Seven years without a clear plan from Canucks brass.

[Honky Cat]

2 minutes ago, Honky Cat said:

double post

 

 

Edited April 15, 2021 by Honky Cat

[lmm]

3 minutes ago, Honky Cat said:

Going into their 5th year without the playoffs, and there will still be several more to come.They are not close

Benning had most of his core within a 4 year span

 

do you think Dretoit will be a force before the Canucks or will Vancouver get there before Detroit?

I am willing to wager that with Steve Y in charge Detroit has 2 more cups before Bo Horvat retires cupless or on another team

 

Demko Boeser Petterson

or Boeser Petterson Hughes?

which 4 year period are you talking about?

 

[kloubek]

5 hours ago, aGENT said:

I think he'd happily have taken more picks within the context....

Not going to quote your lengthy post, and normally I would just give an emoticon, but I agree with every single point (and there were many).  All well said.

 

I don't agree with everything Jim has done, and he's made unfortunate mistakes, but people have to understand how depleted we were after the Gillis era, how we were expected to keep the team winning with a core in the twilight of their careers, and how much work there was to be done in homegrowing our talent. He HAS has a plan all along, and has almost finished executing it.

 

I also don't believe these people realize that we are basically almost there. Yes, Benning will need to continue tweaking and trying to keep injecting high end talent, but most of the pieces are in place. If guys like Rathbone and Podz turn out as expected (and there is a high chance for), maybe we bring in Tryamkin, hopefully Demko remains stellar, we are right there in a year or two. I do think we need to fix our defensive structure though for it all to come together.

 

It's just so hard to see right now for some. The team (for whatever reason) started off poorly then all this Covid BS, it's been one hell of a downer season. But for me, the start of next season symbolizes a shift in our momentum. If I'm right, it's all going to be up from there.

[Honky Cat]

1 hour ago, lmm said:

do you think Dretoit will be a force before the Canucks or will Vancouver get there before Detroit?

I am willing to wager that with Steve Y in charge Detroit has 2 more cups before Bo Horvat retires cupless or on another team

 

Demko Boeser Petterson

or Boeser Petterson Hughes?

which 4 year period are you talking about?

 

All I can say is the Canucks pretty much have a young core group, with some exceptional players.Really not seeing that with the Wings.

Senators have been rebuilding around the same time as the Wings, and have Chabot,Tkachuk,Norris, Stutzle

Detroit are another two years away (minimum) from being a playoff team.So good luck on those 2 Stanley Cups any time soon.

2014-18 the Canucks drafted Demko,Boeser,Pettersson, Hughes.This is the bulk of the core group.

Edited April 15, 2021 by Honky Cat

[NewbieCanuckFan]

1 hour ago, kloubek said:

Not going to quote your lengthy post, and normally I would just give an emoticon, but I agree with every single point (and there were many).  All well said.

 

I don't agree with everything Jim has done, and he's made unfortunate mistakes, but people have to understand how depleted we were after the Gillis era, how we were expected to keep the team winning with a core in the twilight of their careers, and how much work there was to be done in homegrowing our talent. He HAS has a plan all along, and has almost finished executing it.

Certainly not with a career minor league coach as the head coach for multiple seasons.

[aGENT]

1 hour ago, kloubek said:

Not going to quote your lengthy post, and normally I would just give an emoticon, but I agree with every single point (and there were many).  All well said.

 

I don't agree with everything Jim has done, and he's made unfortunate mistakes, but people have to understand how depleted we were after the Gillis era, how we were expected to keep the team winning with a core in the twilight of their careers, and how much work there was to be done in homegrowing our talent. He HAS has a plan all along, and has almost finished executing it.

 

I also don't believe these people realize that we are basically almost there. Yes, Benning will need to continue tweaking and trying to keep injecting high end talent, but most of the pieces are in place. If guys like Rathbone and Podz turn out as expected (and there is a high chance for), maybe we bring in Tryamkin, hopefully Demko remains stellar, we are right there in a year or two. I do think we need to fix our defensive structure though for it all to come together.

 

It's just so hard to see right now for some. The team (for whatever reason) started off poorly then all this Covid BS, it's been one hell of a downer season. But for me, the start of next season symbolizes a shift in our momentum. If I'm right, it's all going to be up from there.

It's actually pretty astounding how well the Canucks have rebuilt thus far given they've basically done it with one hand tied behind their back. Have there been mistakes along the way? Absolutely. But frankly they should be lauded for what they've managed to build under those conditions and with the amount of scrutiny and vitriol they've endured during it.

[spur1]

2 hours ago, NewbieCanuckFan said:

Certainly not with a career minor league coach as the head coach for multiple seasons.

Ya...I know... they just hire them off the internet these days. 

[NewbieCanuckFan]

12 minutes ago, spur1 said:

Ya...I know... they just hire them off the internet these days. 

