Geoff Courtnall to return to Canucks?

[-Vintage Canuck-]

 

[Fred65]

45 minutes ago, Dazzle said:

Ok.

 

Benning also established himself as one of the best scouters. For each Sakic or Yzerman story, there is a Markus Naslund one, who if I remember correctly, didn't stay for very long as a MODO Swedish hockey GM.

Dorion (Ottawa Sens GM) is also a famed scouter. He's made plenty of mistakes himself. In short, Sakic/Yzerman probably were set up for success better than Benning/Dorion. Look at the teams of Colorado and Tampa, but particularly Tampa.

Is this the truth or a fallacy ??  First round picks include Virtanen, McCann and Juolevi. I wouldn't  think these are players you'd rave about. The good picks include Boeser, Hughes and Pettersson ( Podkolzin not yet in the NHL) so that's a 50% drafting record for Vcr ... is that the work of one of the best ??  Personally I don't think so

[Gurn]

21 minutes ago, Fred65 said:

Virtanen, McCann and Juolevi

Vitanen 317 games played in the best league in the world

McCaan 353 games

Ollie 22 games after some injuries slowed him up.

 

Nothing wrong with those picks. Jake's development did, imo, get messed up by having him here a year early, however he could well have ended worse had he stayed with the Hitmen. Pays yer money, takes yer chances.

 

 

[oldnews]

3 hours ago, Dazzle said:

So here's the thing.

 

Sakic and Yzerman have made a ton of mistakes during their tenure, as everyone inevitably does.

 

While your point about the Courtnall/Linden hirings being akin to figureheads has some merit

 

 

The problem with that 'discussion' is that it is extremely patronizing to Linden - while also entirely presumptuous.

 

It doesn't 'judge' him on the record of what he actually did - the decisions that were made, within his 'jurisdiction'/responsibility - but instead creates an (ideological) narrative - that he was used as a bandaid for p.r. appearances.  The whole departure in that discussion is very disrespectful of the guy.  And it presumes that ownership would make moves that are merely a manipulative - for appearance sake.  I'm not a 'fan' of ownership - nor do you hear me calling for heads to role or the team to be sold - their decisions also deserve to be taken in context (they have an interest in more than appearances - they have an interest in winning/success - for reasons integrated to their financial interest in the team).

 

Which is why I make the point of attempting to assess what Linden actually did - in his role as President - otherwise the discussion never enters a realm of reality or fairness - rests in the sub realm of (bad) narrative that usually dominates / makes so much noise in this market.

 

The whole "let's not hire a Canuck" thing is a categorical - that isn't based in merit, or assessing the individual candidate - that is no more useful to us, or advisable that the counterpoint - ie "we must hire a Canuck" (which some people perceive takes place in other markets like Deadmonton).   Hard pass on both irrelevent categoricals - and a hard pass on not giving Linden a fair assessment, based on the decisions that were actually his to make (until they no longer were) - which is a part of the timeline we don't need to debate about to have a body of his work that should be looked at in any reference to the existing management group and recent trajectory of the team.

 

 

[Conscience]

25 minutes ago, gurn said:

Vitanen 317 games played in the best league in the world

McCaan 353 games

Ollie 22 games after some injuries slowed him up.

 

Nothing wrong with those picks. Jake's development did, imo, get messed up by having him here a year early, however he could well have ended worse had he stayed with the Hitmen. Pays yer money, takes yer chances.

 

 

Dont even try to say those were the right picks.

 

McCann turned out alright but benning didn't like what he say and flipped him and a 2nd for gudbranson. 
 

so that's 3 misses

[JM_]

3 hours ago, Timråfan said:

So why do you and others bring up Dahlen every time I talk about how bad Benning behaved? 
 

I think because you really dug that hole for so long and maybe its your username. 

[Gurn]

14 minutes ago, Conscience said:

Dont even try to say those were the right picks.

 

McCann turned out alright but benning didn't like what he say and flipped him and a 2nd for gudbranson. 
 

so that's 3 misses

Doesn't matter where McCaan is now, he was a good pick, as were the other 2.

[Elias Pettersson]

31 minutes ago, Conscience said:

Dont even try to say those were the right picks.

 

McCann turned out alright but benning didn't like what he say and flipped him and a 2nd for gudbranson. 
 

so that's 3 misses

I didn’t realize Juolevi finished his NHL career. Geez time flies when you’re having fun. 

Also please name one GM in the history of the NHL where all of his first round picks became star players, or even regulars in the lineup. I’ll wait. 

