Jim Benning Pre Draft talk (TSN 1040, June 17)

[Industrious1]

Folks are looking far too much into what he is saying in these interviews. Over the years I've heard GM's say one thing prior to the draft and do something completely opposite when it actually happens.

This is just to satisfy the hungry hockey media in Vancouver and give the most basic of overviews for the short-term future, and even then it is all subject to change. I wouldn't put much stock in anything at this point.

[JamesB]

-Both pro and anti-Markstrom in the same thoughts.

-This market understands that signing Miller was a mistake.

-Prepare to lose Markstrom on waivers, or get relatively nothing for Lack.

-We're not getting any more picks.

-Grenier in, Kassian out.

-Bieksa out.

-Bartschi's top-6 role not a sure thing.

-Shinkaruk is still aways away. Injury took it's toll. Probably not fast enough to become a star.

-Gaunce is a 4th liner.

-Bieksa is packing his stuff. Hamhuis on notice.

-Prepare for some more 'need a job' castoff prospects to get a shot here.

-Would pass on Patrick Kane.

-Matthias should have already been traded.

-Richardson is gone too.

-Complete about-face with regards to who to take at 23.

-Prepare for a crap draft.

-Prepare for further re-tooling of the defense with other teams' crap.

-You might be rewarded next season with being able to see Virtanen for 8mins a game.

-Chicago re-tooled their roster with multiple young franchise players already in place, after they won a cup.

I hope he's just trolling us.

I would not be as negative as TO but the Miller comments bothered me

1. We all figured out already that Miller would be staying and one of Lack or Markstrom would be going. But the real reason is that it is impossible to unload Miller's contract.

2. There were fairly reliable rumors circulating that the Canucks had been asking about interest in Miller and had drawn a blank. And the reasons are obvious. Miller was a below average NHL goalie last year (32nd in SVP), finished the year with an injury that may or may not be a long run problem, and is at an age where age-related decline is likely. Add in the fact the cap estimate continues to fall and now looks to be anywhere between 68 and 71 million and no-one is going to take Miller's contract with a cap hit of 6 million a year unless the Canucks keep some salary, give away another asset or take on an equally bad contract in return. Right now goalies with an expected performance just as good as Miller'e likely expected performance next year can be obtained for next to nothing . (See Lack, Eddie.)

3. I am not expecting Benning to say "we tried to unload Miller but couldn't do it". But a simple "we expect have Ryan back next year" would have been enough.

4. It is of course possible that Miller recovers 100% from his injury and has a great bounce-back year next year. The only thing Benning can do is to hope for that outcome. It is unlikely and if it does not pan out, the Canucks miss the playoffs, make deadline trades to get extra draft picks, and get a high pick first rounder with their own pick.

5. I hope Benning has learned not to overpay for veteran players and that when a player agent makes an opening bid you are allowed to negotiate and make a lower offer.

[Watermelons]

Exactly, but this is CDC, people love to look at stuff in hindsight, point out the flaw, and act like they are geniuses for doing so.

You made a lot of good points here and there is quite a bit at play on this, but I just dont see why the plan wouldnt be to sign him long term at the time. He was playing very well and he fits the type of player Benning wants moving forward. IE skilled but also big, as well as young enough to be part of the next core. It's unfortunate he fell off so hard. It's too bad too because if we had moved him at the deadline I think he'd probably fetch a second at least considering how well his play was up to that point.

I wouldn't say that Matthias fell off so hard near the end of the season. Out of the 18 goals that he scored 4 of them were against teams in the Western Conference. Up until the trade deadline Matthias had 16 goals but only a measly 3 of them were against teams from the West. We're talking 3 goals in 50-60 games against teams in the West. I think it was pretty obvious that Matthias had most of his success against teams in the East and wouldn't have been much help in the playoffs.

No matter how i look at it Matthias was inconsistent all season. He'd have long scoring droughts and then score two in two games and have another drought. I think the reason most people here wanted him gone was because his value was at an all-time high right before the trade deadline. Matthias was coming off of his hattrick against Boston when we made our road trip through the East. He looked dominant against the teams in the East which would have looked very attractive from the perspective of a GM in the East.

[Gstank29]

I would not be as negative as TO but the Miller comments bothered me

1. We all figured out already that Miller would be staying and one of Lack or Markstrom would be going. But the real reason is that it is impossible to unload Miller's contract.

