HighOnHockey
-
Posts
1,874 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by HighOnHockey
-
-
1 hour ago, janisahockeynut said:
I keep asking................what is the one position we do not have a key player in
The answer is...............a Right Hand Dman
The next question is....................
When is the next time we will be in position to go after one?
So lets do it!
Pretty much whenever we want. But we already talked about Cernak is probably off the table. I know you like Braden Schneider, but wouldn't be high on my list. Not sure who else might be available. Damon Severson would be the guy I'd be pushing hard for. Perhaps Jersey feels they are still somewhat early in the rebuild and his best years are being wasted there. Henri Jokiharju is another one I'd like to make a strong push for, but doubt Buffalo would part with him. And the other guy I mentioned before that would be a huge add for the Canucks would be Mackenzie Weegar.
-
OK I've ranted and raved enough about Eklund lately, now lets look at the reasons he could fall to 9th overall.
He didn't have it quite as bad as the OHL players, but Eklund's draft rankings have been drastically effected by covid. Being a late birthday, he was eligible for last year's U18s, which were cancelled, and not this year's. And then he missed World Juniors because he tested positive for covid. He did get to play a full season in SHL and he actually excelled, but if he'd had the opportunity to play amongst his peers he could have dominated on an international stage. As things stand, teams will have to rely mainly on their European scouts and video, but those 10+ games between U18s and U20s for GMs and head scouts to see him live for themselves would have made a big difference
While there's a lot to like about his skating, there's some things not to like. His first couple steps could use more power, and his top speed is very good, but not elite.
He has good lower body strength and is tough to knock off his feet, but lack of upper body strength makes it tough to win puck battles at the pro level, but he often still finds a way with his smarts and quickness. He has good positioning and an active stick defensively, but he needs to continue to learn to be more deceptive from a defensive standpoint - he's not much of a difference-maker on the forecheck.
In the offensive zone, he certainly has the ability to read and react to make plays in tight spaces, but I'd like to see him take the puck into those high-danger scoring areas more often. He has no hesitations to get in around the net and battle without the puck, and actually scores some really nifty deflection goals, but when he has the puck he's often too responsible and cautious to maintain possession first and then looks to make plays to the net with his passing rather than carrying it to the inside himself.
-
1
-
1
-
-
17 minutes ago, Nurnge said:
Sorry some of the ones I was recalling were older some were mock but these I just looked at and they all had them above the others McKeen's final , draft analyst , the hockey writers and sportsnet . when is McKenzie's final coming out I thought he said it would be out early last week
I would assume shortly after the Stanley Cup Finals finish. Right now everyone is interested in the Finals, after they're over people are hockey hyped with nothing else to talk about so it's the perfect time. Looking back to 2019 it was June 17, so that sounds about right.
-
1
-
-
16 minutes ago, Nurnge said:
Powers , Beniers and Johnson having the three all play at U of Michigan will that skew how teams might look at each of these players one way or another . Keep recalling how OJ was talked about by many his draft year being on the powerhouse junior team and should have been a lower pick . I am an OJ fan and I am still hoping he gets a full summer in gets to where his talent level could be .
I expect anybody listed on most ranking Could go 3-9 in any order but 1&2 look like that would stay top 2 . Long winded is there any chance either Powers or Beniers start dropping and how far . Still remember them showing Vilardi after every pick as he just kept dropping
Not sure what rankings you're going off of, but the two rankings that best reflect what NHL teams might be thinking are NHL Central Scouting and Bob McKenzie's scout survey. Obviously Bob McKenzie's is by far the best indicator because it is an actual survey of NHL scouts. NHL central scouting's stated intention is to support NHL teams, so they tend to value the things NHL teams value - size, pro-translatability, safe picks. Also, they have actual scouts who formerly worked for NHL teams, vs. the media scouting services and bloggers, which are lower quality scouting amateurs.
We'll see what Bob McKenzie's final rankings say, but his mid-season rankings had Beniers 4th, and Central's final rankings have Beniers 6th in North America, so I'm not sure where this idea comes from that Beniers is consensus number two.
-
1 hour ago, Sp3nny said:
I said it a number of pages back now, but he has been my #1 for a while for these exact reasons. He looks like a game breaker to me. I love his hockey sense, and his speed through the neutral zone is really good. I don't think his size will reduce his effectiveness much. We can dream!
