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

Will Canucks coaching staff survive the season?

Rate this topic


Ms.Glitter
 Share

Who should be the new coach or GM?  

106 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

Have to wonder if Benning would still have a job if there were fans in the stands this season?

 

It took one “fire Gillis” chant to end MG. By the next day, our reactive ownership had decided that Gillis was done.

 

One bad season, and they fired the GM who built the greatest contender in Canucks history. 6 seasons, 5 division titles, 2 Presidents’ trophies, 10 playoff rounds, and one trip to game seven of the SCF.


It took one bad season and a fan chant, and Mike Gillis was fired.

 

Benning has done some good things. I freely admit, I’ve never been a huge JB fan, but I’ve also never been a “hater.” I’d like to think I’m pretty fair in giving credit where it’s due, when it comes to JB. But when I look back over the totality of his record with the Canucks, I can’t help but think that he’s done far more things that would get the average NHL GM canned, and several times over during his tenure, than Gillis ever did in one failed season (when ownership installed Torts, reportedly against the wishes of their GM, and the new coach ended up burning the team to the ground in a single season).

 

JB really seems to have more lives than a cat. 

 

(Wonder if Benning knows where the Aquilinis bury the bodies of their undocumented blueberry pickers? :ph34r:)

 

But even with the mysteriously blessed existence JB has enjoyed, when it comes to his job security as the GM in Vancouver, I really have to wonder how the owners would react if the struggles this season led to “fire Benning” chants from the fans?

Edited by SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME
  • Hydration 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everything I've read on this forum seems to lead directly to Gillis in one way or another.

Same argument about why Green is so good is what made Gillis good.

 

The stage is set with a brilliant core to let Gillis come back, older and wiser.

 

I don't bother with the Benning apologisers on this forum. They are either stupid or paid. 

They can also be damaged goods after some time at HF :bigblush:

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Canuckster86 said:

Laughable that people think Mike Gillis is the right GM for us right now...Gillis was good at 2 things, giving NTC to many players and trading away lots of picks and the picks he had never panned out.

 

We would take 3 steps back bringing in Gillis, I would much rather bring Burke back before Gillis.

Dude hasn't even been in hockey since he left.

It was a good call to let him go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Never liked Green so hope not.  He never did anything with Utica, never developed any players and never won anything.  Made it to the Finals, only because they stocked pile his team at the deadline with top career AHLers and still couldn't get it done.

 

All of our top prospect either never developed under him (Virtanen, Shinkaruk, Gaunce, Jensen) and all of our good one by-passed him in the minors (Boeser, Horvat, EP, Hughes).  He never elevated any teams or prospect for this organization.

 

I think Babcock's time has passed, he'll never have the success he had before, so pass as well.  But looking at a guy like Gallant who was canned twice for no reason and seeing how the Panthers crumbled after he left and where he brought the Golden Knight elevating guys like Marchessault, Reilly Smith, William Karlsson, etc, I think he's what this team needs.  He was a big part of the Habs success too during his 2 years as an assistant there.  I'd jump on him.

  • Hydration 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

Have to wonder if Benning would still have a job if there were fans in the stands this season?

 

It took one “fire Gillis” chant to end MG. By the next day, our reactive ownership had decided that Gillis was done.

 

One bad season, and they fired the GM who built the greatest contender in Canucks history. 6 seasons, 5 division titles, 2 Presidents’ trophies, 10 playoff rounds, and one trip to game seven of the SCF.


It took one bad season and a fan chant, and Mike Gillis was fired.

 

Benning has done some good things. I freely admit, I’ve never been a huge JB fan, but I’ve also never been a “hater.” I’d like to think I’m pretty fair in giving credit where it’s due, when it comes to JB. But when I look back over the totality of his record with the Canucks, I can’t help but think that he’s done far more things that would get the average NHL GM canned, and several times over during his tenure, than Gillis ever did in one failed season (when ownership installed Torts, reportedly against the wishes of their GM, and the new coach ended up burning the team to the ground in a single season).

 

JB really seems to have more lives than a cat. 

 

(Wonder if Benning knows where the Aquilinis bury the bodies of their undocumented blueberry pickers? :ph34r:)

 

But even with the mysteriously blessed existence JB has enjoyed, when it comes to his job security as the GM in Vancouver, I really have to wonder how the owners would react if the struggles this season led to “fire Benning” chants from the fans?

