Seven years without a clear plan from Canucks brass.

[Aladeen]

1 minute ago, Canuckfanforlife82 said:

When has Benning in his tenure been able trade players on the roster for

assets? We have seen this story before. He will come out and say he tried but there was nothing. You will see a lot of other teams make trades and we will be left scratching our heads. How come it is so hard for our team make moves and yet we see other teams making trades and getting assets back? It’s because they have gms that are capable. If he surprises me that will be awesome but I expect more excuses as to why they couldn’t make trades. It happens almost every year. The puzzled, bewildered look we have become so accustomed to. I hope I am wrong but with covid it’s another excuse to use.

Schmidt for a 3rd comes to mind. I haven't seen a deal so lopsided in quite awhile.

 

Schmidt was playing 22 minutes a night, 31 pts in 59 games - holy crap what a steal of deal, I wonder how many GMs had bewildered looks on their faces missing out on that trade. 

[Dekey Pete]

It sounds like an excuse, and maybe it is a little bit, but like Benning said early on, they planned this team around normal division opponents.  Only at the last minute were the divisions realigned to put us against some very good Canadian teams.  Can you imagine if we got to play 1/2 our games against Arizona, Anaheim, LA and San Jose, instead of Toronto, Edmonton, Winnipeg and Montreal?  This season would look very different right now.  Toronto, Edmonton and Winnipeg carry some of the best players in the entire league.

The silver lining is, we should be due for a high pick at the end of this rough one.  Hopefully by the Fall we'll have the vaccines out and we can go back to a more normal season.  This season is a bump in the road, but we're definitely on an upwards trajectory.  

[aGENT]

6 minutes ago, Canuckfanforlife82 said:

When has Benning in his tenure been able trade players on the roster for assets? We have seen this story before. He will come out and say he tried but there was nothing. You will see a lot of other teams make trades and we will be left scratching our heads. How come it is so hard for our team make moves and yet we see other teams making trades and getting assets back? It’s because they have gms that are capable. If he surprises me that will be awesome but I expect more excuses as to why they couldn’t make trades. It happens almost every year. The puzzled, bewildered look we have become so accustomed to. I hope I am wrong but with covid it’s another excuse to use.

We've traded a lot of players for assets when the opportunity was there. If you're going to make an argument, try to stick to actual facts.

[DSVII]

17 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

We won 8 out of 10 games.  Was Benning supposed to just sell all his assets when your team is winning?  You think the owner is going to approve that when he may have a shot at some playoff revenue.

 

Stop living in a bubble.  it's not all black and white.  Decisions are being made on a weekly basis and changes are always being looked at.  We are not Buffalo where we know we are the worst team in the league so therefore you can look at trading core assets as well as expiring contracts no matter what the team does on the ice.  With the Canucks we play well enough to win some games and not others, so alot of that has to do with coaching and preparation.  Not to mention we have several key injuries right now.

 

 

If the stated goal is to compete in two years (again, the goal post has changed from 2014, 2017), knowing this season is a write off. An eight game winning streak that takes you back to 0.500 doesn't change the need to evaluate your roster and off load assets that you may not plan to keep for that timeline in 2 years. So no, not all his assets, but players like Benn, Sutter, Pearson, if they are not to be in your roster in two years, should be shopped. 

 

 

 

Edited March 26, 2021 by DSVII

[kanucks25]

11 minutes ago, NewbieCanuckFan said:

I wouldn't have a problem with dating my sister.

You missed an important word here and it completely changes the meaning of the sentence. 

[Canuckfanforlife82]

5 minutes ago, aGENT said:

We've traded a lot of players for assets when the opportunity was there. If you're going to make an argument, try to stick to actual facts.

So go ahead and tell me what they are? You have to come back with actual assets we have right now made from those trades. He has also let a lot of players walk for free. I can go through a long list if you would like. Again it has affected our depth long term.

Edited March 26, 2021 by Canuckfanforlife82

[NewbieCanuckFan]

2 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

You missed an important word here and it completely changes the meaning of the sentence. 

I would've post the Full Metal Jacket scene but it has that expletive.

[bigbadcanucks]

Pro sports is all about results...last August when the team was marching onto Conference semis in the bubble, nearly everyone was excited about how well the Benning plan was coming together.  I remember guys like Elliot Friedman were extolling the wisdom of Benning building a top six of young, talented, high powered offensive players and a bottom six of wily old veterans who could slug it out.  And many bought into that "plan". 

 

Fast forward to spring 2021 where the Canucks have played well at times and have generated lousy results, with the inevitable "gotta rebuild", or the "plan sucks" or "there is no plan" conversations taking place.

 

In between, Demko became a true no. 1 tender, Schmidt and Hamonic took over from Tanev and Stecher, Hoglander replaced Toffoli, and Pettersson/Hughes/Miller all took a step back when the Canucks faithful were expecting them to take two steps forward.

 

From where I sit, I see Benning's plan as building organizational depth based on skill and talent through astute drafting, and complementing it with hard working/grinding veterans.  As with many GMs, Benning's actual vs. objectives have its fair share of hits and misses.

