Benning's Window of Opportunity

[Rob_Zepp]

20 hours ago, JamesB said:

I always wondered about who was driving the strategy and I don't think it will ever be clear. Yes, Linden did talk about trying to build around the Sedins, but was that his agenda or was he just pushing the party line? Of the Canuck senior management -- Aquilini, Linden, and Benning, Linden was the guy who emphasized the importance of drafting and development the most and was the first to use the "R-word" (rebuild). My sense is that he become uncomfortable with "win now" strategy fairly early, maybe by his second year whereas Benning has always maintained the "we can turn things around quickly" approach.

It was Linden who always spoke of "owing it to the Sedins" to not strip too many veterans out.   It was noticeable that immediately after Linden's departure how many moves were made (including even placing signed veterans in the minors).   I think this team is now and truly Benning's and he should be judged on these next two years as if they are not a playoff team by the end of this 12 or 24 month window, his time will be up.   My bet is he will be here for a long while after as I think many (entire league?) will underestimate this team.   

[Rob_Zepp]

21 hours ago, kanucks25 said:

5 years of ineptitude and nothing to show for it so far?

Self-diagnosis?

[alt kilgore]

1 hour ago, Smashian Kassian said:

Its frowned upon to talk about on here, but its true. If the powers that be had it their way, this team likely wouldnt have drafted Elias Pettersson. 

 

'Accidently' may not be the right word, but there was reluctancy along the way.

Teams also need a bit of luck as well. It's true that perhaps we'd not have landed Pettersson if we'd actually done worse - by doing a traditional break down.... and picked higher, Or done better if Eriksson and other deals had lived up to expectations.....and had to pick lower. 

 

That's where part of that "accidental" comes in. Personally I think the Hockey Gods finally felt a bit sorry for us.

 

 

[SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME]

1 hour ago, aGENT said:

Giant (and incorrect IMO) assumptions.

Unfortunately, the Canucks didn’t help much in preventing those assumptions:

 

And there was similar messaging from the front office around additions like Eriksson and Gudbranson.

 

It’s not as simple as the Canucks were desperately chasing the playoffs, and this drove their acquisitions through much of Benning’s tenure. But it’s also not as simple as Benning was working the same exact plan from day one, and we’re now reaping the inevitable rewards of his sound management practices since 2014.

 

Vancouver spent considerable cap space and assets on players they believed would help them “win now” while providing stability and leadership to allow the kids to grow and develop. How successful this was is certainly up for debate. The Benning years saw us have the worst record of any team in the NHL over several seasons, so the “winning atmosphere” angle was largely a fail. And he made some acquisitions that either resulted in net asset loss, or tied up considerable cap space in players that likely will not help this team when it reaches a competitive window (some may even need to be moved out in cap dump trades with “sweeteners”). Not sure if those moves really helped us get any better, either then, now, or into the future.

 

I’m really not interested in going negative on Benning. I’m far from a hater. But I’m equally disinterested in fluffing up his management record. There’ve been mistakes. The rebuild has been far from optimal. We’ve finally reached a place now where one can see the potential for things coming together for this team, but before we actually reach “contender” status, Benning (or his replacement) may very well need to spend nearly as much time and energy cleaning up after some of his own mistakes, as was devoted to cleaning up “the mess” from the team he inherited in 2014.

 

Many here will disagree with my assessment, of course. CDC remains the land of “in JB we trust.” Personally, I’ve never “trusted” JB completely as the guy to get this team where it needs to be. That level of faith just isn’t in my nature. But I’ve always wished him well. I think he’s made some very good moves in the last few years. I think we’re headed in a good direction now. But I also think he’s stumbled at many stages along the way. Just my $0.02, and I don’t expect everyone to agree.

 

 

[aGENT]

2 minutes ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

Unfortunately, the Canucks didn’t help much in preventing those assumptions:

 

And there was similar messaging from the front office around additions like Eriksson and Gudbranson.

