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)
10 hours ago, joe-max said:

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Funny how the OP claims to be interested in an open and honest discussion, but has barely anything to offer but one liners, insults and moaning. A little substance wouldn't hurt.

 

He might also consider that there is not only black and white in the world and in this instance. One can criticize management and still like the overall direction. Or dislike the direction, but still support certains actions. Overgeneralizing and calling everybody who dares to say something positive about management a troll and/or blind Benning shill does not contribute to the discourse.

 

Trying to go back to topic : I like the overall direction of the team and disagree that JB has no plan. His drafting has been very good (not excellent), for most of his trades I understand why he made them and can get behind. I'm not as critical of his FA signings as the majority. Several injuries make deals look bad (Ferland, Sutter, OJ, Roussell, Baertschi), it is debatable to what extent he could have known, Ferland was certainly a big risk. His

college signings have been good. He could be a bit more creative.

 

I like that he is not afraid to take risks (e.g. Miller, EP, Markström), that he is rather patient with prospects but values two way play and lets go of players who don't get it (Goldobin, Gaudette). He doesn't seem to care much about public opinion, which is a plus imo.

 

Negotiating in trades and free agency doesn't seem to be his strongest suit, it feels like he needs to pay the extra dollar or draft pick to get deals done. In general better internal communication may have saved him assets or staff. Tryamkin, Dahlen, Brackett, Tanev, Toffoli, Malhotra, Stecher, Gaudette, Clark - we cannot be sure to what extent (lack of) communication led to people leaving the organisation and if JB wanted to reatain them anyway, but that's an area where I see deficits. 

 

I'm undecided about player development. There are bright spots on forward and in goal, but especially on defence or on the defensive side there players have not progressed as much as I would like. I'm also not sold on the playing style. It is effective and successful when everybody is on, but it seems to be rather taxing physically and posibbly not sustainable for a long playoff run. For both aspects I'd first have to blame coaching, but JB is ultimately responsible for choosing the guys.

 

Does he speak up against the owner for the good of the team or is he a yes-man mainly trying to please his bosses to save his own backside? I don't know. Hopefully the former, but certain leads point to the latter.

 

Is he the bestest GM that every wandered the seven seas? Probably not. Is he the most worthless piece of hedgehog dung? I guess not. In my opinion he is a solid GM that has managed to give the franchise a very talented young core and should get one more (full) season.

Did you miss my very first post? It was intended to be an honest and open conversation until the trolls started pouring on. 

 

If you actually read this thread, you can see there are a lot of people offering no productive conversation and just blatantly trolling.


CDC has really gone downhill in the last couple years.


EDIT: 

Thanks for the well-thought out, non-troll response. 

 

I think a lot of people right now don't see a plan. Can you point to me where there has been a substantial plan that has been set in motion?


What was the plan to trade a second and a very good prospect for Toffoli, only to not re-sign him? What was the plan to re-sign Pearson this year despite him declining and shown to be on a downward trajectory? What's the plan to trade Gaudette for Highmore? Gaudette at least showed glimpses of being a top six forward last year - Highmore's someone you could have gotten for a 7th round pick at the expansion draft. The moves don't align together IMO. Where was the plan when we signed Myers 6X6, or Eriksson 6X6? When is our competitive window exactly? 

 

The problem with those signings is that when you sign bottom six forwards with term, you create a lot of risk for your team. Because bottom six forwards tend to fizzle out quicker, they aren't a sure thing like top six forwards or top four dmen. I don't think it's fair to use the injuries as an excuse for some of these signings. Sutter is who he is regardless of injuries - he's always been a 3rd line center, even when we acquired him. Is it common to give 3rd line centers 5 year deals averaging $4.3M? The thought process behind that extension never made any sense - injuries or not.


I don't see Pettersson as a risky pick... it's not like he went way off the board. Moving on from Markstrom made a lot of sense because he wanted an NMC but also because we couldn't afford him (due to the several bad contracts on the books). I think you're giving him too many props here for these "risks". He also took a lot of bad "risks" (see Linden Vey, Erik Gudbranson, not-resigning Toffili).

 

Edited by JohnTavares
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, MikeyD said:

I definitely would avoid the collapse with a ten foot pole like we play now. Our defense has a lot of two-way aspects and is teetered towards offensive, so to play extremely passive and to not use any of the offensive capabilities seems silly to me. We have quite a few good puck moving defensemen, yet we play a constant up and out game and our forwards don't play high enough to counter (which is odd considering that's our only hope on offense because we play so passively). 

