48MPHSlapShot Posted March 21, 2019 Share Posted March 21, 2019 This thread may have more weight behind it if it didn't come from someone who's entire account has been dedicated to trashing GMJB for the last several years. Boy who cried wolf syndrome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goalie13 Posted March 21, 2019 Share Posted March 21, 2019 Can you really have an Armchair GM thread about firing the GM? Would he have to fire himself? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the grinder Posted March 21, 2019 Share Posted March 21, 2019 d 10 hours ago, TheGuardian_ said: [Proposal] Time To Let Benning Go. There has not been a GM in the NHL that has lasted as long as Benning with such a losing record. Since September 2015 to date the win percentage of .386 is the worst in Canuck history since the first four years of expansion, this doesn't change 319 games played, 123 games won and the 196 lost. For all the talk of prospects he has done the least to help a team rebuilding other teams amass draft picks, even teams that had players with NMC's and NTC's, were moved so clause contracts are only an EXCUSE to do nothing not a reality. in 2015 this team had 31 W and 51 L In 2018 - 31 W and 51 L He has not had a trade that has made a difference. He has not signed a FA that has made a difference, he has not added draft picks, he is the only GM that has two questionable draft picks out of the top 10 over 5 drafts, one that hasn't played at all. Under his management many Euros have left the team. The youngest FA he has signed in July was 29 years old, hardly getting younger, he stated clause contracts hampered trades and then signed more than the previous GM did in 8 years. In 5 TDL days he has accomplished nothing, Dahlen left and Goldy is the current punching bag, Spooner benched, so nothing, no picks, 5 years. He has stated the goal of the team is to play meaningful games in March? After 5 years it is not playoffs or a cup run, it is to play "meaningful" games, what does that mean? Out of the playoffs and want to play spoilers? Still be mathematically in the second wild card hunt? Only 10 points out? His contracts are atrocious, too old, too long, too much with clauses to hamper trades. Go ahead a parade Boeser out as a genius move, that is crap, he was ranked 25th and went there, Elias Pettersson, maybe a small kudo there but EP was ranked #1 Euro, but his drafting record is pretty disappointing being a scouting guru. He got lucky with Gaudette, but that was a pick Gillis got him otherwise he wasn't there as Benning doesn't get picks. So is Hughes such a coup when all of the top ten are expected to be stars as well, what if he drafted Dobson, Bouchard, Boquist or Zadina, the hype would be the same. After 5 years of picks, at least 35 players drafted and only 4 are on the NHL team, Elias, Brock, Jake and Adam, funny thing, any that started their career in Utica, none have made the team. Benning has one more year on his contract and I am concerned that his "future" becomes to the forefront. This is a time that the team COULD make the playoffs next year but end up a crap team, old with many clause contracts and young player's best years being used up OR the team does what is best for the franchise and spends one full season playing some of those 30 some odd draft picks giving them experience in the NHL, showing them what they need to improve on during the CBA lockout. A new GM with a new mandate and contract will be more into having one bad year, his first followed by many winning seasons, a new GM might feel secure enough to do what is necessary, trade off vets for picks, trade for bad contracts with picks attached, maybe even trade a young player, Brock or Bo, to get even more top picks, dmen, Either have huge value for teams with a lot of picks, Colorado for instance, Horvat at center, Buffalo, Brock as a trigger man for Eichel with some salary relief, just examples, maybe even a Lucic deal with retention a top pick/prospect (of size) just stuff that, complex deals that need quick responses, appear to be beyond anything Benning has shown he is capable of. Fantasy, all Fantasy have fun. Please no "they will be great in the future", I concede, at some time in the future the Canucks will be a good team and even win the cup, but not next year. Hey a big positive this year, they will not lose 50 games, all those championing all those prospects now have tangible proof of improvement. Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds dear mike gillis quit your whining we know aquaman didn't want a rebuild and you had to deal with torts but really it been 5 long years since you have been gone , you left poor jim with nothing and yet jim has done not to bad to be honest , ya we know your big fish loungo is gone but he will back to haunt us with his recapture penalty when he retires its ok mike gillis you got us close and then stuck us with those nmc and ntc you were handing out like candy but yet you whine about jb signing erikson for 6 years but at least it wasn't 13 years lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuardian_ Posted March 21, 2019 Author Share Posted March 21, 2019 19 hours ago, therodigy said: I wouldn't mind challenging your post for the sake of discussion. Take out the current season (where there has been a subtle improvement) and you get a .374 win percentage between the 2015-2016 season and the 2017-2018 season. Now, take seasons 1996-1997 to 1998-1999, another identical dark time frame. Winning percentage is .336 during this time. Our most recent run of losing seasons is 4 percentage points better than my previous example, so it's not the worst. You have to take into account that ties are eliminated from games played because there was no winner or loser, purely on wins and losses added together and then the average made those years are much better , 96/97 - 35 W, 41L - 76 games, 7 tie games = 0% wins/loss, this is not using points because of three point games - .470 win percentage, similar through to 98/99 - .354, still the last years are much worse. 19 hours ago, therodigy said: Trades are always hit and miss for all teams True, the big difference is Benning has mostly traded for prospects turned projects and AHL players, no real impact players. Even Sven has never scored 19 goals in a season. 19 hours ago, therodigy said: 2016 was a weak draft for JB as he will be lucky to come out of it with 2 players (Juolevi and possibly Lockwood). I know this is cherry picking your post but 2016's draft was not that horrible, of the top 11 picks only two do not have 130 NHL games. 19 hours ago, therodigy said: Hard to determine prospect development in Utica, considering the lack of quality prospects going through the system since his tenure began (Only current prospects of recent note are Lind, Gadjovich, Brisebois, Sautner, and MacEwan) as well as the success of our prospects at the NCAA level. There should be the prospects from 2014, 5 years ago, 2015, 4 years ago, 2016, three years ago, Utica or AHL teams are not made up of only 19 to 24 year olds, Many posters seem to have lost track of time, Horvat is 24 years old in two weeks or so, 5 years in the NHL. 18 hours ago, Warhippy said: The issue with your post is you ONLY have the negatives, and much of your negatives in the full context are actually beneficials or positives. Your negatives are also entirely opinion based and many not grounded in fact. C'mon, my "opinion" is they have lost 190+ games over the last 4 years, that only FOUR draft picks are on the team, TWO this year. You won't find my post saying "he should have drafted whoever" you will find me saying he drafted the wrong guy, he made a mistake, this genius of scouting. To start saying he should have drafted whomever now is hindsight and hindsight is perfect, I don't like doing that. True if he had made a different pick that OJ, say one of higher ranked dmen or one of the other 7 forwards, that player would have over 130 NHL games, the top 11 do except one other player. I go by wins and losses, I don't credit players who have never skated in the NHL team as being a great find or the next one or a sure thing, I constantly say a prospect is an unknown if not on the NHL team. Every draft the same posters grasp onto some picks and crown them sure things, great picks, guaranteed players, I don't, if my opinion is to not crown a player not playing in the AHL, NHL as the superb player and great, well which is what, he will be the great one, that is opinion, he is an unknown so far because he is not in the NHL, that is a fact. Everyone keeps forgetting Benning is a LAME DUCK GM, in his last year. 18 hours ago, Warhippy said: Comparing Benning to Vegas when Vegas LITERALLY picked the cream of the NHL crop is so pathetic it isn't even worth discussing. If you think Sbisa was the cream of the crop it is no wonder you cheering like a little girl about Benning. No the difference is Vegas selected NHL players, Benning trades for AHL players and stale prospect become projects. 20 hours ago, NUCKER67 said: Where is the re-sign Benning option? All GM's get fired, they are hired to be fired, his end is coming. 