2. There were fairly reliable rumors circulating that the Canucks had been asking about interest in Miller and had drawn a blank. And the reasons are obvious. Miller was a below average NHL goalie last year (32nd in SVP), finished the year with an injury that may or may not be a long run problem, and is at an age where age-related decline is likely. Add in the fact the cap estimate continues to fall and now looks to be anywhere between 68 and 71 million and no-one is going to take Miller's contract with a cap hit of 6 million a year unless the Canucks keep some salary, give away another asset or take on an equally bad contract in return. Right now goalies with an expected performance just as good as Miller'e likely expected performance next year can be obtained for next to nothing . (See Lack, Eddie.)

3. I am not expecting Benning to say "we tried to unload Miller but couldn't do it". But a simple "we expect have Ryan back next year" would have been enough.

4. It is of course possible that Miller recovers 100% from his injury and has a great bounce-back year next year. The only thing Benning can do is to hope for that outcome. It is unlikely and if it does not pan out, the Canucks miss the playoffs, make deadline trades to get extra draft picks, and get a high pick first rounder with their own pick.

5. I hope Benning has learned not to overpay for veteran players and that when a player agent makes an opening bid you are allowed to negotiate and make a lower offer.

Some people just don't lisen to facts Also the Cap isn't going to fall, infact it's going to rise

LOL he wouldnt be in NHL gm if he didn't know this. That's the price you pay when you don't give a player NTC/NMC's

[Gstank29]

I wouldn't say that Matthias fell off so hard near the end of the season. Out of the 18 goals that he scored 4 of them were against teams in the Western Conference. Up until the trade deadline Matthias had 16 goals but only a measly 3 of them were against teams from the West. We're talking 3 goals in 50-60 games against teams in the West. I think it was pretty obvious that Matthias had most of his success against teams in the East and wouldn't have been much help in the playoffs.

No matter how i look at it Matthias was inconsistent all season. He'd have long scoring droughts and then score two in two games and have another drought. I think the reason most people here wanted him gone was because his value was at an all-time high right before the trade deadline. Matthias was coming off of his hattrick against Boston when we made our road trip through the East. He looked dominant against the teams in the East which would have looked very attractive from the perspective of a GM in the East.

That and the fact that he's going to fetch 3-3.5 million dollars and for us to match is just ludicrous.

I wonder if his right will be traded

[JamesB]

God, what's with all the negativity of our GM JB. This is a guy who has lived and breathed hockey for a half century. Let that sink in. Benning has a plan and strikes me as a guy who over prepares and analyzes to the nth degree. Yes, this is a discussion board with some very knowledgeable fans but it gets tiresome reading all these negative posts from wanna be GMs. Just hang on and enjoy the ride.

Agreed, but when GMs are interviewed after a long career most will admit that they made some mistakes early in their careers. In fact, a lot of successful GMs get fired from their first GM jobs.

Benning came up the scouting route (after finishing his playing career). He is regarded as a good judge of talent and was well acquainted with the prospects of every team in the NHL. And I think that has helped. He had his eye on guys like Pedan and Baertschi and Clendening and was able to get them into the Canuck pipeline at modest cost.

But he did not have much experience in negotiating contracts. The player agents are, on the other hand, experienced and well-prepared. When Benning sat down with Miller's agent or Sbisa's agent I am sure the agent gave a very persuasive argument as why the player deserved a high salary and Benning took the bait. This is normal. Now that he has been bitten on the rear end a couple of times I hope he has learned his lesson.

I am not saying I could do any of this even as well as Benning. I am just noting that this is a normal learning curve. And it also means that Benning is not above criticism.

[Gstank29]

Agreed, but when GMs are interviewed after a long career most will admit that they made some mistakes early in their careers. In fact, a lot of successful GMs get fired from their first GM jobs.

Benning came up the scouting route (after finishing his playing career). He is regarded as a good judge of talent and was well acquainted with the prospects of every team in the NHL. And I think that has helped. He had his eye on guys like Pedan and Baertschi and Clendening and was able to get them into the Canuck pipeline at modest cost.

But he did not have much experience in negotiating contracts. The player agents are, on the other hand, experienced and well-prepared. When Benning sat down with Miller's agent or Sbisa's agent I am sure the agent gave a very persuasive argument as why the player deserved a high salary and Benning took the bait. This is normal. Now that he has been bitten on the rear end a couple of times I hope he has learned his lesson.

I am not saying I could do any of this even as well as Benning. I am just noting that this is a normal learning curve. And it also means that Benning is not above criticism.

FOR THE MILLIONTH TIME, WE WEREN"T THE ONLY ONES BETTING ON MILLER

[D-Money]

I applauded the Clendenning pick up. Still like it. Having watched his speed, which is not as A grade as his skills, I am speculating to project a good depth D and PP specialist. All which helps. But does not (edit did not currently) fit in the line up, aka him being sent down to Utica.

