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

[Edited] Bottom 5 Finish Now in Reach!

Rate this topic


Provost

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Dazzle said:

Drafting is way higher than a B. It's likely the only reason why Benning still isn't fired for the failures. That being said, this has always been a long term thing in the making. The curse of having Gillis as your GM. And the hilarity of people wanting him back.

Come up with some evidence for your belief that he is doing better than just "above average" in his drafting to deserve higher than a B.  A "B' means pretty decent... though not excellent.

How many later picks are making meaningful contributions at the top of the lineup?  What percentage of his top 10 picks would be drafted at the same spot or higher if a redraft was done?  How much did he fare better than the other draft lists in the years he picked the players he did?  I did a bunch of that work and he came out above average, but not excellent.

Where is the later round steal like Tampa always gets?  Who outside of the first couple rounds is at the top of our roster?  for Tampa half their top contributors were picked outside the top of the draft... Point picked in the 3rd round, Palat picked in the 7th round, Killorn picked in the 3rd round, Cirelli picked in the 3rd round, Kucherov picked right at the end of the 2nd round (56th overall). 

Save the "A" grades for the actual excellent draft records... not for the "above average" one Benning has.  Do some actual legwork to support your opinions.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Provost said:

Come up with some evidence for your belief that he is doing better than just "above average" in his drafting to deserve higher than a B.  A "B' means pretty decent... though not excellent.

How many later picks are making meaningful contributions at the top of the lineup?  What percentage of his top 10 picks would be drafted at the same spot or higher if a redraft was done?  How much did he fare better than the other draft lists in the years he picked the players he did?  I did a bunch of that work and he came out above average, but not excellent.

Where is the later round steal like Tampa always gets?  Who outside of the first couple rounds is at the top of our roster?  for Tampa half their top contributors were picked outside the top of the draft... Point picked in the 3rd round, Palat picked in the 7th round, Killorn picked in the 3rd round, Cirelli picked in the 3rd round, Kucherov picked right at the end of the 2nd round (56th overall). 

Save the "A" grades for the actual excellent draft records... not for the "above average" one Benning has.  Do some actual legwork to support your opinions.

Gaudette's pretty successful, yes? The thing is, Tampa Bay has always been good with scouting. Vancouver on the other hand, until Benning, was extremely inconsistent.

 

Furthermore, some teams are just luckier. Hansen was a great pick in hindsight, but you cannot gauge super late picks as the sole basis of drafting success. Benning has had a player so far in the draft show up in the NHL. That in itself is a success of some kind. A-. 

 

If you actually look back, Gillis did horrible. I would go as far as to say we are still in this mess of losing partially because of Gillis.

 

Edited by Dazzle
  • RoughGame 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Dazzle said:

Gaudette's pretty successful, yes? The thing is, Tampa Bay has always been good with scouting. Vancouver on the other hand, until 

Ummm... Gaudette has been stapled to the press box and isn’t producing at all.  If that is the rousing success outside the top end of the draft, you have made my point pretty eloquently.  Our “steal” can’t hold down a 3rd line role when the alternative competition is an aging journeyman in Sutter who could be waived and not picked up by most teams in the league.

 

Yes, Tampa is excellent at drafting.  That is why they get an A and Benning doesn’t. that is how grades work, you don’t get to discount someone for being good.  Go around the league and you will find several teams with guys selected later in the draft who are playing pivotal roles for their teams... we don’t have that.

 

Benning has been inconsistent.  As soon showed in a couple of threads... he has barely beaten the pack of random prospect ranking lists.  Of all his picks, Petterson is the clear win.  Hughes gets picked by almost everyone at that spot... Virtanen and Juolevi get replaced by either Ehlers/Nylander and Tkachuk by almost every other list.  Benning is hitting about 50% on those top 10 picks compared with everyone else.  50% isn’t an “A”

 

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, khay said:

Botterill gave 9mil to Skinner after one season of 40 goals not to mention other messes.

 

Chayka really wasn't even qualified for the job. He wasn't some methodical numbers guy, only that he wanted to be seen as such and the Coyotes got fooled.

