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

Ian Clark chances of contract renewal

Rate this topic


boscorevat

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

there are coaches and staff all over the league that are on their last year because of the uncertainly of the cap and revenue, you'd think that would be the overriding idea here, but it seems like any chance to $&!# on Benning is the prime reason for posts on here sometimes. Now that we know most people will be vaccinated in a few months and there will be bums in the seats again we'll start to see staff extensions again. 

I tend to lean on this being more of an ownership issue than Benning, because AQ is famously tight on the purse strings when it comes to paying for front office staff. Benning's job is to push for it now if he truly sees Ian Clark being here for his two year plan.

 

At the same time, wouldn't you want to see a little bit more pro-activeness from a management group that admitted they ran out of time on extending people they wanted to keep? Considering this goalie coach was expressly singled out as a reason why Benning wanted to take a chance on Holtby?

 

 

Edited by DSVII
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The Lock said:

Yeah, I'm a little amazed at how many people on this forum look at this season like it's a normal season. It's just isn't which throws a lot of so called "logic" out the window.

 

I'm not saying Benning's a saint by any means, and I definitely have my criticisms of him, but some of the hatred lately doesn't really have much thought behind it.

yeah its weird and over the top. All GMs make mistakes. I'd be fine with an upgrade on Jim if there were one, just not sure who's out there that would be better. For now he's getting the most important job right, drafting and developing well. 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, DSVII said:

I tend to lean on this being more of an ownership issue than Benning, because AQ is famously tight on the purse strings when it comes to paying for front office staff. Benning's job is to push for it now if he truly sees Ian Clark being here for his two year plan.

 

At the same time, wouldn't you want to see a little bit more pro-activeness from a management group that admitted they ran out of time on extending people they wanted to keep? Considering this goalie coach was expressly singled out as a reason why Benning wanted to take a chance on Holtby?

 

 

its a weird year and we have no idea whats been said or not behind the scenes. Jims not an idiot, I'm sure he'd love to keep Clarke but I can see his hands being tied until the business has some kind of reliable revenue projection. Which I expect will be soon. 

  • Cheers 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DSVII said:

At the same time, wouldn't you want to see a little bit more pro-activeness from a management group that admitted they ran out of time on extending people they wanted to keep? 

You negative Nellie's know Jim has no control over the rest of the league, right? It doesn't necessarily equate to a lack of 'pro-activeness'. He couldn't force Pietrangelo to sign in Vegas faster to make Schmidt become available etc etc.. 

 

This happened all over the league due to Covid with teams having players move on and not waiting around for 'what ifs'. They wanted some job security... Which is TOTALLY their prerogative. It however, doesn't have to equate to managerial incompetence or a lack of pro-activeness. Excrement, as they say, happens.

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, aGENT said:

You negative Nellie's know Jim has no control over the rest of the league, right? It doesn't necessarily equate to a lack of 'pro-activeness'. He couldn't force Pietrangelo to sign in Vegas faster to make Schmidt become available etc etc.. 

 

This happened all over the league due to Covid with teams having players move on and not waiting around for 'what ifs'. They wanted some job security... Which is TOTALLY their prerogative. It however, doesn't have to equate to managerial incompetence or a lack of pro-activeness. Excrement, as they say, happens.

Has nothing to do with the rest of the league, it just reeked of lack of planning.

 

"Ran out of time" shouldn't even be in the vocabulary of a high ranking business official.

Edited by kanucks25
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On March 21, 2021 at 7:17 PM, Jimmy McGill said:

what if he's a professional and just wants to move on to a new organization for legitimate reasons? what exactly are you going to do about it? 

Well, the "realistic fans" generally suggest bullying any unwanted players who have NMCs/Full NTCs into moving when they don't want to.

 

So I guess the idea here would be to "make him an offer he couldn't refuse" with a horse's head in the bed or explicit threats on his life of those of his family, to force him to sign a new contract.

