JB has thrown away far too many assets - needs to be replaced as GM

[Alflives]

3 minutes ago, ItTakesAnArmy said:

The day Benning took over the team had;

28 players under 30 years old and only 10 30 and over play that year.

The next season, Benning's first,

24 players under 30 years old and 8 over 30 years old played that year

Benning inherited

Canucks had 5 clause contracts Hamhuis (waived when asked) , Garrison (waived when asked), Burrows (waived when asked), Sedins (never asked), Hansen (waived when asked) - Garrison waived when asked before start of the next season

Benning's first season

Canucks gained two more clause contracts in Miller (refused to waive) and Vrbata (selected non playoff teams only, no move) for a total of 8, he had time to deal Edler's 6 year contract before the clause kicked in.(refused to waive)

 

FYI Edler just signed another NMC contract that does not expire until AFTER the Seattle expansion draft, June 30, all NHL contracts are in force up to June 30.

 

Currently the Canucks now have 7 clause contracts, all Benning's and with the Seattle expansion coming up to boot.

4 does not make a team and 4 points out of a possible 164 or 27th not really worth selling the farm for or worthy of high praise.

 

Last 4 years = 127 wins and 201 losses, careful crafting for that.

156 million spent on FA that walked away or the team traded picks for.

3 of 7 1rst round top 7 picks on the team in 7 years.

A prospect pool that only counts last years picks.

I get it.  We tanked, but not on purpose.  Look at the results, and not the method.  We are in a great position right now.  I disagree with JB’s process to get us here, but I really like where we are.  

[ItTakesAnArmy]

14 minutes ago, spur1 said:

Who do they beat out? Well let’s see.... maybe the Flames. We beat them in the season series last year. We also beat several of the top teams last season so it could be any of the 8 that made it last year. 

Name them? Calgary Okay but Calgary ended up ahead of the Canucks by a mere 26 points even losing the extra game Markstrom stole.

So who? Dallas? Colorado? Vegas?

[BPA]

53 minutes ago, ItTakesAnArmy said:

On JB, Eriksson, radio has the Canucks trading away the future to rid themselves of the Eriksson contract.

 

IMO this is insane, this team is rebuilding.

 

If Eriksson's contract is so bad why is Benning still here? Gillis was burned at the stake for "ALL THOSE BAD CONTRACTS" This forum has many posters that frie dGillis and bent the knee to Benning.

Wake up, look at what your idol has done,

Capped out

Traded away more draft picks and what will be a lottery pick and lets throw a salt in that wound, to a team that needed to get rid of this player to sign better ones, vaseline please.

Multiple clause contracts to older players that will not be moved for YEARS.

Franchise loss of repsect league wide, essentially the national media keeps the Canuck talk to the bare minimum, what are they going to talk about, their confusion of what is going one here? If they nothing good to say, say nothing. There has been a lot of silence.

This is a death by a thousand cuts.

 

What makes up for all the mistakes, the time taken, loss of draft picks? Getting close to a playoff spot? A playoff spot that this coming year many team may tank to get better odds or just a better draft position because this year is so good and deep?

 

Mulligan for Eriksson, Mulligan for Sutter, Mulligan for Gudbranson, Mulligan for letting assets go for nothing, Mulligan for trading away draft picks, Mulligan for FAILING in the draft, Both Jake and Olli were taken in the wrong spots and compared to others in their classes, failures, Mulligan for capping out, Mulligan for screwing the Seattle expansion draft, Milligan for have the team lose 50 games a year, Mulligan for creating the worst team in Canuck history.

 

How many more Mulligans? Deep prospect pool? Montreal and NYR as examples, surpassed the Canucks in 2 years there should be 15 1rst and 2nd round picks, where are they? Mulligan

LE contract is bad in that it was $6M x 6yrs (a bit too long for my liking).  At the time he was a 25-30 goal scorer to play with the Sedins (and yes...the owners wanted to make the playoffs...cuz that's revenue that they keep and don't have to share).  It didn't work out as hoped thus now the contract is a problem.  But still...it's far better than the Luongo contract that is hamstringing the Canucks with cap recapture penalty.

 

You still seem to ignore the fact that when JB was hired, owners wanted to make the playoffs.  You can't exactly make it to the playoffs with just UFA (players do have choice of where they want to play) and draft picks (prospects that can't immediately jump into the line-up).

 

I didn't like the signings of Sutter, Beagle, Schaller, etc at the time but understood that VETERANS were necessary to insulate (instead of throwing them to the wolves) the young players.  VETERANS to take those defensive responsibilities so the young offensive minded players can flourish.

