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

Assessing Benning - Again


JamesB

What is your opinion on Benning?  

189 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

Just now, kingofsurrey said:

 

Good General Managers convince players to waive NTC's all the time.  No need to make excuses for our GM 

Sure you go ahead and believe your fantasies. Don't worry Radim I'll look after your pregnant wife while you're away......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Baggins said:

Sure you go ahead and believe your fantasies. Don't worry Radim I'll look after your pregnant wife while you're away......

 

There you are making excuses for JB again... wow at least you are consistent.

 

Effective General Managers find solutions to problems.  Poor Managers make excuses. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Baggins said:

 

Utica being bad is squarely on Gillis' shoulders. Only 18 year old Benning draft picks from 2014 would be able to play for Utica this year. Gillis left a bare cupboard of NHL ready prospects and anything coming to Utica from junior. That's quite the void. How do you clear out the old when there's nothing new to replace them with? This is why Benning had to trade some picks, that would be no help at all for years, for NHL ready prospects like Vey, Clendenning and Baertschi. The prospect pool was too weak to begin with and he had fill at least part of the hole Gillis left with some trades and free agents. Later round picks that play two more years of junior and one year of AHL are pretty quick to the NHL. Even if Benning picked one of those guys he'd be playing his first AHL season this year and first NHL season next year. And that would be a damn good pick.

 

I can't believe anybody is still going on about not moving Vrbata and Hamhuis. It's just refusing to face reality. Benning doesn't have a magic wand that makes players with ntc's do what they don't want to. Vrbata said publicly he gave a list of teams he knew wouldn't be interested because he didn't want to move with his wife due to have a baby. Hamhuis gave very limited options where only one team had any interest and Hamhuis was their second choice. Ignoring reality doesn't change it. Both used their ntc which prevented them being moved. I will point out we did get both for nothing as well.

The point I was trying to make was that TO capitalized on their rentals. They got a 1st for Franson and two 2nds for Polak as well as trading Winnik twice in two years. I don't blame Benning for Vrbata and Hamhuis but their NTCs hurt this team. What I am not a fan of is squandering picks to take other teams' castoffs. It hasn't worked out very well. Baerstchi is the only semi-success story. Vey, Pedan and Etem have all ended up on waivers and Forsling is looking more and more everyday like a top 4 defenseman at the very least. These trades have not worked out and the "bridging the age gap" excuse doesn't work when they have failed to even stick on the roster. They could have just signed FA on 1-2 year contracts and not traded those picks.

 

Also there are a few 2015 draft picks that are playing in the AHL, the ones with an early birthday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Toews said:

The point I was trying to make was that TO capitalized on their rentals. They got a 1st for Franson and two 2nds for Polak as well as trading Winnik twice in two years. I don't blame Benning for Vrbata and Hamhuis but their NTCs hurt this team. What I am not a fan of is squandering picks to take other teams' castoffs. It hasn't worked out very well. Baerstchi is the only semi-success story. Vey, Pedan and Etem have all ended up on waivers and Forsling is looking more and more everyday like a top 4 defenseman at the very least. These trades have not worked out and the "bridging the age gap" excuse doesn't work when they have failed to even stick on the roster. They could have just signed FA on 1-2 year contracts and not traded those picks.

 

Also there are a few 2015 draft picks that are playing in the AHL, the ones with an early birthday.

Also Prust.

I try not to argue with Baggins, I'm pretty sure he's either a troll or a kid. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Toews said:

The point I was trying to make was that TO capitalized on their rentals. They got a 1st for Franson and two 2nds for Polak as well as trading Winnik twice in two years. I don't blame Benning for Vrbata and Hamhuis but their NTCs hurt this team. What I am not a fan of is squandering picks to take other teams' castoffs. It hasn't worked out very well. Baerstchi is the only semi-success story. Vey, Pedan and Etem have all ended up on waivers and Forsling is looking more and more everyday like a top 4 defenseman at the very least. These trades have not worked out and the "bridging the age gap" excuse doesn't work when they have failed to even stick on the roster. They could have just signed FA on 1-2 year contracts and not traded those picks.

 

Also there are a few 2015 draft picks that are playing in the AHL, the ones with an early birthday.

 

I don't see how they are castoffs. Vey had more AHL success than anybody we've had in the past decade. He was the victim of being behind a contender. It's like saying Grabner was a castoff. Teams often have decent prospects headed toward waiver eligibilty that they just don't have room for. I saw both Vey and Baert as good gambles. Using a 2nd doesn't come with guarantees either and as I said, we had a huge hole in the prospect pool. Most 2nd's never play an NHL game.

