Honest Conversation With Those Who Still Support Management

[whysoserious]

1 hour ago, aGENT said:

That's ridiculous. Is Petterson also unmovable due to his contract? He's making over $7m and is barely staying out of the pressbox.

 

Team playing poorly =/= poor, immovable players.

If you can't tell the difference between Pettersson and the likes of Poolman, Pearson, Myers and Dickinson I really don't know what to tell you.

 

Seriously, what team would be willing to take Myers, Pearson, Dickinson or Poolman on? They're not young and do not have upside, no team with the cap flexibility would want them.  Dickinson is the only one who may have some value (probably less than we traded for him) since he's relatively young, although he hasn't shown he's capable of playing 3C. These players simply don't move the needle for contending teams nor would they have the cap space to take any of them on. Not to mention they would have to commit to them for multiple years. The only way we are moving any these guys is in the final year of their contracts as rentals (assuming their play hasn't declined) or as lateral move where we take on a similar player from another team (which does not help us cap wise). 

[kanucks25]

5 minutes ago, aGENT said:

No, you explain how is Pettersson any different?

 

The team is playing poorly as a whole. Pettersson individually, more so than a good few of the players on that so-called 'untradeable' list in fact. And at a far higher price tag.

 

Poolman for example is making 3rd pair D money and playing at or above that level, even on said team in a tailspin.

 

This is the same, shallow level of valuation that leads to oversimplified takes like 'OEL has lost his offense'. No, our team/forwards are not scoring like almost any goals. Creating next to no offense. Where is he supposed to pick up the assists that traditionally make up the lion's share of his points from?

"Shallow level of valuation"...

 

Pettersson is a 23 year-old that up until this bad ~20 game stretch, has been a front-line player pretty much his entire career both eye-test wise and statistically.

 

The rest of those players are older depth players that have seemingly reached their respective potentials.

 

Like it's completely apples and oranges, c'mon now.

 

Nobody wants depth players signed to term off a bad team. Not without retention and/or sweeteners.

[DSVII]

1 hour ago, King Heffy said:

Toronto has two NHL defensemen and is playing a defenseman who can't play defence 7.5 million.  Benning hasn't been great, but Dubas is a special kind of stupid.

We have a $26 million dollar defense (7th most expensive in the league), with only three players who can be considered top 4 caliber, that is responsible for the worst PK in the league and bottom 10 in giving up scoring / danger chances against the last five years. And he let two NHL RHDs leave to chase OEL and tried plugging that hole he created with filler depth.

 

I'll take Dubas.

 

[DSVII]

1 hour ago, Patel Bure said:

Your Leafs haven't won a playoff series since 2004 and so you might want to dial back the arrogance.

I'll dial back the arrogance the other way too. The Leafs have made the playoffs 5 years in a row since they got Matthews from their rebuild. Making playoffs (nothing more) has been Benning's stated goal since he got here.

 

(for the record I hate the Leafs, I hate it even more when they do moves that I wish the Canucks did like admit a rebuild. Just like how i hate seeing Calgary reaping the benefits from having that Markstrom-Tanev when we could have kept Tan Man.) 

 

If you swapped Dubas' and Benning's record since he got there, 110% people here would be estatic because 'anything can happen' once you make playoffs.

 

In terms of that bar of 'making playoffs'. It's been 5-2 Toronto since we both swapped management teams in 2014. 

Edited November 30, 2021 by DSVII

[MaxVerstappen33]

2 hours ago, combover said:

Funny because yes those players were the teams best but what made them the best is the fact they got surrounded with support players that made it so they could play that way. 
Just because a gm can bring in the stars especially when drafting in the top 10 doesn’t make it a good team. (Oilers) 

manny Lappiere Jansen probably the best third line in franchise history.

For years they looked for a match on the sedin line. 
turns out it was burrows. 
Finding the right support players and building around the stars is just as important. 
people like to forget we traded Nonis great pick Patrick white for what turned into one of our best offensive defenders. While he was here. 
 

so yeah Burke nonis put the main pieces on the table but they failed to assemble the puzzle Gillis found the missing pieces and put it all together. 
same here Benning has put some pieces on the table but it’s pretty clear he doesn’t understand it or he lost the box/ picture  to see how it all fits together. 

