Jim Benning is a good GM

[Nuxfanabroad]

18 minutes ago, messier's_elbow said:

People here like Benning. HF on the other hand hate his guts. They are all making excuses like saying Judd is the reason we are winning. 

Them types are impersonating real fans. Prob putzes that secretly cheer for other franchises. Originally they wanted to sabotage JB's work & smear our fanbase. Now they dbl down on their stupidity & toxic vitriol.

 

Our karma(CDC) is running over their dogma!

[48MPHSlapShot]

His legacy as GM is going to be largely dependent on how he handles the upcoming cap crunch. If we manage to resign Toffoli, Tanev and Marky in the offseason, don't do something stupid like trade Boeser for scraps/cap relief, and manage to dump some of our bad contracts to get EP and QH signed, it'll go a long ways toward solidifying his legacy as GM. 

 

There's still a lot of work to be done, and some sacrifices (Demko, Virtanen, Gaudette?) will probably have to be made in order to keep this core together.

 

Even if he manages to pull the rabbit out of the hat and keep our core together withing dumping a piece of it for cap relief, we still have a few more slots to fill in order to complete our rebuild. Specifically a youngish, minute munching, top 4 RD and a youngish, defensively minded bottom 6 center that can can fill the same sort of role Sutter is filling for us right now (ideally without the injuries). 

 

If he manages to pull off all of this in the next couple years, he may go down as a contender for the best GM this franchise has ever had.

Edited August 27, 2020 by 48MPHSlapShot

[wildcam]

On August 23, 2020 at 7:27 AM, Chickenspear said:

Of the more recent decades:

#1: Pat Quinn

#2: Brian Burke

#3: Jim Benning (so far)

#4: Mike Gillis

#5:Dave Nonis

1. Pat Quinn

2.Jim Benning

3. Brian Burke

4.Gillis

5.Nonis

[iceman64]

On 8/22/2020 at 6:52 PM, Timbermen said:

Jim Benning has took a lot of heat as GM of the Vancouver Canucks (mostly from Alf's buddy's at HFboards)

Do you think he's a good GM, yes or no poll.

Are we not in the playoffs? We took down the Wild, the Blues, and starting to give Vegas troubles, how can anyone even say JB hasn't done a "great' job?

Edited August 27, 2020 by iceman64

[Bertorama]

I have a hard time listening to him during interviews, I get this impression he’s not the brightest book ever written. That being said often in life the people I meet that are brilliant minds don’t come off socially well. 
 

totally not a hockey comment just an observation. 
 

as for where the Canucks are right now I have to say he’s a top three GM in Canucks History with an option for number one if we win a cup. Aside from our drafting we all have to admit that the Miller Trade deal was like what Who’s Miller???? Then we all were like ahhhhh Very Nice!!!!! So he’s obviously got an ability to bring in the right talent that he’s been presented from his Scouting staff and that’s really the number one job of a GM. So far it’s working out. ! 

[Puckster]

JB frustrated the heck out of me drafting the 7 dwarfs.... Size matters!!!

But, I have to eat a wee bit of Crow.... EP40 is taking it and dishing it out....Hughes is skating so smooth, nothing seems to stick to him. Motte... he can play on my team with the forecheck and energy he brings. I still think we need an answer for the Reeves of the league and I do not think the Rooster is the best answer for that.

But... here we are :

just bounced the defending champs( who are a big hard team to play against)

just even'd the series with the Big Bad Vegas ( the obvious Golden NHL Team, bigger badder than the Blues)

 

So, JB is way better than I expected and when he brings home the cup , he will surpass Quinn and Burke IMHO

 

 

[nergish]

Jim was a fantastic offensive defenseman in his youth. We don’t have a Sakic or Yzerman in our alumni to manage the team, but Jim knows the game as it’s played on the ice. This is not a businessman. This is a hockey mind.

 

Our team finally looks like how a HOCKEY PLAYER would build a team, not a stock broker.