 

In contrast to these two, JB has not made any real big mess. His biggest screw ups are signing bottom 6 guys to long term high dollar contracts and Eriksson, which didn't even matter until last off season since those contracts didn't get in the way until when it came to retaining Tanev and Toffoli. Signing Eriksson was to satisfy the owner's mandate to make the playoffs with the Sedins, so can't really blame him for that.

 

Other than cap management and allocation, I'd up his letter grades: A for amateur scouting  and B- for pro evaluation/trades/signings. That's why JB still has a job while Botterill and Chayka don't.

 

I don't think we have ever had a GM that finds NHL players in every draft, let alone superstars. Look no further than Calgary and Edmonton to learn how hard it is to draft stars when you don't have a top 3 pick. Edmonton would be in shambles if they didn't get lucky in 2014 with 3OA and 2015 with 1OA. If JB doesn't get A for amateur scouting, then I don't know who does? Tampa gets A+ for me but I can't think of any other team that finds an NHL player year in and year out.

 

When you evaluate signing aspect of JB's performance, you have to include RFAs like Horvat, Boeser, Motte, and Gaudette. If he didn't sign Roussel and Eriksson, his UFA signings would also be considered pretty good. Criticize Myers all you want but he is a big RHD who can move the puck and score points and he is nothing like Eriksson who was useless almost immediately. Beagle is sacrificing his body on the PK and on the 4th line. Is 3 mil a bit much? Yes, but we would have had to pay around 2 mil for veteran 4C like Beagle anyways so that's a saving of 1 mil, big deal! 

 

I agree that his cap allocation hasn't been great, which led to losing Tanev and Toffoli. Had Roussel been signed to a three year deal, we could have fit at least one of Toffoli or Tanev. He could have also try to find a way to dump some salary, for example, trading Virtanen (saves 2.25 mil) and Gaudette to dump Roussel (4 mil) but he wasn't able to. 

 

.I don't get the witch hunt on JB. I'm wondering if a lot of the criticism is from butt hurt Gillis fans. 

The Sedin's retired barely 2 years ago. JB didn't want to rebuild on old stars barely hanging on for glory. He beat them in Boston he knew their limitations. AQ wanted to give them another cup run.  WRONG CALL!  Everybody could see they were past their due date. AQ acquiesced to public pressure. Many on here wanted a last kick at the can. Many on here were wrong. And AQ should not have listened to them. We way overspent on Louie and bottom 6 help, and Baers might have been worth that 2nd but for his concussion. And sign Tryamkin please. We are barely out of the Sedin years and I for one am excited about a fresh start. Let Smyl mop up the year and play the kids. OJ and Mac for starters. 

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Provost said:

Ummm... Gaudette has been stapled to the press box and isn’t producing at all.  If that is the rousing success outside the top end of the draft, you have made my point pretty eloquently.  Our “steal” can’t hold down a 3rd line role when the alternative competition is an aging journeyman in Sutter who could be waived and not picked up by most teams in the league.

 

Yes, Tampa is excellent at drafting.  That is why they get an A and Benning doesn’t. that is how grades work, you don’t get to discount someone for being good.  Go around the league and you will find several teams with guys selected later in the draft who are playing pivotal roles for their teams... we don’t have that.

 

Benning has been inconsistent.  As soon showed in a couple of threads... he has barely beaten the pack of random prospect ranking lists.  Of all his picks, Petterson is the clear win.  Hughes gets picked by almost everyone at that spot... Virtanen and Juolevi get replaced by either Ehlers/Nylander and Tkachuk by almost every other list.  Benning is hitting about 50% on those top 10 picks compared with everyone else.  50% isn’t an “A”

 

Player development is as important as drafting.  Look no further than Markstrom.  Hiring the wrong NHL head coaches...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Dazzle said:

Gaudette's pretty successful, yes? The thing is, Tampa Bay has always been good with scouting. Vancouver on the other hand, until Benning, was extremely inconsistent.