I'd prefer a tighter checking defensive set up because that's what our team is largely consisted of. Our whole bottom six for most of the year was mainly checking forwards so to have them play away when off the puck seems really dumb to me. We also need a much better forecheck, and we have some phenomenal forecheckers on this team, we just don't utilize them for that role. 

This team should be heavy, but they never play that way. On the back end we have some big bodies that can throw weight around, but we only park them in front of the net. 

This team does well when they apply pressure, it's the reason why we win games. When we don't we get outshot 2-1 and rely far too much on our goaltending. Our players tire out from being on the ice too long and then we don't have enough energy to counter. If we pressed the action a bit and took away the offense's defense, we'd be far more successful. When you have guys who are great on a forecheck like Motte, Bailey, Macewan, Hogs, Miller, Petey, etc. and you have guys who are good checking players like Bo, Sutter, Beagle, etc. you're underutilizing their talents by making them play a rigorous structure of a collapse that pretty much removes any talent in those areas because there isn't much application. Too often we focus on chipping the puck in but because the legs are done from defending we aren't retrieving it, we're changing lines. 

Offensively our defense don't activate nearly enough. Again, this could be due to our defensive structure. We have some fantastic offensive defensemen and oddly enough, they're rarely the guys that pinch. 

Our team just isn't utilizing anything they're good at aside from goaltending. There's a reason why guys like Schmidt aren't adapting to our game. There's a reason why these unbelievably gifted offensive defensemen aren't coming up and being dynamic like they were in the AHL. Our team game just isn't structured for them to be as successful as they were before. When's the last time you've seen a defenseman even rush the puck out of our own end? Has that happened more than a handful of times this entire season? 

Can't win many games waiting for the puck to come to you. 

MikeyD you get my vote for new Head Coach!

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Alflives said:

Lots of crying by the OP, so here you go friend.  It’s going to be okay. :canucks:

 

image.gif.f7644af3aaba60ee3e7f554b6608a5e7.gif

 

No crying here at all.


You're worried about an internet stranger's username on a message board. I really suggest getting another hobby.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 24K PureCool said:

You lost me the moment you start complaining about the Bonino trade, op. 

 

That said, let's just say I will not be jury and executioner for this management group or ownership (mostly Francesco).

But I won't shed a tear when the blade eventually falls.

Please elaborate how I lost you on the Bonino trade?

 

Bonino was better, younger, and cheaper at the time.

 

JB then gave Sutter an enormous extension for a bottom six forward that absolutely set this team back. 


Please elaborate again how I lost you?

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, joe-max said:

I do not see myself as JB's defence team. Wasn't this thread to be supposed an honest discussion? In my understanding this requires a fair and differentiated approach, both sides of the coin. Can I not see deficits and still be content with the overall picture? Talking about ambiguity tolerance. People who call for the perfect GM without flaws that delivers from day one, will be in a tough spot - guy doesn't exist.

 

Going back to the OP's post, I do not see the result basis as a big issue as they meet my expectations, the process and transaction basis are portrayed much worse than they actually are (do I have to add "in my opinion" to every sentence to make clear it is my opinion and not the ultimate truth?), the relation management area looks to be the worst of the four, but this is really hard to judge without insider knowledge, so I'd be careful here.

 

So yes, I think JB deserves another year. I wouldn't necessarily mind a change, but I see the risks that inserting a new GM brings and often enough it has not helped much but just set back the team a few more years. Then again, I'm probably on the tentative and patient side. Maybe I'm wrong. Who knows...

I'm curious. When do the results basis become an issue for you? Do we need to suck for another 2/3 years before you're ready to move on from JB?


1 playoff round win in 7 years is ok? When did we set the bar so low for this franchise?  It's undeniable that we have been one of the worst teams in the NHL during JB's tenure, despite constantly spending to the cap and trading picks/prospects for players to accelerate the rebuild. We are now in a cap crunch with Hughes and Pettersson needing contracts... there is limited to no room for improvement. We will likely see the same team for the next couple years. Are you ok with missing the playoffs for the next 2 years?

