Calgary/Vancouver Evaluation - updated 3/29/21 - CAL TIED WITH VAN

[kanucks25]

3 hours ago, Dazzle said:

but bashing the same GM for long term contracts that anchor a roster.

Well, we can agree that "anchor" is the operative word.

[kanucks25]

3 hours ago, Dazzle said:

Hindsight is 20/20.

Trying to decide what the slogan for Benning's tenure should be.

 

It's either ^that, something about the importance of age-gap, or "rebuilds aren't linear".

[kanucks25]

2 hours ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

Yet Buffalo has had 3 GM's during Bennings tenure, and are probably farther away from winning a cup. Despite a 1st overall pick and 8 top 10 picks. 

And Buffalo has had no playoff games since 2011, and Buffalo is closing in on one decade since making the playoffs. 

 

 

WHO CARES

 

WE ARE NOT BUFFALO

 

WE DO NOT ASPIRE TO BE BUFFALO

 

OUR GOAL SHOULD NOT BE "BE BETTER THAN BUFFALO"

 

HAVE BETTER STANDARDS, PLEASE

 

THANK YOU

[Dazzle]

1 hour ago, Alain Vigneault said:

The point is that it's not an excuse to sign 4th line players for crazy amounts.

 

As for St. Louis, yes, you're right, it is an extreme example because 1) it doesn't account for the fact that St. Louis had brought in O'Reilly during the summer and thus improved their team over the off-season and 2) also rode Binnington - a goalie that nobody had a book on - all the way to the summit.  At most, Berube put players into better positions to succeed.  He didn't suddenly make the players play better.  He was doing what Mike Yeo was supposed to do.  When you compare it to our team, we got worse over the off-season and we were never a great team to begin with.  Firing Green is futile for that reason.

 

Why are you bringing up Gillis?  My original point was that it was wrong to suggest Benning inherited "nothing" as he quite literally inherited his future captain and starting goaltender that brought him his most success here.  This isn't a Gillis vs Benning thing, it's a statement of facts.

So using your logic, if O'Reilly was so successful, how did St. Louis end up so bad to begin with? Logic is supposed to work at all times, not when you think it's convenient.

 

Benning did inherit nothing. List the number of assets that Gillis left behind, including the number of draft picks that remained on the team before the transition. Ok?

 

[Dumb Nuck]

Dear parent(s):

 

With the school year almost half over we are sending you a review of your child and request you review and sign the report and return it ASAP

 

We regret to inform you that your child has been severely underperforming in almost all areas as per our review below:

 

Attention to detail: C-

Enthusiasm: F

Dedication: D+

Energy: D

Potential: A+

 

—————————————————————————————————————————————————————

 

Dear school:

 

We have signed your report and are dismayed by our child’s performance and after some review we feel our child is not the issue but rather the coaching they have received, after some intense discussion there seems to be lack of structure, consistency and interest and as a result our child’s performance has suffered significantly. We request our child be placed with a more experienced teacher so they can thrive and achieve their full potential.

Thank you for you mid term evaluation and we hope with these changes our child will be a shining example  of what a great institution you represent.

 

Edited March 4, 2021 by Dumb Nuck

[iinatcc]

5 hours ago, Dazzle said:

  This is just a sample of the opinions that don't look very smart after about a month.

Notice where Montreal and Calgary stand - marginally above us, despite our 'major' setback this offseason. Long term, letting Tanev/Markstrom go was the right decision. Whoever the next GM is, they need to get rid of the current coaching staff and let the contracts expire so the team can start relatively fresh.
 

Unlike Montreal and Calgary,  we don't have their long-term contracts. So much for them being "cup contenders".

 

Benning's made plenty of mistakes, such as keeping on WD and TG (and staff). This roster's a lot better than what these coaches are getting out of.

Stale systems, mind-numbing roster decisions, and no adaptation.

Once we get a set of proven NHL coaches, I'm sure this team will do a lot better next year.

 

While the Flames aren't the world beaters we thought they be I still think the Flames are a better team than the Canucks. Flames have better goaltending than the Canucks and have a better all around D-core. As for the Forwards I give the edge to Calgary too. While Calgary doesn't have a Pettersson, they have a stronger center depth of Lindholm, Monahan, and Backlund. Plus Johnny Gaudreau is the superstar winger the Canucks don't have. Sure the Flames still have holes in their roster but it's a lot less holes than what Vancouver has to fill.