 

Remember, you can get whatever you want from negotiations, regardless of what the other party wants and who has the leverage, if you are just stubborn and obnoxious enough. Lol.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, WeneedLumme said:

Well, the "realistic fans" generally suggest bullying any unwanted players who have NMCs/Full NTCs into moving when they don't want to.

 

So I guess the idea here would be to "make him an offer he couldn't refuse" with a horse's head in the bed or explicit threats on his life of those of his family, to force him to sign a new contract.

 

Remember, you can get whatever you want from negotiations, regardless of what the other party wants and who has the leverage, if you are just stubborn and obnoxious enough. Lol.

I guess the flip side if Clarke re-signs is Jim was just lucky. 

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

7 hours ago, kanucks25 said:

Has nothing to do with the rest of the league, it just reeked of lack of planning.

 

"Ran out of time" shouldn't even be in the vocabulary of a high ranking business official.

not sure why the last offseason gets so over complicated. The plan was pretty simple, Marky needed to agree to less $, term and expansion. He had better options elsewhere. Same with Tanev. I'm OK with not having TT either for 4 or 5 more years, 1 or 2 sure. 

 

The team is actually doing fine with the losses of Marky and Tanev. We're squeezed on F talent, which is a problem that wasn't going to go away in large part until this offseason and next. 

 

You guys like to hyper-analyze every word out of Jim's mouth, its kind of funny. 

Edited by Jimmy McGill
  • Cheers 1
  • Vintage 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, kanucks25 said:

Has nothing to do with the rest of the league, it just reeked of lack of planning.

 

"Ran out of time" shouldn't even be in the vocabulary of a high ranking business official.

Yes. It does.

 

Once again over analyzing minutia while ignoring context. Shocking :bored:

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Yes. It does.

 

Once again over analyzing minutia while ignoring context. Shocking :bored:

newsflash - Jim's a crappy public speaker. I guess some prefer to get the turd polishing that TO fans get. 

 

We'll see how this TDL and offseason goes, if we can land a guy like Lowry and shed some other vet's like Rooster I'm happy. 

 

Edited by Jimmy McGill
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

not sure why the last offseason gets so over complicated. The plan was pretty simple, Marky needed to agree to less $, term and expansion. He had better options elsewhere. Same with Tanev. I'm OK with not having TT either for 4 or 5 more years, 1 or 2 sure. 

Pretty much this. I would have liked to keep Tanev (at cap and term that made sense) due to his leadership and stability for Hughes but Hamonic is a completely suitable replacement (at 1/4 the price and term). Though it did unfortunately take a while to get the stability and chemistry down.

 

Quote

The team is actually doing fine with the losses of Marky and Tanev. We're squeezed on F talent, which is a problem that wasn't going to go away in large part until this offseason and next. 

Again, yup. Though I'll caveat that with 'we're doing fine now'. We clearly had issues with all the new faces, lack of practice and preseason etc early on. As much as that sucked though, it was a very short term problem.

 

Quote

 

You guys like to hyper-analyze every word out of Jim's mouth, its kind of funny. 

Indeed. I was already laughing at all of the remarks this crowd was going to hyper analyze, take out of context and lose their cheese over like 5 minutes after the interview :lol:

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

1 hour ago, aGENT said:

Pretty much this. I would have liked to keep Tanev (at cap and term that made sense) due to his leadership and stability for Hughes but Hamonic is a completely suitable replacement (at 1/4 the price and term). Though it did unfortunately take a while to get the stability and chemistry down.

 

Again, yup. Though I'll caveat that with 'we're doing fine now'. We clearly had issues with all the new faces, lack of practice and preseason etc early on. As much as that sucked though, it was a very short term problem.

 

Indeed. I was already laughing at all of the remarks this crowd was going to hyper analyze, take out of context and lose their cheese over like 5 minutes after the interview :lol:

On that point, which is fair, I think people forget sometimes switching starters takes *years* not 1/4 of a season. We are so damn lucky to have Demko turning out the way he is.

