[Report] Canucks sign GM Jim Benning to contract extension

[Smashian Kassian]

 

12 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

Jim is what he is, I do think the the good well outweighs the bad, and I like stability right now for seeing this particular rebuild through. At least if this one goes sideways there's better talent to move. 

 

I think this core he's assembled really has a chance to compete for a Stanley Cup if a few more shrewd moves can be made. I don't worry about things going totally sideways.

 

 

12 hours ago, theo5789 said:

Sakic became GM with a team that had Duchene, MacKinnon, O'Reilly, Landeskog and Barrie all around 22 or under. Plus guys like Paul Statsny and Erik Johnson.

 

MacKinnon alone is a different starting point from Benning and Benning had to use scouting and balls to make that pick at 5 (he clearly knew he wasn't rated as highly as he wanted to trade down). EP is another product of Benning and crew (while again not winning the lottery, but taking fate in his own hands and stealing the lottery money).

 

Despite starting around the same time, they've only squeaked into the playoffs the last couple of years with a decent core/tradable pieces already in place. Not knocking on Sakic's work, but he gets a lot of praise here that he wouldn't have had he done the same here (see Benning). If MacKinnon hadn't found a new level to his game, I don't think the Avs even make the playoffs the last couple of seasons either.

 

12 hours ago, aGENT said:

Sakic's also had some pretty large horse shoes up his kiester in comparison to Benning as well as a lot of extra years of high draft picks to make things like the Duchenne trade available in the first place.

 

But this is naturally what happens. When Pettersson finds that new level our team will be in the playoffs too. 

 

Sakic's had better talent to work with, but he's done a good job with it. He lost Stastny for nothing, he's not really a factor. He had to trade ROR & got a good return (still has Zadorov & Compher to show). He had to trade Duchene & hit a home run. Rantanen at #10 was a great pick. exc. 

 

When Jim came there wasn't alot of prospects but the roster still had assets. It wasn't totally bare bones. Edler was 27, Tanev was just 24, Bieksa & Hamhuis were still in there primes, same with Kes & Garrison. As far as younger assets; Tanev, Horvat, 2 younger goalies & a 6th overall pick. And he was able to get decent returns on most of them. 

 

Its relative to a degree, but Sakic has done a really good job. As much as he got maligned for waiting on Duchene, he's made some real nice moves last few years.

 

12 hours ago, aGENT said:

Who's arguing otherwise? What suggests we won't?

 

Well im glad everyone agrees. That's why I generally haven't always liked this management group trading drafts. That's my rationale.

[Smashian Kassian]

6 hours ago, Canuck Surfer said:

I don't share the opinion that Roussel and Beagle are bad contracts.  I am not hot on Sutter's.  And of course Eriksson's is bad. 

 

If Jim has shorn up our top 9 with other value contracts; Ferland, Virtanen, Miller, Pearson?  Baer somewhat on par with Sutter for not being great. But well short of a dead loss.

 

We'll still be able to wait it out. With these deals. Have some ELC's within two years to start superceding them.  Lind, Hoglander, with some luck Gadjovich, Podkolzin, Madden, with some luck Lockwood, Gaudette sooner.Leivo expires next year. Schaller next year. Baer, Sutter & Pearson, the year after.  Before both expansion. And Hughes + Pettersson's pacts. If we shed even one significant pact? Just Tanev's pact may buy enough space next year for Barrie.  If Eriksson is dispatched somehow, ANOTHER potential bad contract for a role player like Roussel? 

 

I prefer it to having a sheer cliff in quality 1/2 way through the 3rd line.  Sutter, when healthy was top 3 in minutes.  Had a valuable role, even if a black hole in scoring.  Some of these guys give us match up bodies, weight, speed, puck wins, an ability to punish opposing D.  Its not all goals and assists...

 

 

 

 

I've never thought Roussel's contract was bad in the slightest. His contract was fine from the moment was signed. I've always said that. 

