Seven years without a clear plan from Canucks brass.

[Bertuzzipunch]

12 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Lol 7 years of Benning history gives me a pretty solid chance of that not happening. Cant wait to see how people defend him if he wastes all the cap space he is finally getting. He has done it every time. Not sure why anything would be expected to change now.

Because we actually have players now that deserve the money. Giving your top players top money will literally handcuff him to give good money to bad players lol. 

Edited May 14, 2021 by Bertuzzipunch

[IBatch]

22 hours ago, iinatcc said:

Yeah and if Toffoli was in the team the Canucks could actually have 3 scoring lines with Pettersson, Miller, and Horvat all taking center and Pearson, Höglander, Boeser, Toffoli, and maybe Podkolzin or an untraded Gaudette as line mates 

No cap and ED TT is a no brainer.   Doubt anyone would even debate that.  No cap even LE is a no brainer because you can't have enough depth.  

 

Personally, i'd rather have our futures (Hogs, Podz, Lind and whomever) given our cap.    TT is a luxury at this point, and by the time our teams at the right age will be either retiring or doing a league minumum deal somewhere just to stay in the league likely.    

[Kootenay Gold]

All the coulda woulda crap is just that... water under the bridge IMO. I am far more interested in how we move forward and not in spending hours upon hours and pages upon pages of re-hashing that which has already transpired.

[iinatcc]

1 minute ago, Kootenay Gold said:

All the coulda woulda crap is just that... water under the bridge IMO. I am far more interested in how we move forward and not in spending hours upon hours and pages upon pages of re-hashing that which has already transpired.

You are right but the thing is I think after 7 or so seasons Benning is always going to be Benning and, based on his history as the GM, I can't imagine him really improving the team. 

[Bertuzzipunch]

4 minutes ago, Kootenay Gold said:

All the coulda woulda crap is just that... water under the bridge IMO. I am far more interested in how we move forward and not in spending hours upon hours and pages upon pages of re-hashing that which has already transpired.

Thats why its better to focus on this coming draft. Its a real positive compared to all the wat ifs benning has done over the years. Also train yourself on being excited when loui, lou beagle and rousells contracts are gone in a year. There is a light at the end of the tunnel lol

[iinatcc]

Just now, Bertuzzipunch said:

Thats why its better to focus on this coming draft. Its a real positive compared to all the wat ifs benning has done over the years. Also train yourself on being excited when loui, lou beagle and rousells contracts are gone in a year. There is a light at the end of the tunnel lol

But what's going to prevent him from resigning similar players on similar deals.

 

If his reason for getting Beagle and Roussel is to "insulate" the young guys what's makes you think he won't do the same once more young guys are drafted ? 

[wallstreetamigo]

15 minutes ago, Bertuzzipunch said:

Because we actually have players now that deserve the money. Giving your top players top money will literally handcuff him to give good money to bad players lol. 

Maybe. Or he still gives good money to bad players hoping the good players take less for the privelage of staying. Seems to be his M.O. He could just as easily cap us out and lose a good young player as a result. We already lost some good vets as a result of this approach, after all. Its not without risk given his terrible contract management and pro scouting judgement history.

[knucklehead91]

1 hour ago, iinatcc said:

So two points I'd like to reply on here ..

 

Considering how much he was producing offensively with the Canucks and the Habs a Toffoli in a steady decline is still worth it a 4.25 million. Toffoli is a 0.84 PPG and 28 goal scorer for the Habs. If a steady decline means he's down to a 0.6 PPG player and scoring only 20 goals. Still good value. Or would it be better paying Brandon Sutter $100,000 more scoring being a 0.25 PPG player for a number of seasons? 

 

As for Toffoli being the missing link only if The Canucks are competitive. Didn't Benning always say before this season this is a team "that can compete"? And if the Canucks were a rebuilding team then why did Benning give up a 1st for JT Miller and give up gave up a prospect, a 2nd round pick and a conditional pick for Toffoli? This isn't something rebuilding teams do. So to me Benning gave up some of the teams futures for Toffoli it would have made sense to at least keep longer term. 

