Jim Benning

[aGENT]

1 hour ago, theo5789 said:

I don't mind the lineup and can accept the trade, but it requires finding takers for Roussel and Benn at full cap. One cap dump is hard enough, you're looking at supposedly 3 on top of two buyouts (or more cap dumps) just to barely squeeze in that roster. It also ends up using up a lot of the depth we have, so if we run into any injury issues, it's going to be a tough ride. Plus we give up a 2nd and Jake to accomplish it. Too much going on just to fit him in IMO for an offense that looked good prior to him arriving, even if a bit inconsistent (could improve here with more experience added).

Roussel (assuming he returns to form, with this time off, from his knee injury) is no cap dump. Healthy, he's one of the best 3rd liners in the league, was scoring at a borderline 2nd line rate last year and is an elite pest with tonnes of leadership. He was also highly sought after when we signed him (for all those reasons). $3m x 2 years remaining for a borderline 2nd liner/middle 6 player is not a hard sell.

 

Benn might cost us a late pick or mid round pick swap but likewise is still a useful, legit NHL player player (if less attractive). One year at $2m should be movable without hurting too much.

 

Eriksson will certainly be the PITA to move though. Our one saving grace might be that there's going to be a few cash poor owners looking for guys with upside down deals like Eriksson, with less cash owed than their cap hits. Even if we need to take a smaller cap but cash heavy deal back. Here's hoping the deal comes with lube, whatever it is *Fingers Crossed*

Edited July 25, 2020 by aGENT

[coolboarder]

I could see this as an option to buyout some players where their prospects is ready to play if it takes to keep Toffoli, Tanev, and Markstrom..  Roussel could be a buyout candidate if no team is willing to acquire Roussel through trades. It will save us 1.4 million in savings to be able to use that to keep Toffoli and a trade if someone is interested in other players like Sutter or Beagle to unload some of the salary so that we might have some cash left to keep Tanev and Markstrom.  I feel that other prospects are ready to step up or buyout Roussel next summer for just 2 years of cap hit rather than buying out for 4 years of cap hits.  Also don't forget that Edler's salary is off the book next summer as well for ED.  We might be able to keep most of our young players to long-term.  I still see the Canucks are in a good shape to be able to replace bottom 6 players with their replenished prospect pool.  

[IBatch]

2 hours ago, coolboarder said:

I could see this as an option to buyout some players where their prospects is ready to play if it takes to keep Toffoli, Tanev, and Markstrom..  Roussel could be a buyout candidate if no team is willing to acquire Roussel through trades. It will save us 1.4 million in savings to be able to use that to keep Toffoli and a trade if someone is interested in other players like Sutter or Beagle to unload some of the salary so that we might have some cash left to keep Tanev and Markstrom.  I feel that other prospects are ready to step up or buyout Roussel next summer for just 2 years of cap hit rather than buying out for 4 years of cap hits.  Also don't forget that Edler's salary is off the book next summer as well for ED.  We might be able to keep most of our young players to long-term.  I still see the Canucks are in a good shape to be able to replace bottom 6 players with their replenished prospect pool.  

Roussel is still on the books for two more years... means we’d be paying for him for four so no thanks.   Pearson, Bear and Sutter ... and even then no thanks for buyouts.   Trade Pearson - play Ferland and Bear and Roussel...edit:  see you might be meaning after this season.   Guess we’d have to wait and see how things go.   Pretty sure we could find a taker as long as remains healthy ... useful player. 

Edited July 25, 2020 by IBatch

[BigTramFan]

I have a feeling Pearson will be traded. He is one of the easiest players to trade compared to Eriksson, Sutter, Roussel, and he is not likely in Canucks long term plans.

I don't see VAN being able to retain Toffoli either.

Eriksson should be waived. Let him ride the bus for a year and maybe he will terminate the final year of his contract in 2021/22.

Let Stecher walk or try to trade his rights for something.

Resign Fantenberg to $1m if Rathbone is not ready for the NHL.