 

Cowgary threw too much money and term at Marky because they hunted for a good goalie for a very long time. And what did they get? 2 points behind us with 3 games in hand, and 4 back of MTL with 2 more games played. And they have a lot of cap tied up. We're in a much better position moving forward than they are. 

 

Hey Jim is what he is, he's made some doozies. But the endless whining about him is just so tiresome. 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fans on this forum are so ridiculous, it’s a no brainer that Benning will want to resign Ian Clark.. But it’s not a one sided decision lol ever consider that Clark wants a change of scenery? He has always moved around a lot and taken his talents to lots of different teams. If he doesn’t resign it’s ridiculous to immediately jump to “Benning is a bad GM”. You can’t force the dude to want to stay.

Edited by Petey40
  • Cheers 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, kanucks25 said:

Has nothing to do with the rest of the league, it just reeked of lack of planning.

 

"Ran out of time" shouldn't even be in the vocabulary of a high ranking business official.

Riiiiiiiiiiiight......

 

Moving on....

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tick tock, tick tock, still no extension.  Meanwhile, there's tons of time to wait and see if the team will surge into the playoffs.

 

Makes you wonder..

Edited by Alain Vigneault
Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol.  Now the JB excuse makers have set up, in advance, the reasons why Clark didn't re-sign. 

He wanted a change of scenery.  He likes moving around. And the old standby "excrement happens"

 

I suspect the reason for the advance covering of behinds, is because they know as well as anyone, JBs history here in "running out of time" or "not being on the same page" etc etc...of talent, both on and off the ice.  But conversely, lots of time to sign overpriced , over valued, over extended contracts for subpar players when he doesn't have to. 

 

I hope Clark stays and signs late. But people wonder why the concern?  When they know how the hockey world works. You re-sign talent you want to keep early in their final year at the latest. COVID or no COVID.  So why wouldn't fans be a little anxious? If JB ends up re-signing Clark,  (and or Green) right before their contract runs out, AND they oblige his fickleness by waiting around for him to have the time to get to it, I'll say I was worried for nothing. Its just that would be an anomaly in the hockey world.  But you never know, excrement happens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

yeah its weird and over the top. All GMs make mistakes. I'd be fine with an upgrade on Jim if there were one, just not sure who's out there that would be better. For now he's getting the most important job right, drafting and developing well. 

This is pretty much the way I see it. A new GM is risky unless if we absolutely know what we're getting. People seem to like to think it'll smell like roses or something if a new GM comes in, but when has there ever been a guarantee of that happening?

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, kilgore said:

lol.  Now the JB excuse makers have set up, in advance, the reasons why Clark didn't re-sign. 

He wanted a change of scenery.  He likes moving around. And the old standby "excrement happens"

 

I suspect the reason for the advance covering of behinds, is because they know as well as anyone, JBs history here in "running out of time" or "not being on the same page" etc etc...of talent, both on and off the ice.  But conversely, lots of time to sign overpriced , over valued, over extended contracts for subpar players when he doesn't have to. 

 

I hope Clark stays and signs late. But people wonder why the concern?  When they know how the hockey world works. You re-sign talent you want to keep early in their final year at the latest. COVID or no COVID.  So why wouldn't fans be a little anxious? If JB ends up re-signing Clark,  (and or Green) right before their contract runs out, AND they oblige his fickleness by waiting around for him to have the time to get to it, I'll say I was worried for nothing. Its just that would be an anomaly in the hockey world.  But you never know, excrement happens.

Lol that’s clearly a response to my post, I’m no benning defender. I realize the good and the bad he’s done in his tenure with Vancouver. But my point still stands that Clark has to want to resign here, if he chooses to sign elsewhere even with a contract offer then there is nothing that could have been done. If benning doesn’t offer him a contract or has no contact with him that’s an entirely different story. But right now both scenarios are hypothetical. It’s almost like he’s a FA and can go where ever he wants like every FA in the league.. kinda how countless players sign with other teams every year cause they want to move to a different team. Malholtra left cause he was offered a great opportunity as a bench coach, and Brackett left because he was offered a job as the head of the amateur scouting department in Minnesota. If I were those guys I would have taken those job opportunities as well.

