A realistic analysis of Jim Benning's tenure so far

[Convincing John]

7 minutes ago, oldnews said:

Thanks and no worries - I'd have to google Ben Shapiro to know who the guy is - but first I'd have to care enough about Trump's chorus to bother --which I don't.

 

Btw - if you agree with 75% of Benning's moves - be careful - I think that would put you in homer territory haha.

 

I don't see Beagle as a significant enough contract - or term - to be too concerned -and I think he's a necessary 'foundation' piece over that duration.  I don't see those kind of hard minutes as mere 'mentoring' - and I agree with rewarding Beagle, Dorsett types in general for being the 'warriors' they've been. On the contrary - I'd much rather see the millions shaved off the Matthews, Nylanders etc of the NHL and go to their team-mates, who work harder than they do.   I'd sign the Beagle deal all over again in a heartbeat - and probably add yet another veteran depth center to the mix (if I could have signed Richardson this offseason, I would have - and moved wingers.  The deal I didn't care for that summer was the Roussel deal - explained my reasons at the time and feel pretty much the same way about it today.

I don't have a problem with the Myers deal - I would have if it had been in the dramatically projected range of $50 million / 7x7.  

It was 5 years by the way - and $30 million is quite a huge chunk away from $49/50.

This is all hypothetical. What would he have done with that space? Jim’s eye for talent doesn’t end at the draft. Miller and Motte are examples of his eye for talent at any level. His best moves make his worst moves that much more frustrating. He did so well with Miller and Schmidt that it makes you wonder what he coulda done with cap flexibility before that or even today. I’m over him burning picks on age gap guys, whatever, he doesn’t do it anymore so why cry about it? I would just like to see him with more cap flexibility to play to his strengths. 

[oldnews]

2 hours ago, 13231 said:

I've been following this forum since 2008 and it's always great to read different perspectives about this team that we all love. Although I've hardly posted over the years, I feel compelled to now because I think we have a team that is unlike any other we've had before; at least within the time frame that I've been following the Canucks (the 02-03 season, the glorious WCE days). 

 

The person at the crux of moulding this roster is the ever polarizing Jim Benning. Love him or hate him, you have to admit that his run as GM, from what he inherited to what he is building up, has been unprecedented. The following is my personal perspective on what his run has been like, and why we must be a little more patient and let him see his vision through. 

 

The end of the Gillis era was one of the most frustrating times for me as a fan. The team had no clear direction, random trades were made on a whim, the embarrassing goalie "controversy" & how that was handled, on top of the fact that we all knew the Sedins had a few more good years in them that were being completely wasted had all of us pretty exhausted. When Benning came in as GM in 2014, it was clear through interviews with him & Linden that the team was still aiming to compete, and moves made in the subsequent couple of years were a clear indication of that objective. Good or bad, it's pretty accurate to ascertain that ownership believed that the team could still be competitive, and moved steadily in that direction. I see every move made in this era as an attempt at a long shot playoff run, whether it's the Loui signing, the various trades, and all else. But things just did not work out, and finally during the 2017-2018 it became clear that we were undergoing a full fledged rebuild. This is where my assessment of Benning's tenure truly starts. 

 

If you guys recall, the 2017-2018 season started off quite strong until injuries decimated us. But Boes & Bo had solid seasons and there was this guy named Pettersson that was tearing it up and breaking records in the SHL. I remember feeling optimistic having 3 legitimate young players on the come up, right as the Sedins played their final season. When was the last time we had something like that? Keep in mind this was just about three years ago, which is not that long of a time span at all. We have witnessed a team that lost its two faces of franchise, was going through misguided hopes of playoff runs, and a guaranteed basement dweller go into its deepest run since 2011 and legitimately in talks of being a long term contender within the span of three years. 

I think a lot of fans would benefit to broaden their perspective on what is going on here. Everything seems to be evaluated on such black & white terms, whereas we have a team in hand that is so ahead of schedule and the envy of many fan bases around the league (whether they want to admit it or not). I look at Detroit, Colorado, Carolina, Toronto, Arizona, Buffalo, Minnesota, Edmonton, even Calgary & Montreal, and how long it took some of them to become competitive. I can't help but feel that some of us really take our situation for granted.

