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

Jim Benning has and is the owners type of GM. 

He has always been against a complete rebuild. Every year he has tried through FA to fill a hole or two. He has shown that he has no interest in taking a few down years to build organizational  depth.  

  • RoughGame 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

When all is said and done Jim will have drafted the top 5 players in the history of this organization. Not a single one with a lotto pick either. ( yea I'm exaggerating a bit but Brock Petey Quinn Demmer hoggy ARE FRANCHISE PLAYERS) 

 

If you're shortsighted and huffing and puffing over 1 year left on Beagle Loui Roussel, then you probably aren't at peace. 

 

I'd recommend psilocybin to find some peace within your minds in hopes of it becoming less disgruntled and pessimistic. 

 

Spread love. Be kind. 

 

Edited by apollo
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, appleboy said:

Jim Benning has and is the owners type of GM. 

He has always been against a complete rebuild. Every year he has tried through FA to fill a hole or two. He has shown that he has no interest in taking a few down years to build organizational  depth.  

This is false.  

 

The time to do a "complete rebuild" was after the 2012 loss to the Kings.  Why?  Because - our top players still had incredible value at the time and would have landed us firsts and elite prospects.  I believe that this is what Gillis wanted to do after the loss to the Kings but ownership denied the request.  By the time Benning took over at the end of 2014, the value of those superstars had greatly diminished (age decline + premium contracts).  In other words, a lot of those old vets had more intrinsic value to the Canucks' organization rather than whatever (low ball) value that we would have received in return.   In other words, we wouldn't have gotten the types of picks and elite prospects ready to step up and take over immediately by making trades in 2014.  

 

That's what a lot of fans in the city do not understand.  You can't just trade vets for the sake of trading vets in the name of a rebuild.  If you are committed to trading a vet, you need to be sure that the young guy or prospect filling in that role can realistically succeed in that role or quickly grow into that role............otherwise, you neither do the player nor the teammates justice by moving a vet, and you ultimately just kill the confidence of that young kid.   
 

Having said all of that, I do believe that it’s time for Benning to go if the fans, media, and even players on the team do not understand management’s vision to the point where things have become toxic.   My only advice to ownership would be to not bring in popcorn farts like Geoff Courtnall because it “saves a few bucks” and is perceived to be good from a PR standpoint.  Pony up the money to bring in proven successes.

 

Dean Lomabard as GM + Gerard Gallant or Claude Julien as head coach.

Edited by Patel Bure
  • Like 1
  • Hydration 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Kenny Blankenship said:

Just out of curiosity, is there actually any tangible evidence that the Aquilini’s meddle any more than every other owner of a sports franchise? I feel like I hear people whine about ownership all the time but as far as I’m concerned it’s always been conjecture pushed by the media. People here just love to eat it up though lol. 

So if it's not owner interference then it's squarely on JB ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still think the issues we see today stem from not replacing Linden with another competent PoHOp's. We'd have a clearer direction, or at least a better chance of it, and hopefully better communication which is an important part of the job.

 

But sometimes this market is just weird. There's still people mad about Linden "lying" to a reporter about getting the job :picard: 

  • Haha 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Kenny Blankenship said:

What does my question have to do with Benning? I’m just asking about the claims of meddling ownership. 

You're right, but the post was about "Honest Conversation With Those Who Still Support Management" and there fore those that don't support Management. Although FA is the owner he is also included in the group named management  IMO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Patel Bure said:

This is false.  

 

The time to do a "complete rebuild" was after the 2012 loss to the Kings.  Why?  Because - our top players still had incredible value at the time and would have landed us firsts and elite prospects.  I believe that this is what Gillis wanted to do after the loss to the Kings but ownership denied the request.  By the time Benning took over at the end of 2014, the value of those superstars had greatly diminished (age decline + premium contracts).  In other words, a lot of those old vets had more intrinsic value to the Canucks' organization rather than whatever (low ball) value that we would have received in return.   In other words, we wouldn't have gotten the types of picks and elite prospects ready to step up and take over immediately by making trades in 2014.  

 

That's what a lot of fans in the city do not understand.  You can't just trade vets for the sake of trading vets in the name of a rebuild.  If you are committed to trading a vet, you need to be sure that the young guy or prospect filling in that role can realistically succeed in that role or quickly grow into that role............otherwise, you neither do the player nor the teammates justice by moving a vet, and you ultimately just kill the confidence of that young kid.   
 

