Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

A realistic analysis of Jim Benning's tenure so far

Rate this topic


13231

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, appleboy said:

How much of the drafting was Jim or Brackett. We will soon see. Jim is the guy who put the system in place. Jud was responsible for running it. 

It's a manager change by a manager.   The staff hasn't change much.   

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Since i'm already winning, please do tell me how we'd "acquire" PLD?   Laine is the bar - does that mean your suggesting we couldn't have traded Miller or Horvat for him - as in not enough cap (and should we even consider that?...what's the cap hit for PLD again).    We have the "flexibility" but it has nothing to do about cap space - it has to do about who we give up for that asset.  

We can’t even have this conversation without cap, that’s the point my dude. It’s not PLD specifically, it’s that age group I’m referring too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great discussion and good point(s) on both side.  

 

Imo, from the start JB needed to create a succession plan by filling the pipeline with legit prospects and surrounding the young players with veterans (although, with hindsight I do agree that he gave too much term but the reasoning seems to make sense with context).   The biggest X factor in pro sports due to its structured nature is the coaching staff because it is there job to put it altogether: the deployment and system being employed is in there hands; JB accumulates the talent and the player executes the system.  Of course it can be argued that a talented/smarter player can execute better and will adapt quicker to the system but due to the cap or cost you cannot have these types of players at every position. The cheaper and most sustainable solution is to then hire coaches that can build a system that is able to maiximze the talent of the roster despite the talent level.  

 

Preferably, I hope Green gets signed and wins with this core; perhaps some tinkering with the asst should probably be explored - first.  Imo, most of the staff seems to had plateaued with this team and a new setting might be what is best for there coaching careers.  Greens best days might be with another team as he takes away what he has learned from his tenure here.  This shorten season is perhaps a good test for the staff due to its playoff style schedule (playing a ten times) cause it will breed some familiarities between the teams.  Despite the flaws this team is ready to be competitive and this is probably why Aquaman and management are delaying his signing (?).   These next few against a better structured/coached Jets team will probably be a better indicator of were the Canucks are at.   

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me those talking about the cap squeeze and not being able to take advantage of COVID contracts - it’s not like he knew there would be a global pandemic and plenty of other teams were unable to do so as well. 
 

When you look at the structure of the team, the ages of the players, the way contracts are formed - over the next two seasons significant cap comes off and EP and QH ELC contracts expire.

 

taking it all into perspective the plan can clearly be that the view was the develop the players, support them with Vets and then as the vets fade out the window opens and the next group on ELCs who would be supporting cast would slot in.

 

the fact is the team did better  than the plan dictated last season. Which is a good sign. However it does have a knock on effect on people’s expectations and going from we need to tank and still get more pics to the other extreme if we must win now. 
 

has benning made mistakes along the way sure but he has also made some astute signings, some good trades (the motte trade now looks like and absolute steal in retrospect) 

 

this is one of the hardest points for him now because when you rebuild you have time because it’s not realistic to win right away and you need to get the picks and the players in. He has built a core and it needs to mature and bit and gain experience. This means you need to win but are not yet ready to go all the way. This is often when fans and owners get itchy feet/trigger fingers because they can see the team isn’t to far away. A GM change gets made and they switch to win now, which unless that GM is an idiot they should do well as the ground work, the contracts, the picks, the prospects are all there and ready for them to just fling all over the place to get the last few pieces. 
 

I think benning has earnt the right to see this through for a few more years 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, UKNuck96 said:

For me those talking about the cap squeeze and not being able to take advantage of COVID contracts - it’s not like he knew there would be a global pandemic and plenty of other teams were unable to do so as well. 
 

When you look at the structure of the team, the ages of the players, the way contracts are formed - over the next two seasons significant cap comes off and EP and QH ELC contracts expire.

 

taking it all into perspective the plan can clearly be that the view was the develop the players, support them with Vets and then as the vets fade out the window opens and the next group on ELCs who would be supporting cast would slot in.

 

This is pretty much what most people have hoped for over the last few seasons but it never materializes. History usually repeats itself so it’s hard to assume he won’t just sign more UFA’s as soon as he gets the cap space. It’s what he has done every single year. Why would he stop now? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, UKNuck96 said:

For me those talking about the cap squeeze and not being able to take advantage of COVID contracts - it’s not like he knew there would be a global pandemic and plenty of other teams were unable to do so as well. 
 

