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

Benning on Team 1040 December 9


AlwaysACanuckFan

Recommended Posts

Just now, IbanezRG said:

 

 

?? We certainly did not...

 

13 minutes ago, J.R. said:

 

That's not entirely why he filled the age gap. And it was try to win. And no we didn't.

 

I challenge you both to try and break it down.  What age gap and what was the purpose/benefit of those players?

 

For example Linden Vey

Why did this team need to get Vey? What did he accomplish?  Did we not currently have a player (Santo) on our roster that could have filled that void?

 

  -For what Vey brought this team we could have signed any scrub UFA and got the same if not more value. 

-Lets move on to Prust? Did he fill an age gap? What did he accomplish?  Could we have not just dumped Kassian for nothing and kept our late pick?

-Who’s next, Etem, Did he fill an age gap? What did he accomplish?  Could we have not just dumped Jensen for nothing or left him in the AHL (possibly get claimed) but keep our late round pick?

-Larsen, Did he fill an age gap? What did he accomplish?  Did we not currently have a player (Weber) on our roster that could have filled that void?

-Clendening, Did he fill an age gap? What did he accomplish?

-Pedan, Did he fill an age gap? Are we even going to give him NHL opportunity so that he can accomplish anything?

 

We’ve let players leave for nothing. Matthias, Kassian, Santo, Richardson, Corrado, and been forced to replace them at a cost of picks. 

 

When people use the excuse that we needed to fill the age gap? Ask yourself, WHY?  Why did need to fill that age gap.  The ideology behind that theory would be that they’d make it a smoother transition, but how smooth has this been?  Sure we added some players in an age range, but what was the benefit, to finished 28th overall and eventually loosing those age gaps (Vey, Etem, Prust, Larsen, Pedan) for nothing.  And we will likely loose Granlund or Baertschi come expansion draft.

 

For what this team has accomplished it wouldn’t have made a single difference if we had kept the players we had vs going out and the new players.  At least had we kept the other players we wouldn’t have been able to hold on to all our picks. The majority of the picks we've moved (who cares if they are late round picks) have accomplished nothing for this franchise.  And that is a fail for a team that's in the middle of a rebuild.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, billabong said:

 

I think it's more of if benning let's more players walk for nothing like vrbata and hammer last year and possibly miller this year then it will piss the fans off 

 

 

Then its people wanting to be po'd for no reason, or the wrong reasons then. Vrbata gave a sh!t list, he admitted that himself that he scuttled any deal. Hammer... I just dont get how anyone can blame JB for that. Hammer didn't want to go anywhere. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hutton Wink said:

Jim Benning's job is to build this team.  Not placate fans and the media.  Not to blow sunshine up their behinds.  Not to take advice from people who don't have a clue about how to run a sports franchise let alone build a good roster.  He was hired and is being paid to build a successful competitive team whether any of you like or agree with the process or not, and that isn't going to change, especially after just 2.5 years in.

 

Thats absolutely true, but when the fans are confused with the direction of this club, not only from Jim, but from Trevor as well and the seats become more and more empty, ask the Owner who pays Jim's cheques how he is feeling about the FAN's not paying for his investment.

 

You may not think fans are important for in any entertainment business, without them there is no business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rocksterh8 said:

 

Thats absolutely true, but when the fans are confused with the direction of this club, not only from Jim, but from Trevor as well and the seats become more and more empty, ask the Owner who pays Jim's cheques how he is feeling about the FAN's not paying for his investment.

 

You may not think fans are important for in any entertainment business, without them there is no business.

 

*Some fans.

 

Some of us understand the plan just fine, thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 well im happy benning isnt trading any draft picks. There will be a ton of trades before expansion no team wants to lose a ton of value.  benning could trade sbisa, tanev, one of gaunce, baertchi or granlund rather than lose them maybe miller and burrows  to a contender look for a few draft picks coming back. Plus resign tryamkin guddy horvat 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not a huge fan of Benning's comments. Were Bieksa and Hamhuis not good leaders? Frankly Hamhuis was a far better mentor than Edler ever will be, so Benning's statement that the remaining vets with NTCs are the best leaders the team could have seems a bit strange. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rocksterh8 said:

 

Thats absolutely true, but when the fans are confused with the direction of this club, not only from Jim, but from Trevor as well and the seats become more and more empty, ask the Owner who pays Jim's cheques how he is feeling about the FAN's not paying for his investment.

 

You may not think fans are important for in any entertainment business, without them there is no business.

 

How many dozens and dozens of times must it be explained, only to have people "dur, I don't get it"?  What more do they have to do or say?  If people still don't get it yet they probably never will until they wake up one day with a competitive team and it'll be "dur, wha' happened?  He musta got lucky!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not trading draft picks THIS year?

They are truly showing their lack of hockey business understanding.

With the expansion draft, those picks will be worth double or triple the standard.

Many teams will be looking at losing a pretty good player for nothing.

 

Here is a question for etal,

If you could pick up a Hansen type player for lets say a 3rd round pick, would you not do it? What about Silverberg?

After the deadline there might be even more very decent players available.

