Nuxfanabroad Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 Benning's Biggest Blunder? Thus far, that is.For me, probably squandering a 2nd on Vey. He's frittered away a few picks, & we should be taking the 'shotgun-approach' on drafting young D. Would have been far better last yr to retain Santo & Schreds(hustling RH C's), thus using another selection on the back end. Try to find more Subban/Hutton's. Them 2 guys(Santo, Schredder) likely play 'bigger' than LV. We only needed a short bridge to our slew of emerging C's...Sbisa contract? Has certainly garnered it's fair share of detractors. Sure don't like the stage this sets for future RFA negotiations. Hopefully this comparable is never used (file 13).Kassian deal. Hard to believe it's the best we could obtain(he'll take the 5th, as well)Lack return. Don't like it, compared with what other young 'tenders garnered. If Markstrom doesn't bail out Benning here, this one could get ugly in a big way.A CDC sig used to quote: "It's easier to be critical, than correct." Which is pretty hard wisdom to deny. Could also be that setbacks occur(seemingly) more rapidly than payoffs come to fruition. With this in mind, some of JB's moves may positively outweigh the duds,(or some negatives noted here, reverse), thus, it's too early to judge, definitively..one way or the other.In the end, it's a forum-all voices, enthusiastic, endorsing, or dissenting, should be able to stake a claim... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thejazz97 Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 the 2nd was more of a gamble than Vey was btw. Vey looked solid going into last year, and he just didn't put it together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted September 24, 2015 Author Share Posted September 24, 2015 Fair enough, Jazz. However, keep hearing of teams that carry 10 or 11 picks in a single draft. 2014/15/16, I felt we needed to aim for that approach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumerman77 Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 Sbisa's deal was really bad. But didn't cost too much. I would say his biggest blunder so far was how he has handled Miller. He overpaid and gave way too long of a contract (if Miller wouldn't have taken less length then I would have walked). And then not trading him this off season (and publicly saying he could have ). I don't necessarily think Lack was a better goalie than Miller, but he was better at the price point. Paying an average goalie (who was 34) 6 mil per season is just too much. I think the last 6 years (save for Thomas) has shown that you don't need an elite goalie to win a cup - just an average or above average goalie hopefully at a decent price point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5 decades and no cup Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 Redundant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jejejester Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 Sbisa's deal was really bad. But didn't cost too much. I would say his biggest blunder so far was how he has handled Miller. He overpaid and gave way too long of a contract (if Miller wouldn't have taken less length then I would have walked). And then not trading him this off season (and publicly saying he could have ). I don't necessarily think Lack was a better goalie than Miller, but he was better at the price point. Paying an average goalie (who was 34) 6 mil per season is just too much. I think the last 6 years (save for Thomas) has shown that you don't need an elite goalie to win a cup - just an average or above average goalie hopefully at a decent price point. Just to bring something up against your point. I would say Quick is an elite level goalie, he is top 5 in the league. Crawford doesn't get the respect he deserves but the guy is an above average goalie and doesn't break down in playoffs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersexual Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 I predict salary cap will be a big issue going forward. There is a reason why Boston is in salary cap hell and probably a big reason why Gilman was let go. Gilman probably laughed at some of the contracts Benning was/is handing out. All that salary cap space will be taken up by one person next season...Lucic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonMexico Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 I would rate your thread as -1 star if I could. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesB Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 There are two ways to assess moves. We can ask if the move made sense at the time and we can ask how it worked out. In Vey's case, the move was good at the time. Vey had been a WHL scoring leader and a scoring star in the AHL while still a young prospect. Normally you would project a guy like that as likely to become a legitimate top 6 player in the NHL. And only about 1/3 of second round picks ever become NHL regulars anyway. The Vey deal looked pretty good. It just has not worked too well so far. Although I think the negativity about Vey is overdone. Let's wait and see how things go this year. I think the biggest mistake was trade away Garrison for that second round pick in the first place and replacing Garrison with Sbisa at left D. I know it was a salary dump but then Benning turned around and paid Sbisa only about a million less than Garrison is getting. And Garrison had a great year last year (much better than Sbisa). I would have preferred to keep Garrison, not sign Miller, sign Santo, and get someone other than Sbisa in the Kesler trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted September 24, 2015 Author Share Posted September 24, 2015 Yeah Baumer, I thought of listing that, & felt it would probably be debated incessantly. Often feels like propaganda 'round here. Ask a hard question(or two), & yer a pinko, hating, bashing, debbie downish-human. ^To redundancy-suggestion..Just wanted a centralized thread, where all beefs can be sorted , stated, & analytically discussed. Sorry,(& merge/delete), if it's already done... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumerman77 Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 Just to bring something up against your point. I would say Quick is an elite level goalie, he is top 5 in the league. Crawford doesn't get the respect he deserves but the guy is an above average goalie and doesn't break down in playoffs I would disagree. I would say Quick was an above average and now is closer to average. He plays on a good team it helps his numbers. I think I read somewhere that his backup goalies had a better save percentage than him over the past three seasons. His underlying numbers aren't that good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frazzy Desjardins Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 I don't understand some people. A hockey team isn't like a baking recipe where if u follow directions closely then your cookies will turn out perfect. Name one gm who obtained a REBUILDING team with an EMPTY prospect cupboard and won a cup or was even remotely close to being a contender by his second season. Have some Damm patience and watch it all unfold. Conversation is good but stop the doom and gloom! