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

[lmm]

On 10/10/2021 at 5:47 PM, Rindiculous said:

I think Jim Benning did not have a good grasp on the job until after 2016, but after that he got more confident in his job making more off the board decisions that media, fans, and other GMs thought were the wrong pick, however trusted in him and his advisors knowledge and look how it’s worked out since then.  I don’t believe there’s been a move since the 2016 draft that has turned out poorly for Benning.  He had a rough start, but he’s become very good at his job especially evaluating amateur and pro talent.

 

Ive never had more faith in Jim’s skills, however I still don’t know about Green.  Him and his systems may or may not be NHL worthy.

and yet hiring the coach is also part of Jim's job

[iinatcc]

It's one of his strong points but he's no Ken Holland or Steve Yzerman.

[IBatch]

4 hours ago, iinatcc said:

It's one of his strong points but he's no Ken Holland or Steve Yzerman.

Ken Holland had an amazing run thanks to Zetterberg and Datsyuk...but it came to a crashing halt when he couldn't draft his way out of the inevitable rebuild - the exact same one JB was up against given Detroit and SJ for sure are Vancouver's best comps since 2000.   Over a 14 year period, those teams won more games then anyone else, and Detroit like Vancouver finally had to pay the piper.   Yzerman's legacy for sure is solid so far. 

 

And yes, for 2 decades Holland was considered the "Man"...only Bertuzzi and Larkin really to talk about though...not close to what JB drafted, and in Detroit we will have to wait for awhile before we find out how good Yzerman is at re-setting a failed rebuild.   Seider turned out to be both a massive head turner, and a good starting pick though.  

 

Edit:  On Holland.   Aside from Zetterberg and Datsyuk and the gift he had with the team before that, and since this is about drafting, who else did he draft that became an impact player?  Bertuzzi, Mantha, Larkin ... all Horvat plus aged ... diddly squat really.   Yzerman ... yes he did pretty good in TB no denying that. 

Edited October 15, 2021 by IBatch

[iinatcc]

39 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Ken Holland had an amazing run thanks to Zetterberg and Datsyuk...but it came to a crashing halt when he couldn't draft his way out of the inevitable rebuild - the exact same one JB was up against given Detroit and SJ for sure are Vancouver's best comps since 2000.   Over a 14 year period, those teams won more games then anyone else, and Detroit like Vancouver finally had to pay the piper.   Yzerman's legacy for sure is solid so far. 

 

And yes, for 2 decades Holland was considered the "Man"...only Bertuzzi and Larkin really to talk about though...not close to what JB drafted, and in Detroit we will have to wait for awhile before we find out how good Yzerman is at re-setting a failed rebuild.   Seider turned out to be both a massive head turner, and a good starting pick though.  

 

Edit:  On Holland.   Aside from Zetterberg and Datsyuk and the gift he had with the team before that, and since this is about drafting, who else did he draft that became an impact player?  Bertuzzi, Mantha, Larkin ... all Horvat plus aged ... diddly squat really.   Yzerman ... yes he did pretty good in TB no denying that. 

I guess eventually after a long successful run and giving away picks to stay competitive (and multiple Stanley Cups to show for it), it would be inevitable for any team to decline. 

But during that period Holland not only found his superstar players in the later round but also found good complementary pieces in later rounds to stay competitive. Some of the later examples include Gustav Nyquist and Tomas Tatar but that's just a small sample set of a long list of successfully drafting in the later rounds. 

 

About Benning you are right we have to wait how the later rounds will pan out. But right now he's struck out on Lind, Gadjovich, and failed to develop Gaudette in the system despite hockey pundits being very high on him.

[IBatch]

4 minutes ago, iinatcc said:

I guess eventually after a long successful run and giving away picks to stay competitive (and multiple Stanley Cups to show for it), it would be inevitable for any team to decline. 

But during that period Holland not only found his superstar players in the later round but also found good complementary pieces in later rounds to stay competitive. Some of the later examples include Gustav Nyquist and Tomas Tatar but that's just a small sample set of a long list of successfully drafting in the later rounds. 