 

As for keeping Markstrom or Tanev while I agree it doesn't make sense to keep both but I think keeping one would have been beneficial to the team, especially since these guys were apparently leaders in the locker room. I would have been fine with Demko + Tanev or <New D-Man> + Markstrom. Of even find if Canucks replaced both with better players than can play either role especially a Stay at home defenseman. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[lmm]

6 hours ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

Frankly I expected the team to take a step back. But I didn't think it would be this discombobulated. 

I don't see any way Green and the assistants get renewed. Ian Clark stays and maybe Chris Higgins. 

 

I wouldn't be surprised if there's tweeks at the front office. Weisbrod I can't see staying. 

I would also say all the professional scouts for the exception of Lindgren get turfed. 

 

Amateur scouting seems to be fine. It's the UFA's that seem to be a problem.

 

If the team struggles out of the gate, next season (1/4 mark) then I can see a GM change.

Benning's used about 8 of his nine lives. 

I think Weisbrod will be the last man standing

he has 10 or 11 lives

[lmm]

2 hours ago, Dazzle said:

So using your logic, if O'Reilly was so successful, how did St. Louis end up so bad to begin with? Logic is supposed to work at all times, not when you think it's convenient.

 

Benning did inherit nothing. List the number of assets that Gillis left behind, including the number of draft picks that remained on the team before the transition. Ok?

 

Kesler ---trade-----                                              346 games 44 playoff games as a Duck

Higgins--nothing--                                              110 games as a Canuck

Burrows-trade prospect--                                   149 games canuck/91 games +15 playoff Senator

Bieksa--- trade pick, traded package for Sutter--60 games Canuck/210 games Duck

Garrison---trade pick waisted on Vey--              212 games Lightning+few for Vegas+Oil

Richardson -nothing---                                       299 games Coyotes/8 Preds-still active

Santorelli----nothing--                                         149 games Leafs/Preds/Duck- traded for Leipsic+Konecney

Mathias-------nothing--                                        163 games Leafs /Avs/Jets

Stanton--nothing--                                                54 games Canuck/1 game Caps _traded for Golobeuf

Sestito---nothing but bad blood-                            3games-1 fight Canucks /17 gamesPens67 PIM

Weber -nothing--                                                 221 games+ 30 playoffs Pred/ 2 gamesPens this season

Kassian --trade at a loss---                                 330 +17 playoff games Oil

Lack--trade pick Briesbois/MacKenzie---              61 games Hurricanes/Flames/Devils

Tanev--- 6 years of service/nothing--                  358+23 playoff games/23 Flames games

Hamhius--embarrassedhimself/noting--              117 games Canuck/276 Stars/Preds

Markstrom--6 years of service/nothing--              223+14 Playoff Canucks- 15 Flames games

Horvat------6 years of service and counting-        472+23 playoffs Canucks

                                         =                                 3942 regular season games

Edited March 4, 2021 by lmm

[iceman64]

7 hours ago, Dazzle said:

  

 

 

 

This is just a sample of the opinions that don't look very smart after about a month.

Notice where Montreal and Calgary stand - marginally above us, despite our 'major' setback this offseason. Long term, letting Tanev/Markstrom go was the right decision. Whoever the next GM is, they need to get rid of the current coaching staff and let the contracts expire so the team can start relatively fresh.
 

Unlike Montreal and Calgary,  we don't have their long-term contracts. So much for them being "cup contenders".

 

Benning's made plenty of mistakes, such as keeping on WD and TG (and staff). This roster's a lot better than what these coaches are getting out of.

Stale systems, mind-numbing roster decisions, and no adaptation.

Once we get a set of proven NHL coaches, I'm sure this team will do a lot better next year.

 

Blah f'n blah.. first off and last off because I'm not even going farther than the stupidity of your sample opinions.. which made me laugh and honestly, if you or anyone else doesn't like the way things are headed then f off and go cheer for the Oilers or Flames..  No wonder people think most Canucks fans are the lamest in the league, I disagree with "most" but a lot have their head up their _____ and listen to too much media.    

 This is getting old...................

[spook007]

6 hours ago, Dazzle said:

This is exactly it, and people have been talking about Sutter and Roussell being signed for too long - yet they were under 30 when signed.

