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

Benning rebuild on the fly.


BMorrison 7

Recommended Posts

I agree.

However, this time I have reasons to believe that this ship is finally going in the right direction. Jim Benning is a master at drafting. Last year, the Canucks drafted Virtanen, but they didn't draft McCann; Benning did.

BENNING'S DRAFT RECORD

BUFFALO - DIRECTOR OF AMATEUR SCOUTING ( 1998 - 2004 )

Picks that worked out

1998 - BUF - 1/18 - D - Dimitri Kalinin

1998 - BUF - 2/34 - LW - Andrew Peters

1998 - BUF - 6/164 - RW - Ales Kotalik

1999 - BUF - 5/138 - G - Ryan Miller

2000 - BUF - 7/220 - C - Paul Gaustad

2001 - BUF - 2/32 - C - Derek Roy

2001 - BUF - 2/55 - RW - Jason Pomminville

2002 - BUF - 1/11 - D - Keith Ballard

2002 - BUF - 1/20 - LW - Daniel Paille

2002 - BUF - 8/241 - D - Denis Wideman

2003 - BUF - 1/5 - RW - Thomas Vanek

2003 - BUF - 3/74 - LW - Clarke McArthur

2003 - BUF - 4/106 - D - Jan Hejda

2004 - BUF - 1/13 - RW - Drew Stafford

BOSTON - ASSISTANT GM ( 2006 - 2014 )

Picks that worked out

2006 - BOS - 1/5 - C - Phil Kessel

2006 - BOS - 2/50 - LW - Mila Lucic

2006 - BOS - 3/71 - LW - Brad Marchand

2008 - BOS - 1/16 - Joe Colborne

2008 - BOS - 3/77 - G - Michael Hutchison

2010 - BOS - 1/2 - C - Tyler Seguin

2011 - BOS - 1/9 - D - Dougie Hamilton

Jim Benning's lifetime batting average at the draft is 21/103 (as of 2011).

20.39% of players drafted under Benning made it as regulars in the NHL.

An average of 1.6 players per year drafted by Benning make it to the NHL.

TOO EARLY TO TELL (2011 - )

2012 - BOS - 1/24 - G - Malcolm Subban

2012 - BOS - 3/85 - Matt Grzelcyk

2012 - BOS - 5/131 - RW - Seth Griffith

2012 - BOS - 5/145 - D - Cody Payne

2012 - BOS - 6/175 - D - Matthew Benning

2012 - BOS - 7/205 - F - Colton Hargrove

2013 - BOS - 2/60 - D - Linus Arnesson

2013 - BOS - 3/90 - RW - Peter Cehlarik

2013 - BOS - 4/20 - C - Ryan Fitzgerald

2013 - BOS - 5/150 - D - Wiley Sherman

2013 - BOS - 6/180 - LW - Anton Blidh

2013 - BOS - 7/210 - LW - Mitchell Dempsey

2014 - VAN - 1/6 - RW - Jake Virtanen

2014 - VAN - 1/24 - C - Jared McCann

2014 - VAN - 2/36 - G - Thatcher Demko

2014 - VAN - 3/66 - D - Nikita Tryamkin

2014 - VAN - 6/126 - D - Gustav Frosling

2014 - VAN - 6/156 - C - Kyle Pettit

2014 - VAN - 7/186 - D - MacKenzie Stewart

benning didn't join the bruins until after the 2006 draft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree.

However, this time I have reasons to believe that this ship is finally going in the right direction. Jim Benning is a master at drafting. Last year, the Canucks drafted Virtanen, but they didn't draft McCann; Benning did.