 

About Benning you are right we have to wait how the later rounds will pan out. But right now he's struck out on Lind, Gadjovich, and failed to develop Gaudette in the system despite hockey pundits being very high on him.

Yes even Bertuzzi was a second rounder.     But the point i was making - which you just acknowledged, over the same period of time that JB and Holland were drafting .... well ... it's very obvious who did better and both teams were suck by then and also in their down cycle after being a top team for a long time.   Holland at least drafted better then MG for sure though. 

[Fred65]

Here's the drafting record for Benning/Vcr

 

All Draft Choices - Vancouver Canucks - All-time Drafts (nhl.com)

 

2014   Virtanen and McCann,   2nd round Demko

2015   Boeser...........................Traded

2016  Juolevi............................"  "

2017   Pettersson.................... Lind/Gadjovich

2018   Hughes.........................Woo

2019   Podkolzyn.....................Hoglander

2020   Traded away.................Traded

2021   Traded away.................Klimovich

 

That's nine first round picks during his era of which 3 have failed as 1st rounders and two slections have been traded away that gives us 3 quality selection plus Podkolzyn ( IMO still to be determined ) We could do the same for the second round. Three traded away, two failed, two winners ( Demo & Hoglander) two TBD Percentage wise that gives us a  success rate of 33% in the first round and 25% in the second round.

 

Draft stats show us the likelyhood of success in the draft is 1st round 65% and 25% in the second round.

Edited October 15, 2021 by Fred65

[RU SERIOUS]

28 minutes ago, Fred65 said:

Here's the drafting record for Benning/Vcr

 

All Draft Choices - Vancouver Canucks - All-time Drafts (nhl.com)

 

2014   Virtanen and McCann,   2nd round Demko

2015   Boeser...........................Traded

2016  Juolevi............................"  "

2017   Pettersson.................... Lind/Gadjovich

2018   Hughes.........................Woo

2019   Podkolzyn.....................Hoglander

2020   Traded away.................Traded

2021   Traded away.................Klimovich

 

That's nine first round picks during his era of which 3 have failed as 1st rounders and two slections have been traded away that gives us 3 quality selection plus Podkolzyn ( IMO still to be determined ) We could do the same for the second round. Three traded away, two failed, two winners ( Demo & Hoglander) two TBD Percentage wise that gives us a  success rate of 33% in the first round and 25% in the second round.

 

Draft stats show us the likelyhood of success in the draft is 1st round 65% and 25% in the second round.

Great post and maybe this more graphic presentation will convince the Uncle Jim choir - that he is certainly no drafting wizard to behold on a pedestal  At best he no more than average and in reality slightly below.  ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,and don't get me started on his contract management, trading and free agency record!  His time is up - green too !

[Kevin Biestra]

36 minutes ago, Fred65 said:

Here's the drafting record for Benning/Vcr

 

All Draft Choices - Vancouver Canucks - All-time Drafts (nhl.com)

 

2014   Virtanen and McCann,   2nd round Demko

2015   Boeser...........................Traded

2016  Juolevi............................"  "

2017   Pettersson.................... Lind/Gadjovich

2018   Hughes.........................Woo

2019   Podkolzyn.....................Hoglander

2020   Traded away.................Traded

2021   Traded away.................Klimovich

 

That's nine first round picks during his era of which 3 have failed as 1st rounders and two slections have been traded away that gives us 3 quality selection plus Podkolzyn ( IMO still to be determined ) We could do the same for the second round. Three traded away, two failed, two winners ( Demo & Hoglander) two TBD Percentage wise that gives us a  success rate of 33% in the first round and 25% in the second round.

 

Draft stats show us the likelyhood of success in the draft is 1st round 65% and 25% in the second round.

 

Juolevi and Virtanen are failures but McCann is a success.  The failure was trading him.

[Fred65]

8 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

Juolevi and Virtanen are failures but McCann is a success.  The failure was trading him.