 

On a few critiques that Benning gets, especially pertaining to this off season: There is no way I would be comfortable in having Marky & Tanev to those contracts long term. The only guy we lost that would make sense to still have is Tofolli, but you can't overlook the flat cap & the shady Lou recapture situation that blind sided us. Regardless, I have immense faith in Hog & it wouldn't surprise me if he ends the season with more points than Tofolli. His overall 200 foot game has so much potential as well. On the topic of the bottom six contracts, I agree they might be a bit overpaid, but look at where we were when we signed those guys, that veteran presence was essential. And there is no way we make a playoff run last summer without the likes of Sutter & Beagle. That's another aspect you cannot look at in black and white terms because the value of these guys is what teams like Edmonton, Buffalo, Arizona, and currently Ottawa have all lacked. It is entirely unreasonable to believe that this season or last would be seasons we'd be competing for the cup; the time frame when these contracts hold their greatest weight on the cap overall. When it's said & done, especially with majority of those contracts coming off the books as soon as this off season, I think our team long term in context of creating a team culture and helping our young players develop, has been better off with those guys being around than without them.

 

I want to close by again underscoring the fact that we are in an unprecedented situation. The WCE era and the Sedin era are the two most prolific times our team has had in the past 20 years. But both eras had a 3-4 year window, as those players peaked a bit later in their careers. With the team we have now, we have already gone further than the WCE ever did, and this is a team that has truly only been assembled and taken direction in the last 3 years. The window here to be legitimate contenders seems to be open for several years to come. Our core is young, and they are coming into their own in a positive and competitive team culture & environment, that many other rebuilding teams lacked. And the man at the helm of this has had his ups & downs but he's done something in the last three years that majority of teams around the league would take in a heart beat. So let's keep our perspective focused on the long term, understand the gray areas that challenged our team, and ultimately enjoy this era. I will openly admit I was wrong if management takes a blatant wrong turn, but with the hand that was dealt turning into what we have now, I am greatly looking forward ahead to being a Canucks fan. 

 

Cheers & take care guys

 

 

I agree in general with the chaos towards the end of the Gillis tenure - and I'd add that I think the most damaging decision the franchise made - was the year of Tortorella experiment - which was not only a misfit - but set them back more than just that year...

The one thing I'd disagree with in your assessment is the idea of re-signing Toffoli - I'd have opted for Tanev instead for a few reasons - 1) prioritizing Hughes' partner, 2) retaining a high end shutdown D pairing and 3) the relative depth of the organization in youth at RW = Boeser, Hoglander, Virtanen, Podkolzin (Gaudette also potential winger conversion)..

Markstrom is probably my favorite goaltender of all-time - but signing him and losing Demko would have resulted in a scene like the recent seige of Washington - so I find it pretty comical when some folks came in here in recent weeks to claim they 'shoulda signed Markstrom'.  Very few people considered Markstrom a contender to be a legit starter through the majority of his time here.   If I can let go, anyone else here ought to be able to.  Which also makes sense from a team trajectory standpoint - their young talent are a few years away from beginning to approach their prime - Demko is that guy that fits the team's timeline (and gives them far more cap flexibility in the meantime).  Very hard to see Markstrom go - but necessary.

 

[iinatcc]

2 hours ago, Convincing John said:

Pietrangelo will be a negative value down the road. Vegas is ready to win now, if they think he can put them over the top then ok, but that’s not even close to a comparable situation to us. We just emerged from multiple lottery seasons and they are a Stanley Cup favourite. 
 

I wasn’t specifically saying Joe. I was saying if you need mentors, go short term. 

Pietrangelo is an elite d-man and I can't see him being a negative until possibly his final contract year. And elite d-men like Pietrangelo will have longetivity just like Shea Weber, Brent Burns, and Duncan Keith. Plus 8.8 million is a steal !!!  

 

Plus let's not pretend if Vancouver had the cap space we would be asking Benning to make that offer 

[Darth Canuck]

13231, that was a good read. Thank you. You and I are on the same page. 

In the next 1-2 years when the dead weight contracts are gone, yes there will be cap space, but signing Petey, Quinn, Bo, Brock, and Demko will eat up a lot of that. I’m guessing the days of huge UFA signings will disappear, much like the trading of pics for gap players has stopped. 

 

Part of Bennings job is for the here and now, and part of it is big picture, long term planning. It’s a challenge to balance the 2. 
 

We have an exciting team, with an exciting future, and for that I am grateful!

 

Go Canucks!
 

[kanucks25]

Realism is in the eye of the beholder. 