He seemed like the type of coach to hire if the plan was to ice a bunch of prospects not a guy you hire if you’re trying to “compete for the Cup”.  You hire a guy with actual NHL experience in coaching imho if that is your goal.

[lmm]

2 hours ago, Honky Cat said:

All I can say is the Canucks pretty much have a young core group, with some exceptional players.Really not seeing that with the Wings.

Senators have been rebuilding around the same time as the Wings, and have Chabot,Tkachuk,Norris, Stutzle

Detroit are another two years away (minimum) from being a playoff team.So good luck on those 2 Stanley Cups any time soon.

2014-18 the Canucks drafted Demko,Boeser,Pettersson, Hughes.This is the bulk of the core group.

I am not even going to pretend I know any of those players Steve Y drafted are but I do see some NHL names  picked in the later rounds as well as a 6'4" and 6'3" defenseman drafted in the second round in each of Steve's first 2 drafts.

Are theyEkblad/Hedman/Weber types? who knows

but they stand a better chance based on size alone than anyone Jim has drafted in the last 6 years

 

Did you notice that the players you call our core play exactly like our team does right now, 

All scoring and a goalie, but no defense

[Honky Cat]

1 hour ago, lmm said:

I am not even going to pretend I know any of those players Steve Y drafted are but I do see some NHL names  picked in the later rounds as well as a 6'4" and 6'3" defenseman drafted in the second round in each of Steve's first 2 drafts.

Are theyEkblad/Hedman/Weber types? who knows

but they stand a better chance based on size alone than anyone Jim has drafted in the last 6 years

 

Did you notice that the players you call our core play exactly like our team does right now, 

All scoring and a goalie, but no defense

Just because players are tall, means squat, and Hedman and Ekblad were picked at the very top of the draft.

Well, we have scoring, and a goalie, and Quinn Hughes.The Red Wings dont have elite scoring, defensemen , or a goalie.

Edited April 15, 2021 by Honky Cat

[lmm]

8 hours ago, Honky Cat said:

Just because players are tall, means squat, and Hedman and Ekblad were picked at the very top of the draft.

Well, we have scoring, and a goalie, and Quinn Hughes.The Red Wings dont have elite scoring, defensemen , or a goalie.

being big does not equate to being good

however 

name a good team that does not have big defensemen

[189lb enforcers?]

On 4/13/2021 at 8:42 PM, aGENT said:

 

 

Why does anyone but Frank (who seemingly approved it) care that we spent money during the rebuild? How much is tea in China anyway?

 

 

Why?

Because intent matters.  
 

What did JB intend to do with those cap teams?

 

Did he intend it to buy lottery tickets?  Because that was the result. 
 

It matters that he spent to the cap because without acknowledging how JB’s cap teams still failed and tanked hard, how is this an appropriate assessment of his tenure here as GM?  God of the Gaps, stuff... 
 

I know the canned response to follow my own, much like the distraction you just deployed here in reminding us that it’s not our money, etc., that what comes next are the staple posts like “competitive environment, winning culture”, those PR-bent slogans, but there is no hiding from the result of those cap-intentions, and JB’s failure to deliver either slogan. 
 

Rather than hire Ruutu and other honest pros on PTOs during those Miller, Vrbrata, Gagme RE-thingy years, he sold the fans on the fixing of the PP and all kinds of strategy and budget logic as to his “plan”, but the results were exactly the opposite.  This is fact.  Let’s not forget his IR-mainstay roster too, classic Benning there. 
 

Then there was the whole age-gap replaceathon thing... what the heck was that? 
 

Again, PTOs and college kids could have solved most of that supposed gap, but instead he traded rebuild capital for ‘certain aged players’ to the NHL roster via trades.  Why?  Because they were a certain age... yeah, ‘real good’ move there, JB.  Along with his miserable coaching experiments, suckcessess, that was founded on a fallacy anyways.  It’s still as laughable as it is subjective.  Again, there was a cost to that as well, cap-wise. 
 

If the plan was to finish within lotto contention, then that was the most expensive rebuild in NHL history.  This ‘ plan’ can be spun to show how generous FA was for giving fans an expensive roster during those RE-thingy years, but that wouldn’t be a serious person’s deduction.  Nor would it be honest, as any manager should know. Nobody has ever been handed a budget and told to go dump it over a cliff... well except for maybe the Liberal government. 
 

Bottom line for critical thought regarding his intentions of spending to the cap, is that he failed to execute; still landed at the bottom in spite of himself; and even while there, he still mismanaged draft capital, seemingly at every opportunity.  
 

To state that cap and roster cost is not a paramount consideration in an assessment of his results as GM is to have contempt for thought.  Of course he must be measured on his intended VS the actual result, regarding cost. 
 