 

Furthermore, some teams are just luckier. Hansen was a great pick in hindsight, but you cannot gauge super late picks as the sole basis of drafting success. Benning has had a player so far in the draft show up in the NHL. That in itself is a success of some kind. A-. 

 

If you actually look back, Gillis did horrible. I would go as far as to say we are still in this mess of losing partially because of Gillis.

 

I'm not sure what the point of citing players that were drafted in 2007 (Killorn) is - that was literally 5 GMs ago.  He was taken by the Jay Feaster - since him there has been Brian Lawton, Tom Kurvers, Yzerman and now Brisebois.  We may as well be talking about Alex Edler as a 3rd round pick...

Palat and Kucherov were drafted in 2011 - 10 years ago - just after the Canucks went to the Finals....

Point and Cirelli were great picks (in 2014 and 15)....Yzermans's 4th and 5th years in Tampa.

Demko, Tryamkin, Gaudette (Forsling) is a pretty solid take outside the 1st, from Benning's first two drafts...

Aside from those drafts - it's still too early to say with a lot of prospects.  Perhaps we can 'judge' players like Jasek, Lockwood, or Brisebois at this point.

But Dipietro is far too young a goaltender to judge.  Rathbone is a 21 yr old defenseman.  Lind is the kind of talent you wait to see what he's capable of once he's truly healthy (ala Juolevi).  Woo is just old enough to step into the AHL (5 career pro games thus far).

Hoglander sure looks like a steal at 40. 

The past 3 or 4 drafts are too early to judge.  Guys like Costmar and McDonagh look promising but so far from the pro game let alone attempting to predict if they'll ever be NHL ready/players.

But when you look at Hoglander in his draft +2 season, DiPietro, Gaudette, Demko, (Tryamkin), and a few additional prospects that upticked and were traded...that is a pretty good draft record with relative longshot picks.   Realistically, Juolevi's draft  was Benning's 3rd - and he's only 22 years old and just cutting his teeth in the NHL - so it's pretty premature to be judging the overall draft record.   Comparing it to a draft record of 5 GMs including picks made in 2007, or 2011 though - isn't exactly a level playing ground - and would go back to the Nonis era - who was here when Killorn was drafted.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, oldnews said:

I'm not sure what the point of citing players that were drafted in 2007 (Killorn) is - that was literally 5 GMs ago.  He was taken by the Jay Feaster - since him there has been Brian Lawton, Tom Kurvers, Yzerman and now Brisebois.  We may as well be talking about Alex Edler as a 3rd round pick...

Palat and Kucherov were drafted in 2011 - 10 years ago - just after the Canucks went to the Finals....

Point and Cirelli were great picks (in 2014 and 15)....Yzermans's 4th and 5th years in Tampa.

Demko, Tryamkin, Gaudette (Forsling) is a pretty solid take outside the 1st, from Benning's first two drafts...

Aside from those drafts - it's still too early to say with a lot of prospects.  Perhaps we can 'judge' players like Jasek, Lockwood, or Brisebois at this point.

But Dipietro is far too young a goaltender to judge.  Rathbone is a 21 yr old defenseman.  Lind is the kind of talent you wait to see what he's capable of once he's truly healthy (ala Juolevi).  Woo is just old enough to step into the AHL (5 career pro games thus far).

Hoglander sure looks like a steal at 40. 

The past 3 or 4 drafts are too early to judge.  Guys like Costmar and McDonagh look promising but so far from the pro game let alone attempting to predict if they'll ever be NHL ready/players.

But when you look at Hoglander in his draft +2 season, DiPietro, Gaudette, Demko, (Tryamkin), and a few additional prospects that upticked and were traded...that is a pretty good draft record with relative longshot picks.   Realistically, Juolevi's draft  was Benning's 3rd - and he's only 22 years old and just cutting his teeth in the NHL - so it's pretty premature to be judging the overall draft record.   Comparing it to a draft record of 5 GMs including picks made in 2007, or 2011 though - isn't exactly a level playing ground - and would go back to the Nonis era - who was here when Killorn was drafted.