Yeah, interestingly, my most trusted prospect source over on HF had Eklund first overall since pretty early in the season. I had him third on my last list but only about four viewings, so when you said you have him first too I knew I needed to see more. Found these 5NU18 games and I think I'm convinced. I'm seriously considering him for first overall.
-
5 minutes ago, Alflives said:
We might get lucky and Eklund falls to us. Imo this is exactly the kind of play driving (and smart without the puck too) winger who would perfectly compliment Bo. I think he might even play right away. Lighter guy, but very smart.
Lol, yeah, you never know, he could fall to nine. There could be some rip in the spacetime continuum that opens a dimensional vortex gateway and... I dunno. Anything is possible, right?
-
1
-
-
I've been complaining about not enough available footage on Eklund for someone who is/ought to be in serious contention for first overall. Managed to find two Sweden games from the 2019 fall 5 nations U18s. As one of the youngest and smallest players on the team, he was playing on the third line. One of the things you just love to see from a player is that you always recognize them on the ice. You don't need to be watching for him, as soon as he gets the puck on his stick and starts moving around you're like "oh, there's Eklund." I mentioned recently he needs to add more power to his skating, but not by all that much. Give him three strides and he's going, it's just that first step or two could use more oomph. And reminiscent of a Stranges, Drysdale or Amirov from last year's draft, he accelerates beautifully in any direction. I mean, of course nobody will ever be Antonio Stranges, but man Eklund is a treat to watch move around the ice in his own right.
His hockey IQ is off the charts, but it's not just how well he thinks the game, but how quickly he thinks the game - most prospects have major issues making the jump from junior to pro mostly because of the increase in pace, but you can see why Eklund made such a seamless transition. It's like the game slows down for him when he has the puck on his stick, and he can do multiple things in a single instant - reading the play and reacting with both his hands and feet simultaneously before most players would know what is happening.
He's also very intelligent, committed and responsible in his own zone. Sure the size will be a bit of a problem in the NHL but the number of times he's lifted sticks to prevent scoring chances around his own net in this one game I watched so far today, lets just say it's abnormal.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
35 minutes ago, Sp3nny said:
Do you (or anyone for that matter) think Guenther is as good as his small WHL sample size this year indicates? I made a post a while back about his shooting % being potentially inflated, and also about some high scoring games he was in (he had three 4-point games, which meant 25% of games played were 4-point, along with a couple 3-point nights). I'm not trying to pick him apart, it's just hard when you are dealing with a small sample size, which isn't their fault, it's just the hand that they and we as amateur scouts, have been dealt this draft.
Reason I ask is I haven't been overly impressed with him in my viewings, and I'm thinking it must be me by this point as many have nothing but stellar things to say.
Not as good as the WHL sample indicates, no. Two points per game in any CHL league for a 17 year old makes for a first overall pick generally. Edmonton was a powerhouse this year, which worked perfectly for Guenther, who is at his best as a complimentary offensive player.
He's not one of my favorite players in the draft - think I have him ranked 8 or 9, but he's just about as safe a pick as there is in the draft. And given how risk-averse NHL teams tend to be, I expect he'll go a little earlier than I have him ranked. Not the most exciting player in the class, but I see him as turning out something along the lines of players like Nino Niederreiter, Kyle Palmieri, T.J. Oshie, Alex Killorn, with Max Pacioretty as a kind of ceiling. But I believe the closest comparison will be Palmieri.
-
2
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Dazzle said:
You did support the Petey pick. I remember going through the thread several times and your name didn't stick out like some people's, like messier's elbow. LOL. Well, to his credit, he realized the error of his ways and recanted what he said after about an hour or so.
It's actually surprising that the most negative of the posters of the pick aren't usually found here - HFBoards is a cesspool.
Yeah I dunno how many people would remember, but there was a time when HF was the place for intelligent, reasonable discussion among people who closely follow the draft and prospects. Makes me think of the movie Social Network, in that they followed the Facebook model - make it the cool spot for smart people first, and then the masses followed. There are still some incredibly insightful, informed people over there, but they're drowning in the swamp.
-
1
-
1
-
-
10 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:
True, one tournament doesn't define a player though. This guy seems to do everything goal scoring wise very well in addition to playing a complete game, with a wicked shot.