 

Hits, in no particular order: 1) Demko's development and emergence; 2) Pettersson; 3) Boeser; 4) Hughes; 5) Miller trade; 6) Pearson trade; 7) Schmidt trade; 8) Motte for Vanek deal

 

Misses, in no particular order: 1) Eriksson signing; 2) Beagle signing; 3) Roussel signing; 4) Virtanen pick; 5) Ferland signing; 6) Failing to sign Toffoli

 

To be determined: 1) Myers signing; 2) Podkolzin; 3) Hoglander; 4) Rathbone; 5) Hamonic; 6) Juolevi; 7) Holtby signing; 8) Woo; 9) DiPietro

 

I'm sure I have missed a few in each of the categories.

 

IMHO, even though it caused short term pain losing Tanev and Markstrom was the right move, based on team demographics.

 

Lastly, I view this season as an all or none type of season, so the lost season hasn't really alarmed me all that much.  However, if this continues into the next, I'll be worried for the Canucks and for myself as a loyal Canucks fan.  Til then, I'm going to be thankful that we've got hockey during the pandemic and keep cheering on my sometime awesome and sometimes woeful Canucks.

Edited March 26, 2021 by bigbadcanucks

[-DLC-]

2 hours ago, Alain Vigneault said:

In seriousness, the "plan" has changed multiple times and been reimagined on the fly.  That has led to the execution behind exacting these plans to miss the mark quite frequently.

 

Whether it was building a winning team in the beginning, or retooling/rebuilding now, there's been a cycle of one step forward and two steps back with a lot of the moves.  Drafting has been fairly consistent, which is great, but pro scouting and asset management, to date, have been atrocious and we have suffered immensely for it.

 

Peaks and troughs, ups and downs, are inevitable, especially in the proverbial grind to the "top", but the extent to which we hit these troughs, these lows, are far too frequent.  This most recent set of lows after our success in the bubble has especially been damaging.

 

So, what is the plan?  Well, 3 weeks ago, we were "2 years away", and last week going into this week, we were seeing if this team could ride a string of wins into the playoffs and refusing to sell assets because of that.  That says it all.

Well some things are unforeseen.  

 

Injuries.  Development of players.  Players who opt to move on.  Etc.

 

None of us "know" the plan because we're not in the loop and rely on hearsay and reports.  

 

Damaging how?  They HAD success in the bubble, to some degree and then lost some key players and had to adjust.  They've even expressed that.  Some of the people who cry about long term deals, older players, etc. should be happy that we didn't sign on long term for Marky with Demko waiting in the wings.  Tanev, who's 31 and was looking to optimize his final year(s) deal.  Some are never satisfied and want perfection but that's THEIR plan.  The team gets a say.

 

"Far too frequent" is hard to pin on THIS group because it's a matter of moving parts.  Patience is required.  

 

Who had a 2 years away plan 3 weeks ago?  I'd say that's probably not a bad guestimate actually.

 

No team can predict a cup....there are FAR too many variables involved.  You can strive for one but you have to go through a whole lot of territory to get one.  31 teams all think their plan is the one but one team's pans out.

 

Asset management is a two way deal.

[DSVII]

36 minutes ago, Boudrias said:

Why would Benning broadcast to his competing GM's what his priorities are? For sure he doesn't owe the fans any 'detailed' plan. Comical what goes on here.

It's comical that the mish mash of moves that led us to the self inflicted salary cap squeeze can be interpreted as a coherent plan since 2014. 

 

Fans don't need plans spelled out, but they expect consistency. You can infer a plan from the actions this group takes, and it's always been a pattern of chopping off their right hand (drafting) with their left (trading away picks and signing overpriced UFAs). 

 

Considering Fans don't owe the Canucks their money, they do need to communicate to fans the path they are following towards sustained future success

 

Benning is hardly subtle by the way, he's absolutely broadcasting to his fellow GMs what is priorites were. They just change whenever shiny keys jump in front of him. (see OEL)

 

Edited March 26, 2021 by DSVII

[aGENT]

32 minutes ago, Convincing John said:

- He admittedly doesn’t look far ahead, when you hear things like “I ran out of time” “I look at our team day to day” it’s hard to accept his excuses. 

 

Speaking of the team's poor messaging, I was laughing my arse off when I first heard those quotes as I knew they were going to get misconstrued and become memes 

 

Looking at the team day to day doesn't mean there's no larger plan at work. But things literally do change EVERY day in the league. You have injuries, other teams have injuries, players become available that weren't yesterday etc, etc. You have a greater plan that you adjust day to day, as new information becomes available. This really shouldn't be surprising or news worthy.

 

As for running out of time, yeah Benning has to wait for Vegas to sign Pietrangelo before he could trade for Schmidt as an example. He's not in a vacuum, sometimes he has to wait on other GM's and players to sign or make moves. He was reportedly talking to numerous teams about moving cap to sign the likes of Toffoli and/or Tanev/Stecher. Given Covid and the diminishing cap space around the league, they decided to take security of a contract over waiting. This wasn't isolated to just Benning/Vancouver. GM's around the league were doing acrobatics to finalize rosters. They 'ran out of time' too.