 

Likely line up next year which can easily fit within $81.5m cap limit, including all penalties, retentions and performance overages from 2020:

 

Miller Pettersson Boeser

Ferland Horvat Virtanen

Baertschi Gaudette MacEwen

Roussel Beagle Sutter

(Motte)

 

Hughes Tanev

Edler Myers

Benn Rafferty

(Fantenberg/Rathbone)

 

Markstrom

(Demko)

 

The advantage of this approach is that in 2021/22 the following players will be off the books:

Sutter, Baer, Edler, Benn (and hopefully Eriksson)

 

And we will infuse youth such as Hoglander, Lind, Podkolzin, Juolevi, Woo (and bring back Tryamkin)

[theo5789]

4 hours ago, grandmaster said:

I agree there is a lot of moving parts to fit this scenario through but if it means having a formidable top 6 like this, JB is sure to give it a try. 
 

As for depth, we have plenty of kids in the minors that need to start showing what they got. As you know, these guys are ELC with min cap hits.

There isn't going to be much time to make these moves and if we sign Toffoli (and the others) first, then it really puts us in a cap bind and teams will play hard ball. The stars will really have to align just right. Not impossible, but is it worth the trouble when there is an alternative that isn't too different without any assets given up and doesn't make us top heavy? 

 

I agree there is youth on the cusp, but in the end, they need to earn their spots just like every prospect in Benning's regime has had to. There's a couple of players that could graduate, but the lineup to keep Toffoli has like 5 rookies jumping in all at once and depleting pretty much most of Utica. I just can't see that happening, but who knows? But it's funny that you mention this youth (aside from 24 year old Virtanen) as we have Lind, Podkolzin, MacEwen, Hoglander all with potential for a top/middle 6 role on wing which is a position that can take on more risks as you don't get as exposed.

 

Our top 6 is certainly better with him, but that's a luxury rather than a necessity and we have the potential within the system that could take that spot and doesn't hold up more cap in a spot that we have youthful depth from within.

[theo5789]

4 hours ago, aGENT said:

Roussel (assuming he returns to form, with this time off, from his knee injury) is no cap dump. Healthy, he's one of the best 3rd liners in the league, was scoring at a borderline 2nd line rate last year and is an elite pest with tonnes of leadership. He was also highly sought after when we signed him (for all those reasons). $3m x 2 years remaining for a borderline 2nd liner/middle 6 player is not a hard sell.

 

Benn might cost us a late pick or mid round pick swap but likewise is still a useful, legit NHL player player (if less attractive). One year at $2m should be movable without hurting too much.

 

Eriksson will certainly be the PITA to move though. Our one saving grace might be that there's going to be a few cash poor owners looking for guys with upside down deals like Eriksson, with less cash owed than their cap hits. Even if we need to take a smaller cap but cash heavy deal back. Here's hoping the deal comes with lube, whatever it is *Fingers Crossed*

When I say cap dump, it's like a JT Miller "cap dump" (Tampa only needed to make one move, not several like us). Obviously not to that extent, but we have to find a taker. The cap market has shifted. It should be easy enough to move him, but we aren't getting much value back, but the point is to rid his cap. That's the easy part and probably a necessity in any scenario.

 

Benn isn't as desirable. If we are looking at past history on Roussel as a sell, Benn's history with us makes it a detriment. Moving a bottom pair (a 7th dman for us) isn't going to be easy. I'd say it's going to be as difficult as finding a buyer for Baertschi.

 

Even if we could get those 2 deals done, it's another uphill battle here. I don't think there are any teams that will have troubles reaching the cap floor, so that market isn't really there. A team like Ottawa could try and penny pinch, but if they are sending back any cap to us at all, that negates the goal in creating enough space to get Toffoli signed. We would also just be spending more assets and depleting our depth (by pretty much having everyone brought up).

