Did Benning "lose" the Canucks' core players in the 2020 off-season post bubble success?

[Toyotasfan]

16 hours ago, PetterssonOrPeterson said:

Edler's doing better in LA than OEL is doing here.

I was keeping an eye on Edler down in LA and I was humourlessly shocked how low he is on LA’s defence core . Prior to injuries to Doughty and Maata , Edler was 6th on the depth chart and only being played 12-14 minutes/game . Recently he is up to 16-17 minutes, but still sparingly used and sheltered. 

Granted it’s a nice luxury to have an experienced veteran in the third pairing, he is not even comparable to OEL.

[Smashian Kassian]

In hindsight it's clear Tanev was the big miss.

 

I think most were fine to walk away from him given his injury history, but it's turned out to be the biggest loss.

 

Markstrom was fine to walk away from, Toffoli seemed worse but now we have Garland.

[Patel Bure]

Just now, -DLC- said:

But my point is, I would not sacrifice Demko OR Podz to keep any of those three.

 

We dumped those players without having to do that.

And in the process, may have left a very sour taste amongst guys such as Miller, Myers, Horvat, Pettersson, Hughes, Edler, etc.  

 

Especially in the case of both Miller and Myers who were brought in here specifically to compete “in the now”, only to have management diverge from the perceived plan.

 

And on top of that, sacrificing those guys for a troubled and non-professional guy like Jake Virtanen.

 

I just can’t help but wonder as to what our team would have looked like this year with the following roster:  (assuming that in 2020, we would have moved Sutter, Baertschi, Player Name, Demko, and Podkolzin for OEL, Garland, and maybe one year of Kuemper as back up).

 

Miller-Pettersson-Toffoli

Pearson-Horvat-Boeser

Hoglander-Dickinson-Garland
Motte-Beagle-MacEwen

 

Hughes-Tanev
OEL-Myers

Schenn-Stecher

 

Markstrom

Halak

 

[-DLC-]

4 minutes ago, Patel Bure said:

And in the process, may have left a very sour taste amongst guys such as Miller, Myers, Horvat, Pettersson, Hughes, Edler, etc.  

Players are moved in/out all the time.  I feel like we put too much drama into stuff that's just every day part of hockey...not sure the players do.  If they do initially, I'm sure they get over it and it's not something they dwell on.

[Ghostsof1915]

1 hour ago, Smashian Kassian said:

In hindsight it's clear Tanev was the big miss.

 

I think most were fine to walk away from him given his injury history, but it's turned out to be the biggest loss.

 

Markstrom was fine to walk away from, Toffoli seemed worse but now we have Garland.

Walking away from Tanev was like Ottawa giving up on Salo. The reality the team was in a cap crunch. Given the choice between Tanev, Toffoli, and Markstrom, they should have found a way to keep Tanev. But that's in hindsight. The worry was could Tanev stay healthy? I do wonder if they found a way to keep Toffoli if that would have been better?

His 9 points certainly would help the team right now. 

[DSVII]

31 minutes ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

Walking away from Tanev was like Ottawa giving up on Salo. The reality the team was in a cap crunch. Given the choice between Tanev, Toffoli, and Markstrom, they should have found a way to keep Tanev. But that's in hindsight. The worry was could Tanev stay healthy? I do wonder if they found a way to keep Toffoli if that would have been better?

His 9 points certainly would help the team right now. 

It's not hindsight. It's lack of foresight which is the management issue here. A lot of his board was hoping to keep at least one of the three as soon as the 2020 season ended. To lose all three because they were chasing OEL was an unforced error on their part. And certainly not a hindsight issue.

 

I do wonder though. How much the Coaching has skewed our perception of player value. Was Tanev's health a concern because of Green's system due to all those high danger chances he was forced to block/stop. We've seen Tanev and Schmidt both leave for other teams now with more established NHL coaches and they are playing career years. Players that we've deemed not necessary to us (MacEwen/Gadjo) are scooped up by other teams and kept on their rosters (Philly today chose to waive another of their depth forwards over MacEwen.).