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, MikeyD said:

I definitely would avoid the collapse with a ten foot pole like we play now. Our defense has a lot of two-way aspects and is teetered towards offensive, so to play extremely passive and to not use any of the offensive capabilities seems silly to me. We have quite a few good puck moving defensemen, yet we play a constant up and out game and our forwards don't play high enough to counter (which is odd considering that's our only hope on offense because we play so passively). 

I'd prefer a tighter checking defensive set up because that's what our team is largely consisted of. Our whole bottom six for most of the year was mainly checking forwards so to have them play away when off the puck seems really dumb to me. We also need a much better forecheck, and we have some phenomenal forecheckers on this team, we just don't utilize them for that role. 

This team should be heavy, but they never play that way. On the back end we have some big bodies that can throw weight around, but we only park them in front of the net. 

This team does well when they apply pressure, it's the reason why we win games. When we don't we get outshot 2-1 and rely far too much on our goaltending. Our players tire out from being on the ice too long and then we don't have enough energy to counter. If we pressed the action a bit and took away the offense's defense, we'd be far more successful. When you have guys who are great on a forecheck like Motte, Bailey, Macewan, Hogs, Miller, Petey, etc. and you have guys who are good checking players like Bo, Sutter, Beagle, etc. you're underutilizing their talents by making them play a rigorous structure of a collapse that pretty much removes any talent in those areas because there isn't much application. Too often we focus on chipping the puck in but because the legs are done from defending we aren't retrieving it, we're changing lines. 

Offensively our defense don't activate nearly enough. Again, this could be due to our defensive structure. We have some fantastic offensive defensemen and oddly enough, they're rarely the guys that pinch. 

Our team just isn't utilizing anything they're good at aside from goaltending. There's a reason why guys like Schmidt aren't adapting to our game. There's a reason why these unbelievably gifted offensive defensemen aren't coming up and being dynamic like they were in the AHL. Our team game just isn't structured for them to be as successful as they were before. When's the last time you've seen a defenseman even rush the puck out of our own end? Has that happened more than a handful of times this entire season? 

Can't win many games waiting for the puck to come to you. 

One of the better posts regarding coaching that I've read on here recently. Well said, Mikey.

  • Hydration 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, RU SERIOUS said:

 

With all due respect - YES we do !   Until The owners start listening to what fans like John Tavares (above) keeps saying, nothing will change.  He has pointed out some extremely valid points that the Owners have to start paying attention to or we'll get another 7 years of boring/losing hockey until the last of the fans have lost complete interest in this team.

The last seven years reminds me of the very DARK days we endured back in the 80's - 90's where we were spinning our wheels and stuck in the MUD.  That's what this team feels like now - unfortunately.   JB and TG both have to GO ! Sorry !

 

CHANGE IS NEEDED NOW - ENOUGH IS ENOUGH !

100%


People don't like to answer to hard questions, so people just say "close thread" etc.


14 pages in and I don't think I've received more than a handful of legitimate responses.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, MikeyD said:

I definitely would avoid the collapse with a ten foot pole like we play now. Our defense has a lot of two-way aspects and is teetered towards offensive, so to play extremely passive and to not use any of the offensive capabilities seems silly to me. We have quite a few good puck moving defensemen, yet we play a constant up and out game and our forwards don't play high enough to counter (which is odd considering that's our only hope on offense because we play so passively). 

I'd prefer a tighter checking defensive set up because that's what our team is largely consisted of. Our whole bottom six for most of the year was mainly checking forwards so to have them play away when off the puck seems really dumb to me. We also need a much better forecheck, and we have some phenomenal forecheckers on this team, we just don't utilize them for that role. 

This team should be heavy, but they never play that way. On the back end we have some big bodies that can throw weight around, but we only park them in front of the net. 

This team does well when they apply pressure, it's the reason why we win games. When we don't we get outshot 2-1 and rely far too much on our goaltending. Our players tire out from being on the ice too long and then we don't have enough energy to counter. If we pressed the action a bit and took away the offense's defense, we'd be far more successful. When you have guys who are great on a forecheck like Motte, Bailey, Macewan, Hogs, Miller, Petey, etc. and you have guys who are good checking players like Bo, Sutter, Beagle, etc. you're underutilizing their talents by making them play a rigorous structure of a collapse that pretty much removes any talent in those areas because there isn't much application. Too often we focus on chipping the puck in but because the legs are done from defending we aren't retrieving it, we're changing lines. 

