Van bc Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 I agree partly with your view of the oiler's troubles, but would add that their top forwards are weak at defence too. Their goalies (Dubnyk for example) performed a lot better on teams that played a strong defensive TEAM game. Benning made changes to the team that got us 101 points last season. A huge improvement over the previous season. He added more hard working players in Prust and Sutter this summer. That is what the oilers did not do. They gave their young guys too much money too soon, instead of bringing in the solid vets like Benning continues to do here. hardworking doesn't equal skill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HK Phooey Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 I'm getting sick of that line of reasoning. Edmontons problem was poor goal-tending and an even worse d-corp. Dallas had the same issues last season. Many predicted Dallas over Canucks last season. Our defence and goal-tending made the difference. Mentors still need to perform. If Lack supplants Ward and Kassian has a good year, then Benning and Linden will be held accountable. Like players, if they want my praise, they need to earn it. Having said that, I haven't turned on them like some; but I am not willing to blindly praise them either. Aren't you a tough guy to please? As if your praise means anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 I wasn't really trying to go in depth on Edmontons issues. Rather, I was pointing out that the mentorship angle is being way over-played in this market. IMO it's not so much even about 'mentoring' which I agree is vastly over stated here. It's about putting young players in roles they're not ready for vs sheltering them a bit and letting them grow in to those roles. Edmonton has IMMENSELY failed at that, Vancouver looks to be doing it fairly well so far and getting Sutter to continue to ease Horvat in is another example of that. But as always, the proof will be in the pudding...which will likely take another 2-3+ years to make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coryberg Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 Benning must have noticed something in Sutter's play. To be honest I have not watched much of his play He's faster, taller, better on faceoffs, gives 100% every shift and is an elite PKer. Personally I would have pushed harder for Bonino + 3rd for Sutter and left it at that. Its amazing how much better CDC does in their fantasy land trades than Benning (or gillis) can do. I keep hearing... -I would have held onto Kassian till the deadline and got a 2nd -I would have held out for a 1st round pick for lack -I would have told new jersey I want a 2nd round pick as well as #9 for Schneider -I would have told Anaheim I want #10, etem and Theodore instead of #24,bones and sbisa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheCammer Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 Anyone check out this "authors" profile pic? The closest this guy has been to ice is in his 64 oz Big Gulp. Just another writer nerd whose hockey knowledge is based of what he learned on the back of hockey cards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neko Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 Clearly you know a lot more than Linden/Bennington does so I'm going to give the Canucks a call and tell them that we have a pro on the CDC forums that they should hire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jejejester Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 Really it's an amateur article. Only opinions and one sided facts the don't really prove their point. Just a lot of manipulation of stats that don't really mean much in that context. Guess it's the next interns turn to write something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 The thing is nobody knows what Benning is doing. Don't you ever get tired of publicly humiliating yourself? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RWMc1 Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 Aren't you a tough guy to please? As if your praise means anything. My praise probably means more than yours as I don't blindly praise without tangible results. That was my point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VegasCanuck Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 I really love reading articles, written by guys who would have trouble qualifying as stick boy on an actual NHL team! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crabcakes Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 IMO it's not so much even about 'mentoring' which I agree is vastly over stated here. It's about putting young players in roles they're not ready for vs sheltering them a bit and letting them grow in to those roles. Edmonton has IMMENSELY failed at that, Vancouver looks to be doing it fairly well so far and getting Sutter to continue to ease Horvat in is another example of that. But as always, the proof will be in the pudding...which will likely take another 2-3+ years to make. The term mentoring has become a catch phrase on this board. Older players bring a lot more than mentoring that benefits young players. Leadership and culture for starters. Culture: how to win, what it takes to win, how you take a tough loss, how you react to injury or bad bounces, how you deal with playing against guys who were your hero's growing up....and the list goes on. Any team needs to have the benefits that various age groups and role players bring. Not everybody can be a mentor but young players