 

Sure that gets him in trouble sometimes (esp. cap compliance), but these playoffs are being played exactly the way I want my home team to play. Jim is a good GM. He has the opportunity to be great.

[IBatch]

JB has already more or less moved to the top of the pack as far as drafting GMs go.   Burke is still close given his hands were in drafting Bure (acquired the paperwork showing he’d really played one more game then was common knowledge making him eligible) although he flunks by recommending to Quin not to pick him anyways (too small - same as it ever was), Quin ignored his advice so Quin gets the credit for sure, plus he was the GM.   Burke’s masterpiece was the Sedins.  Other then that his drafting was average.    Quins was about the same maybe a little worse then Burke’s even with Bure.   He gets the cake for Naslund though.   And his brilliant Butcher trade bringing in Ronning, Mommesso and Courtnall, Ronning at the same age difference to Linden as Horvat is to EP).... Miller trade was JBs best to date but doesn’t come close to those two doozies. 
 

Given Burke largely built the Sedin team and ran the WCE team he’s still firmly in second IMO.   JB is close though - really it comes down to what he does next and how the remainder of his picks/prospects work out.  

[189lb enforcers?]

2 hours ago, IBatch said:

JB has already more or less moved to the top of the pack as far as drafting GMs go.   Burke is still close given his hands were in drafting Bure (acquired the paperwork showing he’d really played one more game then was common knowledge making him eligible) although he flunks by recommending to Quin not to pick him anyways (too small - same as it ever was), Quin ignored his advice so Quin gets the credit for sure, plus he was the GM.   Burke’s masterpiece was the Sedins.  Other then that his drafting was average.    Quins was about the same maybe a little worse then Burke’s even with Bure.   He gets the cake for Naslund though.   And his brilliant Butcher trade bringing in Ronning, Mommesso and Courtnall, Ronning at the same age difference to Linden as Horvat is to EP).... Miller trade was JBs best to date but doesn’t come close to those two doozies. 
 

Given Burke largely built the Sedin team and ran the WCE team he’s still firmly in second IMO.   JB is close though - really it comes down to what he does next and how the remainder of his picks/prospects work out.  

It’s easy to give a nod to their drafting success, but it came at a price seldom mentioned in these threads. 
 

Their success at Drafting is directly proportional to his run of those unintended draft position results.

 

Any one of us could have picked the BPA off a list at the podium and done at least ok. 
 

I don’t like using that metric to define a great GM because it’s obviously flawed, as Benning’s silver linings has shown. He gets praised for the great picks, which is easy to do, but I maintain that even you could have picked a BPA after failing to deliver on your cap team’s intended results, for many consecutive seasons. 
 

Whenever I see this metric used, I get irritated that it’s usually not accompanied by the flip side of that coin - an admission that the draft position gold came to him against his wishes. That doesn’t scream Manager of The Year in any office in any industry, but JB gets the glory without any hedging about unintended consequences. 
 

Nothing can compare to the miserable era we had there this century, except for a brief run in the 80s where we continually passed over future superstars. 
 

The death of LB really changed this team’s fortunes at the time and it really never recovered in that position. What might have been had he lived and became another, meaner Edler. 

Edited August 31, 2020 by 189lb enforcers?

[oldnews]

6 hours ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

It’s easy to give a nod to their drafting success, but it came at a price seldom mentioned in these threads. 
 

Their success at Drafting is directly proportional to his run of those unintended draft position results.

 

That's reductive to the point of meaningless, though.  And not going to bother with debating of "intention" / 'unintended claim - what remains is the fact that draft position may matter in the top 10 or 15,  but if you're going to reduce drafting to that, you've missed the bulk of the work - and also can't praise the wisdom of the #stockpiles - which have literally nothing to do with draft position. (ie I'll take the players listed below that are also on the roster, taken outside the top 10, over one Dermott, for example).

 

The first 5 picks they made under Benning - NHLers.

exclude Virtanen as a top 10.