 

I said 2-3, meaning the 2 would be Eriksson - Sutter, and some may include Beagle or someone else if they have a different opinion. I like what Beagle brings, but we definitely paid a premium to get him.

 

I was just saying going forward as we hope to contend, we need to be more prudent on the pro-side. When your a bad team its understandable to have 20 million allocated to guys scoring less than 30 points, but those trends cant continue if you have aspirations of winning the cup.

 

Sutter would be a nice contributor in that role if he can stay healthy. But with Gaudette / Madden on the horizon, and now Jay Beagle signed to be a similar kind of player (RH defensive/pk role), he becomes an obvious guy to try and move along for cap space.

 

I think if they move Eriksson money will be coming back. That or we're giving up something we don't want too. Sutter would be a more likely candidate to free money. Him or Tanev. 

 

 

Edited August 20, 2019 by Smashian Kassian

[Smashian Kassian]

6 hours ago, IBatch said:

I completely agree that this year is a crap shoot.   Recent ratings by the THN yearbook have us 5th in the division but also expect us to get better - if the playoff bar remains low because the West continues to canalbalize  each other in all their strong vanilla (which I fully expect then to do) and the East continues to beat on the west - 91-94 points is a realistic bar for the two wild card spots and be it’s anyone’s guess who it could be.  They had CAL 1 (look at their top scorers and how far down you have to go before you hit 30 and it’s not hard to see why not - their 12th highest scorer was Sam Bennet - right around where Goldobin was and four points ahead of JV - who were our 8 and 9th scorer..and they had five guys between 74 and 99 points .. 2nd best offense and 9th best defense despite average goaltending... they fix that and we won’t ever catch them this cycle without some serious luck.  Vegas 2nd, SJ 3rd (debatable), ARI 4th (already picked them as a dark horse ) and us 5th.

 

McKeen who does a good fantasy mag had us a 4....wild card team. 

 

On the bright side last year most experts picked us as a bottom 3 team in the entire league - so at least now we are getting some respect - and it’s hard not to think that a modest improvement will occur at the minimum which should push us right to the edge. 

 

As an aside they believe OJ will get some games but won’t be full time to the following season which I agree on.  THN has been a strong supporter since we drafted him (66 ranked overall for all prospects - currently 4th on our team behind Podz, Demko and Hughes who they are also high on).

 

Next year I see as a transition year much the same as when Luongo first came in. It will take some time for the team to gel and get their teeth out, but when they do  I’m expecting we will give CAL and Vegas a run for their money.  SJ is going to implode in a year or too - they still have a window but it’s closing fast.   

 

I agree completely, good analysis on the other teams. Going in, I think we're neck & neck with ARZ in our div.

 

If the wildcard playoff bar is as low as it was last season, I like our chances alot more. I'm kind of expecting the bar to get back closer to 95+ pts (based on; teams cant possibly be that bad again, can they?) but it could stay the same. (hopefully)

 

I like the comparison to Luongo coming. You can tell the team is building to something good. The core is too good to be held out of the playoffs forever, but right now Pettersson & Hughes are still just starting out. Our team getting to the next level will probably coincide with them taking their next step(s). 

 

 

4 hours ago, mikeyman109 said:

there were 8 teams we failed to take a [point off of last year.Just a loser OT point against them makes up more than Nine points we would have needed to make the playoffs.

Its not just added goals to expect this season its the added defense to prevent them. Last season when Edler and Tanev went down we had Stecher and Hutton as our top 2. This year we have Myers and Benn and I see that as a huge upgrade over the previous two. Add in Hughes for a full year and we may have a much improved goals against this season if Marky can just play at a decent level. Goal for on the power play should be up as Miller adds passing ability and another look for either the first PP or better yet the second. We also have a D man that can shoot the puck on the first unit as well in Myers. Edler hasnt exactly been productive there the last three seasons. If Myers can score 5-8 goals on the power play with his shot its a huge improvement over Edlers 1 on the power play. Theres a lot of question marks this coming season that could answered very quickly once the games start for real. I like the odds that they will pick up a few goals for and a few against and that could translate into those 9 points we need or maybe even a few more.

