Is the Current Ownership Failing this Team?

[mikeyman109]

2 minutes ago, N7Nucks said:

Dang it’s getting heated in here. I need an adult.

[JM_]

12 hours ago, kingofsurrey said:

Being one of the worst teams in the league for  3 years  generally should give you a few top prospects.... 

generally but not always. Some guys find ways of picking Yakupov's. Lots of teams passed on Boesser and Gaudette. 

[JM_]

9 hours ago, oldnews said:

So what is the substance of the difference between Linden and Aquilini - that lead to this departure?  Who knows - but one of the more plausible possibilities may be the one you refer to in point 4 - one that I believe was implied by James Cybulski.  If the hockey/player personnel decisions are more directly assigned to Benning, effectively inching Linden out of his role of overseeing those hockey decisions - that would be a fundamental reneg on the terms under which he was hired.  There would not necessarily have to be a rift between Linden and Benning of any substance in order for that progression to rub Linden in a fundamentally problematic way. 

thats plausible, and if Linden wanted to go after different free agents as well then i can see the split making more sense. 

 

[appleboy]

The decisions that will be made in the near future will tell all. Will they maintain a patient attitude. The 3 UFA signings are troubling but not the be end all.

[stawns]

5 minutes ago, appleboy said:

The decisions that will be made in the near future will tell all. Will they maintain a patient attitude. The 3 UFA signings are troubling but not the be end all.

Why troubling?  I thought they were excellent, Beagle especially

[JM_]

2 minutes ago, stawns said:

Why troubling?  I thought they were excellent, Beagle especially

troubling would have been JVR for 40 mil. One extra year of Beagle? meh. 

[mikeyman109]

It doesnt look like they are pressuring young Hughes to step into the line up early to make an impact. I would say they are being patient with him and the rest of the young players.

[smithers joe]

i wish people wouldn't create a drama out of things they don't know the real facts. 

beagle may not play out his full contract here, but fans are going to love the way he plays and how his play improve this team in hustle and determination. i don't know much about roussel and schaller but love beagle. i'm eager to see how schaller plays. 

[mikeyman109]

5 minutes ago, smithers joe said:

i wish people wouldn't create a drama out of things they don't know the real facts. 

beagle may not play out his full contract here, but fans are going to love the way he plays and how his play improve this team in hustle and determination. i don't know much about roussel and schaller but love beagle. i'm eager to see how schaller plays. 

Totally agree on the Bolded.

Beagle will be an strong two way guy for us. wont lead the team in points but a good defensive center

Roussell think Matt Cooke. Hopefully without the antics.

Schaller is my unknown although he did score against us in that lopsided win against the Bruins last year.

[Jester13]

13 hours ago, aGENT said:

Sure, who hasn't. 

 

I don't begrudge the guy with 100's of millions on the line, who's team had just won back to back president cups from being hesitant to rebuild. 

 

At all. 

The thing for me is that he had so many people around him telling him that the writing was on the wall, but he refused. I'm just not a fan of leaders who don't put their trust into those they hire to do a job - a job where they are the ones who know better. 

 

FTR, I'm not of the mind that his meddling screwed us over long term - JB has done a fantastic job since getting the green light to rebuild - but I do worry that FA will meddle again; it's not a big worry, because I really do think that FA is still on board with the rebuild, but the concern will always be there for me (not that I lose sleep over it, or anything). 

 

Although I was hoping to see him this year on the team, I was pleased to read QH isn't getting rushed to sell tickets. 

[EdgarM]

I don't think that the fact that ownership is willing to spend to the cap should be looked at lightly as well as the fact that they care enough to try and help the team to win by "meddling". 

The only other factor being presented here is that many have opinions on what should be done to make the team successful. That is a whole new ballgame.

They care and they are willing to "put their money where their mouth is".....end of story.

[Crabcakes]

10 hours ago, oldnews said:

Well stated - agree with much of it.

 

I think Linden did an excellent job personally - he hired the right GM - they collaborated to generate a good coaching progression plan (I like Green and believe he is the right coach to develop this group).