Weren't you shutting up and putting me on ignore and not posting negative responses to my posts?  Lied about your "deal" yet again I see.  I guess more fool me for letting other folks convince me you had changed your stripes.

The first post of yours I uncover from being hidden/ignored and it is more nonsense.  Maybe bow out of a thread gracefully when literally every other post you put in it has been shown to be absolutely wrong?

You as always take some detail to try to create a false argument as you have no actual substance to work with.  Brayden Point taken in 2014 after Benning had 4 picks in the same draft.  Find a Benning comparable... I will wait.
How about Cirelli..picked 72nd overall in 2015, where is our comparable... I will wait.
 
How about even Matthew Joseph from theer 4th round (120th overall) in 2015?  He is a just a tiny, minor victory in their terms for a late pick who is playing regular games and is out producing our big victory Gaudette by a long shot... even if you combine both Gaudette and our 1st rounder Virtanen.  They have a couple other players from recent drafts playing regular minutes for them already.

Only you could try to create some false narrative that Tampa's great consistent drafting can be discounted as an argument by trying to cherry pick out something and weave and entirely false narrative.

Being shown to be wrong and a liar (again) within a few days.  You can stop with your weird stalking crush on me anytime there sparky.
(Narrator: Sparky could not, in fact, stop with his weird stalking crush on Provost)

@Gurn
@grandmaster
@ibatch

Next time keep this in mind when his fake offer comes up again.... he could stop anytime, but won't.

 

Oldnews.pdf

Edited by Provost
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Provost said:

Weren't you shutting up and putting me on ignore and not posting negative responses to my posts?  Lied about your "deal" yet again I see.  I guess more fool me for letting other folks convince me you had changed your stripes.

The first post of yours I uncover from being hidden/ignored and it is more nonsense.  Maybe bow out of a thread gracefully when literally every other post you put in it has been shown to be absolutely wrong?

Being shown to be wrong and a liar (again) within a few days.  You can stop with your weird stalking crush on me anytime there sparky.

I missed the part where you agreed to any of the options. 

 

In fact you didn't - you  just prattled on, as you are here once again.

 

So spare the "lied" about your deal nonsense - as usual - you weren't able to accept any kind of detente.

 

No need to launch back into your hysterical responses - 'lied to', fooled, stripes, nonsense, bow out, obsession with binary concepts of 'right and wrong', "liar", stalking, crush, "sparky".

For someone that plays victim as much as you do, you can sure load a lot of passive aggressive drivel into a few lines.

 

Nothing I said in my conversation with Dazzle was particularly contestible, aggressive, or offensive.

 

Get over yourself.

 

 

  • RoughGame 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, khay said:

His biggest screw ups are signing bottom 6 guys to long term high dollar contracts and Eriksson, which didn't even matter until last off season since those contracts didn't get in the way until when it came to retaining Tanev and Toffoli

Such a shallow (and wrong) evaluation.

 

Did you need someone like Bob McKenzie to make an official tweet that says "Canucks were going to sign or trade for X star player but couldn't because of their bad contracts"?

 

Open cap space is an extremely valuable asset.

 

Imagine you paid $20,000 for a car you don't even drive and don't intend to drive in the future. Would you rather have this car or $20,000 in cash that you can spend on something you actually need or invest it for the future?

 

The signings/trades/etc. we could have made with better asset management? Possibilities are endless. 

 

7 years of no shrewdness, no cap weaponization, no taking advantage of other teams' problems other than the Schmidt trade but we had to lose Tanev to do that anyway because of our own cap problems (which a rebuilding dumpster fire team should never have).

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, kanucks25 said:

 

7 years of no shrewdness

pretty good use of picks I'd say. 

 

1 minute ago, kanucks25 said:

 

, no cap weaponization,

I keep seeing this criticism, but please explain when that would have been possible? certainly not under Linden. I also think its never really been that successful of a strategy. Who has really hit a home run with that? Maybe Carolina with TO, but give me a list of how many times this has been a killer strategy. 