It is an exceedingly dishonest take to suggest, in print, that cost shouldn’t be factored into assessing his tenure here.  Lastly, what did JB actually do during this tenure that was intentional, besides the actual draft selection from him unintentional draft position, all these years?  Very few examples, I’m sure, compared to his intended results/Plan/Vision. 
 

The guy has rebuilt a team out of the silver linings of his mismanagement, hence why I’ve labeled it as an accidental rebuild.  
 

Imagine if he had succeeded with those cap teams?  Where would the new core be then?  

 

This was the first season he should have been measured on intended results.  I was hoping he’d be anyways, but nahhh, the virus swoops in like last year and he gets a few more excuses to be possibly kept around.  
 

Guy has a horseshoe up his ass, too bad it didn’t rub off on the team too. 

Edited April 15, 2021 by 189lb enforcers?

[Ballisticsports.]

11 minutes ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

 

 

This was the first season he should have been measured on intended results.  I was hoping he’d be anyways, but nahhh, the virus swoops in like last year and he gets a few more excuses to be possibly kept around.  
 

Guy has a horseshoe up his ass, too bad it didn’t rub off on the team too. 

Being a Manager, of course budgeting and planning and controlling assets is one the biggest task of a Manager, especially a General Manager

Just as scouting unproven NHL talent is the biggest job of Scouting staff - JB has to hope he is getting good info from his staff and drafting is a group effort from the scouts . He is the spokesman for them at draft day, just because he was a scout at one time, it is not what he is doing on this team- to say otherwise is to ignore what other GM's have stated is not their job, yet that is the biggest reason of some people supporting him

 

Some want to put him on a pedestal for this and ignore he has a scouting staff or ignore what he has actually managed

I cannot recall a Canucks team in all it's history being so bad for so long (Even from its inception) and why we are finally excited to see some hope with the younger players we have

 

How would our cupboard look if we hadn't sucked for the last 7 years and never had these top picks and were relying on all our draft picks from the 2nd round on ?

Would many be bragging about our cupboard and team and future then?

 

I have been around since the beginning, and when younger got upset reading Gallagher negativity a long time ago, and because i took it that way, instead of looking at it as constructive criticism. If one is unable to see both sides of observations and unable to think for oneself, then you become sheeple. It is 40 years since reading him and still waiting (so could he have been terribly wrong with what he was saying afterall)?, and from what i see JB does not have the skills needed to be that guy, while i cannot offer who can, unless he magically reinvents himself , I do not see him as being the guy

[aGENT]

1 hour ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

Why?

Because intent matters.  
 

What did JB intend to do with those cap teams?

 

Did he intend it to buy lottery tickets?  Because that was the result. 
 

It matters that he spent to the cap because without acknowledging how JB’s cap teams still failed and tanked hard, how is this an appropriate assessment of his tenure here as GM?  God of the Gaps, stuff... 
 

I know the canned response to follow my own, much like the distraction you just deployed here in reminding us that it’s not our money, etc., that what comes next are the staple posts like “competitive environment, winning culture”, those PR-bent slogans, but there is no hiding from the result of those cap-intentions, and JB’s failure to deliver either slogan. 
 

Rather than hire Ruutu and other honest pros on PTOs during those Miller, Vrbrata, Gagme RE-thingy years, he sold the fans on the fixing of the PP and all kinds of strategy and budget logic as to his “plan”, but the results were exactly the opposite.  This is fact.  Let’s not forget his IR-mainstay roster too, classic Benning there. 
 

Then there was the whole age-gap replaceathon thing... what the heck was that? 
 

Again, PTOs and college kids could have solved most of that supposed gap, but instead he traded rebuild capital for ‘certain aged players’ to the NHL roster via trades.  Why?  Because they were a certain age... yeah, ‘real good’ move there, JB.  Along with his miserable coaching experiments, suckcessess, that was founded on a fallacy anyways.  It’s still as laughable as it is subjective.  Again, there was a cost to that as well, cap-wise. 
 

If the plan was to finish within lotto contention, then that was the most expensive rebuild in NHL history.  This ‘ plan’ can be spun to show how generous FA was for giving fans an expensive roster during those RE-thingy years, but that wouldn’t be a serious person’s deduction.  Nor would it be honest, as any manager should know. Nobody has ever been handed a budget and told to go dump it over a cliff... well except for maybe the Liberal government. 
 

Bottom line for critical thought regarding his intentions of spending to the cap, is that he failed to execute; still landed at the bottom in spite of himself; and even while there, he still mismanaged draft capital, seemingly at every opportunity.  
 

To state that cap and roster cost is not a paramount consideration in an assessment of his results as GM is to have contempt for thought.  Of course he must be measured on his intended VS the actual result, regarding cost. 
 