19 hours ago, debluvscanucks said: I prefer that other Beatles' song. Let It Be. Helter Skelter for the team, Hey Jude and Something for me. 18 hours ago, JayDangles said: Oh snap! OP gonna piss some people off! This thread is 1 year early. If 1 year from right now everything is exactly the same.. then re-post.. Till then. Shush it. Bah, it needs being repeated so many here are on their knees worshiping Benning, they need to be reminded he is only human and prone to errors not a demigod. Next year his deal is done, the CBA will cause a labour stoppage, He is a lame duck GM, this thread is no more than 2/3 months early, and by then the fair weather posters will disappear and come back next year protesting that htye were right and Benning should have been fired a year earlier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuardian_ Posted March 21, 2019 Author Share Posted March 21, 2019 17 hours ago, Glug Datt said: ok I guess a fairer response from my point of view is a question: exactly who do you propose he is replaced with? I don't really keep up with gm's all that much, but who is out there that is experienced, unemployed and has a solid resume at the NHL level? and wants to sign on with Vancouver.. Hunter, Fletcher, Burke, Gilman, lists are everywhere, 17 hours ago, gurn said: Why create a new thread when this one is already here? http://forum.canucks.com/topic/389402-jb-has-thrown-away-far-too-many-assets-needs-to-be-replaced-as-gm/?page=20&tab=comments#comment-14813424 Two different forums 17 hours ago, I.Am.Ironman said: So consensus had Brock Boeser ranked 25+., yet IIRC Benning was quoted saying he had BB ranked top 10 (for whatever reason 8th pops into my head) - so wouldn't that imply that Benning and his team were more accurate at indentifying the better player compared to the consensus? In a re draft Boeser goes top 8 easily. I don't understand your point of how 18 scouts ranking him 25+, and those scouts being egregiously incorrect, being a slight on Benning. I posted the consensus rankings for you 15 hours ago, SingleThorn said: Button had him ranked #9. A couple had him ranking at #14. Some out of round one. MyNHLdraft, a compilation ranking, did not have him in round one. They re-did their round two mock after the first round was completed, so hard to know where they had him ranked. Okay the consensus again Consensus updated: June 2nd 2015 NHL Draft - Consensus Prospect Rankings RK Player PTS Pos. Team Ht. Wt. Mar. RK 1 Connor McDavid 210 C Erie (OHL) 6' 0" 185 1 2 Jack Eichel 203 C Boston Univ. 6' 2" 193 2 3 Dylan Strome 189 C Erie (OHL) 6' 2" 177 5 4 Mitchell Marner 185 C/RW London (OHL) 5'10" 164 4 5 Noah Hanifin 182 D USA U18 NTDP 6' 2" 200 3 6 Ivan Provorov 167 D Brandon (WHL) 6' 0" 191 8 7 Zack Werenski 155 D USA U18 NTDP (USHL) 6' 1" 206 7 8 Lawson Crouse 154 LW Kingston (OHL) 6' 3" 200 6 9 Matthew Barzal 150 C Seattle (WHL) 5'11" 174 9 10 Mikko Rantanen 147 C/RW TPS Turku (a) (SM-liiga) 6' 4" 195 12 11 Pavel Zacha 135 C/LW Liberec (CZE) 6' 3" 200 11 12 Kyle Connor 134 C Youngstown (USHL) 6' 1" 170 14 13 Timo Meier 116 RW Halifax (QMJHL) 6' 1" 208 15 14 Nick Merkley 110 C/RW Kelowna (WHL) 5'10" 175 13 15 Evgeny Svechnikov 100 LW Cape Breton (QMJHL) 6' 1" 180 18 16 Travis Konecny 93 C Ottawa 67's (OHL) 5'10" 172 16 17 Colin White 74 C/RW USA U18 NTDP 6' 0" 175 19 18 Thomas Chabot 68 D Saint John (QMJHL) 6' 1" 181 22 19 Joel Eriksson Ek 67 C Farjestad Jr. (SWE-JR.) 6' 2" 180 35 20 Jeremy Roy 66 D Sherbrooke (QMJHL) 6' 0" 183 17 21 Jakub Zboril 52 D Saint John (QMJHL) 6' 1" 184 23 22 Brock Boeser 51 RW Waterloo (USHL) 6' 1" 192 26 23 Daniel Sprong 48 RW Charlottetown (QMJHL) 5'11" 175 20 24 Jansen Harkins 45 C Prince George (WHL) 6' 1" 177 21 25 Jake DeBrusk 43 LW Swift Current (WHL) 5'11" 171 30 26 Oliver Kylington 36 D Farjestads BK (SHL) 6' 0" 180 10 27 Ilya Samsonov 34 G Magnitogorsk 2 (RUS-JR.) 6' 3" 200 - 28 Paul Bittner 31 LW Portland (WHL) 6' 4" 201 27 29 Denis Guryanov 28 RW Togliatti 2 (RUS-JR.) 6' 2" 183 - 30 Jeremy Bracco 28 C/RW USA U18 NTDP 5' 9" 156 25 As you can see Brock's March ranking was 26th 12 hours ago, 48MPHSlapShot said: This thread may have more weight behind it if it didn't come from someone who's entire account has been dedicated to trashing GMJB for the last several years. Boy who cried wolf syndrome. The first 3 years I was harping about this not being a rebuild a re-whatever, I was right, they finally stated started a rebuild a year ago, I railed against Eriksson's contract as being horrible, I stated they would drag the team to the lowest depths in it's history, all true and continuing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glug Datt Posted March 21, 2019 Share Posted March 21, 2019 1 hour ago, TheGuardian_ said: Hunter, Fletcher, Burke, Gilman, lists are everywhere yah but no thanks to Fletcher, he's arguably