 

Absolutely. The defense was just as big of a problem, and part of the offensive problem too as they added nothing from back there. The one thing they had was Markstrom's incredible play to bail them out more often or not. At times it was closer to an AHL defense.

 

I agree its a huge improvement. Just moving Pouliot / Gudbranson out, with Hughes / Myers coming in is such an upgrade on both ends. I expect the offense to be better too, whether it will be average or above average depends on Petey & Hughes mostly IMO. (I guess Boeser too)

[Ballisticsports.]

8 hours ago, mordekai said:

Just using boeser as an example

So you are saying all those years Canucks drafting late 1st round picks like Jensen, Gaunce, Schroder; all they had to do NOT to screw up on these picks was to draft someone 'expected' on Hockey prospect list or Bob's list? I get it... is so easy even I could out GM GMJB.

 

You are a funny person

Not what I am saying at all

 

Boeser was the BPA when drafted, He wasn't a nobody we drafted (people praised the pick too)

All teams whiff on top picks (even Benning has, I could use examples here like you, but this is not the gist of my post))

We did not have the luxury of drafting 1st round early picks like now, then  you mentioned about us flopping on late 1st round picks in the past (which are basically 2nd round)- which ours now could be considered flops until proven as well

Yes some people in the know already knew EP was special and had him up there where he was drafted  (I never claimed I did) even some on here were proclaiming at the time how it was a great choice

 

We were winning , playing exciting hockey, should have won the cup

We had stars

If you had the choice of JUST between these 2 choices

Would you rather win (and possibly a cup or two)  and flop on late 1st round picks, make stars out of late round picks

or

Lose and pick high draft picks and not make the playoffs and flop on late round picks (sounds like Edmonton to me)

 

 

Maybe I don't have the Benning can do no wrong attitude as you do?

I do not put him on a pedestal, or put him in a dumpster either

If he can build  that same kind of team, without developing, then more power to him

I am a Canuck TEAM fan, not just an individual fan (funny how some are, then hate that player after)

If he is the great evaluator of talent, then why have almost all of the established trades not panned out till now? (established players are easier to predict)

Where are our late round picks (like mentioned above) being top contributors to our current team? (like the ones previously mentioned) We need those too !

 

What I was saying is that we need to get more production from our late picks, as an example current rfa (every team has them (late picks, top contributors, we did too)

Aho @ 35th

Labanc @ 171

Point @ 73

 

Like I also stated You don't need a team of all high draft picks, just the right combination and chemistry ( LVK and 2010 Canucks as examples)

more of

Kesler @23

Raymond @ 51

Edler @ 91 (and still on our top 6)

Hansen @ 287

Bieksa @151

Burrows - undrafted

Rypien  - undrafted

Tanev  - undrafted (and still on our top 6)

 

You wouldn't like to see more from late picks then and are just happy with 1st round picks?

We may as well package all rounds for mid 1st rounds if that is the case

 

We developed the players above before, I would like to see more of them produce in the NHL (and lower leagues)

I hear  talk of potential always, but not on the ice so far

Now we don't even have spots for them to earn if they have a great camp

I don't think that management does either regarding them breaking out and have already traded away some of them

 

I am neither an optimist or a pessimist, more of a mix of both and being a realist

 

With all that being said, I am looking forward to this season, for the 1st time in years and hoping they can play exciting, winning hockey, without being pushed around  (although I expect to see agitators take attacks on our stars when the refs are not looking (like wwe) and goad our tougher guys to respond and put us down a man (hopefully our tougher guys know by now to play smart and make it count)

[spook007]

Nevermind....