I find it honestly baffling how some people are so blindly loyal to Benning no matter what he does despite us being bottom-feeders for a majority of his tenure and Gillis - who gave us the best team/era in franchise history and would have delivered a Cup if everything was even - is treated like a joke.

 

I know Benning comes off like your likeable innocent "aw shucks" uncle and Gillis comes off like a smarmy douche but I don't see that as being enough to create the discrepancy.

 

Also love how people condemn Gillis for "leaving the cupboards bare" when it's been reported many times that he actually wanted to rebuild but ownership didn't allow it, which was a big part of the Torts hire (not a Gillis hire). Not to mention the plethora of quality pieces that Benning did inherit: 6th overall pick, Sedins, Bieksa, Kesler, Hamhuis, Edler, Garrison, Tanev, Burrows, Hansen, Horvat, Markstrom, Hutton, Higgins, Richardson.

Edited by kanucks25
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Sprinterkb said:

I laugh at Green developing young players,he has destroyed Jake and is doing the same thing with jol.

Likes to play his faves like Sutter and others, he's on the way to destroy Petey, Boeser, Quinn too.

nail in the coffin should have been when this brilliant intellect that is travis green decided to take hogs off the second line who clearly has been the hardest working player and playmaker on that line to insert Eriksson into the second line... 

how? just how do you do that?. talk about ruining a kids mental game. "hey kid you are doing great but yeah not as good as some 35 year old washed up bum that signed here only to ride into the sunset and never try again". 

dude gets paid alot of money to be so oblivious.   

Edited by MoldyTaco
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, DarkIndianRises said:

I disagree.

 

Trades such as Leivo, Pearson, Toffoli, Miller, and Motte were huge wins for us.     

 

As far as contracts go, we will be able to offer more favourable term and money once this team pushes closer to its window (i.e. The Holtby signing).   

Im not saying he hasn't had success in some trades it just doesn't seem to be his strong suit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, hammertime said:

I picked Hextall for GM however I don't think JB needs to be replaced I think he needs help. Trevor wasn't the right guy for prez. The team needs someone to help with contract negotiations and signings. MG/Lawrence Gillman someone of that ilk. JB is a solid contractor but he's no interior designer. 

 

I also don't think Green is to blame here this team is young and its pretty hard to coach when we have played a 3rd more games than the league average. 

I hope JB stays too and he needs to probably do some tweaking with his management team.  For example: Asst GM, Weisbrod where does he fit in all this cap mess - he was a GM before, what does he contribute and was he the reason why Brackett left ?   Imo, the buck stops at JB but I do (assume) all/most personnel decisions are initially discussed & debated then JB makes a decision with support from his team.   I would prefer Weisbrod be replaced with JBs' future replacement (someone he can mentor) cause if JB & Green gets canned and due to the quarantine requirements the interim replacements will be the Assistants: Weisbrod & Baumer - Yikes !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, kanucks25 said:

I find it honestly baffling how some people are so blindly loyal to Benning no matter what he does despite us being bottom-feeders for a majority of his tenure and Gillis - who gave us the best team/era in franchise history and would have delivered a Cup if everything was even - is treated like a joke.

 

I know Benning comes off like your likeable innocent "aw shucks" uncle and Gillis comes off like a smarmy douche but I don't see that as being enough to create the discrepancy.

 

Also love how people condemn Gillis for "leaving the cupboards bare" when it's been reported many times that he actually wanted to rebuild but ownership didn't allow it, which was a big part of the Torts hire (not a Gillis hire). Not to mention the plethora of quality pieces that Benning did inherit: 6th overall pick, Sedins, Bieksa, Kesler, Hamhuis, Edler, Garrison, Tanev, Burrows, Hansen, Horvat, Markstrom, Hutton, Higgins, Richardson.

The prospect cupboard was bare, a roster full of NTC - there was no sustainable succession plan cause a legit prospect pipeline did not exist due to his drafts being mostly/all duds.  Ofcourse, it can be argued that he was not picking high in the draft and his one top ten pick turned out (Horvat) but he had drafts were the Canucks were not graduating anybody or not one played one game for the team - a whole draft.....  He was mainly building a team through trades & FA (but he did well finding Tanev in college FA) and most of the homegrown players (other than Horvat) was drafted or acquired by the Nonis & Burke regimes; so he did inherit a team that had players entering there prime and JB inherited mostly the same players in there prime or past it.  With hindsight, he did do some good things and he was perhaps the best person to lead the ship at that time after Nonis followed Burke to Toronto.

