner rather than later, while brushing off the value that is consistently getting spilled over.
How long are Canucks fans expecting this "rebuild" or "retool" or "rewind" or "recycle"? 10 years? 5 years? 2 years?
My contention is that if Canuck fans want to be stanley cup competitive in 2-5 years, value can't be pissed away. The Canucks are going to have to hit some home runs here, accumulate value in their value jar, and spend this on the right things, at the right time.
The Canucks are competing against teams that are either ripe for a cup now, or who have many years head start in terms of valuable young assets to compete sooner in the future. There is a lot of ground to make up, if the Canucks are to be back to cup contenders within the foreseeable future (within the next half decade). And every time a little bit of value gets clumsily spilled over, a few steps farther away Benning pulls this thing from where the Canucks need to go. The Canucks aren't so asset rich that a higher 2nd that SJ probably grants can't be seen as notably more valuable than a lower 2nd that Anaheim probably grants. Higher 2nds often have 1st round talent spillage. The Canucks need 1st round talent-caliber assets. If it was the honorable thing to do or not, the reality is, IMO, Benning let emotion get in the way of a high 2nd compared to a low 2nd... If the Canucks could afford this, I'd say, good on you, Benning... Tell him to stuff it... Canucks don't need his 2nd anyways... but, the only thing is, the Canucks do need it.
I wish there was someone with a bucket that could follow Benning around... and just scoop up that value he clumsily spilled practically every time he made a move over the course of an entire year. Only a small few, IMO, had no spillage or fall within a tiny standard deviation.
Yeah, on this Bieksa trade, the value spilled wasn't as large as other spills (when compared to a few really nasty value and wasted cap space accidents)... but there is still spillage here. I think if you did a poll entire forum wide which 2nd rounder next year would you rather have... Anaheim or SJ?... SJ's is the clear winner... and if you had the chance for the SJ one, it would have been more valuable to get... and according to a credible Friedman, it was Benning's to take. Let's call it what it is, IMHO, Benning probably chose the Anaheim 2nd over the SJ 2nd for reasons other than value maximization. I don't think the Canucks are in a position for Benning to let emotion get in the way of a better decision. It would be great if the Canucks were. I'm not going to ridicule or mock Benning with this move, the spillage wasn't "mock worthy", IMO... The Vey contract wasn't "mock worthy", IMO... but I do think it deserves comment on, and isn't something that should be ignored or brushed aside. These aren't feathers in his cap. This is another hole in his value bucket. After one year, what this regime needs is someone to make Benning more careful.
I'd say fire Benning... give him to the end of next season (for the benefit of the doubt, why not)... But I'm not convinced that if the Canucks fire Benning, Weisbrod doesn't step in. I'd rather have Benning, than Weisbrod. There's a whole year left until things really get ugly for this regime, IMO, I do hope they take the time to figure it out.