 

Whether ownership is 'failing' the team?   Who can say?  What I would say is that they failed the team in the interim before this current management group.  The Tortorella misadventure - was costly and ill-advised - and certainly doesn't appear to have Mike Gillis' fingerprints on it.

 

So - that was apparently corrected when complete hockey jurisdiction was handed over to Linden.  And here's where I think people get carried away with assumptions that he lacked the intellect (and experience) to pull that role off.  He wasn't required to know every aspect of building a successful franchise - he was charged with hiring the right GM and working with them to set the transiition on course.

 

Personally, I think Linden did a good job of that - as evidenced by the asset outcomes they currently enjoy.  People can make meaningless claims that their youth haven't proven anything - but youth by definition haven't proven anything - until they do.  Expecting premature outcomes of players - many of whom haven't hit NHL ice yet is no more reasonable than assuming they're an inevitable SCC core.  All we can do is assess them with reasonable tempering either way - optimism maybe, with realistic expectations.  But one thing is clear - the Linden/Benning team has transitioned this franchise and have the young assets to grow into the roles vacated by the departed core.   There are very few assets remaining here that predate Linden's tenure.  I don't see any potential asset decisions that could have been significant enough to separate Benning and Linden - I think it clearly tracks towards a disagreement between Linden and Aquilini (and perhaps that's why 12 tweets followed....)

 

So what is the substance of the difference between Linden and Aquilini - that lead to this departure?  Who knows - but one of the more plausible possibilities may be the one you refer to in point 4 - one that I believe was implied by James Cybulski.  If the hockey/player personnel decisions are more directly assigned to Benning, effectively inching Linden out of his role of overseeing those hockey decisions - that would be a fundamental reneg on the terms under which he was hired.  There would not necessarily have to be a rift between Linden and Benning of any substance in order for that progression to rub Linden in a fundamentally problematic way.  At the same time, once Linden hired Benning, he effectively hired the person whose mandate was to define those decisions - moreso than Linden himself, despite his role of overseeing the GM.   If this is the subtance of the dispute, I think it's a reasonable one from Linden's perspective, but not overly problematic from a fan perspective - unless Aquilini intends to alter the directions coming from what was previously Linden.  That does not appear to be the messaging - and Linden leaving over the 'restructuring' may be enough to insulate/protect the Benning/Green project to some extent (if there's anything to it in the first instance).  In any event - we'll see what kind of autonomy Benning maintains, and we won't really know until we've had the chance to track his subsequent moves....but this poiint - #4 - may be the most plausible.  To some extent, the extent to which Linden did his job - ie the momentum Benning/Green now appear to have - could be part of what made himself somewhat redundant.  For me that is largely positive - because I think he has left at a point where the team is in good hands and correctly directed - and I never really expected Linden to be more competent in all aspects than the GM, coaches, scouting staff etc that he had a hand in recreating/transitioning.  If he felt less focal or critical to the team's decisions and success, perhaps that isn't really negative - but at the same time might make him wonder if his time is better spent with his family - and perhaps he in part also didn't feel particularly respected - for where the team sits today relative to the shambles it was in when his character was required to piece it back together.

 

Well said.  I don't think that Linden and Benning are far apart philosophically at all.  This is more to do with Linden being left out of the decision making process.  Like you say, this is exactly why he was hired.  He reportedly had "full autonomy" to make decisions and this was written into his contract.  

 

There may be small differences like giving young players more opportunity.  Or, looking at it another way, placing them in positions to succeed.  As this team is at this point, there could have been 5 spots for youngsters or as it is rolling out, 3 spots.  It's still draft and develop.  It's just a small difference in how to develop and how to transition players to the NHL.

 

Would one way result in more wins than the other?  I really don't know, but I think Bennings way, we'll see fewer lopsided losses.  This could help the group to feel more competitive on a nightly basis.  It's really not about putting bums in seats because fans want to see kids developing.  The old guard is mostly gone, it's a new and exciting team.

 

 

[aGENT]

57 minutes ago, Jester13 said:

The thing for me is that he had so many people around him telling him that the writing was on the wall, but he refused. I'm just not a fan of leaders who don't put their trust into those they hire to do a job - a job where they are the ones who know better. 