I would rather take Sillinger or Johnson than Lambos, or dropping down. My philosophy is one higher ranked player has a better chance of panning out than two lower ones. Although this draft I wouldn't be terribly upset with a Cueleman's and Svechkov / Raty / Sillinger type situation and then snagging another RD with our second like Morrow or Bar I guess.
I've said before,I thought Guenther's U18 was under-rated. He's not flashy, but does all the little things right. As I put it, where his teammates were getting credit for scoring goals off the high cycle, Guenther was the guy parked in front of the net. Where his linemates got the credit for getting in hard on the forecheck to casue a turnover, he was the man back in perfect position to eliminate passing lanes.
Guenther's season even on paper may look strange at first glance, but it made perfect sense to me. In the WHL amongst older, bigger, stronger, wiser players on average, his hockey IQ and mature style of play allowed him to thrive, but at the U18s where players are smaller and weaker and not as familiar with playing higher-level defensive systems, but on average more purely skilled, it makes sense that Guenther wouldn't stand out as much.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
52 minutes ago, Dazzle said:
Oh gawd, yeah. Some people heard about Pettersson being good, but his size was definitely a concern. Others thought Pettersson was going to bust (HFBoards was pretty guilty of this). For those who knew about him, almost EVERY SINGLE LIST, minus one of them, did not have Pettersson at 5.
https://thehockeywriters.com/elias-pettersson-2017-nhl-draft-prospect-profile/
Another list here:
http://www.mynhldraft.com/2017-draft/2017-nhl-draft-rankings
Hockey Prospect nailed the 2017 draft for the first 5 picks.
So therefore, for TGokou to claim he had Pettersson at 5 is completely bollocks. Even if Pettersson was thought to be good, some posters thought he would mostly be available when traded down. In other words, Pettersson at 5 was considered a reach.
Obviously, the Canucks were more than comfortable with the guy, given how he had been scouted by Vancouver early on.
I wasn't following the draft super close that year, and don't seem to have even made a list, but I distinctly remember being confused when people were so appalled with the pick. I'd seen Pettersson at U18s and U20s and he very clearly stood out with his skill both times. Not saying I would have ranked or taken him at five, but I remember at the time of the pick it seemed pretty natural to me.
Man seeing all those lists one after another just conforming with Patrick and Hischier over Makar, Heiskanen, Pettersson. A great reminder that in a draft like this where there's no obvious superstars and lots of question marks, you're better off to just trust yourself than go along with the hive.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, flickyoursedin said:
Raty is going to whichever pick the Hurricanes have. They love picking fins.
Well their director of European scouting behind those picks, Robert Kron, is now gone to Seattle. As is the director of amateur scouting, Tony MacDonald. As is their GM, Ron Francis.
-
1
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Beary Sweet said:
I'm curious if we go with a kid like Raty at our pick. He's had a slow start this season playing in the Finnish league he was projected to be a top 5 pick last season before the year he had. Sure, he hasn't been clicking but he's a center who I believe can play the wing as well if needed. But, he still has the potential to be the best player in the draft. There's risk involved but sometimes you have to take one in order to grab the best player in the draft. Look at Podz for instance with the last 1st rounder we had and used. Should've been a top 5 pick but because he still had a contract with his Russian team, teams were afraid to take him. Now, he's looking like a star the way he's been able to play when it matters most when he was with SKA. Anywho, this is a wide open draft and hopefully we grab another stud
Completely different situations. Podkolzin fell because of the Russian factor. Raty is falling because people realized he's just not as good as they thought. This is not a big sudden revelation either. It was just Craig Button and a few high-profile names that had him high, cus the media needs to figure out a name to hype. I remember reading from some very smart prospect people last summer saying that Raty would go nowhere close to first overall.
I always try to find a way to get excited about whoever my teams pick, but I would be pretty disappointed with Raty.
-
1
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, TGokou said:
I apply this theory to both forwards and defensemen. I have just noticed a more consistent trend within defensemen. I typically bias drafting a forward with the high 1st round pick because I find there is a higher bust/2nd pairing potential with defenseman. With a late round 1st or 2nd round pick I typically bias towards drafting defensemen as there are many top pairing defensemen drafted in that range based on history. This is where I find it benefits if you skew towards the late birthdays as you can find gems in this area that were bypassed in the 1st round because they haven't yet shown the ability to defend at a high level. In case you were wondering I have compared many players and based on the early - late birthday stats I find the general statline is most players tend to improve 20-30% on their stats in that time frame. In other words let's say a player born in July has 40 pts in any given league. I would multiply that by 1.25x to give a comparable to a player born in October-December.