To your first point, Sutter is a centre and Toffoli is a winger. Sutter has also been plagued by injuries, something that is not his fault. As you can see without Sutter or Beagle in the lineup our special team suck on the PK, Gaudette (when he was here) was not capable of taking on 3/4c duties. Our defensive zone begins to crumble, Horvat becomes over played in the dzone and doesnt have Beagle or Sutter to help take care of the important draws in the dzone. When Sutter and Eriksson were signed, they were the hailmary “puzzle” piece players that Benning hoped would give the Sedins another crack at a cup. Benning, up until the Sedins retired, worked tirelessly at giving the Sedins another shot at a cup. This is a different time and the reasons as to why previous contracts were handed out and why current ones are not being offered. It would be different if Sutter was offered a contract at the same time Toffoli was not. Sutter also had 21 when he was acquired, he had a major injury in his first season and then put up 17g 17a and was worth his contract especially on a team that was destined for a rebuild, you cant underpay guys to come to a rebuilding team or to stay. They want to win. Hanging onto the 29 year old players is like hanging onto the 2010-11 roster, hanging on and hoping we can do it again and then the next thing you know, your core is 35 and you havent been contender for the last 3 years and now its time to blow it up. If Gillis would have started making moves and acquiring draft picks, we may have extended the window to win. But he held onto what was so close, the what ifs or what coulda been.  You need to know when its time to cut something loose and move on. We lived in the past for too long. We didnt make enough tough choices after 2011 or 2012 to get back to a contending team.

 

 

Your second point, i guess what i should have clarified when I said competitive is I meant a contender. We can compete for our losses but we are not contending for our wins. There was an opportunity to get into the playoffs, Benning went for it and we got in on a technicality. We beat a Minnesota team who at the time last year, was stale and meh. Then we took on a stl team who wasnt healthy, Tarasenko was out all season and played 4 games. Then the real test came, we faced a contender. We realized pretty quick that Toffoli was a measuring stick and we were no match for Vegas. We made a move to see how we would do, we sacrificed a draft pick yes, and we got a real test and Toffoli was not the answer. We scraped our way to a game 7 in a heavily lopsided series where Demko stood on his head. We got knocked out, our D needed big upgrades, our top 6 was not enough fire power. We identified our goalie to be so we let Marky go. We went after a big dman who can move the puck and play all situations (OEL) we couldnt make it happen (thank god cuz i did not want OEL for his cap hit and term) Went and acquired Schmidt who has been useful.

 

Ultimately this year is not to be blamed on not having Toffoli, because who’s to say he would have the same success here if he went through the same scheduling, COVID and the final 19 game log jam. Mixed in with injuries.
 

At some point we have to let things go, we cant keep holding onto 2011. Retool and improve, dont stagnate

 

Toffoli was a measuring stick last year. We knew we werent ready to contend, but checked to see  how much oil was on the dipstick.

 

He didnt help us then and he wouldnt help us now. We did not beat Vegas and we were lucky to even make it to a game 6, let alone a game 7.

 

 

Canucks were paper, Vegas was scissors, Dallas was rock, Tampa was dynamite.

Edited May 14, 2021 by knucklehead91

[wallstreetamigo]

7 minutes ago, iinatcc said:

But what's going to prevent him from resigning similar players on similar deals.

 

If his reason for getting Beagle and Roussel is to "insulate" the young guys what's makes you think he won't do the same once more young guys are drafted ? 

This.

 

I think many Benning supporters will just have a new round of bad contracts to defend.

 

Realistically for 2 years the young platers and guys like Bo and Miller have been insulating the vets rather than the other way around.

[Beefcake]

There is a reason why Travis Green doesn't have a new contract yet. Ownership has another Gm in mind to run the ship and he gets to choose his own coach

Edited May 14, 2021 by Beefcake
typo

[Nucker 67]

5 minutes ago, Beefcake said:

There is a reason why Travis Green doesn't have a new contract yet. Ownership has another Gm in mind to run the ship and he gets to choose his own coach

Interesting, any idea who they might be targeting? New GM means possibly an entire new coaching staff. Hope they keep Clark though. 

