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

[Report] Canucks announce coaching staff updates

Rate this topic


-Vintage Canuck-

Recommended Posts

50 minutes ago, tas said:

I disagree. I think benning knows when to take a shot. he always had 2022-23 circled, but last year he recognized that the team had some juice and did what he had to do to capitalize on that and get them some incredible experience and a taste of winning in the playoffs, invaluable going forward. 

 

that being said, I think he either underestimated the impact in the room of letting some important players go, or he had his hands tied completely by ownership. 

I think he also just had to make some hard decisions.

 

I'm sure he'd have loved to have brought Tanev back for two years but there's no way we should have matched Calgary's offer either.

 

I'm sure he'd have loved to keep Demko and Marky together for another year or two and eventually trade Marky for an asset. ED threw a wrench in to that.

 

Toffoli would have been nice to keep and that was evidently the plan before a global pandemic cocked that up. Even then, Benning was reportedly, furiously, trying to move cap to still make it happen. In hindsight it would have been nice to simply let Virtanen walk to get at least part way there (or even better have moved him last year when I wanted to move him). But of course the usual suspects would have been whining about letting a young player go for free as well... So a no win situation really :lol:

 

Man makes plans...

Edited by aGENT
  • Cheers 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/9/2021 at 1:57 PM, Pears said:

Happy with all of these except Baumgartner being back. 

Same here.  I am hoping that his role would be different and allow for Shaw to be in charge of defensemen group and allow Baumgartner getting different perspective while doing a different role.  I'm not exactly sure of his role for next season.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, coolboarder said:

Same here.  I am hoping that his role would be different and allow for Shaw to be in charge of defensemen group and allow Baumgartner getting different perspective while doing a different role.  I'm not exactly sure of his role for next season.

Per Green, it is coaching by committee. No one has a defined role other than him having the final call. But if we have to assign something to the coaches it is most likely.

Green: Forwards

Shaw: Defense/PP

Baumer: PK

King: PP

Gustafson: eye in the sky + skills + Abby duty. 

  • Thanks 1
  • Cheers 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, tas said:

I disagree. I think benning knows when to take a shot. he always had 2022-23 circled, but last year he recognized that the team had some juice and did what he had to do to capitalize on that and get them some incredible experience and a taste of winning in the playoffs, invaluable going forward. 

 

that being said, I think he either underestimated the impact in the room of letting some important players go, or he had his hands tied completely by ownership. 

It is most likely both. Ownership turned the money tab off, understandably, causing JB to really choose between keeping players or getting new ones. 

IMO, the biggest mistake last off season was qualifying Jake. Woth him gine, we might have been able to get Tofu done. Though that may have costs us Hamonic. 

  • Cheers 2
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sean Monahan said:

 

I believe they’ve also had two interviews with Tocchet as well. There’s a real possibility that Gallant will still be without a head coaching job come opening night. 

I think Clark is/was well aware he could’ve had 20+ teams interested in his services should he decide to test the waters. He signed here for 5 years nonetheless. 
 

We also don’t know anything about it from Clark’s side. It’s possible he wasn’t interested in negotiating during the season. Many players go that route. 

Except we do know that it was a management decision because Benning actually said it was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, aGENT said:

I think he also just had to make some hard decisions.

 

I'm sure he'd have loved to have brought Tanev back for two years but there's no way we should have matched Calgary's offer either.

 

I'm sure he'd have loved to keep Demko and Marky together for another year or two and eventually trade Marky for an asset. ED threw a wrench in to that.

 

Toffoli would have been nice to keep and that was evidently the plan before a global pandemic cocked that up. Even then, Benning was reportedly, furiously, trying to move cap to still make it happen. In hindsight it would have been nice to simply let Virtanen walk to get at least part way there (or even better have moved him last year when I wanted to move him). But of course the usual suspects would have been whining about letting a young player go for free as well... So a no win situation really :lol:

 

Man makes plans...

So how do you square that with both Tanev and Toffoli saying they never received a contract offer from Benning and that there was basically no contact from the team? Until they had already accepted in principal other offers.

 

Its clear keeping either wasnt a priority for Benning. Revisionist history doesnt change that it was his choice. And he had the right to make it which he did. But trying to lay blame at the players feet when no one knows if he actually had to match the offers they ultimately signed for them to stay is kind of unfair. Both clearly wanted to stay. They may have accepted less to do so, we will never know. It seems like it might have been prudent to offer them lesser terms (if that was the plan) before they got any other offers though, dont you think?

 

Benning made a bad call on both by not even exploring what it might take to keep them. I suspect he saw OEL as the replacement for Tanev which is where his focus was.

 

How you treat players does matter. It would have been easy to keep at least some line of communication open with them if he truly wanted them back. He clearly didn't though until it was too late.

 

Edit: Totally agree that they should have let Virtanen walk to make it happen and that they actually should have traded him the year before. I would have lost no sleep if they let him walk to keep Toffoli, young guy or not.

Edited by wallstreetamigo
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

So how do you square that with both Tanev and Toffoli saying they never received a contract offer from Benning 

Toffoli because he was trying to clear cap and had already qualified Virtanen (I wish we'd traded him and Gaudette LAST season).

 

Tanev because he wasn't going to match the Calgary offer and he was looking at ways to improve our D and didn't want to commit to Tanev (status quo) before exploring options of improving elsewhere.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Except we do know that it was a management decision because Benning actually said it was.