And of course he'll be up next year as he wont clear waivers. Same for Corrado. Who I speculate projects as a good depth two way defender. Both of whom are on the medium, not large size. And do either project as top end guys?

They can be good pieces and our puzzle still does not fit together as you like. There is still restructuring to do (unless my projections are wrong, which is possible). And precious little being said until that statement I commented on, and you responded to.

For one, what do you expect him to do? Anyone who projects as a "top end" D-man is simply not available - except maybe for Horvat + Virtanen. He tried moving up for Ekblad, but the price was still too high, and there was no one worth picking at 6. Our goalie depth was also severely lacking, and the best goalie in the draft fell to his 2nd pick, so can't blame him for picking him. After that, he picked D's with 3 of his 4 remaining picks. Forsling already looked to be a good pick, so he flipped him for Clendening when his value spiked.

Benning's secondary plan has been picking up guys that have shown flashes, but maybe fallen out of favour or been stuck behind other players/prospects, so their value is low. He hopes to develop at least one of them into something special.

And being big and "projecting" high doesn't mean everything - especially on D. Clendening was drafted higher than Duncan Keith, and outscored him almost 2-to-1 in the AHL. He's virtually the same size (1 inch shorter, but the same weight - and more than Keith was at that age). Now that doesn't mean Clendening will ever become a Keith (even Keith wasn't supposed to become Keith). But maybe he'll develop into a solid top-4 guy...maybe even top pairing. Who knows?

The guy is doing a TON to address our black hole of D prospects. Actions speak louder than words.

[Watermelons]

Some people just don't lisen to facts Also the Cap isn't going to fall, infact it's going to rise

LOL he wouldnt be in NHL gm if he didn't know this. That's the price you pay when you don't give a player NTC/NMC's

Exactly. When the cap goes up, players get paid more. If a GM offers a NTC/NMC a player will take less salary. If not, the player will want more salary. You can't have it both ways.

Sure, playing on a good team might help because players will be more inclined to taking less money to be on a good team but that's only ONE factor that affects salary. People like to laugh at Gillis offering NTCs to a lot of players all the time but that's the reason why we were able to sign players for lower than the market price. The Canucks are no longer a premier team and we aren't offering players a full NTC anymore so why should they take less to come here?

[ForsbergTheGreat]

I would not be as negative as TO but the Miller comments bothered me

1. We all figured out already that Miller would be staying and one of Lack or Markstrom would be going. But the real reason is that it is impossible to unload Miller's contract.

2. There were fairly reliable rumors circulating that the Canucks had been asking about interest in Miller and had drawn a blank. And the reasons are obvious. Miller was a below average NHL goalie last year (32nd in SVP), finished the year with an injury that may or may not be a long run problem, and is at an age where age-related decline is likely. Add in the fact the cap estimate continues to fall and now looks to be anywhere between 68 and 71 million and no-one is going to take Miller's contract with a cap hit of 6 million a year unless the Canucks keep some salary, give away another asset or take on an equally bad contract in return. Right now goalies with an expected performance just as good as Miller'e likely expected performance next year can be obtained for next to nothing . (See Lack, Eddie.)

3. I am not expecting Benning to say "we tried to unload Miller but couldn't do it". But a simple "we expect have Ryan back next year" would have been enough.

4. It is of course possible that Miller recovers 100% from his injury and has a great bounce-back year next year. The only thing Benning can do is to hope for that outcome. It is unlikely and if it does not pan out, the Canucks miss the playoffs, make deadline trades to get extra draft picks, and get a high pick first rounder with their own pick.

5. I hope Benning has learned not to overpay for veteran players and that when a player agent makes an opening bid you are allowed to negotiate and make a lower offer.

A - no reliable facts, I've said this before Miller was the plan from the get go, at no point has Benning wanted to move miller.

B - He's not confident in lacks ability to be a number one, only the people in vancouver seem to them he's ready, if other teams thought he could, then we'd get a whole lot bigger offers than a second round pick. Schneider picked up a 9th overall. Both goalies were the same age and played roughly the same amount of games.

I can't believe some people are so delusional that they think Benning is trying to justify a mistake. MIller signing wasn't a mistake, He filled a hole for 3 years Signing Miller as a stop gap his plan all along. Just because the fans in vancouver think Lack is ready to take over from Miller doesn't mean that's what the rest of the world believes.

[Cupless44]

A - no reliable facts, I've said this before Miller was the plan from the get go, at no point has Benning wanted to move miller.

B - He's not confident in lacks ability to be a number one, only the people in vancouver seem to them he's ready, if other teams thought he could, then we'd get a whole lot bigger offers than a second round pick. Schneider picked up a 9th overall. Both goalies were the same age and played roughly the same amount of games.

