When can we extend Jim Bennings contract?

[Gurn]

So Pratt is of the opinion that if the Sedins don't re-sign the team has to re-sign Vanek. I don't see how those moves are related myself? It would seem 1040 is unaware of a thing called free agency- at least in as much as the fact the Canucks can sign free agents, not just lose them to other teams?

[IBatch]

27 minutes ago, gurn said:

So Pratt is of the opinion that if the Sedins don't re-sign the team has to re-sign Vanek. I don't see how those moves are related myself? It would seem 1040 is unaware of a thing called free agency- at least in as much as the fact the Canucks can sign free agents, not just lose them to other teams?

And whos to say Vanek even wants to come back and won't field other offers before considering coming back from another year of possible bottom dwelling.  Sell him no matter what, for whatever we can get....or I will have to read more posts comparing him to the "huge" Hamhuis debacle/failure.  

[NewbieCanuckFan]

30 minutes ago, IBatch said:

And whos to say Vanek even wants to come back and won't field other offers before considering coming back from another year of possible bottom dwelling.  Sell him no matter what, for whatever we can get....or I will have to read more posts comparing him to the "huge" Hamhuis debacle/failure.  

Interestingly enough, Hamhuis is still playing notable minutes on a playoff team right now (just over 20 minutes a game - or about top 4 minutes) for a team that signed him as a free agent.  

[CroSen]

Benning deserves to see a lineup with Petterson, Brock,  an experienced and healthy Horvat as the captain, Guadette, and Demko playing on the team.  If a team with those players in the line-up sucks, then fine, fire Benning.  But at least re-sign him for another 2 years.

[Silky mitts]

5 hours ago, gurn said:

So Pratt is of the opinion that if the Sedins don't re-sign the team has to re-sign Vanek. I don't see how those moves are related myself? It would seem 1040 is unaware of a thing called free agency- at least in as much as the fact the Canucks can sign free agents, not just lose them to other teams?

Pratt is such a tool

[Gurn]

4 minutes ago, Silky mitts said:

Pratt is such a tool

As a tinnitus sufferer I listen to the radio or a cd on repeat while I sleep; it is a major disappointment to wake up before 9 and hear Pratt.

[IBatch]

1 hour ago, WiseOne said:

Benning deserves to see a lineup with Petterson, Brock,  an experienced and healthy Horvat as the captain, Guadette, and Demko playing on the team.  If a team with those players in the line-up sucks, then fine, fire Benning.  But at least re-sign him for another 2 years.

Wise words, wise one.

[IBatch]

5 hours ago, NewbieCanuckFan said:

Interestingly enough, Hamhuis is still playing notable minutes on a playoff team right now (just over 20 minutes a game - or about top 4 minutes) for a team that signed him as a free agent.  

I'm happy for him, and Bieksa.  Guys say play the younger players, we didn't have any defenseman and still have barely anyone, maybe two in Juolevi and Brisbois (whom I've always liked).  Those two vets have played key roles in both their teams, and come playoff time still have a chance at the cup which always makes it more fun at that time of the year ( to see former players get a chance like last year with Burrows).

[Tom Sestito]

10 hours ago, IBatch said:

Radio Ray GMing the Canucks...nice him and Green can brawl in the sandbox given their home towns and the hate they had for each other when they were growing up.   (Just kidding unless you know what I'm talking about then to the sandbox to see who wins).

 

Ferraro certainly has the gift for the gab which would mean interviews would be better for sure.  And it could be worse if you liked Kypreos (so much).  Or Elliote Freedman, better if you picked McKenzie, I like him the best..

I like the Ferraros too, not sure how well journalism goes to GMing, but why not we've seen one GM and a lot of coaches go to talking heads.  But he should not start as GM,. an assistant somewhere, under Yzerman preferably.

 

Also agree with Holland.  No thanks.

I'm honestly not sure what you're referring to.

 

But I remember Ferraro did a radio hit and he was a fan of Travis.

 

Also, the competency and respect for media plays a big part in who I select as a leader of a franchise. Gillis knew how to speak, but was an arrogant snob. Benning has no speaking abilities, and really does fit the "Dim Jim" thing. 

 

Ferraro is a media member, he speaks clearly and is able to get his points across, and will be perfect at that.

 

Also, I read somewhere that he was in the top 100 for NHL points when he retired. He was no slob of a player. 

 

I think another thing people overlook is that the franchise value for the canucks has gone down like 200m under Benning while it rose significantly under Gillis. That to me, is likely the real reason why Benning has not been re-signed.