 

Decent ufa's are not typically looking for 1 or 2 year deals. The decent ones are looking to cash in with term and/or money. Those that are willing are not likely to be much help. They certainly wouldn't have the potential to more than they are than young guys like Vey and Baertschi. Using the pick or trading it for a developed prospect is rolling the dice either way. But I'd say the guy that's been through AHL deveopment and had success has the higher chance of making it in the NHL than the guy drafted out of junior. 70% don't play 100 NHL games and only 25% manage 200 or more. That's not taking into consideration the quality of the ones that do play more than 200 games. Raymond played over 500. Many like to believe that our 2nd's will become stars but that's not the reality. That's the smallest percentage of 2nd rounders and you have to be the lucky one that picked him. Some are better than others at assessing young talent but if any of them actually new Weber or Subban or Lidstrom would become Norris calibre they wouldn't have gambled on waiting till the second round to grab them. There is some luck involved.

 

In a couple of years we'll likely be in the position to move D-men we don't have room for. The one area we have some depth. Will they be castoffs? It's just moving something you have too much of for something you need. Even if the need is draft picks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, CanadianRugby said:

Also Prust.

I try not to argue with Baggins, I'm pretty sure he's either a troll or a kid. 

 You have to stop pointing to Pedan, vey, etem and prust being tragic errors.  They were low risk moves that didn't pan out.  Jensen, 5th, 2nd and a 3rd isn't enough to get you much in this league.  Hell Roman Polak a trash bottom pairing defenseman was worth 2 2nd round picks.  All of those players had potential.  All of those players have played more than the average 2nd round pick in the NHL.  Forsling is hardly at top 4 guy.  If he were a Canuck, he would be flamed without stop.  He is basically an identical version of Philip Larsen who is less developed in his skills.  Benning took small risks to improve the team.  So what?  Stop microanalyzing small trades as if they are why we are bad team.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, CanadianRugby said:

Also Prust.

I try not to argue with Baggins, I'm pretty sure he's either a troll or a kid. 

 

Neither. Been a Canuck fan since they joined the NHL. Wouldn't a troll be the one criticizing every move the team makes? You just don't get anything right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The sky is falling. Into a four game winning streak the sky was the limit.

 

I recall other lean periods in Canuck history, this is not any different. Hang in there flip floppers and knee scraped band wagoners we're a long ways off and just watch the prospects early in their careers blossom into better players and become a more competive team.

 

I have faith in Linden and Benning, anybody who follows sports know a coaching change is a part of the process if necessary. I personally enjoy the rebuilds to see if it can turn out to be a 1994 or 2011 all over again in the future.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, CanadianRugby said:

But... but... tanking doesn't work.  You must be mistaken.  We're a playoff team just ask Benning. 

San Jose retooled and went to the cup.  Oilers tanked for a decade, and they would still suck if they didn't luck out win the McDavid lottery.  The leafs are going nowhere.  That's not a good team.  Beating us does not make you a playoff team.  I would tank for McDavid any day that's why there was such a crazy race that year for him.  For Mathews or Patrick or McKinnon no thanks no garauntee you get the pick and no garauntee you are getting a player to change your franchise.  The leafs got Babcock, and he will turn that team around not Matthews.   Tanking is beyond dumb.  How do you think we have become such a goaltending factory?  Schneider played under Loungo.  Markstrom under Miller.  Demko and Gartig are next.  Why was Nashville such a factory for defenders? Weber, Suter, Josi, Klein, Ekholm, Jones.  You need good players to learn from and to shelter your minutes to ease you into the NHL.. How does Detroit develop their players? 16 years of playoffs in a row no?  It's not by picking 1st overall.  It's by easing players in and giving them players to look up to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, CanadianRugby said:

True, and individually they're not tragic.  But when you piece every move together I would say it's pretty tragic. 

What did we give up to get them? Not even a 2nd liner or top 4 defenseman.  We didn't even give up a 1st round draft pick.  We gave up bit parts for bit parts.  They didn't work out so what?  Jim couldn't have cobbled all that trash and gotten us Sydney Crosby.  It's like everyone here always says Ballard+Raymond+1st gets you anything you want.  This isn't EA sports you can't just deal all your trash for better players in two for one or three for one deals.  Real GMS aren't that stupid.  Real GMS aren't going ooh goodie 3rd round pick, 4th liner and a 7th defenseman for my 2nd line forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, CaptainLinden16 said:

San Jose retooled and went to the cup.  Oilers tanked for a decade, and they would still suck if they didn't luck out win the McDavid lottery.  The leafs are going nowhere.  That's not a good team.  Beating us does not make you a playoff team.  I would tank for McDavid any day that's why there was such a crazy race that year for him.  For Mathews or Patrick or McKinnon no thanks no garauntee you get the pick and no garauntee you are getting a player to change your franchise.  The leafs got Babcock, and he will turn that team around not Matthews.   Tanking is beyond dumb.  How do you think we have become such a goaltending factory?  Schneider played under Loungo.  Markstrom under Miller.  Demko and Gartig are next.  Why was Nashville such a factory for defenders? Weber, Suter, Josi, Klein, Ekholm, Jones.  You need good players to learn from and to shelter your minutes to ease you into the NHL.. How does Detroit develop their players? 16 years of playoffs in a row no?  It's not by picking 1st overall.  It's by easing players in and giving them players to look up to.