When you look at the structure of the team, the ages of the players, the way contracts are formed - over the next two seasons significant cap comes off and EP and QH ELC contracts expire.

 

taking it all into perspective the plan can clearly be that the view was the develop the players, support them with Vets and then as the vets fade out the window opens and the next group on ELCs who would be supporting cast would slot in.

 

the fact is the team did better  than the plan dictated last season. Which is a good sign. However it does have a knock on effect on people’s expectations and going from we need to tank and still get more pics to the other extreme if we must win now. 
 

has benning made mistakes along the way sure but he has also made some astute signings, some good trades (the motte trade now looks like and absolute steal in retrospect) 

 

this is one of the hardest points for him now because when you rebuild you have time because it’s not realistic to win right away and you need to get the picks and the players in. He has built a core and it needs to mature and bit and gain experience. This means you need to win but are not yet ready to go all the way. This is often when fans and owners get itchy feet/trigger fingers because they can see the team isn’t to far away. A GM change gets made and they switch to win now, which unless that GM is an idiot they should do well as the ground work, the contracts, the picks, the prospects are all there and ready for them to just fling all over the place to get the last few pieces. 
 

I think benning has earnt the right to see this through for a few more years 

The problem is that we lost all of our UFA players. Even without a pandemic and the cap rising by 3 million dollars as projected, we would at best be able to retain one player (assuming we still go and get Schmidt to improve our defence).

 

Moving on from Markstrom makes sense since we have Demko and with the Seattle expansion looming -- Markstrom got NMC from the Flames -- we would have for sure lost Demko.

 

Tanev and Toffoli at 4 years were good deals. Signing at least one of them would have been nice.

 

With better cap management, we would have had a pretty good shot at coming out of the North division and possibly onto the cup finals. I think the window opened last season but due to poor cap management, we might have to take a step back this season.

 

Of course, I'd be happy to be proven wrong and will be cheering on this team to win the cup this season.

 

I gotta say, JB is finding good young players that covers up for some of the cap management issues. Like I'm pleasantly surprised by the emergence of Chatfield and Juolevi. We will see how they perform against stronger competition but they looked good against Ottawa.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Convincing John said:

This is pretty much what most people have hoped for over the last few seasons but it never materializes. History usually repeats itself so it’s hard to assume he won’t just sign more UFA’s as soon as he gets the cap space. It’s what he has done every single year. Why would he stop now? 

There will be more UFAs except the kind of player will be a bit different. Previously we had to overpay to get them to come here. But it’s been worth it to have them around the young core. The next load of UFAs that land will be to address holes in the roster that is needed rather than for a veteran presence.

 

he will never win - if he gets ufas people will moan he didn’t bring players through or made a blockbuster trade. If he trade people will moan we lost and why give up a player when we can get in free agency. 
 

the cap coming off over the next few seasons will be used on the expiring ELCs. And if there is some left over why wouldn’t we use it on a UFA 

  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, khay said:

The problem is that we lost all of our UFA players. Even without a pandemic and the cap rising by 3 million dollars as projected, we would at best be able to retain one player (assuming we still go and get Schmidt to improve our defence).

 

Moving on from Markstrom makes sense since we have Demko and with the Seattle expansion looming -- Markstrom got NMC from the Flames -- we would have for sure lost Demko.

 

Tanev and Toffoli at 4 years were good deals. Signing at least one of them would have been nice.

 

With better cap management, we would have had a pretty good shot at coming out of the North division and possibly onto the cup finals. I think the window opened last season but due to poor cap management, we might have to take a step back this season.

 

Of course, I'd be happy to be proven wrong and will be cheering on this team to win the cup this season.

 

I gotta say, JB is finding good young players that covers up for some of the cap management issues. Like I'm pleasantly surprised by the emergence of Chatfield and Juolevi. We will see how they perform against stronger competition but they looked good against Ottawa.

 

The window possibly opened last season but all the build up was for it to be open next season onwards. I don’t blame him for the team overperforming. It was an unexpected bonus which people are retrospectively crucifying him for. We wouldn’t have had than run if we didn’t have the Myers, the sutters and beagles on the team. 
 

