(Proposals)(Discussions) Should we let Benning go?

[morrissex95]

fire Benning for investing all that money in Sutter, Beagle, Roussel and Eriksson. The Eriksson and Sutter contracts are absolute albatrosses. That Baertschi trade was terrible which I said from the get-go. Baertschi's contract also sucks. JB generally signs the worst contracts. 

 

Trading Jared McCann was also a mistake. If we hadn't have traded McCann our forward lines would look much different. McCann in my opinion is already better than and significantly younger than who we eventually got in return for trading McCann, Tanner Pearson. Pearson is a good middle six guy signed to a suitable contract but he's not going to be a future 60 point guy which looks like McCann could blossom into. 

 

The Virtanen pick wasn't terrible if you look at who was available that year. Bennett and Dal Colle were both picked ahead of him and he's been better than both IMO. He looks like he's becoming a much better player and is almost on pace for 20 goals. In my opinion, he's a late bloomer. He'll get a good contract extension this year and hopefully can again put up career numbers next season. Sure we could've gotten Ehlers, Nylander, Fiala, Vrana, Sanheim, Tuch or N. Schmaltz; but that's besides the point as hindsight is always 20/20 

 

Now there's the Juolevi pick. What a dud. He's still got potential as a #4 or #5 guy but as a project player he's taken forever to develop. Just a complete and utter disappointment. Brisebois our 2015 3rd round pick has passed OJ on the depth chart. We could've had M.Tkachuk, Keller, Sergachev(that would've been a home run), McAvoy, Fabbro or Chychrun. Even though Chychrun fell significantly in pre-draft ranking I wanted to move down from #5 and pick Chychrun. He's the exact player we wanted Juolevi to be. Big, strong, bruising and a decent skater in his FOURTH NHL season at the age of TWENTY-ONE. FILTHY. We really missed out there. 

 

I'm not saying Benning hasn't made some killer moves but trading pick #50 in 2014(Roland McKeown), #33 in 2016(Rasmus Asplund), #53(Rasmus Andersson) and these are just the early picks. If we had some luck with the two picks not used to select Rasmus Andersson we could've had Montour, Donato or C.Dvorak at #50 in 2014 and in 2016 with pick #33 we could've had Alex DeBrincat, Jordan Kyrou, Libor Hajek, Samuel Girard, Boris Katchouk, Carter Hart, Filip Hronek and so on. Basically what I'm saying is that Benning should've held onto more picks earlier on his tenure. It would've made a huge difference for our bottom. 

 

I think Ron Hextall would make a great General Manager for our team after he built the Flyers. He could use the bones that Benning built for this team and then go from there! 

 

 

 

 

[lumberman]

Basically, you have cited information everyone is aware of, nothing new here. Anyone can look back and say ..........

GMJB answers to the owner, no move is made without his approval, this is why he is the GM. Anyone with half a brain and some fortitude was fired by the

owner. What are you going to do if you replace GMJB? Owner will just hire who he wants and the cycle continues. Better if the owner would stop being like a Jerry Jones  ( look it up if you are too young to know ).

[ReggieBush]

This is a dumb post because it 100% hindsight. I understand that a GM job is based off results, but you have no right to complain unless you have had issues with these moves from the beginning. I seriously doubt that you have. GMJB has done a decent job given the change in the owners mandate the past couple years, but that is not something that you thought about or can comprehend (idk, you tell me). We are having a tough stretch right now, but when has making rash decisions ever been a good thing? Fans like you (and you are not the only one), are what bother me. You don't understand the process and factors that it takes to run or coach a team. You that that it is easy, or at least that is what you are alluding to in this post.

[Canckelhead]

5 Years and this is where we are, send him on the next one way flight back to Boston 

[combover]

He should be let go. 

 

[smithers joe]

so, lets see. we need new owners; new management team; new coaches and different players. we make those moves and the SC is ours. makes sense. 

[Toews]

50 minutes ago, lumberman said:

Basically, you have cited information everyone is aware of, nothing new here. Anyone can look back and say ..........