And through all those years of Detroit's success were the core veterans mentoring the youth, we have that in place too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Baggins said:

 

Utica being bad is squarely on Gillis' shoulders. Only 18 year old Benning draft picks from 2014 would be able to play for Utica this year. Gillis left a bare cupboard of NHL ready prospects and anything coming to Utica from junior. That's quite the void. How do you clear out the old when there's nothing new to replace them with? This is why Benning had to trade some picks, that would be no help at all for years, for NHL ready prospects like Vey, Clendenning and Baertschi. The prospect pool was too weak to begin with and he had fill at least part of the hole Gillis left with some trades and free agents.

The pool was weak but it really hasn't been replaced. 

Corrado, Santo, Matthias, Richardson kassian, Jensen, Schroeder and lack were all on our roster before jb got here. He gave them all away for basically nothing and had to give up other assets and picks at similar ages for replacements and in the end all we really we have to show is baertschi.  Everyone else has been a somewhat lateral move that we don't have anything to show for it and has cost us either a roster spot (that forced us to expose a player on waivers) or an asset in acquiring. Players like prust, vey, etem, barkowski, clendening, skille, Larsen. 

 

It's not like there really was an age/player gap. He just didn't like the players that were currently in place there. But again he hasn't brought in much for long term replacements. Baertschi I think will be and my fingers are crossed with pedan but their development will also rely on direction of the coach.

 

 

So if the excuse was we needed to trade assets to fill in for our age gap. Shouldn't there be more to show for it. Either in current roster players or just success on the ice? Could we have not accomplished the same mediocre succuss with the players we already had and held on to the extra assets, which in turn help are current farm team. If we were really trying to fill the age gap it shouldn't have been on risky players that had high chance of being lost to waivers and more moves like the guddy or even the Dorsett deal where we actually know we're getting an Nhl player. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

The pool was weak but it really hasn't been replaced. 

Corrado, Santo, Matthias, Richardson kassian, Jensen, Schroeder and lack were all on our roster before jb got here. He gave them all away for basically nothing and had to give up other assets and picks at similar ages for replacements and in the end all we really we have to show is baertschi.  Everyone else has been a somewhat lateral move that we don't have anything to show for it and has cost us either a roster spot (that forced us to expose a player on waivers) or an asset in acquiring. Players like prust, vey, etem, barkowski, clendening, skille, Larsen. 

 

It's not like there really was an age/player gap. He just didn't like the players that were currently in place there. But again he hasn't brought in much for long term replacements. Baertschi I think will be and my fingers are crossed with pedan but their development will also rely on direction of the coach.

 

 

So if the excuse was we needed to trade assets to fill in for our age gap. Shouldn't there be more to show for it. Either in current roster players or just success on the ice? Could we have not accomplished the same mediocre succuss with the players we already had and held on to the extra assets, which in turn help are current farm team. If we were really trying to fill the age gap it shouldn't have been on risky players that had high chance of being lost to waivers and more moves like the guddy or even the Dorsett deal where we actually know we're getting an Nhl player. 

It's actually not that easy to acquire NHL ready and caliber talent.  Kassian whom we all love was in a real bad way here and got waived after getting traded.  I know you like him as do I, but there is no way to reconcile that.  Corrado and jensen are whatever...if they make the NHL on a consistent basis kudos.  Mattahias is a dime a dozen.  Richardson and Santo are two players who had skill and played hard.  I wish we still had them.  Does Horvat develop with them still on the roster?  As they are both two good two way centers.  I don't know maybe he is further back on his curve if they are still here.   Nevertheless, fault Jim for not making a big trade to get a big piece.  That I am fine with.  This small stuff is what it is...Jim being cocky thinking he can find gems like he does drafting.  He definitely thinks he is buying low and selling high in all of these deals.  It's just that he is selling low and buying low.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

The pool was weak but it really hasn't been replaced. 