 

It’s not as simple as the Canucks were desperately chasing the playoffs, and this drove their acquisitions through much of Benning’s tenure. But it’s also not as simple as Benning was working the same exact plan from day one, and we’re now reaping the inevitable rewards of his sound management practices since 2014.

 

Vancouver spent considerable cap space and assets on players they believed would help them “win now” while providing stability and leadership to allow the kids to grow and develop. How successful this was is certainly up for debate. The Benning years saw us have the worst record of any team in the NHL over several seasons, so the “winning atmosphere” angle was largely a fail. And he made some acquisitions that either resulted in net asset loss, or tied up considerable cap space in players that likely will not help this team when it reaches a competitive window (some may even need to be moved out in cap dump trades with “sweeteners”). Not sure if those moves really helped us get any better, either then, now, or into the future.

 

I’m really not interested in going negative on Benning. I’m far from a hater. But I’m equally disinterested in fluffing up his management record. There’ve been mistakes. The rebuild has been far from optimal. We’ve finally reached a place now where one can see the potential for things coming together for this team, but before we actually reach “contender” status, Benning (or his replacement) may very well need to spend nearly as much time and energy cleaning up after some of his own mistakes, as was devoted to cleaning up “the mess” from the team he inherited in 2014.

 

Many here will disagree with my assessment, of course. CDC remains the land of “in JB we trust.” Personally, I’ve never “trusted” JB completely as the guy to get this team where it needs to be. That level of faith just isn’t in my nature. But I’ve always wished him well. I think he’s made some very good moves in the last few years. I think we’re headed in a good direction now. But I also think he’s stumbled at many stages along the way. Just my $0.02, and I don’t expect everyone to agree.

 

 

 

I never expected perfection from 'the plan'. 'Mistakes' are an inevitable and inherent part of the job. If you don't take risks, you don't 'risk' improving either. And I believe the word you were looking for was 'competitive'  

 

And beyond Eriksson (whom I think all agree has been a giant, wet fart of a move), we have very little cap space 'tied up' past when Hughes and Petey need raises. Almost like it was planned that way...

 

Not 'fluffing' anything here. Just commending the pretty apparent and continuing positive upward trend in the organization (despite some expected mistakes along the way). Declaring that trend as simple, dumb luck is frankly asinine.  

 

 

[189lb enforcers?]

2 hours ago, aGENT said:

Giant (and incorrect IMO) assumptions.

If you were to take the time to illustrate how each move has effectively resulted in the desired outcome and execution of a Plan, one may be swayed into thinking you have a point, other than the predictably-generalized platitudes of equally hypocritical ass-u-me claims, the likes of which you label the thoughts of others here with. Do you even hear yourself? 

 

 

As for you defining, then defending, the Plan, why not just start with Gagme, since I highly doubt you have the desire or the capacity to copy and paste Benning’s plan out of his pocket, nor will you be able to convince anybody that he spent to the cap ceiling to pick top 5-7 all this time.

 

This will save us all th time and bother, unless you really are the keeper of JB’s thoughts and secret, hidden intentions and Plan?  

 

I look forward to your revisionist history or conjurings of how the IR mainstays are assessed, as to the Plan. Geeenious move, using all those expensive smoke screens to secure EP. Please tell me all about it. 

 

Will you find those annually-predictable roster vacancies in key positions to have been expected and “planned” by JB, thus part of the plan?

 

Maybe it was and this was all just a very, very expensive stealth Tank then, with the intended result always having been to pick a franchise player in the top 5? Tell me more so I can tell my boss how to spend in style with no concern because of silver linings. 

 

But then you’ll have to explain the need for Beagle on term, etc., and how he plays into JB’s planned Stealth Tank. 

 

What part JB’s tenure went to Plan? Be specific. 

(Not the reasoning, no this is entirely not the point here, this is about results and execution which delivered expected outcomes)

 

Was the goal of each season to pick top 5? I look forward to seeing this defined in your work, likely under the header of, Silver linings.