It is an exceedingly dishonest take to suggest, in print, that cost shouldn’t be factored into assessing his tenure here.  Lastly, what did JB actually do during this tenure that was intentional, besides the actual draft selection from him unintentional draft position, all these years?  Very few examples, I’m sure, compared to his intended results/Plan/Vision. 
 

The guy has rebuilt a team out of the silver linings of his mismanagement, hence why I’ve labeled it as an accidental rebuild.  
 

Imagine if he had succeeded with those cap teams?  Where would the new core be then?  

 

This was the first season he should have been measured on intended results.  I was hoping he’d be anyways, but nahhh, the virus swoops in like last year and he gets a few more excuses to be possibly kept around.  
 

Guy has a horseshoe up his ass, too bad it didn’t rub off on the team too. 

Well you did sum up part of the issue/confusion somewhere in that post, being that it's certainly subjective.

 

I still think many, yourself included, confuse what Benning meant by 'competitive', especially when we were at the tail end/past the point of the Sedins. (Or how much of that was in also PR to a rather skittish market.) It's clear you don't agree, but I don't think management ever felt we were anything resembling 'contenders', particularly after the first couple Sedin retool/'little r' rebuild years.

 

We knew we were likely to finish in the bottom 5-15'ish depending on luck, health, performance etc. Bubble playoff team if things went well, lotto if they didn't. What he didn't want to do was set up the team to loose with certainty, in the summer (tank). Ie: 'competitive' in the context of a rebuild. You want your players to feel they at least have a chance of winning a game and some shred of hope for playoffs, even if unlikely. What you don't want is guys showing up at the rink resigned to losing and just punching in and punching out. I think some of you severely underestimate the negative effects of that, how pervasive it can be to an organization, and how hard it is to get out after its settled in to a team's culture.

 

THAT was his 'intent'.

 

I also think Benning felt confident enough in his scouting department that we'd be able to find good players in that range to rebuild with.

 

And after all that typing , I'll reiterate that I'm not really interested in re-beating the dead horses of the how's and why's of the rebuild or how you feel a #proper rebuild should go. Management and ownership evidently agreed on said plan and the spending to go along with it. You're free to not like and/or understand said plan but the premise that there isn't/wasn't a plan, is laughable.

Edited April 15, 2021 by aGENT

[Tom Sestito]

 

In the words of Ray Ferraro, the Canucks have been operating under the "no plan" plan. 

[DSVII]

18 hours ago, aGENT said:

Profligate is a tad hyperbolic... come on. I never claimed he was doing a 'normal' rebuild (whatever that is...AKA there's no such thing).

 

 

McCann (1st), three second round picks, a third and a fourth and fifth for Linden Vey, Baertschi, Gudbranson, Pedan, Pouliot, Larsen.  This was wasteful.

 

This was a frankenstein retool that to rebuild once the Sedins retired.

 

And yes there is such thing as a normal rebuild. Just look in any sport you will see a pattern of accumulating draft capital, selling UFA and veteran assets for picks and prospects and generally having a low cap to allow you to take advantage of other teams inefficiencies. Any abnormalities is a result of the quality of the management executing said rebuild. Human error.

 

Quote

 

I covered this a few pages ago replying to @lmm Some of the guys we brought in were simply warm bodies/sacrificial lambs as well (never mind just icing an actual NHL team). How about so guys like Boeser, Horvat et al don't need to be the guys gutting shelled and taking on all the media/fan base vitriol? We haven't had any 'stifled' kids. Any who've proven worthy, have played and will continue to do so.

But we already had these guys here. Stanley cup champion Brad Richardson on the fourth line for $1 million, Shawn Matthias, Santorelli. Nevermind the other veterans like Higgins, Hamhuis, Hansen. 

 

The point of contention is why Benning felt the need to pay premium for other veterans when he already had the cheap veteran base here to start with. He also let these guys walk for free to be signed and traded for picks by other rebuilding teams. 

 

I know you also think the 2014 team had no tradeable assets, but they had the veteran presence, even going in to 2016. There were already warm bodies here to shelter the guys on the ice. Jim just chose to walk away from them and pay premium for other vets.

 

You are also not mentioning the 'age gap' that Benning wanted to fill no matter what the cost. That resulted in the failed Vey and Baerschi signings. Again, that is counter productive to drafting a young core and sheltering them. That doesn't scream 'patiently wait and draft' a core.

 

Quote

Some of them now. And they're playing. Some guys still will require sheltering, particularly those guys still arriving. Honestly, until Petey/Hughes are in their primes, we're not a 'contending team'. Never mind getting some miles under the skates of guys like Podz, Hoglander, Lind, Rathboone, Juolevi, Woo etc. The only 'kids' in our core legitimately ready to actually contend right now are Horvat and Boeser IMO. And Boeser really only this year. 