 

Both were first time GMs and by contrast (with hindsight) both had done some great things as well as some head scratchers.  Our first time owners are also still perhaps learning how to run a hockey team and their decisions moving forward is what is really going to matter; I do like there outside of the box apporach of giving unkowns or lesser knows there first shot to be a coach or GM or etc (probably just being cheap or prudent cause some people just need a legit chance and they blossom).  Never boring to be a Canuck fan - GCG !

 

Edited by ShawnAntoski
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Sbriggs said:

Im not saying he hasn't had success in some trades it just doesn't seem to be his strong suit

The two biggest issues people seem to have with Benning, as far as trades are concerned, are the Sutter and Gudbranson deals.   
 

In the case of Gudbranson, he was meant to be the Tanev replacement so that the Canucks would be able to trade Tanev at a premium.  Unfortunately, Gudbranson didn’t pan out.   The game started to change to a faster pace and Gudbranson didn’t adapt his game unfortunately.   Young physical stay at home RD’s are rarely ever made available, and so that’s why Benning took a calculated risk.   Gudbranson also had a pretty good year with Mitchell in that past season and so Benning figured he’d fit in our system quite well.

 

As far as Sutter goes, the guy had been durable as a horse for all of his career prior to coming to Vancouver.  He had been a selke trophy candidate, and had shown plenty of signs that he could be a decent “2A” calibre center unlike Bonino who has proven that he wasn’t quite second line material (Bonino is/was an excellent 3rd line center but can’t play top 6).    The idea was that Sutter and Horvat could each play the “2A” role with Horvat taking on more offensive deployment (more suitable to his game), while Sutter would take on more defensive match-ups. 
 

Unfortunately, Sutter became completely brittle upon arriving here and was never able to live up to his billing.   Horvat ended up having to take on a lot of the tough defensive match-ups even though that’s not a natural part of his game (Horvat, stylistically, is more of a power forward/Jason Arnott type than he is a Linden/Kesler type two way guy).   
 

long story short - Benning’s reasoning behind these moves was actually pretty good but these moves simply didn’t pan out.

 

That’s not to say that I blindly agree with everything Benning does.  I was not a fan of the Spooner and Gagner signings/trades whatsoever.

  • Hydration 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

Have to wonder if Benning would still have a job if there were fans in the stands this season?

 

It took one “fire Gillis” chant to end MG. By the next day, our reactive ownership had decided that Gillis was done.

 

One bad season, and they fired the GM who built the greatest contender in Canucks history. 6 seasons, 5 division titles, 2 Presidents’ trophies, 10 playoff rounds, and one trip to game seven of the SCF.


It took one bad season and a fan chant, and Mike Gillis was fired.

 

Benning has done some good things. I freely admit, I’ve never been a huge JB fan, but I’ve also never been a “hater.” I’d like to think I’m pretty fair in giving credit where it’s due, when it comes to JB. But when I look back over the totality of his record with the Canucks, I can’t help but think that he’s done far more things that would get the average NHL GM canned, and several times over during his tenure, than Gillis ever did in one failed season (when ownership installed Torts, reportedly against the wishes of their GM, and the new coach ended up burning the team to the ground in a single season).

 

JB really seems to have more lives than a cat. 

 

(Wonder if Benning knows where the Aquilinis bury the bodies of their undocumented blueberry pickers? :ph34r:)

 

But even with the mysteriously blessed existence JB has enjoyed, when it comes to his job security as the GM in Vancouver, I really have to wonder how the owners would react if the struggles this season led to “fire Benning” chants from the fans?

The prospect cupboard was bare, a roster full of NTC and there was no sustainable succession plan cause a legit prospect pipeline did not exist due to his drafts being mostly/all duds.  Ofcourse, it can be argued that he was not picking high in the draft and both of his top ten picks turned out (Hodgson & Horvat) but he had drafts were the Canucks were not graduating anybody to the big club (just look at the 2010 draft - abysmal).  Also, He was mainly building a team through trades & FA (but he did well finding Tanev in college FA) and most of the homegrown players (other than Hodgson & Horvat) was drafted or acquired by the Nonis & Burke regimes; so he did inherit a team that had players entering there prime and JB inherited mostly the same players in there prime or past it.  With hindsight, he did do some good things and he was perhaps the best person to lead the ship at that time after Nonis followed Burke to Toronto.