 

FTR, I'm not of the mind that his meddling screwed us over long term - JB has done a fantastic job since getting the green light to rebuild - but I do worry that FA will meddle again; it's not a big worry, because I really do think that FA is still on board with the rebuild, but the concern will always be there for me (not that I lose sleep over it, or anything). 

 

Although I was hoping to see him this year on the team, I was pleased to read QH isn't getting rushed to sell tickets. 

Meh, we've been rebuilding since JB got here (while also attempting to maintain a half decent NHL team with two $14m total, immovable, HOF's...and a bunch of handcuffing NTC's). A tear down style rebuild was never really in the cards here despite some loud screaming from a few noisy detractors.

 

I don't really see the concern. 

 

Should he have green lighted it maybe one year sooner with some hindsight? Sure. But like I said, I don't begrudge the guy with real skin in the game for being hesitant to do so from a team not far removed from back to back President's cup seasons. I don't have much time for the hindsight and spilled milk crowd.

[-DLC-]

I do wish that the team would be more careful in NOT creating this sort of fodder for the media and the masses.  We get enough of that without the team participating in it.  Be direct and concise..don't use Trump's tactics to tweet out from afar.  It's very disconnected and, especially when there's ambiguity, stirs up the silt.

I wish this exit for Trevor was more sensitive to the last time he was turfed from here and avoided doing more of the same.  I feel it was insensitive and not, at all, the way he should have left this organization.  A heart and soul guy deserves a better send off.  Some appreciation and gratitude for what he HAS done for this city was in order.  I mean, they can still do that, but this feels like a negative strike and could have been a positive one if done correctly.

 

Even though people are disposable in this business, you want to create an environment that demonstrates being valued.

After having time to sit back and ponder this, while I don't feel like we should create drama, that door was left open by owners.  They did a poor job of addressing this departure.  FA didn't step up to the plate as he should have, but instead opted to offer his goodbye in a fragmented, impersonal way that felt like a parting shot more than an explanation.

 

Business or not, it's not how to do it in my opinion.

[Crabcakes]

1 hour ago, Jester13 said:

The thing for me is that he had so many people around him telling him that the writing was on the wall, but he refused. I'm just not a fan of leaders who don't put their trust into those they hire to do a job - a job where they are the ones who know better. 

 

FTR, I'm not of the mind that his meddling screwed us over long term - JB has done a fantastic job since getting the green light to rebuild - but I do worry that FA will meddle again; it's not a big worry, because I really do think that FA is still on board with the rebuild, but the concern will always be there for me (not that I lose sleep over it, or anything). 

 

Although I was hoping to see him this year on the team, I was pleased to read QH isn't getting rushed to sell tickets. 

This isn't meddling at all.  This is mishandling executives.  If FA wanted to restructure his executive group, he should have been proactive about it rather than create an untenable situation for Linden.  But Francesco hasn't meddled in hockey decisions here.

[oldnews]

52 minutes ago, Crabcakes said:

Well said.  I don't think that Linden and Benning are far apart philosophically at all.  This is more to do with Linden being left out of the decision making process.  Like you say, this is exactly why he was hired.  He reportedly had "full autonomy" to make decisions and this was written into his contract.  

 

There may be small differences like giving young players more opportunity.  Or, looking at it another way, placing them in positions to succeed.  As this team is at this point, there could have been 5 spots for youngsters or as it is rolling out, 3 spots.  It's still draft and develop.  It's just a small difference in how to develop and how to transition players to the NHL.

 

Would one way result in more wins than the other?  I really don't know, but I think Bennings way, we'll see fewer lopsided losses.  This could help the group to feel more competitive on a nightly basis.  It's really not about putting bums in seats because fans want to see kids developing.  The old guard is mostly gone, it's a new and exciting team.

 

 

I agree.  Linden's statements of intent heading into free agency actually indicate a large factor of consensus among the group, judging by what Benning did in the end - which was to add depth support for a young core of skilled forwards while avoiding any 'core' signings and allowing the next core of forwards to grow from within. 