 

I just think Ferraro ticks all the boxes of what an NHL GM should be and is a perfect balance.

 

The dinosaur mindset the NHL has regarding the old boys club and that only former NHLers belong in managerial spots is so cringey. They're running billion dollar businesses. 

[baumerman77]

2 hours ago, Tom Sestito said:

I'm honestly not sure what you're referring to.

 

But I remember Ferraro did a radio hit and he was a fan of Travis.

 

Also, the competency and respect for media plays a big part in who I select as a leader of a franchise. Gillis knew how to speak, but was an arrogant snob. Benning has no speaking abilities, and really does fit the "Dim Jim" thing. 

 

Ferraro is a media member, he speaks clearly and is able to get his points across, and will be perfect at that.

 

Also, I read somewhere that he was in the top 100 for NHL points when he retired. He was no slob of a player. 

 

I think another thing people overlook is that the franchise value for the canucks has gone down like 200m under Benning while it rose significantly under Gillis. That to me, is likely the real reason why Benning has not been re-signed.

 

I just think Ferraro ticks all the boxes of what an NHL GM should be and is a perfect balance.

 

The dinosaur mindset the NHL has regarding the old boys club and that only former NHLers belong in managerial spots is so cringey. They're running billion dollar businesses. 

This is a great point I think many people miss. Fans are too busy debating whether Benning signing Player X was a B+ or A- pick up or if Benning won or lost trade Y. But the fact of the matter is that the owners rightfully so want maximum profit. They've given Benning the ability to spend pretty much to the cap on labour so you would expect they would want maximum returns. I think people really need to think about it. When the owners allow Benning to pay someone a salary of 6 million they expect that person to return more than they are paying them (plus overhead costs). Yes it is difficult to calculate the return of investment of a single player but it is easier to calculate it for an entire roster/organization. It's easy for a fan to say "I'm ok with being bad for a few years to rebuild" but it would be a lot different if you were losing out on millions of dollars. 

 

It would be an extreme vote of confidence if the owners did resign him. 

[flickyoursedin]

Louis Eriksson is good again! Benning is a genius lol!

[Canvoucer Vanuck]

When can we extend him? More like when can we turf him. He can't be fired soon enough.

[IBatch]

10 hours ago, Tom Sestito said:

I'm honestly not sure what you're referring to.

 

But I remember Ferraro did a radio hit and he was a fan of Travis.

 

Also, the competency and respect for media plays a big part in who I select as a leader of a franchise. Gillis knew how to speak, but was an arrogant snob. Benning has no speaking abilities, and really does fit the "Dim Jim" thing. 

 

Ferraro is a media member, he speaks clearly and is able to get his points across, and will be perfect at that.

 

Also, I read somewhere that he was in the top 100 for NHL points when he retired. He was no slob of a player. 

 

I think another thing people overlook is that the franchise value for the canucks has gone down like 200m under Benning while it rose significantly under Gillis. That to me, is likely the real reason why Benning has not been re-signed.

 

I just think Ferraro ticks all the boxes of what an NHL GM should be and is a perfect balance.

 

The dinosaur mindset the NHL has regarding the old boys club and that only former NHLers belong in managerial spots is so cringey. They're running billion dollar businesses. 

Radio Ray is a moniker he was given during his playing days by his teammates because of his gift of the gab.  He's from Trail/Rossland Green is from Castlegar two small towns twenty minutes apart that had a rivalry, especially when they were young.

 

 

Linden also was a top hundred player when he retired.  Not sure how colour commenting is a GM translatable skill, but he is a good communicator and I also like what he has to say, but isnt it a contradiction given he's a former player (a very good one at that)?  Former players make great coaches, I agree that unless they have MBAs and an aptitude that they shouldn't be running NHL clubs... Yzerman and Sakic teams are both doing ok though.  I'm sure they have guys with MBAs surrounding them.

 

As per the value going up and down, Vancouver doesn't have 7.5 million people (GTA) or even as many as MTL that support their team no matter what.   Their prices don't go up and down depending on how well the team does, it would not matter who the GM was, we weren't going to stay on the top after Luongo, Schneider and Kesler left, plus half the auxillary guys.  The price is subjective and always was, who knows what exactly somebody is willing to pay, but the Seattle price has gone from 500-650 based on how well Vegas is doing...so...Vancouver is worth  50 more than that?  

 

It's funny how the league s pulling prices out of a hat that nobody would have ever considered paying for say ARI before Vegas, or a considerable other amount of franchises, but i guess there's a lot more billionaires than there are hockey teams, and they only come up for sale so often.  Aqualini is smart enough to know that he should have sold in 2013 if it's all about the money. 