 

McCann/Gud/Pearson

Demko

Tryamkin

Forsling

 

NHL games outside the top 10 - some regulars, some cups of coffee thus far but nowhere near their prime - still viable NHL prospects.

Boeser

Brisebois

Gaudette

DiPietro

 

Another wave that has yet to be tested - still in the system/development.

This team could have EP and Hughes and still be an absolute train wreck / bottomfeeder - with no support, and those two playing in entirely different contexts where they're not Calder winners.

Edited August 31, 2020 by oldnews

[oldnews]

I'd add to this that it's not really the gift of a 'tank' when you draft 3 consecutive Calder finalists - taken 23, 5, 7....that actually undermines the idea that a team 'must' go full tank to get those elite lottery picks at the top of the draft.

 

That was the basis of all the protesting - over ever win - when the team 'needed' to go all-in for Matthews or whomever.  Every win, allegedly, was going to contribute to dropping a spot, and thus a step closer to being trapped in mediocrity.

I'd also point out that there is typically a significant gap between the few truly worst teams in the NHL - and the next tier of teams that typically fall out of playoff races near the deadline, or get too injured to compete, etc - and wind up 6 or 8 spots out of the cellar.   Some teams have really set the tank standard so low that many weren't willing to go there with them.

 

Let's look at a few of the true shameless, stated tank jobs and the spoils.  Haven't noticed many playoff advances out of Edmonton, Toronto, Buffalo.  The irony is that being excluded from the top overall picks - was supposed to be what would relegate us to mediocrity.  And yet - who are the actually mediocre franchises - year after year.  I'd say it's 'karma' but don't believe that - I think it's actually the way they've built their teams.

 

On the other hand, the Canucks didn't dispose of every Tanev, Edler - added a few veteran placeholders and some foundation - and thereby did it 'wrong' because they won 5 or 10 too many games here and there, and may have won more had they not been riddled with injuries to blueliners and vets.

But forgetting Vancouver...

 

Chicago - similar timeline - but with a younger core - did not re-tank - kept Toews, Kane, a few other key pieces, a few other relatively immoveable pieces - but rethinged/retooled - choose your semantics - and they also attempted to remain relatively "competitive".  I think this is the word that people misinterpret - don't represent what was actually meant by it - and the grey area takes over in - with few people talking about the same (re) things, as a result.    The Hawks did not "tank" - still naturally cycled down - got an 8th overall, got a 3rd overall - but the kicker is this - they were already back in the 2nd round, having knocked off one of those tank franchises - before also running into the Golden Knights.

 

Boston - also a similar timeline - with a younger core that remains viable to this day - had retool assets to move and still able to retain the Bergerons et al - enough said imo.

 

The Canadiens.  The Flyers - got a Provorov, a Couturier - but never really 'tanked' - won a lottery pick but not instrumental yet in their rise....

The Islandes - ironically, Dal Colle and Reinhart busted....as did Strome imo - didn't really tank - and aren't really built on any of those picks - their best players are mid-late 1sts...

Dallas = one Heiskanen, who they got lucky moving from 8 to 3 in the lottery.... no tank.

Looks like an actual trend that would suggest that the full tank = racing for a 1st overall - might be the best way to exclude yourself from these groups of teams advancing - none of whom fit the Coil, Leaf, Sabres, (Sens?) bill.

 

 

 

 

 

[canucksnihilist]

My worry with JB is that he overpays easily.

 

at least he has in the past - contracts for support players are too high... and might cost some of the core.  We will see.... 

[spook007]

8 hours ago, canucksnihilist said:

My worry with JB is that he overpays easily.

 

at least he has in the past - contracts for support players are too high... and might cost some of the core.  We will see.... 

As we are getting better, I think they will be able to get players at a lower price, than they could while being bottom feeder.

Players are not blind... they can see something is cooking in Vancouver.

However fans have to make up their mind as well, do they want good players or not. MG collected a lot at discounted salaries, but the price were NMC's or NTC'...

I don't think we can have it both way.