GMJB answers to the owner, no move is made without his approval, this is why he is the GM. Anyone with half a brain and some fortitude was fired by the

owner. What are you going to do if you replace GMJB? Owner will just hire who he wants and the cycle continues. Better if the owner would stop being like a Jerry Jones  ( look it up if you are too young to know ).

This is a very valid point. Grass is probably not going to be greener on the other side. We are probably going to get another inexperienced GM, who likely has given up some decision making powers in order to get the job like Benning's first few years on the job. Linden was allergic to saying the word "rebuild" because it was plainly obvious to anyone who wasn't in denial that we were going through an accelerated version of a rebuild commonly referred to in sports as a "retool". The narrative initially was, we didn't want to bottom out and become the Oilers due to the negative effect it would have on young players. The term "winning culture" was tossed around a lot, even on this forum. 

 

Past that first year we did very little winning but I don't think at all that it has created a toxic culture on this team. So the "winning culture" argument was garbage. The Oilers were dumpster-fire because they frequently signed players who were just exiting their prime to exorbitant contracts. Now I have never lived in Edmonton but I have rarely ever heard good things about it. When you are a young millionaire Edmonton is probably not going to be on anyone's choices as a place to settle down. That may have played a part in that but my point is that the Oilers lacked talent and were a poorly run organization from the top down which is why they never maximized what talent was on the roster. "Winning culture" to me was just emphasized by this management group because the ownership hadn't come to grips that this team had to be torn down and built from the group up. 

 

Gillis through his words and actions has let us know that decisions were made that were out of his control. Botchford's (RIP) reporting paints a damning picture of our ownership group. This is where there has to be a separation in terms of business and hockey operations. Ownership should have involvement in the business aspect of it but they should leave the hockey operations to the experienced people that they hire. Both the HC (Tortorella) and GM (Gillis) knew this team was on its last legs and needed to be rebuilt, instead we prolonged that and we are probably seeing an effect of this, in that we have a lot of expensive players signed to be short term solutions who have now turned into a headache. 

Edited December 18, 2019 by Toews

[Toews]

27 minutes ago, ReggieBush said:

This is a dumb post because it 100% hindsight. I understand that a GM job is based off results, but you have no right to complain unless you have had issues with these moves from the beginning. I seriously doubt that you have. GMJB has done a decent job given the change in the owners mandate the past couple years, but that is not something that you thought about or can comprehend (idk, you tell me). We are having a tough stretch right now, but when has making rash decisions ever been a good thing? Fans like you (and you are not the only one), are what bother me. You don't understand the process and factors that it takes to run or coach a team. You that that it is easy, or at least that is what you are alluding to in this post.

Disagree. You are creating an impossible standard. If I or anyone on this forum had the foresight to predict how every move was going to land then we would be running hockey teams not posting here. Foresight is something that GM's must possess regarding the moves they make or don't make. 

[Toni Zamboni]

[RonMexico]

New 3 year contract extension signed in August. Seems like a vote of confidence from the guy who signs the paycheques.

[PhillipBlunt]

1 hour ago, RonMexico said:

New 3 year contract extension signed in August. Seems like a vote of confidence from the guy who signs the paycheques.

Until they miss the playoffs.

[RonMexico]

1 minute ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Until they miss the playoffs.

What new GM would come to a team that canned their GM a few months after extending him?

[captaincowbasher]

Nope we should not let JB go. I agree about the OJ pick, as he made a positional need pick with a 5th overall selection, and that will always be a mistake. When your picking that high you always grab the best possible player. Huge mistake by JB and company, but i do believe he's learned from that hence the IPod pick. With that said, EP40 might be the best pick this franchise has ever made, and the Miller trade was a huge coupe (a physical, play driving forward who will probably get 30 goals and 75 points) for a conditional 1st. JB had the fore thought to make the 1st conditional; if we don't make the playoffs this year we keep the lottery draft pick, and this years draft is ubber full of talented forwards, giving the Canucks a chance at landing another top 6 forward. I would say JB has been competent, and strategic in the way he's building the team from the time the rebuild started, so let him see this process through, 2-3 years before this team is contending. 