Edited August 20, 2019 by spook007

[IBatch]

9 hours ago, Smashian Kassian said:

Ballard was the one guy. Malhotra made 2.5 as a third line C. So comparable to Sutter but he was a better player than Sutter & made less.

 

They had 1 bad contract. Bottom pair guy was overpaid by a few million. Not 2 or 3 guys being overpaid.

Not sure if anyone else mentioned this but he also had Booth at 4.75 - both him and Ballard were his two buy-outs from last lock-outs freebies.  One thing about AF he sure doesn’t mind spending the money - at the time (within one year) he bought out MG, Torts, Booth, Ballard and took on part of Luongo salary which he’s still paying 9 million on over the next three years - a MG cap circumvention attempt that the league warned against but he did anyways (and one last MG mistake that’s holding the current team back).  

 

Just for fun google MG and see all the articles that’s pop up of what sort of mess he turned the team into starting from 2013 and continuing for years afterwards.  Hockey writers get it as do most fans.   Personally I can forgive him, he went all in and did what he could to give the team a cup and we came very close to just that.   As far as Maholtras final contract he made 2.5 with a NTC, and the cap was 56-60 million during the duration, would work out to about what we just signed Ferland for in today’s dollars.   

 

Agreed Sutter is too expensive - at least 1 million and that’s if he plays and also why most proposals (and there are many) have the retention in them.  But compared to LE he looks pretty good ha ha.   Beagles is fine - one year too many though and so far Rousell earned every cent.   LEs the only real bummer - factually about the same as well - Ballard and Booth in percentage of cap.  So MG had TWO LEs to deal with.

 

Also back to MG - at the time both Edlers and Keslers contracts were thought to be too expensive, didn’t take long for Keslers to look good, and after a while Edlers too.  Think people forget what other comparables were making back then (better defenseman making less and Kesler was getting more then some first line centres before he even broke out).  

 

That said MG was an expert at getting players to sign for fair-good deals, by the use of clauses.  Burrows had the best deal on the team but got his pay-cheque too with his next deal....but he also had his albatrosses too.

[IBatch]

2 hours ago, ba;;isticsports said:

 

You are a funny person

Not what I am saying at all

 

Boeser was the BPA when drafted, He wasn't a nobody we drafted (people praised the pick too)

All teams whiff on top picks (even Benning has, I could use examples here like you, but this is not the gist of my post))

We did not have the luxury of drafting 1st round early picks like now, then  you mentioned about us flopping on late 1st round picks in the past (which are basically 2nd round)- which ours now could be considered flops until proven as well

Yes some people in the know already knew EP was special and had him up there where he was drafted  (I never claimed I did) even some on here were proclaiming at the time how it was a great choice

 

We were winning , playing exciting hockey, should have won the cup

We had stars

If you had the choice of JUST between these 2 choices

Would you rather win (and possibly a cup or two)  and flop on late 1st round picks, make stars out of late round picks

or

Lose and pick high draft picks and not make the playoffs and flop on late round picks (sounds like Edmonton to me)

 

 

Maybe I don't have the Benning can do no wrong attitude as you do?

I do not put him on a pedestal, or put him in a dumpster either

If he can build  that same kind of team, without developing, then more power to him

I am a Canuck TEAM fan, not just an individual fan (funny how some are, then hate that player after)

If he is the great evaluator of talent, then why have almost all of the established trades not panned out till now? (established players are easier to predict)

Where are our late round picks (like mentioned above) being top contributors to our current team? (like the ones previously mentioned) We need those too !

 

What I was saying is that we need to get more production from our late picks, as an example current rfa (every team has them (late picks, top contributors, we did too)

Aho @ 35th

Labanc @ 171

Point @ 73

 

Like I also stated You don't need a team of all high draft picks, just the right combination and chemistry ( LVK and 2010 Canucks as examples)

more of

Kesler @23

Raymond @ 51

Edler @ 91 (and still on our top 6)

Hansen @ 287

Bieksa @151

Burrows - undrafted

Rypien  - undrafted

Tanev  - undrafted (and still on our top 6)

 

You wouldn't like to see more from late picks then and are just happy with 1st round picks?