as bad or worse.. Burke might be better, but imo his day has come & gone.. Hunter could be better.. Gilman I can't comment.. but my point is it's not as easy as picking up the phone and quickly bringing in an all star GM.. they've all got jobs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonMexico Posted March 21, 2019 Share Posted March 21, 2019 37 minutes ago, TheGuardian_ said: Hunter, Fletcher, Burke, Gilman, lists are everywhere, Like any of these guys are remotely considered upgrades. Lets review the longest tenured GMs and their 'successes' David Poile - considered a top GM. In 20 years! as GM has made it past the second round once with all those good defencemen and an elite goalie. Ken Holland - considered a GM legend. Not as shiny in recent years and hasn't had a playoff team make it past the 2nd round in 10 years Doug Wilson - solid GM. Always a competitive team but never good enough Bob Murray - inherited a championship core, failed to do anything with it. Numerous Division wins and early exits Stan Bowman - no complaints there. x3 SC Cup champs. Doug Armstrong - hasn't accomplished anything of note Kevin Cheveldayoff - the most conservative GM going. took 3 years to make his first trade. Seven years for his team to become relevant. Looking good but many questions surround the team. Bergevin, Kekalainen, Nill, Treliving - middling at best though Flames look good this year. Next is Benning....is he really any worse than the above 4? Worse than Murray or Armstrong? To me no. To some yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-DLC- Posted March 21, 2019 Share Posted March 21, 2019 14 hours ago, 48MPHSlapShot said: This thread may have more weight behind it if it didn't come from someone who's entire account has been dedicated to trashing GMJB for the last several years. Boy who cried wolf syndrome. And who didn't say (about drafting EP): Quote Posted June 24, 2017 It seems a year when Benning and company expect the future is for sub 180 lb guys.....they picked a boy that could take another 3 years to fill out, but remember the Sedins matured late. Definitely hoping for a big improvement in 5 years or so. To me it was a "meh" draft after the first two selections but I had hoped that being the case size to play in the western conference might be a consideration. Benning certainly doesn't understand trying to get the market excited. I think Benning may know more some think. Sure, he has help when he drafts but if he's going to take the heat, he also gets to take the credit. FTR, this market's very excited...I know because I'm part of it. But there are those who still lament Hunter Shinkaruk, etc. who carry baggage of things from the past that should be let go at some point. Look you can go back and connect dots to support "wasted opportunities" and mistakes but that's taking things out of context and using hindsight to do so. Teams do things in the moment that aren't always obvious and have been outlined...sometimes even unexpected (injuries). They may not seem to make the best sense in a long term vision...but maybe they do? Maybe the stuff that we don't see or consider impacts that vision (too). Like how comfortable the kids are as they are put through the ringer of the big league. It's not a given that you plug them in and they go. Edmonton certainly hasn't done a great job of that...but we seem to be. People want Edler gone...how do we know that he's not a staple for Petey right now? A kid who's far away from home in a strange place who loves to win and is enduring some losing? The pieces in place aren't always JUST what we see on the ice...it's also in support of them. Not all make it when they break in and so it's important to keep that in mind...it's one thing to acquire them, it's another to do the "little things" that make it work. I feel like this management knows what types of individuals they're targeting and it's a combination of things that matter. Sometimes it's short sighted and a stubborn stance that doesn't evolve over time. The team is...not sure why some of our posters aren't. I think this part set me off. Trying to just chill and ignore all the screaming, but: Quote Bah, it needs being repeated so many here are on their knees worshiping Benning I support Benning because I understand these things are more complex than surface value. Doesn't mean I'm on my knees worshipping him. There's a middle ground between loving and hating him that many of us can be placed in. And I've been watching this team for a long time and go to the games (an awful lot). I am more excited than in the recent past and there's a reason for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posted June 24, 2017 It seems a year when Benning and company expect the future is for sub 180 lb guys.....they picked a boy that could take another 3 years to fill out, but remember the Sedins matured late. Definitely hoping for a big improvement in 5 years or so. To me it was a "meh" draft after the first two selections but I had hoped that being the case size to play in the western conference might be a consideration. Benning certainly doesn't understand trying to get the market excited.