 

It's a nice top heavy lineup that I think is unnecessary when considering what we have in the system. If we are looking at the strength of our prospect pool, wing (and LD) is where we should be trying to save on cap with ELCs and cheap contracts. I think it's only worth keeping Toffoli at this point is if we can maintain the lineup (luxury piece) and add him on top of it which at the end of the day, LE's full cap has got to go. The will be the largest domino that has to fall before we even start considering the rest to fit TT in.

[aGENT]

45 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

When I say cap dump, it's like a JT Miller "cap dump" (Tampa only needed to make one move, not several like us). Obviously not to that extent, but we have to find a taker. The cap market has shifted. It should be easy enough to move him, but we aren't getting much value back, but the point is to rid his cap. That's the easy part and probably a necessity in any scenario.

 

Benn isn't as desirable. If we are looking at past history on Roussel as a sell, Benn's history with us makes it a detriment. Moving a bottom pair (a 7th dman for us) isn't going to be easy. I'd say it's going to be as difficult as finding a buyer for Baertschi.

 

Even if we could get those 2 deals done, it's another uphill battle here. I don't think there are any teams that will have troubles reaching the cap floor, so that market isn't really there. A team like Ottawa could try and penny pinch, but if they are sending back any cap to us at all, that negates the goal in creating enough space to get Toffoli signed. We would also just be spending more assets and depleting our depth (by pretty much having everyone brought up).

 

It's a nice top heavy lineup that I think is unnecessary when considering what we have in the system. If we are looking at the strength of our prospect pool, wing (and LD) is where we should be trying to save on cap with ELCs and cheap contracts. I think it's only worth keeping Toffoli at this point is if we can maintain the lineup (luxury piece) and add him on top of it which at the end of the day, LE's full cap has got to go. The will be the largest domino that has to fall before we even start considering the rest to fit TT in.

Yeah I kind of hope Benning bites the bullet and just pays the price right of the hop. 

 

Once he's gone, our leverage on any other moves increases ten fold. Just get it done.

[theo5789]

14 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Yeah I kind of hope Benning bites the bullet and just pays the price right of the hop. 

 

Once he's gone, our leverage on any other moves increases ten fold. Just get it done.

I think we can still put out a respectable lineup with him still here. I rather keep the assets instead of doubling down on Toffoli (as that would be the main purpose of the trade) on top of eating up more cap space on wing. Benning has never seeming wanted to pay assets to move contracts, maybe unless it's necessary. I don't see it being necessary with what we have in the system. Do I want LE gone? For sure, but not if it continues to hurt us further.

 

I think Virtanen should get a look in the top 6, MacEwen has already been given a look on Bo's wing. We have two very good prospects in Lind and Podkolzin that could jump in, maybe even Hoglander as well although I believe he's a LW. We have Ferland who could play a top 6 role and arguably why we signed him in the first place. And if we keep Roussel, he has looked good playing alongside Bo putting up some career numbers. Even Eriksson had a good run on that line. We just have so many options and our offense was flying in games even without Toffoli. Toffoli is a sure top 6 for us, but just the work involved and how his cap hampers us in other areas in keeping him outweighs that value in my view. With a rising cap, it was much more feasible, but times have changed from when we first traded for him when I thought we should retain him.

[aGENT]

1 hour ago, theo5789 said:

I think we can still put out a respectable lineup with him still here. I rather keep the assets instead of doubling down on Toffoli (as that would be the main purpose of the trade) on top of eating up more cap space on wing. Benning has never seeming wanted to pay assets to move contracts, maybe unless it's necessary. I don't see it being necessary with what we have in the system. Do I want LE gone? For sure, but not if it continues to hurt us further.

 

I think Virtanen should get a look in the top 6, MacEwen has already been given a look on Bo's wing. We have two very good prospects in Lind and Podkolzin that could jump in, maybe even Hoglander as well although I believe he's a LW. We have Ferland who could play a top 6 role and arguably why we signed him in the first place. And if we keep Roussel, he has looked good playing alongside Bo putting up some career numbers. Even Eriksson had a good run on that line. We just have so many options and our offense was flying in games even without Toffoli. Toffoli is a sure top 6 for us, but just the work involved and how his cap hampers us in other areas in keeping him outweighs that value in my view. With a rising cap, it was much more feasible, but times have changed from when we first traded for him when I thought we should retain him.