We may as well package all rounds for mid 1st rounds if that is the case

 

We developed the players above before, I would like to see more of them produce in the NHL (and lower leagues)

I hear  talk of potential always, but not on the ice so far

Now we don't even have spots for them to earn if they have a great camp

I don't think that management does either regarding them breaking out and have already traded away some of them

 

I am neither an optimist or a pessimist, more of a mix of both and being a realist

 

With all that being said, I am looking forward to this season, for the 1st time in years and hoping they can play exciting, winning hockey, without being pushed around  (although I expect to see agitators take attacks on our stars when the refs are not looking (like wwe) and goad our tougher guys to respond and put us down a man (hopefully our tougher guys know by now to play smart and make it count)

GMJB is building a team that is banking on some of our later picks to fill in the roster as the Sutters, Rousells, Beagles, and even LEs, Tanev and Edlers leave the team in the next 2-3 years.   And we will need them to pay the core and keep under the cap - otherwise we will be filling it in with Schenns or one year fill in types until someone steps up.  

 

AG will replace Sutter almost undoubtedly - and play on the wing and push out a guy like Bear if Sutter can’t be traded.  Hopefully Tree will come back.  Demko replaces Markstrom.  There’s three guys picked after the first round from his Bennings early drafts - and Woo is looking close to at least a 100 game guy if not a shoe-in yet to replace a guy on the right side - second line most likely but you never know (over a PPG in the WHL last year, producing at a much better clip then OJ draft year and draft plus one and he plays a heavy game).   Madden is looking good, Lind has a bad first AHL year but there’s still hope...Hogs looks to be a third line fire plug, maybe second line in a couple years.   Brisbois is already a depth guy...maybe that’s all he ever will be though.  

 

I 100% agree that some of these guys have to work out as regulars too.   As an aside AHO was a second rounder, and Point a third - which shows there is talent available right through the end of the first round and well into the second (watching each draft for years it’s obvious how important second rounders are as guys often slip from the first round, this draft right to almost where we picked which is how we got both Lind (ranked around where Boeser was his draft year) and Woo and Demko etc. 

 

It’s well documented that EDMs failures are primarily from poor drafting outside the first round (and even not all those were hits with Yakupov been a huge bust - but he was ranked where he was for a reason).   They have the biggest ADP penalty of all the NHL teams, factually the worst drafters in the league all things being equal.   BTW we are 9th based on this system - which doesn’t take into account how many picks a team has or if they traded picks - just where they draft and how high their overall 21 are ranked so it’s not perfect but pretty close.   TB is first under this system given they draft the latest and have the 9th best group - a plus 21.  EDM is a minus 20.  

 

Late rounders take a few more years then most, they don’t get the chances first and some second rounders get, have to prove themselves and earn a spot on the team.   I’d expect that we will have 4-5 second rounders and beyond on the team by the time Podz gets here.  Demko and AG are two, Tree is three, and a few  more should get there as well.    Not too worried about it yet.  EDM has ZERO. 

[IBatch]

10 hours ago, ChuckNORRIS4Cup said:

Now regarding Benning, kind of the same as Gillis on how I feel about him, do I think he's the greatest GM no, but he's done some good things and some questionable things as well, doesn't mean I don't like him I believe he's really good at drafting and seeing potential in players, so I do like that in him.

 

Regarding the starting over part, that area imo is a catch 22 as they like to call it. The original approach they took which is the one I didn't agree with, was instead of stripping this team down and restarting over, they wanted to try and stay competitive instead and give the Sedins a couple more years it seemed at a chance at the cup(I still believe it was Aquilini though), but that is what has pushed this rebuild back which I knew was going to happen by taking that approach. They're on the right approach now, it's just it could of started sooner but they took a different approach which slowed the rebuild down, so as a fan yes it frustrates me a bit because I believe we should be a couple more years ahead in the rebuild then we are.