Edited by Petey40
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Petey40 said:

Lol that’s clearly a response to my post, I’m no benning defender. I realize the good and the bad he’s done in his tenure with Vancouver. But my point still stands that Clark has to want to resign here, if he chooses to sign elsewhere even with a contract offer then there is nothing that could have been done. If benning doesn’t offer him a contract or has no contact with him that’s an entirely different story. But right now both scenarios are hypothetical. It’s almost like he’s a FA and can go where ever he wants like every FA in the league.. kinda how countless players sign with other teams every year cause they want to move to a different team. Malholtra left cause he was offered a great opportunity as a bench coach, and Brackett left because he was offered a job as the head of the amateur scouting department in Minnesota. If I were those guys I would have taken those job opportunities as well.

 

Sure, Clark can go anywhere he wants.  And none of us can see into his mind. But why start over on another team, to learn and work with their systems, if you are happy with your salary, and working conditions and challenges where you are?  Why would he move, just for moving sake?  

Also, I didn't hear of any offer on the table, that Clark is mulling over, did you?  There are exceptions, but there is a reliable trend in the NHL, of......if a coach is not offered an extension in his final year, he is going to be replaced in the next season. And as his contract gets closer to running out, he will naturally start to look at other teams, and listen to their offers.  And begin to feel that the present team doesn't value his services much.  So maybe its all COVID related somehow. (Although I think this is a bizzare excuse).  Clark is not added into the cap, and investing in your goaltending department and keeping such an asset will potentially generate revenue down the road due to more success in the overall team's chances. Its a smart business decision.

 

As far as Brackett, he didn't want to leave either. He was groomed in the Canucks organization for 12 %^$&ing years. Earned his way up the ladder by his stellar work.  Particularly his scouting of players from the USHL/East league, where Boeser and Gaudette were plucked from.  Then, after Jim insisted on Juolevi, he went on a tear with pushing for  Pettersson and Hughes.  Why would he want to leave with such success?  No, Benning made him an offer he had to refuse. Designed that way.  After blindsiding Brackett the year before his contract ran out by firing two of his assistants, JB demanded any new contract would include that he be allowed to continue meddling in his staff hiring decisions. I think rightly so, Brackett could not accept that. It wasn't hard to find another team that would gladly afford him that professional courtesy of hiring his own staff.  It was all about consolidating power for himself and his old hockey buddy Weisbrod. The Canucks have one of the smallest front office of any in the league. And for a Canadian franchise, you'd expect a little more investment there.  Still no replacement for Brackett. No replacement for Trevor. No replacement for Gilman.

 

But maybe Ian and Judd, just don't like the rain here.  Who knows.  I could be wrong.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/23/2021 at 6:58 PM, Petey40 said:

Lol that’s clearly a response to my post, I’m no benning defender. I realize the good and the bad he’s done in his tenure with Vancouver. But my point still stands that Clark has to want to resign here, if he chooses to sign elsewhere even with a contract offer then there is nothing that could have been done. If benning doesn’t offer him a contract or has no contact with him that’s an entirely different story. But right now both scenarios are hypothetical. It’s almost like he’s a FA and can go where ever he wants like every FA in the league.. kinda how countless players sign with other teams every year cause they want to move to a different team. Malholtra left cause he was offered a great opportunity as a bench coach, and Brackett left because he was offered a job as the head of the amateur scouting department in Minnesota. If I were those guys I would have taken those job opportunities as well.

Brackett left because he didn't want Benning to meddle with who he picked.

 

If our drafting turns to $&!# after Judd leaves, will people maybe admit that Benning isn't some super scout, and that the Hughes/Pettersson picks shouldn't give Benning infinite job security?

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...