 

Both were first time GMs and by contrast (with hindsight) both had done some great things as well as some head scratchers; they each have there flaws and strenghts.  Our first time owners are also still perhaps learning how to run a hockey team and their decisions moving forward is what is really going to matter; I do (to a certain degree) like there outside of the box apporach - low risk high reward - of giving unkowns or lesser knows there first shot to be an NHL coach or GM or etc (probably just being cheap or prudent cause some people just really need a legit chance and they could blossom).  Currently, there is something going on internally cause the players are showing it on the ice based on how they are losing and the cap hell that JB had created for himself has not helped. Perhaps his rumoured failures of communication issue with the departed and current roster has perhaps cause the morale issue (where is Weisbrod a pass GM in all of this) or perhaps the players had tuned out the staff - lots of questions but the way they are losing is indicating that some changes need to happen.  

 

 Never boring to be a Canuck fan and sometimes I do feel like we are cursed - GCG !

Edited by ShawnAntoski
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, DarkIndianRises said:

The two biggest issues people seem to have with Benning, as far as trades are concerned, are the Sutter and Gudbranson deals.   
 

In the case of Gudbranson, he was meant to be the Tanev replacement so that the Canucks would be able to trade Tanev at a premium.  Unfortunately, Gudbranson didn’t pan out.   The game started to change to a faster pace and Gudbranson didn’t adapt his game unfortunately.   Young physical stay at home RD’s are rarely ever made available, and so that’s why Benning took a calculated risk.   Gudbranson also had a pretty good year with Mitchell in that past season and so Benning figured he’d fit in our system quite well.

 

As far as Sutter goes, the guy had been durable as a horse for all of his career prior to coming to Vancouver.  He had been a selke trophy candidate, and had shown plenty of signs that he could be a decent “2A” calibre center unlike Bonino who has proven that he wasn’t quite second line material (Bonino is/was an excellent 3rd line center but can’t play top 6).    The idea was that Sutter and Horvat could each play the “2A” role with Horvat taking on more offensive deployment (more suitable to his game), while Sutter would take on more defensive match-ups. 
 

Unfortunately, Sutter became completely brittle upon arriving here and was never able to live up to his billing.   Horvat ended up having to take on a lot of the tough defensive match-ups even though that’s not a natural part of his game (Horvat, stylistically, is more of a power forward/Jason Arnott type than he is a Linden/Kesler type two way guy).   
 

long story short - Benning’s reasoning behind these moves was actually pretty good but these moves simply didn’t pan out.

 

That’s not to say that I blindly agree with everything Benning does.  I was not a fan of the Spooner and Gagner signings/trades whatsoever.

Great context, hopefully he has learned to not make the same mistakes moving forward.  Perhaps a GM that has the background of an agent/lawyer (Gillis) and a scout (JB) would be a good replacement to take this core to the next step - hope JB gets to win with his core and pls replace Weisbrod cause he seems to be the type that is too much of a management schill.

Edited by ShawnAntoski
  • Hydration 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, ShawnAntoski said:

Great context, hopefully he has learned to not make the same mistakes moving forward. 

Thanks man.    You know what’s the most ironic thing right now?    All throughout Benning’s tenure, his critics critiqued him for....

 

1) Being only focused on the short term without considering the big picture.

2) Committing to expensive vets while “burying” the kids (in actuality, the vets were brought in because the kids in the system weren’t ready for those roles, and most of these kids ended up developing better by not being rushed).

 

Now - at present day - Benning has clearly emphasized the long term over the short term by committing to guys like Demko, Hoglander, and Podkolzin over Markstrom, Toffoli, and Tanev, and is CLEARLY prioritizing kids over expensive vets now that the actual kids in the system are ready for said roles, and he’s being Flamed.     
 

What many people don’t realize is that Benning could have committed to guys like Toffoli, Tanev, and Markstrom had he TRULY wanted to, but that would have involved blowing up the prospect pool by using sweeteners to get rid of the “transitional” contracts.    The hell with that.  Benning wants this team to have a solid healthy prospect pool and he’s done exactly that.   
 