 

Obviously both GMs were in 2 different situations, but hey one of them got this team to game 7 of the Stanley Cup playoffs, and if Benning can do that and get this team to the Stanley Cup finals again, then he will for sure be labeled better then Gillis hands down, the only question will be though will he have enough time to get there, that will be the big question, and that starts with this year imo this team needs to make the playoffs and if they don't, well that's going to be a big fail imo.

You bet - on JB getting to the cup - it would put him right up their with Quin as the best GM ever (Quins teams made the playoffs 7 out of 9 years and won more playoff games and series then any other teams ever - he also started with quite a bit to work with). 

 

On the stripping down...well he went to the studs - but was never getting those off until they retired.   The re-tool was a mistake for sure, I’m pretty sure that’s coming from AF but it doesn’t matter anyways because he drafted well those years and got us the guys we can make a new core around.   Yesterday I read that JB basically started a new team from scratch which I’d 100% agree on - we got virtually nothing from our old core except Horvat - and that’s mostly on MG which is well documented in the sports media too.

 

The correct time to rebuild was actually before we re-signed the Sedins to their last contract - but considering we were a top team still no way ownership would go for it.  If we could have traded them for assets - and hired a fall guy GM to come in and tell every player with a clause they were getting moved no matter what - Hansen - Burrows - Edler - Beiksa - Kesler - Maholtra - Hamhuis and on and on - the massive amount of assets would have made what the Linden team got us look like the Columbus Blue Jackets starting team lineup.   Hindsight is everything - there’s always going to be a better way even if that way was a good one.   Maybe we’d have McDavid and Mathews as our top two centres instead plus Boeser, Point, Aho, MT etc etc...add Pastrnak, McAvoy, Werenski, Ghost etc etc just because we’d have extra picks.  

 

Our line-up still has some serious deficits, but I look forward to seeing what some of our later picks can do, as well as what JB can do with a better team then he started with which I think we now have (although expect one year of growing pains).  Like others have pointed out we’ve never assembled a team this young with this much potential - other then maybe Linden-Bure-Nedved, but that team didn’t have the sheer quantity of young guys either.   This means we will have a good 6-8 years coming up to tweak things.   EP, Boeser and Hughes look to make a much bigger impact then the Sedins had the first 8 years of their career too which is crazy to think about.   The best version of this team will look nothing like it does now, just like the best version of the Sedin era team looked nothing like it did a year after they joined the league...just imagine if they peaked right off the hop - the WCE team would have won multiple cups even with Cloutier in net ha ha.

[aGENT]

6 hours ago, Smashian Kassian said:

Well im glad everyone agrees. That's why I generally haven't always liked this management group trading drafts. That's my rationale.

Because, the deepest prospect depth in the history of the organization is lacking? You can only sign so many. We already have people lamenting letting decent prospects walk because of the depth.

 

6 hours ago, Smashian Kassian said:

When your a bad team its understandable to have 20 million allocated to guys scoring less than 30 points, but those trends cant continue if you have aspirations of winning the cup.

First, Sutter is HIGHLY underrated around here. Yes, he needs to get back to staying healthy. (Hopefully, like Edler/Tanev, the added depth and what appears to be a higher possession team this season, help with that.)

 

But yes at some point 'soon', he'll likely be moved to make room for fresh meat.

 

Second, of course it's understandable. Again, it's very situational, I'm glad your can at least see that. Now what makes you think that's going to continue? Did any of the signings this summer indicate that's a continuing trend?

 

 

Edited August 20, 2019 by aGENT

[mikeyman109]

8 hours ago, kingofsurrey said:

I see you failed to comment on 

Tkachuk 6th ( 71 NHL goals now  )  ....  Calgary says thanks to Jim for this.

Montreal took D man Sergachev at 9th pick and he now has 165 games in the NHL

 

Not surprising though.  I think we all need to do a shot every time Mikey buries his head in the sand while typing on his keyboard....