bring enthusiasm and optimism, players in their prime get the job done and older players carry and pass on the culture of the team (hopefully a winning one). All groups benefit from the presence of the other groups. So to think that the Canucks should just dump all players over 32 is wrong headed. Management understands this balanced approach. They understand that the support structures within the roster must be maintained too. So when Bieksa had to be moved, who fills the void? Enter Prust. We have all watched Edmonton and how they have had few veteran players and how their young guys are progressing very slowly. So we really want to fall into that trap here? Another point on the culture that Benning covets. Internal competition. Every player must earn his spot on the team. Each step requires you to work even harder. Horvat had to work damn hard to make the team last year and through good defensive play and adjusting to the speed of the NHL game and size of players etc he has earned the 3C spot this year. To advance, he's now going to have to play better than Sutter. There are no gifts, he will have to work harder than ever and this is a good thing. Players have to learn that they never "arrive" somewhere, they have to keep fighting their entire careers. I don't like the term sheltering because it implies that you're somehow making it easy on a player. If a player doesn't get defensive zone starts for example, it's because he hasn't earned the coaches trust yet and he must work hard to earn that trust. The players get this. It's about earning your stripes not mollycoddling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RWMc1 Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 IMO it's not so much even about 'mentoring' which I agree is vastly over stated here. It's about putting young players in roles they're not ready for vs sheltering them a bit and letting them grow in to those roles. Edmonton has IMMENSELY failed at that, Vancouver looks to be doing it fairly well so far and getting Sutter to continue to ease Horvat in is another example of that. But as always, the proof will be in the pudding...which will likely take another 2-3+ years to make. Exactly. I don't have a problem with optimism. I have an issue with people criticising others for not immediately praising a deal that has unproven results. I would rather keep an open mind, and wait and see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdgarM Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 Although I do not believe I would call them mistakes, I do think that there is a growing trend of paying what appears to be "more then whats needed" for fringe players. I do agree that these types of players are badly needed, especially at playoff time, but things started to kind of "not look right " with the signings of Sbisa and Dorsett. It appears it also started the growing trend of paying players "before" they prove themselves in Vancouver. Did not see Sbisa or Dorsett "shine" in last years playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puckdontlie Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 The term mentoring has become a catch phrase on this board. Older players bring a lot more than mentoring that benefits young players. Leadership and culture for starters. Culture: how to win, what it takes to win, how you take a tough loss, how you react to injury or bad bounces, how you deal with playing against guys who were your hero's growing up....and the list goes on. Any team needs to have the benefits that various age groups and role players bring. Not everybody can be a mentor but young players bring enthusiasm and optimism, players in their prime get the job done and older players bring wisdom and a balanced approach. All groups benefit from the presence of the other groups. So to think that the Canucks should just dump all players over 32 is wrong headed. Management understands this balanced approach. They understand that the support structures within the roster must be maintained too. So when Bieksa had to be moved, who fills the void? Enter Prust. We have all watched Edmonton and how they have had few or no veteran players and how their young guy are progressing so slowly. So we really want to fall into that trap here? Another point on the culture that Benning covets. Internal competition. Every player must earn his spot on the team. Each step requires you to work even harder. Horvat had to work damn hard to make the team last year and through good defensive play and adjusting to the speed of the NHL game and size of players etc he has earned the 3C spot this year. To advance, he's now going to have to play better than Sutter. There are no gifts, he will have to work harder than ever. I think it does come down to mentorship at least for goaltending. Lack and Kassian would take spots as established NHLers no different than Miller and Prust. The decision making seems to take many factors into consideration but I think mentorship is a big one at least in Miller's case. If Miller was signed to 5 years then I think that's way overvaluing mentorship and crippling the future. Miller's short contract is similar to the Sundin situation where it's lead by example and share vast experience but then leave in time for that cap space to be used on upgrades. The Kassian for Prust deal I don't love but I don't think it's a big deal either... it's probably one of those deals that fades away in a year's time with the key aspect being focusing energy on Virtanen to be the skilled power forward and opening up that spot. Prust may offer mentorship, maybe