Jim Benning's mid-season press conference

[JM_]

1 hour ago, Josepho said:

There was logic to it, but keep in mind that Loui was a clearly declining asset until he had one season propped up by elite linemates. Benning completely fell for it. 

 

Yes, it was part of the Sedin re-jig. However, it was a bad transaction -- showing horrendous pro-scouting where we gave up a cheaper and better player while also downgrading our draft pick. Doesn't that make Benning's talent evaluation look quite poor? We would've been better off keeping Bonino as the 2C in front of Bo, which we literally did the previous season.

a lot of people thought Loui would be a good fit, I don't recall anyone but @aGENT making a good case against it at the time. If the term had been 5 years instead of 6 I think most pundits would have said Jim got a great deal. 

 

Quote

Beagle and Roussel may have had some form of mentoring (even though there's no actual evidence of this), but look at opportunity cost, and look at similar deals handed out to other placeholders. Valterri Filpulla was available in the same offseason, and signed a 1 year contract worth 2.75 -- he also has a cup ring like Beagle if you're into that. Same thing with Chris Kunitz and Eric Fehr, who both signed for 1x1 contracts.

the bubble playoff run is the evidence. 

 

Quote

He stinks this year, but that's because the vast majority of hockey players do decline significantly once they hit their 30s -- Benning even experienced this himself after signing Eriksson.

I like Beagle a lot, I honestly can't understand why some folks on here can't see his value. I would have preferred 3 year deals for both guys. Something odd is going on with Rous this year, but Beagle is a solid 4C, he's not dead cap space like some lament, not even close. 

 

Quote

If what I'm saying are excuses, then what are your defences of Benning? Additionally, if Toronto wins a playoff round (or multiple) this season, will you suddenly admit that Toronto might know what they're doing? If beating Toronto was that easy, maybe we (and the other 5 teams in our division) should do that make them play team defence.

Do I need to defend Benning? I just don't hate him. I don't need to get boxed into a position, there's good and bad about the guy. I love our prospect pool, I like the Boeser deal, and Bo's, and I see what he's trying to accomplish post-Linden. Do I like all the pro-scouting decisions, nope. 

 

Quote

I think Myers is a decent player, but again, cost opportunity, and the fact that these bad contracts all stack up. Without contracts like Myers' (and others), this team actually probably could've made a serious bid for an actual star player like Hall or Pietrangelo,

gonna stop you right there. We had zero, like zero, chance at Pietrangelo. Not sure thats going to be a wise decision 3 years from now for Vegas either. Lots of risk and opportunity cost there too at his age, as you said, declining years are a concern. 

 

I don't want Hall anywhere near this team, totally the wrong fit. 

 

Quote

 

and they could've kept Toffoli. He already has declined so far -- he has the worst 5v5xGA/60 among team regulars. Pretty much every non-elite player gets significantly worse in their 30s, and it's foolish to suggest that Myers will buck the trend. This "wait and see" mentality shows a lack of proactivity, which you absolutely can't have from your GM.

TT is fine, but I don't think I'd be looking to swap him for Myers. In terms of impact on the club, imagine if we had TT and his replacement was Chatfield, thats a disaster waiting to happen. 

 

We need to get over Toffoli, he was a rental, full stop. Madden is tiny. I would have preferred not to lose the 2nd tho. 

 

Quote

 

Here's my question: what IF Myers declines significantly before his contract ends (which is likely)?

 

 

what IF? he'll be 34 at the end of the deal, so I'm not sure how likely that is given how good of shape he's in. But lets say he does start declining after next season, do you really think he'll be so bad as to be unmovable? whats the indication specifically about him that you think this is a major concern? 

 

I don't see anything yet to be worried about that in his per game stats: https://www.hockey-reference.com/players/m/myersty01.html

 

Edited March 9, 2021 by Jimmy McGill

[Gurn]

3 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

I like Beagle a lot, I honestly can't understand why some folks on here can't see his value.

Doesn't score enough and not playing for minimum salary, would be my guess.

Funny though, that attitude, if stretched a bit, means the goalie should be the lowest paid player as he gets the fewest points.

Wonder how that works towards team success?

 

[kanucks25]

29 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

I like Beagle a lot, I honestly can't understand why some folks on here can't see his value. I would have preferred 3 year deals for both guys. Something odd is going on with Rous this year, but Beagle is a solid 4C, he's not dead cap space like some lament, not even close.

Just doesn't make sense to pay someone who plays a relatively limited role that much money.