 

What part of the pick-high plan required the PP be fixed, as JB had stated, by adding Delzaster and a Gagme?

Was the PP fixed, as planned? 

No.

Please define. 

I’m being facetious, of course. 

 

 

 

My position requires no lobbing or reaching hypotheticals, Ifs and Buts, or explanations of any kind.

 

Slim-Jim’s Plan can be readily assessed on the merits of statements made by Linden and Benning themselves, against the results and against his supposed Plan. 

 

If you choose to belive that these past, expensive plans delivered their intended results, then that’s great, but you can’t justify shouting-down the thoughts of others on here simply because you can type. Your wobbly claims are those which require the most convincing of their merits, not the other way around, hence this response. 

 

If you can define and then convince me of how JB has delivered on his plan without any subjective reaching or generalizing or projecting, then do it.

 

I don’t think you can, not in any seriousness.

 

This is why there remains so much noise about his tenure within the hockey community, media, etc; a vast majority of hockey people continue to doubt his results as being intentional because of his management/actions and the reliance on silver linings-theory to defend those results.

 

We should all hope for such an understanding boss as Auquman then. 

 

I am not expecting a God for a GM, people make mistakes and $&!# happens, I get that, fully. I think we are on the same page in this aspect, but stand on opposite sides of how we perceive this era’s results as being part of a master Plan, or blueprint.

 

Unlike yourself, I do not have a vocation here requiring my time to be spent rolling my eyes at the thoughts of others to make a point. You can’t possibly speak for Benning or know his plan anymore than what he has said to the rest of us “incorrect” people, but continue, please, and be quite specific. 

 

You seem to have no limit to the amount of time you can spend on this site, so I challenge you to defend your claims that, for instance, landing EP at 5th overall, etc, was all part of the Gagme Plan, or whatever. They are your claims, after all. 

Insert eye roll here. 

Edited July 16, 2019 by 189lb enforcers?

[189lb enforcers?]

1 hour ago, Smashian Kassian said:

Its frowned upon to talk about on here, but its true. If the powers that be had it their way, this team likely wouldnt have drafted Elias Pettersson. 

 

'Accidently' may not be the right word, but there was reluctancy along the way.

This, entirely. 

 

The Silver linings Plan. 

 

All part of the plan. 

[189lb enforcers?]

1 hour ago, ilduce39 said:

JB takes a ton of heat for not publicly crapping all over his team during what has to be the most talent-deficient lineup in 50 years of Canucks.

Ryan Miller?

RV?

etc. 

I disagree. 

[ilduce39]

20 minutes ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

Ryan Miller?

RV?

etc. 

I disagree. 

You’ll have to post the worse roster. I remember when we couldn’t give tickets away in the 90s and we still had AlMo and Bure.  

 

All due respect to the twilight Sedins, we didn’t have anyone who could hold their (Bure/Mogilny’s) jock straps in the Willie years.

Edited July 16, 2019 by ilduce39

[189lb enforcers?]

1 minute ago, ilduce39 said:

You’ll have to post the worse roster. I remember when we couldn’t give tickets away in the 90s and we still had AlMo and Bure.  

 

All due respect to the twilight Sedins, we didn’t have anyone who could hold their jock straps in the Willie years.

Skill-wise though? 

These have been expensively good rosters comparable to some years. 

I think some of the early 2000 ones and a year here and there were pretty bad, comparable at least. 

Of course I won’t point to comparables. 

 

I suppose you’re correct though, once you factor in/out the injuries and the Chaputs of late. I can see that. Point awarded! 

[ilduce39]

3 minutes ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

Skill-wise though? 

These have been expensively good rosters comparable to some years. 

I think some of the early 2000 ones and a year here and there were pretty bad, comparable at least. 

Of course I won’t point to comparables. 

 

I suppose you’re correct though, once you factor in/out the injuries and the Chaputs of late. I can see that. Point awarded! 