Edited March 26, 2021 by aGENT

[canuckleheads fan]

2 hours ago, appleboy said:

I agree that the club has drafted well under Jim. We all do. 

So is that the plan? Fumble through year after year with no direction?        How many extra draft picks could have been acquired if there was an organized plan to maximize assets?

I would imagine that when we were really horrible and very young, it was hard to get quality UFAs to sign in Vancouver, and the UFAs JB could attract had to be paid more because they'd have no shot at the cup and Vancouver is a high-tax venue.  The bottom six UFAs and players that JB brought in were all high quality teammates and strong defensive players, Motte, Sutter, Beags, even Rooster, and that was by design to provide veteran leadership and balance the offensive prowess of the top six, giving the team a better chance to win by having the bottom six guys take a higher percentage of defensive zone starts to take pressure off the young guys.  So, as the Canucks improve, as the youngsters smoothe off the rough edges, my guess is that JB will find higher quality UFAs, like Thornton and Spezza, who are willing to take bargain basement type deals and play third and fourth line roles in exchange for a shot at the cup.  You'll notice that as the team improved, and JB recognized that Petey needed a big, physical player on his line, he pulled the trigger on his best trade so far in his tenure, getting under-used JT Miller in what I think is a real steal.  The plan as we move forward is to continue to add to and build around the core, fill the minor league system with quality prospects who will play a role one day, sign UFAs to fill in the gaps and hope they turn out to be a good fit.

Edited March 26, 2021 by canuckleheads fan

[aGENT]

11 minutes ago, Canuckfanforlife82 said:

So go ahead and tell me what they are? You have to come back with actual assets we have right now made from those trades. He has also let a lot of players walk for free. I can go through a long list if you would like. Again it has affected our depth long term.

Of the top of my head... Kesler, Bieksa, Burrows, Hansen, Vanek... 

[kanucks25]

6 minutes ago, Dekey Pete said:

It sounds like an excuse, and maybe it is a little bit, but like Benning said early on, they planned this team around normal division opponents.  Only at the last minute were the divisions realigned to put us against some very good Canadian teams.  Can you imagine if we got to play 1/2 our games against Arizona, Anaheim, LA and San Jose, instead of Toronto, Edmonton, Winnipeg and Montreal?  This season would look very different right now.  Toronto, Edmonton and Winnipeg carry some of the best players in the entire league.

 

 

[Gurn]

Original plan:

 I'm going to walk to work.

Look outside and it is hailing golf balls.

Stick to original plan or should I change it?

[Convincing John]

6 minutes ago, debluvscanucks said:

Well some things are unforeseen.  

 

Injuries.  Development of players.  Players who opt to move on.  Etc.

 

None of us "know" the plan because we're not in the loop and rely on hearsay and reports.  

 

Damaging how?  They HAD success in the bubble, to some degree and then lost some key players and had to adjust.  They've even expressed that.  Some of the people who cry about long term deals, older players, etc. should be happy that we didn't sign on long term for Marky with Demko waiting in the wings.  Tanev, who's 31 and was looking to optimize his final year(s) deal.  Some are never satisfied and want perfection but that's THEIR plan.  The team gets a say.

 

"Far too frequent" is hard to pin on THIS group because it's a matter of moving parts.  Patience is required.  

 

Who had a 2 years away plan 3 weeks ago?  I'd say that's probably not a bad guestimate actually.

 

No team can predict a cup....there are FAR too many variables involved.  You can strive for one but you have to go through a whole lot of territory to get one.  31 teams all think their plan is the one but one team's pans out.

 

Asset management is a two way deal.

It’s not so complex. Look at it what is literally in front of us. We have been at the bottom of the league for roughly 6 years now and we have spent the maximum amount in all those years. He isn’t getting the results, plain and simple.  If he just put his pen away every summer since he started. We would have the same core, possibly more and we would have maximum cap flexibility to insulate them. You don’t insulate a core before you have a core. All his UFA spending hasn’t gotten this team any further ahead, it’s only impeded our progress. 

[Canuckfanforlife82]

3 minutes ago, Convincing John said:

It’s not so complex. Look at it what is literally in front of us. We have been at the bottom of the league for roughly 6 years now and we have spent the maximum amount in all those years. He isn’t getting the results, plain and simple.  If he just put his pen away every summer since he started. We would have the same core, possibly more and we would have maximum cap flexibility to insulate them. You don’t insulate a core before you have a core. All his UFA spending hasn’t gotten this team any further ahead, it’s only impeded our progress. 

Exactly.

[kanucks25]

7 minutes ago, gurn said:

Original plan:

 I'm going to walk to work.

Look outside and it is hailing golf balls.

Stick to original plan or should I change it?

A good planner checks the weather beforehand

[Canuckfanforlife82]

So here’s my question to everyone. Are there more reasons to keep Benning as gm or are there more reasons to fire him? Please explain.

Edited March 26, 2021 by Canuckfanforlife82

[alucard]

It`s not that bad,cheer up. 

Later days in middle of next season would be the time to put Benning in front of Canucks jury.