Full disclosure, I have often missed some really good players in my draft ranking because I rank the early birthdays too low. This is why Adam Gaudette and Tyler Madden never would've shown up on my radar. Here are some examples of who I would have drafted based on my criteria.
2014 Nikolaj Ehlers
2015 I did not have a pick this year (don't remember why)
2016 Matthew Tkachuk
2017 Elias Pettersson (Note : Pettersson was an early birthday but his Allvenskan stats were too good to ignore) - Gabe Vilardi was also very high based on my criteria but the injuries scared me off
2018 - Noah Dobson - Dobson's birthday falls in January so I don't deduct him or give him an advantage. Right now Quinn Hughes looks like the better choice although that could still change as he's looked really good with the Islanders.
2019 - I believe I had forgotten that Podkolzin was available and really wanted Caufield. Podkolzin is a June birthday but his stats scared me off as I find it very difficult to run stats if there are no stats to work off of. This is where my analytics can easily fall short. I would also argue it doesn't really help for this year either as the sample size is too small in most cases.
2019 - 2nd round - Nicholas Robertson was my #1 choice here because he was literally 4 days away from being 2020 eligible. Early returns suggest Hoglander will be the better choice here.
2020 - No 1st or 2nd round pick so I had no interest in the draft
2021 - Like I said the stats are too small of a sample size to make a great selection here. Instead I will predict who might be the best player of the draft and I'm going to say Luke Hughes based on his production and birthday. I would also highly rate Pastujov based on the same criteria although I suspect he will be drafted in the teens.
Edit: I also have Corson Ceulemans rated highly because of this criteria.
You've still yet to acknowledge the Malcom Gladwell claim someone mentioned that seems to directly contradict your theory. Just from the Wikipedia synopsis:
"The book begins with the observation that a disproportionate number of elite Canadian hockey players are born in the earlier months of the calendar year. The reason behind this is that since youth hockey leagues determine eligibility by the calendar year, children born on January 1 play in the same league as those born on December 31 in the same year. Because children born earlier in the year are statistically larger and more physically mature than their younger competitors, and they are often identified as better athletes, this leads to extra coaching and a higher likelihood of being selected for elite hockey leagues."
The argument seems to make sense. Without looking into the actual data he will provide in the book, I'm fairly confident his research and sources will be much better than your "just look up a random selection of defensemen" or "it's pretty much just common knowledge among scouts [says me]."
-
2
-
-
26 minutes ago, brbetts542 said:
This is not a theory. It’s widely known in the scouting industry and is common sense, in my opinion....If it helps, try thinking about it more along the lines of mining value from draft eligible players that aren’t quite as developed and have, on average, been a whole 6 months behind in age compared to their peers.
Or just read outliers by Malcolm Gladwell.
Wait, what? You just seem to be making the argument that there is more room for development for summer birthday players at the time they are drafted. Everyone knows that the youngest players at the draft on average have more room for improvement. This doesn't logically entail TGoku's claim that most of the best players are born in that date range. In fact, I looked up the synopsis to the book you mentioned, and it seems to claim exactly the opposite, that "a disproportionate number of elite Canadian hockey players are born in the earlier months of the calendar year."
-
1
-
-
55 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:
it could be a lot of fun to see a line with McTavish and Gadjovich tho... it would look like a crazed lumberjack line. Might scare the $&!# out of some teams to see two big bearded kids coming at them.
Need Podkolzin on the other wing. Reminds me of Boston's 700 pound line from 2003: Mike Knuble - Joe Thornoton - Glenn Murray. It was a big man's game back then.
-
2
-
1
-
-
7 minutes ago, 73 Percent said:
So question about kent Johnson.
How good is he doing the other center stuff? Faceoffs? Defensive game?
Did he mainly play center last year or is it like a stamkos situation?
He played full-time with Matt Beniers on the second line. Beniers was the center. Johnson was 8 for 16 on draws for the season. Good chance Beniers and Bordeleau are both back next season so he's likely stuck on the wing again. He's solid defensively but not exactly a standout. Smart money is on him being primarily a winger in the NHL.
