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

[SabreFan1]

8 minutes ago, Generational.EP40 said:

Yea I mean he can still give input just as Shannahan did for Toronto. Doesn’t mean because he doesn’t have managerial status he won’t have a say.

 

Honestly made this topic for healthy discussion so people can come to realization of things. Appalled by how defensive and attached people were at the beginning of thread that they couldn’t even realize stuff which nearly the rest of league would agree on lol. And it’s not like I’m some random, I am a STH as well. Does it mean I can’t make constructive criticism? Hell no. People that think you have to nod your head are ones that enable bad trends to continue in organizations by not holding them accountable. I’m just stating a relatively fair resolution I’d be in favour of the team making for these (obvious) reasons. There’s literally no harm in doing this, at least not that I can think of atm 

When you poke the bear with a stick, you should expect a negative reaction.  It's just CDC's way.

[Rindiculous]

3 hours ago, -AJ- said:

Honestly, the impatience of fans sometimes baffles me. It's like they expect a GM to be perfect in every aspect and turn a team from a bottom feeder to a contender in 2 years. Jimbo has made some mistakes, but you have to be really turning a blind eye not to see how drastically our future has turned around with him and Brackett at the helm.

A Gillis and Benning hybrid would be a great GM to have.  Benning knows how to draft, Gillis knows how to handle assets and get a good team signed under the salary cap.

[86Viking]

Interesting upcoming off season for JB. He did well with the Horvat signing, I wish he would have went max 8yr term tho. But, how will the Brock negotiations go...Been a bit unlucky with injuries to shorten his first 2 years. I like Boeser, he needs to improve on his speed or acceleration if at all possible. His contract is going to be interesting though...

[PuckFather]

Generational Troll 40 + Captain Hindsight

[ForsbergTheGreat]

 

2 hours ago, joe-max said:

You say: "JB has thrown away far too many picks!"

I say: "He had no other choice. The prospect pool was bare, he had to give away lottery tickets (2nd-round picks) for players further along in their development to ice a somewhat respectable team."

I say, "if you think 3rd worst in 2016, 2nd worst in 2017, and 6th worst in 2018 is respectable, then i think your bar is set extremely low.  We are the worst team in the leage over the last 3 seasons, it literally couldn't be worse."

 

You say: "But he overpaid. Vey was a bust, Granlund sucks, Baertschi is done."

I say: "Each of them played over 100 NHL games with the Canucks. Not many 2nd-rounders will achieve that. "

I say, "too bad they don't hand out cups for games played, the goal is to win, this is done by obtaining home runs, not by obtaining wavier fodder and claiming that was a success"

You say: "But, but, he could just have turned players of the old core into younger assets instead of giving away picks like candy!"

Ie say: "The core was old, stale, had NTCs all over the place and most players didn't have a lot of value. Additionally he was trying to give the Sedins one last shot."

I say, "yep he indeed was, and that was a costly mistake that delayed the rebuild from starting.  Gillis gave sedins there last shot in 2013 and again in 2014, after failing it was time to turn the chapter on the short term focus"

 

You say: "But look at that long list! Look at what he shipped out!"

I say: "There is not a single player on that list that I would want on the team right now. Gagner? Hansen? Mallet? Garrison? Come on. Possibly Kassian, but that's it and there were good reasons to get rid of him. Instead we reveived Leivo, Pearson, Baertschi, Granlund, Goldobin, Sutter, Motte, Brisebois."

I say, "McCann, 2014 2nd & 3rd round picks, 2015 2nd round pick, 2016 2x 2nd, 3rd & 5th round picks, 2016 3rd, 4th, & 5th round pick, 2017 5th & 6th round pick, 2018 4th round pick.

 

You say: "But....but....Forsling!"

I say: "Yeah, he might become something one day. This year he has played 32 games and recently averages around 15 minutes per game on an average team and is -8."

I say, "Meanwhile McCann has 6 goals and 10 points in his last 10 games"

 

You say: "And Granlund ist trash. Utter trash!"

I say: "No, he isn't."

I say, "no, he isn't trash and he's definitely an upgrade on Shinkaruk"

 

You say: "Anyways. A proper rebuild would have required to go hard for picks. JB has failed miserably at that."

I say: "Young players with a more predictable future like Goldobin, Motte are not worse than draft picks."