I thought about that but it's har,d to say a guy was a 1st round success when he's played for 3 teams in his short career, I'd maybe class him as a tweener for a 1st round pick, but that's just my view. But lets go with your view it gives us a 1st round success rate of 44%.  IMHO Vcr is in desperation mode for the play-offs trading 2 succesive 1st round picks but that's neither here of there, we're looking at the record

Edited October 15, 2021 by Fred65

[Kevin Biestra]

1 hour ago, Fred65 said:

I thought about that but it's har,d to say a guy was a 1st round success when he's played for 3 teams in his short career, I'd maybe class him as a tweener for a 1st round pick, but that's just my view. But lets go with your view it gives us a 1st round success rate of 44%.  IMHO Vcr is in desperation mode for the play-offs trading 2 succesive 1st round picks but that's neither here of there, we're looking at the record

 

How can he not be a success with 32 points in 43 games last year.  3 points in 2 games so far this year.

 

We were Geoff Courtnall's 5th team when he arrived here.

 

Meanwhile, I would say it is too early to give credit to Podkolzin as a successful pick.  So I would say he is 4 for 6 in actual first rounders drafted.  I guess 4 for 8 if you insist on counting the traded away picks...  But I don't see the point in calling a traded pick an automatic failure as an amateur scout, nor classifying a too early to tell pick as a failure for the percentage (which is what was done with a 3 for 9 or 33%).

 

 

Edited October 15, 2021 by Kevin Biestra

[Westcoasting]

39 minutes ago, Fred65 said:

I thought about that but it's har,d to say a guy was a 1st round success when he's played for 3 teams in his short career, I'd maybe class him as a tweener for a 1st round pick, but that's just my view. But lets go with your view it gives us a 1st round success rate of 44%.  IMHO Vcr is in desperation mode for the play-offs trading 2 succesive 1st round picks but that's neither here of there, we're looking at the record

Gretzky was traded too... 

[IBatch]

2 hours ago, Fred65 said:

Here's the drafting record for Benning/Vcr

 

All Draft Choices - Vancouver Canucks - All-time Drafts (nhl.com)

 

2014   Virtanen and McCann,   2nd round Demko

2015   Boeser...........................Traded

2016  Juolevi............................"  "

2017   Pettersson.................... Lind/Gadjovich

2018   Hughes.........................Woo

2019   Podkolzyn.....................Hoglander

2020   Traded away.................Traded

2021   Traded away.................Klimovich

 

That's nine first round picks during his era of which 3 have failed as 1st rounders and two slections have been traded away that gives us 3 quality selection plus Podkolzyn ( IMO still to be determined ) We could do the same for the second round. Three traded away, two failed, two winners ( Demo & Hoglander) two TBD Percentage wise that gives us a  success rate of 33% in the first round and 25% in the second round.

 

Draft stats show us the likelyhood of success in the draft is 1st round 65% and 25% in the second round.

 No Forsling?  Adam Gaudette?  Plus no Miller, OEL or Garland?

 

And please state what you consider a "success" in the first round ... and the second round... JV aside from his outside hockey affairs, was on par to play 400 games which is the par for 6th overalls.   I'd like to see what your looking at that makes you feel this way.  Each draft, has 40 guys that go on to play 300 games ... less then JV played ... and only 60 that play 100.   So your math is pretty suspect.  

 

Edit: Plus we also got a couple 2nds traded back ... but those aren't represented in your goofy post is it? 

 

Edit:  Games played matter more then any other stat.   So far we've got that one down pat.   But i'm sure it wouldn't be pleasant for anti-benner's to look at more then a couple teams before they might have an "AHA" moment once they include trades for those picks - and even if they don't then well it will still happen.   Based on average draft position, JB has proven that he's in the top third of the league based on four year blocks.    That upsets people well i'm sorry if it does.  He's not a great drafter, but he's pretty good compared to his peer group.  Above average to the point of being too good to complain anyways.   But i suppose the same folks that do that, are also worried about the cap hits with his hits too lol. 