Ok lets comment on those , despite Tkachucks success we know the family is not a big Canucks booster and who knows what the kid said at the interviews. so no loss there if he let JB know he didn't want to play for the team.

Sergachev was there at 9 so ok . Juolevi might still pan out as good or better.

No head buried in the sand, just see a glass half full opposed to your Half empty. Ill take a morning shot for dumb replies.

[JeremyCuddles]

20 hours ago, Smashian Kassian said:

Off the top of my head, Joe Sakic? Probably just for that Duchene trade alone. I wouldnt say theres many.

 

He did get MacKinnon (under the old system) but we got Pettersson. 

The fact he had a Duchene to trade already means he had more to work with than Benning. Kesler was by far our best trade chip and we only had two teams he’d accept a trade to. Also Sakic had a MacKinnon and a Landeskog to build around when he officially became GM which was after the 12/13 season I believe. We just had Bo when Benning signed on. 

[theo5789]

7 hours ago, Smashian Kassian said:

But this is naturally what happens. When Pettersson finds that new level our team will be in the playoffs too. 

The point is Sakic inherited MacKinnon. He took on a team that was bad already, so he didn't have to suffer as long as a GM, but the team arguably was in the dumps longer than the Canucks and thus had a longer time to rebuild. Benning started his GM career further behind than Sakic did and he had to hit his home run in EP. Rantanen was a good pick by Sakic, but he had a #1 overall to play with, something we never have been so lucky to have.

 

Quote

Sakic's had better talent to work with, but he's done a good job with it. He lost Stastny for nothing, he's not really a factor. He had to trade ROR & got a good return (still has Zadorov & Compher to show). He had to trade Duchene & hit a home run. Rantanen at #10 was a great pick. exc. 

He lost Stastny for nothing and can you imagine if this happened to Benning? It's the negative perception that comes with everything Benning does while for Sakic, it's "not a factor". He had to trade ROR, just like we had to trade Kesler, difference was we had one or two teams to work with while ROR had no limitations and was a younger player. He did well with the Duchene trade, but he had a Duchene to trade (again no restrictions), we didn't. I doubt Sakic knew that Ottawa was going to plummet like they did when they made that trade. They were Eastern conference finalists about to add Duchene to the mix and no one knew the EK situation was about to blow up.

 

Sakic had 2/3 of his current powerhouse line already in place and a top RD in which he only recently lost but replaced because his team hasn't been all too successful in the beginning when he started much like Benning's Canucks.

 

Quote

When Jim came there wasn't alot of prospects but the roster still had assets. It wasn't totally bare bones. Edler was 27, Tanev was just 24, Bieksa & Hamhuis were still in there primes, same with Kes & Garrison. As far as younger assets; Tanev, Horvat, 2 younger goalies & a 6th overall pick. And he was able to get decent returns on most of them. 

We did trade Bieksa, Kes and Garrison. We would've traded Hamhuis, but chose not to take a low ball offer and let him walk out of principle and it paid off in the next TDL. This is where the negativity comes though where Benning is scrutinized for not trading Hamhuis, while Stastny got them nothing too and I'd argue Stastny would've been the more valuable player at the time.

 

You can't really say any of the assets we had would've netted any return that ROR or Duchene would get. Kesler would've been the only one but he handcuffed us.

 

Quote

Its relative to a degree, but Sakic has done a really good job. As much as he got maligned for waiting on Duchene, he's made some real nice moves last few years.

I'm not saying Sakic hasn't done a good job, but at the same time, what Benning has built in comparison from a different starting point, he should be getting just as much praise. The difference is Benning is our GM so he's in the spotlight/microscope here.

[canuck73_3]

10 hours ago, kingofsurrey said:

I see you failed to comment on 

Tkachuk 6th ( 71 NHL goals now  )  ....  Calgary says thanks to Jim for this.

