Goat James Posted November 5, 2019 Share Posted November 5, 2019 Everyone always brings up what a great scout Benning is but he’s whiffed on two really high draft picks (Jake at 6, Juolevi at 5). Sure Pettersson and Hughes look amazing, but top end draft picks are supposed to turn out into great players. The only players drafted by Benning in the later rounds currently playing for our team are Demko and Gaudette. I don’t feel like he’s this big draft guru that everyone is making him out to be. 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Hindustan Smyl Posted November 5, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted November 5, 2019 The plan of this Ownership and management will likely go down as one of the most misunderstood plans in sporting history. Fiery debates amongst fans and media have raged since 2015 as to what this ownership and management has been doing: Myth #1: The Canucks only started rebuilding two years ago. The Acquillini group started to put more of an emphasis on the long term when they traded Luongo back in 2014. The goal was to still try and compete hard each and every night in order to push for the playoffs, but the emphasis was going to be on making sure that the kids within the system were properly insulated and were placed in roles that, while challenging, wouldn’t place undue pressure on them. When a young player was ready to take over a vet’s role, a spot would be created for the kid (ie Baertechi moved up, Higgins got sent down). Myth #2: Bringing in/signing guys like Sutter, Eriksson, Gudbranson, Prust, Gagner, Roussel, Beagle, Vrbata, and Ryan Miller is/was evidence that this team never had any intentions of rebuilding. There were holes in the line-up that no young kid within the system was ready to fill. If these kids were placed into those roles at that time, not only would said kids be in way over their heads, but you would risk hurting their confidence long term and adversely affecting their development (ie what the Edmonton Oilers did). Myth #3: The Canucks trading draft picks for guys like Vey, Pedan, Baertschi, Motte, Clendenning, and Granlund (via Shinkaruk) is evidence that this team is/was never rebuilding and that they were in “compete now” mode. Anyone who has ever played sports and has been inside of a lockerroom, knows that team chemistry and team cohesiveness is paramount to a team’s long term success. If you have a bunch of 18-20 year old kids on one side of the room, and a bunch of guys north of 30 on the other side of the room, the chances of their being great team chemistry will be severely reduced. Hence - filling the age gap. These moves were also necessary due to the fact that the previous management group (the Gillis regime) failed to fill the pipeline with good prospects. Due to that, the Canucks had a huge void in that 20-24 age range. Myth #4: This management group doesn’t deserve much praise. Despite trying their hardest to “win now,” they failed spectacularly and simply accumulated top end talent via the lottery draft. A blind monkey could have done their jobs. Guys like Pettersson and Boeser weren’t “obvious” slam dunk picks. A lot of research and scouting went into these players, and these players were carefully selected despite the fact that other more well known players were on the table (ie Brandon Carlo, Cody Glass). Guys like Demko and Hoglander look like they were major steals as well (although time will tell), while guys like Woo, Tryamkin, and Dipietro also look like they might become good long term pieces for us. Juolevi and Virtanen will likely never live up to their draft position, but both players also have a good shot at being good long term roster pieces. Myth #5: Management’s often terrible long term signings were evidence of naivety. Management recognized that the kids in the system weren’t ready to take on roles that needed to be filled. Management also recognized that in order to maximize the potential of young talents within the organization, and in order to create a culture and get the kids to compete hard each and every night, a premium price needed to be paid for leadership and intangibles. Period. Unfortunately, in a competitive UFA market, a team has to often times overpay for certain players...........especially if said team is near the bottom of the standings, and isn’t located in an area that “everyone wants to go to,” such as New York City, California, Northeastern United States (easy travel schedule), or an original 6 team. Yes - mistakes were made (ie Management not recognizing that the game was changing and that youth and speed was becoming more important and so Eriksson and Gudbranson may not be the best targets), but holes needed to be filled by veterans so that the kids could develop in roles that were best suited for their games. Myth #6 - the Canucks attempting to trade for Lucic back in 2016 (a 1st) was evidence that this management group didn’t have a clue where this team was as an organization. At that time, the Canucks had made the playoffs in the year prior and as of the 2016 deadline, were still very much in the race for the playoffs. Although management knew where the Canucks realistically were as an organization, you