Edited October 15, 2021 by IBatch

[IBatch]

1 hour ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

How can he not be a success with 32 points in 43 games last year.  3 points in 2 games so far this year.

 

We were Geoff Courtnall's 5th team when he arrived here.

 

Meanwhile, I would say it is too early to give credit to Podkolzin as a successful pick.  So I would say he is 4 for 6 in actual first rounders drafted.  I guess 4 for 8 if you insist on counting the traded away picks...  But I don't see the point in calling a traded pick an automatic failure as an amateur scout, nor classifying a too early to tell pick as a failure for the percentage (which is what was done with a 3 for 9 or 33%).

 

 

Mr. Biestra, with some guys it's a lost cause.   The reasonable ones might be able to change my mind, if they show the data, with the other teams side by side, include their trades for picks and how they worked out and vice versa and included factual information for how well they played as in the quality of the pick or the quality of the player that pick was used for.   Crazily enough Vey actually surpassed the average 2nd rounder.   And Bear for surpassed it.   But that information isn't included is it?     I think maybe it's the rebuild, or maybe it's just not enough people have educated themselves on what they should expect on average for a pick in any round - especially the first depending on draft slot, and seconds - and the entire remainder of the draft.    The odds are extremely slim past the second round your ever going to hit big - especially in a 32 team league.   Elder was our last big hit in that regard.   Raymond, who everyone whines about ... played 500ish games didn't he?   Not really the same compared to some either.   Is Chris Phillips a failure as a first overall?  Absolutely NOT!  Played over 1000 freaking games.    But of course he is compared to other first overalls at the same time.    The math is close to high for cups of coffee guys.   The math is slim in the first round, and gets slimmer that they will well, be a Mason Raymond. 

Edited October 15, 2021 by IBatch

[Kurgom]

He's certainly not great at scouting and drafting. Trying to claim so is a joke, but he did draft Hughes (not exactly finding a Datsyuk but teams passed on him that are probably regretting it) and got him signed to a contract. That is enough to win a cup if Hughes stays. Overall his drafting is sub-par or average for the league, he's far better than Gillis who was terrible at it. Until we start seeing some of these later round picks actually convert into something useful it's hard to give him any props for picking highly rated players in the first round. I mean, it's better than picking Patrick White in the first round but I have yet to see anything amazing from this scouting team.

 

Either way, 2 big busts in the first round isn't a great record but it's better than what we've had for a long time.

Edited October 15, 2021 by Kurgom

[Rindiculous]

2 hours ago, Fred65 said:

Here's the drafting record for Benning/Vcr

 

All Draft Choices - Vancouver Canucks - All-time Drafts (nhl.com)

 

2014   Virtanen and McCann,   2nd round Demko

2015   Boeser...........................Traded

2016  Juolevi............................"  "

2017   Pettersson.................... Lind/Gadjovich

2018   Hughes.........................Woo

2019   Podkolzyn.....................Hoglander

2020   Traded away.................Traded

2021   Traded away.................Klimovich

 

That's nine first round picks during his era of which 3 have failed as 1st rounders and two slections have been traded away that gives us 3 quality selection plus Podkolzyn ( IMO still to be determined ) We could do the same for the second round. Three traded away, two failed, two winners ( Demo & Hoglander) two TBD Percentage wise that gives us a  success rate of 33% in the first round and 25% in the second round.

 

Draft stats show us the likelyhood of success in the draft is 1st round 65% and 25% in the second round.

I've been avoiding posting in this thread because it's such a subjective and dumb thread but lol this is such a bad post.  That number of successful first and second rounders are based on what?  By every metric, all picks except for maybe Juolevi we have succeeded but who knows if Juolevi will get to play a long career as a #4-6 D.  2nd round picks are impossible to judge until the end of their careers because they usually take way longer to get to the NHL unless you're a guy like Aho or Hoglander.