 

1 minute ago, kanucks25 said:

no taking advantage of other teams' problems other than the Schmidt trade but we had to lose Tanev to do that anyway because of our own cap problems (which a rebuilding dumpster fire team should never have).

losing Tanev's 4 year deal isn't a bad thing. I would have loved him for two, but Calgary paid him too much term. 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, oldnews said:

I'm not sure what the point of citing players that were drafted in 2007 (Killorn) is - that was literally 5 GMs ago.  He was taken by the Jay Feaster - since him there has been Brian Lawton, Tom Kurvers, Yzerman and now Brisebois.  We may as well be talking about Alex Edler as a 3rd round pick...

Palat and Kucherov were drafted in 2011 - 10 years ago - just after the Canucks went to the Finals....

Point and Cirelli were great picks (in 2014 and 15)....Yzermans's 4th and 5th years in Tampa.

Demko, Tryamkin, Gaudette (Forsling) is a pretty solid take outside the 1st, from Benning's first two drafts...

Aside from those drafts - it's still too early to say with a lot of prospects.  Perhaps we can 'judge' players like Jasek, Lockwood, or Brisebois at this point.

But Dipietro is far too young a goaltender to judge.  Rathbone is a 21 yr old defenseman.  Lind is the kind of talent you wait to see what he's capable of once he's truly healthy (ala Juolevi).  Woo is just old enough to step into the AHL (5 career pro games thus far).

Hoglander sure looks like a steal at 40. 

The past 3 or 4 drafts are too early to judge.  Guys like Costmar and McDonagh look promising but so far from the pro game let alone attempting to predict if they'll ever be NHL ready/players.

But when you look at Hoglander in his draft +2 season, DiPietro, Gaudette, Demko, (Tryamkin), and a few additional prospects that upticked and were traded...that is a pretty good draft record with relative longshot picks.   Realistically, Juolevi's draft  was Benning's 3rd - and he's only 22 years old and just cutting his teeth in the NHL - so it's pretty premature to be judging the overall draft record.   Comparing it to a draft record of 5 GMs including picks made in 2007, or 2011 though - isn't exactly a level playing ground - and would go back to the Nonis era - who was here when Killorn was drafted.

Really this is just a much longer post than necessarily, comes off like a façade to hide the facts.

 

It's extremely bleak outside the 2nd round; all the players you've named are either fringe NHLers or not old enough yet to become fringe NHLers or worse. It's as simple as that. Change the criteria to top-40 and it's a wasteland.

 

20-40 has actually been a strong spot for Benning, you've got to wonder why he hasn't prioritized acquiring picks in this range.

 

You've got to wonder about a lot of things.

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

20 hours ago, khay said:

Botterill gave 9mil to Skinner after one season of 40 goals not to mention other messes.

 

Chayka really wasn't even qualified for the job. He wasn't some methodical numbers guy, only that he wanted to be seen as such and the Coyotes got fooled.

 

In contrast to these two, JB has not made any real big mess. His biggest screw ups are signing bottom 6 guys to long term high dollar contracts and Eriksson, which didn't even matter until last off season since those contracts didn't get in the way until when it came to retaining Tanev and Toffoli. Signing Eriksson was to satisfy the owner's mandate to make the playoffs with the Sedins, so can't really blame him for that.

 

Other than cap management and allocation, I'd up his letter grades: A for amateur scouting  and B- for pro evaluation/trades/signings. That's why JB still has a job while Botterill and Chayka don't.

 

I don't think we have ever had a GM that finds NHL players in every draft, let alone superstars. Look no further than Calgary and Edmonton to learn how hard it is to draft stars when you don't have a top 3 pick. Edmonton would be in shambles if they didn't get lucky in 2014 with 3OA and 2015 with 1OA. If JB doesn't get A for amateur scouting, then I don't know who does? Tampa gets A+ for me but I can't think of any other team that finds an NHL player year in and year out.

 

When you evaluate signing aspect of JB's performance, you have to include RFAs like Horvat, Boeser, Motte, and Gaudette. If he didn't sign Roussel and Eriksson, his UFA signings would also be considered pretty good. Criticize Myers all you want but he is a big RHD who can move the puck and score points and he is nothing like Eriksson who was useless almost immediately. Beagle is sacrificing his body on the PK and on the 4th line. Is 3 mil a bit much? Yes, but we would have had to pay around 2 mil for veteran 4C like Beagle anyways so that's a saving of 1 mil, big deal! 

