[Report] Ben Hutton to become UFA

[JM_]

9 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

*Vast majority on this forum only.

 

And, for the record, I don't hate everything Benning has done, either

bringing in $3 hot dogs to the arena doesn't count, it has to be a hockey thing. 

 

This forum is the only place you can often find "balance" when it comes to Canucks info. Twitter is a toilet of negativity, there's almost never anything of value from there. Same with TSN 1040, utter trash (but hey what movies Donnie likes is fascinating at times). The lower-tier faux stats bloggers are the poster boys for biased argument.

 

At least here on CDC you get people that often produce thoughtful posts like our new fella @DBronco or just total garbage posts, and then everything and anything in between. 

 

You act like there's two choices, Benning cheerleaders or "unbiased" people. Thats convenient. 

Edited June 26, 2019 by Jimmy McGill

[kanucks25]

3 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

bringing in $3 hot dogs to the arena doesn't count, it has to be a hockey thing. 

 

This forum is the only place you can often find "balance" when it comes to Canucks info. Twitter is a toilet of negativity, there's almost never anything of value from there. Same with TSN 1040, utter trash (but hey what movies Donnie likes is fascinating at times). The lower-tier faux stats bloggers are the poster boys for biased argument.

 

At least here on CDC you get people that often produce thoughtful posts like our new fella @DBronco or just total garbage posts, and then everything and anything in between. 

 

You act like there's two choices, Benning cheerleaders or "unbiased" people. Thats convenient. 

Take a look at these poll results. This is balanced?

 

Try Canucks Reddit for a more balanced crowd.

 

For what it's worth, I don't post much on Canucks HF either because a lot of it is blind rage for the sake of blind rage.

 

And yes, I do like some hockey things Benning has done. Not the majority, but some.

[aGENT]

4 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

Take a look at these poll results. This is balanced?

 

Try Canucks Reddit for a more balanced crowd.

 

For what it's worth, I don't post much on Canucks HF either because a lot of it is blind rage for the sake of blind rage.

 

And yes, I do like some hockey things Benning has done. Not the majority, but some.

'Balance' doesn't have to mean 50 % love and hate him. Particularly when the vast majority of his work, on balance has in fact, been good.

Edited June 26, 2019 by aGENT

[Smashian Kassian]

I think this is a loss. Hutton had a nice bounce back season. As a #4/5 I think hes fine.

 

Part of the problem is our defense is already terrible. Huttons not an amazing player but he was a top 4 guy for us. Hes gunna need to be replaced.

 

Quinn Hughes probably wont start in the top 4, so having Hutton back to start there would be ideal then you can move him later when Hughes & Juolevi are up & going later in the year.

 

As far as losing him for nothing. It is tough circumstances, i dont neccesarily blame management, but it is another player that had value possibly walking for nothing, so thats tough with our lack of assets.

[JM_]

3 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

Take a look at these poll results. This is balanced?

 

Try Canucks Reddit for a more balanced crowd.

 

For what it's worth, I don't post much on Canucks HF either because a lot of it is blind rage for the sake of blind rage.

 

And yes, I do like some hockey things Benning has done. Not the majority, but some.

Buddy gave us a binary choice. If the poll had a 3rd option of "mostly OK there's some things I dislike" my guess is that would be the #1 option selected. 

 

I forgot about HF  I usually only go there after the Flames or Oilers lose a playoff round for the yuks.

 

That last part is good to hear. There's just too much ragey hate over Bennings moves. 

[kanucks25]

1 minute ago, aGENT said:

'Balance' doesn't have to mean 50 % love and hate him. Particularly when the vast majority of his work, on balance had in fact, been good.

Couldn't go two posts in a row without the shameless plug

[Dazzle]

49 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

Uh, news flash, us on this forum are all nobodies, as well. My point is, only a certain segment of Canucks fans (I'm not allowed to use the "H" word) are the ones that die on the Benning hill. Everyone else, specifically those that are unbiased, are mostly confused as to what the hell our management team is doing.

 

Also, get your facts straight: I never made a thread, and Hodgson wasn't involved

You should've been permabanned for your post. I definitely remember you posting the Corey Perry trade too.

 

I mean if Ukranian_Canuck gets banned as long as he did, so should you.