BENNING'S DRAFT RECORD

BUFFALO - DIRECTOR OF AMATEUR SCOUTING ( 1998 - 2004 )

Picks that worked out

1998 - BUF - 1/18 - D - Dimitri Kalinin

1998 - BUF - 2/34 - LW - Andrew Peters

1998 - BUF - 6/164 - RW - Ales Kotalik

1999 - BUF - 5/138 - G - Ryan Miller

2000 - BUF - 7/220 - C - Paul Gaustad

2001 - BUF - 2/32 - C - Derek Roy

2001 - BUF - 2/55 - RW - Jason Pomminville

2002 - BUF - 1/11 - D - Keith Ballard

2002 - BUF - 1/20 - LW - Daniel Paille

2002 - BUF - 8/241 - D - Denis Wideman

2003 - BUF - 1/5 - RW - Thomas Vanek

2003 - BUF - 3/74 - LW - Clarke McArthur

2003 - BUF - 4/106 - D - Jan Hejda

2004 - BUF - 1/13 - RW - Drew Stafford

BOSTON - ASSISTANT GM ( 2006 - 2014 )

Picks that worked out

2006 - BOS - 1/5 - C - Phil Kessel

2006 - BOS - 2/50 - LW - Mila Lucic

2006 - BOS - 3/71 - LW - Brad Marchand

2008 - BOS - 1/16 - Joe Colborne

2008 - BOS - 3/77 - G - Michael Hutchison

2010 - BOS - 1/2 - C - Tyler Seguin

2011 - BOS - 1/9 - D - Dougie Hamilton

Jim Benning's lifetime batting average at the draft is 21/103 (as of 2011).

20.39% of players drafted under Benning made it as regulars in the NHL.

An average of 1.6 players per year drafted by Benning make it to the NHL.

TOO EARLY TO TELL (2011 - )

2012 - BOS - 1/24 - G - Malcolm Subban

2012 - BOS - 3/85 - Matt Grzelcyk

2012 - BOS - 5/131 - RW - Seth Griffith

2012 - BOS - 5/145 - D - Cody Payne

2012 - BOS - 6/175 - D - Matthew Benning

2012 - BOS - 7/205 - F - Colton Hargrove

2013 - BOS - 2/60 - D - Linus Arnesson

2013 - BOS - 3/90 - RW - Peter Cehlarik

2013 - BOS - 4/20 - C - Ryan Fitzgerald

2013 - BOS - 5/150 - D - Wiley Sherman

2013 - BOS - 6/180 - LW - Anton Blidh

2013 - BOS - 7/210 - LW - Mitchell Dempsey

2014 - VAN - 1/6 - RW - Jake Virtanen

2014 - VAN - 1/24 - C - Jared McCann

2014 - VAN - 2/36 - G - Thatcher Demko

2014 - VAN - 3/66 - D - Nikita Tryamkin

2014 - VAN - 6/126 - D - Gustav Frosling

2014 - VAN - 6/156 - C - Kyle Pettit

2014 - VAN - 7/186 - D - MacKenzie Stewart

He never drafted Lucic. I like Benning but his draft record is just a bit above average it's not much better then Gillis, if at all...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really everybody, whatever your opinions happen to be:

If you honestly believe that tanking is the only way to rebuild properly, then do not complain about the following things:

1) Lack of a puck-moving defenseman. Apparently we are tanking, so we are not trying to build our existing team to do anything but lose.

2) Lack of scoring depth. Apparently we are tanking. See #1.

3) Carrying players with unfavourable cap hits. This just in - cap hits matter when you are trying to fit as many good players on to a WINNING TEAM as possible. If you are trying to tank, all that matters is asset accumulation.

4) Contracts to players like Sbisa and Dorsett. If they are not the answer, that helps your cause. But in order to stockpile picks from other teams you need assets to trade at the deadline or in the offseason. This involves HAVING PLAYERS UNDER CONTRACT. It involves signing people to contracts and hoping that they improve, so that you can move them for greater value.

5) NTCs. News flash. They limit where you can move people. But they also usually accompany contracts that are cap and cash friendly - making them more desirable provided the player is willing to move. Yes you have fewer trade options, but you also have higher trade value. They are not, I repeat, NOT, the unbelievable obstacle to trades that some people believe them to be. Kesler, Luongo, Garrison - all had NTCs given out by Gillis. All have been moved. Would you rather have Sbisa at 3.6 with no NTC, or at 3.0 with a NTC? The return that you get in a trade differs by very much.