also have to have the players’ backs at all times. If a team is competing for a playoff spot, you have to give them the vote of confidence. Rewards need to be based on merit. What type of message does it send to the team if you imply through your actions that, “yeah you’re competing for. A playoff spot but we think it’s a fluke and so we’re not going to give you complementary pieces?” Myth #7 - “I think we can turn this around pretty quickly,” A smart fan will know that this comment was never meant to be taken literally, and that, it was simply a way of management giving the vote of confidence to the boys in public while reassuring the boys (players) that this management believed in them and had their backs. What type of massage do you send the players, the fans, and the media if you say, “we’ve got a long rebuild ahead of us?” Think season ticket holders will want to renew with comments like that? Concluding thoughts: While this management group and ownership has made some mistakes (ie Gudbranson trade, Eriksson signing, Gagner signing, Juolevi/Virtanen draft picks), I get a sense that critics of this ownership and management really don’t understand where this team was as an organization back in 2014, and how depleted this team was from top to bottom thanks to the complete drafting incompetency of the Gillis regime. Our 2008-2013 core players were aging and we had absolutely no one in the pipeline. When Benning, Weisbrod, and this management took over this team, they were faced with a HUGE task. A good and successful rebuild will usually take between 5-7 years, and this management group seems to be directly in line with that time frame. 4 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coastal.view Posted November 5, 2019 Share Posted November 5, 2019 (edited) 8 minutes ago, The Game said: Everyone always brings up what a great scout Benning is but he’s whiffed on two really high draft picks (Jake at 6, Juolevi at 5). Sure Pettersson and Hughes look amazing, but top end draft picks are supposed to turn out into great players. The only players drafted by Benning in the later rounds currently playing for our team are Demko and Gaudette. I don’t feel like he’s this big draft guru that everyone is making him out to be. so your criteria for success is every first round pick must be a star or superstar jb has not missed on any 1st round pick go look at other teams see how many gms can say that and the look at the home run drafts he achieved ep40, brock, well hughes did fall in his lap but gaudette, demko, and i'm sure i'm missing others an no, ep40 did not fall to him, the consensus on these boards was glass Edited November 5, 2019 by coastal.view 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post King Heffy Posted November 5, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted November 5, 2019 47 minutes ago, Timråfan said: Drafting is Bennings best tool. Regarding how the team is configurated it's like Benning has been on this forum and took the best ideas here. If Benning learns the diplomatic skills needed for a GM he can be great. Most of CDC was not particularly happy with the EP pick. He is very clearly smarter than us, even collectively. 1 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted November 5, 2019 Share Posted November 5, 2019 1 hour ago, hammertime said: I think he's in tough (JB) It takes huevos to say hey Frankie we bout to flip this switch member those top 5 picks we been playing for the bast few seasons ya were done with that sh.. And to prove it I'm a trade one of the next 2. I still don't think this team is as good as the record suggests however where credit is due I have to respect the man and I cheer for him to succeed. The last two seasons they have been very competitive when they were healthy. People are acting like this season is the outlier, when it's actually the progression of the past three seasons. It's all about staying healthy, something they haven't been able to do. If they stay healthy, they are a legitimately good team. 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted November 5, 2019 Share Posted November 5, 2019 10 minutes ago, coastal.view said: so your criteria for success is every first round pick must be a star or superstar jb has not missed on any 1st round pick go look at other teams see how many gms can say that and the look at the home run drafts he achieved ep40, brock, well hughes did fall in his lap but gaudette, demko, and i'm sure i'm missing others an no, ep40 did not fall to him, the consensus on these boards was glass Even in Jake's and OJ's draft classes, the guy taken before each was a total bust. People complained we reached for Petey; I wanted Mittlestadt, but didn't have a problem with the pick. Most seemed to want Vilardi or Glass, and I was definItely an outlier for wanting neither. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hindustan Smyl Posted November 5, 2019 Share Posted November 5, 2019 2 minutes ago, King Heffy said: Even in Jake's and OJ's draft classes, the guy taken before each was a total bust. People complained we reached for Petey; I wanted Mittlestadt, but didn't have a problem with the pick. Most seemed to want Vilardi or Glass, and I was definItely an outlier for wanting neither. My guy was Heiskanen and so I kind of pouted/lost interest after Dallas snatched him. I didn’t know much about the other players, but recall being surprised/taken aback when we selected Pettersson. I was fully expecting us to take Cody Glass at that point (although I didn’t really know Glass or Pettersson very well). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 5, 2019 Share Posted November 5, 2019 1 hour ago, Nucksfollower1983 said: You should. There are a lot of bandwagon fans in any market for any sport. Never saw the ESPN article, what was their criteria? Pretty sure this is the one, I haven't read it in a year or so, make of it what you will. I took out some teams cause it was too long but included the link in case you want to read them all. https://www.espn.com/nhl/story/_/id/25416866/nhl-homecoming-bandwagon-rankings Quote The Wysh List publishes every Friday. One of the best trends in the NHL over the past decade or so are the waves of popularity created by the resurgence of the Chicago Blackhawks, Pittsburgh Penguins and Boston Bruins during their championship runs. Their championship contention felt like a national movement: Fans from yesteryear, fans from the region who relocated -- everyone came back to root for them. It was the Homecoming Bandwagon effect, and it was glorious. Who might be the next team to provoke such a reaction by reversing its fortunes? Glad you asked. Here are the current NHL Homecoming Bandwagon rankings, for the top 15 teams. The following teams are rated on five factors: Pity, which can be everything from a championship drought to a general sadness about the team's plight; City, as in "how much does the populace like this place?" overall; Nostalgia, as in the warm fuzzies the team would create like the rise of the Blackhawks and Bruins did; National Pull, as in how big the national bandwagon would be; and Root-ability, as in whether we'd actually want this team to win anything. If we didn't include your team it's because it won too recently or are contending too frequently or we're just apathetic to its plight. 15. Florida Panthers (21) Pity Factor: 8 City: 1 Nostalgia: 3 National Pull: 3 Root-ability: 6 The city score would be helped if, you know, the "Miami" team actually played there. But the Panthers' playoff droughts land them a high Pity and decent Root-ability score, although the "Year of the Rat" nostalgia may have run its course. 14. Carolina Hurricanes (22) Pity Factor: 5 City: 3 Nostalgia: 3 National Pull: 3 Root-ability: 8 We might be going a little high on the City score, because we're not sure how much national affection there is for Raleigh. Having won the Cup before also knocks down the Pity Factor. But given how they've played and celebrated this season, they've never been more likable. 13. Columbus Blue Jackets (24) Pity Factor: 7 City: 5 Nostalgia: 1 National Pull: 4 Root-ability: 7 There's not exactly much nostalgia here, unless one yearns for the halcyon days of David Vyborny. But it's possible the Blue Jackets could capture the hockey world's affection as a small-market team making its first championship push. 12. Vancouver Canucks (25) Pity Factor: 5 City: 6 Nostalgia: 5 National Pull: 4 Root-ability: 5 Their Root-ability has ticked up a bit thanks to an influx of great young players, but the negative sentiments about this franchise still burn like a post-Game 7 ember in some corners. 1. Buffalo Sabres (45) Pity Factor: 10 City: 8 Nostalgia: 10 National Pull: 9 Root-ability: 8 C'mon now: The skate in the crease. The close-but-no-cigar runs with Hasek, and again in 2006. The existence of the Buffalo Bills. There's not but pity for this team, and nothing but a national rooting interest from both Western NY expats and people who just loved using Alexander Mogilny on "NHL 93." If the Sabres get close to winning their first Cup again, the hockey world will embrace them. Especially if they eliminate the Leafs along the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KyGuy123 Posted November 5, 2019 Share Posted November 5, 2019 (edited) I think the proof that he is actually learning is in who he let go more than who he acquired. From Gudbranson the end of last year to letting MDZ, Pouliot, Hutton and Granlund walk. Those guys were weak links and I’m sure Sutter would be gone if healthy as well even though he is playing fantastic right now. also drafting high skill and fallers in the draft shows he is seeing the game transition to what it is now and even if Podkolzin doesn’t pan out he was easily the best player available and hard to blame. Edited November 5, 2019 by KyGuy123 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VIC_CITY Posted November 5, 2019 Share Posted November 5, 2019 5 hours ago, Stelar said: 14 games in folks. Way too early to claim anything about the season. Things are looking good but the wheels could come off at any time. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timråfan Posted November 5, 2019 Share Posted November 5, 2019 1 hour ago, King Heffy said: Most of CDC was not particularly happy with the EP pick. He is very clearly smarter than us, even collectively. Most of CDC is clearly biased towards big NA players. Skinny foreign players is not the first picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stanleysteamersmyl Posted November 5, 2019 Share Posted November 5, 2019 The kids are going to get better, more prospects in the system than any other years. The future looks bright!!!!!!!!!! Good job JB! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VIC_CITY Posted November 5, 2019 Share Posted November 5, 2019 1 hour ago, Timråfan said: Most of CDC is clearly biased towards big NA players. Skinny foreign players is not the first picks. I mean, we're Canadian. Obviously we like Canadian players. But Canada is one of the most multicultural countries in the world. So when it comes to hockey, we like winners. Whether you're Russian, Finish, Swedish, Danish etc, it doesn't matter. Leave it all on the ice and the fans will love you for life. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goat James Posted November 5, 2019 Share Posted November 5, 2019 (edited) 5 hours ago, coastal.view said: so your criteria for success is every first round pick must be a star or superstar jb has not missed on any 1st round pick go look at other teams see how many gms can say that and the look at the home run drafts he achieved ep40, brock, well hughes did fall in his lap but gaudette, demko, and i'm sure i'm missing others an no, ep40 did not fall to him, the consensus on these boards was glass Did you even read my post? What I said was that while Benning certainly has hit on some draft picks (mostly Elias and Brock) he’s missed on some (Jake and Olli). What do you mean when you say that he hasn’t missed on any first round draft pick? Juolevi was picked at number 5 overall three years ago and has yet to play an NHL game, Matthew Tkachuk (34 goals last year) was picked right after him. That’s a miss I my book. And calling Gaudette a “home run pick” seems a bit pre mature, the guy’s scored six career NHL goals. I’m not saying that Benning has done a horrible job, I’m saying that he hasn’t been as good as some people on here try say that he has. Edited November 5, 2019 by The Game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IBatch Posted November 5, 2019 Share Posted November 5, 2019 (edited) 7 hours ago, The Game said: Everyone always brings up what a great scout Benning is but he’s whiffed on two really high draft picks (Jake at 6, Juolevi at 5). Sure Pettersson and Hughes look amazing, but top end draft picks are supposed to turn out into great players. The only players drafted by Benning in the later rounds currently playing for our team are Demko and Gaudette. I don’t feel like he’s this big draft guru that everyone is making him out to be. Yes and no. As in yes he’s not great, but he is considered pretty good - and it’s way to early even now to know how good. Every year THN does a ranking of the best 21 and unders and then an analysis of how well teams did compared to each other based on ADP - or average draft position over the four year period teams drafted those 21 and unders .... and Vancouver has come out in the top ten the last two years (which covers JBs draft periods only) 9 last year. Even though we have a top two or three group. Guy ages out each year (BB and Demko did this year), but we still have EP, Hughes Podz etc in that group and it’s enough to be ahead of almost every other team in the league. People that think teams hit on most of their second rounders need to do some research - and only 12.5% of 3rd rounders and beyond are hits (JB has two of those already, AG and Tree, one every 8 years or so is average). THN uses a varying system where the following are considered busts. Top three picks that don’t play 700 Games, top ten picks that don’t play 400. First rounders that don’t play 200. This only counts for the first round. Also they go deeper into how big the busts are and have terms for those. Which is why I said at the beginning it’s still too early to really know exactly how well he’s done, but he’s definitely in the top third of the group REGARDLESS of where he’s drafting, add to that the high picks and it looks great so far. Only OJ looks to be a bust so far using these metrics - but even then injuries played a lot into his development - so who really knows. As an aside despite all the tools available to them now once they make the show and the extra scouting staff, there are still as many misses as hits looking at the guys drafted in the 90’s and 2000’s based on a recent study. Button called it before it was done too, smart guy. Also want to add, just for fun go back and review a few of our highly lauded GMs track history’s and their drafting records. Quin did a lot of things for the club but had his fair share of zeros on the draft board too, most notably Stajonov (7 or 8 I think) and Antoski (mid teens) in the same year. Of course he also went after Bure and it worked. Nedved instead of Jagr (can be forgiven for this as he did tell everyone that he wasn’t interested- except for the Pens in secret) ... Takes 10 years to mostly know what you have - and 15-20 to completely know. Edited November 5, 2019 by IBatch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phat Fingers