Montreal took D man Sergachev at 9th pick and he now has 165 games in the NHL

 

Not surprising though.  I think we all need to do a shot every time Mikey buries his head in the sand while typing on his keyboard....

Taken 1 spot ahead of Virtanen and 2 ahead of Tkachuk, Michael Dal Colle. 

[Ghostsof1915]

Colorado picks since 2009

2009- 3rd overall

2010- 17th overall

2011- 2nd overall

2012- no first rounder

2013- 1st overall

2014- 23rd overall

2015- 10th overall

2016- 10th overall

2017- 4th overall

2018- 16th overall

2019- 4th overall, and 16th

 

7 top ten picks and 1 first overall. 

So unlike Edmonton, Colorado has drafted well, and the pieces that

don't fit they've turned into a 4th overall. 

 

Vancouver since 2009:

2009- 22nd overall

2010- No first round picks, didn't even pick until the 4th round

2011- 29th overall

2012- 26th overall

2013- 9th overall and 24th overall

2014- 6th and 24th overall

2015- 23rd overall

2016- 5th overall

2017- 5th overall

2018-7th overall

2019- 10th overall.

 

No picks in the top four compared to Colorado's 5. 

6 top ten picks. So not only did the Canucks have nothing in the cupboard when Benning took over.

We've never been gifted any great picks. 

Sakic much like Benning made his mistakes early. But ownership stuck it out. And are reaping the benefits of it. 

 

 

[Ghostsof1915]

Just now, canuck73_3 said:

Taken 1 spot ahead of Virtanen and 2 ahead of Tkachuk, Michael Dal Colle. 

Pretty sure Benning would like to thank the 22 other teams for passing on Brock Boeser. As well as 4 teams that passed on Pettersson. 

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

Colorado picks since 2009

2009- 3rd overall

2010- 17th overall

2011- 2nd overall

2012- no first rounder

2013- 1st overall

2014- 23rd overall

2015- 10th overall

2016- 10th overall

2017- 4th overall

2018- 16th overall

2019- 4th overall, and 16th

 

7 top ten picks and 1 first overall. 

So unlike Edmonton, Colorado has drafted well, and the pieces that

don't fit they've turned into a 4th overall. 

 

Vancouver since 2009:

2009- 22nd overall

2010- No first round picks, didn't even pick until the 4th round

2011- 29th overall

2012- 26th overall

2013- 9th overall and 24th overall

2014- 6th and 24th overall

2015- 23rd overall

2016- 5th overall

2017- 5th overall

2018-7th overall

2019- 10th overall.

 

No picks in the top four compared to Colorado's 5. 

6 top ten picks. So not only did the Canucks have nothing in the cupboard when Benning took over.

We've never been gifted any great picks. 

Sakic much like Benning made his mistakes early. But ownership stuck it out. And are reaping the benefits of it. 

 

 

Fabulous post.  

[Alflives]

Just now, Ghostsof1915 said:

Pretty sure Benning would like to thank the 22 other teams for passing on Brock Boeser. As well as 4 teams that passed on Pettersson. 

And 6 that passed on Quinn, and 9 that passed on Podz.  I can’t remember a time when we’ve had so many top young players all coming up around the same time.  

[AlwaysACanuckFan]

Nevermind

Edited August 20, 2019 by AlwaysACanuckFan

[Ghostsof1915]

3 minutes ago, Alflives said:

And 6 that passed on Quinn, and 9 that passed on Podz.  I can’t remember a time when we’ve had so many top young players all coming up around the same time.  

I know it's dangerous to get caught up in potential. But from the clips I've seen, I hope Podz absolutely destroys in the NHL. And puts Tkachuk through the glass. 

[AlwaysACanuckFan]

2 minutes ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

I know it's dangerous to get caught up in potential. But from the clips I've seen, I hope Podz absolutely destroys in the NHL. And puts Tkachuk through the glass. 

Watch out for the Russian locomotive.