I don’t blame him for ferland- it’s unfortunate, same with Baer. LE at that time was brought in to extend the Sedins window and maybe he should have put his foot down, but we have to live with that one. I wouldn’t say he miss managed the team at all. He was looking to take advantage of the situation unfolding over the off season and had a shot at OEL, which didn’t turn out, and did get NS. We also made a few depth pickups and got Hamonic in. So in reality the only loss which wasn’t replaced was Toff.

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, UKNuck96 said:

There will be more UFAs except the kind of player will be a bit different. Previously we had to overpay to get them to come here. But it’s been worth it to have them around the young core. The next load of UFAs that land will be to address holes in the roster that is needed rather than for a veteran presence.

 

he will never win - if he gets ufas people will moan he didn’t bring players through or made a blockbuster trade. If he trade people will moan we lost and why give up a player when we can get in free agency. 
 

the cap coming off over the next few seasons will be used on the expiring ELCs. And if there is some left over why wouldn’t we use it on a UFA 

There is no bigger weapon in the NHL than Cap. Stop signing 28 year olds to 4-6 year contracts and target the 21-25 year old RFA’s by exploiting rival GM’s cap issues. That’s how he got Miller and Schmidt. That’s more of what I’d like to see. UFA’s are so 90’s. Quit living in the 90’s Jim. 

  • Cheers 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Convincing John said:

There is no bigger weapon in the NHL than Cap. Stop signing 28 year olds to 4-6 year contracts and target the 21-25 year old RFA’s by exploiting rival GM’s cap issues. That’s how he got Miller and Schmidt. That’s more of what I’d like to see. UFA’s are so 90’s. Quit living in the 90’s Jim. 

But you have just given two good examples of what he has done. He does seem to be able to sniff out a good deal 

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/29/2021 at 12:32 PM, The Lock said:

 

 

The truth is, you can paint all of this whatever shade of positive or negative you want, but when you start comparing all of these with the outside world that is the actual NHL and not just our team, the good and bad get diminished. It's for this reason I really think Benning's more in the middle of the pack in terms of GMs. He's not terrible. He's not the best. He has his good and bad, just like with any other GM.

The point i was implying was that people to say he is a great GM, or a bad GM based on his draft record is the wrong thing to do, when it is done by a committee of scouts who do the work.  He has a team of scouts that is on the road doing all the hard work, they report their findings, probably provide video, he eventually sees in person and is the guy that eventually stands at the podium to announce and it is wrong to give him all the credit either good or bad on draft picks, which he even admits EP was pushed by scouts (odd because I believe EP saved his job) May as well fire all the scouts if it is all JB and save Aquaman money

 

Just saying for people here to judge if he is a good manager based on drafts, when the top GM's say the draft is the scouts show surprises me

How is he at his own job? the Manager, the General Manager?

How does he manage his duties, his management team, players he signs and has, his salary cap

That is what he should be based on, not what his panel decides

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, UKNuck96 said:

The window possibly opened last season but all the build up was for it to be open next season onwards. I don’t blame him for the team overperforming. It was an unexpected bonus which people are retrospectively crucifying him for. We wouldn’t have had than run if we didn’t have the Myers, the sutters and beagles on the team. 
 

I don’t blame him for ferland- it’s unfortunate, same with Baer. LE at that time was brought in to extend the Sedins window and maybe he should have put his foot down, but we have to live with that one. I wouldn’t say he miss managed the team at all. He was looking to take advantage of the situation unfolding over the off season and had a shot at OEL, which didn’t turn out, and did get NS. We also made a few depth pickups and got Hamonic in. So in reality the only loss which wasn’t replaced was Toff.

Good points in your post, but the fact that the window opened two years sooner than he anticipated is an evidence of misjudgement. TBH, I don't buy the theory that JB was aiming for 2021-22 season as the year in which to begin contention for the cup; I think it's a made up theory by the fans to align with the year in which all of the bad contracts expires.