[theo5789]

On 8/31/2020 at 9:12 AM, 189lb enforcers? said:

It’s easy to give a nod to their drafting success, but it came at a price seldom mentioned in these threads. 
 

Their success at Drafting is directly proportional to his run of those unintended draft position results.

 

Any one of us could have picked the BPA off a list at the podium and done at least ok. 
 

I don’t like using that metric to define a great GM because it’s obviously flawed, as Benning’s silver linings has shown. He gets praised for the great picks, which is easy to do, but I maintain that even you could have picked a BPA after failing to deliver on your cap team’s intended results, for many consecutive seasons. 
 

Whenever I see this metric used, I get irritated that it’s usually not accompanied by the flip side of that coin - an admission that the draft position gold came to him against his wishes. That doesn’t scream Manager of The Year in any office in any industry, but JB gets the glory without any hedging about unintended consequences. 
 

Nothing can compare to the miserable era we had there this century, except for a brief run in the 80s where we continually passed over future superstars. 
 

The death of LB really changed this team’s fortunes at the time and it really never recovered in that position. What might have been had he lived and became another, meaner Edler. 

While I agree you cannot look at drafting as a single metric for a good GM, but let's not undermine his work. If it was so easy to pick BPA (everyone has a different set of rules to determine their own BPAs), then how do you explain teams like Edmonton, Buffalo, Arizona, etc? It helps to have a good draft position, but you still have to get the job done. EP was far from BPA at our pick for many GMs and "experts".

 

With that said, we have also been screwed of our "intended" pick every year. We have dropped where we should've picked the most of any team since the change in draft lottery rules right when we were in our rebuild phase. So while there was some luck involved in us getting the players that we did because other teams passed on them, that just demonstrates that it's not that simple to pick out the BPA while we had the guys that we picked high on our list and hoped they would be available.

 

I don't think we got our pick "against his wishes". The mandate changed from his 1st couple of years to the most recent years. He was fully on board for a rebuild when that became his mandate and he is showing that he is getting the job done. He spent money on players to build a competitive team, but that doesn't mean it's a winning team. This was to help insulate the youth, so they wouldn't get thrown in if they weren't ready (the ones that were beat out the competition and made the jump). This is development of the youth drafted, which is something that often seems overlooked while arguably is as important as picking out the BPA. This is where we have differed from teams like Edmonton, Buffalo, etc because they didn't build the support system (have so called "foundational" players).

 

Has every move been perfect for JB? Definitely not. But the goal that we have been trying to achieve is shining through now, but could have been seen over the last couple of years for those who were looking at the bigger picture.

 

Every successful GM makes that excellent trade that pushes the team to the next level. It's looking like Miller might be that one. We have filled out secondary needs through trades as well such as Pearson and Motte. So again we could argue over the less favourable deals (which every GM in the league will have), but in the end we continue to head in the right direction.

 

Then we come to signings. Our RFAs have been on the money IMO. To get UFAs to come to a bottom feeder, you have to pay that price. We will see how we do with our internal UFAs and with the team on the up, we will see how UFAs in the future are handled with a competitive team.

[189lb enforcers?]

Thanks @theo5789
 

This is an example of the more objective approach I was advocating for in any serious assessment of Benning’s body of work as GM. Thanks. 

 

Whether I agree with a synopsis or not, I’ll at least respect this actual argument enough not to be forced into the role of hater/critic; the surrogate devil’s advocate, which often results in being shot down as the messenger, just from holding up the truth-mirror to the mob. 
 

The are ways to quantify points and there are ways to qualify them in an argument.
 

@oldnews, disagree with him at times or not, is a terrific example of a poster who makes the necessary effort required build an argument with supporting metrics to hedge base points, but will also acknowledge and give reasons for obvious blind spots in his argument. This is how to build credibility in a discussion. 
 