 

Let me say this first, YOU CAN NOT MAKE A PICK UNSUCCESSFUL BECAUSE IT WAS TRADED.  So many players get traded during their career or before they are successful...those would be included as successful in your 65% BS metric.  So let me go through the first and second round picks and see where they would sit in games played which I think is the most reasonable metric to quickly determine how much NHL success they have had and I'm not including later rounds despite us having pretty good success from them for example 2014 there are 15 players with more than 100 games played past the second round, we had one of those players and would have another if Tryamkin didn't bail on us and I believe once it is all said and done we'll average about 2 of those every 3 drafts which is above average drafting in crapshoot rounds.

 

2014 - Virtanen (317 #15 aka first round), McCann (355 #10 aka first round and a high first round at that so this is actually a really good pick for the position he was picked), Thatcher Demko (72 #55 aka second round however goalies play fewer games than skaters)

2015 - Boeser (253 #22 aka first round)

2016 - Juolevi (N/A although still to be determined but he'll be an NHL player for a period of time)

2017 - Pettersson (165 #6 aka first round), Mario Ferraro is the only second round or later pick to have played more than 100 games so you cannot determine successful second round picks

2018 - Hughes (129 #5 aka first round), Woo still TBD no player past the first round has played more than 56 games.

 

So out of all our first round picks we have had 2 risers in draft position, Boeser and Pettersson have both dropped by 1 however I'm pretty sure everyone would agree they're good picks, and 2 droppers.  However, every first round pick in a redraft in term of games played would be redrafted in the first round except for Juolevi which is a good track record.  So basically instead of your stupid 33% success rate, we actually have a 5/6 or 83% success rate in terms of drafting a first round player.  In terms of second round who knows how successful they will be but right now of ones we can probably determine we're 100% with Demko and Hoglander.  Just have to wait for Lind and Gadj and Woo to form careers to see if they add to the successfulness or drop our number down from our perfect second round record.

[Kevin Biestra]

8 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Mr. Biestra, with some guys it's a lost cause.   The reasonable ones might be able to change my mind, if they show the data, with the other teams side by side, include their trades for picks and how they worked out and vice versa and included factual information for how well they played as in the quality of the pick or the quality of the player that pick was used for.   Crazily enough Vey actually surpassed the average 2nd rounder.   And Bear for surpassed it.   But that information isn't included is it?     I think maybe it's the rebuild, or maybe it's just not enough people have educated themselves on what they should expect on average for a pick in any round - especially the first depending on draft slot, and seconds - and the entire remainder of the draft.    The odds are extremely slim past the second round your ever going to hit big - especially in a 32 team league.   Elder was our last big hit.   Raymond, who everyone whines about ... played 500ish games didn't he?   Not really the same compared to some either.   Is Chris Phillips a failure as a first overall?  Absolutely NOT!  Played over 1000 freaking games.    But of course he is compared to other first overalls at the same time.    The math is close to high for cups of coffee guys.   The math is very slim in the first round, and gets slimmer that they will well, be a Mason Raymond. 

 

I still think Virtanen is a bust, games played be damned.  In this case, we were able to see the quality of games whereas we might just have to go with the games stat with someone from another team.  He wasn't a stop gap until younger guys developed, he wasn't a glue guy, he wasn't a defensive guy, just a "blue chip" offensive talent who scored very few points.  He was just a waste of a roster spot where someone else could have developed.

 

On top of that there were character questions before the pick was made and...holy moley did that turn out to be the case.

 

As to Chris Phillips...  Can't judge him too harshly.  His draft year was crap, maybe worse than the Sedin year.  There were very few players that turned out better from that draft, even though Phillips was pretty middling as first overall picks go.

[Patel Bure]

On 10/10/2021 at 5:30 PM, RU SERIOUS said:

After the most recent failure & departure of yet another 1st Round pick ( Yo-Levi ), this following another 1st Round failure and deportation of Jake "The Ripper" to Siberia and the 2019 give away of yet another 1st round pick for Miller, do you still believe that Uncle Jim is a drafting genius and can be trusted to properly handle this years 2022 1st round pick?