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted September 24, 2015 Author Share Posted September 24, 2015 JamesB, Generally agree with your insight- but seperate Garr/Pizza-man for a second..which move is worse? For example, they might've chosen to move Edler(coming off an atrocious campaign, likely a lousy return), which may have had us agonizing even more, at this juncture. It's hard to isolate these things, with all the moving parts. Thus, I link Santo/Schreds to Vey. Overall, I'd boil it down to the options they basically have complete control over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumerman77 Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 For me it isn't Benning's biggest blunder that I find disconcerting. Rather it is a bunch of smaller ones (not getting enough in trades, over paying in contracts, valuing assets in certain ways, etc) that show Benning has a very old school mindset. The times are changing and Benning's blatant disregard of analytics of any strip does not bode well for this team -- I would much prefer a GM that accepts progress and doesn't cling to static views. That being said, we need to rebuild and supposedly Benning is a good at drafting and developing. So if he gets us to the bottom and drafts and develops good players and then gets fired I'll be happy. In that scenario at least we are using Benning to his (supposed) strengths. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted September 24, 2015 Author Share Posted September 24, 2015 @FrazzyD, thanks for that patience recommendation. Since the 70's, this NEVER occurred to me :^) On the other hand, the PTB would appreciate your sentiments. Accepting what one has must surely have led to many a parade. Personally would say there's too much diversity, to track ONE way of emerging as Cup champion. Bare cupboards? Horvat, Shink, Hutton, Gaunce, Cassels, Subban, Kassian, Lack, Markstrom, Grenier, Fox, & Jensen. I'd argue for a 5-yr contender,(in my mind, a cheated 2011-winner), it was a reasonable collection to start from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
linden17 Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 Sbisa's deal was really bad. But didn't cost too much. I would say his biggest blunder so far was how he has handled Miller. He overpaid and gave way too long of a contract (if Miller wouldn't have taken less length then I would have walked). And then not trading him this off season (and publicly saying he could have ). I don't necessarily think Lack was a better goalie than Miller, but he was better at the price point. Paying an average goalie (who was 34) 6 mil per season is just too much. I think the last 6 years (save for Thomas) has shown that you don't need an elite goalie to win a cup - just an average or above average goalie hopefully at a decent price point. You have to take into consideration that the teams winning the cup are elite and have great defense infront of their so called average goalies. Miller is a better option than Lack and i think most would agree. I see what you are trying to get at but at this stage the Canucks are not going to be elite for a few years atleast. I think you take Miller as your goalie over an inexperienced lack during this time so you can build up team confidence a bit more with a few big saves that miller is definetly capable of and his leadership. It ties right in with Linden and Bennings view of bringing up the young guys in a winning enviroment rather than one like Edmonton has done over the years. After this and next season we will have a jacob to take over hopefully and a few more prospects up and coming in the goalie position and by that time hopefully some of these young guys have developed enough to be regulars and have an impact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshuaGuy Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 I don't think enough time has passed to even reach any conclusions on his moves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted September 24, 2015 Author Share Posted September 24, 2015 It's professional sport - which naturally lends itself to the inexact science of prediction. More interesting than calling the weather, or which one of your 'buddy-couples' will go the distance... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumerman77 Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 You have to take into consideration that the teams winning the cup are elite and have great defense infront of their so called average goalies. Miller is a better option than Lack and i think most would agree. I see what you are trying to get at but at this stage the Canucks are not going to be elite for a few years atleast. I think you take Miller as your goalie over an inexperienced lack during this time so you can build up team confidence a bit more with a few big saves that miller is definetly capable of and his leadership. It ties right in with Linden and Bennings view of bringing up the young guys in a winning enviroment rather than one like Edmonton has done over the years. After this and next season we will have a jacob to take over hopefully and a few more prospects up and coming in the goalie position and by that time hopefully some of these young guys have developed enough to be regulars and have an impact. I agree that is the ideally and that is what Benning and Linden want to happen. But I am very skeptical it will happen. The only way I see us being a solid playoff team for the next few years is if our young guys supersede our wildest expectations and we get phenomenal goal-tending (which would likely have to come from Markstrom). Being a competitive playoff team while developing good prospects into future core players is the exception to the rule. The vast majority of teams drop out of the playoffs for at least a couple years to get the high picks which turn into core players. I understand that Benning wishes to have his cake and eat it too, but I think that especially in light of his actions, this is a very unlikely possibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshuaGuy Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 I agree that is the ideally and that is what Benning and Linden want to happen. But I am very skeptical it will happen. The only way I see us being a solid playoff team for the next few years is if our young guys supersede our wildest expectations and we get phenomenal goal-tending (which would likely have to come from Markstrom). Being a competitive playoff team while developing good prospects into future core players is the exception to the rule. The vast majority of teams drop out of the playoffs for at least a couple years to get the high picks which turn into core players. I understand that Benning wishes to have his cake and eat it too, but I think that especially in light of his actions, this is a very unlikely possibility. When Benning and Linden talk about a winning environment, they mean not a losing one like the Oilers. Doesn't mean they have to go 82-0 and 16-0 in the playoffs. Just that you play to win every night Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.