I can't believe some people are so delusional that they think Benning is trying to justify a mistake. MIller signing wasn't a mistake, He filled a hole for 3 years Signing Miller as a stop gap his plan all along. Just because the fans in vancouver think Lack is ready to take over from Miller doesn't mean that's what the rest of the world believes.

I think you make a very valid point that there is a difference between Lack's real value around the NHL and his perceived value by Canuck fans.

[sonoman]

Agreed, but when GMs are interviewed after a long career most will admit that they made some mistakes early in their careers. In fact, a lot of successful GMs get fired from their first GM jobs.

Benning came up the scouting route (after finishing his playing career). He is regarded as a good judge of talent and was well acquainted with the prospects of every team in the NHL. And I think that has helped. He had his eye on guys like Pedan and Baertschi and Clendening and was able to get them into the Canuck pipeline at modest cost.

But he did not have much experience in negotiating contracts. The player agents are, on the other hand, experienced and well-prepared. When Benning sat down with Miller's agent or Sbisa's agent I am sure the agent gave a very persuasive argument as why the player deserved a high salary and Benning took the bait. This is normal. Now that he has been bitten on the rear end a couple of times I hope he has learned his lesson.

I am not saying I could do any of this even as well as Benning. I am just noting that this is a normal learning curve. And it also means that Benning is not above criticism.

I have no issues with your arguments or opinions ( or anyone else's), I was really bothered reading the word "stupid" in referring to the GM ( not by you). You don't get to Bennings position by being "stupid", and I agree, every GM makes mistakes. I've been a Canucks fan since expansion, and my great hope is to see the Stanley cup paraded around Vancouver before I leave. Let's just support the team without all the crazy drama ( again, not pointing fingers at anyone in particular)

[Gstank29]

If you guys want to complain about our GM, the HF board is filled with like minded people

(i'm marking this as solved so everyone sees it)

[elvis15]

Considering the fact that the last gm got fired proved I was correct so not sure your point there since the problem was gillis otherwise he wouldn't have gotten fired. Your logic doesn't make sense.

Good GMs, like good coaches, get fired all the time.

That would've been my only question in regards to this. I feel like Benning was happy with the moves he had made for the Canucks in the off season and during the season made moves to strengthen Utica with young 20 somethings that can hopefully make the jump in the next year or too.

As you said, trading him at deadline does obviously look very smart now, especially if he hadn't penciled him in to next years team from the start. However, had we traded him for say a 2nd or 3rd rounder, and off he goes to the eastern conference and continues his hot streak, we'd all be hanging him out to dry for that. It's a lose lose situation for Benning. He couldn't possibly have known his scoring would dry up like the Sahara.

To be more clear, I wanted to trade him at that point. If we weren't moving someone like Higgins then we were likely to have trouble re-signing him so why not capitalize on his value at a high point? I think it would have been a safe bet he couldn't consistently put up that pace and we were going to have to make moves anyway. He would have been easy to move at that point.

...

You made a lot of good points here and there is quite a bit at play on this, but I just dont see why the plan wouldnt be to sign him long term at the time. He was playing very well and he fits the type of player Benning wants moving forward. IE skilled but also big, as well as young enough to be part of the next core. It's unfortunate he fell off so hard. It's too bad too because if we had moved him at the deadline I think he'd probably fetch a second at least considering how well his play was up to that point.

Why had any number of other players under contract, and once he moved for players like Baertschi who would be waiver eligible the following season then he had to know at that point there'd be a logjam. It's easy to say he'd just move some of the players under contract beyond this season, but it's also a pretty easy decision to let a player go to UFA as an alternative.

If he still wants him to play out the year (as we did with Salo and Ohlund) but doesn't have him in future plans, then he takes the hit. We were predicting he'd get a big raise so Benning had to have a similar idea.

[DownUndaCanuck]

Intrigued about what will happen with Matthias and Richardson. I'd rather keep Matthias for around 1-2M as a 4th line bull to be honest, he didn't play too heavy a game but he was hard to knock off the puck all season long and absolutely broke some games open or us. Richardson is getting older and no better, I don't think we can milk 40 points out of him again.

Gaunce has been playing the wing in Utica so he's not ready for even 4th line center duties. McCann will probably spend another season in junior, or ideally Utica (age?), and Cassels needs a year in Utica to get up to NHL-speed and physicality, which leaves a gaping hole at the 4C spot.

I'd prefer a young, big, 18 goal scoring Matthias over Richardson who may kill penalties well, put up 30-40 points last season but is on the decline. We've already got too many veterans, Benning needs to get rid of a lot of them now.