 

 

Edited November 13, 2021 by DSVII

[*Buzzsaw*]

2 hours ago, Toyotasfan said:

I was keeping an eye on Edler down in LA and I was humourlessly shocked how low he is on LA’s defence core . Prior to injuries to Doughty and Maata , Edler was 6th on the depth chart and only being played 12-14 minutes/game . Recently he is up to 16-17 minutes, but still sparingly used and sheltered. 

Granted it’s a nice luxury to have an experienced veteran in the third pairing, he is not even comparable to OEL.

Actually Edler is up to 19 or 20 minutes a game and is on the second pairing.

 

He is not being sheltered.

 

His plus/minus is up there with the team's better defensemen.

[*Buzzsaw*]

The real problem with the Canucks is their players are not playing to their potential.

 

All you need to do is look at the level of play of players when with the Canucks and when with other teams.

 

This is especially the case with defense... Nate Schmidt, Erik Gudbranson, Luke Schenn, Alex Edler... all of them play much better with other teams than the Canucks.

 

This is coaching... it is a case of a more knowledgeable coach being able to position and coach a player to that player's strengths... not put him in a system which is geared for failure.

Edited November 13, 2021 by *Buzzsaw*

[ruilin96]

Markstrom was the right move to let him go. If we kept him, we 100% will lose Demko to Seattle.

 

Toffoli & Tanev should've definitely been retained. Last season would've been drastically different if we had Toffoli & Tanev. Montreal would've never made the playoffs without Toffoli's 28 goals. People said Toffoli only scores his points AGAINST the Canucks, but fail to recognize that he has 6 goals and 4 assists in 10 games WITH the Canucks. Even if Toffoli doesn't score 28 goals and say he only scores 20 goals for the Canucks, that is 15 more than "he who must not be named" which we choose to sign instead of Toffoli.

 

Tanev would've really stabilize the d-core and especailly Hughes. He continues to shine as one of the best defensive defenseman in the league.

 

Don't make the trade for Schmidt (or if we do, should've utilize him properly, see how he now thrives in Winnipeg, because he is utilized properly). Shouldn't have signed Holtby, should've went for a cheaper back up on a 1-2 year deal.

 

The time to trade Gaudette imo is not last year at the deadline, should've been last off-season if the team doesn't see him part of the long term plan. Gaudette came off of a 33 points in 59 games season in 2019-20, despite not recording a point in the playoffs, he would still have drawn more interest from teams being a former Hobey Baker winner. If he was moved in the off-season as a cap dump sweetener to get rid off one of Beagle/Roussel, it could save the team some cap space. Instead of re-signing "he who must not be named," he also could've been dumped as a sweetener for the remainder of Beagle/Roussel.

 

Team can then sign cheap veteran players at or close to league minimum to replace Beagle/Roussel. As for Stecher, I think he would've stayed in Vancovuer for less money. Detroit offered him 2 x 1.7 we probably could've kept him for 2 x 1.5. I wouldn't oppose to that as I think he is more important in the locker room than people realize.

 

If that was the team we assembled, we probably could've been that team that end up with the 4th playoff spot in the North and probably would've made it to the 2nd round (assuming the Leafs choke against us in Round 1). I don't see us beating Winnipeg no matter what, but at the very least, it didn't demoralized the team so signifcantly.

 

What's done is done, we can't dwell on what happened last season. I thought Benning did a good job assembling a team to compete for the playoffs this year and this team on paper should be at the very least a bubble playoff team. Right now, nothing is working with this group. Terrible special teams lead to a lot of Powerplay goals against. We have argubly the best top 9 forwards since 2011 and we struggle to score. Giving up the first goal in all but 2 of our games is just unacceptable. This team is drastically underperforming. The team struggle to find their identity on the ice. They are not a run and gun offensive entertaining team. They aren't elite defensive team that shuts everything down. They are team that relies on Demko to play lights out to bail them out of trouble so they can get wins. If losing Tanev, Markstrom, Toffoli and Stecher still demoralized the team's lockerroom to this day, then this is a mentally fragile group and deserves to be ripped apart. You can't dwell on the past, you have to move on to the future. The team must find a way to establish their identity, if not, we are staring at another lost season.