Edited by DarkIndianRises
  • Hydration 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DarkIndianRises said:

Thanks man.    You know what’s the most ironic thing right now?    All throughout Benning’s tenure, his critics critiqued him for....

 

1) Being only focused on the short term without considering the big picture.

2) Committing to expensive vets while “burying” the kids (in actuality, the vets were brought in because the kids in the system weren’t ready for those roles, and most of these kids ended up developing better by not being rushed).

 

Now - at present day - Benning has clearly emphasized the long term over the short term by committing to guys like Demko, Hoglander, and Podkolzin over Markstrom, Toffoli, and Tanev, and is CLEARLY prioritizing kids over expensive vets now that the actual kids in the system are ready for said roles, and he’s being Flamed.     
 

What many people don’t realize is that Benning could have committed to guys like Toffoli, Tanev, and Markstrom had he TRULY wanted to, but that would have involved blowing up the prospect pool by using sweeteners to get rid of the “transitional” contracts.    The hell with that.  Benning wants this team to have a solid healthy prospect pool and he’s done exactly that.   
 

Well said and great discussion.  The decisions/reasoning with context makes sense and with hindsight, it did not work out but (I agree) cleaning up those salaries would had cost the too much of the future....

Edited by ShawnAntoski
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, DarkIndianRises said:

Thanks man.    You know what’s the most ironic thing right now?    All throughout Benning’s tenure, his critics critiqued him for....

 

1) Being only focused on the short term without considering the big picture.

2) Committing to expensive vets while “burying” the kids (in actuality, the vets were brought in because the kids in the system weren’t ready for those roles, and most of these kids ended up developing better by not being rushed).

 

Now - at present day - Benning has clearly emphasized the long term over the short term by committing to guys like Demko, Hoglander, and Podkolzin over Markstrom, Toffoli, and Tanev, and is CLEARLY prioritizing kids over expensive vets now that the actual kids in the system are ready for said roles, and he’s being Flamed.     
 

What many people don’t realize is that Benning could have committed to guys like Toffoli, Tanev, and Markstrom had he TRULY wanted to, but that would have involved blowing up the prospect pool by using sweeteners to get rid of the “transitional” contracts.    The hell with that.  Benning wants this team to have a solid healthy prospect pool and he’s done exactly that.   
 

Ironic yes....

 

The prospect pool is ranked 18th now, blowing what up? Aside from Nils and Pods, we're pretty bare.  https://theathletic.com/2337070/2021/01/24/canucks-nhl-prospect-pool-rankings-2021/#:~:text=NHL prospect pool rankings%3A No. 18 Vancouver Canucks – The Athletic

 

He also didn't need to blow apart the pool to keep Toffoli. Sign a cheaper back up, don't qualify Jake, buyout sutter, he had moves. It was a lack of communication and planning on his part when he got distracted by OEL and 'ran out of time'.

 

Benning was still doing the short term moves as recent as less than a year ago, he traded a 1st for Miller and a 2nd and Madden for Toffoli. He literally didn't even try to think forward until the cap situation he dug himself into smacked him in the face last October.

 

It's not hindsight. There is no foresight with this management group and they need to be held accountable.  We thought he learned his lesson with Loui, and he goes out to sign Myers and Ferland three years later. Myers at 6 mil for 5 more years is not a transitional contract. Taking Schmidt at 5.9 mil for another 4 years is not transitional. 

 

It is true there is an opportunity to restructure this team in the next two years, but I don't want to put that in the hands of a management group that's dug us into this hole.

 

He's been given 7 years already, they're already the second longest serving front office in our franchise history and with two playoff appearances out of seven, while the last group only got fired after missing one. And we're on board with giving a below average GM the leash of a great one?

 

The hell with that. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by DSVII
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, DarkIndianRises said:

The two biggest issues people seem to have with Benning, as far as trades are concerned, are the Sutter and Gudbranson deals.   
 

In the case of Gudbranson, he was meant to be the Tanev replacement so that the Canucks would be able to trade Tanev at a premium.  Unfortunately, Gudbranson didn’t pan out.   The game started to change to a faster pace and Gudbranson didn’t adapt his game unfortunately.   Young physical stay at home RD’s are rarely ever made available, and so that’s why Benning took a calculated risk.   Gudbranson also had a pretty good year with Mitchell in that past season and so Benning figured he’d fit in our system quite well.