 

Especially when you have a Brandon Sutter on your roster doing similar things and for even more money, and other bad contracts. If Jay Beagle was the only "less than desirable" contract on the books you could obviously live with that. The problem is the overall construction of the bottom-6 both when it comes to the on-ice product and how it works out on the books.

 

Similar reasoning on the Myers contract.

Edited March 9, 2021 by kanucks25

[kanucks25]

1 hour ago, ruilin96 said:

I don't remember exactly where, but I read it a couple years ago that the deal was 5th OA + Horvat for PK Subban. At the time, Bergevin also wanted a NHLer in retruen because Subban was at his prime and one of the best offensive defenseman in the league and Bergevin did not just want to part him with just a pick. So the rumour was Horvat + 5th OA. Now there is also a possibility that Horvat + 5th OA for Subban + 9th OA (pick was later used to select Sergachev). I am not sure which one is the truth, but Horvat's name was in the mix. My theory at the time was ownership wanted one last kick at the can with the Sedins as they were trying to trade for Subban and try to sign Stamkos in the UFA market (if he gets there which he didn't). 

 

I found out about this after the draft as I remember I was super upset at the draft when Dubois was gone at 3 as he was the guy I wanted the most. Little did I know that we dodged a huge bullet.

Horvat added on our side and the 9th added on theirs seems to ring a bell.

 

I can't see it being Horvat + 5th for Subban only. Even I don't think Benning is that bad at trading. 

[JM_]

14 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

Just doesn't make sense to pay someone who plays a relatively limited role that much money.

 

Especially when you have a Brandon Sutter on your roster doing similar things and for even more money, and other bad contracts. If Jay Beagle was the only "less than desirable" contract on the books you could obviously live with that. The problem is the overall construction of the bottom-6 both when it comes to the on-ice product and how it works out on the books.

 

Similar reasoning on the Myers contract.

the idea was he'd be a good leader while the team was rebuilding, which was a good idea. The mistake Jim made was year 4 of the deal imo. 

[Josepho]

45 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

a lot of people thought Loui would be a good fit, I don't recall anyone but @aGENT making a good case against it at the time. If the term had been 5 years instead of 6 I think most pundits would have said Jim got a great deal. 

 

the bubble playoff run is the evidence. 

 

I like Beagle a lot, I honestly can't understand why some folks on here can't see his value. I would have preferred 3 year deals for both guys. Something odd is going on with Rous this year, but Beagle is a solid 4C, he's not dead cap space like some lament, not even close. 

 

Do I need to defend Benning? I just don't hate him. I don't need to get boxed into a position, there's good and bad about the guy. I love our prospect pool, I like the Boeser deal, and Bo's, and I see what he's trying to accomplish post-Linden. Do I like all the pro-scouting decisions, nope. 

 

gonna stop you right there. We had zero, like zero, chance at Pietrangelo. Not sure thats going to be a wise decision 3 years from now for Vegas either. Lots of risk and opportunity cost there too at his age, as you said, declining years are a concern. 

 

I don't want Hall anywhere near this team, totally the wrong fit. 

 

TT is fine, but I don't think I'd be looking to swap him for Myers. In terms of impact on the club, imagine if we had TT and his replacement was Chatfield, thats a disaster waiting to happen. 

 

We need to get over Toffoli, he was a rental, full stop. Madden is tiny. I would have preferred not to lose the 2nd tho. 

 

what IF? he'll be 34 at the end of the deal, so I'm not sure how likely that is given how good of shape he's in. But lets say he does start declining after next season, do you really think he'll be so bad as to be unmovable? whats the indication specifically about him that you think this is a major concern? 

 

I don't see anything yet to be worried about that in his per game stats: https://www.hockey-reference.com/players/m/myersty01.html

 

If the forum completely misevaluated the Eriksson contract, shouldn't they learn from that experience that signing players over 30 (especially in positions such as the 2016 Canucks) has a serious risk to it?

 

The bubble playoff run is evidence that Beagle/Roussel are important parts of the team in the same way that Tanner Glass was a big part of the 2011 run. I don't even hate Beagle the player, but I'd rather have someone cheap and be allocating that 2mil elsewhere. I can similarly say that Stecher was an important part of the run, and that Benning was stupid for letting him go. Correlation does not equal causation. The "odd" thing going on with Roussel is that he's an energy player in his 30s, Benning himself saw similar declines in Prust/Dorsett and apparently didn't learn from his mistakes. 