There's no argument here. This is true, but it is also a consequence of not choosing to bottom out in 2015/16 and accumulate draft picks that this mini age gap in our core exists right now. 

 

Quote

A top 2 C with a 2 team list and really not a lot else. Especially after the previous management's Tortorella gong show massively devalued half of them. Like you can't even seriously argue this with a straight face.

Yes you can. the 2014/15 team was a 100 point team. there is value there. And we've seen what good management can do with players whose values were 'depressed' for one reason or another. (Yzerman with Drouin, Sakic with Duchene). 

 

Quote

Kane and Toews are a year younger NOW than the Sedins were then...and they've already been retooling for a couple seasons...no, it's not the same.

We still had Kesler, Bieksa, Schneider, Edler. Sedins were still producing.  And this underlines why it was a mistake to try and compete at that time Benning started. 

 

Quote

Why would it just be since they moved to WPG? They were rebuilding as an organization long before that. 

 

And we've been 'trying to compete' as well. You're moving goal posts for everyone but the Canucks. They've been rebuilding since at least 10/11 and only became a legit 'contender' in the last year, maybe, generously 2. That's 8-9 years by my math.

 

Again, you can't use  that excuse for everyone but the Canucks. Try 05/06 for the Leaves. And they're honestly still not a legit 'contender' IMO.

The Atlanta thrashers are not entirely comparable to us though. They were a new expansion team that was going through their own struggles without any playoff success. Even then the core was starting to be assembled in 2011 with Scheifele, Trouba, Morrissey, Ehlers.

 

You're assuming the same plan was in effect under Sakic and his predecessor. It was not a monolithic plan. Good management can turn things around quicker than the 8-9 years timeline you're expousing. How fast did these teams move out of their rebuild phase when they hired Shanahan, Sakic, Waddell.

 

Also, think we need to define what the end of a rebuild is here. It's not being a contender per say. But when making playoffs and competing with your core becomes your goal and expectation. That expectation was what drove the first part of Benning's tenure in 2014-16.

 

Quote

If we're using your criteria, we've only been 'rebuilding' since the twins retired then. How's that? Look how great we're doing by your moving goal posts now! It's only been three years!

I mean, that's exactly my point. It doesn't take eight years to rebuild. There wasn't one single plan in place since 2014 to rebuild as you are claiming. We had to actually look to the draft and get a new core starting in 2017. Look how much good we did by just drafting for three years rather than trade away picks for projects? Even without pro-actively procuring picks we did pretty well.

 

You take a look at the transactions done in terms of trading picks for projects and how we actually kept our 2nd round picks after 2016 and stopped chasing that age gap...imagine how well much better of a core this approach could have netted if applied in 2014/15/16.

 

We prolonged our losing by three seasons for no reason but to try and chase playoffs. Ad hoc. Myopic. Short term thinking. 

 

We are looking at the same thing here, but seeing different results. So I'll leave it at that.

 

Quote

Nope to be apples to apples, it would have been closer to us full-on rebuilding in 2012 after the disappointing 1st round exit. Two full years before Benning was even hired. And while most our vets were still at max value/we had saleable pieces

They made playoffs three more times after their Stanley Cup run, with a first round exit three years later causing them to admit they needed to rebuild. 

 

The timelines and the states of the team at the time they had to make their choices to retool/rebuild are comparable.

 

Quote

Nope. Just based in reality.

Your interpretation of reality. 

 

Quote

Entirely different starting points. Honestly don't know how anyone could determine otherwise.

Both made playoffs in 2013, got booted in the first round by contending teams. Prompting the need to move on from the stale cores. New GM and president to usher in a rebuild in 2014. I don't see how you can't see this either. But again, you're entitled to your opinion. 

 

What makes the Thrasher's rebuild a more relevant example of a rebuild than what the 2013 Leafs and Rangers went through?

 

Quote

Yeah, no Covid and he still would have got a small inflation raise despite having an 'off' year from high $3m's to low $4m's. We got a 20% Covid discount on that. Do you honestly believe that a consistent, career .46PPG player having an off year is his new 'normal'?

I find that hard to believe he can get a raise when he's producing at half his rate the year before. His experiences in Pittsburgh have proven he's not a consistent player. he's a complementary piece that relies a lot on who he plays with.

 

Quote

Goodness, see this is nonsense. 28 is surely towards the middle-end of a players prime but it's hardly 'twilight years' That's bloody ridiculous. It's 1 year past most players still being RFA's!

 

Roussel didn't 'regress' either FYI. He had a career threatening knee injury that he unfortunately hasn't been the same since. It's a rough sport, that sort of thing happens. It's not like his play just happened to fall off with/because of age.

Everyone has a different game style. Some of them age well, others just fall off a cliff. This will be determined later but 

 

Quote

Whatever floats your boat about last year. I don't see how that counters my point at all.