[TOOMUCHINTERNET]

I would not be as negative as TO but the Miller comments bothered me

1. We all figured out already that Miller would be staying and one of Lack or Markstrom would be going. But the real reason is that it is impossible to unload Miller's contract.

2. There were fairly reliable rumors circulating that the Canucks had been asking about interest in Miller and had drawn a blank. And the reasons are obvious. Miller was a below average NHL goalie last year (32nd in SVP), finished the year with an injury that may or may not be a long run problem, and is at an age where age-related decline is likely. Add in the fact the cap estimate continues to fall and now looks to be anywhere between 68 and 71 million and no-one is going to take Miller's contract with a cap hit of 6 million a year unless the Canucks keep some salary, give away another asset or take on an equally bad contract in return. Right now goalies with an expected performance just as good as Miller'e likely expected performance next year can be obtained for next to nothing . (See Lack, Eddie.)

3. I am not expecting Benning to say "we tried to unload Miller but couldn't do it". But a simple "we expect have Ryan back next year" would have been enough.

4. It is of course possible that Miller recovers 100% from his injury and has a great bounce-back year next year. The only thing Benning can do is to hope for that outcome. It is unlikely and if it does not pan out, the Canucks miss the playoffs, make deadline trades to get extra draft picks, and get a high pick first rounder with their own pick.

5. I hope Benning has learned not to overpay for veteran players and that when a player agent makes an opening bid you are allowed to negotiate and make a lower offer.

The #2. intrigues me. in that I think we should explore the possibility of trading Miller for an overpriced, similar salary, and similar term but still useful man of the defense variety. I'm trying to think of someone with a similar bad contract but getting paid around Miller on a team that also needs a goalie maybe

Mark Streit, or Brent Burns? With a trade for Burns we'd need to add + though, obviously!

[TOOMUCHINTERNET]

Intrigued about what will happen with Matthias and Richardson. I'd rather keep Matthias for around 1-2M as a 4th line bull to be honest, he didn't play too heavy a game but he was hard to knock off the puck all season long and absolutely broke some games open or us. Richardson is getting older and no better, I don't think we can milk 40 points out of him again.

Gaunce has been playing the wing in Utica so he's not ready for even 4th line center duties. McCann will probably spend another season in junior, or ideally Utica (age?), and Cassels needs a year in Utica to get up to NHL-speed and physicality, which leaves a gaping hole at the 4C spot.

I'd prefer a young, big, 18 goal scoring Matthias over Richardson who may kill penalties well, put up 30-40 points last season but is on the decline. We've already got too many veterans, Benning needs to get rid of a lot of them now.

I'd like that as well, however Matthias will garner a much larger contract. Dare I say 4 million?

[PhillipBlunt]

Benning's made some questionable moves since first being hired but improved the team enough that it was a four line team that was able make the playoffs. Those were both goals that Benning set out to do and he did them.

What he forgot to do was deal with the defense, which I hope he does. The defense was the real reason the series ended up the way it did.

I'll reserve judgement until he's finished dealing this summer.

[Honky Cat]

Agreed, but when GMs are interviewed after a long career most will admit that they made some mistakes early in their careers. In fact, a lot of successful GMs get fired from their first GM jobs.

Benning came up the scouting route (after finishing his playing career). He is regarded as a good judge of talent and was well acquainted with the prospects of every team in the NHL. And I think that has helped. He had his eye on guys like Pedan and Baertschi and Clendening and was able to get them into the Canuck pipeline at modest cost.

But he did not have much experience in negotiating contracts. The player agents are, on the other hand, experienced and well-prepared. When Benning sat down with Miller's agent or Sbisa's agent I am sure the agent gave a very persuasive argument as why the player deserved a high salary and Benning took the bait. This is normal. Now that he has been bitten on the rear end a couple of times I hope he has learned his lesson.

I am not saying I could do any of this even as well as Benning. I am just noting that this is a normal learning curve. And it also means that Benning is not above criticism.

Isn't negotiating contracts Laurence Gilmans area of expertise?

[granpappy]

Benning's made some questionable moves since first being hired but improved the team enough that it was a four line team that was able make the playoffs. Those were both goals that Benning set out to do and he did them.

What he forgot to do was deal with the defense, which I hope he does. The defense was the real reason the series ended up the way it did.

I'll reserve judgement until he's finished dealing this summer.

he also forgot to realize this is a team in decline and making the playoffs is a post mortem exercise at this point. his ufa signings do not exactly reinforce hsi decision making and his lack of dispensing expiring assets at the deadline is dissapointing. all this leads to reasonable concern heading into the draft. blind faith does not win anything