Gillis  also was adamant that we had to be strong down the middle getting possession and keeping it. 
sedins played a possession game imagine if the gm had found a dump and chase coach that refused to change. 
 

we suck down the middle people whine about horvat the only guy on the team that wins faceoffs lol. Dropped in every situation to do so. It’s not a recipe for success to have one Center. 

and as far as drafting goes he admitted after he was fired that he should have fired delarome  and revamped the drafting but his words were on the lines of you hire a person to do a job you let them do their job.

 

gillis did a good job I know the people here what to discredit him. lots of gms get good teams and do nothing nonis got burkes team missed the playoffs….time for excuses. 
gillis is in the franchise history books for winning. 
Gillis time was up when he spoke out against the terrible ownerships meddling and saw the team needed to be rebuild he didn’t want to hire torts owners did. 

bennings only got a job because he’s a lap dog puppet and hasn’t said anything to contradict the owners it’s made him look like a refool since day one. 

as far as drafting scouting

for fun I looked a Craig buttons mock draft list from 2014 it’s it’s comparable to what Benning has done some better some worst so he’s been over rated and over sold and really proof is on the ice 7 picks 5 first rounders (top ten) and 2 second that’s not good drafting. No late round gems ..not one in 7 seasons. 
when was garland drafted (5th rd) Burroughs 7th rd 

great at drafting hes to two misses in the top 6 .. 

 

 

 

Benning might not be the worst GM but he’s in the bottom 5 just like his teams. 


 

I don't think Nonis was as bad of a GM as we remember. And Gillis did a decent job too.

 

All i am saying now is , i think Benning just might have played his part by assembling the makings of a core. Just like Nonis and Burke did. Benning won't be around for any of the glory just as Nonis wasn't. 

 

It just pisses me off when Canucks fans pile onto Benning on HF boards and the rest of the league, playing up the idea that he's the worst in the league. The rest of the league says that mainly because they just hate us. You aren't supposed to agree with them. Benning deserves a little bit more respect than he's getting. And i don't disagree that its time for him to move on. As long as his replacement isn't someone like Jim Rutheford. 

[King Heffy]

4 minutes ago, DSVII said:

We have a $26 million dollar defense (7th most expensive in the league), with only three players who can be considered top 4 caliber, that is responsible for the worst PK in the league and bottom 10 in giving up scoring / danger chances against the last five years. And he let two NHL RHDs leave to chase OEL and tried plugging that hole he created with filler depth.

 

I'll take Dubas.

 

Never said our D was great, it's just not as bad as Toronto's.  I'll take a qualified candidate over Benning or Dubas.

[aGENT]

10 minutes ago, whysoserious said:

If you can't tell the difference between Pettersson and the likes of Poolman, Pearson, Myers and Dickinson I really don't know what to tell you.

 

Seriously, what team would be willing to take Myers, Pearson, Dickinson or Poolman on? They're not young and do not have upside, no team with the cap flexibility would want them.  Dickinson is the only one who may have some value (probably less than we traded for him) since he's relatively young, although he hasn't shown he's capable of playing 3C. These players simply don't move the needle for contending teams nor would they have the cap space to take any of them on. Not to mention they would have to commit to them for multiple years. The only way we are moving any these guys is in the final year of their contracts as rentals (assuming their play hasn't declined) or as lateral move where we take on a similar player from another team (which does not help us cap wise). 

Who said I couldn't tell the difference?

[aGENT]

13 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

The rest of those players are older depth players that have seemingly reached their respective potentials.

Seems to me we could use a few extra  'older, depth players that have seemingly reached their respective potentials' to help with our PK.

 

13 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

Nobody wants depth players signed to term off a bad team. Not without retention and/or sweeteners.

They'd love some of our bad team's, depth players actually. Especially if they can get them at a discount due to said 'bad team'ing'.

 

 

[Patel Bure]

6 minutes ago, DSVII said:

I'll dial back the arrogance the other way too. The Leafs have made the playoffs 5 years in a row since they got Matthews from their rebuild. Making playoffs (nothing more) has been Benning's stated goal since he got here.