6) Not playing Virtanen, McCann soon enough/enough minutes/whatever - apparently we are tanking, and don't want our players to burn years off their ELCS while we accumulate high picks. We also dont mind sitting guys in Utica for a few more years, because you can be 100% sure that the players agents will have a harder time negotiating if their clients haven't done much in the NHL.

If you believe that we can rebuild on the fly, please don't complain about the following things:

1) That we lost to Calgary in the first round. Apparently we are rebuilding, and this means that we are not going to be favorites every year.

2) That we are not drafting in the top 5 every year. Apparently we are trying to win. Winners are not aiming for first overall picks.

3) That if we we gamble on guys like Vey or Beartschi or Clendening, that is part of trying to acquire and develop assets, which is a part of rebuilding, which is not necessarily always going to be 100% compatible with winning.

4) That we don't already have a #1 PMD. Apparently these are hard to come by. They don't magically appear upon request, are not immediately available to be drafted or traded for, and may not choose to come here in free agency.

5) That the entire core has not been traded out already - rebuilding involves "building" - this includes building value in new players but also attempting to realize full value in existing players. All of Hamhuis, Bieksa, Bonino, Higgins, Miller, Edler, etc are all worth MORE after this season than they were coming off of last season. But they still may be worth more to the team than they can get in trade value, in which case they stay!

6) That we trade away "core" players. If you can get value for a Bieksa or a Hamhuis or a Lack, you have to do that trade. Don't whine about how they bleed blue and green. We are rebuilding. This means trying to acquire a new, young, competitive core of players.

***Note on #4 - If we still have no likely candidates for a #1 D five years from now, complain all you want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He is also aware that Calgary and Edmonton fill their buildings every game even when their in last place and haven't made the playoffs for years. He also knows that our fans not all of them but some of them would stop buying tickets and empty seats mean less money. Our fan base would put up with a blow it up for the future rebuild

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The talk about Chicago's and Anaheim's rebuilds on the fly aren't really appropriate comparisons. They rebuilt around their stars who were 1. Proven winners and 2. much younger. Neither of which can be said about our club or our stars, 3 playoff wins since the finals in 2011: the core is broken.

Benning was left with an unenviable task. A team with aging stars. little cap room, a boatload of NTC and no prospects ready to step in. Really who were his top two prospects in the low 20s looking to break onto the team, Corrado and Jensen neither of which has really won that role. Jensen looks more and more like he is going to be Europe bound for most of his career and Corrado will be with the team next year.

He needed to add young prospect/players in their early 20s, all he had were a couple very young quality prospects and slightly overripe vets on NTCs. Other GMs don't give those players away they are the lifeblood of the franchise. He was able to get some decent players like Vey, Clendening and Baertschi for draft picks. 2nd round draft picks only have what about a 20% chance of having significant NHL careers, these 3 have more like 40-50% chance but the ceiling isn't as potentially high, that is what the trade off is. When you have holes to fill that is what happens.

Benning's name seems to come up anytime better quality young players like Kane come on the market, which is not very often and there is a reason why. Quality young players just don't come on the market unless there is a reason.

Benning and Linden have said before that essentially first round picks go for the most talented guy, usually a forward. Quality D men can be found later. You now they are going to take more time to develop. More time to shave the warts off the frog.

I think we have seen Benning be very aggressive considering the climate of the current NHL. Clendenning and Sanguinetti were both attempts to address the PMD issue with younger guys that we are hoping can progress to the big club.

