What style of play do you see Benning taking the team in the future

[canacks1970]

We don't however the pieces to have the speed in the line up. In the minny game we were clearly outskated by them leading to many turnovers, and grade A scoring chances. Kenins, Maithas and Hansen are our only fast skaters up to this point.

Yes and Rome wasn't built in a day!! You asked us what kind of team J.B was trying to build for the future and that's what Nuck nit told you from J.B first news conference. I'm pretty sure Benning is well aware of what this team needs but it doesn't mean he's going to change his plans because he doesn't have the pieces now.

[Ronalds.Kenins41]

Yes and Rome wasn't built in a day!! You asked us what kind of team J.B was trying to build for the future and that's what Nuck nit told you from J.B first news conference. I'm pretty sure Benning is well aware of what this team needs but it doesn't mean he's going to change his plans because he doesn't have the pieces now.

I wouldn't mind either style tbh.

[Crabcakes]

Character

[DownUndaCanuck]

This coming deadline and off season will be especially telling, considering so many of our defencemen are RFAs. I think he wants a balanced defence with equal number of righties/lefties and offensive/defensive defencemen which is a pretty good way to build chemidtry amongst pairings.

As for up front, looks like two-way forwards are the way you win Cups these days and Benning knows it. He's got Horvat to stary with as a freebie, then took McCann whp plays a similar two way game. Virtanen over Nylander just shows that Benning wants size in his forward group too.

I think we're going to see a pseudo-sort of Bruins 2011/Kings team in the next few seasons. The Sedins will slowly be phased out and as they're playing third line minutes, we'll see great two way players taking their time (IMO the biggest reason we lost the cup was our poor defence from forwards). This is also why Jensen and Shinkaruk are still in minors - they need to develop their defensive game far more, and they're both capable of it.

Good defence from your forwards is in the playoffs, Benning knows it and thats how he's (or should be) buildimg this team.

[BanTSN]

The great teams can play ANY style. That way they cannot be out-coached, out-muscled, out-skated, out-skilled, etc. They will take the style of the opponent and beat the opponent over the head with it.

To get that team, you of course need as many great players as possible, and they all have to buy into being able to play any style, as a complete team.

It is FAR more important to assemble these players than it is to dictate the style of hockey they play.

The Canucks have aways to go before they can be in the position noted above. This is why opponents are dictating the style of play and the Canucks have adjusted rather poorly against a lot of teams this season and really since 2011.

For example, Chicago was behind 2 goals in the third? The Canucks, if effective, should have easily been able to lock that down. Instead, Chicago dominated the third and came back. They have the players with the extra gear required for that. The Hossa highlight goal, blowing by Tanev, who's one of our faster d-men, was indicative of how underskilled we are compared to them, but this isn't shocking.

Then the Winnipeg game... Winnipeg isn't a great team by any stretch, but they have a few physical players. Those few physical players took it to the Canucks all night long and even injured one or two. The Canucks, if effective, should have been able to counter than with some physicality of their own. Instead, they took their lumps and got the win at great physical cost. In a playoff series it looks like the Canucks would have collapsed due to injury. Shades of 2011.

There isn't any secret here. You need truly great players to win. The system a substandard team choses to implement is irrelevant windowdressing.

[Ronalds.Kenins41]

The great teams can play ANY style. That way they cannot be out-coached, out-muscled, out-skated, out-skilled, etc. They will take the style of the opponent and beat the opponent over the head with it.

To get that team, you of course need as many great players as possible, and they all have to buy into being able to play any style, as a complete team.

It is FAR more important to assemble these players than it is to dictate the style of hockey they play.

The Canucks have aways to go before they can be in the position noted above. This is why opponents are dictating the style of play and the Canucks have adjusted rather poorly against a lot of teams this season and really since 2011.

For example, Chicago was behind 2 goals in the third? The Canucks, if effective, should have easily been able to lock that down. Instead, Chicago dominated the third and came back. They have the players with the extra gear required for that. The Hossa highlight goal, blowing by Tanev, who's one of our faster d-men, was indicative of how underskilled we are compared to them, but this isn't shocking.