Just offering a counter point to whenever I hear how Covid is brought up to explain away issues on this team or absolve the management team responsibility of any issues. It's going to cloud any evaluation of JB on whether he can actually assemble a team that can compete in the playoff. It's another topic altogether though so i'll just leave it at that.

 

Anyways, I'm done with this. Gonna take a step back and chillax. Last word is yours. 

 

 

 

Edited April 15, 2021 by DSVII

[awalk]

17 hours ago, kloubek said:

Not going to quote your lengthy post, and normally I would just give an emoticon, but I agree with every single point (and there were many).  All well said.

 

I don't agree with everything Jim has done, and he's made unfortunate mistakes, but people have to understand how depleted we were after the Gillis era, how we were expected to keep the team winning with a core in the twilight of their careers, and how much work there was to be done in homegrowing our talent. He HAS has a plan all along, and has almost finished executing it.

 

I also don't believe these people realize that we are basically almost there. Yes, Benning will need to continue tweaking and trying to keep injecting high end talent, but most of the pieces are in place. If guys like Rathbone and Podz turn out as expected (and there is a high chance for), maybe we bring in Tryamkin, hopefully Demko remains stellar, we are right there in a year or two. I do think we need to fix our defensive structure though for it all to come together.

 

It's just so hard to see right now for some. The team (for whatever reason) started off poorly then all this Covid BS, it's been one hell of a downer season. But for me, the start of next season symbolizes a shift in our momentum. If I'm right, it's all going to be up from there.

This has been true of almost every GM in the past couple decades for this team. Gillis was handed a roster that was ready to jump to the next step, and did a lot of good things to get us there (-1 game ) but definitely continued the trend of dog sh** prospect pool development. This meant he handed Benning a team similar to what Burke handed Nonis: aging core, very few NHL-ready or even NHL potential prospects, and an over-abundance of no-trade clauses.

 

That said, Benning was handed a team with the 6th overall pick in a good draft, plus a pretty good stack of aging assets that could have been moved. Instead he tried to do a "rebuild on the fly" around the Sedins... I thought it was a decent plan at the time. It clearly has not worked and this team is dangerously close to Chiarelli Oilers right now. Top tier young core of 3-4 players, surrounded by a cap nightmare and almost no move-able assets. This is a problem.

Edited April 15, 2021 by awalk

[IBatch]

18 hours ago, lmm said:

do you think Dretoit will be a force before the Canucks or will Vancouver get there before Detroit?

I am willing to wager that with Steve Y in charge Detroit has 2 more cups before Bo Horvat retires cupless or on another team

 

Demko Boeser Petterson

or Boeser Petterson Hughes?

which 4 year period are you talking about?

 

Put your money where your mouth is.  I want to here your wager.   So far Yzerman is starting Holland's process all over again and they are our closest comp.   Mantha is gone.   Would be like us trading Horvat in a way. 

[IBatch]

2 hours ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

Why?

Because intent matters.  
 

What did JB intend to do with those cap teams?

 

Did he intend it to buy lottery tickets?  Because that was the result. 
 

It matters that he spent to the cap because without acknowledging how JB’s cap teams still failed and tanked hard, how is this an appropriate assessment of his tenure here as GM?  God of the Gaps, stuff... 
 

I know the canned response to follow my own, much like the distraction you just deployed here in reminding us that it’s not our money, etc., that what comes next are the staple posts like “competitive environment, winning culture”, those PR-bent slogans, but there is no hiding from the result of those cap-intentions, and JB’s failure to deliver either slogan. 
 

Rather than hire Ruutu and other honest pros on PTOs during those Miller, Vrbrata, Gagme RE-thingy years, he sold the fans on the fixing of the PP and all kinds of strategy and budget logic as to his “plan”, but the results were exactly the opposite.  This is fact.  Let’s not forget his IR-mainstay roster too, classic Benning there. 
 

Then there was the whole age-gap replaceathon thing... what the heck was that? 
 

Again, PTOs and college kids could have solved most of that supposed gap, but instead he traded rebuild capital for ‘certain aged players’ to the NHL roster via trades.  Why?  Because they were a certain age... yeah, ‘real good’ move there, JB.  Along with his miserable coaching experiments, suckcessess, that was founded on a fallacy anyways.  It’s still as laughable as it is subjective.  Again, there was a cost to that as well, cap-wise. 
 

If the plan was to finish within lotto contention, then that was the most expensive rebuild in NHL history.  This ‘ plan’ can be spun to show how generous FA was for giving fans an expensive roster during those RE-thingy years, but that wouldn’t be a serious person’s deduction.  Nor would it be honest, as any manager should know. Nobody has ever been handed a budget and told to go dump it over a cliff... well except for maybe the Liberal government. 
 