Doesn’t address my other point. Clark is aware he could basically dictate his terms to a great numbers of teams should he decide to go that route but nonetheless he signed a 5 year deal to stay in Vancouver. As far as we know he didn’t have talks, or serious talks, with other teams. Does it really seem like JB erred and nearly lost Clark?

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Sean Monahan said:

Doesn’t address my other point. Clark is aware he could basically dictate his terms to a great numbers of teams should he decide to go that route but nonetheless he signed a 5 year deal to stay in Vancouver. As far as we know he didn’t have talks, or serious talks, with other teams. Does it really seem like JB erred and nearly lost Clark?

No way of knowing for sure he did or didnt. Leaving a contract hanging until the last minute definitely added risk of that happening though. And it looks like it cost Benning a big contract in the end. 

 

Based on what Benning said not long ago about the financial uncertainties surrounding the team, do you really believe a 5 year deal was Benning's preferred choice and idea? Doubtful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Toffoli because he was trying to clear cap and had already qualified Virtanen (I wish we'd traded him and Gaudette LAST season).

 

Tanev because he wasn't going to match the Calgary offer and he was looking at ways to improve our D and didn't want to commit to Tanev (status quo) before exploring options of improving elsewhere.

 

He had the cap for Toffoli though. He chose where to use it, first with Virtanen then with Holtby and Schmidt.

 

Like I said, how you treat players matters. And leaving Tanev twisting in the wind to chase OEL (a very stupid pursuit that thankfully did not happen) was a huge mistake. OEL would not be an improvement on Tanev at his cap hit btw. Benning chose to wait until Calgary made their offer. He had a lot of time to lock up Tanev before that.

 

And hindsight certainly shows that he didnt upgrade the defense letting Tanev go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/9/2021 at 1:34 PM, Pickly said:

Not thrilled about having Baumgartner back. Dont expect much of a difference in defensive philosophy next season. 

maybe we will have a "De-coach - De-coach donnybrook" and next season we can blame the failure on a disjointed coaching staff

O'l Jimmer hasn't used that excuse yet

  • RoughGame 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Well we did need a goalie...and D. And Schmidt (despite his off year) was a no-brainer trade.

 

Virtanen was an error given hindsight. The same people complaining about Toffoli would have been complaining about letting Virtanen walk for nothing. I wouldn't be surprised if Benning was likely attempting to use qualified Virtanen's rights to move some of that cap to add Toffoli actually. When Toffoli signed elsewhere...

 

Sure. By most accounts, players are treated quite well and fairly by Vancouver/Benning.

 

You have no idea what OEL's cap would have been or what cap we might have moved out. 

 

He didn't want to. He was looking for ways to improve, not maintain the status quo of a rebuilding team that wasn't good enough. 

 

I disagree. May not have showed this season (for a myriad of reasons) but I 100% swap Tanev and Stectcher for Schmidt and Hamonic any day. 

Well put man, as usual. I was pretty salty that we didn't sign Tofu, but it is what it is at this point. Cap was supposed to go up and it didn't. I do believe some of the players weren't happy with not bringing him back, but I think they're professionals at the end of the day. If they get pissy about not resigning a player, that would reflect pretty bad on their overall attitude.

 

I wasn't a huge fan of letting Tanev walk either, especially with how he's played in Calgary, but the term was too long. 

 

I really do hope we keep Schmidt and Hamonic, I'm actually pretty optimistic for next season.

 

Edited by Dirtman
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, tas said:

I disagree. I think benning knows when to take a shot. he always had 2022-23 circled, but last year he recognized that the team had some juice and did what he had to do to capitalize on that and get them some incredible experience and a taste of winning in the playoffs, invaluable going forward. 

 

that being said, I think he either underestimated the impact in the room of letting some important players go, or he had his hands tied completely by ownership. 

I think his value on making the playoffs at the expense of a longer vision was a mistake.  Whether to please fans or ownership, it set the team back and the value of the playoffs is questionable based on what we saw this year.  Patience and a good plan will get a team to the level they need to compete.  Enough of throwing $&!# at a wall hoping something sticks.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DIBdaQUIB said:

I think his value on making the playoffs at the expense of a longer vision was a mistake.  Whether to please fans or ownership, it set the team back and the value of the playoffs is questionable based on what we saw this year.  Patience and a good plan will get a team to the level they need to compete.  Enough of throwing $&!# at a wall hoping something sticks.  

how was it at the expense of the long term? how did it set the team back?

  • Vintage 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Bertuzzipunch said:

Dont forget we also have silvos. Ppl still wanna draft wallstead tho like cmon :picard:

Having depth and a position of strength isn’t a bad thing. If Wallstedt is the BPA at 9, I 100% recommend taking him. 


Can always find a player in a position of need and acquire him using DiPietro, Silovs, Wallstedt as a trade chip. 

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

It sounds like Baumgartner is still in charge of the defense and the PK, King will be in charge of the forwards and PP, and Shaw will be more of a big picture planning resource for Green.

 

I hope he is more than that. Baumgartner and King do not inspire confidence in me tbh.

We still have a very inexperienced coaching staff if King and Bum are in charge of the main F/D/PP/PK . I think it is way to early to say what Shaw's role is going to be, but I hope he is here to push Green and if we fall flat on our face next season, Shaw might get an interim HC opportunity with us if things are still a tire fire like years past.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...