 

Pietrangelo/Hall/Toffoli were moreso examples of players to go after when a team is looking to make a deep playoff run (which should be the expectation for our team given how good and cheap our young players currently are). If you want other examples, look at the Lightning acquiring McDonagh or the Blues acquiring O'Reilly. I do agree that there are some risks, but the risk with overspending one elite player making a lot of money is a whole hell of a lot better than spending on multiple mediocre players for the same price.

 

If Myers' replacement is Chatfield, doesn't that say a lot about the defensive depth that Benning himself has built? Maybe if we didn't stupidly get rid of Stecher, we would have actual respectable RD depth.

 

Benning's "ran out of time" comment indicates that Toffoli was intended to be more than just a rental, and that he wasn't smart enough to plan and/or create cap space around him. He clearly wasn't intended to be strictly a rental.

 

There are a lot of dumb NHL GMs out there, so I wouldn't put it past someone to acquire Myers. My issues with Myers are that we give up a lot of chances while he's on the ice and that he takes a $&!# ton of penalties -- these are not qualities that warrant having the 28th highest cap hit amongst defencemen in the entire league. And again, players basically always get worse as they proceed into their 30s -- this is inarguable.

 

Edited March 9, 2021 by Josepho

[ruilin96]

19 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

Horvat added on our side and the 9th added on theirs seems to ring a bell.

 

I can't see it being Horvat + 5th for Subban only. Even I don't think Benning is that bad at trading. 

The only way I can see it is that if ownership pressures him and he wants to make this a deal Bergevin couldn't turn down, which is a possibility given at the time ownership seems to believe that the Sedins still have what it takes to take us to a cup.

[JM_]

7 minutes ago, Josepho said:

If the forum completely misevaluated the Eriksson contract, shouldn't they learn from that experience that signing players over 30 (especially in positions such as the 2016 Canucks) has a serious risk to it?

but doesn't 1/2 the league do that every year? 2016 was a very bad year for a lot of teams in the UFA market, but there's been many over 30 signings since. 

 

7 minutes ago, Josepho said:

 

The bubble playoff run is evidence that Beagle/Roussel are important parts of the team in the same way that Tanner Glass was a big part of the 2011 run. I don't even hate Beagle the player, but I'd rather have someone cheap and be allocating that 2mil elsewhere. I can similarly say that Stecher was an important part of the run, and that Benning was stupid for letting him go. Correlation does not equal causation. The "odd" thing going on with Roussel is that he's an energy player in his 30s, Benning himself saw similar declines in Prust/Dorsett and apparently didn't learn from his mistakes. 

for sure we could use 1-2 mil in other spots. I do wish this was Roussel's last year. 

 

7 minutes ago, Josepho said:

Pietrangelo/Hall/Toffoli were moreso examples of players to go after when a team is looking to make a deep playoff run (which should be the expectation for our team given how good and cheap our young players currently are). If you want other examples, look at the Lightning acquiring McDonagh or the Blues acquiring O'Reilly. I do agree that there are some risks, but the risk with overspending one elite player making a lot of money is a whole hell of a lot better than spending on multiple mediocre players for the same price.

 

If Myers' replacement is Chatfield, doesn't that say a lot about the defensive depth that Benning himself has built? Maybe if we didn't stupidly get rid of Stecher, we would have actual respectable RD depth.

We actually replaced Stech with a cheaper and better player in Hamonic. 

 

7 minutes ago, Josepho said:

 

Benning's "ran out of time" comment indicates that Toffoli was intended to be more than just a rental, and that he wasn't smart enough to plan and/or create cap space around him. He clearly wasn't intended to be strictly a rental.

 

There are a lot of dumb NHL GMs out there, so I wouldn't put it past someone to acquire Myers. My issues with Myers are that we give up a lot of chances while he's on the ice and that he takes a $&!# ton of penalties -- these are not qualities that warrant having the 28th highest cap hit amongst defencemen in the entire league. And again, players basically always get worse as they proceed into their 30s -- this is inarguable.

 

I don't think Jim is dumb, just needs better pro scouts on his team. 

[kanucks25]

1 hour ago, Jimmy McGill said:

the idea was he'd be a good leader while the team was rebuilding, which was a good idea. The mistake Jim made was year 4 of the deal imo. 

Yeah, bringing a respected, experienced vet into a young, inexperienced team is a pretty standard concept which I have no problem with.