smithers joe Posted March 21, 2019 Share Posted March 21, 2019 this post is getting silly. as i see it, there are 2 opposite opinions here. one side want JB replaced and the other side wants to see the results of this rebuild, finished. it makes more sense to just have a poll as to who is on what side. doesn’t make sense dividing the sides into, on their knnee, worshipping benning, or those with machine guns trying to bully others into thinking their way. we are all canucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Zepp Posted March 21, 2019 Share Posted March 21, 2019 On 3/20/2019 at 11:06 AM, TheGuardian_ said: [Proposal] Time To Let Benning Go. There has not been a GM in the NHL that has lasted as long as Benning with such a losing record. Since September 2015 to date the win percentage of .386 is the worst in Canuck history since the first four years of expansion, this doesn't change 319 games played, 123 games won and the 196 lost. For all the talk of prospects he has done the least to help a team rebuilding other teams amass draft picks, even teams that had players with NMC's and NTC's, were moved so clause contracts are only an EXCUSE to do nothing not a reality. in 2015 this team had 31 W and 51 L In 2018 - 31 W and 51 L He has not had a trade that has made a difference. He has not signed a FA that has made a difference, he has not added draft picks, he is the only GM that has two questionable draft picks out of the top 10 over 5 drafts, one that hasn't played at all. Under his management many Euros have left the team. The youngest FA he has signed in July was 29 years old, hardly getting younger, he stated clause contracts hampered trades and then signed more than the previous GM did in 8 years. In 5 TDL days he has accomplished nothing, Dahlen left and Goldy is the current punching bag, Spooner benched, so nothing, no picks, 5 years. He has stated the goal of the team is to play meaningful games in March? After 5 years it is not playoffs or a cup run, it is to play "meaningful" games, what does that mean? Out of the playoffs and want to play spoilers? Still be mathematically in the second wild card hunt? Only 10 points out? His contracts are atrocious, too old, too long, too much with clauses to hamper trades. Go ahead a parade Boeser out as a genius move, that is crap, he was ranked 25th and went there, Elias Pettersson, maybe a small kudo there but EP was ranked #1 Euro, but his drafting record is pretty disappointing being a scouting guru. He got lucky with Gaudette, but that was a pick Gillis got him otherwise he wasn't there as Benning doesn't get picks. So is Hughes such a coup when all of the top ten are expected to be stars as well, what if he drafted Dobson, Bouchard, Boquist or Zadina, the hype would be the same. After 5 years of picks, at least 35 players drafted and only 4 are on the NHL team, Elias, Brock, Jake and Adam, funny thing, any that started their career in Utica, none have made the team. Benning has one more year on his contract and I am concerned that his "future" becomes to the forefront. This is a time that the team COULD make the playoffs next year but end up a crap team, old with many clause contracts and young player's best years being used up OR the team does what is best for the franchise and spends one full season playing some of those 30 some odd draft picks giving them experience in the NHL, showing them what they need to improve on during the CBA lockout. A new GM with a new mandate and contract will be more into having one bad year, his first followed by many winning seasons, a new GM might feel secure enough to do what is necessary, trade off vets for picks, trade for bad contracts with picks attached, maybe even trade a young player, Brock or Bo, to get even more top picks, dmen, Either have huge value for teams with a lot of picks, Colorado for instance, Horvat at center, Buffalo, Brock as a trigger man for Eichel with some salary relief, just examples, maybe even a Lucic deal with retention a top pick/prospect (of size) just stuff that, complex deals that need quick responses, appear to be beyond anything Benning has shown he is capable of. Fantasy, all Fantasy have fun. Please no "they will be great in the future", I concede, at some time in the future the Canucks will be a good team and even win the cup, but not next year. Hey a big positive this year, they will not lose 50 games, all those championing all those prospects now have tangible proof of improvement. Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I.Am.Ironman Posted March 21, 2019 Share Posted March 21, 2019 23 hours ago, I.Am.Ironman said: So consensus had Brock Boeser ranked 25+., yet IIRC Benning was quoted saying he had BB ranked top 10 (for whatever reason 8th pops into my head) - so wouldn't that imply that Benning and his team were more accurate at indentifying the better player compared to the consensus? In a re draft Boeser goes top 8 easily. I don't understand your point of how 18 scouts ranking him 25+, and those scouts being egregiously incorrect, being a slight on Benning. 6 hours ago, TheGuardian_ said: I posted the consensus rankings for you As you can see Brock's March ranking was 26th The first 3 years I was harping about this not being a rebuild a re-whatever, I was right, they finally stated started a rebuild a year ago, I railed against Eriksson's contract as being horrible, I stated they would drag the team to the lowest depths in it's history, all true and continuing. Since you obviously didn't read or didn't comprehend my post I put up here for you. I wasn't arguing what they consensus ranking were. Consider Benning had Boeser in his top 10... remember the video "why isn't anyone taking Brock Boeser"? Benning having Brock rated above his consensus ranking of 26 indicates that him and his scouting team out performed the cumulative work of scouts that contributed to the consensus. I want you to tell me: How a pre-draft consensus, one with 'misses' all over the place, is a slight on Benning? Especially considering he had him ranked closer to where Brock would go in a re-draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wizardofoz Posted March 22, 2019 Share Posted March 22, 2019 What a crazy forum this is, half the comments have nothing to do with the team and half are so wrong. Easily two thirds of the posters post like they are 14 years old or not much older, definitely teenagers, the one's that know everything regardless of facts or reasonable observations. Attacks on posters? And this is allowed even when it is obvious that these teenagers, who never let truth get in the way of criticism, make wild statements or no statements at all to do with the subject. I read through the opening and the rest of this, this poster "theguardian" appears to have made an attempt to be closer to the truth and facts than many others whining about the circumstances this team is in, some poster don't even appear to understand or simply are attention whores that need to feel part of a herd. Some are interesting though the Boeser conversation; the guardian states he was ranked 25th and others say Benning did a great job taking him at 25th and had him ranked around #10. I don't get how Benning can be credited with the other 20 or so GM's not taking him, if anything it is pure luck that he wasn't taken earlier, luck and even if Benning had him at 10 Boeser did not go at ten. I simply cannot see how theguardian is wrong, it was pure luck and where he was ranked that Boeser was there at all, realy not much different that Pasternak being available to Boston in the mid rounds. You know I decided to read a bunch of theguardian's threads because so many posters here protest his posts, sure how he posts can come off as being negative but so many posts here are so happy he seems to be a balance. But I'll tell you one thing theguardian seems to know way more about "hockey operations" overall than most of his respondents. He rarely makes outrageous statements and as he has stated he doesn't attack players, I checked and didn't find any although he does make a distinction between AHL and NHL calibre players. When states facts as facts he does offer numbers. I read many posts in this thread and others he started and then decided to make comment with as much content as any others. Theguardian clearly has the most influence on this forum than any other poster so many attack him rather than the facts he posts. Those that attack rarely have an argument better than a teenager, "You don't know anything, you don't understand" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cup2022 Posted March 30, 2019 Share Posted March 30, 2019 Lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cup2022 Posted March 30, 2019 Share Posted March 30, 2019 On 3/21/2019 at 9:21 AM, TheGuardian_ said: Hunter, Fletcher, Burke, Gilman, lists