 

You also ignore that Canucks had multiple NTCs from the Gillis era that most likely prevented speeding up the rebuild.  Look no further than Edler refusing to waive his NTC at the trade deadline.

 

Easy to be the Armchair GM with Captain Hindsight on your staff.

 

[ItTakesAnArmy]

53 minutes ago, spur1 said:

The only thing insane here is you and the Pulp beating the same old drum, thread after thread and expecting different results. Read the polls and give it up as you’re vastly out numbered. You guys sound just like Arty57 on sportsnet and that is bad. 

The Canucks do own the forum you know?

[Rob_Zepp]

1 hour ago, Tomatoes11 said:

Nothing to disagree about. This is the exact result of JB’s work broken down.

 

since we can never have a perfect baseline in any comparison, the best we can hope to do is assume that the drafting would have similar results if our team was full of garbage like Schaller, Dorsett, vey compared to icing a team full of UFA’s, waiver wire pick ups, and AHLers. Since you can’t really finish worse than 3rd last, 6th last, and 9th last we will assume the main core is the same.

 

So our main core would be EP, Hughes hopefully, Boeser, Horvat, Myers , and Edler.

 

So that would be the same or similar regardless if we went the dim Jim retard route or the proper rebuild route.

 

So now that has been established, fast forward 5 years later.

 

lets ask the simple question who would help and support our core win a cup better?

 

27 year old baerschit one concussion away from retiring or 23 year old 2nd round pick drafted pretty high?

 

Dorsett sitting at home drinking beer or a 23 year old 3rd rnd prospect?

 

Mcaan, 22 year old 2nd, 22 year old 3rd or tanner fricking Pearson?

 

go through EVERY Single trade he has ever made with the same question. And it’s 100% safe to say that besides the Burrows and Hansen trades, we would be much better off with what we gave up. 

 

Its pretty cut cut and dry. Benning span his wheels for 5 years and saddled us with unmovable garbage like Schaller, Erikkson, and beagle and we didn’t benefit from any of his moves. We would have been much better off with what he traded away than what we got. Not sure if there is anything to disagree with. The comparisons are right there for everyone to plainly see.

 

OP is bang on. That is plain to see for anyone that looks at this realistically and without the Canuck cheerleading poms poms on.

 

 

Sincerely tried reading but could only see this in my mind...

 

[ilduce39]

1 hour ago, ItTakesAnArmy said:

Capped out

 

Multiple clause contracts to older players that will not be moved for YEARS.

“Capped out” after signing Myers and Benn, trading for Miller and re-signing Boeser.  I keep reading this on Twitter and it makes me laugh as though JB couldn’t get anything done this offseason.  He’s done more than anyone save maybe one or two teams.

 

Pretty huge tantrum to throw because we can’t sign Dzingel.  

 

Its also hypocritical to criticize JB for not being able to sign UFAs because... he signed too many UFAs.  What do you want? To sign or not to sign? As always with JB’s critics, there isn’t much of an alternative plan (other than 10 years of tanking, “weaponizing cap space” and “stockpiling picks.”)  You just want to sit back and bitch about everything in isolation and then wonder why nobody agrees with you.  

 

JB’s clause contracts are also a lot less restrictive than the full NTC’s Gillis was tossing around.  They’re always partials and scale back as the contracts age. 

 

Loui aside, we also have a ton of guys coming off the books as we progress.  There’s a lot of flexibility.  We may be “capped out” this year after a few big moves but are in no danger long term to lose guys like Petey or Quinn.  

[Rob_Zepp]

1 minute ago, ItTakesAnArmy said:

The Canucks do own the forum you know?

And they pay people to vote in polls as long as they vote to make the Canucks look good.

 

Pssst, it's a secrete so don't tell anyone.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, ItTakesAnArmy said:

The Canucks do own the forum you know?

 

[ItTakesAnArmy]

1 minute ago, BPA said:

LE contract is bad in that it was $6M x 6yrs (a bit too long for my liking).  At the time he was a 25-30 goal scorer to play with the Sedins (and yes...the owners wanted to make the playoffs...cuz that's revenue that they keep and don't have to share).  It didn't work out as hoped thus now the contract is a problem.  But still...it's far better than the Luongo contract that is hamstringing the Canucks with cap recapture penalty.

 

You still seem to ignore the fact that when JB was hired, owners wanted to make the playoffs.  You can't exactly make it to the playoffs with just UFA (players do have choice of where they want to play) and draft picks (prospects that can't immediately jump into the line-up).

