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

With the premature departure of Juolevi - do you still think JB is a drafting genius?

Rate this topic


RU SERIOUS

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Patel Bure said:

In terms of converting draft picks into current full-time NHL players, the Canucks seem to be superior to Colorado, and appear to be on par with Tampa Bay:

 

Canucks = 8 picks converted into roster players from 2013-2019.  7 seasons.


2013: Horvat
2014: Demko
2015: Boeser
2017: Pettersson + Rathbone
2018: Hughes
2019: Podkolzin + Hoglander

 

Tampa = 8 picks converted into current roster players from 2007-2015 (9 seasons)

2015:  Anthony Cirelli (3rd round)
2014: Brayden Point (3rd round)
2012: Andrei Vasilevsky 
2011:  Nikita Kucherov + Ondrej Palat
2009: Victor Hedman
2008: Steven Stamkos
2007: Alex Killorn

 

Avalanche = 8 picks converted into current roster players from 2011-2019.

2019:  Bowen Byram + Alex Newhook (possibly)

2017:  Cale Makar + Conor Timmins

2016:  Tyson Jost

2015:  Mikko Rantanen

2013:  Nathan Mackinnon

2011:  Gabriel Landeskog
 

Although Horvat wasn’t drafted by Benning, he was developed under this management regime.  Although it’s premature, I would also argue that Klimovich would *already* be selected in the first round in a 2021 redraft (and yes, I’m admitting that it’s *way* too early to do a redraft projection here.....but still).

Gillis hit with Hodgson and Horvat. That's it. He missed with epic picks like Brendan Gaunce (when he did have a first rounder). Otherwise he ended up trading it in some stupid transaction like the Ballard for Grabner + 1st round pick.

 

People talk about Benning squandering picks. I'm like WUTTT? LOL.

 

The track record of the Gillis drafting was not good, at all. How was a team supposed to build? Gillis basically took the foundation of Burke + Nonis and improved it with some depth players. Other than that, he didn't have a clue about how to build a team through the draft.

 

So many of those picks ended up being crapola.

 

And don't get me started on that Mallet pick. Wow. That was an awful, awful pick.

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

2 minutes ago, Dazzle said:

Gillis hit with Hodgson and Horvat. That's it. He missed with epic picks like Brendan Gaunce (when he did have a first rounder). Otherwise he ended up trading it in some stupid transaction like the Ballard for Grabner + 1st round pick.

 

People talk about Benning squandering picks. I'm like WUTTT? LOL.

 

The track record of the Gillis drafting was not good, at all. How was a team supposed to build? Gillis basically took the foundation of Burke + Nonis and improved it with some depth players. Other than that, he didn't have a clue about how to build a team through the draft.

 

So many of those picks ended up being crapola.

 

And don't get me started on that Mallet pick. Wow. That was an awful, awful pick.

Good points.  In my raging war against HF Canucks, it also goes back to one of my initial points.

 

Why is Mike Gillis held in similar regard to Scotty Bowman on HF Canucks, despite Gillis’ terrible drafting record (as you have highlighted), and yet Jim Benning is regarded as being one of the worst GM’s in all of sporting history over there due to his controversial trades and signings related to pro scouting? (I won’t get into the debate as to why Benning needed to make a lot of those moves as I’ve found that my arguments goes over the heads of most of the Anti-Benning crowd).

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

Saying that the OJ pick is proof that JB is a bad drafter is a statement made with the luxury of hindsight. . . O.J was maybe only a spot reach, obvious M.T was the preferred pick by most analysis,  but there were many red flags around him: Family bias, Ability to drive a line, Character, Another Winger. . . O.J seemed like a high floor player with a good chance at being an impact first pair guy. Injuries certainly dertailed his career. Maybe its pain management he is struggling with again... or maybe it is an attitude thing ?  If its the later i think we can judge the JB drafting record a little more harshly, after the failure of Virtanen. 

 

J.V was much more of a reach - a risk we should really have not taken with the many character and IQ red flags that were a plenty ... maybe these were reasons while we didn't draft M.T too. 

 

Its very frustrating we have got close but then missed on players like J.G, Lind, Gaudette etc - but as many have pointed out on this board JB has actually just an average drafting record at this point. Which could still improve if Lockwood, Podz, Woo, Mikey can all still make the show. 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

in 2016 i wanted to draft Sergachev because he was the skilled D. But we went with OJ because he was the "safe pick" D. lesson is you shoot for the high hills and go all out for skill, size and the way they control the game. Turns out the safe pick was not so safe. Sad to see OJ go because I wanted him to prove me wrong by having a solid top 4, 10 year career and be the next eagle.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dazzle said:

Gillis hit with Hodgson and Horvat. That's it. He missed with epic picks like Brendan Gaunce (when he did have a first rounder). Otherwise he ended up trading it in some stupid transaction like the Ballard for Grabner + 1st round pick.

 

People talk about Benning squandering picks. I'm like WUTTT? LOL.

 

The track record of the Gillis drafting was not good, at all. How was a team supposed to build? Gillis basically took the foundation of Burke + Nonis and improved it with some depth players. Other than that, he didn't have a clue about how to build a team through the draft.

 

So many of those picks ended up being crapola.

 

And don't get me started on that Mallet pick. Wow. That was an awful, awful pick.

But Mallet had great hair! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

But Mallet had great hair! 

So did Loui Player Name............what is your point? :emot-parrot:

 

It will not take Loui Player Name in the above slot...........weird!

