Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Honky Cat

Members
  • Posts

    8,299
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Honky Cat

  1. Again, the 'turning it around ' comment was based on the 2013-14 Canucks, not turning the franchise around...Higgins ,Burrows and Hansen were never going to get a whole lot (especially with their salaries) The point of turning it around was to compete for the newly signed Sedins.The team had indicated that there was' not' going to a rebuild months before Benning was even hired. They were not going to trade pieces that were going to keep them competitive, so all this talk of weaponizing cap space, and collecting draft picks was never in the cards. We missed the playoffs 4 years in a row? while transitioning to a new core.How many years does it take in your mind to completely transition a core ? .Look around the league and see how long other teams have (or currently) missed the post season during a transition period. More than anything it just demonstrates that you're an impatient fan.
  2. The core was aged out, and we had a barren prospect pool (Torts, "slow and stale").This was going to take more than 2-3 years to fix. That 2014-15 team was not a 'good' team. This was completely clear to all, after being easily dispatched by the Flames One more time.Who are these great assets we had which were moveable after the 2014-15 season?.
  3. We were talking about the beginning of the 2014-15 season.Torts had tanked a lot of value of players on the team (an ageing core and barren prospect pool) The acquisition of Vrbata and Bonino had a big part in the success of that season.which was the final last gasp of the 2011 core After we were eliminated by the Flames, it was apparent to me that this core was cooked... Who in your mind, from that 2014-15 squad, had lots of value?..and could be traded?
  4. You've placed a couple of quotes out of context 'This is a team we can turn around in a hurry' Benning was referencing the 2013-14 Canucks, and he did indeed 'turn it around' into a 101 point playoff team. The second quote you can sort of hold him accountable for,.by year 5 he assembled one of the best young cores in the league, and got to the 2nd round in the playoffs. This season (especially the first 15 games) have been brutal, I think the last 4 games is more indicative of how they can play.
  5. In my mind, there were bad transactions, but considering the mandate in the first 3, I give him a slight pass He has to take responsibility for the current lack of cap flexibility, (1/3 of NHL teams are scrambling to get under the cap.) He has drafted amazing players from unfavourable draft positions (in a fairly short amount of time). He's not brilliant, or a genius, but to call him terrible is asinine. my 2 cents.
  6. I'm not defending those transactions you listed, because obviously they were poor ones What I will say, is that they were made under the 'rebuild on the fly' where the mandate (Linden) was to compete for the Sedins.Its a known fact that Trevor was at the GM controls just as much as Benning. I take the the first 3 years of Bennings tenure as a gong show.The mandate was doomed to failure because they were a 101 point team and made the playoffs in Bennings first year.That was the cause and effect of the trying next two years. With a weak prospect pool, and core players withering from age..It was going to founder. Most posters that dislike GMJB usually pillory him for moves made in the first 3 years, as opposed to his last 3
  7. Its not a yes or no question,In 2014 Benning inherited a busting prospect in Markstrom. Yes, he inherited top 4 D men, some on their last legs, the best of the bunch being Edler and Tanev. No argument from that Benning couldn't find better D men in his tenure, but the price tag to trade for a legit top 4 would have been steep Having one impact player , and a busting goalie prospect in your prospect pool to show for 5 years of drafting is piss poor. If Gillis inherited that team, how many Presidents Trophies would he have won?
  8. Again, Markstrom was a failing prospect in 2014, passed through waivers the following year Most of the players here were 30+ at the time, their value tanked by the Torts season Tanev was the only impact player in his prime, Also, add in a barren prospect pool This was not going to be fixed in 2-3 years.
  9. I enjoyed that era of hockey as well, but can at least realize that 'context' matters.? Comparing the win/loss results column of both GM's does not tell the whole story. If Gillis inherited what Benning did in 2014, how many Presidents Trophies would he have won?, how many playoff rounds would he have won? One GM was brought in to take an underachieving elite core to the next level (which he did), the other was brought in to salvage what was left from an ageing core group, and start transitioning the old core, into a brand new one.
  10. If it was a matinee game, it has all the trappings of a previous good night on the town by the Flames players.
  11. There's plenty of things that Benning has failed at (having no flexibility with the cap?) You're just picking the wrong ones.
  12. They had the 3rd highest career amount of points in 2005-06
  13. He didnt win the lottery and picked some amazing players in unfavourable draft positions.
  14. Front office staff move greener pastures, happens all the time. He did a good job here, but then again, Brackett demonstrated nothing until Benning arrived and revamped the way the scouts identify players.
  15. Thats not the point, claiming Markstrom as a commodity in 2014 is false His outstanding goaltending wouldnt emerge till 5 years down the road.
  16. The whole Gillis 'couldn't draft after the first round' because he was too busy chasing Stanley Cups, is a crock. LA Kings and the Blackhawks were just as elite as the Canucks (2008-12) Kings,.Pearson,Colin Miller,Toffoli,Forbort,Clifford,Nolan,Dowd,Voynov,Martinez..Many of these players would play a key part in their SC wins Hawks,.Motte,Saad,Danault,Hayes,Nordstrom,Pirri,Hinostroza
  17. 24 year old Markstrom was a failing prospect in 2014, who cleared waivers in 2015.(and nobody would have really cared if he got claimed) 24 year old Tanev was the only impact player in his prime years on the entire team in 2014 Horvat is the only impact player to show for 5 years of drafting (imagine if he's missed out on Bo?)
  18. No argument that the talent level drops off. Gillis struck out on all his late 1sts. The barren prospect pool he left behind is evidence of that. Turning a position of strength (goaltending) in an organization,into a weakness is astute?
  19. The Canucks drafting record 2008-13 is one of the worst stretches in modern NHL history You dont have to pick high, LA Kings and the Blackhawks were also elite at the same time as the Canucks, and both found impact players throughout the draft. Even when the Canucks picked Horvat,every single Canuck pick from that draft busted.
  20. All the scouts try to sell their favourite players to the GM, this really isn't news If all the scouts are unanimously liking the same guy all the time,our scouting system would be broken Debate over players is natural. JB made the executive decision, and picked the right guy, good story.
  21. Other than Horvat, what players did Brackett discover from 2008-13? Who implemented a new system of identifying players to all the scouts in 2014?
  22. Brackett has been a scout for the Canucks since 2008, what did he do before JB arrived on the scene ? Do you have a source that Delorme had to convince JB? JB makes the executive decision on the players in the first round
  23. This is true It almost seems like its fuelled by the 1040 firings Like misspent rage. Patrick Johnson,Drance,Dayal are all piling on Once the Province starts putting in 'complaining ' letters from disgruntled fans who are cancelling seasons tickets, jumping ship to the Kraken etc..You know somethings afoot.
×
×
  • Create New...