[kanucks25]

2 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

That last part is good to hear. There's just too much ragey hate over Bennings moves. 

That said, don't get me wrong, he should have been fired long ago  The Gudbranson trade alone was a fireable offense.

 

1 minute ago, Dazzle said:

You should've been permabanned for your post. I definitely remember you posting the Corey Perry trade too.

 

I mean if Ukranian_Canuck gets banned as long as he did, so should you.

Except, again, check your facts, I never made a post. I broke no rule.

Edited June 26, 2019 by kanucks25

[JM_]

Just now, kanucks25 said:

That said, don't get me wrong, he should have been fired long ago  The Gudbranson trade alone was a fireable offense.

 

[Seannnp]

41 minutes ago, Smashian Kassian said:

I think this is a loss. Hutton had a nice bounce back season. As a #4/5 I think hes fine.

 

Part of the problem is our defense is already terrible. Huttons not an amazing player but he was a top 4 guy for us. Hes gunna need to be replaced.

 

Quinn Hughes probably wont start in the top 4, so having Hutton back to start there would be ideal then you can move him later when Hughes & Juolevi are up & going later in the year.

 

As far as losing him for nothing. It is tough circumstances, i dont neccesarily blame management, but it is another player that had value possibly walking for nothing, so thats tough with our lack of assets.

4+million for a 5/6 guy? I think I would rather have the cap space to take on a bad contract with additional assets or going after guys like Johansson, Connoly, Burakovsky, etc. I don't think you could've moved him for anything more than a 3rd/4th rounder. These draft picks do have value but if we aren't able to move him then it compromises our cap.

 

I always thought he was a fine player and worth at least a late 2nd, but having heard different things from different media sources, it seems there is a consensus that he held a lot more value for the Canucks then he could offer another team and that he is/was nothing more than a bottom pairing guy that could step into a top 4 role if called upon for a short period of time.

 

There is always that off chance he could come back to the Canucks. He is a UFA and I think if he was comfortable coming back at a lower cap than $4m, there is still a spot.

 

by December I expect the following defensive roster

 

Edler Stetcher

Hughes Tanev

Juolevi Schenn

[aGENT]

5 minutes ago, Seannnp said:

 

by December I expect the following defensive roster

 

Edler Stetcher

Hughes Tanev

Juolevi Schenn

If Schenn's in our starting 6, Benning has failed this summer. #7 or #8 D, sure.

[Seannnp]

Just now, aGENT said:

If Schenn's in our starting 6, Benning has failed this summer. #7 or #8 D, sure.

I thought he played well last season. He wasn't a defensive liability and was a heart and character guy. Probably the only physical threat we had on the backend at that time as well.

 

I don't think I would consider it a fail on Benning's part exactly. I would prefer he wait and continue to explore the trade route than spending money on Myers or Gardiner, etc or wait till next year. I think we have one more year before we should be expected to compete/etc. If we don't make the playoffs we keep our 1st as well. Maybe Podk can get out of his contract a year early. Juolevi and Hughes make decent strides this year with the big club, Tryamkin comes back with Podk, and Woo makes the team next year. There are some quality UFA's available next year as well including Barrie. With Tryamkin and Woo in the lineup I think we could go a little smaller on the backend with Barrie.

 

Hughes Barrie

Juolevi Woo

Tryamkin Stetcher

 

 

[aGENT]

2 minutes ago, Seannnp said:

I thought he played well last season. He wasn't a defensive liability and was a heart and character guy. Probably the only physical threat we had on the backend at that time as well.

 

I don't think I would consider it a fail on Benning's part exactly. I would prefer he wait and continue to explore the trade route than spending money on Myers or Gardiner, etc or wait till next year. I think we have one more year before we should be expected to compete/etc. If we don't make the playoffs we keep our 1st as well. Maybe Podk can get out of his contract a year early. Juolevi and Hughes make decent strides this year with the big club, Tryamkin comes back with Podk, and Woo makes the team next year. There are some quality UFA's available next year as well including Barrie. With Tryamkin and Woo in the lineup I think we could go a little smaller on the backend with Barrie.

 

Hughes Barrie

Juolevi Woo

Tryamkin Stetcher

 

 

He played admirably last year. I wouldn't even mind him slotting in against bigger teams occasionally (beyond injury fill in). But he should not be in our starting 6, Myers or otherwise.