Well, in any case, it was a throwaway comment.  It’s the Canucks so I’m sure we’ve had a few stinky rosters.  2015-2017 in particular have to be up there though. A bunch of listless vets and role players put in over their heads... then Chaput/Megna/Vey and Matt Bartkowski’s mom.  Wooo!

 

I think management could have saved a lot of headaches even if they did everything the same but framed it with the “lean years” veneer instead of “trying to make the playoffs.”  

 

Or “we acquired Sutter because he was the best we could get for Bonino and we need someone to get their head kicked in while Bo develops and the Twins soak up 70% ozone starts.”  Rather than calling him “foundational.”   (This is admittedly debatable - did JB really think Sutter would come in and put up 50 points in a 2C role?  Or maybe just hoped and figured he’d settle for a solid 3C in any case. I’m not sure.)

 

I still think that’s a weird way to sell your team, though, and I like the stubborn fighting spirit even though they didn’t have chance.  That’s just me though.

[189lb enforcers?]

2 minutes ago, ilduce39 said:

 

I still think that’s a weird way to sell your team, though, and I like the stubborn fighting spirit even though they didn’t have chance.  That’s just me though.

The nutshell.

[aGENT]

2 minutes ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

If you were take the time to illustrate how each move has effectively resulted in the desired outcome and execution of a Plan, one may be swayed into thinking you have a point, other than the predictably-generalized platitudes of equally hypocritical ass-u-me claims, the likes of which you label the thoughts of others here with. Do you even hear yourself? 

 

 

As for you defining, then defending, the Plan, why not just start with Gagme, since I highly doubt you have the desire or the capacity to copy and paste Benning’s plan out of his pocket, nor will you be able to convince anybody that he spent to the cap ceiling to pick top 5-7 all this time. This will save us all th time and bother, unless you really are the keeper of JB’s thoughts and secret, hidden intentions and Plan?  

 

I look forward to your revisionist history or conjurings of how the IR mainstays are assessed, as to the Plan. Geeenious move, using all those expensive smoke screens to secure EP. Please tell me all about it. 

 

Will you find those annually-predictable roster vacancies in key positions to have been expected and “planned” by JB, thus part of the plan? Maybe it was and this was all just a very, very expensive stealth Tank then, with the intended result always having been to pick a franchise player in the top 5? Tell me more so I can tell my boss how to spend in style with no concern because of silver linings. 

 

But then you’ll have to explain the need for Beagle on term, etc., and how he plays into JB’s planned Stealth Tank. 

 

What part JB’s tenure went to Plan? Be specific. 

(Not the reasoning, no this is entirely not the point here, this is about results and execution which delivered expected outcomes)

 

Was the goal of each season to pick top 5? I look forward to seeing this defined in your work, likely under the header of, Silver linings.

 

What part of the pick-high plan required the PP be fixed, as JB had stated, by adding Delzaster and a Gagme?

Was the PP fixed, as planned? 

No.

Please define. 

I’m being facetious, of course. 

 

 

 

My position requires no lobbing or reaching hypotheticals, Ifs and Buts, or explanations of any kind.

 

Slim-Jim’s Plan can be readily assessed on the merits of statements made by Linden and Benning themselves, against the results and against his supposed Plan. 

 

If you chose to belive that these past, expensive plans delivered their intended results, then that’s great, but you can’t justify shouting-down the thoughts of others on here simply because you can type. Your wobbly claims are those which require the most convincing of their merits, not the other way around, hence this response. 

 

If you can define and then convince me of how JB has delivered on his plan without any subjective reaching or generalizing or projecting, then do it.

 

I don’t think you can, not in any seriousness.

 

This is why there remains so much noise about his tenure within the hockey community, media, etc; a vast majority of hockey people continue to doubt his results as being intentional because of his management/actions and the reliance on silver linings-theory to defend those results.

 

We should all hope for such an understanding boss as Auquman then. 