 

I didn't like the signings of Sutter, Beagle, Schaller, etc at the time but understood that VETERANS were necessary to insulate (instead of throwing them to the wolves) the young players.  VETERANS to take those defensive responsibilities so the young offensive minded players can flourish.

 

You also ignore that Canucks had multiple NTCs from the Gillis era that most likely prevented speeding up the rebuild.  Look no further than Edler refusing to waive his NTC at the trade deadline.

 

Easy to be the Armchair GM with Captain Hindsight on your staff.

 

What do you know of what the owners wanted? Did you know about the guards? Do you WHY the owners backed away totally and gave Linden/Benning 100% control of the team? Do you WHY the owners fired Nonis or Gillis? If so why is Benning still here?

 

Throwing to the wolves? Like they are now? I am sure that Boeser's 130 games and Elais's 70 some odd have made them into grizzled veterans used to losing like Horvat. Hughes is waiting to embarrass all those players he will have to go into the corners with, standing up his head is elbow level.

 

Read before, all except Edler waived, the Sedins were not asked. None of Benning's 7 clause contracts waived.And as i posted Edler's NMC carries until June 30, AFTER the Seattle expansion draft so he will have to be covered using up a spot. The fact he has no contract the next year is not a loop hole because nothing states he could not sign again so the NMC needs to be covered.

[ItTakesAnArmy]

25 minutes ago, ilduce39 said:

“Capped out” after signing Myers and Benn, trading for Miller and re-signing Boeser.  I keep reading this on Twitter and it makes me laugh as though JB couldn’t get anything done this offseason.  He’s done more than anyone save maybe one or two teams.

 

Pretty huge tantrum to throw because we can’t sign Dzingel.  

 

Its also hypocritical to criticize JB for not being able to sign UFAs because... he signed too many UFAs.  What do you want? To sign or not to sign? As always with JB’s critics, there isn’t much of an alternative plan (other than 10 years of tanking, “weaponizing cap space” and “stockpiling picks.”)  You just want to sit back and bitch about everything in isolation and then wonder why nobody agrees with you.  

 

JB’s clause contracts are also a lot less restrictive than the full NTC’s Gillis was tossing around.  They’re always partials and scale back as the contracts age. 

 

Loui aside, we also have a ton of guys coming off the books as we progress.  There’s a lot of flexibility.  We may be “capped out” this year after a few big moves but are in no danger long term to lose guys like Petey or Quinn.  

Wrong wrong wrong what NMC did Gills give out? 2 to the Sedins who they never asked to waive? Benning has 7 on the books now, all his and that does count the 3 that expired and he got no assets in return. Hamhuis, Burrows, Hansen, Garrison all waived when asked, none of Benning's did.

 

He did more than NYR or Montreal? Or Chicago and Tampa? Or Pittsburgh and Arizona?

 

I am not hypocritical about signing FA's, only the over paid old ones he gives clauses to, the cap is the problem, not signings but handcuffing being unable to use it to enhance a trade or take on a bad contract to gain or improve draft picks or simply have a schedule to pay contracts internally. This spending to the cap every losing year is a joke, no team has suffered as much paying as much for 4 young players.

 

4 years to have these off the books. 2024, but Benning will trade away more picks to get rid of them.

Edited July 4, 2019 by ItTakesAnArmy

[BPA]

13 minutes ago, ItTakesAnArmy said:

What do you know of what the owners wanted? Did you know about the guards? Do you WHY the owners backed away totally and gave Linden/Benning 100% control of the team? Do you WHY the owners fired Nonis or Gillis? If so why is Benning still here?

 

Throwing to the wolves? Like they are now? I am sure that Boeser's 130 games and Elais's 70 some odd have made them into grizzled veterans used to losing like Horvat. Hughes is waiting to embarrass all those players he will have to go into the corners with, standing up his head is elbow level.

 

Read before, all except Edler waived, the Sedins were not asked. None of Benning's 7 clause contracts waived.And as i posted Edler's NMC carries until June 30, AFTER the Seattle expansion draft so he will have to be covered using up a spot. The fact he has no contract the next year is not a loop hole because nothing states he could not sign again so the NMC needs to be covered.

I may not know the intentions of the owners but neither do you.  But most certainly, people want to make a profit.  The more the merrier.

 

Pretty sure the young guns are not defensively matching up against the other stars in this league.  Horvat is the exception as he is crazy good in the face-offs.  What a gem.

 

 

 

Simple google search of the recent Las Vegas expansion draft in 2017...

 

Teams were required to protect any contracted players with no move clauses (NMCs) with one of the team's slots for protected players, unless the contract expired on July 1, 2017, in which case the NMC was considered void for the draft.