 

I agree that his cap allocation hasn't been great, which led to losing Tanev and Toffoli. Had Roussel been signed to a three year deal, we could have fit at least one of Toffoli or Tanev. He could have also try to find a way to dump some salary, for example, trading Virtanen (saves 2.25 mil) and Gaudette to dump Roussel (4 mil) but he wasn't able to. 

 

I agree - there's a point at which banging the drum over Eriksson has spent it's shelf life.  I wasn't thrilled with the Roussel signing either - but I'm not going to dwell on those any more than the other factors - Luongo recrap, expansion draft and Covid cap stall - all which have also played into what I think were necessary decisions last summer.  I probably would have done what's necessary to re-sign Tanev - but moving cap was a very rare occurance league-wide this offseason.

And I've come around to letting Tanev go.  If the team can find the right young RHD partner for him moving forward - it could actually turn out better when it really matters - ie in a few years and thereafter when this core is beginning to approach it's prime.

Which leads back to the cap point - that they have all of Eriksson, Pearson, Roussel, Sutter, Beagle, Edler, Holtby, Benn, Hamonic, Baerstchi, Spooner and the Luongo penalty expiring this year and next - about 39 million in cap space clearing in the next two offseasons - and 3.5 million of LTIR with Ferland (if he doesn't retire).

So there's not really any reason to panic about this team's trajectory - whatsoever.

 

Really - a whole lot of it boils down to premature expectations in the short term.  

 

For me there's also some irony in the outrage that the team did not recommit to 4-6 year terms for veterans - instead integrating Hoglander, Juolevi, Demko into the lineup.   It's looking a whole lot like this market did not in fact have the stomach for a rething/transition/(semantics of the 'rebuild).

Must win now!   Not exactly realistic - or an imperative that I share.  And the whole panic over when to call this a season - is also overblown - there isn't really that much at stake - particularly if we take the opinion that the bottom six suck so badly seriously at all.  That leaves precisely one Tanner Pearson to sell - for probably a mid-range asset at best - and literally no way of knowing whether selling him today would be any more possible, or bring a better return, than selling him in a month would.  So much noise though.

Edited by oldnews
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
  • RoughGame 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

Really this is just a much longer post than necessarily, comes off like a façade to hide the facts.

 

It's extremely bleak outside the 2nd round; all the players you've named are either fringe NHLers or not old enough yet to become fringe NHLers or worse. It's as simple as that. Change the criteria to top-40 and it's a wasteland.

 

20-40 has actually been a strong spot for Benning, you've got to wonder why he hasn't prioritized acquiring picks in this range.

 

You've got to wonder about a lot of things.

cool string of unsubstantiated one-liners.  ironic that you refer to a post as too long when you have four lines of substance-free, pointlessness there.

  • RoughGame 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

pretty good use of picks I'd say. 

 

I keep seeing this criticism, but please explain when that would have been possible? certainly not under Linden. I also think its never really been that successful of a strategy. Who has really hit a home run with that? Maybe Carolina with TO, but give me a list of how many times this has been a killer strategy. 

 

losing Tanev's 4 year deal isn't a bad thing. I would have loved him for two, but Calgary paid him too much term. 

the weaponization of cap is an interesting debate.

I look at other teams in a position to 'weaponize' their cap - and what did they do?  Ottawa, for example, spent a 2nd to take on 6.5 million Stepan.   A 5th for $4 millon Gud.  A 4th for Watson.  They got a 2nd for eating Coburn and Paquette - but really, if they'd prioritized 'cap weaponization' you'd think they could have eaten some real garbage for a lot more gain than that.

Arizona did some comparable things - the analyticz geniuses in Arizona - who acquired Stepan in the first place at the price of a top 10 pick....ate Kessel for no real gain.  Ate the Datsyuk deal, and threw in a 2nd round pick to trade up 4 mere spots...