Oh I wasn't even referring to keeping Toffoli.

 

Getting rid of Eriksson just gives us so much more leverage in any other trades. Suddenly we don't have a gun to our head and are free to make appropriate moves and extract real value from assets.

 

If we manage to hang on to Toffoli after that, great. If not... Like you said, we can still put out a solid forward group without him.

[IBatch]

2 hours ago, theo5789 said:

I think we can still put out a respectable lineup with him still here. I rather keep the assets instead of doubling down on Toffoli (as that would be the main purpose of the trade) on top of eating up more cap space on wing. Benning has never seeming wanted to pay assets to move contracts, maybe unless it's necessary. I don't see it being necessary with what we have in the system. Do I want LE gone? For sure, but not if it continues to hurt us further.

 

I think Virtanen should get a look in the top 6, MacEwen has already been given a look on Bo's wing. We have two very good prospects in Lind and Podkolzin that could jump in, maybe even Hoglander as well although I believe he's a LW. We have Ferland who could play a top 6 role and arguably why we signed him in the first place. And if we keep Roussel, he has looked good playing alongside Bo putting up some career numbers. Even Eriksson had a good run on that line. We just have so many options and our offense was flying in games even without Toffoli. Toffoli is a sure top 6 for us, but just the work involved and how his cap hampers us in other areas in keeping him outweighs that value in my view. With a rising cap, it was much more feasible, but times have changed from when we first traded for him when I thought we should retain him.

Well said.    So many things have to happen indeed.   Pearson seems like the easy trade at this point - but the return wouldn’t be great - at least as a trade before the season starts.     I do feel Bear would be a lot easier to move with only one year on his deal but in this case we’d be better off keeping him in case Ferland goes on the LTIR (which of course would also help with cap).   Believe that’s where JB would start and go from there.   The cap being flat could work ok for us given it should also affect GMs spending .... well that’s what you’d think anyways.    The best case would be that we go deep this year - and it’s the Beagle’s, Pearson’s, Sutters etc that really help with this raising team’s interest and that there are enough injuries that teams need some depth.  A lot to ask.   At least after the playoffs are done we should have a better indication of how things could go.   Feel Pearson would re-coup the second - but it could be just to help sign these guys (not including TT).   Which is fine.   Agree that LE retiring is about the best hope JB has of making this work without a whole lot of buy-outs and cap dumps (which I kind of detest).   Feel that if we accept TT is a rental and just take our medicine long term the team will be better for it for sure.   Also rather spend the money on defense later when it’s available then more middle six wingers. 

[theo5789]

3 hours ago, IBatch said:

Well said.    So many things have to happen indeed.   Pearson seems like the easy trade at this point - but the return wouldn’t be great - at least as a trade before the season starts.     I do feel Bear would be a lot easier to move with only one year on his deal but in this case we’d be better off keeping him in case Ferland goes on the LTIR (which of course would also help with cap).   Believe that’s where JB would start and go from there.   The cap being flat could work ok for us given it should also affect GMs spending .... well that’s what you’d think anyways.    The best case would be that we go deep this year - and it’s the Beagle’s, Pearson’s, Sutters etc that really help with this raising team’s interest and that there are enough injuries that teams need some depth.  A lot to ask.   At least after the playoffs are done we should have a better indication of how things could go.   Feel Pearson would re-coup the second - but it could be just to help sign these guys (not including TT).   Which is fine.   Agree that LE retiring is about the best hope JB has of making this work without a whole lot of buy-outs and cap dumps (which I kind of detest).   Feel that if we accept TT is a rental and just take our medicine long term the team will be better for it for sure.   Also rather spend the money on defense later when it’s available then more middle six wingers. 