 

The way you phrased your post is very biased but to answer your question, I still think this regime is quite good at drafting as a whole:

 

2014:  Demko goes top 15 in a redraft.  Tryamkin likely also would have been a late 1st had he decided to stay here.  

2015:  Boeser probably goes between 10-12 in a redraft.   He was selected at 23.

2016:  We can agree on this diaharrea.  

2017:   Pettersson goes #2 or #3 here in a redraft.  He was selected #5.  Rathbone enters the 1st round in a redraft. 

2018:   Hughes likely goes between #3 and #5 in a redraft.  He was selected at #7.

2019:   Hoglander probably goes between 15 and 20th in a redraft.  The jury is still out on Podkolzin, but many list have him as going #5 in a redraft.

2021:  Many hockey pundits *already* believe that Klimovich would enter the 1st round (30-32) in a redraft.  Still way too early obviously, but still.

 

So yes, based on this, I would argue that Jim Benning and his regime that have done an excellent job as a whole despite the Virtanen and Juolevi gaffes. 

 

All teams make drafting gaffes.  For example, Calgary picked Tkachuk while we picked Juolevi, but how have they drafted since?  https://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/draft/teams/dr00005090.html   We got Hoglander in the 2nd round of 2019 while they picked up crapola in the 1st round.  

 

 

As far as the Jets go, they beat us with Ehlers over Virtanen, but how have they performed since the 2016 draft?  See for yourself:  https://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/draft/teams/dr00010675.html

[Rindiculous]

6 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

I still think Virtanen is a bust, games played be damned.  In this case, we were able to see the quality of games whereas we might just have to go with the games stat with someone from another team.  He wasn't a stop gap until younger guys developed, he wasn't a glue guy, he wasn't a defensive guy, just a "blue chip" offensive talent who scored very few points.  He was just a waste of a roster spot where someone else could have developed.

 

On top of that there were character questions before the pick was made and...holy moley did that turn out to be the case.

 

As to Chris Phillips...  Can't judge him too harshly.  His draft year was crap, maybe worse than the Sedin year.  There were very few players that turned out better from that draft, even though Phillips was pretty middling as first overall picks go.

Yes Virtanen is a bust for his position, however in every metric he is still a mid first round pick in a pretty weak draft.

[Fred65]

To my mind every team is alotted the same number of picks in the draft. Some teams get mostly high picks ( Vcr for one ) because they suffered a lousy season. It's up to management what they do with the alotted pick. The future success depends on these decissions. So trading a draft pick is a management choice, we don't see any one worth picking or the guy e want will be gone, what ever, but the decission lands at their door.  Apart of on ice skills scouts are supposed to check character and by all metrics Virtanen was a failure, ditto McCann and Juolevi it was of all things his skating, ..scouts failed to detect his skating flaws, absolutely unforvigable. I allways remember Alex Burrows summation of Virtanen the summer following his draft " Maybe he'll get it some day" that was a afilure just like Juolevi defiency with his skating.

 

Quote

Yes Virtanen is a bust for his position, however in every metric he is still a mid first round pick in a pretty weak draft

I recall Button ranked Virtanen in the 2nd round and no insult intended but  I'd take his review over your, 

Edited October 15, 2021 by Fred65

[Patel Bure]

7 minutes ago, Rindiculous said:

Yes Virtanen is a bust for his position, however in every metric he is still a mid first round pick in a pretty weak draft.

As of this writing, Virtanen is 25th overall in points for the 2016 draft (as an aside, McCann is 14th.... :-()).  Virtanen would probably drop about 7-10 more spots given that there are good goalies (Demko) and other stay-at-home defensemen that need to be considered, but overall, yeah, Virtanen still might be worthy of being considered a late 1st round pick.  He's a bust as a #6 obviously, but he still performed at a level consistent with that of a late 1st rounder/high 2nd rounder.   We still got 4 full seasons out of Jake, which is also consistent with that of a late 1st rounder/high 2nd rounder I believe.  

 

Our only outright bust was Juolevi.

Edited October 15, 2021 by Patel Bure