 

[Provost]

1 hour ago, Fred65 said:

Is this the truth or a fallacy ??  First round picks include Virtanen, McCann and Juolevi. I wouldn't  think these are players you'd rave about. The good picks include Boeser, Hughes and Pettersson ( Podkolzin not yet in the NHL) so that's a 50% drafting record for Vcr ... is that the work of one of the best ??  Personally I don't think so

I did a really deep dive and compared all Benning’s 1st round picks with what we would have gotten just by going by various major draft rankings.  I picked the highest ranked player left available from each list at our draft spot.

 

Benning came out above average, but not some sort of genius level that people attribute to him.  He was beaten by Pronman and Craig Button for example.  The one clear win by Benning is that almost no one had Petterson that high.  Hughes and Boeser were a wash because almost all the scouting lists would have also selected them at that spot.  Juolevi and Virtanen were obviously the misses. 

 

I have no issue saying Benning is an above average draft guy.l and still think he needs to get fired.  It is a results league and he hasn’t gotten results... the rest is just people trying to rationalize and fit their bias.  7 years is insanely long for any NHL GM who has a losing record.

[Dazzle]

1 hour ago, Fred65 said:

Is this the truth or a fallacy ??  First round picks include Virtanen, McCann and Juolevi. I wouldn't  think these are players you'd rave about. The good picks include Boeser, Hughes and Pettersson ( Podkolzin not yet in the NHL) so that's a 50% drafting record for Vcr ... is that the work of one of the best ??  Personally I don't think so

Demko and Hoglander. Personally, I think you're biased. Not to mention Rathbone as well, and Gaudette.

 

Also, name a GM that has nailed picks out of the park all the time. Even Yzerman has practically freaking missed on a whole draft. Take your blinders off.

 

[stawns]

On 5/15/2021 at 2:00 PM, Jimmy McGill said:

I would think its just more about helping to reach out to people in the hockey world for potential job interviews, and also maybe some general advice on direction. I doubt its more than that. 

I doubt it's anything hockey related.  Maybe aquaman is looking for a piece of real estate for a new rink?

 

[Timråfan]

1 hour ago, Jimmy McGill said:

I think because you really dug that hole for so long and maybe its your username. 

I think it's more of trolling me. 

Wich steer the criticism away from Benning. 

But I keep on. Trash is trash. 

 

If it was my username you could have talked about Petey, Zetterberg, Näslund....

 

[Timråfan]

40 minutes ago, Provost said:

I did a really deep dive and compared all Benning’s 1st round picks with what we would have gotten just by going by various major draft rankings.  I picked the highest ranked player left available from each list at our draft spot.

 

Benning came out above average, but not some sort of genius level that people attribute to him.  He was beaten by Pronman and Craig Button for example.  The one clear win by Benning is that almost no one had Petterson that high.  Hughes and Boeser were a wash because almost all the scouting lists would have also selected them at that spot.  Juolevi and Virtanen were obviously the misses. 

 

I have no issue saying Benning is an above average draft guy.l and still think he needs to get fired.  It is a results league and he hasn’t gotten results... the rest is just people trying to rationalize and fit their bias.  7 years is insanely long for any NHL GM who has a losing record.

And Petey is a Canuck due to a swede.

Kilgore mentioned in another thread that Brackett chosed the picks Benning confirmed, after Benning chosed Juolevi. 

So Brackett is the headmaster. 

[Ilya Mikheyev]

8 hours ago, Slegr said:

This is actually pretty disturbing, and I hadn't seen it before. Courtnall has gone through dark times, and had made bad choices for sure. He's been nailed for drinking and driving multiple times. He's no Trevor Linden in that sense of things. 

Don't think hiring him, especially as they deal with Virtanen's issues, makes much sense. But who knows, clearly he and Aqua are connected in their other businesses.

[Provost]

1 hour ago, Teemu Selänne said:

Don't think hiring him, especially as they deal with Virtanen's issues, makes much sense. But who knows, clearly he and Aqua are connected in their other businesses.

It would be terrible optics that would almost surely cause backlash.  I know it was many years ago, but you are absolutely right that it isn't something you want to be in your history when dealing with a current similar issue.

[DeNiro]

Maybe he can convince them to bring back the skate jerseys

[Fred65]

19 hours ago, gurn said:

Doesn't matter where McCaan is now, he was a good pick, as were the other 2.

Come on, lets have a little integrity, even Benning didn't like McCann he rated McCann + a 2nd round pick = Gudbranson who he in turn dumped later because he couldn't play. And  the subtle point missed is they were all first round picks and Juolevi a #5 and Jake a #6 ... O/A in the world he had the world at his feet and he chose those three, please don't turn this into the Sermon on the Mount 

[Fred65]

18 hours ago, Dazzle said:

Demko and Hoglander. Personally, I think you're biased. Not to mention Rathbone as well, and Gaudette.

