Canucks fans fly #FireBenning banner over Vancouver

[alt kilgore]

3 hours ago, tas said:

typical of a large swath of the canucks fan base, particularly as represented online. too much information, not enough brain power to understand. 

 

benning is focused on team building, not asset management. 

 

25 minutes ago, DSVII said:

Good teams stay together to build because of good asset management. 

 

You can't have one without the other. Both are needed.

 

6 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

I was about to post this.

 

Proper asset management encompases team building. They arent two separate things a gm should be choosing between.

 

Maybe we should just get a GM who can do all the parts of the job effectively.

 

When all these guys retire without a cup I am sure they will be satisfied that they had a bunch of besties that could perpetually lose together.

 

This rationalization is spoken like someone who has never actually spoken to an nhl player in their life. They arent only there to play with their friends. Its not atom rep. They want to win. And sometimes they are ok with a douche or two on the team if that player helps them win.

 

Far too often, "team building" is used as an excuse for signing a bunch of bad contracts that hinder the teams chance to improve and win.

 

If Pearson, Sutter, Roussel, Beagle, Edler, and Myers were all traded tomorrow, the culture of the team would not suddenly crater. The leadership would not suddenly crater. All decent players but what have they actually done to suggest that losing them and having a winning culture are mutually exclusive?

 

Me three.

 

That's an insanely laughable statement.  Its like a chess player saying "I'm not focused on how, why, or when many of my men are taken off the board, I'm concentrating on getting my opponents King!"

[bree2]

1 hour ago, Tom Sestito said:

Do you feel the same way about Oilers fans who bought a newspaper ad to remove Lowe or Sens fans who bought a billboard ad to remove Melnyk? Do you feel the same way about people who chanted “Fire Gillis” and paraded outside Rogers Arena with Gillis head on a stick? 

 

If you think these people are also not real fans, I’ll believe you are consistent. I still won’t agree that these people are not “real” fans. 

 

“Those people” want to win a cup. They disagree with the current path ownership and front office are taking them down and their seven years of previous work. 

 

every team wants to win a cup,  it is very distasteful imo!  and yes oiler fan,Sens and any other team so called fans who do it. anyways it will not accomplish anything. Benning has done a good job here and i am pretty sure Aquilini thinks so too!

[smithers joe]

speaking of the canucks....how are they doing?

[wallstreetamigo]

People who want a new GM dont necessarily hate Benning or even irrationally dislike everything he does.

 

Some go to extremes to defend him, suggesting he has never made anything but a perfect move. Some hate everything he does, even the good stuff just because its him. Most are somewhere between those extremes though.

[captainhorvat]

Where was the “Trade Virtanen” banner flying over Abbotsford???

[wallstreetamigo]

1 minute ago, smithers joe said:

speaking of the canucks....how are they doing?

Overall? Not great. The last couple of games? Pretty good.

 

Context matters and passive aggressive "they won two games, suck on that haterz" is just as bad a look as "They had a terrible season until recently, suck on that Benning lovers!"

 

Both extremes are ridiculous imo.

[aGENT]

1 hour ago, DSVII said:

 

Yes, 5x5 would make me happier. $1 mil alone doesn't make a difference. But if you overpay by 1 mil as a pattern over a multitude of contracts. it adds up. $1 million is certainly huge right now, and is one of the reasons we traded out Gaudette. 

Don't want to get in a (another ) drawn out argument. But $5mx5 would have been a HUGE (AKA unrealistic) discount. His current contract is in no way an 'overpay'. 

 

Beagle overpaid by $1m? Yes (and worth it IMO). Sutter same (and also worth it)? Yup.

 

Myers overpaid? Nope. Pearson? Nope. Pre- knee injury Roussel? Nope. This supposed 'pattern' adds up to two, key match up  centre, vets that we had to attract/keep, in the depths of a rebuild.

 

And Gaudette is no longer here because he made zero progression towards learning to play defense. Not a guy you win with. His near league base salary had zip to do with it. 

Edited April 22, 2021 by aGENT

[RU SERIOUS]

11 minutes ago, captainhorvat said:

Where was the “Trade Virtanen” banner flying over Abbotsford???

Can they even spell way out there in Abbotsford?

[13231]

4 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Your bolded part applies to both sides of the coin though, pro Benning and Anti Benning.