not. He does provide competition for guys like Grenier and Kenins... I'd like to see a young guy fill that 4th line tough guy role with the effectiveness of a healthy Ferland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyacry Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 His plan is going to unfold next year and the year after. This is just a transition year. We're going to have a very hard working team that everyone is going to hate playing against. Not only that, but most of the players he is drafting and trading for up their games in the playoffs. Sorta like Kings. Cruises during regular season and turns into a wrecking ball come playoffs, though they were bounced out of a spot last season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benchsplinters Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 Trade everyone. Hell that will not solve anything with the fans here. I say move the team to another city. Then no one will have anything to cry or whine about with regard to the Canucks. Instead they will infest another team board with their ludicrous, immature whine and cry. . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RWMc1 Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 Hell that will not solve anything with the fans here. I say move the team to another city. Then no one will have anything to cry or whine about with regard to the Canucks. Instead they will infest another team board with their ludicrous, immature whine and cry. . . Is it more mature to whine about a team which you are emotionally invested in, or to whine about the whining of people you don't even know??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 It's not overrated because look at what happened to the Oilers without mentoring…you can't just throw these young players out to the wolves on their own. Also, with that logic…would Taylor Pyatt have been a good candidate to pass on his abilities to a young and up coming player because he played with the Sedins? Yeah, no. Learning from the best is a pretty simple formula. The Oilers struggle because they have poor goaltending and defense. (Something that they've addressed, finally, this off-season) There is absolutely nothing wrong with the development of Hall, Nuge and Eberle and the jury's still out on Yak. This thread is so predictable.... A few weeks ago, CBS Sports wrote an unflattering article about the Canucks and it was an instant flood of "CBS. What do they know about hockey?!". Now were seeing the same thing being said about Sportsnet. Next, I suppose it'll be NHL.com. The points are perfectly valid. Disagree with them if you like, but the "What do they know?" argument is weak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Honky Cat Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 The only glaring "mistake' I personally agree with from this article is keeping Miller over Lack. I understand management thought process behind it but I still think it was a mistake given where the franchise is (rebuild, not a contender). IMO they should be gambling on moves like this given the franchise's current state and they didn't. Particularly with the paltry return we got for Lack. If the return was actually good (a mid-late 1st say), I'd have been more comfortable with moving Lack. Otherwise we should have kept the younger, cheaper goalie whose performance is roughly on par but trending in the opposite (and more positive) direction IMO. Not mentioned in the article but not getting something for Matthias was a small mistake as well. Then there was the selling low of Kassian. I don't disagree with moving him given the evident situation but man it's like they did everything they could to lower his value before actually moving him. Why he didn't get the cushy 'Hodgson' treatment to boost his value is beyond me. They did so much the opposite I was CERTAIN they were planning on working with him as a long term project. I mean who would devalue an assets like that on purpose if they planned to move him?! Beyond that, I've like-loved most of what they've done to varrying degrees. and if this writer can't see the 'plan', well that's his problem. I'm in agreement with the selling low of Kassian..I too,have no problem with trading him,but given his age and pedigree,he could have been given been built into a better asset....Seems like Benning couldn't get Kassian out of the door fast enough (even by throwing in that 5th for good measure..was it personal..?).....If Kassian does decide to get his act together,this trade could look really bad for JB..IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 I'm in agreement with the selling low of Kassian..I too,have no problem with trading him,but given his age and pedigree,he could have been given been built into a better asset....Seems like Benning couldn't get Kassian out of the door fast enough (even by throwing in that 5th for good measure..was it personal..?).....If Kassian does decide to get his act together,this trade could look really bad for JB..IMO I said much the same thing in the "bizarre" thread. Of course the Benning cheerleaders were quick to slam that opinion. My point has always been that the Canucks have tried to turn Kassian into something he's not. A player like Brandon Prust, with a slightly better offensive upside. In my mind, Kassian is a pure skill player, who will occasionally chip in in the toughness department but not make it his main focus. If the Habs allow him to play that game, I believe this trade will indeed look bad for the Canucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.