Posted November 5, 2019 Share Posted November 5, 2019 JB did have a learning curve. He has steadily improved at his job. Hard to to say if the turn around could have been sooner. The keys are Ep40, Hughes, Boeser, Horvat and Markstrom. Getting Myers and Benn have been huge factors as well. Markstrom has been a welcome bit if good news and took a long time to get there. Yes we could have drafted Tkachuk and Nyalnder vs OJ and Jake. Sure we would have been better in the last few years, not a playoff team and with hindsite Ep40 and Hughes would not have been available at our draft spot. Yet we would've really be better. Yet both Jake and OJ are rounding into form at the right time be effective. The only season I really had an issue with not talking openly was the Mathews Draft. I strongly felt that Hamhuis should have been dealt at the tdl. We would have lost 3 more games and instead of drafting OJ, we could have had a shot at Mathews, Laine or PLD, which means we would have had Subban if the latter was available at our draft spot. But we would have missed Ep40. No doubt. Then Hughes, no doubt. I think we could have been a playoff team, but without the depth or star players on ELC's. Love what we have now, just don't care about it taking 4 years or 3. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-DLC- Posted November 5, 2019 Share Posted November 5, 2019 I don't think you give Benning enough credit and have recognized the patience that's involved and workarounds these guys have to deal with (injuries, players' decisions to do something different/bolt, etc.). While having plan b's and depth is part of that....it also changes game plans at times. And to be "lucky" with draft picks? Sort of offsets some of the unluckier aspects of his tenure. So you've actually helped highlight that, to some degree, luck is involved. That when he picks, chooses, selects, trades for players it's somewhat out of his control if they live up to things and we're quick to assign blame but, in the next breath, credit "luck" for things that do work out. It's at both ends that some faith/luck factor in. People want immediate decisions, moves and results in a deal that has ever changing parts and others who determine if we get what we want or not. All the teams vying for the same thing. I don't feel I'm qualified to assess Benning and it feels slightly ego driven to do so. We all feel we have the answers in this world and are quick to judge and criticize others...but the only true test is walking a mile in their shoes. And we simply don't have the ability to do so. The measure in all of this will mostly be the end product/results....the beginning was just that. Some times pieces are added/subtracted on a more temporary basis as fill gaps...but maybe aren't part of the long term picture. Some times players will be put into place for more than just their on ice contributions...in the room and to help guide the newer guys coming in. So many "moves" have been harshly reacted to initially but have really worked out well. There will be good and bad...happens with every team that deals with not only skill but individuals who are at different levels of commitment and investment. Work ethic is huge but you don't always see where that's set at. A player's flexibility and cooperation....do they willingly do what's asked of them or sulk and pout and make demands? When you deal with a "team" of multiple individuals it can take time to strike the right balance. Especially when you're adopting the team and then having to work around the restrictions noted. The sample size wasn't there in the beginning and now is...so I'd say he's done well overall to get us to the point we're at right now. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bo fan Posted November 5, 2019 Share Posted November 5, 2019 Short and sweet - Benning inherited an old stagnant team and no prospect pool. Are we an old stagnant team today with no prospect pool? 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted November 5, 2019 Share Posted November 5, 2019 17 hours ago, RonMexico said: Disagree on this point. You learn on the job as AGM. Then when you take over, you already know all the ins and outs. Granted his mentor was clearly suspect but you don't fall backwards into a Cup. I do agree that learning by doing is a fundamental aspect of human activity but in this case, I think doesn't 100% apply. There are a few things you will learn on your own but by and large you gotta have a really good idea if you were an AGM first. To my eyes, I saw a team in disarray and he tried to plug the holes of a sinking ship. Sure there were more misses than hits in the early going but that's par for the course in this business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post JeremyCuddles Posted November 5, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted November 5, 2019 17 hours ago, Stelar said: 14 games in folks. Way too early to claim anything about the season. Things are looking good but the wheels could come off at any time. Must be fun at parties "lets not have too much fun guys, someone can slip and die on a ice cube at any time". 4 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now