Maddogy

That's what people said about Winnipeg, Toronto, Buffalo, Florida, even Edmonton. I am a proponent for the long patient rebuild. I have to concede though that none of these teams including Colorado have won anything. Toronto and Buffalo are shedding talent right now. Edmonton cannot really add any talent.

I share a lot of your views. Moreover, I personally dislike the Miller trade. However, we need to add more perspectives to this discussion. (1) By the standard you have set, I think most GM's are mediocre. Many teams are stuck with crappy contracts, failed high draft picks, trading high draft picks for short term help that did not pan out, failing to trade assets before free agency or restricted free agency, signing players to overpriced contracts, failing to develop players......etc. In this regard, Jim is not mediocre but average to somewhat above average. In this respect, I suspect your rating of "mediocre" is at least partially swayed by the results. As you know, results based approach for assessment is a highly subjective and contextual debate. Is Peter Chiarelli a good GM based on his results in Boston and Edmonton? It is difficult to say. (2) Without knowing the personal discussions among the owner, GM and management team, it is difficult for us to speculate whose fault it is for the decisions and results. Jim strikes me as a thinker. He is learned and observant when it comes to player assessment and development. My personal speculation based on nothing but previous disclosures from Jim are: - He is not personally interested in the details of trades or asset management, salary cap or negotiation techniques. It is the on ice product and hockey players that excite him. He gets excited talking about players he drafted, signed or traded, but does not take much pride in the bargain he is receiving. - I have no idea how much help Jim is asking for or receiving from others to complement him in terms of asset management. - I have no idea how much input the owner has. Francesco is clearly a hockey fan, fairly knowledgeable one. Does he come on to this forum and check out fans' feedbacks? - Jim is clearly of the view that long term rebuilds such as the ones carried out in Winnipeg, Buffalo, Colorado and Florida are not necessary nor preferable. Without going into further details. I do not think he is clearly wrong even though I personally prefer the long patient route. The long and patient route is risk averse because all you do is draft well, hope for draft lottery, sit and wait for your players to develop, and only strike when your talent pool is comprehensive and ready. This is what I prefer. BUT, I have to concede that this would suck for players such as Horvat whom were drafted earlier. Ryan O'reilly suffered a lot in Buffalo before been traded. I love Horvat and the kids. I hate to see them suffer. - Since Jim is clearly of the view that the rebuild should not be dragged out, can we win a Cup with this approach? OF COURSE WE CAN!!! If teams such as Boston, St.Louis, San Jose, Washington that refuse to rebuild, but instead retool, can compete for the Cup, Jim's approach CAN work. However, the reason I'm personally against this approach are: - This approach may ALSO take a long time. Who is to say this approach would be quicker than the long patient route? - Have to get very lucky drafting with inferior picks, have to manage assets well and squeeze every inch out of the salary cap. Jim so far is smart enough to accomplish this but his results need to improve. He may not be the right guy to do this. I do not like Mike Gillis, but he may be a better GM to execute Jim's vision. In conclusion, I really like Jim Benning. I do not prefer his approach to rebuilding however his approach is not wrong. The problem is that he does not realize that he personally may not be the right guy to carry out his own plan. The solution is for him to ask for help. Jim is a great GM for the long and patient rebuild, but not necessarily the quick rebuild/retool that he personally prefers.

I agree with Jim that in terms of rebuild you can not just keep sucking and drafting and accumulating assets. Winnipeg, Colorado, Florida, Edmonton, Buffalo have not won a thing. You also do not want to waste the prime of Horvat's career the way Buffalo did to Ryan O'Reilly. However, Jim needs to be patient. He has time to wait and see. Do not overpay in trades or free agent signings. Patience pays off.

I agree with Jim that in terms of rebuild you can not just keep sucking and drafting and accumulating assets. Winnipeg, Colorado, Florida, Edmonton, Buffalo have not won a thing. You also do not want to waste the prime of Horvat's career the way Buffalo did to Ryan O'Reilly. However, Jim needs to be patient. He has time to wait and see. Do not overpay in trades or free agent signings. Patience pays off.

Before winning the Cup this year, Ryan O'Reilly admitted that the constant losing in Buffalo was too much for him. I pray that we do not do the same to Bo Horvat.

Some details regarding this trade: - Jim Benning HATES trading 1st round picks. He loves drafting and he is not Mike Gillis. - Jim tried to acquire a RD of the right age, skill set, and contract but it was not available. Jim spoke with every GM in the league about possible trades and vice versa. - Jim TARGETED T.J. Miller for a trade because he is deemed to be the BEST forward available to Vancouver. Free agent forwards are more expensive, older or less skilled than Miller. Miller seems to the only one that fits every single criteria for a core piece. My personal take on the deal per se regardless of which team building strategy is favoured: Conditional 1st round pick is an over payment if the draft year (2020) is deep. However, this over payment is unlikely to damage the team depth long term if Jim and his staff can continue to draft well in the later rounds. As someone who follows the Oilers I have to say that I would criticize Holland for not making this trade. Miller would immediately help the top line and they have the cap space to pay him.