 

I am not expecting a God for a GM, people make mistakes and $&!# happens, I get that, fully. I think we are on the same page in this aspect, but stand on opposite sides of how we perceive this era’s results as being part of a master Plan, or blueprint.

 

Unlike yourself, I do not have a vocation here requiring my time to be spent rolling my eyes at the thoughts of others to make a point. You can’t possibly speak for Benning or know his plan anymore than what he has said to the rest of us “incorrect” people, but continue, please, and be quite specific. 

 

You seem to have no limit to the amount of time you can spend on this site, so I challenge you to defend your claims that, for instance, landing EP at 5th overall, etc, was all part of the Gagme Plan, or whatever. They are your claims, after all. 

Insert eye roll here. 

That's an impressive wall-o-rant 189  Seems a bit of a waste of time as it's already been explained before and you're still yelling in to the wind, but...

 

From day one Benning has stated (paraphrasing) he would 'replenish youth' (rebuild) as his primary objective while simultaneously doing what he could to support the NHL team and keep them as 'competitive' as possible. EXACTLY what has done from day one and continues to do now. Build as much organizational depth as you can, in any way you can and finish where you finish. Draft where you draft. Rinse. Repeat.

 

Sometimes it worked (playoffs and Boeser), more often it didn't (largely injury induced) and we get the rest of our, then higher, 1sts. The latter (losing) was always a risk during a rebuild with poor depth. I'd wager both Benning and ownership were well aware of those risks/likelihood of poor seasons. Sorry if they weren't entirely upfront with you about that. They still wanted to sell tickets and not end the players season in the media before they even stepped on the ice.  And if ownership was willing to foot the bill, I'm not sure why you care? 'Most expensive rebuild' or otherwise. It was the plan ownership and management agreed on and executed. And likely kept a good few kids from roles etc over their heads an away from being media scapegoats and pinatas.

 

There was no declaration that every move would work or that every move would be still be paying fruits when the team was truly playoff worthy again. Some guys were quite literally, just fillers (Gagner, MDZ etc). I'm not sure why you get to declare that as 'bad' when it was pretty clearly their main intended purpose.  Some were long shots that didn't work out. Some simply didn't work on any real level at all (Eriksson). The key is to keep building. 

 

What a fun goal post you've determined as well? Can you define and convince me without any subjective reaching, generalizing or projecting that it hasn't been his plan?  As far as I know, very few if any CDC'ers are in Benning's inner circle. We aren't privy to his inner thoughts or detailed specifics of 'the plan'. All I know is there were a good few of us who've understood (as best as anyone can from the fan level) what the plan has been since day one, through the PR-speak, the inconsequential filler signings etc

[189lb enforcers?]

Anyone else want to take a serious stab at this?

[alt kilgore]

2 hours ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

Unfortunately, the Canucks didn’t help much in preventing those assumptions:

 

And there was similar messaging from the front office around additions like Eriksson and Gudbranson.

 

It’s not as simple as the Canucks were desperately chasing the playoffs, and this drove their acquisitions through much of Benning’s tenure. But it’s also not as simple as Benning was working the same exact plan from day one, and we’re now reaping the inevitable rewards of his sound management practices since 2014.

 

Vancouver spent considerable cap space and assets on players they believed would help them “win now” while providing stability and leadership to allow the kids to grow and develop. How successful this was is certainly up for debate. The Benning years saw us have the worst record of any team in the NHL over several seasons, so the “winning atmosphere” angle was largely a fail. And he made some acquisitions that either resulted in net asset loss, or tied up considerable cap space in players that likely will not help this team when it reaches a competitive window (some may even need to be moved out in cap dump trades with “sweeteners”). Not sure if those moves really helped us get any better, either then, now, or into the future.

 

I’m really not interested in going negative on Benning. I’m far from a hater. But I’m equally disinterested in fluffing up his management record. There’ve been mistakes. The rebuild has been far from optimal. We’ve finally reached a place now where one can see the potential for things coming together for this team, but before we actually reach “contender” status, Benning (or his replacement) may very well need to spend nearly as much time and energy cleaning up after some of his own mistakes, as was devoted to cleaning up “the mess” from the team he inherited in 2014.