[PhillipBlunt]

3 minutes ago, RonMexico said:

What new GM would come to a team that canned their GM a few months after extending him?

One that's hired by Aquilini.

[J-23]

Think Benning should stay but firing Green won’t look good for him.

 

He’s done a good job on drafting

 

3 hours ago, morrissex95 said:

fire Benning for investing all that money in Sutter, Beagle, Roussel and Eriksson. The Eriksson and Sutter contracts are absolute albatrosses.

Although this is where I agree signings have been awful. Roussel been the best one, can’t say much about the others.

[Rounoush]

No. JB is not the problem. The system we are playing is.

[Elias Pettersson]

If you actually watch the games the players who Benning has acquired via the draft or trade or free agency for the most part aren't the problem.  The problem is the coaching.  We replaced CHL Willy with AHL Green.  What did you expect?  We had a chance to sign Gerard Gallant and Barry Trotz and blew it.  Now Peter DeBoer who has been to two Cup finals and is an actual NHL head coach is available.  We need to fire Green and hire DeBoer.  It's pretty simple really.  Now if DeBoer has little success with this team then that is a different story.  But until we actually get an NHL coach who can get the best out of these young players Benning has drafted then firing Benning at this stage makes no sense.

[EdgarM]

49 minutes ago, Rounoush said:

No. JB is not the problem. The system we are playing is.

This is exactly it, JB has provided the tools, they are just not being used correctly.

[J.I.A.H.N]

I think everybody has to slow down a little here. I am not say we should or should not fire anybody......but lets think this through......

 

From the time Jim Benning has been the GM of the Canucks, he has basically, minus 4 players, Edler, Horvat, Tanev and Markstrom.

 

in essence, replaced every player on the team, not through a dispersal draft, but by drafting, trades, UFA signings and waivers

 

Now, the question for me is, has he replaced the core, and for that, I would say for the most part yes, and the other part of that question is,

 

is it reasonable to expect that a young core full of 20, 21, and 22 year old's, to carry a team.to the playoffs, and with that I would say no, 

 

it is not reasonable.

 

Now, some 5 years later, many on CDC, are acknowledging and calling for Jake Virtanen to be played in key moments, largely in part because

 

his play warrants it, in the opinion of those CDC's. I find this fact Ironic, as just a year ago, many were calling Jake a bust, and questioning

 

Benning's choice. I will admit, that there were players that were drafted behind him that blossomed earlier, but Benning by his actions and statements

 

held strong and was patient, in dealing with Jake.

 

Now, many on CDC, question Benning's choice in Juolevi, and again Benning, has rightfully stood by his often injured prospect, and has not reacted

 

in a knee jerk manner, in response to the many fans bemoaning, Benning's choice. I question how those fans, can say with any certainty, that if 

 

Juolevi had not had so many injuries, he would not now be a better prospect. IMO, regardless of whether Juolevi ever reaches his advertised ceiling

 

or not, because of those injuries, how can anyone say with any certainty, that Juolevi would not have been a core piece...….

 

Now, here we are sitting with what IMO, is a great young developing core, with an abundance of young, core talent, expecting those young players

 

to produce beyond their years.

 

Others, are saying, that outside of drafting, Jim has done a terrible job signing UFA veterans, to which I will say, that in fact, Jim went out and signed

 

both Eriksson and Myers, who were touted as the best UFA's in the year they were signed. CDC questions the cost of those  two UFA's, and again bemoan

 

their production to cost as being Benning's fault. To this I will say, that the cost was high because the market pushed it there, by other GM's who thought

 

that those UFA's were of value. This can be said of the other UFA's Benning has signed.

 

The fact that Eriksson, did not turn out as advertised, is not on Benning, but on Eriksson. If the market, had only pushed Eriksson value up to 2.5 Million

 

would his distractors had said he was not worth that much. I would submit, most would see to days Eriksson's issue as a minor issue, and the cost to get rid

 

of him would be much less painful. CDC would have been much happier, but alas, the other GM's push that value up, and are probably sitting back thanking

 

God, that Vancouver out bid them. But the point is, they in general supported his value, at the time. Again, it was a bidding war, as all are, and unfortunately

 

we won.