[alt kilgore]

Another interesting stat is that the season during JBs tenure where the team had the most regular season points was in his first year, when he was still riding the team that Gillis built. 101 pts.  In eight years he's not managed to rebuild to even get back close to that. 

 

His greatest plus is his drafting of Boeser, Demko, Petey, Hughes, and Podz.  Then promptly fired the amateur scouting director who pushed for those players. because obviously he and Wiesbrod his old hockey buddy who failed everywhere he went, could do it better. Plus handle President duties, and GM.

Minus Virtanen, Joulevi, and trading away McCann Madden, Dahlen, Macewen, and two firsts, and a bunch of seconds and thirds.

 

I seriously do not know how people can't see how bad he has been.  Maybe its easier to see that in terms of how much better shape we could be in right now.  If we'd had an experienced Cup winning GM instead. One who it wasn't their first opportunity desperate to please his boss, and could afford not to bend to an owner's boyhood fantasies and overly optimistic views, and walk away from the job if that's the case.

 

He is ultimately responsible for the state of the team now.  Green can only do so much. Even though I also think we could do better with coaching. He's been here long enough, we need a new face, and ideas. Because it is what it is. Changing the GM would be a good start, but this is the team now, and for the immediate future.

 

We need Ted Lasso! 

I'm half serious. What I mean is that the x's and o's are only so much of the job.  That is what the assistants are for mostly.   The head coach should have a certain cache. He should inspire them even right when he walks into the room like a Pat Quinn. His job is to work with the players. Their quirks, and quibbles. He has to be part psychologist. Know how to play head games.....in a good way.....to spurn some players on. You need a certain level of respect from NHL players to get away with that. A lot of talk about needing character players. We really need a character coach.

 

[Bathgate]

7 hours ago, Patel Bure said:

@Elias Pettersson - Agree that we are sorely missing Tanev but I think letting Toffoli walk was a major gaffe as well.  Toffoli had instant chemistry with Petey and Miller and they were playing like a true top line.  
 

While Boeser has had his moments with Petey, he has never been a great fit with Petey and this is something that Travis Green should have picked up by now.

 

Boeser had his best season last year playing alongside Hoglander and Miller, and also had his best years playing alongside Horvat prior to Pettersson’s arrival.

The problem is benning, he made the choice of keeping Jake rather than toffoli

[Patel Bure]

1 minute ago, Bathgate said:

The problem is benning, he made the choice of keeping Jake rather than toffoli

Which I’m now wondering if this move, along with other decisions, really ticked off our current core?  Jake Virtanen showed up to the bubble way out of shape while Chris Tanev delivered the knock out punch to Minnesota.  Although Toffoli got injured during the play-ins, the guy was one of the biggest reasons why we even qualified for the play-ins.

[Bathgate]

5 hours ago, *Buzzsaw* said:

The real problem with the Canucks is their players are not playing to their potential.

 

All you need to do is look at the level of play of players when with the Canucks and when with other teams.

 

This is especially the case with defense... Nate Schmidt, Erik Gudbranson, Luke Schenn, Alex Edler... all of them play much better with other teams than the Canucks.

 

This is coaching... it is a case of a more knowledgeable coach being able to position and coach a player to that player's strengths... not put him in a system which is geared for failure.

This is a very good take

[EddieVedder]

2 hours ago, kilgore said:

Another interesting stat is that the season during JBs tenure where the team had the most regular season points was in his first year, when he was still riding the team that Gillis built. 101 pts.  In eight years he's not managed to rebuild to even get back close to that. 

 

His greatest plus is his drafting of Boeser, Demko, Petey, Hughes, and Podz.  Then promptly fired the amateur scouting director who pushed for those players. because obviously he and Wiesbrod his old hockey buddy who failed everywhere he went, could do it better. Plus handle President duties, and GM.