[wallstreetamigo]

13 minutes ago, knucklehead91 said:

To your first point, Sutter is a centre and Toffoli is a winger. Sutter has also been plagued by injuries, something that is not his fault. As you can see without Sutter or Beagle in the lineup our special team suck on the PK, Gaudette (when he was here) was not capable of taking on 3/4c duties. Our defensive zone begins to crumble, Horvat becomes over played in the dzone and doesnt have Beagle or Sutter to help take care of the important draws in the dzone. When Sutter and Eriksson were signed, they were the hailmary “puzzle” piece players that Benning hoped would give the Sedins another crack at a cup. Benning, up until the Sedins retired, worked tirelessly at giving the Sedins another shot at a cup. This is a different time and the reasons as to why previous contracts were handed out and why current ones are not being offered. It would be different if Sutter was offered a contract at the same time Toffoli was not. Sutter also had 21 when he was acquired, he had a major injury in his first season and then put up 17g 17a and was worth his contract especially on a team that was destined for a rebuild, you cant underpay guys to come to a rebuilding team or to stay. They want to win. Hanging onto the 29 year old players is like hanging onto the 2010-11 roster, hanging on and hoping we can do it again and then the next thing you know, your core is 35 and you havent been contender for the last 3 years and now its time to blow it up. If Gillis would have started making moves and acquiring draft picks, we may have extended the window to win. But he held onto what was so close, the what ifs or what coulda been.  You need to know when its time to cut something loose and move on. We lived in the past for too long. We didnt make enough tough choices after 2011 or 2012 to get back to a contending team.

 

 

Your second point, i guess what i should have clarified when I said competitive is I meant a contender. We can compete for our losses but we are not contending for our wins. There was an opportunity to get into the playoffs, Benning went for it and we got in on a technicality. We beat a Minnesota team who at the time last year, was stale and meh. Then we took on a stl team who wasnt healthy, Tarasenko was out all season and played 4 games. Then the real test came, we faced a contender. We realized pretty quick that Toffoli was a measuring stick and we were no match for Vegas. We made a move to see how we would do, we sacrificed a draft pick yes, and we got a real test and Toffoli was not the answer. We scraped our way to a game 7 in a heavily lopsided series where Demko stood on his head. We got knocked out, our D needed big upgrades, our top 6 was not enough fire power. We identified our goalie to be so we let Marky go. We went after a big dman who can move the puck and play all situations (OEL) we couldnt make it happen (thank god cuz i did not want OEL for his cap hit and term) Went and acquired Schmidt who has been useful.

 

Ultimately this year is not to be blamed on not having Toffoli, because who’s to say he would have the same success here if he went through the same scheduling, COVID and the final 19 game log jam. Mixed in with injuries.
 

At some point we have to let things go, we cant keep holding onto 2011. Retool and improve, dont stagnate

 

Toffoli was a measuring stick last year. We knew we werent ready to contend, but checked to see  how much oil was on the dipstick.

 

He didnt help us then and he wouldnt help us now. We did not beat Vegas and we were lucky to even make it to a game 6, let alone a game 7.

Benning and Green trying to shoehorn Gaudette into a 3rd line C role is on them, not him. He was ill suited for it from the start. That they couldnt recognize that early on is a pretty epic fail.

 

Our team has been underperforming anyway and actually Toffoli was willing to sign for a reasonable contract to stay. If a player wont come to Van unless you overpay then you find another player that will. Benning's weakness is he focuses only on the player he must have and has no contingency plan other than paying them too much.

 

Why do you keep saying Toffoli didnt help us? Why do you put it on him as not being the difference maker against Vegas? He was a ppg player in Van. And the entire team other than Demko were not up to the task against Vegas. 

 

You don't trade for Toffoli to "check the dipstick". A good GM should actually know his team is not competitive before he trades for that one guy to see if he is the messiah to suddenly fill all the holes on a clearly inferior, overpaid roster. The Toffoli trade seemed like part panic at the Boeser injury and part delusion about just where the team was actually at.

 

I actually agree that standing pat and stagnating is a bad idea. Purposely taking a huge step back is worse though.

Edited May 14, 2021 by wallstreetamigo

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Benning and Greentrying to shoehorn Gaudette into a 3rd line Crole is on them, not him. He was ill suited fof it from the start. That they couldnt recognize that early on is a pretty epic fail.

 

Our team has been underperforming snyway and actuslly Toffoli was willing to sign for a reasonable contract to stay. If a player wont come to Van unless you overpay then you find another player that will. Benning's weskness is hdfocuses only on the player he must have andhas no contingency plan other than paying them too much.