 

This management group seems to be diminishing the value of picks at every opportunity, in a deep draft, they trade picks away for, well nothing and in this draft, considered to be very shallow, they want to horde their picks? Exactly opposite of what they should do.

 

If they do trade for picks it should be the 2018 draft picks, a deeper draft already.

 

I will add one addendum here, at this time. There is still time for a few players to make a large jump, right now Patrick is the consensus #1 and he isn't playing and that just shows how shallow this draft is, there is no clear group ahead of the others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When a GM says he will not ask ANY of the players to wave their no trade at the trade deadline I loose confidence that he can manage assets properly.

 

Burrows and Miller are at the end of their contracts, why on earth would you not at least see if there are some picks to acquire for one or both of them? Even if you want to re-sign them, you can do that next year and still have extra picks. What is the down side to this? Especially when he claims drafting is his thing, why wouldn't he want as many picks as he can possible get.

 

Don't tell me he's just saying this to the media and fans to keep the players happy, because he's proved he cannot trade end of contract players last year.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Rocksterh8 said:

 

I've been a fan probably before you we're born, so don't tell me about trolling.

 

Irrelevant thesis -- one's age has nothing to do with trolling.

You know very well there were multiple trades to acquire picks, so you are either playing ignorant or trolling.  Or both.

And for the record, I was around before the team was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

 

 

I challenge you both to try and break it down.  What age gap and what was the purpose/benefit of those players?

 

For example Linden Vey

Why did this team need to get Vey? What did he accomplish?  Did we not currently have a player (Santo) on our roster that could have filled that void?

 

  -For what Vey brought this team we could have signed any scrub UFA and got the same if not more value. 

-Lets move on to Prust? Did he fill an age gap? What did he accomplish?  Could we have not just dumped Kassian for nothing and kept our late pick?

-Who’s next, Etem, Did he fill an age gap? What did he accomplish?  Could we have not just dumped Jensen for nothing or left him in the AHL (possibly get claimed) but keep our late round pick?

-Larsen, Did he fill an age gap? What did he accomplish?  Did we not currently have a player (Weber) on our roster that could have filled that void?

-Clendening, Did he fill an age gap? What did he accomplish?

-Pedan, Did he fill an age gap? Are we even going to give him NHL opportunity so that he can accomplish anything?

 

We’ve let players leave for nothing. Matthias, Kassian, Santo, Richardson, Corrado, and been forced to replace them at a cost of picks. 

 

When people use the excuse that we needed to fill the age gap? Ask yourself, WHY?  Why did need to fill that age gap.  The ideology behind that theory would be that they’d make it a smoother transition, but how smooth has this been?  Sure we added some players in an age range, but what was the benefit, to finished 28th overall and eventually loosing those age gaps (Vey, Etem, Prust, Larsen, Pedan) for nothing.  And we will likely loose Granlund or Baertschi come expansion draft.

 

For what this team has accomplished it wouldn’t have made a single difference if we had kept the players we had vs going out and the new players.  At least had we kept the other players we wouldn’t have been able to hold on to all our picks. The majority of the picks we've moved (who cares if they are late round picks) have accomplished nothing for this franchise.  And that is a fail for a team that's in the middle of a rebuild.

 

Just looking at JBs picks traded away I think this is the history (please correct me if I missed one) - I'm just looking at the "out" column here not back in:

2014 3rd rounder for Dorsett

2015 3rd rounder in Kes deal for Sbisa

2nd round pick for Vey

3rd round pick for Pedan

2nd round pick for Baer

5th for Prust

2nd for Sutter

7th for Etem

5th for Larsen

 

Watching Dorsett contribute on forechecking and willingness to fight, I'd call that worth the pick. His salary is a different argument. 

 

We'll get the 3rd back, maybe better for Sbisa. in the Kes deal, plus he is a solid #5 D. Thats worth something. 

 

Vey - bust

 

Pedan - he may make it yet

 

2nd for Baer - again, too soon to tell but he may make it

 

5th for Prust - bust

 

2nd for Sutter - totally worth it imo

 

7th for Eten - bust

 

5th for Larsen - if we keep him on as a #7 or move him at the TDL for a similar pick ... I'd say even

 

So just looking at the picks being spent - JB didn't go insane throwing away a 1st rounder. The only true "busts" were Vey and Etem. Etem for a #7 was a good risk. Really Vey is the only blow out, and thats not so bad. Everyone else might make the team or is contributing in a significant way. 

 

I'll add in Prust as a bust too - but that's on him, he never even attempted to play well here imo. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said:

 

Irrelevant thesis -- one's age has nothing to do with trolling.

You know very well there were multiple trades to acquire picks, so you are either playing ignorant or trolling.  Or both.

And for the record, I was around before the team was.

 

There were 2 because he had to trade Kesler and Lack, thats the only reason for those picks. How many has he traded away for players that did nothing for the team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Not a huge fan of Benning's comments. Were Bieksa and Hamhuis not good leaders? Frankly Hamhuis was a far better mentor than Edler ever will be, so Benning's statement that the remaining vets with NTCs are the best leaders the team could have seems a bit strange. 

 

Excatly, Edler is one of the quietest guys you'll ever see, I have a hard time believing he is a mentor on or off the ice.

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...