JamesB Posted July 6, 2015 Share Posted July 6, 2015 There has been a lot of discussion of Benning on CDC. There is plenty of criticism but the Benning supporters outnumber the critics. That is not surprising. The people on CDC are Canuck fans and want to feel good about the team. But it would be nice to see some external validation -- positive comments by respected media people about the Linden/Benning regime. Does anyone know of any positive commentary on the Linden/Benning moves. I have never seen as consistently negative views about the Canuck management in the media as seem to be out there now. That is amazing for a guy just one year in. It took previous GMs a long time to build up consistent criticism. People are not saying Benning has been terrible, but they are saying the he (and the Canucks) are losing ground. Here is an example from Money Puck at Canucks Army: http://canucksarmy.com/2015/7/5/laurence-gilman-hockey-innovation-and-the-future-of-the-canucks-front-office I won't post the whole article but here is a key excerpt: However, as the organization's missteps mount, from bad contracts to bad trades, the undercurrent of front office unrest has slowly bubbled to the surface. This culminated in the termination of Laurence Gilman, Lorne Henning, and Eric Crawford - the some of the last remaining builders of the greatest Canucks team that ever was. It's hard to blame Trevor Linden too much for this debacle. With no operational hockey experience, it was always clear Linden was hired because he's a local legend and ownership was in dire need of a PR win. No one in Vancouver should have been fooled into believing he's actually been hired to run an NHL hockey team. While this episode seems destined to tarnish Linden's legacy in this city, he's not really the problem here. This is Jim Benning's team - full stop. It's also hard not to have a touch of sympathy for Jim Benning. It's not like he's the first person to be promoted past the level where he seems most well-suited. Benning clearly has talent evaluating prospects. On balance, the 2014 and 2015 Canucks draft picks look to be slightly above average, and Benning was able to make a couple small time deals around the margins to land Sven Baertschi and Adam Clendening - both trades we celebrated in this space as being a shrewd use of higher-risk assets to land young and near NHL-capable pieces. He's not the best in the league in this area (which is sort of problematic if you want to win a Stanley Cup one day), but he's far from the worst either. However, being a GM of an NHL team means you need to be able to set a vision, execute a strategy, negotiate contracts, and maximize asset value, all within the context of a challenging salary cap structure. If it was just one one or two critical media guys, okay. But the Province and Sun reporters are all pretty negative about Benning's record so far and they have become amazingly consistent. Same with the Pass It to Bulis bloggers (Harrison Mooney and Daniel Wagner) and Thomas Drance and many other respected Canuck bloggers and commentators. So, like I asked above, are there any positive external evaluations out there? (By the way, Matthias was signed by TO for 2.3 million and DeFazio was signed by Boston on a two-way deal that pays 100K in the AHL. That is a big loss for Utica.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.