Pearson may be moveable, but he's got chemistry with Bo right now. Bo's has been seeing too much change on his wing, so I'm sure he's enjoyed the consistency with him. But even with him moved, there will still be buyouts and other moves needed. So not the optimal direction I would go with.

 

Baertschi just isn't a valued commodity at his cap hit. We would have to retain 50% regardless of the return (or take some contract back like a Gagner for Spooner type deal). Retaining 50% only saves us 500k really compared to him being on Utica so I don't see it being dire unless that amount is the difference to being cap compliant, but we could always buy him out and save that same amount without looking for a buyer (a trade is only preferable to save the 800k the following year of a buyout).

 

I'm not banking on LE retiring, but that would be a nice gift to us. I'm also not banking on being able to make cap dump trades easily. I constantly hear, just trade this and this to make it work, but it won't be that easy. That's why I put forward what I think is the easiest way to create a lineup that's mostly under our control even if it involves buyouts. Any other trades that we can accomplish is just a bonus. At the end of the day, Toffoli seems like he isn't worth the effort involved to retain and I'm fine with that.

[theo5789]

5 hours ago, aGENT said:

Oh I wasn't even referring to keeping Toffoli.

 

Getting rid of Eriksson just gives us so much more leverage in any other trades. Suddenly we don't have a gun to our head and are free to make appropriate moves and extract real value from assets.

 

If we manage to hang on to Toffoli after that, great. If not... Like you said, we can still put out a solid forward group without him.

Maybe so, but I put forward a lineup that doesn't involve paying the piper to get rid of him and still putting forward a decent team. So I don't feel the urgency in doing so, but if we can find a reasonable deal, then for sure. If we pay to get rid of Eriksson and still let Toffoli walk, that seems pointless. His contract will end eventually and we will be fine.

[Nuxfanabroad]

On 3/3/2020 at 1:39 AM, aqua59 said:

Well here it is one week after the trade deadline and the Canucks have fallen face flat on the ice. 

 

 

St Louis, Colorado and Vegas are ramping things up and steam rolling these days. Do we think Vancouver is ready for these teams? 

 

The Goaltending with Markstrom out has not been good but part of that is due to the team play in front of the goalies. Markstrom has covered up a lot of flaws this. Look at the shots allowed every game. It's insane, far too many.

 

This team is not built for the play offs. It's still an October team.

 

This team needs another lottery draft and some big changes in the front office this off season. 

 

I really like JB and have supported him over all hoping for some drastic change. Prudent drafting has saved this mans job but i'm starting to think his contract may not be renewed in the off season and I'm not against that.

 

It's time to move on from Jim Benning. 

 

I'm not happy. This past road trip took me back to the feeling of last season's group. Not good enough with some great players. 

 

 

This thread has aged like milk product in a broken refrigerator.

[Moose Nuckle]

Wonder how he gets out of this cap pickle. Good team though. 

[Nuxfanabroad]

1 hour ago, Moose Nuckle said:

Wonder how he gets out of this cap pickle. Good team though. 

If Sutter, Roussel & Beagle keep playing at this level? Would say there's a good chance they can move 1 or 2 vets, should this team keep gelling/excelling in the PO's.

[spook007]

18 hours ago, Nuxfanabroad said:

This thread has aged like milk product in a broken refrigerator.

True... but in fairness I think a lot of fans, even the pro Benning brigade, has been very positively surprised by the play of some of the vets. 
they have really brought it with them so far. Will be very interesting to see how they fare against stronger opposition. 
Nevertheless the season target has been achieved and everything from now on is gravy. Benning and Green finding out a lot about the mentallity and ability of their players in playoff hockey. 

[Moose Nuckle]

Yup, my opinion was that Benning shouldn't have gotten the extension until this achievement, but he got here so I don't care now.

[Hogs & Podz]

Just had to post this... Benning has made some glaring mistakes but ultimately he's building a championship team here for years to come and this quote from an article today highlights why I think Bennings criteria for what he looks for in players is a winning one.