-
1
-
1
-
-
42 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said:
Which player(s) in the Top 10 are most likely to be a bust?
30 minutes ago, Alflives said:Geunther, Edvinsson and Johnson
Incorrect. Edvinsson would obviously be top of the list, and Johnson, sure, I can see the argument there. But not Guenther. Of course there's a chance anyone busts, but the chance for Guenther to is one of the lowest in the draft.
Of course it depends what you mean by "bust". Some rough comparables are T.J. Oshie, Nino Niederreiter, Alex Killorn, Max Pacioretty, Kyle Palmieri. If he's picked in the top two or three, and develops along the weaker end of that list, that probably wouldn't be the best pick (a la Niederraiter), but if he somehow falls to 9, that's about as safe a pick as you're gonna get.
Obviously if one of the goalies goes top ten, they would have to rank high on likely bust candidates. Nothing against either of them, but it's just the nature of the position.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, TGokou said:
Sure you could say he's a year younger. I say he's closer to a year older. Fact remains that those born in September - January of their draft year tend to have a lower upside potential compared to their draft eligible peers drafted April - August. This is particularly pronounced with top pairing defensemen in the NHL for whatever reason. If you don't believe me pull a random assortment of the best defensemen in the league and I guarantee you a high probability will be from those birth month I highlighted. I find this indicator less reliable for forwards but still applies.
Lol. you're right that Marv wasn't precise in his statement, but this isn't something that is open to interpretation or debate. In his D-1 season he was a few months younger than those other players mentioned. Now in his draft season he's closer to a year older. That's how late birthdays work.
As for your April-August theory, it is a neat theory, but "pull a random assortment of the best defensemen in the league" does not make a fact. Just off the top of my head, Cale Makar, Victor Hedman, Seth Jones were late birthdays. Not saying you're wrong, but I would need a much better argument to be convinced.
-
1
-
-
28 minutes ago, DontMessMe said:
He has 3 points cuz the team doesnt play the guy
Lol this has been posted many times with similar comments. I still haven't watched it, but do they give any explanation as to why the team doesn't play him?
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Marv-the-wet-bandit said:
A lot of prospects don’t develop the way you’d hope they would. But if you get a guy that doesn’t meet or exceed expectations but is a player that contributes that’s not a bust, is it disappointing? Sure but not a bust. If you take a guy like Yakupov that’s out of the league after a few years then it’s a bust. The goal is to find players that play, obviously in the best case scenario these guys reach their potential but that doesn’t happen all that often. When you see the comparables these players get on draft day it’s ridiculous and makes it hard for players to reach their lofty expectations. I absolutely love Kent Johnson and he’s who I want at 9 but Button saying his comparable is Pettersson is crazy, if that was truly his comparable then he’d be going 1. Raffi Torres isn’t who you ideally want at 5 overall, you’d prefer a Jagr but he still played a role so I don’t think that can be considered a bust but a Griffin Reinhart at 4 is certainly a bust
OK, fine, not a "bust". I'm not all that interested in the terminology. But you know it's not just bust or player. If you're a GM, you need to hold your scouts accountable. Picks need to be not just players, but players worthy of (or exceeding) their draft position. GMs and scouting directors are keeping close track of which scouts say what, and if they just get an NHL depth player with a top five pick, someone needs to be held accountable. Likewise if an area scout pushes for a player in later rounds who ends up being a steal, it gets noticed. A good example of how scouts' prestige works is the concept of "crossover scouts". It isn't just scouting directors at the top and then the rest. Lower level scouts are assigned to specific regions, and then the most trusted scouts also get assigned to do crossover between regions. This way, at the scouting meetings, the area scouts will give their breakdowns of players in their regions and then the higher ranking crossover scouts are more responsible for actually comparing prospects across regions to arrange the order, and then the area scouts can push for certain players to move up or down.
I get the point you're making, and I'm sure it is important for some people to hear, but my point is that there absolutely are better and worse picks, and it is important for teams to assess the quality of their scouts' picks and each scout is always moving up or down the ladder based on the relative success or failure of their evaluations.