To state JB has been a great drafter of talent is a fairly safe, effortless bit of jargon. Where is the argument? The thread asks a question; attaches a measuring of consensus poll; and posters put forth their supporting comments. Some posters went as far as to build an argument, as you have in a reasonable response to my post where I attack the use of drafting as a sole metric to assess a GM. I had an easy, free shot and took it. 
 

Thank you for at least having command of (our public education system’s) English classes‘ utility to articulate your reasoning. However we may disagree, at least it isn’t a genuine waste of time like reading drive-by slogans or convictions, which are typically adorned with positive upvotes. All good, just boring. 
 

A serious person can easily bore of what typically passes as hockey discussion on this site, but thankfully there are a handful of quality posters here who create quality content for our casual discussions. I won’t manage to get most of them, but this is where I should recognize these posters for their quality posts throughout the summer, including yourself.
 

This of course is just my opinion amd experience, but thanks to those who help make great content to read through on here. Many guests views this content and site and IMO, these posters are partly why. Of course, the list would be long if I could remember most names off hand.
 

@mll

@SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME

@Kevin Biestra

@IBatch

@oldnews

 

I tip my hat to all of you before I retire my account when the 2020 season ends. 
Cheers and respect. 
 

Shoutout to The Guardian and @Alflives

RIP lol. 

 

Edited September 2, 2020 by 189lb enforcers?

[JM_]

On 8/31/2020 at 3:53 PM, oldnews said:

I'd add to this that it's not really the gift of a 'tank' when you draft 3 consecutive Calder finalists - taken 23, 5, 7....that actually undermines the idea that a team 'must' go full tank to get those elite lottery picks at the top of the draft.

 

Another aspect is the idea of picking people for quality of their personalties. Benning has always stated he looks for "character" - call it the euro skill with Canadian heart thing that caused a fluff a while back. Look at the attitudes of the key picks and the UFAs, they all have that in common. 

 

We are seeing the benefits of that approach now in guys that are coachable and willing to do what it takes to win. 

[oldnews]

6 minutes ago, Robert Long said:

Another aspect is the idea of picking people for quality of their personalties. Benning has always stated he looks for "character" - call it the euro skill with Canadian heart thing that caused a fluff a while back. Look at the attitudes of the key picks and the UFAs, they all have that in common. 

 

We are seeing the benefits of that approach now in guys that are coachable and willing to do what it takes to win. 

Yes - it seems like an entire lot that is very coachable.  Part of that has to also be credited to Green - who clearly 'gets through' to his players - but you see how completely engaged even all of their 'stars' (I hate the term) are.    Boeser is playing the complete game - I pointed out - before last night - that I thought he was having, contrary to most takes - a very good playoffs in spite of the perceived difficulty producing - his forecheck has been constant and fierce, his backcheck likewise, he's been parked in the hard areas, he's been showing some great playmaking - he's worked his butt off consistently.   EP - the antithesis of double-flamingos - he throws his body in front of shot and passing lanes, he's battling all over the ice - he's nothing like a one-way 'star', he has the complete game work ethic and drive to excel in every area of the game - and Hughes likewise, his defensive game has grown remarkably in short order, he fights through every single barrier, and he breaks through whenever you give him a crack of time or space - ie last night the team goes down 1-0 - Hughes feathers a stretch pass to Boeser immediately that Boeser and Miller convert into a counterstike right on the heels of giving up the lead.  Character oozing from their most talented players, character oozing from the likes of Motte, Stecher, etc as well - all of whom seem to have high regard and respect for the foundation - Edler, Tanev, Beagle, Sutter - so much so that they emulate their game over 200ft.   None of it is by mere 'accident' - it's actually the antithesis of the "tank" - it's earning everything via hard work, character.

[Kevin Biestra]

37 minutes ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

Thanks @theo5789
 

This is an example of the more objective approach I was advocating for in any serious assessment of Benning’s body of work as GM. Thanks. 

 

Whether I agree with a synopsis or not, I’ll at least respect this actual argument enough not to be forced into the role of hater/critic; the surrogate devil’s advocate, which often results in being shot down as the messenger, just from holding up the truth-mirror to the mob. 
 