 

Needless to say, the shutdown line that will be populated with Beagle, Roussel, Schaller types - is not the development ground for the next core of skilled forwards.  Much ado about nothing in the drama surrounding depth forward signings - the team clearly needed at least one or two of these guys bare minimum and have tended to err on the side of adding an extra body (and with 20+ million of cap, and an extremely young group, it's more understandable than at any point)

 

It's comical to listen to the dumbfounded chorus that doesn't understand why they didn't chase any top 6 forwards (where will the scoring come from?) - almost as comical to hear suggestions of parachuting players like Dahlen and Goldobin into the hard minutes roles that will be played by Beagle et al.

I'm not sure there could possibly be more daft responses to what they did in free agency.

 

Almost equally as unfounded is to hear endless suggestions from both sides of relatively irrelevent debates attempt to use Linden in diametrically opposed versions of their own player/personnel protest stories.  Linden wanted to speed up , Aqua to slow down, Linden wanted to slow down, Aqua to speed up, Linden wanted more veterans, less youth, Aqua wanted more veterans, Linden wanted more youth, Aqua wanted more youth!!!  - Linden has assumptions planted in his mouth on both sides of that spectrum and none of it makes a great deal of sense given the relative stated consensus between Linden's intent and the team's actual course of action.

 

I don't think any of this has to do with a departure on transition philosophy between Benning and Linden.  The idea that depth forwards were enough to precipitate Linden's departure is a convenient storyline for people whinging about their free agent signings, but putting either extreme version of those perspectives in Linden's mouth is pretty far-fetched.

What's clear - from Linden's own statements - is that Linden did not want them signing top 6 forwards - and they did not. 

 

The team has added veteran depth forwards at every step of the transition -   two or three signings every summer and this summer, the additional departures of two Sedins, after the retirement of Dorset - in the past in large part because they didn't have the youth ready to step into those spots.

That may no longer be the case with their skilled forward positions, but where their hard minutes shutdown minutes are concerned, it arguably still is - and in the absence of a ready top 6 C, it's possible Sutter will be drawn upon to shelter young wingers as opposed to forming their shutdown line - which could enable them to create space for and support another young winger or two. 

 

In any event, I think this boils down to Linden finding himself on the relative margins of a team and management group he created and guided to this point - with whom stepping into that role (hockey decisions now answerable to Aquilini?) - it's not hard to see why he'd find that disrespectful.  I doubt there's much more to it that - the terms of his position appear to have changed/been watered down for whatever reason. 

[EdgarM]

6 minutes ago, oldnews said:

I agree.  Linden's statements of intent heading into free agency actually indicate a large factor of consensus among the group, judging by what Benning did in the end - which was to add depth support for a young core of skilled forwards while avoiding any 'core' signings and allowing the next core of forwards to grow from within. 

 

Needless to say, the shutdown line that will be populated with Beagle, Roussel, Schaller types - is not the development ground for the next core of skilled forwards.  Much ado about nothing in the drama surrounding depth forward signings - the team clearly needed at least one or two of these guys bare minimum and have tended to err on the side of adding an extra body (and with 20+ million of cap, and an extremely young group, it's more understandable than at any point)

 

It's comical to listen to the dumbfounded chorus that doesn't understand why they didn't chase any top 6 forwards (where will the scoring come from?) - almost as comical to hear suggestions of parachuting players like Dahlen and Goldobin into the hard minutes roles that will be played by Beagle et al.

I'm not sure there could possibly be more daft responses to what they did in free agency.

 

Almost equally as unfounded is to hear endless suggestions from both sides of relatively irrelevent debates attempt to use Linden in diametrically opposed versions of their own player/personnel protest stories.  Linden wanted to speed up , Aqua to slow down, Linden wanted to slow down, Aqua to speed up, Linden wanted more veterans, less youth, Aqua wanted more veterans, Linden wanted more youth, Aqua wanted more youth!!!  - Linden has assumptions planted in his mouth on both sides of that spectrum and none of it makes a great deal of sense given the relative stated consensus between Linden's intent and the team's actual course of action.

