Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Honest Conversation With Those Who Still Support Management

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Dazzle said:

Ok, the story of Sakic needs to be set straight. He made a ton of mistakes during his tenure. Perhaps the romanticism surrounding this guy needs to be toned down.

 

In 2013, he was named GM. It's worth noting that before he became GM, Colorado had missed the playoffs for three consecutive years.

 

 

In 2010-2011, COL drafted in the 17th overall Joey Hishton.

The next year (2011-2012), COL drafted #2 Gabriel Landeskog

The year after that, they didn't draft anyone, and picked up Varlamov from Washington (COL receives a 2nd round pick in exchange). Varlamov is their starting goalie.

 

Following that, aside from a first round push, Sakic misses the playoffs for three more years.

 

2013–14 2013–14 Western CentralDivision champions 1st 82 52 22 8 112 248 217 7 3 4 20 22 Lost in First Round, 3–4 (Wild)
2014–15 2014–15 Western Central 7th 82 39 31 12 90 219 227 Did not qualify
2015–16 2015–16 Western Central 6th 82 39 39 4 82 216 240 Did not qualify
2016–17 2016–17 Western Central 7th 82 22 56 4 48 166 278 Did not qualify

 

The following players were obtained under Sakic through the draft, in the consecutive order of the missed years: Rantanen, Jost, Makar. All of them being high first round picks.

 

Safe to say, Sakic was in a better position than Benning was. Benning did not have anyone remotely close to Landeskog to start off.

 

Yzerman was initially on Tampa Bay, but then moved to Detroit. We're seeing a similar type of 'tanking' phase for Detroit.

The amount of romanticism of Yzerman/Sakic is actually disingenous for discussion. You are cherryingpicking the positive results of these two GMs while ignoring the down years they had. Not to mention, the teams were in better positions than the Canucks were, in terms of development.

 

Nevermind

Edited by Crabcakes
Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Dazzle said:

I don't remember what Button said, but Podkolzin was rated pretty highly by other scouts. Selective blindness is affecting you I guess.

 

By only comparing first round picks, you are missing a huge set of information. You did ignore Demko and Hoglander. Who cares what other scouts had ranked them? Look at the freaking draft and use hindsight to see the results. You can SEE Demko and Hoglander flourishing in their draft classes, NOT JUST their respective rounds.

 

You ARE ignoring (selectively omitting) information and that's why I think your discussion is not genuine.

I believe it’s you that’s being selectively blind. My point was that Button as one example would have picked players as good or better than Benning did in the first round. They both would have picked Boeser and Hughes. Many fans would probably say that Button’s picks (Ehlers, Tkachuk, Glass and Caulfield vs Virtanen, Juolevi, Pettersson and Podkolzin) are collectively better than Benning’s.


As for Benning’s drafting in later rounds I agree that Demko and Hoglander are home runs and hopefully Gadjovich is as well. However every team has a long list of hopefuls and looking at the current sad sack defence and bottom six we’re icing at the moment I don’t think we have enough after seven years of JB.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Schmautzie said:

I believe it’s you that’s being selectively blind. My point was that Button as one example would have picked players as good or better than Benning did in the first round. They both would have picked Boeser and Hughes. Many fans would probably say that Button’s picks (Ehlers, Tkachuk, Glass and Caulfield vs Virtanen, Juolevi, Pettersson and Podkolzin) are collectively better than Benning’s.


As for Benning’s drafting in later rounds I agree that Demko and Hoglander are home runs and hopefully Gadjovich is as well. However every team has a long list of hopefuls and looking at the current sad sack defence and bottom six we’re icing at the moment I don’t think we have enough after seven years of JB.

 

Button has a little bit different take on drafting, he goes for the player he thinks is going to be the best in 5 years rather than the best record to date.   

 

It's fair to look at Buttons drafting record as a GM.   Derian Hatcher, Jere Lehtinen, Jamie Langenbrunner, Marty Turco, Jarome Iginla and Brenden Morrow were his picks

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Patel Bure said:

OJ still has lots of time to develop into a good hockey player.  To put things into perspective, he’s only 6 months older than Cale Makar.  

That's what we kept saying for Virtanen.

 

The chances of OJ developing into a meaningful hockey player is very slim at this point. There's a reason why Travis won't let him play more than 13 minutes a game.

  • Like 1
  • Hydration 1
  • Sad 1
  • RoughGame 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Schmautzie said:

I believe it’s you that’s being selectively blind. My point was that Button as one example would have picked players as good or better than Benning did in the first round. They both would have picked Boeser and Hughes. Many fans would probably say that Button’s picks (Ehlers, Tkachuk, Glass and Caulfield vs Virtanen, Juolevi, Pettersson and Podkolzin) are collectively better than Benning’s.


As for Benning’s drafting in later rounds I agree that Demko and Hoglander are home runs and hopefully Gadjovich is as well. However every team has a long list of hopefuls and looking at the current sad sack defence and bottom six we’re icing at the moment I don’t think we have enough after seven years of JB.

 

I'm not selectively blind. It's hard to defend the virtanen pick. Juolevi is still waiting to be judged, to be fair, but the Tkachuk/sergachev alternate picks.

 

In 2014, quite a few first round picks were busts/disappointments, including some ahead of Virtanen. So that context needs to be made clear.

 

A portion of this fanbase questions drafting of Benning because they talk about him being gifted high picks. Yet Demko and Hoglander have been often left out of the discussion.

 

We have a lot to be happy about for prospects. Of course they will have to prove something in the NHL, but things are trending well for them.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, JohnTavares said:

That's what we kept saying for Virtanen.

 

The chances of OJ developing into a meaningful hockey player is very slim at this point. There's a reason why Travis won't let him play more than 13 minutes a game.