 

Now, on the Gudbranson's  and Baertschi, trades, both had risk, but the Canucks had holes, and needed bodies, and as all CDC knows that other GM's are 

 

not in the business to give handouts, to other GM's, so bargains cost. Now at the time of the trade, Baertschi was still a valuable asset of Calgary's and 

 

the 2nd rounder traded was an unknown and many years away. Benning did not have the luxury of that time, as even then many on CDC, were calling

 

for a retool, and not a rebuild. Most should admit, that at the peak of Sven's time here, he was our best LWer and the deal looked good. I would point out

 

that there was not may detractors calling it a bad trade then. Andersson, 4 years later is great hindsight as our core got better, but had Baertschi kept growing

 

as he did in his first 3 years, no one would be looking at this trade as bad.

 

Gudbranson, is a questionable trade, but again, at the time, he had shown well in his last playoff series, and was known as a solid team player with toughness,

 

had he turned out, Benning would have been a genius, if McCann would not have turned out, it would have been a wash, but unfortunately, that did not happen

 

and we must live with that one, and give Benning slack, as not every trade works out for both teams...…..Look at how the other teams feel in the Sedin trade,

 

or the Naslund trade, or the Bertuzzi trade...…….some times you win and sometimes you lose...…...

 

Now, today, we are on a loosing streak, and this may be a year, that has many ups and downs, but I am reminded of how lessens can be great learning experiences.

 

I am reminded that in 2011, my son took me to a Chicago - Vancouver game, which cost him a great deal of money, as he paid for almost everything, including the 

 

$600.00 dollar flight. Chicago won that game 7- 0, and it was bitterly disappointing, but what a run we had afterwards.

 

In conclusion, I will only say this...….Benning or Green and Co, may and will be fired some day, but it should be for the right reason. I hold Benning accountable for

 

making tough decisions, and, if, in Aqualini's opinion, Benning is not making these decisions properly, then I am sure he will be replaced. But it will not be over

 

a rebuild that is not complete, nor completely tested. Benning has added Miller, Ferland, Myers, and has done his best to move the rebuild along, now we must wait

 

and have patience......be reminded Pettersson is not McKinnon or McDavid, and it will take time for him to strengthen. Hughes is not Webber, and Boeser is not

 

OV...….but collectively, given time and good coaching, I believe we are well on our way, thanks in no small part, because of Benning

 

Sorry for the long post

[EdgarM]

17 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

I think everybody has to slow down a little here. I am not say we should or should not fire anybody......but lets think this through......

 

From the time Jim Benning has been the GM of the Canucks, he has basically, minus 4 players, Edler, Horvat, Tanev and Markstrom.

 

in essence, replaced every player on the team, not through a dispersal draft, but by drafting, trades, UFA signings and waivers

 

Now, the question for me is, has he replaced the core, and for that, I would say for the most part yes, and the other part of that question is,

 

is it reasonable to expect that a young core full of 20, 21, and 22 year old's, to carry a team.to the playoffs, and with that I would say no, 

 

it is not reasonable.

 

Now, some 5 years later, many on CDC, are acknowledging and calling for Jake Virtanen to be played in key moments, largely in part because

 

his play warrants it, in the opinion of those CDC's. I find this fact Ironic, as just a year ago, many were calling Jake a bust, and questioning

 

Benning's choice. I will admit, that there were players that were drafted behind him that blossomed earlier, but Benning by his actions and statements

 

held strong and was patient, in dealing with Jake.

 

Now, many on CDC, question Benning's choice in Juolevi, and again Benning, has rightfully stood by his often injured prospect, and has not reacted

 

in a knee jerk manner, in response to the many fans bemoaning, Benning's choice. I question how those fans, can say with any certainty, that if 

 

Juolevi had not had so many injuries, he would not now be a better prospect. IMO, regardless of whether Juolevi ever reaches his advertised ceiling

 

or not, because of those injuries, how can anyone say with any certainty, that Juolevi would not have been a core piece...….