2 varying perspectives on this trade: (1) add to the core players we already have, he must still be young but veteran, play physical with size, versatile, great contract and grow with the core players, can skate and make skilled plays, should be a valuable player for the playoffs——— this is a good/potentially great trade. underlying logic: Horvat is reaching his prime, can not rebuild team for too long or else may be stuck in rebuild like Edmonton, Florida and Buffalo. Long rebuild did not benefit Winnipeg as they did not win Cup and are now in cap hell shedding players. (2) need to accumulate as many assets as possible before making the playoffs, try to win draft lottery, become a Cup contender as soon as making playoffs. Vancouver has great depth for goal tending, centres and wingers, but rebuild should not be hurried unless and until depth in defence is addressed through drafting or transactions, it is preferable that a Norris or legit #1 D prospect is in hand before rebuild is concluded ——— this trade detracts from long term asset management and is strategically the wrong move regardless of whether this is a fair trade with Tampa. underlying logic: objective of rebuild is to win the Cup not merely making the playoffs or become a respectable team, need to be patient like Colorado to accumulate vast amount of assets to push for the Cup. When making the playoffs, the probability of going all the way must be as high as possible to maximize the limited window of opportunity. My view: neither perspective is clearly right or wrong. The key in the long run is whether Jim and his management team can draft great players with lower draft picks. If they can, then this trade is unlikely to harm the chances of Cup contending in the long run. If Van wins the draft lottery next summer the rebuild would as a result wind down.

This trade is not bad but weird. Jim HATES trading 1st round picks. Rumours go that he is willing to offer 1st for D. However what we got is not D but a gritty veteran forward. So what the heck happened to trading 1st round pick for D?

Saw some clips on V.P. Virtanen is supposed to drive to the net like V.P. He does not. I’m disappointed in Jake

Trouba says fiancee's medical studies factored into trade out of Winnipeg https://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl/nhl-trade-jets-rangers-jacob-trouba-june-18-1.5180330

As a general observation for life, indecisiveness (AKA not saying "No" to things) is often the natural consequence of not having a plan. If a legitimate, well researched and well thought out plan is in place, the decision would often be much easier and readily made. J.B. mentioned repeatedly that there is a plan that his team follows. I hope this is the case.

You are correct in hinting that he does not drive a line, he needs other players to drive the play for him, and this is the problem. Marchand and Patrick Kane in comparison drive their lines with their speed, hands and hockey IQ. Horvat and Pettersson drive their lines. At 10th overall Vancouver can potentially draft another play driver such as Krebs.

Van does not have the assets to trade for him. Winnipeg is looking to win a cup and they have cap issues. The type of assets that Winnipeg is looking for are elite players that are both young and on entry level contracts.

His stats were inflated by way of playing for a dominant team. His numbers are expected to drop this season. Nonetheless, it is more likely than not that his ceiling was underestimated by many scouts. I don't expect him to be an offensive D in the NHL, but rather a jack of all trades 2nd pairing D.

I'm not sure if it works salary cap wise. Trading a younger D for an older winger is not good asset management.

No Russians either. Which is a shame.

D prospects are notoriously difficult to assess and extrapolate. Many top D in the NHL were taken in the later rounds of the draft. If J.B. and his staff make a surprising #10 D pick, I'm sure the decision would be based on ample investigation and internal discussions.

Justin Schultz can speak for the exemplary approach that Travis Green is too dumb to follow.

Definitely. It's sort like us drafting Johnny Gaudreau as opposed to Alex Ovechkin. Gaudreau is not as complete of a player as Ovie but that's OK if the rest of your team is well balanced. It would be nice to draft a legit #1 D though. It would take the pressure off Quinn and allow him to be the specialist game breaker that he is meant to be.

Comparing Quinn to legit #1 D such as John Carlson and Drew Doughty, he lacks net-front clearing strength, physical ability to knock players off the puck, an effective slap shot from the point as well as the ability to log long hard minutes during the 4 rounds of playoff grind against top talents and physical grinders. I expect Quinn to alleviate some of his shortcomings as he develops and matures. He is only 19. It is however difficult for him to grow into the all-around dominate #1 that only a few teams possess. He is however an unique talent. He may one day command a salary that is in the ballpark of Drew Doughty.

By definition he is not #1 D. His size limits his potential on the defensive side especially during playoffs. #1D has to be able to carry physical D puck battles on his own. Quinn needs bigger partners to help him in this respect. Quinn is a unique talent. His talent level is already top 5 in the entire NHL D. However, he is not the prototypical #1D. Hopefully Vancouver can draft a legit #1 D.

That's why it's so important to give prospects a taste of NHL before their actual rookie season so they can mentally and physically prepare during the summer.

10 games, not 11

There was no concern with their size nor the expansion draft.

The team's track record this season is that the young prospects or Utica call-ups practise with the team for at least a week before being eased into the lineups. They would also be pulled out of the lineups periodically for coaching reasons.