Having said all of that, I do believe that it’s time for Benning to go if the fans, media, and even players on the team do not understand management’s vision to the point where things have become toxic.   My only advice to ownership would be to not bring in popcorn farts like Geoff Courtnall because it “saves a few bucks” and is perceived to be good from a PR standpoint.  Pony up the money to bring in proven successes.

 

Dean Lomabard as GM + Gerard Gallant or Claude Julien as head coach.

I’m on board with Gallant but Julien can kick rocks lol. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Without wasting a whole lot of team separating the generalizations from a more 'reasonable' case by case basis - I'm not going to debate every single non-youth asset or contract with the OP - that's a dead horse I aint gonna waste time on.

 

So - I'll cut to the chase.

 

The reason I'd stick with the present managment group - is because no one has provided an alternative that will necessarily give me what I want moving forward.

 

The counterpoint to the OP's sh!tlist - is, obviously, to look forward at the team's trajectory.

 

The expansion draft dictated a choice between goaltenders (as did the covid cap stall, Luongo recrap and LE's bad contract)...

Regardless of splitting hairs over the past.... We can debate about Toffolis, Tanevs, etc - but one thing was somewhat written in stone by the e.d. - it was either Markstrom or Demko.

 

I love Markstrom - perhaps my all time favorite goaltender - but I think the franchise made the correct decision - and that decision lines up Demko's trajectory with the rest of the drafted youth imo.  I don't care a whole lot about the rest of it - there is a great deal of cap expiring in the next year as well as the Luongo recrap - my focus was and is on the future (and therefore, I agree with having been generally 'conservative' this past offseason (even if I would have made a few different decisions)..

 

The future of the core - is years from it's prime.

 

EP (Miller) Boeser

Podkolzin Horvat Hoglander

-----------  ******* -------------

A wealth of young bottom six candidates imo - Motte, Highmore, MacEwen, (Virtanen?) etc, etc

 

Hughes  *****

Juolevi

Rathbone Woo etc

 

Demko

DiPietro

 

Long story short:

the 'backbone' of the future loosely outlined above...has only one or two critical spots to fill.

Hughes' partner

Viable third line (during youth transition) shutdown center (and possibly 4th as well during the continued transition stage).

Only one asset listed above - is over 25 years old (Miller - who I think conceivably remains a part of that core longer term).

For me - the principal 'need' is a good, solid two way RHD partner for Hughes moving forward.  The e.d. may provide an opportunity to acquire a Cal Foote - or perhaps a Timmins - or perhaps this draft is a gift horse and provides another key piece (a young RHD)...

Regardless - there are a whole lot of critical/key pieces above - and imo, I've left out a lot of 'longshot' prospects, a few of whom are likely to turn out (at the rate the group is presently producing outside the top of the 1st round).   If this management group can sustain that critical record, I'd give them more time, if not - their viability declines.

 

What I want - is a continued emphasis on filling out the roster from within - continued emphasis on metered, measured drafting and development, so that there remains a moderate, continuous influx of manageable youth to integrate that not only keeps the options/competition open and strong, but provides cap flexiblity moving forward.  If/as these youth turn out, there will need to be another wave of youth to offset their cap demands, create another wave of flexibility. 

The imperative of avoiding going, for example, to the UFA or trade market to fill spots - is accomplished by the very strengths of the present management group - drafting and developing.  So, in a sense, yes, the rest of the 'negatives' - or 'allowances' are forgiven, in exchange for/if that drafting record is sustained. 

 

The team is - for the first time - whether people like the timeline or not - approaching the necessary critical mass of youth that is the point of a 'rething'.

I don't agree with the out of context 7 year timeline that ignores the necessary loss of a few years that the Tortorella year cost the team -  any real engagement with the woulda/shoulda/coulda of this management group, needs to deal honestly with the state of the franchise - the actual 'asset base' and lack of futures - at that point.  So I judge the team on closer to a 5 year 'rething' and find the progress more 'reasonable' in those terms.