 

I think they've been trying to meet one goal of making the playoffs at the earliest possible time. That is the only way you can justify aggressive signings. If you recall, Linden was let go because he proposed more patient approach and there was a bit of tension between JB and TL as a result. It ended up that JB stayed because he pitched a different vision, one in which the team makes the playoffs sooner than whatever vision TL proposed. Of course, this is also unconfirmed but otherwise, why did TL resign? 

 

Having said that, yes, I agree that without signing Beagle, Myers, and even Eriksson, the team may not have made the playoffs. As we saw on that first game against Ottawa, our bottom 6 can win a game for us in an emphatic 7-1 fashion; this reduces the burden on our star players over the course of an 82-game season. Sutter was great in the series against the Wilds too; IMO Sutter was signed to a decent contract at the time and the fact that he isn't producing as much offence in the last couple years of the contract was expected and he shouldn't be crucified for that. That depth helped us to the 2nd round of the playoffs. 

 

And yes, Ferland and Baer were unfortunate cases -- but Ferland had history of concussion. I think Baer was already not a very strong forechecker nor good on the boards (i.e., weaknesses on the defensive side of the game), which made him ill-suited to play on Horvat's wing nor the bottom 6 duties; knowing this, offering him that contract was a mistake. The fact that he suffered concussion makes him even less effective along the boards, which is unfortunate.

 

But don't let it get lost that we made the playoffs primarily because of Markstrom, Miller, Petey, Hughes, Horvat, Edler, Tanev.

In particular, there is no playoffs without acquisition of Miller and Markstrom turning into a Vezina level goalie.

 

There was a cap mismanagement. In order to meet the mandate to make the playoffs as soon as possible, JB took a greedy approach of signing players without considering the potential future use of the cap. GMs, they need to make the playoffs to keep their jobs so they end up making rash decisions that could hurt the team in the future. Typically, it ends badly for the GM and the team: team is decimated with bad contracts and the GM fails to make the playoffs and gets fired. 

 

The difference is that JB did a lot of good things aside from the cap management to avert the worst case scenario: he drafted QH, EP, Demok, BB; he developed Horvat and Markstrom; he acquired Miller; he kept Edler and Tanev; he traded for Toffoli when BB got injured. But the consequence of doing good on other aspects of his job is that, he gets to pay for his rash decisions, which would have been the burden taken on by his successor had JB failed.

 

As I said, I don't buy that JB targeting 2021-22 theory and I'm not crucifying him for getting there sooner and I understand that COVID made things harder. I think JB would have kept Toffoli at the least if the cap went up in a COVID-free world. But if that 2021-22 theory were true, then there is even more reason to crucify him and it's not retrospectively. If a manager, be it a sports team or a shipping company, makes all his/her decisions as if though there are no random factors, no variability, then he should be crucified. As a manager of a major sports team, he should have prepared himself for the scenario in which we get there sooner; he clearly wasn't. 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ba;;isticsports said:

The point i was implying was that people to say he is a great GM, or a bad GM based on his draft record is the wrong thing to do, when it is done by a committee of scouts who do the work.  He has a team of scouts that is on the road doing all the hard work, they report their findings, probably provide video, he eventually sees in person and is the guy that eventually stands at the podium to announce and it is wrong to give him all the credit either good or bad on draft picks, which he even admits EP was pushed by scouts (odd because I believe EP saved his job) May as well fire all the scouts if it is all JB and save Aquaman money

 

Just saying for people here to judge if he is a good manager based on drafts, when the top GM's say the draft is the scouts show surprises me

How is he at his own job? the Manager, the General Manager?

How does he manage his duties, his management team, players he signs and has, his salary cap

That is what he should be based on, not what his panel decides

 

Okay, but let's take a step back for a moment. Let's look at a basic CEO position. What is the job of the CEO? To manage a company. Arguably the best CEO's are not the ones who just sit in their office and do work but rather the ones that do things to motivate others within an organization. What's better? 1 motivated CEO or 1000 motivated employees? However, the most important decisions are often made by that CEO as well and is also the scapegoat if things go wrong.

 

We can apply a similar concept with the draft team. Drafting is a team task. Benning's obviously not going to do it all by himself; however, the onus is going to be on Benning. It's his job, much like with a CEO, to motivate the scouts. It's his job to communicate what he wants in prospects. Sure, all the scouts are doing the hard work as you've said, but the onus is still on Benning to make sure it all works out. It's a team task with 1 person that runs it.