[Honky Cat]

1 hour ago, kanucks25 said:

Take a look at these poll results. This is balanced?

 

Try Canucks Reddit for a more balanced crowd.

 

For what it's worth, I don't post much on Canucks HF either because a lot of it is blind rage for the sake of blind rage.

 

And yes, I do like some hockey things Benning has done. Not the majority, but some.

What ,in your opinion is the % of 'people that think that Benning is doing a decent/bad job...It seems to be polarized on some sites, and all over the map.

[kanucks25]

12 minutes ago, Honky Cat said:

What ,in your opinion is the % of 'people that think that Benning is doing a decent/bad job...It seems to be polarized on some sites, and all over the map.

50/50 sounds about right, as it is on Reddit, as I mentioned.

 

It's 90/10 here but 10/90 on HF, so it kind of evens out

 

I can see the pro-Benning case. I mean if I was in debate class, I would have no problem taking the pro-Benning said and making a decent argument for him.

 

But, I still disagree with. It's not blind hate as some like to suggest in an attempt to dismiss my arguments, just passionate about the team. And this is discussion forum, where we come to discuss

 

I don't see why it should be to either extreme. On one hand, we've sucked for a long time and on the other hand, we were supposed to suck for a long time. The important thing is what happens over the next 3 years and only time will tell, nobody is right or wrong... yet.

Edited June 26, 2019 by kanucks25

[DarthMelvin]

2 hours ago, kanucks25 said:

Uh, news flash, us on this forum are all nobodies,

I love this Haha  Quoting you in my profile.

[The Great Canucks]

2 hours ago, kanucks25 said:

Uh, news flash, us on this forum are all nobodies, as well. My point is, only a certain segment of Canucks fans (I'm not allowed to use the "H" word) are the ones that die on the Benning hill. Everyone else, specifically those that are unbiased, are mostly confused as to what the hell our management team is doing.

 

Also, get your facts straight: I never made a thread, and Hodgson wasn't involved

Uhh, yeah, we are all nobodies. I'm not the one who thought otherwise. So, once again, why should I take your word that Benning is a horrible GM?

[kanucks25]

2 minutes ago, The Great Canucks said:

Uhh, yeah, we are all nobodies. I'm not the one who thought otherwise. So, once again, why should I take your word that Benning is a horrible GM?

You can do whatever you want, just voicing (typing) my opinion, which I'm entitled to do.

 

What else were you expecting when you clicked "Register" on a discussion forum?

[Gaudette Celly]

2 hours ago, Smashian Kassian said:

I think this is a loss.

We get almost $3mil in cap space.

 

Quote

Part of the problem is our defense is already terrible.

Right, so keeping the same D from last year is the solution?  Edler, Tanev, Stecher, are all still here as well.

 

Quote

As far as losing him for nothing.

We get almost $3mil in cap space.

 

Quote

It is tough circumstances, i dont neccesarily blame management, but it is another player that had value possibly walking for nothing, so thats tough with our lack of assets.

If he had value, then why couldn't we get anything for him, despite over a year of shopping him?  And what team doesn't let players walk away, including far better ones?  Where do UFAs come from?  Are they all worth absolutely nothing, that's the only reason? 

Reality of the cap world is that cap space IS an asset, just as much as players.

[Maketherightmove]

39 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said:

We get almost $3mil in cap space. The Canucks "get" nothing in cap space. He wasn't on the books. 

 

Right, so keeping the same D from last year is the solution?  Edler, Tanev, Stecher, are all still here as well. No, but they now have to fill really 3 starting spots with top-6 caliber Dmen, since you know Tanev and Edler collectively will miss ~60 games. 

 

We get almost $3mil in cap space. The Canucks "get" nothing in cap space. He wasn't on the books. 

 

If he had value, then why couldn't we get anything for him, despite over a year of shopping him?  And what team doesn't let players walk away, including far better ones?  Where do UFAs come from?  Are they all worth absolutely nothing, that's the only reason? Nothing to say here, I think the Canucks will probably re-sign Hutton to a reasonable deal. 

Reality of the cap world is that cap space IS an asset, just as much as players. Again, no additional cap space was received. Hutton was not yet on the books for this season. They have 4 NHL Dmen on the roster and need 3 more to even ice a slightly competitive D corps.