 

Continue to draft and develop - and avoid another 'transition' - to a GM that, for all we know - approaches the next stage as a "window".   The last thing I want to see is this prospect pool spent in order to contend sooner.  Unless someone can provide an actual "plan" - beyond "fire Benning" - that substantiates the incoming regimes ability to sustain and improve upon the underlying basis of future success- the continued, sustainable influx of young talent - I'm not particularly interested.  Are there a few GMs I'd prefer?  Probably - yes - but I don't see any Steve Yzermans or Joe Sakics on the UFA GM market - and wadr, a hard pass on the Rutherfords or Lombardis...

 

Whoever it is - I want the course stayed.

Edited by oldnews
  • Hydration 3
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fanuck said:

I agree, FA has the right to do anything he wants with the team. 

My issue with him as an owner is that he's gone on record numerous times that the people he hired to operate the franchise have(had) full autonomy to make hockey decisions and this clearly has not been the case (eg. Trevor Linden leaving when he and FA disagreed on the direction of the club).  FA wants to make any decision he wants with the club, that's completely fine with me, but he's using good people like Trevor/JB to hide behind so he doesn't take any heat in the public eye - that's just cowardly if you ask me.   Trevor wasn't having it and wouldn't let his integrity be compromised - no, I'm not saying JB doesn't have integrity but he may have a different standard of what he can accept from his employer than Trevor does/did. 

 

That's all speculation.  I think anyone who works for an owner of a business fully expects that owner to determine the direction of their business.  

  • Hydration 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, apollo said:

When all is said and done Jim will have drafted the top 5 players in the history of this organization. Not a single one with a lotto pick either. ( yea I'm exaggerating a bit but Brock Petey Quinn Demmer hoggy ARE FRANCHISE PLAYERS) 

 

If you're shortsighted and huffing and puffing over 1 year left on Beagle Loui Roussel, then you probably aren't at peace. 

 

I'd recommend psilocybin to find some peace within your minds in hopes of it becoming less disgruntled and pessimistic. 

 

Spread love. Be kind. 

 

Thanks Apollo.  I'm hoping your journey is pre-rocky when you were king.   I do think too many fans take the negative view too often and don't see the positives for what they are.   JB had zero hope of ever doing that much with our old core.   I don't blame MG either for re-signing that core, was the best of times, and almost worst of times.  Only team we've ever had that was the best team for a couple of years and man did it feel good.   Honouring that for a couple more years was always the best play.   Pretty much the only play given those contracts.   JB didn't do a bad or a great job during that phase but for sure pulled the plug and made the correct changed once he could.  

 

Two more mistakes, one big and one forgivable.   LE.   Enough said.   And timing his contracts one year late for the placeholders.   On the flip side it's a great great problem to have.  And glad we have it.   Otherwise we'd be in for another four years of bottoming out with nothing to show for it.   Which just so happens to be pretty common these days.   

 

Team won't suck next year.  Podz will come in and make an impact.   We will make the playoffs and maybe even win a round or two.    That's the course we are on right now. 

  • Hydration 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, oldnews said:

Without wasting a whole lot of team separating the generalizations from a more 'reasonable' case by case basis - I'm not going to debate every single non-youth asset or contract with the OP - that's a dead horse I aint gonna waste time on.

 

So - I'll cut to the chase.

 

The reason I'd stick with the present managment group - is because no one has provided an alternative that will necessarily give me what I want moving forward.

 

The counterpoint to the OP's sh!tlist - is, obviously, to look forward at the team's trajectory.

 

The expansion draft dictated a choice between goaltenders (as did the covid cap stall, Luongo recrap and LE's bad contract)...

Regardless of splitting hairs over the past.... We can debate about Toffolis, Tanevs, etc - but one thing was somewhat written in stone by the e.d. - it was either Markstrom or Demko.

 

I love Markstrom - perhaps my all time favorite goaltender - but I think the franchise made the correct decision - and that decision lines up Demko's trajectory with the rest of the drafted youth imo.  I don't care a whole lot about the rest of it - there is a great deal of cap expiring in the next year as well as the Luongo recrap - my focus was and is on the future (and therefore, I agree with having been generally 'conservative' this past offseason (even if I would have made a few different decisions)..

 

The future of the core - is years from it's prime.