[Davathor]

1 hour ago, ImConfused said:

Great post, should be on NHL.com

 

+1 upvote

 

Harsh burn man, he's trying

[AK_19]

I largely agree with your assessment except maybe when it comes to pro-talent evaluation. Regardless of what direction the team is going in, some of the trades and contract signings were god awful. My concern is whether these things will continue. Thankfully this and last year I didn't find any issues. The biggest test will be his RFA negotiations. 

[Bad_BOI_pete]

3 hours ago, oldnews said:

 

I'm shocked someone signed Pietrangelo - he should have retired.

 

 

 

 

Uhh......... a defenceman who finished 4th in norris votes should retire?

[Hairy Kneel]

I think we have room on our expansion draft list to protect another forward.

Here's to hoping JB finds a gem for a minimal price. Maybe we can capitalize on a team unwilling to lose a top player for free.

[Fred65]

2 hours ago, 13231 said:

Agreed. And holy, that Duchene trade was a masterclass. From my point of view, all three GMs in question had completely different starting points and teams they inherited. Sakic had Mack and Landeskog & Duchene as a massive trading chip (it was inevitable he was leaving). Gorton had Zibanejad emerge, the huge fortune of Panarin choosing the NYR, and high, hard to miss draft picks like Kakko, Lafreniere. And Benning inherited only Horvat as a key prospect & an ownership group determined to stay competitive. But as I've originally pointed, since the rebuild became definitive as of 2017-2018, we have trended upwards in a huge way, and in the mix as one of the fastest and most impressive rebuilds without the luxury of 1st and 2nd overall picks, the leverage of huge trading chips or top 10 talent level free agent signings. 

Benning inherited Sedins (2) Horvat, Tanev, Markstrom , Kasian*, Kesler*, Edler, Bieska*  and Burrows*

* all traded

The cupboard was not as bare as is suggested. To choose to set the clock at 2017 may be convenient, but to simply discount the previous 3 years is a tad disingenuous. JB has been charge for coming up to 7 years, we can't waive a magic wand and jusr cut short his years  By the way that's roughly the same time as Sakic and Gorton

Edited January 29, 2021 by Fred65

[appleboy]

 If Jimbo hadn't landed Hughes and Petey his tenor as GM would be a disaster. 

 

Drafting Boeser and trading for Miller were solid moves but Hughes is a franchise player and Petey is special.

 

Jims mistakes are endless.

 

Edited January 29, 2021 by appleboy

[appleboy]

Lets not forget their refusal to blow the team up to jump start the rebuild. They should have turned vets into future assets. They were just coming into two of the best draft pools in years. Mcdavids and Matthew draft classes. Then they made the choice to try to speed up the rebuild with the 22 to 25 year old left overs from around the league. Remember Vey , Baer and so on. Those were painful years. Were weren't in a rebuild but we still sucked big time. The rebuild was delayed by 3 years at least. Then there is his cap management. Lets not even go there except to say that it is going to take two more years to clean up that mess. This and one more.

[ShawnAntoski]

5 hours ago, 13231 said:

I've been following this forum since 2008 and it's always great to read different perspectives about this team that we all love. Although I've hardly posted over the years, I feel compelled to now because I think we have a team that is unlike any other we've had before; at least within the time frame that I've been following the Canucks (the 02-03 season, the glorious WCE days). 

 

The person at the crux of moulding this roster is the ever polarizing Jim Benning. Love him or hate him, you have to admit that his run as GM, from what he inherited to what he is building up, has been unprecedented. The following is my personal perspective on what his run has been like, and why we must be a little more patient and let him see his vision through. 

 

The end of the Gillis era was one of the most frustrating times for me as a fan. The team had no clear direction, random trades were made on a whim, the embarrassing goalie "controversy" & how that was handled, on top of the fact that we all knew the Sedins had a few more good years in them that were being completely wasted had all of us pretty exhausted. When Benning came in as GM in 2014, it was clear through interviews with him & Linden that the team was still aiming to compete, and moves made in the subsequent couple of years were a clear indication of that objective. Good or bad, it's pretty accurate to ascertain that ownership believed that the team could still be competitive, and moved steadily in that direction. I see every move made in this era as an attempt at a long shot playoff run, whether it's the Loui signing, the various trades, and all else. But things just did not work out, and finally during the 2017-2018 it became clear that we were undergoing a full fledged rebuild. This is where my assessment of Benning's tenure truly starts. 

