How do you feel about our Management group?

[-DLC-]

Just now, Alflives said:

 I see a lot of Bieksa in Juulson.  

OK, sold.

[The Lock]

I guess my stance at this point, at least with Benning, is he's an average GM. He's not necessarily good or bad. He's made his fair share of mistakes but he's also made some smart moves. It seems like he's been learning from his mistakes which seems promising enough moving forward to where I'm okay with him staying at this point.

 

The real question to me is going to be how this team looks moving forward. Are we a playoff team from the moves made at this point? I guess we'll find out this season. I do think this was perhaps his best offseason to date (after having what is arguably his worst offseason to date) so hopefully things go well from here on out.

 

In terms of the Acquilinis, I have no opinion. The fact that they own the team, in a hockey market no less, means they're going to have a lot of leeway in terms of how they act so I don't see the point in crticizing all that much unless if Eugene Melnyk starts mind controlling them or something.

Edited October 12, 2021 by The Lock

[wallstreetamigo]

Hard to say what we have in Juulsen. He was on a decent development track until the injuries which basically derailed him for a couple of years. Not sure if he is back at 100%. It’s not overly likely he will get much of a shot in Van unless there are significant injuries or several D drastically underperform. He already cleared waivers though so that’s a plus.

[AV.]

Not a very skilled one, not a very bright one.  More mistakes than successes.

But they try their best.

Both the team and the individuals making decisions here would benefit from moving on.

 

[Ghostsof1915]

Playing devils advocate here. 

OJ might be a long hauler from Covid. That would explain the bag skate. 

After all Sutter is still feeling effects from it. And is not playing. 

 

To temper enthusiasm, Juulsen had twin puck strikes to the face, which caused vision related issues. I'm hoping this is not something that is going to derail his career. 

 

 

 

[wallstreetamigo]

3 minutes ago, The Lock said:

I guess my stance at this point, at least with Benning, is he's an average GM. He's not necessarily good or bad. He's made his fair share of mistakes but he's also made some smart moves. It seems like he's been learning from his mistakes which seems promising enough moving forward to where I'm okay with him staying at this point.

 

The real question to me is going to be how this team looks moving forward. Are we a playoff team from the moves made at this point? I guess we'll find out this season. I do think this was perhaps his best offseason to date (after having what is arguably his worst offseason to date) so hopefully things go well from here on out.

 

In terms of the Acquilinis, I have no opinion. The fact that they own the team, in a hockey market no less, means they're going to have a lot of leeway in terms of how they act so I don't see the point in crticizing all that much unless if Eugene Melnyk starts mind controlling them or something.

To me Benning is so polarizing because there is little middle ground with him. He either hits a home run on a move he makes or spectacularly strikes out swinging. He doesn’t manage to hit many solid singles and doubles to steal a baseball analogy.

 

He makes a lot of unforced errors in cap and roster management too. 
 

I feel like the fact he is probably the worst media interview in the NHL and usually sounds kind of like an idiot who has no clue what he is doing doesn’t do him any favours perception wise. I cut him some slack for that as some people just aren’t polished at that stuff but I can see how many would get that perception when combined with some of his more inexplicable moves.

[J.I.A.H.N]

I think one of Benning's down falls has been his profession scouting, which has proven to be better in the second half of his tenure.

 

IMO, his evaluations have been off, but as I say, it has gotten better. It might be more asset management than anything, but it might be more

 

his loyalty to his players, as he is slow to cut bait. IMO, it is these 2 things that people talk about more than anything. Not cutting guys loose

 

before they have no value in some cases, and in other cases not being able to forecast his cap and his timing. 

 

As I think about the above, his problems stem from somewhere in the above, although not all the time, but he does paint himself in a corner from 

 

time to time. It is certainly messy in this area of Jim's management style., 

 

I think this along with his media interviews earns him his name "Benning", which I personally think is wrong, and was given to him in his early days.

 

Jim has learned on the fly, and may have been given more control over the past 3 years..........

 

As @wallstreetamigo points out, Jim is very polarizing, but I like him, he is honest to a fault, and he learns from his mistakes

 

As @Curmudgeon points out his drafting and trades work out well in comparison to his peers, so he may just need that side kick

 

that helps him through his UFA signs.........

 

This is a little bit of a scattered post, but Jim kind of does that to you. He has some pro strengths and some con weaknesses...........

 

Pretty much like the rest of us have.

 

We are just not put under the same microscope or plastered all over the media like Jim is........................so our warts are not as exposed.

[J.I.A.H.N]

I find it kind of funny how all the discussion centers around Benning, with very little about Green and his assistants.