 

EP (Miller) Boeser

Podkolzin Horvat Hoglander

-----------  ******* -------------

A wealth of young bottom six candidates imo - Motte, Highmore, MacEwen, (Virtanen?) etc, etc

 

Hughes  *****

Juolevi

Rathbone Woo etc

 

Demko

DiPietro

 

Long story short:

the 'backbone' of the future loosely outlined above...has only one or two critical spots to fill.

Hughes' partner

Viable third line (during youth transition) shutdown center (and possibly 4th as well during the continued transition stage).

Only one asset listed above - is over 25 years old (Miller - who I think conceivably remains a part of that core longer term).

For me - the principal 'need' is a good, solid two way RHD partner for Hughes moving forward.  The e.d. may provide an opportunity to acquire a Cal Foote - or perhaps a Timmins - or perhaps this draft is a gift horse and provides another key piece (a young RHD)...

Regardless - there are a whole lot of critical/key pieces above - and imo, I've left out a lot of 'longshot' prospects, a few of whom are likely to turn out (at the rate the group is presently producing outside the top of the 1st round).   If this management group can sustain that critical record, I'd give them more time, if not - their viability declines.

 

What I want - is a continued emphasis on filling out the roster from within - continued emphasis on metered, measured drafting and development, so that there remains a moderate, continuous influx of manageable youth to integrate that not only keeps the options/competition open and strong, but provides cap flexiblity moving forward.  If/as these youth turn out, there will need to be another wave of youth to offset their cap demands, create another wave of flexibility. 

The imperative of avoiding going, for example, to the UFA or trade market to fill spots - is accomplished by the very strengths of the present management group - drafting and developing.  So, in a sense, yes, the rest of the 'negatives' - or 'allowances' are forgiven, in exchange for/if that drafting record is sustained. 

 

The team is - for the first time - whether people like the timeline or not - approaching the necessary critical mass of youth that is the point of a 'rething'.

I don't agree with the out of context 7 year timeline that ignores the necessary loss of a few years that the Tortorella year cost the team -  any real engagement with the woulda/shoulda/coulda of this management group, needs to deal honestly with the state of the franchise - the actual 'asset base' and lack of futures - at that point.  So I judge the team on closer to a 5 year 'rething' and find the progress more 'reasonable' in those terms.

 

Continue to draft and develop - and avoid another 'transition' - to a GM that, for all we know - approaches the next stage as a "window".   The last thing I want to see is this prospect pool spent in order to contend sooner.  Unless someone can provide an actual "plan" - beyond "fire Benning" - that substantiates the incoming regimes ability to sustain and improve upon the underlying basis of future success- the continued, sustainable influx of young talent - I'm not particularly interested.  Are there a few GMs I'd prefer?  Probably - yes - but I don't see any Steve Yzermans or Joe Sakics on the UFA GM market - and wadr, a hard pass on the Rutherfords or Lombardis...

 

Whoever it is - I want the course stayed.

That's pretty much the end of the convo and that applies to the coaching staff as well.  There, simply, aren't other candidates better for those positions, imo, and any move at this point will set things back.

  • Hydration 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, stawns said:

jesus I'm tired of people whining about a "meddling owner".  He owns the team, he can meddle if he wants to

"meddle if he wants to

meddle if he wants to.."

 

I'm tired of people that just turn around and bend over. 

So you regard a cities sports teams as some kind of private club? No responsibility to the community as the caretaker of our NHL hockey team?  Our one major sport franchise.  You could care less how much an owner meddles, even if that affects Vancouver's shot at a Cup in the foreseeable future?  Because......?   Their wealth and privilege means they are really really really smart at everything, even at hockey?  Or its just fun to watch wealthy people play with their toys?  (Don't tell me, you are an avid Kardashian fan). Or is it that you just don't give a #%#?

 

If you are fine with know-it-all owners meddling, Harold Ballard says hi

 

940-ballard-8col.jpg

 

Or

 

William Wirtz of the  Blackhawks who lost Bobby Hull to Winnipeg, and starved the team almost to death

Maybe Roger Marino who nearly bankrupted the Pittsburgh Penguins into oblivion, only saved by Mario.

 

 

But lets just drop our drawers and shut up.  Its their toy.  Where do I join this Aquilini fan club?  Who needs the players when I can go straight to the top?

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kenny Blankenship said:

I’m on board with Gallant but Julien can kick rocks lol. 