 

If you guys recall, the 2017-2018 season started off quite strong until injuries decimated us. But Boes & Bo had solid seasons and there was this guy named Pettersson that was tearing it up and breaking records in the SHL. I remember feeling optimistic having 3 legitimate young players on the come up, right as the Sedins played their final season. When was the last time we had something like that? Keep in mind this was just about three years ago, which is not that long of a time span at all. We have witnessed a team that lost its two faces of franchise, was going through misguided hopes of playoff runs, and a guaranteed basement dweller go into its deepest run since 2011 and legitimately in talks of being a long term contender within the span of three years. 

I think a lot of fans would benefit to broaden their perspective on what is going on here. Everything seems to be evaluated on such black & white terms, whereas we have a team in hand that is so ahead of schedule and the envy of many fan bases around the league (whether they want to admit it or not). I look at Detroit, Colorado, Carolina, Toronto, Arizona, Buffalo, Minnesota, Edmonton, even Calgary & Montreal, and how long it took some of them to become competitive. I can't help but feel that some of us really take our situation for granted.

 

On a few critiques that Benning gets, especially pertaining to this off season: There is no way I would be comfortable in having Marky & Tanev to those contracts long term. The only guy we lost that would make sense to still have is Tofolli, but you can't overlook the flat cap & the shady Lou recapture situation that blind sided us. Regardless, I have immense faith in Hog & it wouldn't surprise me if he ends the season with more points than Tofolli. His overall 200 foot game has so much potential as well. On the topic of the bottom six contracts, I agree they might be a bit overpaid, but look at where we were when we signed those guys, that veteran presence was essential. And there is no way we make a playoff run last summer without the likes of Sutter & Beagle. That's another aspect you cannot look at in black and white terms because the value of these guys is what teams like Edmonton, Buffalo, Arizona, and currently Ottawa have all lacked. It is entirely unreasonable to believe that this season or last would be seasons we'd be competing for the cup; the time frame when these contracts hold their greatest weight on the cap overall. When it's said & done, especially with majority of those contracts coming off the books as soon as this off season, I think our team long term in context of creating a team culture and helping our young players develop, has been better off with those guys being around than without them.

 

I want to close by again underscoring the fact that we are in an unprecedented situation. The WCE era and the Sedin era are the two most prolific times our team has had in the past 20 years. But both eras had a 3-4 year window, as those players peaked a bit later in their careers. With the team we have now, we have already gone further than the WCE ever did, and this is a team that has truly only been assembled and taken direction in the last 3 years. The window here to be legitimate contenders seems to be open for several years to come. Our core is young, and they are coming into their own in a positive and competitive team culture & environment, that many other rebuilding teams lacked. And the man at the helm of this has had his ups & downs but he's done something in the last three years that majority of teams around the league would take in a heart beat. So let's keep our perspective focused on the long term, understand the gray areas that challenged our team, and ultimately enjoy this era. I will openly admit I was wrong if management takes a blatant wrong turn, but with the hand that was dealt turning into what we have now, I am greatly looking forward ahead to being a Canucks fan. 

 

Cheers & take care guys

 

 

Great points - with hindsight it easy to criticize but with context (which you provided so eloquently) the same decision can also be defended.
 

 Imo, the X factor in all this is the staff cause it there responsibility to put it all together.   

[coolboarder]

If we continue to criticize Benning for every little faults and the team don't perform, I would bet you that Benning would be able to find a GM job by other team easily.  based on his draft work alone and will be given every opportunity that he is afforded here by other team.  That is how valuable Benning is and we can't lose the hindsight of the reality, the flat cap that Benning was not prepared for and it's not his fault and he had to make the difficult decisions but good news: Benning will have its opportunity to get some good from free agents or trades in the off-season.  He made his mistakes on his first few years but he has been good lately despite the slow start this season.  If we miss the playoffs, that is ok, He should be given one more year for a chance to improve his roster.  I believe that the owner is also realistic and was pleased with his work from the past year.

[khay]

8 hours ago, Alain Vigneault said:

He's probably at D+/C- if we're being honest.  I'm not sure you can give points for drafting in the top 5/top 10...aren't you expected to do well in that range?  Evidently, even that's been a tough job because the team dropped the ball on Juolevi & Virtanen and it remains to be seen with Podkolzin.

 

He's passing but only just.  There's probably much better guys out there, especially after 7 years.

I'd give him B/B+ if we are being honest.

 

Drafting in the top 5/top 10 doesn't guarantee you an NHL superstar.

 

Choosing EP when he was touted in 10-15 range was a home run. It was bold. Almost all Canucks fans, I'm sure you included, bashed him for picking this unknown skinny kid from Sweden. Everyone complained, including myself, that this kid is going to take at least 3 years before making the NHL. Well, everyone was wrong.