 

I don't think any of this has to do with a departure on transition philosophy between Benning and Linden.  The idea that depth forwards were enough to precipitate Linden's departure is a convenient storyline for people whinging about their free agent signings, but putting either extreme version of those perspectives in Linden's mouth is pretty far-fetched.

What's clear - from Linden's own statements - is that Linden did not want them signing top 6 forwards - and they did not. 

 

The team has added veteran depth forwards at every step of the transition -   two or three signings every summer and this summer, the additional departures of two Sedins, after the retirement of Dorset - in the past in large part because they didn't have the youth ready to step into those spots.

That may no longer be the case with their skilled forward positions, but where their hard minutes shutdown minutes are concerned, it arguably still is - and in the absence of a ready top 6 C, it's possible Sutter will be drawn upon to shelter young wingers as opposed to forming their shutdown line - which could enable them to create space for and support another young winger or two. 

 

In any event, I think this boils down to Linden finding himself on the relative margins of a team and management group he created and guided to this point - with whom stepping into that role (hockey decisions now answerable to Aquilini?) - it's not hard to see why he'd find that disrespectful.  I doubt there's much more to it that - the terms of his position appear to have changed/been watered down for whatever reason. 

You bring up good points and the important thing from last year to this is that the mentorship/leadership positions are right where they should be and that is in the bottom 6 positions instead of the top 6, as they were with the Sedins, and not costing us 14 million dollars!

I believe many are reading too much into Linden's departure and I am hoping it is his decision to spend more time with his family and maybe one day he does return to the team. I cannot see him all of sudden having no interest in this team and leaving it forever after all the time he has invested in it. Maybe he takes time off and comes back when its time to hoist the cup. Some of us can  hope and dream I guess. 

 

[stawns]

4 hours ago, Jester13 said:

The thing for me is that he had so many people around him telling him that the writing was on the wall, but he refused. I'm just not a fan of leaders who don't put their trust into those they hire to do a job - a job where they are the ones who know better. 

 

FTR, I'm not of the mind that his meddling screwed us over long term - JB has done a fantastic job since getting the green light to rebuild - but I do worry that FA will meddle again; it's not a big worry, because I really do think that FA is still on board with the rebuild, but the concern will always be there for me (not that I lose sleep over it, or anything). 

 

Although I was hoping to see him this year on the team, I was pleased to read QH isn't getting rushed to sell tickets. 

You don't know that FA had a hand in personnel decisions to be even remotely true.

[Grape]

22 hours ago, zimmy said:

So … imagine the FA signings don't happen, who does Green ice for our squad? Without an established and credible 3 and 4th lines does that not expose our young talent ? Does it not serve to "rush things" along for our young talent?  It would seem that Trevor would be 100% behind the type of signings that occurred, particularly this past month, as they were to meant to impact the culture of this team from one which had little push back to one that would allow everyone to play a braver more belligerent style of hockey. A game, by the way, that Trevor understood explicitly.

The bolded part is absolutely your own and a lot of people’s opinions about how to go about the rebuild and there’s nothing wrong with that.

 

However I wasn’t stating an opinion on the rebuild, rather what it seemed to bother Trevor. I don’t think stating an opinion on how to go about the rebuild affects the validity of my original post. 

 

I don’t disagree with your opinion (bolded) too much, but I definitely disagree with believing that since you believe your opinion is correct, that Trevor must have agreed with it as well because he understands hockey, as if everyone that understands hockey would have done the same thing. Again I was saying what I think Trevor thought leading to him resigning (I presume), rather than what I thought was right.

[thrago]

I would say no they are not failing. All the evidence  that we have that can be proved shows them to be excellent owners. They spend any amount of money the team needs in all aspects from what I can see. All past and present employees only say good things about them from my knowledge. All of there public statements are positive towards the team and indicate they are willing to do and spend what ever they need to to win a Cup in Vancouver. 

 

What more could you want from an owner really? If I was the owner I would make myself the GM and then we would really be in trouble, cause even though I'd like to think I know a lot about hockey truth is I haven't  really got a clue compared to a guy like Benning or any of the other GM's.