 

Like any GM, Benning deserves credit for the good he does and criticism for the bad.

 

Gillis and Benning were almost polar opposites as GM's. Its hard to compare them. Gillis was shady af and took advantage of any loophole he could. Benning is almost naive level nice guy and doesnt have that same killer instinct. Gillis was terrible at drafting and left the cupboards bare, Benning is pretty good and has significantly improved the farm system. Gillis was (for the most part until the end) really good at contracts and cap management. Benning not so good. Gillis did well at adding the right support players to an already good team with a few big misses. Benning is pretty sketchy at his pro talent evaluation and has made a lot of questionable signings and trades with a few really good adds in there. 

 

Neither was/is a great GM. 

 

Really the only things they had in common were they were both Canucks GM, and they both liked to trade picks and give up on younger players who did not fit an often ill fitted role. They also both made bad decisions on coaches.

Gillis was brutal with contracts and cap management. He gave NTCs to literally anyone and made several pieces untradable because of them. Traded a 1st and a few other pieces for a Ballard who carried a 4m cap, which in today's day is a 5-6M cap hit (and people whine about Myers. Ballard was a much inferior and much less proven defenceman). Then there's Jason Garrisson, Marco Sturm, David Booth, etc. Idk where people get this idea that Gillis was some sort of cap wizard. Also, Benning does have a killer instinct but he's just not flashy and bold like Gillis with his gimmicks. Killer instinct is getting JT Miller for a mid-late 1st, Schmidt for a 3rd, and drafting Petey & Hogs when the general consensus thought otherwise. I'd say that is quite better than "sketchy" evaluation of pro talent, not to mention sly pick ups like Motter and more recently Hamonic. The only thing Gillis did right in my pov is picking up the right complementary pieces leading up to the 2011 run. Malhotra, Torres Ehrhoff and Lapierre fit in perfectly with the core we had. Besides that, Gillis was as disastrous as a GM as they come

[captainhorvat]

Just now, RU SERIOUS said:

Can they even spell way out there in Abbotsford?

Prob not the banner might end up like this...“TradeBenning”

[RU SERIOUS]

Wonder what would happen if someone flew a "Jim B Resign #21 at 6y x $5M" banner ???????

Edited April 22, 2021 by RU SERIOUS

[RU SERIOUS]

3 minutes ago, 13231 said:

Gillis was brutal with contracts and cap management. He gave NTCs to literally anyone and made several pieces untradable because of them. Traded a 1st and a few other pieces for a Ballard who carried a 4m cap, which in today's day is a 5-6M cap hit (and people whine about Myers. Ballard was a much inferior and much less proven defenceman). Then there's Jason Garrisson, Marco Sturm, David Booth, etc. Idk where people get this idea that Gillis was some sort of cap wizard. Also, Benning does have a killer instinct but he's just not flashy and bold like Gillis with his gimmicks. Killer instinct is getting JT Miller for a mid-late 1st, Schmidt for a 3rd, and drafting Petey & Hogs when the general consensus thought otherwise. I'd say that is quite better than "sketchy" evaluation of pro talent, not to mention sly pick ups like Motter and more recently Hamonic. The only thing Gillis did right in my pov is picking up the right complementary pieces leading up to the 2011 run. Malhotra, Torres Ehrhoff and Lapierre fit in perfectly with the core we had. Besides that, Gillis was as disastrous as a GM as they come

Good Post - and fairly accurate assessment of what happened. Even though I'm 50/50 on Uncle Jim, I have to say he's done reasonably well on spotting young talent but not so much on trades and managing assets (I.e./ trading players for something/anything before their contracts run out and selecting supporting players on our bottom 6)   Hopefully he continues what he started last year and lets some of the older players (and Lazy Jake) move on.  This team need to get bigger, grittier and faster in order to compete for anything.   We are still missing a few pieces but with ~$40M coming off the books over the next 18 months he should be in a position to Beef up the team.  If he fails that then he MUST definitely be replaced.

[bree2]

1 hour ago, DSVII said:

I said this before, but I'm not married to the idea of paying premium for RHD just for the sake of having RHD. We are happy now to accept Schmidt as a LHD playing on the right side. Why not explore and see if there are some market inefficiencies where talented LHD are being undervalued just because they are not slotted in on the right side on a stacked roster? Going back to Bieksa's take that a same handed D pairing can shoot off faster one timers (ala Ovie/Carlson).  It's kind of my own take on this, and hockey being super conservative may not do this ever, but players like Schmidt make me reconsider it. 