Minus Virtanen, Joulevi, and trading away McCann Madden, Dahlen, Macewen, and two firsts, and a bunch of seconds and thirds.

 

I seriously do not know how people can't see how bad he has been.  Maybe its easier to see that in terms of how much better shape we could be in right now.  If we'd had an experienced Cup winning GM instead. One who it wasn't their first opportunity desperate to please his boss, and could afford not to bend to an owner's boyhood fantasies and overly optimistic views, and walk away from the job if that's the case.

 

He is ultimately responsible for the state of the team now.  Green can only do so much. Even though I also think we could do better with coaching. He's been here long enough, we need a new face, and ideas. Because it is what it is. Changing the GM would be a good start, but this is the team now, and for the immediate future.

 

We need Ted Lasso! 

I'm half serious. What I mean is that the x's and o's are only so much of the job.  That is what the assistants are for mostly.   The head coach should have a certain cache. He should inspire them even right when he walks into the room like a Pat Quinn. His job is to work with the players. Their quirks, and quibbles. He has to be part psychologist. Know how to play head games.....in a good way.....to spurn some players on. You need a certain level of respect from NHL players to get away with that. A lot of talk about needing character players. We really need a character coach.

 

Boy do we need a pat quinn here.  Miss him.  Truly the last of the mohicans

[EddieVedder]

57 minutes ago, Patel Bure said:

Which I’m now wondering if this move, along with other decisions, really ticked off our current core?  Jake Virtanen showed up to the bubble way out of shape while Chris Tanev delivered the knock out punch to Minnesota.  Although Toffoli got injured during the play-ins, the guy was one of the biggest reasons why we even qualified for the play-ins.

Whos our next Tanev?  Heck, whos our next Stetcher even?  Aside from Woo there is nothing in the pipeline as far as dmen that play with that much heart.

[Baggins]

19 hours ago, Bathgate said:

The problem is benning, he made the choice of keeping Jake rather than toffoli

Virtanen wasn't re-signed until after Toffoli bolted. If anything Jake was plan B.

[Baggins]

18 hours ago, EddieVedder said:

Whos our next Tanev?  Heck, whos our next Stetcher even?  Aside from Woo there is nothing in the pipeline as far as dmen that play with that much heart.

Other than likeability, I don't understand anybody being upset about letting Stecher walk. His offense doen't make up for his lack of size. Which was often a problem for him defensively. He's not bad but I doubt he'd be sought after, even for bottom pair, by a good playoff team. One undersized d-man (Hughes) is enough for a team. 

[EddieVedder]

50 minutes ago, Baggins said:

Other than likeability, I don't understand anybody being upset about letting Stecher walk. His offense doen't make up for his lack of size. Which was often a problem for him defensively. He's not bad but I doubt he'd be sought after, even for bottom pair, by a good playoff team. One undersized d-man (Hughes) is enough for a team. 

Stetch played bigger than he was.  He played his heart out every shift and held his own all over the ice.  The guys on the team loved him and letting him go along with tanev hurt this team.  We cant keep assuming that just because a player is further down on the depth chart, that they arent important.  

We need players that bleed green, blue and white.  Players that are brought up through the system.  These are the guys that make a difference.  Im tired of looking at the team and seeing what seem like other teams players.  

Edited November 14, 2021 by EddieVedder

[Baggins]

2 hours ago, EddieVedder said:

Stetch played bigger than he was.  He played his heart out every shift and held his own all over the ice.  The guys on the team loved him and letting him go along with tanev hurt this team.  We cant keep assuming that just because a player is further down on the depth chart, that they arent important.  

We need players that bleed green, blue and white.  Players that are brought up through the system.  These are the guys that make a difference.  Im tired of looking at the team and seeing what seem like other teams players.  

He played like a little bull with a big heart. This is what made him so likeable. It doesn't change the fact he lost too many physical battles because of his size. Particularly around the net. Being likeable or being from here doesn't make him the best choice. He's a great choice for a rebuilding team, because of his heart, but I don't see him on a contender.