Love him or hate him the guy is a terrific coach.  It’s been 10 years since 2011 and so I have absolutely no issue in bringing in coaches or players that were a part of that team.  I got over the cup loss in 2014 when the Seahawks won the Super Bowl.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, kilgore said:

"meddle if he wants to

meddle if he wants to.."

 

I'm tired of people that just turn around and bend over. 

So you regard a cities sports teams as some kind of private club? No responsibility to the community as the caretaker of our NHL hockey team?  Our one major sport franchise.  You could care less how much an owner meddles, even if that affects Vancouver's shot at a Cup in the foreseeable future?  Because......?   Their wealth and privilege means they are really really really smart at everything, even at hockey?  Or its just fun to watch wealthy people play with their toys?  (Don't tell me, you are an avid Kardashian fan). Or is it that you just don't give a #%#?

 

If you are fine with know-it-all owners meddling, Harold Ballard says hi

 

940-ballard-8col.jpg

 

Or

 

William Wirtz of the  Blackhawks who lost Bobby Hull to Winnipeg, and starved the team almost to death

Maybe Roger Marino who nearly bankrupted the Pittsburgh Penguins into oblivion, only saved by Mario.

 

 

But lets just drop our drawers and shut up.  Its their toy.  Where do I join this Aquilini fan club?  Who needs the players when I can go straight to the top?

 

 

You can vote with your dollars.  Don't like the owner, don't watch, don't buy merch......just cut the Nucks out of your life.

 

Beyond that it's none of your business what he does with his business.  He owns it, he has every right to run it, meddle in it, tank it however he says fit.  

 

I own a business, am I not allowed to do what I want with it?  Do my customers get to have a say?  Of course not

 

  • Hydration 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, stawns said:

That's pretty much the end of the convo and that applies to the coaching staff as well.  There, simply, aren't other candidates better for those positions, imo, and any move at this point will set things back.

I think there's probably better (and more) coaching options on the market than there are alternative GM options - but for me, where I may have some differences/criticisms of Benning / the management group, Green on the other hand I've been consistently extremely happy with in almost all senses / am even less inclined to look to replace him - and even in the hardest parts of the end of this season, he's gotten an awful lot out of effort and buy-in out of a very depleted group, top to bottom.

 

We've lost some guys like Malhotra, and possibly Clark - but even there, I have no idea what that really comes down to.  People can assume it's Benning - his fault - but that may or may not be the case.  Some of these guys were hired by Linden - it could be that they don't like working with Benning, or it could be something else entirely - ie a better opportunity elsewhere, or loyalty to TL / not appreciating the way Linden was ushered out  (and again, that appears to have more to do with his relationship to Aquilini than it does Benning - in fact, his own direct references have suggested that).

  • Hydration 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, oldnews said:

I think there's probably better (and more) coaching options on the market than there are alternative GM options - but for me, where I may have some differences/criticisms of Benning / the management group, Green on the other hand I've been consistently extremely happy with in almost all senses / am even less inclined to look to replace him - and even in the hardest parts of the end of this season, he's gotten an awful lot out of effort and buy-in out of a very depleted group, top to bottom.

 

We've lost some guys like Malhotra, and possibly Clark - but even there, I have no idea what that really comes down to.  People can assume it's Benning - his fault - but that may or may not be the case.  Some of these guys were hired by Linden - it could be that they don't like working with Benning, or it could be something else entirely - ie a better opportunity elsewhere, or loyalty to TL / not appreciating the way Linden was ushered out  (and again, that appears to have more to do with his relationship to Aquilini than it does Benning - in fact, his own direct references have suggested that).

I think there's this mistaken assumption that people want to stay in one place for a long time and hockey players aren't brought up with that mentality.  The bulk of your hockey years are spent with a cpl years with a team, then things change and you move to your next team etc.  Even in Jr you spend only 2-3 years with a team (if you're lucky) then move on.  

 

Just because a Malhotra or Clark moves on in no way indicates they're unhappy.  They might, as you say, see a better opportunity or they might just want to try something different.  In Clarks case it might be he thinks his work with Demko is done and he's looking for a new, young goalie project 

  • Hydration 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did a bit of reading in this thread and realized it is time to, once again, expand my list of ignored posters.

 

Wonder what the max is; I'll be at 19 after this  most recent poster.

 

Link to comment
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...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...