 

Why do you keep saying Toffoli didnt help us? Why do you put it on him as not being the difference maker against Vegas? He was a ppg player in Van. And the entire team other than Demko were not up to the task against Vegas. 

 

You don't trade for Toffoli to "check the dipstick". A good GM should actually know his team is not competitive before he trades for that one guy to see if he is the messiah to suddenly fill all the holes on a clearly inferior, overpaid roster. The Toffoli trade seemed like part panic at the Boeser injury and part delusion about just where the team was actually at.

 

I actually agree that standing pat and stagnating is a bad idea. Purposely taking a huge step back is worse though.

Gaud isn't skilled enough to be in our top six, and you point out he's not defensively capable to play a bottom six checking role.  So where does he fit into our team?  Highmore actually fills a role.  

[Bertuzzipunch]

26 minutes ago, iinatcc said:

But what's going to prevent him from resigning similar players on similar deals.

 

If his reason for getting Beagle and Roussel is to "insulate" the young guys what's makes you think he won't do the same once more young guys are drafted ? 

Like i said the cap will prevent it from happening. He wont have the luxury of goving out big contracts to mediocre players.

[DSVII]

1 hour ago, Alflives said:

benning answered your first question when he aquired Tofoli.  He said the team deserved to have a chance at making the playoffs after the Besser injury.  Plus, when a team is on the cusp of a playoff birth it sends the wrong message to the room to trade away (at the deadline) key pieces to the team's chances.  Imaging trading Tanev and Markstrom at the 2020 TDL.  Benning is building through the draft, and he knows we are still a couple drafts away from creating a pool of young talent deep enough to sustain a winning core.  

Appreciate the response @Alflives, I would say at the time considering the upcoming expansion draft, the fact that our team was out of a playoff spot and cratering due to a Markstrom injury pre-covid (covid in a sense, helped this team overachieve by giving Tanev and Marky time to heal) and our questioning whether we were keeping him. A trading of Tanev and Markstrom for picks and assets is defensible in the context that the team is still rebuilding in this hypothetical scenario.

 

Before the Boeser injury, why did we acquire Miller then at the beginning of the season? Rebuilding teams building through the draft do not trade their 1st round picks. Again, it's because Benning's actions have always been with an eye for the playoffs. The results have been mixed, and I will say that part with some generosity. Mixed is not good enough to get you a rebuilt team that can win a cup. That is really the frustration part.

 

I know the favorite go to is 'there is plan, you don't understand it.', but it appears with this new rebuilding phase this team is entering, neither did a good chunk of our fanbase, supporters of mgmt included:

 

https://forum.canucks.com/topic/390814-the-rebuild-is-over/

https://forum.canucks.com/topic/383896-the-rebuild-kicked-off-with-acquiring-bo-was-completed-at-2019-draft/

 

Not directed at you in particular, but the moving goal posts are getting tiresome. I'm almost anticipating the future arguments posters will be having in years 8-10 heh. 

 

I hope we can at least agree on this though. There needs to be a tangible result soon in the next two seasons (if he's here that long) that Benning has to be held accountable to (ie. a winning record season, a team that can make playoffs with sustained success). No more deferments or changing of the goal posts ....

 

2016:

“We want to be competitive next year,” Benning said. “Realistically, if you’re asking me when will the day be that we can compete with the best teams in the league, I think that (Sedin contract) timeline is fair. This is Year 2, and by our fourth or fifth year, I hope we’ll be there with the elite teams in the league.”

 

2018:

 

2019-2020:

https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/courier-archive/news/jim-benning-on-canucks-youth-good-teams-win-with-26-to-35-year-old-players-3097253

Edited May 14, 2021 by DSVII

[knucklehead91]

7 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Benning and Green trying to shoehorn Gaudette into a 3rd line C role is on them, not him. He was ill suited for it from the start. That they couldnt recognize that early on is a pretty epic fail.

 

Our team has been underperforming anyway and actually Toffoli was willing to sign for a reasonable contract to stay. If a player wont come to Van unless you overpay then you find another player that will. Benning's weakness is he focuses only on the player he must have and has no contingency plan other than paying them too much.