Bottom line for critical thought regarding his intentions of spending to the cap, is that he failed to execute; still landed at the bottom in spite of himself; and even while there, he still mismanaged draft capital, seemingly at every opportunity.  
 

To state that cap and roster cost is not a paramount consideration in an assessment of his results as GM is to have contempt for thought.  Of course he must be measured on his intended VS the actual result, regarding cost. 
 

It is an exceedingly dishonest take to suggest, in print, that cost shouldn’t be factored into assessing his tenure here.  Lastly, what did JB actually do during this tenure that was intentional, besides the actual draft selection from him unintentional draft position, all these years?  Very few examples, I’m sure, compared to his intended results/Plan/Vision. 
 

The guy has rebuilt a team out of the silver linings of his mismanagement, hence why I’ve labeled it as an accidental rebuild.  
 

Imagine if he had succeeded with those cap teams?  Where would the new core be then?  

 

This was the first season he should have been measured on intended results.  I was hoping he’d be anyways, but nahhh, the virus swoops in like last year and he gets a few more excuses to be possibly kept around.  
 

Guy has a horseshoe up his ass, too bad it didn’t rub off on the team too. 

The thing that might be missing from this - was it accidentally on purpose?   

 

To me at least, the team was doomed from the start.   It was always about timing the Sedins retirement with the next core.    I also think he's learned on the job and got better, so those first three years were trial by fire.    JB never does what seems easy to do.   Well i guess Benn for a 6th counts for something, he's learning to use his cap space to get something later lol.   I don't really care how we got here, but we did get here, and it's better then i expected. Figured we'd be more like Detroit.   Turfing the golden boy (two decades of best or one of the best GMs out there for Yzerman.  Flounder around and maybe parts of this core and the next compete. Sucks now a top team pretty much is a gaurantee to suck for a decade.   Even sucks more that you could suck for a decade no matter what happens.    At least a clear path has emerged.   Accidentally or not.   

[aGENT]

28 minutes ago, DSVII said:

McCann (1st), three second round picks, a third and a fourth and fifth for Linden Vey, Baertschi, Gudbranson, Pedan, Pouliot, Larsen.  This was wasteful.

 

This was a frankenstein retool that to rebuild once the Sedins retired.

 

And yes there is such thing as a normal rebuild. Just look in any sport you will see a pattern of accumulating draft capital, selling UFA and veteran assets for picks and prospects and generally having a low cap to allow you to take advantage of other teams inefficiencies. Any abnormalities is a result of the quality of the management executing said rebuild. Human error.

 

But we already had these guys here. Stanley cup champion Brad Richardson on the fourth line for $1 million, Shawn Matthias, Santorelli. Nevermind the other veterans like Higgins, Hamhuis, Hansen. 

 

The point of contention is why Benning felt the need to pay premium for other veterans when he already had the cheap veteran base here to start with. He also let these guys walk for free to be signed and traded for picks by other rebuilding teams. 

 

I know you also think the 2014 team had no tradeable assets, but they had the veteran presence, even going in to 2016. There were already warm bodies here to shelter the guys on the ice. Jim just chose to walk away from them and pay premium for other vets.

 

You are also not mentioning the 'age gap' that Benning wanted to fill no matter what the cost. That resulted in the failed Vey and Baerschi signings. Again, that is counter productive to drafting a young core and sheltering them. That doesn't scream 'patiently wait and draft' a core.

Appreciate the responses but I already said I'm not interested in re-beating dead horses on the merits of us vs them rebuild approaches. It's been done, and done again, and again, and again... already on here. It's a time vampire.

 

28 minutes ago, DSVII said:

There's no argument here. This is true, but it is also a consequence of not choosing to bottom out in 2015/16 and accumulate draft picks that this mini age gap in our core exists right now. 

Show me a core that doesn't have any age gap? Nature of the beast. How old are Landeskog and Johnson on COL? Wheeler and Scheifele? They're not just a bunch of 22-25 year old 'kids'.

 

28 minutes ago, DSVII said:

 

Yes you can. the 2014/15 team was a 100 point team. there is value there. And we've seen what good management can do with players whose values were 'depressed' for one reason or another. (Yzerman with Drouin, Sakic with Duchene). 

Yes only after Benning recovered some of it by supporting the twins instead of tearing it down. Burrows, Hansen et al had negative value after the awful Tortorella experiment. Drouin and Duchene were both young players. Once again, you're trying to compare apples and oranges.

 

28 minutes ago, DSVII said:

 

We still had Kesler, Bieksa, Schneider, Edler. Sedins were still producing.  And this underlines why it was a mistake to try and compete at that time Benning started. 

Neither Edler or the twins were ever going anywhere. Schneider had already been moved by previous management. Everyone else of value was in fact moved after Benning recovered some of their value.