Offensively our defense don't activate nearly enough. Again, this could be due to our defensive structure. We have some fantastic offensive defensemen and oddly enough, they're rarely the guys that pinch. 

Our team just isn't utilizing anything they're good at aside from goaltending. There's a reason why guys like Schmidt aren't adapting to our game. There's a reason why these unbelievably gifted offensive defensemen aren't coming up and being dynamic like they were in the AHL. Our team game just isn't structured for them to be as successful as they were before. When's the last time you've seen a defenseman even rush the puck out of our own end? Has that happened more than a handful of times this entire season? 

Can't win many games waiting for the puck to come to you. 

Great assessment.


A big reason why I don't think Travis Green is the right guy moving forward. The success of the team has always been propped up by Vezina level goaltending from Markstrom and Demko.


The coaching is more of a detriment than an advantage IMO.


This goes back to the original post... does JB deserve to fire Green and go through another coach? Most executives never get to bring in 3 head coaches over their tenure. Why would JB get special treatment? When do we acknowledge that he's part of the problem?

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

100%


People don't like to answer to hard questions, so people just say "close thread" etc.


14 pages in and I don't think I've received more than a handful of legitimate responses.

That's should be enough answers to satisfy your 'honest questions'.  Truth is you made a thread to troll.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, kilgore said:

 

I'm not saying the OP couldn't be a little more open to discussion, after starting it.

But its also an interesting angle.  A lot of pro-Benning folks only like to swoop into threads to attack the critics.  Here's a thread you'all can make your lists as to all the great things JB has done. And no one is answering that well.  What does that tell you? 

 

Even yourself:

 

Negotiating in trades and free agency doesn't seem to be his strongest suit, it feels like he needs to pay the extra dollar or draft pick to get deals done

 

it is debatable to what extent he could have known, Ferland was certainly a big risk.

 

He could be a bit more creative.

 

better internal communication may have saved him assets or staff.

 

especially on defence or on the defensive side there players have not progressed as much as I would like.

 

I'm also not sold on the playing style.

 

Does he speak up against the owner for the good of the team or is he a yes-man mainly trying to please his bosses to save his own backside? I don't know. Hopefully the former, but certain leads point to the latter.

 

 

 

But in spite of that you also say you "like the overall direction of the team" and "for most of his trades I understand why he made them and can get behind"   :mellow:

 

See, to me that does not compute. If your post is the pinnacle of Benning's defence team's case, you've got a long way to go.  

 

 

 

Wow. It only took 14 pages but finally someone can see what's going on here. When we take a deep dive together, we can acknowledge the many faults Benning has, but somehow someway, the pro-Benning still like the overall direction of the team?

 

It's just so hard to understand the pro-Benning folks here. When did we set the bar so low for an executive running a near billion dollar business?

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Hogs & Podz said:

That's should be enough answers to satisfy your 'honest questions'.  Truth is you made a thread to troll.  

Please point to one of my posts where I am not trying to start constructive conversation and am "trolling". 

 

Excluding my posts responding to other trolls. 

 

 

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

Please elaborate how I lost you on the Bonino trade?

 

Bonino was better, younger, and cheaper at the time.

 

JB then gave Sutter an enormous extension for a bottom six forward that absolutely set this team back. 


Please elaborate again how I lost you?

It is not a consequential trade that would in many eyes be a fireable offense like you have suggested. That is why. Griping over that one is just whinny. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont think itll be as bad as people think next year.

Theres enough contracts falling off to easily make room for Petey & Hughes. 

Buyout virtanen + Louie gives us about 4m. 
If JB gets creative this offseason, finding a way to move Beagle or convincing Seattle to take Holtby, thats another 3-4m of space. 
We can get a decent shutdown defenseman and a 3c (or bring back sutter for less $ and spend more to get a true #1 defenseman). 

Practice time + everyone healthy + rookies taking the next step + improvements on D and 3C could mean a very different looking year.

Demko at 5m + DiPietro at ELC for the next 3 years saves us 5-8m a year, compared to what other teams are paying for equivalent goaltending. 
Hogs, Podz, Boner at ELCs will give us incredibly good value for scoring punch. If JB can lock in good deals on Petey and Hughes bridge deals, we could be in the best position cap-wise in 2022 out of any team in the league. 
 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, 24K PureCool said:

It is not a consequential trade that would in many eyes be a fireable offense like you have suggested. That is why. Griping over that one is just whinny. 