 

IMO Benning just needs to do a much better job of allocating his cap dollars effectively. This regime has spent a lot of resources on sheltering the lineup with bodies so as to not "expose the kids to a losing environment" but they may have been better served to focus on players that are actually good at hockey and win you games, which is another way to avoid losing.

[JM_]

11 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

Yeah, bringing a respected, experienced vet into a young, inexperienced team is a pretty standard concept which I have no problem with.

 

IMO Benning just needs to do a much better job of allocating his cap dollars effectively. This regime has spent a lot of resources on sheltering the lineup with bodies so as to not "expose the kids to a losing environment" but they may have been better served to focus on players that are actually good at hockey and win you games, which is another way to avoid losing.

I do wonder why the pro scouting group has missed the mark a few too many times on the bolded part.... dunno. Some of Jim's moves I've loved, others I couldn't figure out. Baer's deal annoyed me a lot, e.g., his situation screamed year to year deal. But I'm pleased with Myers, I think we'll get 4 good years from him and we'd be a train wreck with any less d depth. Is he expensive, yes, but thats the UFA market. 

 

[180sret]

6 hours ago, Provost said:

So when you are talking about some placeholders giving you a better chance of being competitive... you weren't talking about our lot I assume?

They sure have done a great job of keeping us near the bottom of the standings!  We are paying premium dollars for worse players.  Are Roussel and Ferland providing more competitive value than Vanek and Vrbata did?  That would be news to pretty much everyone.

You are making false strawman arguments.  No one said to ice an AHL team.  Go to each UFA offseason and look at the players signed after July 1st.  Plenty of good solid veterans for low dollars and term.

Your coaching rant literally had nothing to do with my post as I never mentioned coaching in it.

Yeah sorry Provost, sometimes I confuse Green haters and Benning haters. The bottom 6 may not score as much as I'd like, but you still need guys that can forecheck, play hard minutes and show the younger guys that those things are important at this level. We might score more with better offensive players but I think we'd be losing more games because lack of defensive awareness. Seems people just want the offence but guys like Beagle and Sutter have their place in helping teams win games. I'm not saying they are the best bottom 6 but it'll take a little more patience as the team finishes building. I see their value.

Whats "kept us" at the bottom of the standings has been poor puck battles and puck management, which you must admit, is showing signs of getting better, hence why I've said they're still learning what works and doesn't at this level. Goaltending is coming around also.

[DIBdaQUIB]

While I have concerns about JB taking the next steps with player signings,my more immediate concern is his (mis)management of the staff. 

After collecting the most talented  and promising group of young players this team has ever seen, he let's our senior amateur scout walk.

He let Malhotra walk to Toronto and extended Brown who only was effective when the Sedins ran the PP.

Could have had Burrows as well but stayed with Brown.

Has left Green a lame duck coach.

Has not re-signed Clark, arguably the best goalie coach in the nhl.   

 

I am starting to wonder if perhaps he is insecure to the point of being unable to have top talent around him if they don't agree with his every move.  

Edited March 10, 2021 by DIBdaQUIB

[lmm]

11 minutes ago, DIBdaQUIB said:

While I have concerns about JB taking the next steps with ayer signings,my more immediate concern is his (mis)management of the staff. 

After collecting the most tale today and promising group of youn players this team has ever seen, he let's our senior amateur scout walk.

He let Malhotra walk to Toronto and extended Brown who only was effective when the Sedins ran the PP.

Could have had Burrows as well but stayed with Brown.

Has left Green a lame duck coach.

Has not re-signed Clark, arguably the bwt goalie coach i  the nhl.   

 

I am starting to wonder if perhaps he is insecure to the point of being unable.to have top talent around him.if they don't agree with his every move.  

I agree but 

I think you have nailed the systemic problem in Canuckville

Is it Jim? 

or does that start with Aqua Marine?

 

the faithful said lsat Summer, "i'll drive Brackett to the airport"

or 

"If losing one coach matters that much..."

 

but after a while the evidense starts to pile up

as it is now

[DIBdaQUIB]

Just now, lmm said:

I agree but 

I think you have nailed the systemic problem in Canuckville

Is it Jim? 

or does that start with Aqua Marine?

 

the faithful said lsat Summer, "i'll drive Brackett to the airport"

or 

"If losing one coach matters that much..."

 

but after a while the evidense starts to pile up

as it is now

Jb wouldn't be the first rookie gm to want to surround himself with yes men.  Having successful mgmt. Disagree or question your decisions can be unnerving.  Pretty obvious he couldn't reach agreement with linden either.  Starting to be a long list of competent senior personnel moving on.  To me  that is a huge red flag and concerns me as much, if not more than player management.  If it is aquaman then this franchise is screwed. 