Then the Winnipeg game... Winnipeg isn't a great team by any stretch, but they have a few physical players. Those few physical players took it to the Canucks all night long and even injured one or two. The Canucks, if effective, should have been able to counter than with some physicality of their own. Instead, they took their lumps and got the win at great physical cost. In a playoff series it looks like the Canucks would have collapsed due to injury. Shades of 2011.

There isn't any secret here. You need truly great players to win. The system a substandard team choses to implement is irrelevant windowdressing.

There hasn't been a team with a balanced approach that has won anything. Major difference from 2010 to 2011 was our defense, but we still excelled more at offense then we did at D and it cost against Boston and LA. Detroit and Colarado are the closest but even they excelled more at offense then D and that was before the salary cap.

Benning is going to busy the next few years if he is trying to make a offensive team cause we just don't have the pieces. Although if he can pull it off, he will be made a god in this city.

[BanTSN]

But the thing is Pittsburgh can play just as defensively as LA/Boston now, and the LA Boston cup-winners could play as up-tempo as Pittsburgh/Chicago. These teams have the players that can adapt to the style needed to win. We don't, so agreed he will be made a God in this city if he can pull it off. But we need to be patient. Three out of the 4 teams there were horrible for years while collecting pieces and the other was pretty bad too.

[Ronalds.Kenins41]

But the thing is Pittsburgh can play just as defensively as LA/Boston now, and the LA Boston cup-winners could play as up-tempo as Pittsburgh/Chicago. These teams have the players that can adapt to the style needed to win. We don't, so agreed he will be made a God in this city if he can pull it off. But we need to be patient. Three out of the 4 teams there were horrible for years while collecting pieces and the other was pretty bad too.

But if you look at what they are known for, what comes more naturally you would find that they are like that.

In 2010-2011 we shutout Boston twice and Chicago once but our main identity was a finesse offence, good pp, combined with a bunch of fast grinders in Hansen, Raymond, Higgins and lapierre.

[aGENT]

Largely defensive/two way with size, speed and good (if not elite) skill on all four lines.

[Hugor Hill]

In short, the style that wins.

[Burnsey]

You want a full balance. Speed, skill, toughness and solid goaltending. Thats how you win. Right now, with the players we have we can't play the physical style (Boston, LA). We can play a more skill, which is why we can beat the skill teams but can't handle the physiciality.

You play the style that best fits the team. We have Sedins, Bonino, Burrows, Vrbata. We don't have the players that thrive on the physical side therefore why even bother trying to replicate that?

[hlinkas wrister]

The easy answer is the Boston model, but that was Chiarelli's team. Benning was obviously part of the success but who's to say he would have built the Bruins the way they were if he was the GM. I like the players from his first draft for sure, speed skill and grit never go out of style- even when the league decides to "move the goalposts".

[Crabcakes]

The Bruins are getting faster.

I think that Benning is adding a combination of faster players with big players. He's creating a team that can answer to all comers.

[Ronalds.Kenins41]

The Bruins are getting faster.

I think that Benning is adding a combination of faster players with big players. He's creating a team that can answer to all comers.

Cunningham was their only bright spot in terms of new fast players

[Ronalds.Kenins41]

The easy answer is the Boston model, but that was Chiarelli's team. Benning was obviously part of the success but who's to say he would have built the Bruins the way they were if he was the GM. I like the players from his first draft for sure, speed skill and grit never go out of style- even when the league decides to "move the goalposts".

[cripplereh]

Benning doesn't coach so he won't be taking the team in any style of play,what a bad title for a post!

[Ronalds.Kenins41]

Benning doesn't coach so he won't be taking the team in any style of play,what a bad title for a post!

No every Gm has a direction he wants his team to go in like gillis wanted us to be detriot model.

[Ronalds.Kenins41]

.

[Crabcakes]

Cripplereh

The President hires the GM and the GM hires the coach and they all work together. Everybody on the same page with the same vision and strategy. The GM builds the team, selects the players and the Coach is in charge of the play of the game. It's called organizational alignment and without it you have chaos. Kind of like Gillis and Torts.

[aqua59]

What kind if team did Benning say he was building? No one remembers what he and the rest of the managements goals are . No one listens