 

Many here will disagree with my assessment, of course. CDC remains the land of “in JB we trust.” Personally, I’ve never “trusted” JB completely as the guy to get this team where it needs to be. That level of faith just isn’t in my nature. But I’ve always wished him well. I think he’s made some very good moves in the last few years. I think we’re headed in a good direction now. But I also think he’s stumbled at many stages along the way. Just my $0.02, and I don’t expect everyone to agree.

 

 

 

Mayor of Rightville right there

Post of the thread.

[Silver Ghost]

The Canucks are right at the beginning where they are starting to crack the window of opportunity open. Still, there are a lot of things left to do and at this point a lot will have to go right for the Canucks to be serious contenders if they even make the playoffs.

 

As always, injuries will play a huge role. The Canucks will need healthy seasons from their key players and support guys.

 

Goaltending is a strength but must continue to be a difference maker at key times. Getting goalies on a hot streak in the playoffs is a very common element to cup contending teams.

 

Petterssen, Boeser, Horvat, Hughes, Virtanen, etc all need to keep progressing. Miller, Ferland, Sutter, Baertschi, etc from the secondary scoring group need to all be contributing.

 

Our team has addressed the toughness and hard to play against complaint from years prior. But that has to show up consistently on the ice. That team tough mentality is a key to playoff success.

 

Travis Green needs to continue settling in to the style he wants the team to play. With new weapons to deploy, he finally has options to improve our 4 line team and the PP and PK. More eyes will rightfully be on the decisions he makes, how quick he is to adjust, and how many players he can get the most out of. Coaching (in the playoffs especially) matters a lot. The PP simply needs to be much better and more consistent to give the Canucks their best chance.

 

On paper right now, the Canucks look like a team that over a 7 game series could give any other team a hard battle. I suspect they would not be the favored team to play for the top teams. 

 

Thats a lot to go right. But at the same time, if most things fall their way I could actually see this team being a tough out in the playoffs.

 

Lets hope the shifting style and more of a speedy, heavy game will help reduce the injury effect that has come from other teams controlling too much of the play.

Edited July 16, 2019 by Silver Ghost

[IBatch]

2 hours ago, Rob_Zepp said:

It was Linden who always spoke of "owing it to the Sedins" to not strip too many veterans out.   It was noticeable that immediately after Linden's departure how many moves were made (including even placing signed veterans in the minors).   I think this team is now and truly Benning's and he should be judged on these next two years as if they are not a playoff team by the end of this 12 or 24 month window, his time will be up.   My bet is he will be here for a long while after as I think many (entire league?) will underestimate this team.   

Linden was also used as a shield to deflect any disdain at the whatever was going on with the team while he was here.  I do agree that the team will be judged over the next few years, and I am cautiously optimistic about our chances of making the playoffs.  I like our team and in league parity think anyone can come out of the woodwork and win a cup, so the more kicks at the can the better.   But am not entirely convinced that waiting another year or even two before striking wouldn’t have been the wiser choice.    If everyone and everything works out we are golden, if not we will end up in another rebuild eventually and that team will become our better bet (parts of two cores).  That’s ok too. 

 

Lindens plan whatever it may or may not have been could still be the better path we will never know. I’m just glad he left, not because I didn’t like him as president, but because I was growing tired of seeing his good name used to placate fans and the media. 

[alt kilgore]

45 minutes ago, aGENT said:

That's an impressive wall-o-rant 189  Seems a bit of a waste of time as it's already been explained before and you're still yelling in to the wind, but...

 

From day one Benning has stated (paraphrasing) he would 'replenish youth' (rebuild) as his primary objective while simultaneously doing what he could to support the NHL team and keep them as 'competitive' as possible. EXACTLY what has done from day one and continues to do now. Build as much organizational depth as you can, in any way you can and finish where you finish. Draft where you draft. Rinse. Repeat.