 

So if the above statement is true...the Edler's NMC does not impact the Seattle Expansion draft at all because his contract ends July 1, 2021.  If everything holds true, the expansion will be sometime in June 2021.

 

 

 

[Gaudette Celly]

7 minutes ago, ItTakesAnArmy said:

4 years to have these off the books. 2024, but Benning will trade away more picks to get rid of them.

Four years to have who "off the books", Horvat?  What picks has Benning given away to get rid of contacts?  You're thinking of a kid named Kyle Dubas.

 

Figured this was a garbage thread full of whining and complaining, little surprise it's likewise full of straw men and short on substance.

[Rob_Zepp]

12 minutes ago, ItTakesAnArmy said:

What do you know of what the owners wanted?

He is personal friends with the owner.   That is how he knows.

 

12 minutes ago, ItTakesAnArmy said:

Did you know about the guards?

EVERYONE knew about the guards.   You didn't.   Gee, not sure what to say.   Sorry.

 

12 minutes ago, ItTakesAnArmy said:

Do you WHY the owners backed away totally and gave Linden/Benning 100% control of the team?

Do you WHY?   No, I don't WHY.   What is it to "WHY" anyway?    

 

If you are wondering why he gave the control of the team to Linden/Benning, it is probably coz that is what owners do, they give their management control of managing the team.   There is a course on this at your local evening school I am sure if you are interested.

 

12 minutes ago, ItTakesAnArmy said:

Do you WHY the owners fired Nonis or Gillis?

Again, not sure what "WHYing" is but if you are wondering why Nonis and Gillis were fired it is most likely due to their success as clearly, given your perspective, this owner wants to lose.

 

12 minutes ago, ItTakesAnArmy said:

If so why is Benning still here?

Is this a rhetorical question?   You have answered this so many times here in your new incarnation.   Clearly, gives the owner the best chance to lose.   Plus, I am sure the owner reads these forums and loves to see how woke you are on this subject.   Being honest, many of us are enjoying it too.

 

4 minutes ago, ItTakesAnArmy said:

Wrong wrong wrong what NMC did Gills give out?

All of them.

 

5 minutes ago, ItTakesAnArmy said:

He did more than NYR or Montreal? Or Chicago and Tampa? Or Pittsburgh and Arizona?

He did more than any city or state you can name!   MORE (in capitals is sounds better).

 

5 minutes ago, ItTakesAnArmy said:

I am not hypocritical about signing FA's

We both know it isn't nice to lie.

 

5 minutes ago, ItTakesAnArmy said:

Benning will trade away more picks to get rid of them.

Wow, you can see the future?    Does Lena Gercke come to her senses and seek out former hockey goalie for crazy weekend?

[Salacious Crumb]

20 minutes ago, ItTakesAnArmy said:

Wrong wrong wrong what NMC did Gills give out? 2 to the Sedins who they never asked to waive? Benning has 7 on the books now, all his and that does count the 3 that expired and he got no assets in return. Hamhuis, Burrows, Hansen, Garrison all waived when asked, none of Benning's did.

 

He did more than NYR or Montreal? Or Chicago and Tampa? Or Pittsburgh and Arizona?

 

I am not hypocritical about signing FA's, only the over paid old ones he gives clauses to, the cap is the problem, not signings but handcuffing being unable to use it to enhance a trade or take on a bad contract to gain or improve draft picks or simply have a schedule to pay contracts internally. This spending to the cap every losing year is a joke, no team has suffered as much paying as much for 4 young players.

 

4 years to have these off the books. 2024, but Benning will trade away more picks to get rid of them.

Oh Mr. Sekeres you surely do like to carry on...

[ItTakesAnArmy]

1 minute ago, BPA said:

I may not know the intentions of the owners but neither do you.  But most certainly, people want to make a profit.  The more the merrier.

 

Pretty sure the young guns are not defensively matching up against the other stars in this league.  Horvat is the exception as he is crazy good in the face-offs.  What a gem.

 

 

 

Simple google search of the recent Las Vegas expansion draft in 2017...

 

Teams were required to protect any contracted players with no move clauses (NMCs) with one of the team's slots for protected players, unless the contract expired on July 1, 2017, in which case the NMC was considered void for the draft.

 

So if the above statement is true...the Edler's NMC does not impact the Seattle Expansion draft at all because his contract ends July 1, 2021.  If everything holds true, the expansion will be sometime in June 2021.

 

 

 

Do you think they live on the moon? You are wrong, there are hundreds of people that know the Aqulini's.  Some even talk to them.