 

(for the record I hate the Leafs, I hate it even more when they do moves that I wish the Canucks did like admit a rebuild. Just like how i hate seeing Calgary reaping the benefits from having that Markstrom-Tanev when we could have kept Tan Man.) 

 

If you swapped Dubas' and Benning's record since he got there, 110% people here would be estatic because 'anything can happen' once you make playoffs.

 

In terms of that bar of 'making playoffs'. It's been 5-2 Toronto since we both swapped management teams in 2014. 

Comparing our management team to Toronto’s due to our 2014 start date is nonsensical in my opinion since the Leafs had been struggling for a LOT longer than the Canucks.   The Leafs had been struggling since 2004 while the Canucks had won back to back Presidents trophies in 2011 and 2012 and finished around 7th-8th overall one year prior.  In other words, the Canucks had just started to enter the their dark days in 2014 while the Leafs had pretty much been there since 2004.  The Leafs had their version of our 2019-2020 season in 2013.   

[kanucks25]

Just now, aGENT said:

Seems to me we could use a few extra  'older, depth players that have seemingly reached their respective potentials' to help with our PK.

Which doesn't disprove anything I said.

 

That post was more like it, spin-cycle back on.

Edited November 30, 2021 by kanucks25

[Gurn]

16 minutes ago, DSVII said:

, that is responsible for the worst PK in the league

iirc there are a couple of forwards on the pk at all times as well, so shared blame

 

17 minutes ago, DSVII said:

bottom 10 in giving up scoring / danger chances against the last five years

usually 3 forwards on the ice at regular strength, so shared blame there too.

[aGENT]

3 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

Which doesn't disprove anything I said.

 

That post was more like it, spin-cycle back on.

What you seem to think of as supposed 'spin-cycle' is me pleading with you to actually think critically.

[kanucks25]

3 minutes ago, aGENT said:

What you seem to think of as supposed 'spin-cycle' is me pleading with you to actually think critically.

You're the one lumping Pettersson in with Poolman/Myers/Dickinson/Pearson and I'm not thinking critically?

 

See the thread title: "Honest Conversation With Those Who Still Support Management"

Edited November 30, 2021 by kanucks25

[DSVII]

9 minutes ago, Patel Bure said:

Comparing our management team to Toronto’s due to our 2014 start date is nonsensical in my opinion since the Leafs had been struggling for a LOT longer than the Canucks.   The Leafs had been struggling since 2004 while the Canucks had won back to back Presidents trophies in 2011 and 2012 and finished around 7th-8th overall one year prior.  In other words, the Canucks had just started to enter the their dark days in 2014 while the Leafs had pretty much been there since 2004.  The Leafs had their version of our 2019-2020 season in 2013.   

Matter of opinion Patel, but it is directly comparable. Both of us replaced our President and GMs as well as changed course after a 2013 playoff failure. The Leafs current iteration began as a vision laid out by Shanahan in 2014.

 

Prior to that, the Leafs were mortgaging their future to make playoffs up until 2013. They weren't rebuilding. Look up the timeline of Jeff Ferguson Jr and tell me you aren't getting chills seeing the parallels to Benning.

 

If we are going to analyze the Canucks by saying that the 2014-16 period was the retool and 2017 was when the rebuild began for this core. The same allowance applies for the Leafs. up to 2013 it was a different era, not one continuous rebuild. It was a different era. The 2014 start date applies.

Edited November 30, 2021 by DSVII

[Dazzle]

17 minutes ago, DSVII said:

I'll dial back the arrogance the other way too. The Leafs have made the playoffs 5 years in a row since they got Matthews from their rebuild. Making playoffs (nothing more) has been Benning's stated goal since he got here.

 

(for the record I hate the Leafs, I hate it even more when they do moves that I wish the Canucks did like admit a rebuild. Just like how i hate seeing Calgary reaping the benefits from having that Markstrom-Tanev when we could have kept Tan Man.) 

 

If you swapped Dubas' and Benning's record since he got there, 110% people here would be estatic because 'anything can happen' once you make playoffs.

 

In terms of that bar of 'making playoffs'. It's been 5-2 Toronto since we both swapped management teams in 2014. 