 

And, although it looks like QH was the obvious pick now, there were couple other defencemen who were also highly touted. Considering his smallish statue, I wouldn't have been surprised if we picked one of the other defenceman. For JB and his group to come to an empathic conclusion that QH was the absolute best defenceman in that pack of quality defencemen must have taken a lot of work.

 

Two unexpected superstars picked with No 5 and No 7 picks to set the franchise up for the next 10-15 years... just for that, he gets A/A+ in drafting.

 

Also, I wouldn't call 2014 draft as a failure. There's 5 NHLers picked in that draft by the Canucks: Virtanen, McCann, Demko, Tryamkin, and Forsling, of which 2 are on roster, 1 of them is on his way to establishing himself as an starting goalie.

 

2016 draft was not great, but if Juolevi becomes a top 4D, then I wouldn't call it a complete failure either.

 

His track record on trades is fine. He made some great trades, Schmidt and Miller. But he also made a few suboptimal trades, like McCann for Gudbranson and Gudbranson's trade value deteriorated very fast. 

 

Where he loses points for me is the UFA.

- Eriksson -- we were on a rebuild, why sign the guy? Just to revive the Sedins? And that failed spectacularly.

- Baer -- we signed him to 3+ mil contract only to bury him in the AHL. 

- Ferland -- yes, he is on the LTIR but considering his previous history of concussions, it was a poor signing. 

- Losing all of Toffoli, Tanev, Markstrom, and Stecher as a result of suboptimal UFA signings in the past.

 

So, he's at B/B+ from me. Having said that, he has a lot of work cut out for him. The cornerstones are in place, he needs to chisel out the supporting cast that can help win in the playoffs.

 

[khay]

5 hours ago, Fred65 said:

Benning inherited Sedins (2) Horvat, Tanev, Markstrom , Kasian*, Kesler*, Edler, Bieska*  and Burrows*

* all traded

The cupboard was not as bare as is suggested. To choose to set the clock at 2017 may be convenient, but to simply discount the previous 3 years is a tad disingenuous. JB has been charge for coming up to 7 years, we can't waive a magic wand and jusr cut short his years  By the way that's roughly the same time as Sakic and Gorton

Sedins had NMC.

 

JB took the time to develop Horvat and Markstrom. In particular, Markstrom was given the starting role in the AHL and provided with mentorship from Ryan Miller. Horvat was brought up the right way, starting from the fourth line and up. Along the way, he received mentorship from Richardson, Bonino, Sutter, and Henrik, rather than throwing him to the wolves.

 

Bieksa and Burrows had dwindling values -- Bieksa got us a 2nd, Burrows a prospect. Good trades by JB for couple of guys in their twilight years.

 

Despite everyone on CDC wanting to trade Edler and Tanev, JB stood tall and kept him, which was a great decision. Yes, he lost Tanev for nothing but Tanev was instrumental in Hughes development and the team playing decent hockey last season.

 

Kassian? lol are you kidding? Everyone in the NHL probably was aware of his alcohol problems. I'm glad he fought it off now but he had very little value.

 

Kesler? lol The two-team trade list Kesler?

 

[khay]

8 hours ago, ruilin96 said:

Calgary's 2015 team was a fluke if you ask me. Terrible corsi ratio as well as too many unsustainable 3rd period come back wins.

 

I have said it many times, with Gaudreau and Monahan has their best forwards, and Monahan as their #1 C, they will never win more than 1 round of playoffs.

Wait, you mean they already used up that 1 win quota against the Canucks in 2015?

 

Wow, that's harsh.

 

[ruilin96]

4 minutes ago, khay said:

Wait, you mean they already used up that 1 win quota against the Canucks in 2015?

 

Wow, that's harsh.

 

I will clarify, they won't mean more than 1 round in any given year. But if that's the only series the Flames won in the Gaudreau and Monahan era, that would be great as well!

[24K PureCool]

1 hour ago, khay said:

I'd give him B/B+ if we are being honest.

 

Drafting in the top 5/top 10 doesn't guarantee you an NHL superstar.

 

Choosing EP when he was touted in 10-15 range was a home run. It was bold. Almost all Canucks fans, I'm sure you included, bashed him for picking this unknown skinny kid from Sweden. Everyone complained, including myself, that this kid is going to take at least 3 years before making the NHL. Well, everyone was wrong.