 

I don't consider 6x6 below market value for a RHD defenseman that didn't consistently play top 4 minutes in Winnipeg, was never relied on as the 1PP guy. The market was inflated by virtue of him being the only one out there at the time. It was not a good buy imo.

 

We had an in house RHD stable in Tanev and Stetcher that was cheaper if it came to it. Every basic stat supports Tanev being a better defensive D than Myers at suppressing opponent shots and danger close chances. I think we should acknowledge that when we signed Myers, we essentially handed Tanev his walking papers. 

 

Burke also thought Hughes was too small a player. 

 

Miller and Schmidt are great additions. And I didn't like Gudbranson the day that trade was made (and who made that trade and singing?) Again Guds is what made me think maybe pursuing folks just because they are RHD isn't worth it. 

 

The only thing i'll bash Edler about is his propensity to take bad penalities, but it comes with age. No complaints on him from me.

 

Yes, 5x5 would make me happier. $1 mil alone doesn't make a difference. But if you overpay by 1 mil as a pattern over a multitude of contracts. it adds up. $1 million is certainly huge right now, and is one of the reasons we traded out Gaudette. 

 

And if we are to accept the two year timeline now as a window, then the timing of Myers makes even less sense to me. Yes, these guys don't grow on trees, but I  think there are times you need to show restraint and not make a big splash to  unbalance your entire cap situation and upset the timing of your plans just to pursue them (OEL, or  in a more bigger example, Toronto and Tavares) 

 

i think over and above that Benning knows a lot more about being a gm than us fans do! i hear what you are saying, but what the hell does Burke have to do with our team and Hughes being small. i don't really care what he has to say, as for Myers. love the guy and what he brings to the table, trading Gaudette was the right thing to do. just my opinion!

[Pears]

17 hours ago, DeNiro said:

Not surprised someone dumb enough to spend money on this thinks firing Benning will magically turn us into a contender.

Not only that but all that money and the banner isn’t even legible in the air 

[tas]

37 minutes ago, kilgore said:

 

 

 

Me three.

 

That's an insanely laughable statement.  Its like a chess player saying "I'm not focused on how, why, or when many of my men are taken off the board, I'm concentrating on getting my opponents King!"

except that the people who harp on "asset management" constantly treat the players like they're anonymous pawns and not 3 dimensional human beings. the happiness of the individuals and the group, the team chemistry, the off-ice roles players fill, all these things outweigh the spreadsheets and stats and pts per $. 

Edited April 22, 2021 by tas

[wallstreetamigo]

2 minutes ago, 13231 said:

Gillis was brutal with contracts and cap management. He gave NTCs to literally anyone and made several pieces untradable because of them. Traded a 1st and a few other pieces for a Ballard who carried a 4m cap, which in today's day is a 5-6M cap hit (and people whine about Myers. Ballard was a much inferior and much less proven defenceman). Then there's Jason Garrisson, Marco Sturm, David Booth, etc. Idk where people get this idea that Gillis was some sort of cap wizard. Also, Benning does have a killer instinct but he's just not flashy and bold like Gillis with his gimmicks. Killer instinct is getting JT Miller for a mid-late 1st, Schmidt for a 3rd, and drafting Petey & Hogs when the general consensus thought otherwise. I'd say that is quite better than "sketchy" evaluation of pro talent, not to mention sly pick ups like Motter and more recently Hamonic. The only thing Gillis did right in my pov is picking up the right complementary pieces leading up to the 2011 run. Malhotra, Torres Ehrhoff and Lapierre fit in perfectly with the core we had. Besides that, Gillis was as disastrous as a GM as they come

Context matters though.

 

Gillis signings came back to haunt him at the end, thats true. But he also had a successful team that he was trying to recapture the magic with. In hindsight it didnt work and heshoukd have blown it up way sooner. But a lot of what he did was understandable in that context.

 

Gillis gave out ntc in exchange for cap hit concessions in most cases. He rarely gave all of dollars, term, and trade protection up in a deal. Benning regularly does.

 

The trade for Ballard is another the looks far worse in hindsight but with thecontext at the time you could at least see the reasoning. Mitchell was coming off a potential career ending injury so they clearly werent comfortable bringing him back. He of course went on to play fine and win a couple of cups. But at the time the risk was real.