 

As far as Sutter goes, the guy had been durable as a horse for all of his career prior to coming to Vancouver.  He had been a selke trophy candidate, and had shown plenty of signs that he could be a decent “2A” calibre center unlike Bonino who has proven that he wasn’t quite second line material (Bonino is/was an excellent 3rd line center but can’t play top 6).    The idea was that Sutter and Horvat could each play the “2A” role with Horvat taking on more offensive deployment (more suitable to his game), while Sutter would take on more defensive match-ups. 
 

Unfortunately, Sutter became completely brittle upon arriving here and was never able to live up to his billing.   Horvat ended up having to take on a lot of the tough defensive match-ups even though that’s not a natural part of his game (Horvat, stylistically, is more of a power forward/Jason Arnott type than he is a Linden/Kesler type two way guy).   
 

long story short - Benning’s reasoning behind these moves was actually pretty good but these moves simply didn’t pan out.

 

That’s not to say that I blindly agree with everything Benning does.  I was not a fan of the Spooner and Gagner signings/trades whatsoever.

Im sure he had good intentions but we all know that no GM bats 100%. Sutter is a good player he just hasn't been healthy and is over paid like other on the bottom six. I think JB should of had a plan for Tafolli, to make that trade and loose him in free agency really hurts and not just because Tafolli has roasted us on the ice

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, DSVII said:

Ironic yes....

 

The prospect pool is ranked 18th now, blowing what up? Aside from Nils and Pods, we're pretty bare.  https://theathletic.com/2337070/2021/01/24/canucks-nhl-prospect-pool-rankings-2021/#:~:text=NHL prospect pool rankings%3A No. 18 Vancouver Canucks – The Athletic

 

He also didn't need to blow apart the pool to keep Toffoli. Sign a cheaper back up, don't qualify Jake, buyout sutter, he had moves. It was a lack of communication and planning on his part when he got distracted by OEL and 'ran out of time'.

 

Benning was still doing the short term moves as recent as less than a year ago, he traded a 1st for Miller and a 2nd and Madden for Toffoli. He literally didn't even try to think forward until the cap situation he dug himself into smacked him in the face last October.

 

It's not hindsight. There is no foresight with this management group and they need to be held accountable.  We thought he learned his lesson with Loui, and he goes out to sign Myers and Ferland three years later. Myers at 6 mil for 5 more years is not a transitional contract. Taking Schmidt at 5.9 mil for another 4 years is not transitional. 

 

It is true there is an opportunity to restructure this team in the next two years, but I don't want to put that in the hands of a management group that's dug us into this hole.

 

He's been given 7 years already, they're already the second longest serving front office in our franchise history and with two playoff appearances out of seven, while the last group only got fired after missing one. And we're on board with giving a below average GM the leash of a great one?

 

The hell with that. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I don't understand how Benning could admit that he "ran out of time" when it came to some of the other UFA's they had to deal with. That just simply sounded unprofessional. You are a GM of a multi-billion dollar organization, and you ran out of time?? 

 

Like, what the &^@# were you doing all off-season that you didn't have time to sign Toffoli and Stetcher? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Timråfan said:

Everything I've read on this forum seems to lead directly to Gillis in one way or another.

Same argument about why Green is so good is what made Gillis good.

 

The stage is set with a brilliant core to let Gillis come back, older and wiser.

 

I don't bother with the Benning apologisers on this forum. They are either stupid or paid. 

They can also be damaged goods after some time at HF :bigblush:

No to Gillis, his Luongo contract and his $3mill recapture is currently still hunting and damaging the team. And that was more than 9 years ago when it was signed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, N4ZZY said:

I don't understand how Benning could admit that he "ran out of time" when it came to some of the other UFA's they had to deal with. That just simply sounded unprofessional. You are a GM of a multi-billion dollar organization, and you ran out of time?? 

 

Like, what the &^@# were you doing all off-season that you didn't have time to sign Toffoli and Stetcher? 

 

JB is a horrible communicator. Maybe that is why he kind of suck for the most part in negotiations.

Probably someone who will do way better as president of hockey ops rather than the active manager. 

Edited by 24K PureCool
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...