 

And, although it looks like QH was the obvious pick now, there were couple other defencemen who were also highly touted. Considering his smallish statue, I wouldn't have been surprised if we picked one of the other defenceman. For JB and his group to come to an empathic conclusion that QH was the absolute best defenceman in that pack of quality defencemen must have taken a lot of work.

 

Two unexpected superstars picked with No 5 and No 7 picks to set the franchise up for the next 10-15 years... just for that, he gets A/A+ in drafting.

 

Also, I wouldn't call 2014 draft as a failure. There's 5 NHLers picked in that draft by the Canucks: Virtanen, McCann, Demko, Tryamkin, and Forsling, of which 2 are on roster, 1 of them is on his way to establishing himself as an starting goalie.

 

2016 draft was not great, but if Juolevi becomes a top 4D, then I wouldn't call it a complete failure either.

 

His track record on trades is fine. He made some great trades, Schmidt and Miller. But he also made a few suboptimal trades, like McCann for Gudbranson and Gudbranson's trade value deteriorated very fast. 

 

Where he loses points for me is the UFA.

- Eriksson -- we were on a rebuild, why sign the guy? Just to revive the Sedins? And that failed spectacularly.

- Baer -- we signed him to 3+ mil contract only to bury him in the AHL. 

- Ferland -- yes, he is on the LTIR but considering his previous history of concussions, it was a poor signing. 

- Losing all of Toffoli, Tanev, Markstrom, and Stecher as a result of suboptimal UFA signings in the past.

 

So, he's at B/B+ from me. Having said that, he has a lot of work cut out for him. The cornerstones are in place, he needs to chisel out the supporting cast that can help win in the playoffs.

 

Baer was a good top 6 winger for Horvat before he got caucused by a dirty hit and lost a step from there. He was well worth the 3+ mil before his injury.

I can't completely blame JB on not retaining one of our UFAs cause a lot of it was unforeseen such as a flat cap and Lu's penalty that had nothing to do with him. I can definitely see us retaining Toffoli if no Covid or Lu penalty.

[N4ZZY]

2 hours ago, khay said:

I'd give him B/B+ if we are being honest.

 

Drafting in the top 5/top 10 doesn't guarantee you an NHL superstar.

 

Choosing EP when he was touted in 10-15 range was a home run. It was bold. Almost all Canucks fans, I'm sure you included, bashed him for picking this unknown skinny kid from Sweden. Everyone complained, including myself, that this kid is going to take at least 3 years before making the NHL. Well, everyone was wrong.

 

And, although it looks like QH was the obvious pick now, there were couple other defencemen who were also highly touted. Considering his smallish statue, I wouldn't have been surprised if we picked one of the other defenceman. For JB and his group to come to an empathic conclusion that QH was the absolute best defenceman in that pack of quality defencemen must have taken a lot of work.

 

Two unexpected superstars picked with No 5 and No 7 picks to set the franchise up for the next 10-15 years... just for that, he gets A/A+ in drafting.

 

Also, I wouldn't call 2014 draft as a failure. There's 5 NHLers picked in that draft by the Canucks: Virtanen, McCann, Demko, Tryamkin, and Forsling, of which 2 are on roster, 1 of them is on his way to establishing himself as an starting goalie.

 

2016 draft was not great, but if Juolevi becomes a top 4D, then I wouldn't call it a complete failure either.

 

His track record on trades is fine. He made some great trades, Schmidt and Miller. But he also made a few suboptimal trades, like McCann for Gudbranson and Gudbranson's trade value deteriorated very fast. 

 

Where he loses points for me is the UFA.

- Eriksson -- we were on a rebuild, why sign the guy? Just to revive the Sedins? And that failed spectacularly.

- Baer -- we signed him to 3+ mil contract only to bury him in the AHL. 

- Ferland -- yes, he is on the LTIR but considering his previous history of concussions, it was a poor signing. 

- Losing all of Toffoli, Tanev, Markstrom, and Stecher as a result of suboptimal UFA signings in the past.

 

So, he's at B/B+ from me. Having said that, he has a lot of work cut out for him. The cornerstones are in place, he needs to chisel out the supporting cast that can help win in the playoffs.

 

I agree with you that the 2014 draft, in hindsight, was a home run. I mean, when you have 5 NHL players picked from the draft, that's quite incredible, even if not all those players are playing for the organization, or in it. That's pretty incredible. Two of those players from 2014 are contributing to the team (Virtanen and Demko), and Tryamkin when he was here. I don't recall selecting many NHL players during the Gillis era with the exception of Horvat before his departure.