are everywhere, Two different forums I posted the consensus rankings for you Okay the consensus again Consensus updated: June 2nd 2015 NHL Draft - Consensus Prospect Rankings RK Player PTS Pos. Team Ht. Wt. Mar. RK 1 Connor McDavid 210 C Erie (OHL) 6' 0" 185 1 2 Jack Eichel 203 C Boston Univ. 6' 2" 193 2 3 Dylan Strome 189 C Erie (OHL) 6' 2" 177 5 4 Mitchell Marner 185 C/RW London (OHL) 5'10" 164 4 5 Noah Hanifin 182 D USA U18 NTDP 6' 2" 200 3 6 Ivan Provorov 167 D Brandon (WHL) 6' 0" 191 8 7 Zack Werenski 155 D USA U18 NTDP (USHL) 6' 1" 206 7 8 Lawson Crouse 154 LW Kingston (OHL) 6' 3" 200 6 9 Matthew Barzal 150 C Seattle (WHL) 5'11" 174 9 10 Mikko Rantanen 147 C/RW TPS Turku (a) (SM-liiga) 6' 4" 195 12 11 Pavel Zacha 135 C/LW Liberec (CZE) 6' 3" 200 11 12 Kyle Connor 134 C Youngstown (USHL) 6' 1" 170 14 13 Timo Meier 116 RW Halifax (QMJHL) 6' 1" 208 15 14 Nick Merkley 110 C/RW Kelowna (WHL) 5'10" 175 13 15 Evgeny Svechnikov 100 LW Cape Breton (QMJHL) 6' 1" 180 18 16 Travis Konecny 93 C Ottawa 67's (OHL) 5'10" 172 16 17 Colin White 74 C/RW USA U18 NTDP 6' 0" 175 19 18 Thomas Chabot 68 D Saint John (QMJHL) 6' 1" 181 22 19 Joel Eriksson Ek 67 C Farjestad Jr. (SWE-JR.) 6' 2" 180 35 20 Jeremy Roy 66 D Sherbrooke (QMJHL) 6' 0" 183 17 21 Jakub Zboril 52 D Saint John (QMJHL) 6' 1" 184 23 22 Brock Boeser 51 RW Waterloo (USHL) 6' 1" 192 26 23 Daniel Sprong 48 RW Charlottetown (QMJHL) 5'11" 175 20 24 Jansen Harkins 45 C Prince George (WHL) 6' 1" 177 21 25 Jake DeBrusk 43 LW Swift Current (WHL) 5'11" 171 30 26 Oliver Kylington 36 D Farjestads BK (SHL) 6' 0" 180 10 27 Ilya Samsonov 34 G Magnitogorsk 2 (RUS-JR.) 6' 3" 200 - 28 Paul Bittner 31 LW Portland (WHL) 6' 4" 201 27 29 Denis Guryanov 28 RW Togliatti 2 (RUS-JR.) 6' 2" 183 - 30 Jeremy Bracco 28 C/RW USA U18 NTDP 5' 9" 156 25 As you can see Brock's March ranking was 26th The first 3 years I was harping about this not being a rebuild a re-whatever, I was right, they finally stated started a rebuild a year ago, I railed against Eriksson's contract as being horrible, I stated they would drag the team to the lowest depths in it's history, all true and continuing. Your bloody amazing have another drink Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IBatch Posted March 30, 2019 Share Posted March 30, 2019 On 3/22/2019 at 12:22 PM, Wizardofoz said: What a crazy forum this is, half the comments have nothing to do with the team and half are so wrong. Easily two thirds of the posters post like they are 14 years old or not much older, definitely teenagers, the one's that know everything regardless of facts or reasonable observations. Attacks on posters? And this is allowed even when it is obvious that these teenagers, who never let truth get in the way of criticism, make wild statements or no statements at all to do with the subject. I read through the opening and the rest of this, this poster "theguardian" appears to have made an attempt to be closer to the truth and facts than many others whining about the circumstances this team is in, some poster don't even appear to understand or simply are attention whores that need to feel part of a herd. Some are interesting though the Boeser conversation; the guardian states he was ranked 25th and others say Benning did a great job taking him at 25th and had him ranked around #10. I don't get how Benning can be credited with the other 20 or so GM's not taking him, if anything it is pure luck that he wasn't taken earlier, luck and even if Benning had him at 10 Boeser did not go at ten. I simply cannot see how theguardian is wrong, it was pure luck and where he was ranked that Boeser was there at all, realy not much different that Pasternak being available to Boston in the mid rounds. You know I decided to read a bunch of theguardian's threads because so many posters here protest his posts, sure how he posts can come off as being negative but so many posts here are so happy he seems to be a balance. But I'll tell you one thing theguardian seems to know way more about "hockey operations" overall than most of his respondents. He rarely makes outrageous statements and as he has stated he doesn't attack players, I checked and didn't find any although he does make a distinction between AHL and NHL calibre players. When states facts as facts he does offer numbers. I read many posts in this thread and others he started and then decided to make comment with as much content as any others. Theguardian clearly has the most influence on this forum than any other poster so many attack him rather than the facts he posts. Those that attack rarely have an argument better than a teenager, "You don't know anything, you don't understand" It’s