 

E R I K S S O N 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by J.I.A.H.N
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dazzle said:

Juolevi was a winner at every level: memorial cup + Olympic gold for Finland. His injuries did him in.
 

The narratives about how Juolevi was a 'reach' versus Tkachuk is just plain dishonest commentary.

Exactly what I was thinking.

  • Wat 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, drummer4now said:

Well this guy has a lot pressure on him because he needs to win multiple President trophies including one game 7 SCF match.. anything below that would be regarded as not even close or a failure… now if he won the cup he is god. 
 

I think we are seeing time run out for ol Jimbo.. 

 

Detroit Tigers Time GIF by MLB

 

We will see between this season and the next. 

You are right, Jimbo got more aggressive this year for a couple of reasons.  1. he has been GM for 7 years and it's about time they started seeing some success, and 2.  They actually do have a legitimate core together and it is time to do something serious about the support players

 

So what do we do?  Well, we watch.  But seriously, it might take a couple of years, hopefully less but they need to start moving up the standings

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dazzle said:

Juolevi was a winner at every level: memorial cup + Olympic gold for Finland. His injuries did him in.
 

The narratives about how Juolevi was a 'reach' versus Tkachuk is just plain dishonest commentary.

Juolevi over Tkachuck was a serious reach.

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, Jim Benning is good at drafting.

 

The fact that the Canucks have 2 defensemen, 1 goalie (will be both goalies next season), and six forwards in the lineup that were either drafted or homegrown (I counted Zack MacEwen as the sixth since we signed him as an undrafted CHL free agent). That's 9 players out of a 22 man roster that have been selected by this team (now, mind you, Horvat was counted too but picked by the previous regime -- though he was developed by THIS regime). That's nearly 50% and that's helluva impressive.

 

If you count Lockwood and Dipietro as guaranteed callups this season that will bring the number up to 11. When in Canucks history have up to 11 homegrown guys played on this roster at the same time?!?!?

 

Sure, the Canucks flamed out on Juolevi and Virtanen but a lot of teams miss in the upper rounds of the draft. The Blackhawks whiffed on Jack Skille and Cam Barker in the era when they were picking high but hit on Kane, Toews, and Seabrook. The Penguins whiffed on Pouliot, Angelo Esposito, and Ryan Whitney at a time when they were drafting the likes of Fleury, Malkin, Staal, and Crosby high. It happens to all teams. 

 

The fact is that Petey, Hughes, and Boeser all hit and they hit big. Rathbone looks like a steal and will probably have a better career than Juolevi.

 

Juolevi, ultimately, wasn't the right pick and wasn't the right fit. Between injuries and Covid, it just did not work. It just makes sense to give him another chance elsewhere. I wish him luck but this move isn't an indictment of Benning's draft. He's done good work. Benning hasn't been the absolute best in the league but he hasn't been terrible either (Gillis lost his job because he couldn't draft to save his life).  In fact, Benning is probably the best consistent drafter in Franchise history.

 

In fact, I think moving on from Juolevi shows that this management group has matured and learned from their mistakes. Instead of holding on hoping for something to happen that wasn't going too, they cut bait and are moving on. I'm glad this won't be a conversation going forward and I wish Juolevi the best of luck wherever he plays going forward. Same as I hope we find a gem or two in the players coming our way.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty much everyone would’ve taken Tkachuck.

 

i was worried about that pick the instant it was made. Finland had just won gold at the world juniors and a few teams got blinded by the sudden accolades. 
 

The Canucks were one of those teams.

 

But let’s not kid ourselves, despite the Virtanen, McCann and Juolevi mistakes, we have Pettersson, Boeser, Hughes, Podkolzin as drafts, and Miller and OEL as trades.

 

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

Never thought he was a genius in the first place.  Above average sure… but Juolevi and Virtanen have been clear misses for some time.  
 

He also hasn’t mined a ton out of later rounds, right around average for what is historically expected.  Some 2nd and 3rd rounders always hit… just at a lower rate than top ten picks.

 

If anything this further exposes some of his other weaknesses and the organization’s signing and development issues.

 

We lost picks Tryamkin, Lind, Juolevi, and Virtanen, and Gadjovich just this offseason.  That represents a lot of wasted draft capital or possible assets we could have gotten for them if we moved on from them earlier.  Two top

ten picks, two 2nds, and a 3rd.  Nothing to show for those picks.

 

 

  • Cheers 1
  • RoughGame 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Patel Bure said:

Good points.  In my raging war against HF Canucks, it also goes back to one of my initial points.

 

Why is Mike Gillis held in similar regard to Scotty Bowman on HF Canucks, despite Gillis’ terrible drafting record (as you have highlighted), and yet Jim Benning is regarded as being one of the worst GM’s in all of sporting history over there due to his controversial trades and signings related to pro scouting? (I won’t get into the debate as to why Benning needed to make a lot of those moves as I’ve found that my arguments goes over the heads of most of the Anti-Benning crowd).

Well, that's easy to answer: success on the ice.

One GM took over a team - one that had missed the playoffs 2/3 seasons prior - and propelled them to multiple division titles, PTs, a SCF run.  This doesn't happen by accident.  Good decisions in pro-scouting facilitate that.

The other GM took over a team that, yes, had it's best days behind them, but, all these years later, has yet to do anything of substance with that same team on the ice.  There are other reasons that fans have a rightful disapproval of Benning, but when your team doesn't win games, you aren't gonna win over a fanbase.

[;)]

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...