Corrado, Santo, Matthias, Richardson kassian, Jensen, Schroeder and lack were all on our roster before jb got here. He gave them all away for basically nothing and had to give up other assets and picks at similar ages for replacements and in the end all we really we have to show is baertschi.  Everyone else has been a somewhat lateral move that we don't have anything to show for it and has cost us either a roster spot (that forced us to expose a player on waivers) or an asset in acquiring. Players like prust, vey, etem, barkowski, clendening, skille, Larsen. 

 

It's not like there really was an age/player gap. He just didn't like the players that were currently in place there. But again he hasn't brought in much for long term replacements. Baertschi I think will be and my fingers are crossed with pedan but their development will also rely on direction of the coach.

 

 

So if the excuse was we needed to trade assets to fill in for our age gap. Shouldn't there be more to show for it. Either in current roster players or just success on the ice? Could we have not accomplished the same mediocre succuss with the players we already had and held on to the extra assets, which in turn help are current farm team. If we were really trying to fill the age gap it shouldn't have been on risky players that had high chance of being lost to waivers and more moves like the guddy or even the Dorsett deal where we actually know we're getting an Nhl player. 

 

Ok, if you're concerned about Jensen, Schroeder, the town drunk, and Corrado I'm just flabbergasted.

 

We made the playoffs, which should be the goal every year for every team, and Matthias, Richardson, and Santo all went to free agency. This happens every year to playoff teams. Even some non-playoffs teams lose players to free agency. Where did you think all those free agents magically appear from every July 1st? None of the three was young with the potential to be more than they already were. They certainly wouldn't be moving a rebuild forward. Vey and Baertschi on the other hand did/do have the potential to be more. He traded for them because we lacked them in our system. It sped up the process of drafting players to find out they were Vey and baertschi four years down the road. If those picks played an NHL game at all.

 

Ideally you want prospects coming on a fairly regular basis. So as one doesn't pan out in the NHL, and some won't, you have another to slot in. Tough for a rebuilding team to have a four year hole waiting for somebody NHL ready. When you start with nothing you have to fill the hole to some extent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

2 minutes ago, CaptainLinden16 said:

It's actually not that easy to acquire NHL ready and caliber talent.  Kassian whom we all love was in a real bad way here and got waived after getting traded.  I know you like him as do I, but there is no way to reconcile that.  Corrado and jensen are whatever...if they make the NHL on a consistent basis kudos.  Mattahias is a dime a dozen.  Richardson and Santo are two players who had skill and played hard.  I wish we still had them.  Does Horvat develop with them still on the roster?  As they are both two good two way centers.  I don't know maybe he is further back on his curve if they are still here.   Nevertheless, fault Jim for not making a big trade to get a big piece.  That I am fine with.  This small stuff is what it is...Jim being cocky thinking he can find jems like he does drafting.  He definitely thinks he is buying low and selling high in all of these deals.  It's just that he is selling low and buying low.

 

My point is. Sure JB may have thought that he needed to fill a gap because he didn't like what he was dealt but...after it's said what do we have to show for it.  Do we have s bunch of young prospects?  Do we have a

 

How much worse off would this team have been statiscally had we kept Matthias, corrado, forsling, santo, Jensen and even kassian instead of vey, bartkowski, prust, clendening and etem. It's not that those players were good nhlers but the fact that we gave up extra assets to bring in those placements. Replacements that we have nothing to show for it.   jensen plus a 6th, Kassian plus a 5th. Vey for a 2nd. 

 

At least we'd have more picks and more prospects in our pool than we currently do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Baggins said:

 

Ok, if you're concerned about Jensen, Schroeder, the town drunk, and Corrado I'm just flabbergasted.

 

We made the playoffs, which should be the goal every year for every team, and Matthias, Richardson, and Santo all went to free agency. This happens every year to playoff teams. Even some non-playoffs teams lose players to free agency. Where did you think all those free agents magically appear from every July 1st? None of the three was young with the potential to be more than they already were. They certainly wouldn't be moving a rebuild forward. Vey and Baertschi on the other hand did/do have the potential to be more. He traded for them because we lacked them in our system. It sped up the process of drafting players to find out they were Vey and baertschi four years down the road. If those picks played an NHL game at all.

 

Ideally you want prospects coming on a fairly regular basis. So as one doesn't pan out in the NHL, and some won't, you have another to slot in. Tough for a rebuilding team to have a four year hole waiting for somebody NHL ready. When you start with nothing you have to fill the hole to some extent.

See my post above. It's not about the loss of those players. It's the fact that the replacements cost us extra and we still are not better off. 

 

Say you have a old Honda Civic. Runs ok but you could use an upgrade since it probably will only last year two or three more years. So you decide to trade in and put some extra cash down for a Toyota Corolla.  Two years later your corolla dies. Now your set back even farther than you were two years ago. You would have been better off just keeping what you had an saving up your money. 

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...