 

Which is real funny, as I am having real difficulty in pin pointing any strengths. Lots of weaknesses, but not many strengths?

 

Is it me?

[wallstreetamigo]

1 minute ago, J.I.A.H.N said:

I find it kind of funny how all the discussion centers around Benning, with very little about Green and his assistants.

 

Which is real funny, as I am having real difficulty in pin pointing any strengths. Lots of weaknesses, but not many strengths?

 

Is it me?

Nope

 

I have never been much of a Benning fan. After losing Toffoli and Tanev and having what was easily his worst off-season, this past off-season he recovered some faith from me. I still don’t think he is the GM we need but he did a lot of good things. He filled holes with the right kind of players and added quality top 6 and top 4 D depth. 
 

The D needed more work but the Hamonic thing seemed to blindside him. 
 

Green and Baumgartner and their antiquated style of play are huge problems. Benning should have cut both loose and hired a proven winner. I see absolutely no influence over anything from the addition of Shaw which is unfortunate. The team plays the same way they did last year in both ends and the coaches still value players who can play that style over better players who can actually help the team.
 

 

[The Lock]

1 hour ago, wallstreetamigo said:

To me Benning is so polarizing because there is little middle ground with him. He either hits a home run on a move he makes or spectacularly strikes out swinging. He doesn’t manage to hit many solid singles and doubles to steal a baseball analogy.

 

He makes a lot of unforced errors in cap and roster management too. 
 

I feel like the fact he is probably the worst media interview in the NHL and usually sounds kind of like an idiot who has no clue what he is doing doesn’t do him any favours perception wise. I cut him some slack for that as some people just aren’t polished at that stuff but I can see how many would get that perception when combined with some of his more inexplicable moves.

I think a GM's moves get exaggerated though whenever it's a team one cheers for. If you look around the league, GM's are making similar good and bad moves all the time. Some GM's are obviously going to be moreso than others.

 

Look at the moves Toronto makes for example in getting players like Barrie or Muzzin or signing Tavares. Look at all of the crazy contract buying Arizona's been doing. Look at New Jersey when they traded for Subban. These are literally the 1st 3 teams that came to my mind just now and I'm pretty sure you can look at any team and point out really good trades and moves and really bad trades and moves for the most part. The only real difference is the focus of it being our team since we happen to care more about what goes on here.

 

Think of it like driving. You hear people stating their town has the "worst traffic" all the time because they're focused on their city and not other cities. This isn't much different to that notion.

[DIBdaQUIB]

20 hours ago, Coconuts said:

I agree with most of your assessment tbh.

 

At the end of the day I don't have much to complain about regarding management, and while I've disagreed with some of Benning's moves I've been encouraged by what I've seen the last three years or so. We've lost some players lately and I haven't been thrilled by that, but while I'd rather have retained Gadjovich he probably wasn't going to move the needle much as he is. I'd have preferred to have seen Juolevi, but what we got in return should help us (PK, 4c). I don't blame Hamonic on management, I strongly feel that's very much a Hamonic thing that came up after having signed. 

 

Where I'm skeptical, and trending towards wanting a replacement, is Green. I understand that our team has gotten progressively better over the last four years, but he still only has one playoff appearance throughout his tenure, and arguably only because Hughes and Markstrom played out of their minds. Context or not, a coach only gets so much rope. I wasn't on the "fire Green" wagon last season, but I was on the fire Baumgartner and Brown wagon; I was neutral about his being retained so long as it was with new assistants, and that kind of happened but Baumgartner is somehow still here and that pisses me off. I don't feel Green's the guy to take us to the next level, and I think talent like Hughes, Boeser, and Pettersson would have thrived under another coach as well, they're just that talented. I questioned his playing plugs and waiver tweeners over prospects once the playoffs were out of sight last season, I question his personnel decisions, and I question his ability to adapt in game. 

 

If we tread water to begin the season and look like we're in trouble to start November, he should be gone. Preferably for a veteran coach, I don't want a third rookie guy in a row. I'm not interested in wasting the youth and prime years of our stars and vets for a head coach who can't get what's needed out of the talent we've got. 

I think it may well be the young core that lead to green's departure if the team struggles early this year.  They have made it clear they want to be on a winner and with only 3 years on Petey's contract, time is not a luxury JB or Aquaman have.  

[wallstreetamigo]

8 minutes ago, The Lock said:

I think a GM's moves get exaggerated though whenever it's a team one cheers for. If you look around the league, GM's are making similar good and bad moves all the time. Some GM's are obviously going to be moreso than others.