 

28 minutes ago, DSVII said:

The Atlanta thrashers are not entirely comparable to us though. They were a new expansion team that was going through their own struggles without any playoff success. Even then the core was starting to be assembled in 2011 with Scheifele, Trouba, Morrissey, Ehlers.

They moved eleven years after expansion, collecting rebuild assets along that entire timeline and then took another 6 years as the Jets to finish the rebuild.

 

28 minutes ago, DSVII said:

 

You're assuming the same plan was in effect under Sakic and his predecessor. It was not a monolithic plan. Good management can turn things around quicker than the 8-9 years timeline you're expousing. How fast did these teams move out of their rebuild phase when they hired Shanahan, Sakic, Waddell.

I'm assuming no such thing. I'm following that they had assets, built up over many years, that Sakic either had for, or could sell off to further fuel, their rebuild. Benning had nothing of the sort.

 

28 minutes ago, DSVII said:

Also, think we need to define what the end of a rebuild is here. It's not being a contender per say. But when making playoffs and competing with your core becomes your goal and expectation. That expectation was what drove the first part of Benning's tenure in 2014-16.

 

I mean, that's exactly my point. It doesn't take eight years to rebuild. There wasn't one single plan in place since 2014 to rebuild as you are claiming. We had to actually look to the draft and get a new core starting in 2017. Look how much good we did by just drafting for three years rather than trade away picks for projects? Even without pro-actively procuring picks we did pretty well.

So  no players drafted before 2017 are part of (or potentially part of) our rebuild? No Boeser, Brisebois, Zhukenov, Gaudette, Jasek, Virtanen, McCann(Pearson) Demko, Tryamkin or Horvat. That's silly.

 

28 minutes ago, DSVII said:

 

You take a look at the transactions done in terms of trading picks for projects and how we actually kept our 2nd round picks after 2016 and stopped chasing that age gap...imagine how well much better of a core this approach could have netted if applied in 2014/15/16.

 

We prolonged our losing by three seasons for no reason but to try and chase playoffs. Ad hoc. Myopic. Short term thinking. 

 

We are looking at the same thing here, but seeing different results. So I'll leave it at that.

 

They made playoffs three more times after their Stanley Cup run, with a first round exit three years later causing them to admit they needed to rebuild. 

 

The timelines and the states of the team at the time they had to make their choices to retool/rebuild are comparable.

 

Your interpretation of reality. 

Dead horses again.

 

28 minutes ago, DSVII said:

Both made playoffs in 2013, got booted in the first round by contending teams. Prompting the need to move on from the stale cores. New GM and president to usher in a rebuild in 2014. I don't see how you can't see this either. But again, you're entitled to your opinion. 

Saleable assets, years of already rebuilding prospects and/or younger players vs empty cupboards, age gap and EOL players. Like I actually think it's hilarious when people try to equate them.

 

28 minutes ago, DSVII said:

What makes the Thrasher's rebuild a more relevant example of a rebuild than what the 2013 Leafs and Rangers went through?

It's not really meant as a direct comparison. It's simply to point out you can't truly rebuild a team in like 6 or less years. It's laughable. There's no examples unless you completely move goalposts along the way of not including the 4+ years all your examples had to accrue young assets to use and/or sell 'before' their 'real' rebuilds. Frankly I don't think there's a clear comparable to how handcuffed management was when he was hired. No prospect pool to speak of, threads of saleable assets, EOL vets with NMC's, massive age gap... There's no real comparable team that started with it's hands as firmly tied behind it's back.

 

 

28 minutes ago, DSVII said:

 

I find that hard to believe he can get a raise when he's producing at half his rate the year before. His experiences in Pittsburgh have proven he's not a consistent player. he's a complementary piece that relies a lot on who he plays with.

Outlier stats in a gong show season on a team that has largely been a mess does not a trend make. Never mind that without this pandemic, he (and the rest of the team) may not even be having an 'off' year/or near as bad of one. In an alternate universe without a pandemic, he likely  gets an inflation, UFA raise.

 

28 minutes ago, DSVII said:

 

Everyone has a different game style. Some of them age well, others just fall off a cliff. This will be determined later but 

Sure. Time will tell. Under normal circumstances most players prime is roughly 24-30 and tapering down until about 32-34 where they largely start to fall more rapidly (dependent on health, injuries, player type etc). I'm not particularly concerned about his age.

 

28 minutes ago, DSVII said:

Just offering a counter point to whenever I hear how Covid is brought up to explain away issues on this team or absolve the management team responsibility of any issues. It's going to cloud any evaluation of JB on whether he can actually assemble a team that can compete in the playoff. It's another topic altogether though so i'll just leave it at that.

I mean it's kind of a big deal that has massively impacted a lot of things. It's not some 'the sun was in my eyes' excuse. It is indeed another subject.