 

Sometimes it worked (playoffs and Boeser), more often it didn't (largely injury induced) and we get the rest of our, then higher, 1sts. The latter (losing) was always a risk during a rebuild with poor depth. I'd wager both Benning and ownership were well aware of those risks/likelihood of poor seasons. Sorry if they weren't entirely upfront with you about that. They still wanted to sell tickets and not end the players season in the media before they even stepped on the ice.  And if ownership was willing to foot the bill, I'm not sure why you care? 'Most expensive rebuild' or otherwise. It was the plan ownership and management agreed on and executed. And likely kept a good few kids from roles etc over their heads an away from being media scapegoats and pinatas.

 

There was no declaration that every move would work or that every move would be still be paying fruits when the team was truly playoff worthy again. Some guys were quite literally, just fillers (Gagner, MDZ etc). I'm not sure why you get to declare that as 'bad' when it was pretty clearly their main intended purpose.  Some were long shots that didn't work out. Some simply didn't work on any real level at all (Eriksson). The key is to keep building. 

 

What a fun goal post you've determined as well? Can you define and convince me without any subjective reaching, generalizing or projecting that it hasn't been his plan?  As far as I know, very few if any CDC'ers are in Benning's inner circle. We aren't privy to his inner thoughts or detailed specifics of 'the plan'. All I know is there were a good few of us who've understood (as best as anyone can from the fan level) what the plan has been since day one, through the PR-speak, the inconsequential filler signings etc

Thing is that's what he SAID he'd do, but in all honesty, do you think this is even possible? Let alone that he fulfilled this "plan"?

One of the first moves out of the gate was to relinquish a second round draft pick for Vey. 

 

I get that he had to fill the roster with SOMETHING. It's just the confused strategy of thinking you can have your cake and sip from the Cup too. It's one thing to fill your roster spots, it's another to over pay FAs to fill them. You saw the quote up thread; he made no bones about the playoffs being a realistic goal other than the last season.

 

It's the cuts of a thousand knives, letting players walk for nothing, buying high and selling low. Even if I give him a mulligan on Eriksson. His drafting has saved him. Even that isn't a perfect record. No one expects that though.

 

I'm honestly trying to understand how one could define the last five years as some well executed plan that has now all come to fruition. Or for that matter even that just because we're all spent up to the cap, the plan has succeeded as well as could be expected.

 

All that said, I'm optimistic about the coming season.

 

 

[Alflives]

3 minutes ago, kilgore said:

Thing is that's what he SAID he'd do, but in all honesty, do you think this is even possible? Let alone that he fulfilled this "plan"?

One of the first moves out of the gate was to relinquish a second round draft pick for Vey. 

 

I get that he had to fill the roster with SOMETHING. It's just the confused strategy of thinking you can have your cake and sip from the Cup too. It's one thing to fill your roster spots, it's another to over pay FAs to fill them. You saw the quote up thread; he made no bones about the playoffs being a realistic goal other than the last season.

 

It's the cuts of a thousand knives, letting players walk for nothing, buying high and selling low. Even if I give him a mulligan on Eriksson. His drafting has saved him. Even that isn't a perfect record. No one expects that though.

 

I'm honestly trying to understand how one could define the last five years as some well executed plan that has now all come to fruition. Or for that matter even that just because we're all spent up to the cap, the plan has succeeded as well as could be expected.

 

All that said, I'm optimistic about the coming season.

 

 

JB didn’t follow the path I expected for a rebuild.  However, the proof he did a good job is in the pudding.  We have a decade of really good hockey to look forward to.  

[alt kilgore]

Just now, Alflives said:

JB didn’t follow the path I expected for a rebuild.  However, the proof he did a good job is in the pudding.  We have a decade of really good hockey to look forward to.  

Here I thought you were the more cantankerous alien Alf!