I say, "Picks are better, even JB admitted that he would have preferred picks"

 

You say: "He should have traded Sutter, Tanev, Markstrom, Edler, everybody over the age of 25 for picks. Let the young guns run the show!

I say: "You have to retain a certain balance. Your suggestion would have meant 10-15 wins less."

I say, "we have a 38% winning percentage in the league over the last 4 years. again the worst in the NHL, I'm not sure what this Balance is you're talking about"

 

You say: "Yeah. And that would have been great. Better chances at the no.1 pick that this franchise so much deserves!"

I say: "That's not how a successful team is developed. Players like Horvat or Pettersson could not take several seasons of constant losing. They want to compete, they want to win. If the season was lost before it started, it would hurt their development and they would probably want to get out at one point."

I say, "Horvat has already experienced 3 seasons straight of bottom feeding finishes and after this season will be on year 4"  

 

You say: "But they are losing! No playoffs in years!"

I say: "There has been significant improvement in many areas that will pay off in the long run (EP, prospect pool, EP, goaltending, style of play, EP). A full turnaround requires time. Deal with it. You cannot blow up an entire team and expect immediate results. Team building is more complex than that. This is not NHL 19."

I say, "I don't think anyone expects immediate results, they just wanted a full commitment to building for the future, not just having us dip a toe in.

 

You say: "There is only one way: full tank! YOU NEED A NO.1 OVERALL PICK. Every recent cup winner has had one."

I say: "We'd rather change the team name. Every cup winner since 2002 has had the letter "i" in the name. Let's call them the "Vancouvier Canucks". It increases the odds. Statstically."

I say, "I don't agree with tanking, but you do need top end talent in order to win a cup and the best/most proven way to acquire top end talent is through high draft picks, thank goodness this team has Pettersson, Horvat and hughes coming up or the future would be even bleaker"

 

 

 

[PuckFather]

3 hours ago, BlastPast said:

No, specifically. How would you go about "securing assets for the draft" ? What are your ideas ?

Ideas? What ideas? trolls and ideas? 

[Alflives]

3 minutes ago, PuckFather said:

Ideas? What ideas? trolls and ideas? 

I see a couple posts up from yours a guy who suggested we could have had more picks in the top three rounds by keeping the ones we had.  We did get more picks, but we traded them away.  I don’t see that rational as trolling.  It’s more of a frustration with some fans, who love our team and think we could be better if we kept our picks.  JB has proven to be excellent at the draft, so why not keep the picks?

[DrJockitch]

Both the lists of assets in and assets out is a whole lot of nothing on either side.  No really significant players on either side.  Some of the players involved were fairly high pics but not great players like Guddy.  

The good players on the out list were all past their primes or Kessler who handicapped us.

That is Benning for you.  Draft well, push marginal players and pics around in the margins and see if anything sticks.

Not a bold management style and requires a lot of patience. 

Wish he spent money better and was a bit more consistent in his vision.

[Tom Sestito]

15 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

stuff in response to the strawman argument 

 

 

This was an agreeable response. 

Also @-AJ-, I'm still curious as to what you have to say to my last post. 

Edited March 17, 2019 by Tom Sestito

[-AJ-]

2 minutes ago, Tom Sestito said:

This was an agreeable response. 

Also @-AJ-, I'm still curious as to what you have to say to my last post. 

It was a lot to take in and I'm still kind of digesting it.

[5nothincanucksohno]

4 hours ago, -AJ- said:

Honestly, the impatience of fans sometimes baffles me. It's like they expect a GM to be perfect in every aspect and turn a team from a bottom feeder to a contender in 2 years. Jimbo has made some mistakes, but you have to be really turning a blind eye not to see how drastically our future has turned around with him and Brackett at the helm.

Agreed, only so much one can do with an aging NHL squad on the downturn (what Benning had when he took over). He put a bunch of stop gaps in place to maintain stability at the NHL level and drafted like a stud. Team took a big step this year so I say keep moving forward. Funny how upset people get at losing a 3rd rounder and a couple 2nds.

[Generational.EP40]

26 minutes ago, PuckFather said:

Ideas? What ideas? trolls and ideas? 

Paying for ST’s and wanting the best for the team is trolling now

 

Gotcha. 

 

[Generational.EP40]

13 minutes ago, -AJ- said:

It was a lot to take in and I'm still kind of digesting it.