 

Ballard was a consistent, physical top 4 two way dman who was durable and played tough minutes effectively. The hip surgery before trading for him should have been a red flag but at the timeno one could have predicted just how badly he would regress. Partially due to injuries, partially due to a clear dislike of his hame from AV, and partially just Ballard himself regressing. The trade was fine at the time, not great but ok and understandable.

 

Signing Hamhuis effectively pushed Ballard out of the spot he was probably meant to fill when Gillis traded for him. It only looks this bad in hindsight.

 

Getting Miller and Schmidt were good trades. But their teams were also in need of offloading cap. He didnt swindle them. TB got to sign Point as a result. Vegas got Pietrangelo and needed that cap.

 

Drafting Petey and Hughes is AMATEUR scouting, which Benning has been pretty good at. Virtanen and Juolevi over others keep that from being very good. 

 

You conveniently ignore a very long list of Benning pro scouting disasters right from day 1 and only focus on a few good ones. Overall his pro scouting combined with his valuing those players contracts has been absolutely terrible.

 

[aGENT]

Just now, tas said:

except that the people who harp on "asset management" constantly treat the players like they're anonymous pawns and not 3 dimensional human beings. the happiness of the individuals and the group. the team chemistry, the off-ice roles players fill, all these things outweigh the spreadsheets and stats and pts per $. 

There's FAR more to building a team than eking every last drop off value out of team assets (AKA players, AKA humans, as you pointed out). It's certainly a part of team building but it is not the actual goal, nor should it be the only focus.

 

It also myopically ignores the value in retaining those players.

 

And regardless, we're hardly left wanting in regards to our prospect pool and organizational depth despite this so called asset management 'failing'. Forest. Trees.

 

[wallstreetamigo]

8 minutes ago, tas said:

except that the people who harp on "asset management" constantly treat the players like they're anonymous pawns and not 3 dimensional human beings. the happiness of the individuals and the group, the team chemistry, the off-ice roles players fill, all these things outweigh the spreadsheets and stats and pts per $. 

"Asset management" and all of the stuff you mention are not mutually exclusive.

 

The NHL is a business. Players understand that. Off ice stuff, chemistry, etc does play a role but I can tell you that dollars and cents is the driving force. 

[Bad_BOI_pete]

23 minutes ago, 13231 said:

Gillis was brutal with contracts and cap management. He gave NTCs to literally anyone and made several pieces untradable because of them. Traded a 1st and a few other pieces for a Ballard who carried a 4m cap, which in today's day is a 5-6M cap hit (and people whine about Myers. Ballard was a much inferior and much less proven defenceman). Then there's Jason Garrisson, Marco Sturm, David Booth, etc. Idk where people get this idea that Gillis was some sort of cap wizard. Also, Benning does have a killer instinct but he's just not flashy and bold like Gillis with his gimmicks. Killer instinct is getting JT Miller for a mid-late 1st, Schmidt for a 3rd, and drafting Petey & Hogs when the general consensus thought otherwise. I'd say that is quite better than "sketchy" evaluation of pro talent, not to mention sly pick ups like Motter and more recently Hamonic. The only thing Gillis did right in my pov is picking up the right complementary pieces leading up to the 2011 run. Malhotra, Torres Ehrhoff and Lapierre fit in perfectly with the core we had. Besides that, Gillis was as disastrous as a GM as they come

it becomes a lot easier once you only are missing a few pieces. look at 2016/2017 roster and as it today, everyone knows thier role now. it becomes a lot easier from here. its the reason we have schmidt and virtanen over toffoli, and tanev. People often forget about a very big russian RW that will need a spot.

[tas]

5 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

"Asset management" and all of the stuff you mention are not mutually exclusive.

 

The NHL is a business. Players understand that. Off ice stuff, chemistry, etc does play a role but I can tell you that dollars and cents is the driving force. 

if you don't think team cohesiveness plays an enormous role, compare the canucks last year to the canucks this year. that group last year absolutely LOVED each other. they would go through the wall for one another. they bonded over the deaths of several of their fathers. they were such a tight group and it was reflected in the way they played. this year (prior to the last 2 games)? totally listless. it took a covid outbreak to bring them (hopefully) together ... time will tell where that leads.