 

[Tom Sestito]

58 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Radio Ray is a moniker he was given during his playing days by his teammates because of his gift of the gab.  He's from Trail/Rossland Green is from Castlegar two small towns twenty minutes apart that had a rivalry, especially when they were young.

 

 

Linden also was a top hundred player when he retired.  Not sure how colour commenting is a GM translatable skill, but he is a good communicator and I also like what he has to say, but isnt it a contradiction given he's a former player (a very good one at that)?  Former players make great coaches, I agree that unless they have MBAs and an aptitude that they shouldn't be running NHL clubs... Yzerman and Sakic teams are both doing ok though.  I'm sure they have guys with MBAs surrounding them.

 

As per the value going up and down, Vancouver doesn't have 7.5 million people (GTA) or even as many as MTL that support their team no matter what.   Their prices don't go up and down depending on how well the team does, it would not matter who the GM was, we weren't going to stay on the top after Luongo, Schneider and Kesler left, plus half the auxillary guys.  The price is subjective and always was, who knows what exactly somebody is willing to pay, but the Seattle price has gone from 500-650 based on how well Vegas is doing...so...Vancouver is worth  50 more than that?  

 

It's funny how the league s pulling prices out of a hat that nobody would have ever considered paying for say ARI before Vegas, or a considerable other amount of franchises, but i guess there's a lot more billionaires than there are hockey teams, and they only come up for sale so often.  Aqualini is smart enough to know that he should have sold in 2013 if it's all about the money. 

 

Fair response.

 

1. Ohh I gotcha.

 

2. What I'm getting at is that a head office needs a balance. Between people who have been in the game and have played in the trenches and have an old school mindset, and then with new age analytical thinking. I think anyone who thinks analytics is stupid, is in fact stupid. But I also think people who purely think you can win a cup with analytics being the strict focus in analyzing players, are also stupid. Dialogue is necessary. The first time Benning REALLY got on my bad side was the day he signed Sbisa and Dorsett to bad contracts and then proceeded to fire Gilman for having a differing opinion. A front office needs disagreement. If you surround yourself with yes men, you will always see every move you make in a positive way. For example, you and I respectfully disagree about the way things are handled but the only way we can come to an understanding of each other is by talking. The astounding ignorance of some people to believe that they're always right (this is on both sides of the fire/keep Benning debate) will always baffle me. 

 

3. I don't disagree with anything youve said. My opinion is based on the financial reports that are published online and what is discussed in the media. I'm sure that we are worth more than the numbers I've seen us NOW put at, but I do think they've underrated a wide spread of teams across the league.

 

4. Hard to predict the team's value would drop drastically. If he knew, he would have done it.

 

 

[IBatch]

26 minutes ago, Tom Sestito said:

Fair response.

 

1. Ohh I gotcha.

 

2. What I'm getting at is that a head office needs a balance. Between people who have been in the game and have played in the trenches and have an old school mindset, and then with new age analytical thinking. I think anyone who thinks analytics is stupid, is in fact stupid. But I also think people who purely think you can win a cup with analytics being the strict focus in analyzing players, are also stupid. Dialogue is necessary. The first time Benning REALLY got on my bad side was the day he signed Sbisa and Dorsett to bad contracts and then proceeded to fire Gilman for having a differing opinion. A front office needs disagreement. If you surround yourself with yes men, you will always see every move you make in a positive way. For example, you and I respectfully disagree about the way things are handled but the only way we can come to an understanding of each other is by talking. The astounding ignorance of some people to believe that they're always right (this is on both sides of the fire/keep Benning debate) will always baffle me. 

 

3. I don't disagree with anything youve said. My opinion is based on the financial reports that are published online and what is discussed in the media. I'm sure that we are worth more than the numbers I've seen us NOW put at, but I do think they've underrated a wide spread of teams across the league.

 

4. Hard to predict the team's value would drop drastically. If he knew, he would have done it.

 

 

Fair assessment.  

1.  For me Gillis was good at two things, keeping the team together and creating a level of professionalism from the top down.  Not sure Benning's doing the same job, I agree it's important to have the right people.

 

2.  The Dorsett and Sbisa deals turned out to be fair value in the end, sucks both are gone for the team to reap that now.  I hate the L.E. deal and the Juolevi pick, to me those are Bennings biggest fails as a GM.  But he got three points last night sooooo....and it took him time to get there in Boston...ha ha. Still hate it.  