 

Yea, glad to see your view point changing and being open to discussion. It was meant for healthy talks anyways. Some homers just see nothing but blue and don’t know what constructive criticism is (ex: puckfather dude who’s just calling me a troll)

[Generational.EP40]

33 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

 

 

 

 

Hahahaha

 

Thank you for taking the time to easily pick a part this users homer take. I didn’t want to bother with it. Gotta love the winning culture bs which is the exact opposite of what we’ve had as you said the past 3 years. Not like any of that culture has helped our losing butt’s 

[-AJ-]

7 minutes ago, Generational.EP40 said:

 

Yea, glad to see your view point changing and being open to discussion. It was meant for healthy talks anyways. Some homers just see nothing but blue and don’t know what constructive criticism is (ex: puckfather dude who’s just calling me a troll)

I'm not sure my view is changing, but I like to try to be open to other views at the very least.

[ItsMillerTime]

@Generational.EP40 Without Benning then you don't have your name. Nuff said.

[Generational.EP40]

3 minutes ago, ItsMillerTime said:

@Generational.EP40 Without Benning then you don't have your name. Nuff said.

What does that have to do with anything? Delusional.

 

 

Again like others, read what’s being said. 

[Baggins]

58 minutes ago, JamesB said:

4. We can try to subdivide the key management tasks: drafting, trades, UFA signings, re-signing players, prospect development, organization (coaches, minor league affiliate), and overall strategy, There is no way an objective observer could say the Canucks have been good in any area except drafting. I know that some people will say that the Benning has been good on trades. But which trade acquisition on the Canucks is actually moving the dial? I think the answer to that is no-one. Yes, the Canucks have picked some players who were not good enough to play for other teams but have helped or at least have played for the Canucks (Leivo, Granlund, Pouliot). But that just tells you how weak the talent level is on the Canucks. The UFA record is obviously a problem. And prospect development in Utica has been a problem. 

The only way a trade "moves the dial" for a rebuilding team is trading for a star or elite player. Even at that one won't "move the dial" significantly on a team early in the rebuild. The problem with getting those guys in trade is you actually need quality available to move to get them. You won't get them for Ryamond, Ballard and a 2nd. The bulk of Benning's trades have been for unproven talent. Which of course carries the same inherent risk of a draft pick. He may prove to be an NHL player or he may not. You just find out faster. He hasn't made any high impact trades but it seems high impact results are expected. Probably the closest to a "move the dial" trade is the Gudbranson deal. But being young, and not an impact player, even that trade carried risk.

 

I keep reading Benning has been awesome drafting but who has he drafted that has actually made an NHL impact? Boeser and Pettersson certainly. Those two together haven't "moved the dial" other than the fan excitement meter. Pittsburgh went from intentionally being the worst team in the league to get Lemieux to the second worst team with him the following season. How much did an NHL legend "move the dial" other than fan excitement? Gaudette has made the team but has he "moved the dial"? Nope. It's premature imo to declare Benning a drafting god. Far too much of Benning's great drafting is still nothing more than bold fan predictions at this point.

 

There's this notion here "if we draft him he'll be a star". Like Shinkaruk is our future first line winger and the outrage at trading him. There's a history of it here. Benning does have a track record for scouting. It certainly doesn't mean all his draft picks will be impact players. Many, even ones fans are excitedly making bold predictions about, won't become impact players or "move the dial". Many *gasp* won't even have an NHL career or be more than fringe players. But hopefully that scouting track record pays off with some hits. Of that I'm optimistic.

 

I'll finish with this tidbit: it's been posted many times that only 25% of 2nd round picks play 200+ plus NHL games. Not good odds. Well Baertschi and Granlund are both well over 200 NHL games. Putting them firmly in the top 25%. What falls into that 25% isn't an indication of impact or 'dial movers'. Raymond was a 2nd round pick that played over 500 NHL games. Most would consider that a pretty successful career. But not a "dial mover". This certainly doesn't mean you can't get a high impact player in the 2nd round or later. It's just that they are actually a small percentage. 

[appleboy]

5 hours ago, RetroCanuck said:

hmmmm I thought Lockwood was still in the system. No point reading past that point.

The pick that was used to acquire Lockwood was traded and then later he made another deal and reacquired his own pick back. Then used it to pick Lockwood. Asset management 101.    LOL

[Rounoush]

5 hours ago, Where's Wellwood said:

If you want to be fair you'd have to colour code the net out to see what's worthless there too 

This. Somebody make that cause it will mostly be red.