You have to ask yourself how popular (or effective) the "weaponization of cap" i eating cap dumps for assets - has actually been....

The #proper-rebuild had to give up a 1st to dump on year of Marleau....

Not sure if Benning deserves the disproportionate, perhaps fishbowl take on his cap failures.  There are literally Loui Erikssons all over the place in the NHL.

  • Cheers 3
  • RoughGame 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

pretty good use of picks I'd say. 

How so?

 

33 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

I keep seeing this criticism, but please explain when that would have been possible? certainly not under Linden. I also think its never really been that successful of a strategy. Who has really hit a home run with that? Maybe Carolina with TO, but give me a list of how many times this has been a killer strategy. 

It's possible whenever you have cap space and you're not looking to immediately contend.

 

It's not the only strategy that you need, but having some extra 2nd and 3rd round picks and B prospects in the system doesn't hurt. Just more chances that one hits (like Hoglander, for example).

 

I'm not a huge fan of Benning's drafting but if you're someone that is, you ought to advocate he plays to his strength. It's only logical.

 

38 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

losing Tanev's 4 year deal isn't a bad thing. I would have loved him for two, but Calgary paid him too much term. 

I dunno. Tanev was pretty important to this team, both his contributions on the ice and what he brought off the ice (leader by example, well-liked, Hughes' boy).

 

I find it confusing that so many people have defended the mid and long-term veteran signings of depth/support players and then also support the letting go of an important veteran when we're supposed to be on the uptick?

 

Bad contracts should have been cleared out in years 1, 2, 3, 4... we shouldn't be letting go of valuable pieces before we even become a contender. That should come after Cup runs.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

Really this is just a much longer post than necessarily, comes off like a façade to hide the facts.

 

It's extremely bleak outside the 2nd round; all the players you've named are either fringe NHLers or not old enough yet to become fringe NHLers or worse. It's as simple as that. Change the criteria to top-40 and it's a wasteland.

 

20-40 has actually been a strong spot for Benning, you've got to wonder why he hasn't prioritized acquiring picks in this range.

 

You've got to wonder about a lot of things.

Get used to it...  that is the main trick.

Ignore most of a post because it is objectively true... but take one some meaningless detail of it to weave some false narrative.  A lie is defined as trying to create a false or misleading impression, and these are just straight up lies.

Yes Tampa Bay has an excellent drafting record... much better than ours.  It went farther back than before our GM was hired, and kept going in the years since Benning has been on the job here.  That was the post he was lying about (see above dictionary definition), even he isn't so blind to objective reality to not be able to acknowledge that truth... he just wants to spin and mislead by creating strawmen arguments to hide his bad subjective opinions. 

Pick any metric, find objective facts to back them up, and figure out a grade for Benning's drafting.  It all leads to him being at best an above average (B level) drafter, and not at all near the top of the class in that aspect... which is his best attribute as a GM. 

He is spotty on high end draft picks (I did an exhaustive post about the various public draft lists available at the time of his drafts and he was better than more than half, but worse than some others... no one reasonable could argue that Virtanen and Juolevi would be drafted as high now... even if they do turn out to be regular NHLers. Petterson was a clear huge win by Benning to offset those bad picks).  He hasn't found any significant contributors later in the draft... Gaudette being the high point so far?  That is like when Benning was holding up Brisebois as the example of how well the organization is doing in player development... really that is the highlight example?  Other teams have done better, other teams have done worse.  I also posted a well researched article about how often 2nd and 3rd round players "hit" on average... we aren't there yet.

No one saying that Benning deserves an "A" in his drafting has come up with any objective facts to back up their subjective assertions.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, oldnews said:

the weaponization of cap is an interesting debate.

I look at other teams in a position to 'weaponize' their cap - and what did they do?  Ottawa, for example, spent a 2nd to take on 6.5 million Stepan.   A 5th for $4 millon Gud.  A 4th for Watson.  They got a 2nd for eating Coburn and Paquette - but really, if they'd prioritized 'cap weaponization' you'd think they could have eaten some real garbage for a lot more gain than that.