 

Look at the moves Toronto makes for example in getting players like Barrie or Muzzin or signing Tavares. Look at all of the crazy contract buying Arizona's been doing. Look at New Jersey when they traded for Subban. These are literally the 1st 3 teams that came to my mind just now and I'm pretty sure you can look at any team and point out really good trades and moves and really bad trades and moves for the most part. The only real difference is the focus of it being our team since we happen to care more about what goes on here.

 

Think of it like driving. You hear people stating their town has the "worst traffic" all the time because they're focused on their city and not other cities. This isn't much different to that notion.

Every GM makes good moves and bad moves. And being a fan means you care about your GM’s moves than anyone else’s.
 

As fans, expecting your GM to make less than other ones is probably not a terribly unrealistic expectation to have and when they make lots of them criticism is understandable. I mean, other teams making stupid moves is a good thing to most fans of other teams as it indirectly helps our team.

[SilentSam]

I do clearly remember Green stating in a Conference, when asked about the “bag skate” and OJ..

He answered with “it’s not a bag skate,. It’s a fitness test”.

 

I think the writing was in the wall for OJ,. 
after all , the Canucks had not only done everything for him to succeed, they gave him the time to do it.

Coming to Camp in poor shape was inexcusable for this player.

[Metal Face Doom]

All I know is the management group is more qualified than anyone complaining about them.  

[Locke Lamora]

I’m actually quite impressed with how proactive management has been this off season. No guarantees all the moves are going to work out, but I like the approach overall. The Juolevi trade could end up being a very shrewd move. 

 

[wallstreetamigo]

1 hour ago, SilentSam said:

I do clearly remember Green stating in a Conference, when asked about the “bag skate” and OJ..

He answered with “it’s not a bag skate,. It’s a fitness test”.

 

I think the writing was in the wall for OJ,. 
after all , the Canucks had not only done everything for him to succeed, they gave him the time to do it.

Coming to Camp in poor shape was inexcusable for this player.

If he actually said that, he is a tool. A bag skate like his isn’t a fitness test. OEL was garbage in the “fitness test” too. Why wasn’t he traded as a result?

 

Any coach who puts any weight in a bag skate is just a fool that has no business coaching in the NHL team. Teams spend a ton of money on state of the art evaluation systems for all kinds of fitness parameters. But we get a coach who thinks he knows better from a bag skate?

 

The bag skate matters to Green because of the ineffective style he wants the team to play. If you skate fast in his system it makes no difference if you actually know where to be or have any hockey sense. Highmore is the perfect example.

Edited October 12, 2021 by wallstreetamigo

[J.I.A.H.N]

Just for those that do not know............

 

A bag skate, was invented as a punishment for a bad game or practice by the team

 

The reference to bag, is to skate your balls off, as in very tired

 

It is an immature saying for years gone by........

 

It was first implemented to get the summer time fat off, meaning to improve your conditioning in training camp

 

But the players hated it so much, they put the words to it and it grew into legend

 

Which the coaches then used for punishment

 

Then the PC group showed up and coaches  could not use the term and more, or use it for punishment any more

 

So it reverted back to an on-ice fitness test again, which with todays instruments, is very archaic, and not very accurate

 

As buy in is needed to use it properly.................I suspect Juolevi bought in and OEL said not on my watch

 

Green then judged Juolevi accordingly, and knew what OEL did, because it really did not matter, one way or another with OEL

 

Something that coaches give veterans and not fringe players...................the benefit of the doubt

 

It is archaic to say the least, but hey we are talking about hockey players and coaches that played hockey some time in their career

 

Do not expect the "fitness test"  to change, at least not in the near future

[SilentSam]

28 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

If he actually said that, he is a tool. A bag skate like his isn’t a fitness test. OEL was garbage in the “fitness test” too. Why wasn’t he traded as a result?

 

Any coach who puts any weight in a bag skate is just a fool that has no business coaching in the NHL team. Teams spend a ton of money on state of the art evaluation systems for all kinds of fitness parameters. But we get a coach who thinks he knows better from a bag skate?

 

The bag skate matters to Green because of the ineffective style he wants the team to play. If you skate fast in his system it makes no difference if you actually know where to be or have any hockey sense. Highmore is the perfect example.

You sound angry?

[wallstreetamigo]

15 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

You sound angry?

I’m not angry at all lol. I just have low tolerance for stupid things and stupid people. If the bag skate matters as much as people think then our coach needs to go.

[iceman64]

On 10/11/2021 at 10:41 AM, J.I.A.H.N said:

I have been feeling quite impatient this year about the Canucks. I am feeling Benning has had enough time, to rebuild, and feel this is the sink or swim year, although we are still imcomplete, in terms of still needing some pieces (RHD).