 

Also, name a GM that has nailed picks out of the park all the time. Even Yzerman has practically freaking missed on a whole draft. Take your blinders off.

 

True I am or have become biased. I'm fed up with this teams failure, season after season but what I dislike more is those that continually think failure is OK ..... because .... next season, just wait for it, next season. Nope next season will be a rinse and repeat event, so history tell us, and you know what they say about history   ....  

 

Quote

“Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” Sir Winston Churchill.

 

[SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME]

20 hours ago, Provost said:

I did a really deep dive and compared all Benning’s 1st round picks with what we would have gotten just by going by various major draft rankings.  I picked the highest ranked player left available from each list at our draft spot.

 

Benning came out above average, but not some sort of genius level that people attribute to him.  He was beaten by Pronman and Craig Button for example.  The one clear win by Benning is that almost no one had Petterson that high.  Hughes and Boeser were a wash because almost all the scouting lists would have also selected them at that spot.  Juolevi and Virtanen were obviously the misses. 

 

I have no issue saying Benning is an above average draft guy.l and still think he needs to get fired.  It is a results league and he hasn’t gotten results... the rest is just people trying to rationalize and fit their bias.  7 years is insanely long for any NHL GM who has a losing record.

Agreed that the “draft genius” label hasn’t been earned, as far as the results from the past seven drafts.

 

I think that most Canucks fans (including myself) just forgot what competent/average amateur scouting looks like in the NHL, as well as the huge difference made by draft position, when picking top-10, as a cellar dweller, versus the late first round, as a contender.

 

As much as I expect the reaction on CDC to be one of “robble robble Canucks Smarmy robble robber hit piece,” I do think that the following article can be informative, when considering Benning’s drafting success:

https://canucksarmy.com/2021/03/30/sham-sharron-hockey-draft-vancouver-canucks/

 

The whole “Sham Sharron” thing started before Benning took over the Canucks, and was used to analyze just how bad drafting had been under the previous regimes, and with head scout Ron Delorme.

 

The results were not pretty, and proved what we already knew, the pre-Benning Canucks were pretty terrible at drafting.

 

But it’s interesting that when you apply the same analysis in 2021, and look at Benning’s success rate, that same “lazy intern” with a spreadsheet manages to get results that are pretty darn close to what “draft genius” Jim Benning achieved (the writers actually argue Sham Sharron is better).

 

There are obvious flaws to the whole “Sham Sharron” thing, which clearly represents the bluntest of blunt instruments, when it comes to a data driven drafting model (which is kind of the point, I think). The intern only is allowed to pick forwards from the CHL, which eliminates European prospects, NCAA, and other NA leagues like the USHL. So Sham is starting from quite a disadvantage. However, Sham also only picks forwards, which is probably going to return better GP and points, than picking forwards, defence, and goalies.

 

Still, all things considered, you’d expect Benning and the Canucks scouts to wipe the floor with Sham Sharron and his spreadsheet, but unfortunately, that’s not what happens.

 

And it’s not like Canucks Army tweaked their approach. They just ran the exact same simulation as they did against Gillis, Nonis, and Burke. And while the results weren’t as dramatic (Sham Sharron basically destroyed a Delorme scouting department), the fact that it’s pretty much a push between Benning and that fictional “intern with a spreadsheet,” suggests that much of our recent draft success comes down to merely having competent, but probably about league average, amateur scouting and drafting, over the past seven years.

 

We’ve certainly added some fine young players (and you’ll probably not find many CDCers who get more excited about the draft picks or boost prospects more than I do), but as far as success at the draft table, we’ve probably just done about as well as should be expected, no more and no less, given the picks we’ve actually had available, at our draft position.

Everything is relative. Benning took over in Vancouver at the end of what was arguably the worst extended period of failed drafting of any NHL team of the past quarter century or so. Achieving any level of competence, in amateur scouting and drafting, was going to look like “genius,” in comparison to the incompetence that had become largely the norm (there are a few exceptions, but they are few and far between). And especially when that newly acquired competence also coincided with several losing seasons, and resulting favourable draft position.

 

(Credit where credit is due, however, and I do credit Benning (and Linden) for accomplishing what previous regimes apparently couldn’t. They fixed the broken scouting department. Gillis himself admitted that not fixing these issues earlier was a fatal flaw and one of his greatest regrets of his tenure. And it’s one of the reasons why MG deserved to be fired. Competent drafting is what landed us our exciting group of young players, and I’m grateful for that. I just don’t view Benning’s draft results as anything exceptional, given what really should be expected from draft selections made with those picks, especially when they are informed and guided by competent scouting.)

[Jaimito]