Arizona did some comparable things - the analyticz geniuses in Arizona - who acquired Stepan in the first place at the price of a top 10 pick....ate Kessel for no real gain.  Ate the Datsyuk deal, and threw in a 2nd round pick to trade up 4 mere spots...

You have to ask yourself how popular (or effective) the "weaponization of cap" i eating cap dumps for assets - has actually been....

The #proper-rebuild had to give up a 1st to dump on year of Marleau....

Not sure if Benning deserves the disproportionate, perhaps fishbowl take on his cap failures.  There are literally Loui Erikssons all over the place in the NHL.

Really just another wall of text that muddies the waters instead of offering any sort of legitimate argument.

 

The Stepan and Kessel trades to Arizona were not cap dump trades.

 

The Datsyuk trade was a bad one by Arizona, that doesn't mean all cap dump trades are bad / offer bad value (plus they obviously targeted Chychrun there and I doubt they're regretting right now).

 

What's wrong with another 2nd round pick or B prospect, for example, to add to the organization for cap space you don't intend to use and/or aren't anticipating better value for it in the future? Yeah, sometimes picks and prospects don't work out, but that's a part of the deal. That doesn't mean it's still not a good idea to trade for picks and make picks.

 

22 minutes ago, oldnews said:

The #proper-rebuild had to give up a 1st to dump on year of Marleau....

Carolina got good value here; Toronto's rebuild strategy is irrelevant to topic at hand.

 

Oh, and speaking of Carolina, seems like they have also enjoyed getting Teravainen out of that Bickell cap dump. The same deal that was rumored to be offered to us for Hamhuis at "that" deadline (and Hamhuis reportedly agreed to waive for Chicago, so no NTC issues there).

 

26 minutes ago, oldnews said:

Not sure if Benning deserves the disproportionate, perhaps fishbowl take on his cap failures.  There are literally Loui Erikssons all over the place in the NHL.

Of course he doesn't deserve the negativity, not after all the banners he's put up at Rogers. How dare we?

 

Grave injustice. :emot-parrot:

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

1 hour ago, oldnews said:

I missed the part where you agreed to any of the options. 

 

In fact you didn't - you  just prattled on, as you are here once again.

 

So spare the "lied" about your deal nonsense - as usual - you weren't able to accept any kind of detente.

 

No need to launch back into your hysterical responses - 'lied to', fooled, stripes, nonsense, bow out, obsession with binary concepts of 'right and wrong', "liar", stalking, crush, "sparky".

For someone that plays victim as much as you do, you can sure load a lot of passive aggressive drivel into a few lines.

 

Nothing I said in my conversation with Dazzle was particularly contestible, aggressive, or offensive.

 

Get over yourself.

 

 

So you respond to a post by Dazzle and Provost gets upset?

The world is a strange place.

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

Again... by exactly quoting and referencing my post and cherry picking parts of it to mislead and create a lie by creating a false narrative and inventing an entirely new strawman argument by taking a tangent on something I never said.

Nice try at being disingenuous there... there are other words that will come to mind to describe that... 
 

3 hours ago, Provost said:


Where is the later round steal like Tampa always gets?  Who outside of the first couple rounds is at the top of our roster?  for Tampa half their top contributors were picked outside the top of the draft... Point picked in the 3rd round, Palat picked in the 7th round, Killorn picked in the 3rd round, Cirelli picked in the 3rd round, Kucherov picked right at the end of the 2nd round (56th overall). 

Save the "A" grades for the actual excellent draft records... not for the "above average" one Benning has.  Do some actual legwork to support your opinions.

 

1 hour ago, oldnews said:

I'm not sure what the point of citing players that were drafted in 2007 (Killorn) is - that was literally 5 GMs ago.  

 

4 minutes ago, gurn said:

So you respond to a post by Dazzle and Provost gets upset?

The world is a strange place.

lie

 verb

\ ˈlī  \

Definition of lie

intransitive verb

 to create a false or misleading impression

  • Haha 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...