 

3.  The Forbes list of franchise values is a fun read for a quick idea what they think they could sell for.  I remember when Vancouver was near the top, behind only TO and NYR, about the same as MTL during their hey days.  Only TO and NYR broke the billion mark, Vancouver was around 900.  Impressive increase from the sale, and it sure is nice to have an owner with deep, deep pockets.

 

4.  Not sure he wouldnt have seen his coming given the volatility, that connects to winning and losing.  I think he wanted the re-tool and may have even demanded it to keep the stock high, but that is just my opinion.  It's shocking how many Canucks jerseys I'd see in the Ottawa games around 2011-2013...seemed like the Leafs were in town half the building,  now it's mostly red with pockets of blue.  In other words I think Vancouver was in vogue for passive fans all over the place, and now it's just us lifers keeping the torch and spending our money.  

 

5.  Id be over the moon if we hired a different GM and he managed to speed things up.  I think we have better odds keeping the devil we know though and love what he's done to our pool, he's well respected and liked by other GMs and seems to be improving.  Pettersson is already considered a Calder candidate by THN, no GM has ever pulled that off for us and if they both win (Boeser) I can't recall any GM pulling that off.  Reminds me a lot of CHI when their core was emerging, same with PIT, especially if Demko and Juolevi work out too.

 

Was close to your side a year ago, but since changed my tune.  I do understand where your coming from though, it's obvious we just want what's best for the team long term.

 

 

 

[spook007]

Been following this tread on and off, but the latest debate about the value reduction of this franchise have shaking my head.

 

WTF did people expect was going to happen during a retool/rebuild or what ever you wanna call it? Did you expect higher ticket prices, full houses and onwards?

Please give me strength....

 

Its the same people, who were screaming for youth and change before JB took over and still are complaining... Flipping joke to put that at JB's door.

 

The value of this franchise will build up again once our new team is set and the younger players are good enough to win hockey games on a consistent basis. Play offs saves any franchises financially. 

 

 

[Tom Sestito]

1 hour ago, IBatch said:

Fair assessment.  

1.  For me Gillis was good at two things, keeping the team together and creating a level of professionalism from the top down.  Not sure Benning's doing the same job, I agree it's important to have the right people.

 

2.  The Dorsett and Sbisa deals turned out to be fair value in the end, sucks both are gone for the team to reap that now.  I hate the L.E. deal and the Juolevi pick, to me those are Bennings biggest fails as a GM.  But he got three points last night sooooo....and it took him time to get there in Boston...ha ha. Still hate it.  

 

3.  The Forbes list of franchise values is a fun read for a quick idea what they think they could sell for.  I remember when Vancouver was near the top, behind only TO and NYR, about the same as MTL during their hey days.  Only TO and NYR broke the billion mark, Vancouver was around 900.  Impressive increase from the sale, and it sure is nice to have an owner with deep, deep pockets.

 

4.  Not sure he wouldnt have seen his coming given the volatility, that connects to winning and losing.  I think he wanted the re-tool and may have even demanded it to keep the stock high, but that is just my opinion.  It's shocking how many Canucks jerseys I'd see in the Ottawa games around 2011-2013...seemed like the Leafs were in town half the building,  now it's mostly red with pockets of blue.  In other words I think Vancouver was in vogue for passive fans all over the place, and now it's just us lifers keeping the torch and spending our money.  

 

5.  Id be over the moon if we hired a different GM and he managed to speed things up.  I think we have better odds keeping the devil we know though and love what he's done to our pool, he's well respected and liked by other GMs and seems to be improving.  Pettersson is already considered a Calder candidate by THN, no GM has ever pulled that off for us and if they both win (Boeser) I can't recall any GM pulling that off.  Reminds me a lot of CHI when their core was emerging, same with PIT, especially if Demko and Juolevi work out too.

 

Was close to your side a year ago, but since changed my tune.  I do understand where your coming from though, it's obvious we just want what's best for the team long term.

 

 

 

Dorsett and Sbisa are interesting cases.

 

Obviously Dorsett wouldn't have continued his hot streak, but man oh man did he have an extra step. He looked like he would hit 25 points this year, and was playing against top competition on a shut down line. That surgery must have fixed something. I think he alluded to how it's the best he's ever felt before the season and it clearly showed. Still a bad contract at the time it was signed. 

 

Sbisa only was good at one thing in his tenure and that was being an effective crease clearer.  Oh and he occasionally threw a big hit. He was really good on the PK. He couldn't do anything else at more than a depth defenseman level. His possession metrics are similar this year, but he has a lot more defensive responsibility and is doing well. Plagued with injuries this season but now looks like he could be a top four defenseman. Maybe he finally took the next step after flat lining his development since his rookie year. Really strange development curve - like 8 years of no improvement and he finally figures it out. He is better than MDZ, Pouliot, Gudbranson, and even Stecher. Although I do believe Gudbranson and Stecher could be better in different systems. 