Toronto is so screwed with the cap. They also choked up picks to buy themselves out of some trouble too. Dubas is not that well liked in Toronto anymore, but I can understand why you think that the grass is greener on the other side.

 

The fact that they have Matthews and Marner as part of their core should be emphasized in your post. We do not have anyone like that from 2014 onwards. Look at where they were picked in the draft. Then you should realize that Toronto was in a better spot than what Gillis left Benning with.

[aGENT]

1 minute ago, kanucks25 said:

You're the one lumping Pettersson in with Poolman/Myers/Dickinson/Pearson and I'm not thinking critically?

 

See the thread title: "Honest Conversation With Those Who Still Support Management"

I didn't lump him in.

 

I'm asking you (all) to think critically about player valuation as it pertains to our underperforming team.

 

The team and even Pettersson himself playing poorly doesn't tank his value entirely, does it? Why is that? Yes, some part of that is because he's younger and has shown star ability etc. But he's also now paid at that level and isn't coming anywhere close to it currently.

 

Poolman has also shown NHL level ability to play 3rd pair D quite competently both elsewhere and EVEN on this underperforming team. The exact level he's being paid at in fact. Yet we'd evidently need to 'pay to dump him'...?

 

That's not how this works. 

[NewbieCanuckFan]

On 11/25/2021 at 11:24 PM, NHL97OneTimer said:

Changing the GM does nothing NOW is what I said.  Yes, of course it does change things.  But in most cases, a new GM can't walk in, fleece the league and put together a run.  Changing a coach and fixing the inners of a locker room can have more rapid changes.

 

While you're so fixed on JB and only JB, here's what's dropped recently:  https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/canucks-culture-problem-drama-leaders

 

Like I said, JB has his blame but there's other issues going on that needs dealing with.  Changing the GM solves none of this.  Changing coaches, trading problem players or player leadership sure could though.

 

For some reason you're fixed on thinking that I defend JB to the end.  I have no idea why.  I've simply said that people like you are oversimplifying the issue by solely pointing at the GM.  I've never said this was a stellar team.  I said it should be performing better based on what's on paper.  Find me an analyst or pundit out there that truly believes that this team is a bottom 5 team on paper.

 

Perhaps those who have inside scoops in the media are correct.....we have a bunch of squabbling players on the team that's taking the group down.  Like I've said all along......it's a shame because these are pros.

Changing the GM now means he won't ultimately be able to hire another rookie head coach of the Canucks. Drafting home runs with his picks means jack manure if their development is stunted by the coaching staff.  Who hired those guys?  Jim Benning.

[Boudrias]

29 minutes ago, MaxVerstappen33 said:

I don't think Nonis was as bad of a GM as we remember. And Gillis did a decent job too.

 

All i am saying now is , i think Benning just might have played his part by assembling the makings of a core. Just like Nonis and Burke did. Benning won't be around for any of the glory just as Nonis wasn't. 

 

It just pisses me off when Canucks fans pile onto Benning on HF boards and the rest of the league, playing up the idea that he's the worst in the league. The rest of the league says that mainly because they just hate us. You aren't supposed to agree with them. Benning deserves a little bit more respect than he's getting. And i don't disagree that its time for him to move on. As long as his replacement isn't someone like Jim Rutheford. 

Interesting that neither Nonis or Ferguson have ever got another GM gig after leaving the Laffers. Maybe they don't want the stress. 

[whysoserious]

35 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Who said I couldn't tell the difference?

Evidently, you.

 

53 minutes ago, aGENT said:

No, you explain how is Pettersson any different?

 

The team is playing poorly as a whole. Pettersson individually, more so than a good few of the players on that so-called 'untradeable' list in fact. And at a far higher price tag.

 

Poolman for example is making 3rd pair D money and playing at or above that level, even on said team in a tailspin.

 

This is the same, shallow level of valuation that leads to oversimplified takes like 'OEL has lost his offense'. No, our team/forwards are not scoring like almost any goals. Creating next to no offense. Where is he supposed to pick up the assists that traditionally make up the lion's share of his points from?

 

 

[aGENT]

4 minutes ago, whysoserious said:

Evidently, you.

 

 

Nope.