 

“We wanted to try to find the right kind of people – people of high character who are going to play hard and compete hard,” Benning explained. “I believe if you work hard, you become more than the sum of your parts. We always make sure we do our background work with the people we draft and who we bring in, the free agents we look at.

 

“If you have a group of guys that are willing to work hard for each other. . . you can have success with a group like that. Since I’ve been here, that’s always been important to us.”

 

Benning has run the Canucks for six years. The qualifying round was his first playoff series win in Vancouver. The team has been almost entirely rebuilt. Whatever mistakes Benning has made, he and Green got the chemistry right.

 

As Boeser said, there seem to be a lot of good human beings on this team.

 

“I think you get to a point where you get out of yourself and you’re playing for each other,” Benning said. “When you develop that culture where you’re going to compete and do whatever you can to win that game. . . guys get out of their comfort zone to do anything that helps the team achieve more. When you can gather a group of players that can do that, I think that’s when you have something.”

 

In Benning I trust.

Go Canucks go

 

Edited August 14, 2020 by Hogs & Podz

[grandmaster]

Notable Drafting :  A+

 

Petey -  5th OA

Quinn - 7th OA

Brock - 23rd OA

Hopefully these guys pan out as they are our most regarded prospects:

Podkolzin - 10th OA
Hoglander - 2nd round 

*worst is OJ ahead of Tkachuk and McAvoy

 

Notable Trades:  A  

 

JT Miller for 1st & 3rd (Easily top 10 best trade ever for the Canucks)

TT for Madden and 2nd (He did his job and help contribute for the Canucks to make the playoffs when BB was down)

Pearson for Gubranson

Leivo for Carcone

Motte For Vanek

 

Notable Free Agent signings :  C-

LE  6 X 6M (worst in team history)

Meyers 5 X 6M (bad)

BB - 3 X 5.875M (good)

Bo - 6 X 5.5M (great)

Ferlund 4 X 3.5M (ok)

Beagle - 4 X 3M (ok - only for playoffs)

Motte - 970K (excellent)

 

Other factors:

 

- Coach (Good)

- Communication to fans and media (ok)

 

[aGENT]

6 hours ago, grandmaster said:

Notable Drafting :  A+

 

Petey -  5th OA

Quinn - 7th OA

Brock - 23rd OA

Hopefully these guys pan out as they are our most regarded prospects:

Podkolzin - 10th OA
Hoglander - 2nd round 

*worst is OJ ahead of Tkachuk and McAvoy

 

Notable Trades:  A  

 

JT Miller for 1st & 3rd (Easily top 10 best trade ever for the Canucks)

TT for Madden and 2nd (He did his job and help contribute for the Canucks to make the playoffs when BB was down)

Pearson for Gubranson

Leivo for Carcone

Motte For Vanek

 

Notable Free Agent signings :  C-

LE  6 X 6M (worst in team history)

Meyers 5 X 6M (bad)

BB - 3 X 5.875M (good)

Bo - 6 X 5.5M (great)

Ferlund 4 X 3.5M (ok)

Beagle - 4 X 3M (ok - only for playoffs)

Motte - 970K (excellent)

 

Other factors:

 

- Coach (Good)

- Communication to fans and media (ok)

 

Sorry to pick apart your post but literally nobody had McAvoy anywhere near where we were picking. With perfect 20/20 hindsight (or a time machine), sure we trade down, gaining additional assets, and nab McAvoy (while hoping that doesn't negatively effect us getting Pettersson or Hughes). And OJ is still a high quality prospect, he's simply had injury issues. Ideally he's just late to the party.

 

Also, Myers is not remotely a bad contract. And Beagle (and Roussel while we're at it) are certainly no bargains but they're key, contributing, veteran players who know how to play 'the right way'. While not cheap, I'd argue they're invaluable to the young core.

 

Edited August 14, 2020 by aGENT