The are ways to quantify points and there are ways to qualify them in an argument.
 

@oldnews, disagree with him at times or not, is a terrific example of a poster who makes the necessary effort required build an argument with supporting metrics to hedge base points, but will also acknowledge and give reasons for obvious blind spots in his argument. This is how to build credibility in a discussion. 
 

To state JB has been a great drafter of talent is a fairly safe, effortless bit of jargon. Where is the argument? The thread asks a question; attaches a measuring of consensus poll; and posters put forth their supporting comments. Some posters went as far as to build an argument, as you have in a reasonable response to my post where I attack the use of drafting as a sole metric to assess a GM. I had an easy, free shot and took it. 
 

Thank you for at least having command of (our public education system’s) English classes‘ utility to articulate your reasoning. However we may disagree, at least it isn’t a genuine waste of time like reading drive-by slogans or convictions, which are typically adorned with positive upvotes. All good, just boring. 
 

A serious person can easily bore of what typically passes as hockey discussion on this site, but thankfully there are a handful of quality posters here who create quality content for our casual discussions. I won’t manage to get most of them, but this is where I should recognize these posters for their quality posts throughout the summer, including yourself.
 

This of course is just my opinion amd experience, but thanks to those who help make great content to read through on here. Many guests views this content and site and IMO, these posters are partly why. Of course, the list would be long if I could remember most names off hand.
 

@mll

@SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME

@Kevin Biestra

@IBatch

@oldnews

 

I tip my hat to all of you before I retire my account when the 2020 season ends. 
Cheers and respect. 
 

Shoutout to The Guardian and @Alflives

RIP lol. 

 

 

[JM_]

1 hour ago, oldnews said:

Yes - it seems like an entire lot that is very coachable.  Part of that has to also be credited to Green - who clearly 'gets through' to his players - but you see how completely engaged even all of their 'stars' (I hate the term) are.    Boeser is playing the complete game - I pointed out - before last night - that I thought he was having, contrary to most takes - a very good playoffs in spite of the perceived difficulty producing - his forecheck has been constant and fierce, his backcheck likewise, he's been parked in the hard areas, he's been showing some great playmaking - he's worked his butt off consistently.   EP - the antithesis of double-flamingos - he throws his body in front of shot and passing lanes, he's battling all over the ice - he's nothing like a one-way 'star', he has the complete game work ethic and drive to excel in every area of the game - and Hughes likewise, his defensive game has grown remarkably in short order, he fights through every single barrier, and he breaks through whenever you give him a crack of time or space - ie last night the team goes down 1-0 - Hughes feathers a stretch pass to Boeser immediately that Boeser and Miller convert into a counterstike right on the heels of giving up the lead.  Character oozing from their most talented players, character oozing from the likes of Motte, Stecher, etc as well - all of whom seem to have high regard and respect for the foundation - Edler, Tanev, Beagle, Sutter - so much so that they emulate their game over 200ft.   None of it is by mere 'accident' - it's actually the antithesis of the "tank" - it's earning everything via hard work, character.

coach-ability is something very underrated imo. Its a big factor in this teams success and pretty much any profession really. Some guys have all the tools and its a "mystery" as to why they don't do better. My bet is most of the time they aren't coachable. 

[oldnews]

Just now, Robert Long said:

coach-ability is something very underrated imo. Its a big factor in this teams success and pretty much any profession really. Some guys have all the tools and its a "mystery" as to why they don't do better. My bet is most of the time they aren't coachable. 

I'd love to have a candid conversation with a couple Leafs coaches about Matthews and Nylander.  One is a lottery champion who scores regular season goals, but seems utterly unable to make his team-mates/linemates better, particularly when it comes time to exit the playoffs in the first round, and the other, well, maybe it's unfair to reduce him to double flamingos, but....

I'm curious - how much better had Matthews gotten over the past 4 years?  Nylander?