 

Why do you keep saying Toffoli didnt help us? Why do you put it on him as not being the difference maker against Vegas? He was a ppg player in Van. And the entire team other than Demko were not up to the task against Vegas. 

 

You don't trade for Toffoli to "check the dipstick". A good GM should actually know his team is not competitive before he trades for that one guy to see if he is the messiah to suddenly fill all the holes on a clearly inferior, overpaid roster. The Toffoli trade seemed like part panic at the Boeser injury and part delusion about just where the team was actually at.

 

I actually agree that standing pat and stagnating is a bad idea. Purposely taking a huge step back is worse though.

Is it a huge step back? Not signing 1 guy. If thats a huge step back, we are royally f***ed.

Benning made a move to improve the top 6. When that move met head on with a contender it proved that the move was insufficient. Thus becoming a measuring stick. We werent close to beating VGK without a stellar performance by Demko for 3 straight games. We realized that and had to take a small step back to draft high and develop.

 

Vancouver was paper, Vegas was scissors, Dallas was rock, Tampa was dynamite.

 

We were 9 wins short of a stanley cup. Thats a lot. Bringing back Toffoli, only repeats the same results. Retool, draft another high pick, develop and compete.

[Alflives]

2 minutes ago, DSVII said:

Appreciate the response @Alflives, I would say at the time considering the upcoming expansion draft, the fact that our team was out of a playoff spot and cratering due to a Markstrom injury pre-covid (covid in a sense, helped this team overachieve by giving Tanev and Marky time to heal) and our questioning whether we were keeping him. A trading of Tanev and Markstrom for picks and assets is defensible in the context that the team is still rebuilding in this hypothetical scenario.

 

Before the Boeser injury, why did we acquire Miller then at the beginning of the season? Rebuilding teams building through the draft do not trade their 1st round picks. Again, it's because Benning's actions have always been with an eye for the playoffs. The results have been mixed, and I will say that part with some generosity. Mixed is not good enough to get you a rebuilt team that can win a cup. That is really the frustration part.

 

I know the favorite go to is 'there is plan, you don't understand it.', but it appears with this new rebuilding phase this team is entering, neither did a good chunk of our fanbase, supporters of mgmt included:

 

https://forum.canucks.com/topic/390814-the-rebuild-is-over/

https://forum.canucks.com/topic/383896-the-rebuild-kicked-off-with-acquiring-bo-was-completed-at-2019-draft/

 

Not directed at you in particular, but the moving goal posts are getting tiresome. I'm almost anticipating the future arguments posters will be having in years 8-10 heh. 

excellent question about the Miller trade.  I like Miller, and believe he's an important player both on the ice and in the room, but do wonder if the timing of getting him (first and third) was a true rebuilding move, considering his contract is near ending when we are competing in 2 years.  Yes, that's an interesting one for sure.  

[DSVII]

Just now, Alflives said:

excellent question about the Miller trade.  I like Miller, and believe he's an important player both on the ice and in the room, but do wonder if the timing of getting him (first and third) was a true rebuilding move, considering his contract is near ending when we are competing in 2 years.  Yes, that's an interesting one for sure.  

heh you hit the nail on the head for me on the Miller trade. I didn't question the value of the player or assets, but the timing of it is all. I really thought we could have used one more year of drafting especially in a class like 2020 which was supposed to be on par with 2003/2015

[Timråfan]

26 minutes ago, knucklehead91 said:

 

Toffoli was a measuring stick last year. We knew we werent ready to contend, but checked to see  how much oil was on the dipstick.

 

He didnt help us then and he wouldnt help us now. We did not beat Vegas and we were lucky to even make it to a game 6, let alone a game 7

When did Toffoli become a Petey/Hughes kind of player?

Compare him with his kind, Boeser, Loui, Virtanen etc. 

Podz is talked about as a bottom six player wich means both Podz and Toffoli fit. 

 

[canucklehead44]

On 5/13/2021 at 9:49 AM, IBatch said:

Gillis drafted two NHLers in 6 drafts.   That's a big fat F. 

 

And his signings, although fair or team friendly for the time, also included Booth and Ballard (both bought out), Luongo's anchor and so many clauses even support players got them.   That's a C+ at best.  

 

Vision is a C because he had no vision for later.    The only A he gets is for creating a professional environment from top to bottom and that's about it.   
 