 

So you can judge a GM by the draft table if you consider the fact that it's on him whether or not the scouts provide him with the information, get him excited about certain prospects such as Pettersson, get him to stay away from certain prospects, etc. Also, it's ultimately his decision in the end on who gets drafted based on the information provided by the scouts.

 

This isn't fully going against what you are saying and I think you are on the right track, but I also think what you are saying doesn't really mean we can't judge Benning based on who he drafted. We can, we have, and we will continue to do so, because ultimately the onus is on him. ;)

Edited by The Lock
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, The Lock said:

 

 

This isn't fully going against what you are saying and I think you are on the right track, but I also think what you are saying doesn't really mean we can't judge Benning based on who he drafted. We can, we have, and we will continue to do so, because ultimately the onus is on him. ;)

I have no problem what you said, but to base his tenure  as a Gm based solely  on a Group consensus from his scouts of who they drafted (good or bad) and if his scouts were competent to provide him with outstanding information and then decide if he is a great GM is not enough to base that on imo.

What of the all the other GM duties and responsibilities that require only his sole hard work (like the scouts have done) for his managing roles?

Some will say that faults were ownerships decision to defend him- why?

In the end it is his name and his responsibility to build this team and he should have the balls to say, you hired me to build you a team, let me do the job you hired me to do

For fans to say otherwise is making excuses and why? If they can't say for sure, why make excuses to defend him and blame ownership?

As everyone knows people make mistakes, so why blame owners for meddling to defend JB?

I won't say he has been stellar and will wait to see how it plays out

 

Funny how the Canucks coach and GM will say that the NHL is not a development league. and yet it was for the management side of it

Hopefully they are seasoned veterans now, because they have had a good kick at the can and need results now

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, ba;;isticsports said:

I have no problem what you said, but to base his tenure  as a Gm based solely  on a Group consensus from his scouts of who they drafted (good or bad) and if his scouts were competent to provide him with outstanding information and then decide if he is a great GM is not enough to base that on imo.

What of the all the other GM duties and responsibilities that require only his sole hard work (like the scouts have done) for his managing roles?

Some will say that faults were ownerships decision to defend him- why?

In the end it is his name and his responsibility to build this team and he should have the balls to say, you hired me to build you a team, let me do the job you hired me to do

For fans to say otherwise is making excuses and why? If they can't say for sure, why make excuses to defend him and blame ownership?

As everyone knows people make mistakes, so why blame owners for meddling to defend JB?

I won't say he has been stellar and will wait to see how it plays out

 

Funny how the Canucks coach and GM will say that the NHL is not a development league. and yet it was for the management side of it

Hopefully they are seasoned veterans now, because they have had a good kick at the can and need results now

One could say your exact same words about anyone who says anything negative. Perhaps then, no matter what your opinion is, the more research and understanding you provide, the better the argument you'll have; thus is debating.

 

This isn't just about the ones who are 100% for Benning, Your arguments are also for people who are against Benning. If the point of this is to claim that the optimists only look at the picture of just Benning, I'd argue most people who post a negative thread are not any better, which is why so many discussion become simple "food fights". ;)

 

This is one of the few threads where I'd say the OP has a fantastic post that's actually well thought out, so cheers to the OP. 

Edited by The Lock
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, RU SERIOUS said:

This screw-up might be the worst one JB's done since the LE signing! 

Which probably resulted in not signing Toffoli

 

I like Benning and really like his honest and approachable personality. But I think his terrible deals and signings are coming back to haunt him. So yeah I don't think Benning is long as GM. 7 seasons and 2 playoff runs and 20 to 30 mil in wasted cap space or over paying players. 

 

No GM can survive this 

 

And really Benning's drafting is good but not as great as people say it is. Sure he struck gold with Pettersson and Boesser.

 

Hughes wasn't exactly a result of great drafting rather he was the best d-man available he was just luck two other GM's went off the board (ARZ and MTL) so Hughes landed to Vancouver. We all knew Hughes was the 2nd best d-man so we all would have drafted Hughes at that spot. So more like a common sense move than a genious move

 

 

 

Edited by iinatcc
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...