[lmm]

22 minutes ago, DIBdaQUIB said:

   

 

I am starting to wonder if perhaps he is insecure to the point of being unable.to have top talent around him.if they don't agree with his every move.  

 

On 3/9/2021 at 12:19 PM, Josepho said:

 

 

 

 

Benning's "ran out of time" comment indicates that Toffoli was intended to be more than just a rental, and that he wasn't smart enough to plan and/or create cap space around him. He clearly wasn't intended to be strictly a rental.

 

 

 

Doesn't the "Ran out of time " quote sound like a guy who is unable to deligate resposibility?

One wonders where was Chris Gear or Wiesbrod during this time crunch?

we all know that Free Agent Day is fast paced,

Are we to believe that Jim is in charge and fully engaged in all negotiations?

If OEL was indeed the big fish and taking all of Jim's attention, one would hope that the number two would be involved with negotiating the Toffoli deal and maybe number 3 is talking to Tanev, if you want to keep him.

Why did we promote Chris Gear again?

[Josepho]

23 minutes ago, lmm said:

 

Doesn't the "Ran out of time " quote sound like a guy who is unable to deligate resposibility?

One wonders where was Chris Gear or Wiesbrod during this time crunch?

we all know that Free Agent Day is fast paced,

Are we to believe that Jim is in charge and fully engaged in all negotiations?

If OEL was indeed the big fish and taking all of Jim's attention, one would hope that the number two would be involved with negotiating the Toffoli deal and maybe number 3 is talking to Tanev, if you want to keep him.

Why did we promote Chris Gear again?

There's also the speculation that Brackett left because Benning wanted to do more in the draft himself.

 

A massive part of being a GM is surrounding yourself with other good people.

Edited March 10, 2021 by Josepho

[lmm]

15 minutes ago, Josepho said:

There's also the speculation that Brackett left because Benning wanted to do more in the draft himself.

 

A massive part of being a GM is surrounding yourself with other good people.

Jim is also President or acting President or some such thing

one would kind of expect him to be grooming the next GM in anticipation of his move upstairs

but in fact 

he is moving toward being head scout

if anybody says, "they do thngs differently out on the left coast"

we might well just shrug and point to Jimmer

[thrago]

 

So Every GM expected the Cap to go up and had to madly scramble because of the flat cap so we are in the same boat as everyone in that sense.  That being said it seems to be downplayed or overlooked completely is amid all that Benning got smacked with a $3 million plus recapture for Luongo. No other GM had to deal with that and IMO that is a really big blow.  Imagine thinking the Cap will go up $3-4 million halfway through the season to nope your going to loss $3 million. He did pretty good all things considered.

[Provost]

31 minutes ago, thrago said:

 

So Every GM expected the Cap to go up and had to madly scramble because of the flat cap so we are in the same boat as everyone in that sense.  That being said it seems to be downplayed or overlooked completely is amid all that Benning got smacked with a $3 million plus recapture for Luongo. No other GM had to deal with that and IMO that is a really big blow.  Imagine thinking the Cap will go up $3-4 million halfway through the season to nope your going to loss $3 million. He did pretty good all things considered.

That “cap going up” narrative is just flat out wrong.  We got hit with the recapture though.

 

As of the December BOG meeting in 2019, the GMs were told to expect a flat cap or a modest increase of $1-2 million if the players used their escalator clause.

 

That was long after Benning made all his UFA decisions the summer prior.  He did not sign any contracts with the understanding that there would be a big increase in the cap.  That $2.5-6 million possible cap increase number didn’t come out as a possibility until March 2020 just before Covid hit.  
 

That means he didn’t make any roster decisions with that information that was only in existence for about 2 weeks before being reversed.  Folks are trying to excuse his contract signing in 2018 by using information neither he, nor anyone possessed at the time... and didn’t come out until the next year.  It was incredibly short lived too.

 

Here are a couple of articles referencing the BOG meetings, note the dates.

 

https://www.prohockeyrumors.com/2019/12/latest-on-salary-cap-ceiling-for-2020-21.html

 

https://www.nhl.com/news/nhl-salary-cap-projections-for-next-season/c-315855100

 

 

Edited March 10, 2021 by Provost

[Convincing John]

So the Sharks can void Evander Kane’s contract due to bankruptcy? Be sweet if they opened up the casino and LE. Ya.