 

The amount of hypocrisy in the fanbase is amusing. Bashing a GM for not committing long term money, but bashing the same GM for long term contracts that anchor a roster.

This.....

Fire JB for signing vets to long contracts, Fire JB for NOT signing vets to longer contracts... 

Can't have it both ways,,,

Edited March 4, 2021 by spook007

[lmm]

19 minutes ago, spook007 said:

This.....

Fire JB for signing vets to long contracts, Fire JB for NOT signing vets to longer contracts... 

Can't have it both ways,,,

yes you can

Toronto signed Tavares

Jim signed Loui

spot the difference

[spook007]

Just now, lmm said:

yes you can

Toronto signed Tavares

Jim signed Loui

spot the difference

Yep....

Do you think JB should have extended Marky and Tanev to the deals they were offered by Calgary?

[lmm]

Just now, spook007 said:

Yep....

Do you think JB should have extended Marky and Tanev to the deals they were offered by Calgary?

no

[spook007]

6 minutes ago, lmm said:

no

OK, then my point still stands... Eriksson has been a disaster... but the majority of contracts handed out to vets ie Beagle, Sutter, Roussel and similar, were not as long, or expensive as the Tanev and Markstrom contracts... and at better age.

If folks are unhappy with those contracts its wrong to complain about Benning not saying so long to Marky and Tan man.... 

Myers remains to be seen...

Edited March 4, 2021 by spook007

[lmm]

26 minutes ago, spook007 said:

OK, then my point still stands... Eriksson has been a disaster... but the majority of contracts handed out to vets ie Beagle, Sutter, Roussel and similar, were not as long, or expensive as the Tanev and Markstrom contracts... 

If folks are unhappy with those contracts its wrong to complain about Benning not saying so long to Marky and Tan man.... 

Myers remains to be seen...

But your point does not stand

would you have signed Tavares instead of Ericksson?

would you have signed any of the $6M guys from 2016?

 

its not about whether you do or don't

Its about whether you get the right pieces

 

you have over simplified the situation

Edited March 4, 2021 by lmm

[lmm]

3 hours ago, kanucks25 said:

Trying to decide what the slogan for Benning's tenure should be.

 

It's either ^that, something about the importance of age-gap, or "rebuilds aren't linear".

haha 

some day I will start the "Catch Phrase" thread

there are plenty

Airport

goal posts

graveyard

best 4 liner

[spook007]

11 minutes ago, lmm said:

But your point does not stand

would you have signed Tavares instead of Ericksson?

would you have signed any of the $6M guys from 2017?

 

its not about whether you do or don't

Its about whether you get the right pieces

 

you have over simplified the situation

True about the right pieces. But often this is only known with hindsight. 

The issue was the length of contracts bottom 6 players were signed to. If you are unhappy about them, you sure would not entertain the idea of signing Marky and Tanev to long term neither, just as you said. 

 

With regards to Tavares v Eriksson...  if only...... 

And with hindsight I would not have signed any $6M from 2017 (I can remember tbh who was available).

[flat land fish]

Simple answer is we need to start allowing fewer than 3 goals a game.  The team plays well with a lead but hasn’t won when failing to score first.  We have seen a big drop off in goal scoring from Virtanen, gaudette, Pearson and really even amongst the 4th line guys.  It’s impacting our ability to come back when we fall behind and also our ability to front run.  Maybe it’s just the teams in the north are that good?  Often teams will give a shift or two to some of the depth guys with the top dogs to get them going.  Team has been playing better lately hopefully they can right the ship in the second half to set the table for next season.

[Ghostsof1915]

4 hours ago, lmm said:

yes you can

Toronto signed Tavares

Jim signed Loui

spot the difference

I'm sorry was Tavares even remotely interested in signing in Vancouver? 

Edited March 4, 2021 by Ghostsof1915

[Ghostsof1915]

7 hours ago, kanucks25 said:

WHO CARES

 

WE ARE NOT BUFFALO

 

WE DO NOT ASPIRE TO BE BUFFALO

 

OUR GOAL SHOULD NOT BE "BE BETTER THAN BUFFALO"

 

HAVE BETTER STANDARDS, PLEASE

 

THANK YOU

No but there's a team that has been through 3 GM's during his tenure. So changing a GM isn't always going to get the results you want.

I didn't think that would be hard to understand.