Essentially though the dark times are coming. We are stocking up now on decent young guys. Two first round picks in last two years, Baertschi also a recent first rounder. They will be getting ready to make it up to the big club regularly about the time the Sedins are nearing the end. At this point we will likely be dropping down near the bottom of the league for a couple years. Much better to be in a position where you are adding a high pick to a bunch of young up and comers than being where Toronto is where you are adding high pics over the next couple years to a thin talent pool and a toxic culture. That is how you become the Oilers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love the way Benning is targeting young talent. its how you end up with guys like Naslund and Bertuzzi. If he can hit a homerun with a Vey or Baertshi or Clendenning or another future guy we will be laughing and we will be singing his praises.

Where Benning will fail is with his cap management. I believe he is too nice, instead of being a hard negotiater he plays nice guy and gives players what he feels they deserve rather than try to get them for the cheapest. It happened woth Miller when he had no other suiters and with sbisa. It happened in Boston when he was there paying lucic 6mil and bottom 6mil guys much more than they're worth.

I think we are just so used to Gillis getting contracts signed cheap but that's because he handed out NTC's to players that had no business getting NTC's. Most players come to Vancouver and end up liking the city so you offer them stability with NTC's and get them to sign a cheaper contract.

I agree that Dorsett and Sbisa got a bit much but that's basically what's going to happen without offering up NTC's. In Dorsett's case, he had all the leverage so there was really nothing JB can do but to play nice. Also, financial reward is always a good way to motivate your employees and to let them know that you think highly of them, which will make them work harder (in theory).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I think we are just so used to Gillis getting contracts signed cheap but that's because he handed out NTC's to players that had no business getting NTC's. Most players come to Vancouver and end up liking the city so you offer them stability with NTC's and get them to sign a cheaper contract.

I agree that Dorsett and Sbisa got a bit much but that's basically what's going to happen without offering up NTC's. In Dorsett's case, he had all the leverage so there was really nothing JB can do but to play nice. Also, financial reward is always a good way to motivate your employees and to let them know that you think highly of them, which will make them work harder (in theory).

Dorsett is getting what he deserves. He may not score much but he brings the most intensity and was crucial to Horvats development.

Sbisa on the other hand may prove he deserves this salary. Some of u are too hard on him and only point out things he did wrong. I would have signed him for 1 year 2.5-3M and then maybe the 4.5 or w.e it is if he showed more progress. Still not disappointed. As long as were not stuck with the NTC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

L Lager has one key point > "The plan hasn't changed, the message is clear. Winning Culture."

Durameter another. We were ranked 18th overall in prospect talent recently. But before we injected Clendenning and Baertschi. We are ranked much higher. Does that really not leave us 8th or 10th? (That after being 28th or 29th just 2 years ago)

Then an anecdote: when Gillis started he was great with the big club, but horrible at drafting. And gave away so many picks. As we peaked; he did a 180... A lot of his on ice moves became questionable. Even good players he acquired (Garrison) did not really fit. We were also crucified in the media fishbowl with his attitude and blunders. From pumping up CoHo to trade him, to losing a staredown with Lou. It was such a distraction having leadership with no direction. But from 2012 on he actually left us a very solid list of drafted players, who now are a big part of that ^ vastly improved prospect pool.

Here is my real assessment;

Our forward group moving forward looks scary good! We have Kassian & Bo who are top 15 picks already on the team + 6 more first round picks lurking for a spot. Plus depth prospects like Grenier, Kenins, CASSELLS. And the Twins are still Top 25 in the world forwards with at least another year with Vrbata. That's good!

Our goaltending is close. And might even be more stacked in guys with upside? Forget Miller for a moment; we have Lack who is showing he is a starter on many NHL squads + not one, but two blue chip prospects. Maybe O'Connor as well? That's also good!

D is where we have assets, but questions. Both on the big club and in prospects. Yes we have good players who will have careers. Clendenning has the skills, but average athleticism. Subban the athleticism but not the size. Hutton may surprise, but needs a more mature game. I could go on, but we are looking to develop guys who had holes in their games at lower levels among some promising skills, into the stud D man we are already missing now. Odds are they will be complimentary players. Hamhuis is the only D in our system, big club or prospects, who is a first round pick. Our D needs an investment!