 

In saying all that, I am very willing to let this version of the Canucks have their turn, and give it the old college try. I have to admit, I am finding the CDC noise a little disruptive, in that there are so many negative views this year, so I thought I would ask you, how you all feel.

 

I am admittedly mixed, in my opinion and this is becoming a make or break season for me. the following are my thoughts on our Canuck management to date.

 

Aqualini.......I think we are lucky to have such a owner, in terms of his deep pockets, and love for his team. I wonder though, if at times, it does not get in the way of some sound judgement, although, it has been hard to pin any blame on  him, in regards to his participation, I keep getting the feeling, he has had a hand in some decisions. Good or Bad, it is his team, and his dollars. But by in large, we could do alot worst than Francesco.

 

Benning.......The buck starts here. I have generally always been a supporter of Jim's, and felt from the very start, he was given a huge task of rebuilding, with very little in the way moveable assets. Sure there were some veterans that could have been moved, and he did move some, but in other cases, was handcuffed with not being able to move fan favorites ( I believe in some way Aqualini had some say in this decision, but I have no actual proof)

 

Benning 's early years, must have been very difficult, in terms of the decision to either Re-build or Re-tool. I think Aqualini, and the Sedin's had some say in this, but again no evidence. But the decision to re-tool, cost the franchise in time and in asset management. Again, I do not blame Benning completely on this, and any good boss wanting his job, would never throw his boss under the bus, but again I believe Aqualini had alot to do with this decision.

 

Now, once Jim got into his tenure a couple of years, he had finally started to move out some veterans, but again, earlier trades like Kesler's, handcuffed him and he was criticized for that, in that the return was not great, but in actual fact Anaheim had him by the neck, and he had no choice. Later trades, seemed to be much better, in Burrows, and Hansen, his last trades involving Beagle, Player Name and Roussel, was very inventive and quite courageous, and inventive, and has brought us OEL and Garland, who the jury should still be out on, but have shown to be massive improvements over those players which were moved out. The Miller trade was his best to date, so I am not sure how people can really criticize his trades, considering, his early handcuffing. I mean, where the hell do you start, when your team is aging out?

 

Now drafting is a different matter. Teams in general must draft approx. 2 players a year, that will play long careers, more if they play shorter careers. This is a league wide thing, as to fill league manning, teams must all do this. The question is not whether Benning drafted enough, because generally, I think he has, but outside of 1st round picks, how has he actually done in developing his later round prospects? Admittedly, there are more than a few scattered around the league, but how many have we developed and kept? This has certainly been a point of discussion this year, with Lind, Gadjovich and Juolevi leaving. Should they all have been let go? Well, none at this point have developed into anything more than fringe NHL players at this point. The question is should they have been more by now? I think that can be applied in general to all our 2nd round picks and beyond, over the past 7 years.

 

There should absolutely be no question over Benning's 1st round picks, as even McCann and Virtanen (who's off ice antics  finally caught up to him) have been NHL calibre. In my POV, it has not been his quality of pick, but lack of picks that has been his Achilles heel. (But we addressed that already)

 

Benning's asset management, which is really all of the above, has been addressed at nauseum as per above, and it is really a mixed bag, but generally, he has moved us forward, where some of our earlier managers, did not. (see our early history for great examples of bad management)

 

Jim's loyalty, is his strength and his weakness. he sends out a great message to the NHL players, but had stopped from some moves, when they should have been considered earlier. Benning certainly demands a great deal of conversation, because his decisions are all over the place, some being great, some not so great, but in the end, I think this is make or break season, or at least it should be.

 

Now, Green is a whole different kettle of fish, which I have such a problem understanding. I am not sure whether he is a good coach with bad assistants or just bad? I am not sure whether his offensive and defensive schemes are acceptable or whether he is over his head. I love his demeanor, but that is not what he gets paid for, so again, I believe this is a make or break season for him.

 

He is still missing his one RHD, that pairs well with Hughes, and that is not on him, but he has enough offensive players to win games, if given the right system to play in. This is a make or break season for him as well, which might explain his player choices for his 4th line.

 

 

So, this is kind of what I see and feel, and I am very mixed over the whole thing. This is a very make or break season for me, in terms of Benning and Green, and I wonder if it is for you too.  More importantly, is it for Aqualini?

 

I apologize for the long winded summary. Some agree and some may not, but I wonder how it will all play out. I do think it will be a better season, will it be enough?

I thought summer was over and we were done beating the dead horse.. guess not..