-
1
-
2
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Alflives said:
So the Hawks, when in their rebuild, picking Skillie at 8 and Barker at three had bad scouts? Those same scouts drafted their three Cup winning key players during that same time. All teams have misses during their rebuilding drafts. It’s wether the scouts can find players with later picks to cover for those misses that’s key. Benning, and his staff, have covered Jake and OJ with Hoglander and Bone. Plus we got Demko in round two. We have several good young prospects coming along too, who will be pushing for spots ove4 the next few seasons. We actually look really good. Thinking we aren’t drafting really well is:
Dude. Do I really need to spell this out? I was actually thinking about addressing this in my original post, but I think my posts tend to run long enough, imagine if I was going to anticipate every possible ridiculous interpretation. A failed pick is just that. No more, no less. Great scouts, great scouting staffs have them sometimes.
-
2
-
-
5 hours ago, Marv-the-wet-bandit said:
A bust is someone who doesn’t play or contribute to a team. Turris wasn’t a star but he was far from a bust, a responsible defensive C that averaged .56 points a game. With your logic someone like Manny Malhotra is a bust because he was drafted at 7 and didn’t produce offensively like you’d hope. If you draft a guy and he plays limited games or doesn’t do anything to help the team, sure he’s a bust, but everyone you draft (regardless of where they were drafted) that plays regularly and contributes to the team isn’t a bust at all. Might not be a home run pick but you just need to find players that help each year and hit a couple home runs in between
I have to disagree with you both here. I mean, maybe we're just arguing terminology and "bust" isn't exactly the correct term for Manny Malhotra, Ryan Murray, Sam Bennett, Alex Galchenyuk, Erik Johsnon, Ryan Nugent-Hopkins, but draft positioning needs to be taken into account relative to success. If you're a contending team and you're picking well into the 20s every year, then yeah you're happy to just get solid NHL players most of the time, but if you're picking in the top 5 or 10 and getting the same players, that is a failure of your scouting staff.
-
1
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, N4ZZY said:
Yeah. I think Johnson has a higher chance of boom or bust than McTavish does. McTavish to me, if he doesn’t fulfill and live up to his potential, then he can still be a middle six to bottom six player. Johnson, I don’t know if he can play a bottom six role.
I've mentioned this before, but this would be an appropriate time to throw it out there again: I think the "bust" element with Johnson is overstated. He's a hard-working kid who cares about playing defense, and his biggest weakness is he tries too hard to be a difference-maker. The team that drafts Johnson is going to be hoping for something along the lines of Giroux or William Nylander, but he's always reminded me in different ways of Kyle Turris and Jonathan Drouin. Point is, even if he doesn't turn out quite the way fans hope he will, I think he could still find a way to be a valuable NHL player.
-
1
-
2
-
2021 NHL Entry Draft
in Prospects / Farm Team
Posted · Edited by HighOnHockey
Lol yeah I figured. But what better way to respond to rhetoric than the truth?
Yeah Severson wouldn't be the best option. Didn't realize he will be 27 in August and a year away from UFA.
See this is where I think the problem is - a loser mentality. Same reason so many people here are so obsessed with tanking to get the highest picks, even though Benning has shown a remarkable knack for getting impact-to-elite level players with picks outside the top 5. He actually kinda has better success with picks 10-40 than he does 1-9. But it's this same idea that "well we could never get an elite young defenseman through trade. The only way to do it is to absolutely suck and get a top pick." Absolute loser mentality. Not calling you or anyone a loser, but I feel like it is just kinda in the air around the Canucks - being one of the longest running Cupless teams with three Finals losses can do that.
When Rutherford came in to Pittsburgh and made a major play to land Kessel, he had already won a Cup with Carolina in 2006. Didn't work out as well for Burke in Toronto, but he knew it could because he'd done it once before with Anaheim. Dean Lombardi was another one who went out and made $&!# happen with L.A. in 2012; he didn't have a Cup with San Jose but he had built them from a basement dwelling expansion team to a perennial contender, increasing their point totals for 6 consecutive seasons. Doug Armstrong, another one that eventually made aggressive moves to put St. Louis over the top. He had been AGM of Dallas' '99 Cup team.
That's where Benning comes in: like Armstrong, he was an AGM to a Cup winner, and like Armstrong, he has been biding his time, doing things "the right way" mostly - although adding Miller was a fairly bold move. But as others have mentioned, Horvat is 26. Demko is about to be 26. We're going to have to find out pretty damn soon what Benning is really made of.