 

Now, here we are sitting with what IMO, is a great young developing core, with an abundance of young, core talent, expecting those young players

 

to produce beyond their years.

 

Others, are saying, that outside of drafting, Jim has done a terrible job signing UFA veterans, to which I will say, that in fact, Jim went out and signed

 

both Eriksson and Myers, who were touted as the best UFA's in the year they were signed. CDC questions the cost of those  two UFA's, and again bemoan

 

their production to cost as being Benning's fault. To this I will say, that the cost was high because the market pushed it there, by other GM's who thought

 

that those UFA's were of value. This can be said of the other UFA's Benning has signed.

 

The fact that Eriksson, did not turn out as advertised, is not on Benning, but on Eriksson. If the market, had only pushed Eriksson value up to 2.5 Million

 

would his distractors had said he was not worth that much. I would submit, most would see to days Eriksson's issue as a minor issue, and the cost to get rid

 

of him would be much less painful. CDC would have been much happier, but alas, the other GM's push that value up, and are probably sitting back thanking

 

God, that Vancouver out bid them. But the point is, they in general supported his value, at the time. Again, it was a bidding war, as all are, and unfortunately

 

we won.

 

Now, on the Gudbranson's  and Baertschi, trades, both had risk, but the Canucks had holes, and needed bodies, and as all CDC knows that other GM's are 

 

not in the business to give handouts, to other GM's, so bargains cost. Now at the time of the trade, Baertschi was still a valuable asset of Calgary's and 

 

the 2nd rounder traded was an unknown and many years away. Benning did not have the luxury of that time, as even then many on CDC, were calling

 

for a retool, and not a rebuild. Most should admit, that at the peak of Sven's time here, he was our best LWer and the deal looked good. I would point out

 

that there was not may detractors calling it a bad trade then. Andersson, 4 years later is great hindsight as our core got better, but had Baertschi kept growing

 

as he did in his first 3 years, no one would be looking at this trade as bad.

 

Gudbranson, is a questionable trade, but again, at the time, he had shown well in his last playoff series, and was known as a solid team player with toughness,

 

had he turned out, Benning would have been a genius, if McCann would not have turned out, it would have been a wash, but unfortunately, that did not happen

 

and we must live with that one, and give Benning slack, as not every trade works out for both teams...…..Look at how the other teams feel in the Sedin trade,

 

or the Naslund trade, or the Bertuzzi trade...…….some times you win and sometimes you lose...…...

 

Now, today, we are on a loosing streak, and this may be a year, that has many ups and downs, but I am reminded of how lessens can be great learning experiences.

 

I am reminded that in 2011, my son took me to a Chicago - Vancouver game, which cost him a great deal of money, as he paid for almost everything, including the 

 

$600.00 dollar flight. Chicago won that game 7- 0, and it was bitterly disappointing, but what a run we had afterwards.

 

In conclusion, I will only say this...….Benning or Green and Co, may and will be fired some day, but it should be for the right reason. I hold Benning accountable for

 

making tough decisions, and, if, in Aqualini's opinion, Benning is not making these decisions properly, then I am sure he will be replaced. But it will not be over

 

a rebuild that is not complete, nor completely tested. Benning has added Miller, Ferland, Myers, and has done his best to move the rebuild along, now we must wait

 

and have patience......be reminded Pettersson is not McKinnon or McDavid, and it will take time for him to strengthen. Hughes is not Webber, and Boeser is not

 

OV...….but collectively, given time and good coaching, I believe we are well on our way, thanks in no small part, because of Benning

 

Sorry for the long post

Very well said and the most important part of this whole thing is that it is still an "Unfinished Product". Coaching may need improvement and the Core needs to grow a little more but we will not see their full potential until they start seeing meaningful games in the playoffs IMO. There are still key components possibly stewing in the minors so we are far from over and more like its just begun.