Bonino for Sutter is one of several transactions that have accumulated for over JB's tenure.

 

Please read my post carefully... I said the Bonino for Sutter trade and extension set off alarm bells for me. I never said or suggested it was a fireable offense alone. It was my own personal turning point.


I'm not griping over that transaction. I don't even know why the pro-Benning folks are trying to argue with me over this transaction? Benning made a bad trade, and then multiplied his mistake by signing Sutter to an enormous deal without him ever playing a single game for the Canucks. What is there to even argue? 

 

It's an objective fact that trade and extension was a huge L for the team and Benning. Why are the pro-Benning folks even trying to argue this?

Edited by JohnTavares
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
24 minutes ago, JohnTavares said:

100%


People don't like to answer to hard questions, so people just say "close thread" etc.


14 pages in and I don't think I've received more than a handful of legitimate responses.

I know, it ceases to amaze me how some people don't recognize when change is needed.   I am like most giving some praise to JB for some of his draft picks - however he has performed well below average in general management and gets a failing grade for asset mgmt.   After 7 years it feels we are still at square 1. Realistically maybe 3 or 4 on a scale of 10 being fair - and that just doesn't cut it.  

 

In any event, we have just a bit over 48 hours left until the axe comes falling!  Thank god!

Edited by RU SERIOUS
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, JohnTavares said:

Bonino for Sutter is one of several transactions that have accumulated for over JB's tenure.

 

Please read my post carefully... I said the Bonino for Sutter trade and extension set off alarm bells for me. I never said or suggested it was a fireable offense alone. It was my own personal turning point.


I'm not griping over that transaction. I don't even know why the pro-Benning folks are trying to argue with me over this transaction? Benning made a bad trade, and then multiplied his mistake by signing Sutter to an enormous deal without him ever playing a single game for the Canucks. What is there to even argue? 

 

It's an objective fact that trade and extension was a huge L for the team and Benning. Why are the pro-Benning folks even trying to argue this?

Fine fair enough, missed the extension part in my skim. The extension was the red flag. My point was the trade itself was not.

 

Anyway for me, we need a regime change but it is more for non hockey related decisions than on ice performance. The suckage this season is understandable given the circumstances. It was moving in the right direction before this write off season.

 

Don't get me wrong, JB's hockey decisions leaves way more to be desired but what makes him disqualifying in my eyes is his complete lack of ability to build up the organizational and management structure to the point we are a joke of an organization in the nhl with all the off ice distractions with regards to Green, players speaking up about the Covid schedule, Virtanen stuff, front office personnel turnover, and constant comments by players, and agents of lack of communication. JB is just not a good corporate executive, hockey decisions aside. 

 

When Linden was here, he made up for JB's shortcoming with this regard and we have seen how things spiraled down when he left front office wise. 

 

Ownership, specifically Francesco, had a lot to do with this downward spiral with his refusal to hire  president of hockey ops to work with JB and his penny pinching spending on non player personnel. 

 

That is why I am not personally marching to Rogers with my pitch forks trying to put JB's head on a spike. I just don't see how just replacing JB is gonna change anything until Francesco wake up and smell his BS or he gets replaced by one of his brothers. 

 

/rant

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

It's actually a well written post, pretty much nailed everything in general, I'm actually glad you brought up the Bonino one that one always bugged me, Bonino was definitely the better player for half the price it never made sense to me.

 

I brought this up in GDT last night, but the other day was thinking of Markstrom, and how this team acquired him in a trade originally, waived him a couple times, but stuck with him until Clark turned him into #1, but you invest that much time into a goalie who was not a #1 and now is #1 and then you just let him walk? Why waste all that time to invest in him and turn him into a good trade piece to just let him walk... That's poor asset management. 

 

I've been a little more critical of Benning in the last year, but also said I'd let him finish off his last year on his contract, but if they don't resign Clark and let him go, then I'll probably lose it and demand Benning is gone before his contract is up.

Edited by ChuckNORRIS4Cup
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Alflives said:

So you’re an Islander’s fan?  ill go for a scooter ride, if you go to your team’s board.  Deal?  :towel:

Have missed you on this board, Alf! ;)

 

  • Hydration 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...