OJ is still developing his game at the NHL level and has noticeable areas in which he is both strong at and weaker at.  Green will give him more ice time as he improves. 
 

Unlike Jake, OJ had two major surgeries which forced him to miss many games in two separate seasons.  That’s why I always scratch my head when the “Analytics” folk point out that it’s OJ’s D+5.   It really isn’t.  In any event, the Canucks still have (had) a lot of good prospects that are either on the verge of being on the big club, or have already made it in.  

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, JohnTavares said:

That's what we kept saying for Virtanen.

 

The chances of OJ developing into a meaningful hockey player is very slim at this point. There's a reason why Travis won't let him play more than 13 minutes a game.

The difference between Virtanen and Juolevi is quite big. One has had injury issues. The other has had off ice issues.

 

Saying Juolevi has a very slim shot at being a meaningful player has so many problems with that, but I suspect your opinion won't change despite your so-called "honest" discussion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Having a universal salary cap means there isn't an even salary cap. High tax locations will always be handicapped with the current system. My advice is not to get too invested in this circus of a league, there are about a million ways the outcomes are influenced by factors hidden behind the curtain.

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Dazzle said:

I'm not selectively blind. It's hard to defend the virtanen pick. Juolevi is still waiting to be judged, to be fair, but the Tkachuk/sergachev alternate picks.

 

In 2014, quite a few first round picks were busts/disappointments, including some ahead of Virtanen. So that context needs to be made clear.

 

A portion of this fanbase questions drafting of Benning because they talk about him being gifted high picks. Yet Demko and Hoglander have been often left out of the discussion.

 

We have a lot to be happy about for prospects. Of course they will have to prove something in the NHL, but things are trending well for them.

 

Agreed.

 

I still have high hopes for our prospects as well. I just don’t think that Benning’s drafting is necessarily at the genius level that some make it out to be.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Schmautzie said:

Agreed.

 

I still have high hopes for our prospects as well. I just don’t think that Benning’s drafting is necessarily at the genius level that some make it out to be.

 

 

Compare Shinkaruk at 24, Gaunce at 26, Jensen at 29, Schroeder at 22, Sauve at 41, Patrick White at 25, Ellington at 33 (Canucks drafting from 2007 - 2013) to Boeser at 23, Hoglander at 40, Demko at 36, (Benning's drafting).

 

The previous drafting for the Canucks has been beyond abysmal. Benning has a few notable bad picks, but he continually turns late first round/early second round picks into high quality NHL players. Just look at that list of previous picks in that range. It actually causes pain to realize just how many wasted picks there were by previous regimes for the Canucks.

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Schmautzie said:

Agreed.

 

I still have high hopes for our prospects as well. I just don’t think that Benning’s drafting is necessarily at the genius level that some make it out to be.

 

 

I have to agree

How long has he had to evaluate Jakes demeanour and commitment?

He has had Years of  on/off ice observation and coaches input, so where is his evaluation of talent with him and other players he has resigned time and time again, that No other GM's would consider good value and we'd have to include good draft picks to get rid of them ?

 

Everyone expecting JB to have money when LE contract up, If JB is here, don't be surprised if he resigns him and calls him foundational

Scouts and Manny gone? Why? Most want to take on a challenge and being at the bottom of the league standings for so long, means eventually there is only one direction to go, when we drafted our good players, no other Canuck GM had as many top picks and all the staff was here-What will we draft without them now?

Some wanna believe all the scouting was JB? , While GM's all say the draft is the scouts show, they do all the work, they sit down and all discuss the merits for each and for that reason alone i am not hiring JB as a scout for our team either, as he wasn't a scout for us

 

If everyone would rate him for General Managing ALONE and Not as a scout (they think he was hired for)

What grade would you give on him being a GM without scouting involved?

Mine now would be C- 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Xanlet said:

Compare Shinkaruk at 24, Gaunce at 26, Jensen at 29, Schroeder at 22, Sauve at 41, Patrick White at 25, Ellington at 33 (Canucks drafting from 2007 - 2013) to Boeser at 23, Hoglander at 40, Demko at 36, (Benning's drafting).

 

The previous drafting for the Canucks has been beyond abysmal. Benning has a few notable bad picks, but he continually turns late first round/early second round picks into high quality NHL players. Just look at that list of previous picks in that range. It actually causes pain to realize just how many wasted picks there were by previous regimes for the Canucks.

I agree with you that Gillis’s drafting was brutal  but we’re talking two different things.

 

I’m just saying that a competent GM (using Craig Button’s prospect list as an example) drafting in the same position as the Canucks did could have drafted as well (or better) than Benning did.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, CanadianRugby said:

You must be new here.

Nope. I joined in 06... left due to the Benning shills attacking any criticism of the GM.

 

Came back to see it is still more or less the same thing here...

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, JohnTavares said:

Nope. I joined in 06... left due to the Benning shills attacking any criticism of the GM.

 

Came back to see it is still more or less the same thing here...

Yeah I was joking.  I've been fighting the good fight on here since the Vrbata & Miller signings. 

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, CanadianRugby said:

Yeah I was joking.  I've been fighting the good fight on here since the Vrbata & Miller signings. 

Respect to you. I don't know how you do it here.

 

Everything is just JB draft well he's amazing end of story.

  • Upvote 1
  • RoughGame 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, flat land fish said:

If button were that good he would be a GM and not an analyst.  

If good drafting was the only criteria then Button WOULD be a good GM. 
 

Unfortunately Benning has shown us that drafting alone does not make a good General Manager.
 

 

  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, JohnTavares said:

Respect to you. I don't know how you do it here.

 

Everything is just JB draft well he's amazing end of story.

Bro I'm a Canucks fan.  Glutton for punishment.

  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...