My only complaint with Trevor Benning > none of the noise we hear addresses the D!. I personally buy grooming our prospects in this winning culture. Among pro's and vets who teach people to compete, train, eat, breathe like a hockey player. I accept the 4 line concept they espouse. I buy the Twins are still valid, many of our other vets as well (where many on CDC have them in the pasture!). I am happy with the message as a whole, and our coach. But Babcock in Detroit will out and out tell you, he wants a horse for his back end!

Lets start adding some truly STUD D! By draft. By trade. By UFA. One each over this summer and next. We can be a contender!

And let me add this; we already "re-tooled" Schneider, Lou, Kesler and Garrison to inject new vitality. It has given us a shot in the arm. How long do guys want to go selling off the farm? :sick:

 

I agree with your assessment. One thing I can add is that we need to do what Chicago did a few years ago and that is to keep your top players intact and disassemble your fringe players. Retain the Miller's, Sedins and Edlers and get rid of the Higgins,Burrows, Hansen type players with young up and comers. IMO, Kenins could have easily replaced Dorsett this year. I am saying Edler though because we really do not have that Stud D-Man that is "untouchable" such as a Chara, Doughty or Pronger. If we look at what happened in the playoffs, players such as Dorsett, Matthias and Higgins did not perform enough for the team to win. Inserting our young hopefuls with the teams fringe players is a win win situation. It helps clear cap space and also gives the young guys NHL experience while the Sedin type players take on the brunt of the work load. I guess you could call this "on the fly" instead of a "rebuild" and makes the most sense out of all the other options.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  

I agree with your assessment. One thing I can add is that we need to do what Chicago did a few years ago and that is to keep your top players intact and disassemble your fringe players. Retain the Miller's, Sedins and Edlers and get rid of the Higgins,Burrows, Hansen type players with young up and comers. IMO, Kenins could have easily replaced Dorsett this year. I am saying Edler though because we really do not have that Stud D-Man that is "untouchable" such as a Chara, Doughty or Pronger. If we look at what happened in the playoffs, players such as Dorsett, Matthias and Higgins did not perform enough for the team to win. Inserting our young hopefuls with the teams fringe players is a win win situation. It helps clear cap space and also gives the young guys NHL experience while the Sedin type players take on the brunt of the work load. I guess you could call this "on the fly" instead of a "rebuild" and makes the most sense out of all the other options.

Kenins was not ready to replace Dorsett, I'd keep Derek till Ronny develops more. Kenins was a great call up, but it's clear he's not quite at full time NHL level yet. I agree, we need to drop the Higgins, Matthias, and Burrows, even though it pains me to say. The problem is though, we don't have the prospect pool Chicago had. We're still building ours. Virtanen and Baertschi can make the jump, but our other prospects still need more time. So we're in a bit of a bind.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Burning it to the ground rebuild guarantees one thing, that you'll suck for while. Use your draft picks wisely and you can dig yourself out, sure. But why not just try to be competitive AND use your draft picks wisely.

Post of the year. Simple, to the point, logical and against idiotic behavior.

Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Um, that's because of our tickets prices and butts in the seats. In the late 90's there was talk of moving the franchise because we were losing, bleeding money, and the seats were empty. Despite having Bure and Mogilny on the team. Then Burke was hired to stop the bleeding and the WCE emerged to save the franchise.

God, I remember those dark times. We were wondering when the 'Nucks would be pulled off life-support and we'd lose our team to some U.S. city. And it didn't get much better until the early 2000s until Markus Naslund took the captaincy and ran with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good catch on the "semi-tough. We can also introduce the rookies to a "semi-fast" environment.

With such a strong semi-environment, it is almost guaranteed we are close to winning a semi-Stanley Cup.

With that...I'm sure we're all going to be "semi-fans" of this idea. :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...