 

Either way, bad contracts at the time.

 

The bolded part is 100% correct. Benning pitched exactly what they had their minds set on and they went after it before giving multiple interviews. In reality, a retool is the best model for business. It makes sense why the Aquilinis went that route. It was just executed badly by Benning. Don't get me wrong, the best move for the franchise from a purely sporting perspective should have been a full rebuild after the torts year. 

 

It's hard to watch a bad team that plays boring hockey that is stuck in a weird place of not knowing what they're doing and a management group that sends mixed signals to the fan base. 

 

I don't think we need to speed things up. I think we need to make the right moves. So many bad trades to fill the "25 and under age gap". Vey, Pedan, Gudbranson, Sutter, Clendening, Pouliot, hell even Goldobin instead of a pick. Only Granlund was a slight win, and was Baertschi a big win. (underrated player imo). Oh, and necessitating NHL players who can make a now impact in Bonino (who was a really good player and I don't know why the &^@# they traded Him, just not what we needed) and Sbisa instead of getting more futures.

 

Pettersson is really &^@#ing good. Demko is really &^@#ing good. Boeser is really &^@#ing good.

 

I thought things had changed for the better at the TDL and they were finally rebuilding when they moved Hansen and Burrows. Then Benning ruined it and said they wanted to keep Hansen and only traded him due to expansion draft, not because they wanted a rebuild. This was then backed up by the fact they made 3 more additions in free agency, with only one seen as a possible player they move at the deadline in Vanek. The other two have term. 

 

[Tom Sestito]

1 hour ago, spook007 said:

Been following this tread on and off, but the latest debate about the value reduction of this franchise have shaking my head.

 

WTF did people expect was going to happen during a retool/rebuild or what ever you wanna call it? Did you expect higher ticket prices, full houses and onwards?

Please give me strength....

 

Its the same people, who were screaming for youth and change before JB took over and still are complaining... Flipping joke to put that at JB's door.

 

The value of this franchise will build up again once our new team is set and the younger players are good enough to win hockey games on a consistent basis. Play offs saves any franchises financially. 

 

 

I don't expect any good attendance records when the team sucks. Aquilini found a GM who sold him on an idea of a team who would compete for the playoffs every year that retooled on the fly and would be competitive by year four or five in an attempt to avoid empty seats and falling revenue of a bottom feeder.

 

It was possible if properly executed with good asset management.

 

Benning has failed in executing during his own stated timeline.

 

We needed youth and change. Benning has brought some youth and traded away a ton and passed up some key players and just overall had made countless bad moves that if he hadn't made, we would have been able to be competitive by now or next year.

 

 

[Darius]

4 minutes ago, Tom Sestito said:

I don't expect any good attendance records when the team sucks. Aquilini found a GM who sold him on an idea of a team who would compete for the playoffs every year that retooled on the fly and would be competitive by year four or five in an attempt to avoid empty seats and falling revenue of a bottom feeder.

 

It was possible if properly executed with good asset management.

 

Benning has failed in executing during his own stated timeline.

 

We needed youth and change. Benning has brought some youth and traded away a ton and passed up some key players and just overall had made countless bad moves that if he hadn't made, we would have been able to be competitive by now or next year.

 

 

I'm genuinely curious about how you know this.   How do you know that it was JB that sold Aquilini and convinced him?    Benning might have publicly stated this was his plan, but how do you know he wasnt mandated to take this direction?

[Tom Sestito]

8 minutes ago, Darius71 said:

I'm genuinely curious about how you know this.   How do you know that it was JB that sold Aquilini and convinced him?    Benning might have publicly stated this was his plan, but how do you know he wasnt mandated to take this direction?

 

19 minutes ago, Tom Sestito said:

Benning pitched exactly what they had their minds set on and they went after it before giving multiple interviews. In reality, a retool is the best model for business. It makes sense why the Aquilinis went that route. It was just executed badly by Benning.

 

Here's what I had said in the previous post and I realize I didn't say it clearly. What I'm suggesting is that Benning pitched exactly what the owners already had considered the best case scenario. When I say sold them this idea, I'm inferring that they wanted to go this route and Benning had his mind on the same path. So Benning was essentially selling them on something they already were sold on in their heads. The reports that Benning was the only GM they interviewed and they ever bothered interviewing anyone else seem to corroborate this.