[oldnews]

JB has gotten so many free assets!

 

Stecher, Myers, Beagle, Roussel,  Motte, Levo - and that's just guys that are likely to be in the lineup this year.....

 

Every single team "throws away assets" -  and gains others for "free."   Much ado / drama - about the norm.

[ilduce39]

57 minutes ago, ItTakesAnArmy said:

Wrong wrong wrong what NMC did Gills give out? 2 to the Sedins who they never asked to waive? Benning has 7 on the books now, all his and that does count the 3 that expired and he got no assets in return. Hamhuis, Burrows, Hansen, Garrison all waived when asked, none of Benning's did.

 

He did more than NYR or Montreal? Or Chicago and Tampa? Or Pittsburgh and Arizona?

 

I am not hypocritical about signing FA's, only the over paid old ones he gives clauses to, the cap is the problem, not signings but handcuffing being unable to use it to enhance a trade or take on a bad contract to gain or improve draft picks or simply have a schedule to pay contracts internally. This spending to the cap every losing year is a joke, no team has suffered as much paying as much for 4 young players.

 

4 years to have these off the books. 2024, but Benning will trade away more picks to get rid of them.

Check again on JB’s contracts.  

 

Loui = full this year, 15 team next 2

Sutter = 15 team no trade

Roussel = 15, 8, 5 teams

Beagle = 15 then 5 teams for last 2 years

Tanev = 8 team no trade

 

Edler is a 2 year deal and avoids expansion.. Myers’ deal is easier to move as time passes too.

 

All his deals get easier to move as time goes on, at least from an NTC perspective.

 

Outside of Myers, our next longest contracts are fantastic 4 year ones for Miller and Horvat. 

 

Roussel, Beagle and Loui still have 3 years left.  Everyone else is 1 or 2.  

 

As as for the rest of the cap, Loui is the big problem.  Other than him, it’s 1.9 for one more season of Schaller and 1 mil for the next 2 to buy out Spoons.  Hardly egregious but it does add up along with the 3 mil for Luongo.  I see one big mistake in Loui, two minor ones and one obnoxious kick to the shins with cap recapture.

 

Maybe we replace one of Sutter or Beagle with Gaudette and save a mil or two after this year but right now they’re starters as 3C and 4C on this team.  Maybe we let Baer’s 3 mil go... but healthy, he provides a similar PPG to a guy like Dzingel at likely a cheaper salary.  

 

A lot of Jim’s guys just need to stay healthy and a better schedule and deeper team should help with that.

Edited July 4, 2019 by ilduce39

[ItTakesAnArmy]

50 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

1 hour ago, ItTakesAnArmy said:

I am not hypocritical about signing FA's

We both know it isn't nice to lie.

Have at er, find one before the signing turned into Eriksson. oops you can't now who is no being exactly accurate?;)

[Rob_Zepp]

Just now, ItTakesAnArmy said:

Have at er, find one before the signing turned into Eriksson. oops you can't now who is no being exactly accurate?;)

You were more fun last time.   Perhaps another name change will do the trick?   

[ItTakesAnArmy]

11 minutes ago, ilduce39 said:

Check again on JB’s contracts.  

 

Loui = full this year, 15 team next 2

Sutter = 15 team no trade

Roussel = 15, 8, 5 teams

Beagle = 15 then 5 teams for last 2 years

Tanev = 8 team no trade

 

Edler is a 2 year deal and avoids expansion.. Myers’ deal is easier to move as time passes too.

 

All his deals get easier to move as time goes on, at least from an NTC perspective.

 

Outside of Myers, our next longest contracts are fantastic 4 year ones for Miller and Horvat. 

 

Roussel, Beagle and Loui still have 3 years left.  Everyone else is 1 or 2.  

 

As as for the rest of the cap, Loui is the big problem.  Other than him, it’s 1.9 for one more season of Schaller and 1 mil for the next 2 to buy out Spoons.  Hardly egregious but it does add up along with the 3 mil for Luongo.  I see one big mistake in Loui, two minor ones and one obnoxious kick to the shins with cap recapture.

 

Maybe we replace one of Sutter or Beagle with Gaudette and save a mil or two after this year but right now they’re starters as 3C and 4C on this team.  Maybe we let Baer’s 3 mil go... but healthy, he provides a similar PPG to a guy like Dzingel at likely a cheaper salary.  

 

A lot of Jim’s guys just need to stay healthy and a better schedule and deeper team should help with that.

All that to do list, what about drafting good young players? Or getting more than 4 onto the team before selling out the future?