that really you Gaurdian? Rarely makes outrageous outrageous statements indeed, clearly has the most incluence on this forum. His/her credibility is completely shot given the sheer number of ridiculous things said over time, and even when IF there is a factual statement here and there it’s hard to take it seriously. Some pretty broad strokes here with some pretty silly statements. Why would you want to re-read a bunch of Guardian statements in the first place, if your on the forum and have been for a while, you know better than to get caught up in that quagmire of pretence, hyperbole, half-facts, extremism, and well a lot of pure bullsh&t. There is a spectrum you know, between hating Benning and worshipping him, I’d bet if there was a poll made most CDCers would be somewhere in the middle, with maybe 2% on the far sides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calvin's Dog Posted March 30, 2019 Share Posted March 30, 2019 I think everyone knows Benning's strengths and weaknesses. Yes, free agency has been a pretty hit and miss (maybe mostly miss) but I think I see an evolution in his FA thinking. I think the Eriksson signing was generally well received at the time and is certainly NOT the worst contract signed that day. Some suggest Ladd, Lucic, Okposo and Backes were all very similar disappointments. Out of all of those at the time, the only one I thought was better was Okposo. But they're all regretful. I liked last July FA's. I think term was given to attract them and I think they have done well. Especially Roussel. Trades have been ok. The biggest one Gudbranson for McCann and picks was probably a 'loss' but Florida has also moved on from McCann. And in the end Pearson may be a veteran presence who can fill in til some of the young wingers in Utica are ready. But the key is drafting and this is what the Canucks desperately needed. I can't remember every draft, but between Grabner and Horvat, not one of the Canuck's first round picks really worked out at all. Hodgson was a borderline success and yielded Kassian. Yes, Virtanen and Juolevi are not what Benning hoped they would yet, but they aren't a complete story yet either. Under Benning and his drafting team, the Canucks are poised for the highest and most sustainable level of competition they have ever had. I've been a fan since 82. Maybe he needs some help with trades and FA but I would be disappointed if Benning were fired now. I think he needs another couple of years to really shape the team after his early mandate of re-tool on the fly. Anyway I understand OP's concerns but I think they are overstated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kloubek Posted March 31, 2019 Share Posted March 31, 2019 So where in the poll is the option of re-signing Benning to an extension? We are forced to pick from a selection of varying degrees of "Benning Sucks". Thats a one sided poll if Ive ever seen one. I am not exactly a Benning fanboy, but he has picked up some real gems for their draft position and refilled our nearly 100% depleted cupboards. Yes he has made mistakes too (especially with his trades) but if a new GM isnt allowed to make mistakes (like every GM in history has) then I think the bar is being set just a tiny bit too high. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest chilliwiggins Posted March 31, 2019 Share Posted March 31, 2019 On 3/20/2019 at 11:14 AM, Qwags said: Resign him for 5 years lmao Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pepe Silvia Posted March 31, 2019 Share Posted March 31, 2019 13 hours ago, kloubek said: So where in the poll is the option of re-signing Benning to an extension? We are forced to pick from a selection of varying degrees of "Benning Sucks". Thats a one sided poll if Ive ever seen one. I am not exactly a Benning fanboy, but he has picked up some real gems for their draft position and refilled our nearly 100% depleted cupboards. Yes he has made mistakes too (especially with his trades) but if a new GM isnt allowed to make mistakes (like every GM in history has) then I think the bar is being set just a tiny bit too high. Couldn't agree more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vannuck59 Posted April 1, 2019 Share Posted April 1, 2019 Im not a Benning fan but we could have done worse. His Drafting has been better lately but I would have picked differently in his first three years.(except Boeser) Signing of free agents he has been 50/50 at best, LE being his worst. So one more year of Benning and then get the rope ,I see a bright future and we will just miss the playoffs next year. Draft BPA and hope to get lucky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.