From where i'm sitting at least, if he was so good why no job offers?  He did a great job of putting the finishing touches by bringing in Hamhuis as a free agent and Erhoff. But a monkey could have come in and enjoyed the fruits of both Burke's and Nonis's labour.   Maybe being on the other side alienated himself from other GMs at the start, JB is much better and more respected then MG ever was by his peers.   

Yzerman recently walked into a similar gig in TB.   Left and was re-hired right away.   MG... is still without a job.   Have to wonder what Quin, or Burke, or Milford or even JB would do in a similar circumstance.   All those clauses and all those contracts to open up more space ... let Mitchell go.   And signed Ballard and Booth with the savings lol.   

Gillis' drafting was poor but you need to remember drafting with a team that wins the president's trophy and is competing vs a team that is a bottom feeder year after year is completely different. The difference between a top 10 pick and a late first is HUGE - in fact an average late first round pick only plays around 100 NHL games. Not to mention when you are a winning team you should be buying at the deadline and losing teams should be selling (a concept Benning doesn't understand). Gillis mostly inherited a system and the changes he made - hiring Judd Brackett and buying an AHL team - were two major factors in our drafting success today. It would have been interesting to see how our drafting would have turned out in a rebuild with Gillis - I know he was planning on taking Dylan Larkin in 2014. He got unlucky with some injuries, and I kind of wish Gaunce, Schroeder, and Jensen got longer looks (especially Gaunce who had relatively strong numbers on a weak team). 

Samuelsson was signed for 2.5 million and had back to back 50 point seasons but slowed down at the end. Sturm was a 1 year contract but was not good anymore so we flipped them for Booth who was a risk but still had some talent. We also gained a draft pick in that trade (3rd rounder). Booth was actually good his first year scoring 16 in 53 and was great down the stretch (23 goal pace) and was top 3 on the team in hits. The second year he sat on the IR so he didn't count toward the cap and in his third season his underlying numbers were fine but Torts hated him personally and gave him little ice time. 

When you compare Booth to Eriksson:
Booth: 16 goals / 82 games, 4.3 million over 3 years (plus we got a 3rd round pick)
Eriksson: 12 goals / 82 games, 6 million over 6 years 

So Eriksson essentially cost us twice as much per goal over twice the period of time and we didn't get a pick to take on his contract. Eriksson also had way more opportunity playing on the top power play unit and in the top 6 - Booth only had a short period of time on the second line (and actually performed in that role). 

Ballard didn't play too bad but we was moved to a 3rd pairing because we signed Hamhuis. 

Ryan Kesler even came out recently and said some of the organizational changes Gillis made lead to a lot of that success. 

 

Gillis made awesome signings:  Manny Malhotra, Mikael Samuelsson, Dan Hamhuis, and Raffi Torres. Some solid trades: Chris Higgins for a 3rd, Maxim Lapierre for a 3rd, Patrick White for Erhoff, Schneider for Horvat. 

He had some misses in Keith Ballard, a 2nd round pick for Derek Roy. But at the end of the day he seemed to find pieces that fit the team and helped them be successful. Even the Luongo trade getting Markstrom and Matthias back was good all things considered (the NHL screwed us changing the rule after the fact on his contract). 

 

Benning seems to cancel out a good trade with a bad trade (moving Garrison for a 2nd then moving a 2nd for Vey as an example). Some of his better trades (Dahlen, Goldobin) didn't pan out but not bad trades at the time. 

Benning traded away so many picks in stupid deals. Like Kassian came of 10 goals in 42 games (close to a 20 goal pace) and I originally heard Kassian for Prust + 5th I was livid only to find out that it was the CANUCKS who gave up the 5th . Forsling for Clendening, 3rd for Pedan. The Sutter trade was low key pretty bad and of course Gudbranson was an atrocity

Benning's trades were actually pretty good from around 2017 up until he blew it with the Toffoli trade - which actually worked out well, but then he blew it again by not signing him. I loved the Schmidt trade at the time but we will have to see how that turns out long term as Schmidt was OK but not great at 5.9 million. 

Overall Benning has had good drafting, his drafts have been ok, but it is his signings that have been AWFUL. If he just avoid free agency I would have been pretty happy with him overall.