For those who say it's been 8 years of Benning...

[dougieL]

I have heard (not necessarily here) people say that we haven't rebuilt properly or that it's been 8 years of mediocrity under the Benning regime.

 

People are forgetting that for the 2014-15 to 2017-18 seasons, Linden said publicly that it would be unfair to the Sedins to rebuild (the articles can be easily found on Google). In these seasons, we signed Erickson, traded for Gudbranson, traded picks for players, and traded for and re-signed Sutter, among other moves.

 

Only AFTER the Sedins retired did Linden start pushing the proper rebuild. First off, the hypocrisy of this pivot is stunning and not acknowledged enough. Him quitting over the owners not buying into this vision is ludicrous considering his refusal to rebuild while the Sedins were clearly done (combined 14m cap hit, neither exceeded 60pts in any of the last 3 seasons of their career).

 

Second, it is difficult to imagine that the Canucks fan base would have the patience for a full rebuild that would start in the 2018-19 season. If a proper rebuild takes 5 years, this season AND next season might still well be a lottery seasons. We would essentially lose the primes of Demko, Horvat, and part of Boeser's, if they even remained with us through this hypothetical rebuild. 

 

With the drafting of Hughes and the anticipation of Pettersson becoming a quality player, along with the pain of the previous 3 seasons, I could see why the owners wanted Benning to accelerate the process.

 

So no, the rebuild was not done properly, but it is not all on Benning. Sure, Benning has made some questionable moves, but which GM hasn't? The owners, along with Linden, have to bear the brunt of the blame for the overall lack of direction.

 

 

[ShawnAntoski]

2 minutes ago, dougieL said:

I have heard (not necessarily here) people say that we haven't rebuilt properly or that it's been 8 years of mediocrity under the Benning regime.

 

People are forgetting that for the 2014-15 to 2017-18 seasons, Linden said publicly that it would be unfair to the Sedins to rebuild (the articles can be easily found on Google). In these seasons, we signed Erickson, traded for Gudbranson, traded picks for players, and traded for and re-signed Sutter, among other moves.

 

Only AFTER the Sedins retired did Linden start pushing the proper rebuild. First off, the hypocrisy of this pivot is stunning and not acknowledged enough. Him quitting over the owners not buying into this vision is ludicrous considering his refusal to rebuild while the Sedins were clearly done (combined 14m cap hit, neither exceeded 60pts in any of the last 3 seasons of their career).

 

Second, it is difficult to imagine that the Canucks fan base would have the patience for a full rebuild that would start in the 2018-19 season. If a proper rebuild takes 5 years, this season AND next season might still well be a lottery seasons. We would essentially lose the primes of Demko, Horvat, and part of Boeser's, if they even remained with us through this hypothetical rebuild. 

 

With the drafting of Hughes and the anticipation of Pettersson becoming a quality player, along with the pain of the previous 3 seasons, I could see why the owners wanted Benning to accelerate the process.

 

So no, the rebuild was not done properly, but it is not all on Benning. Sure, Benning has made some questionable moves, but which GM hasn't? The owners, along with Linden, have to bear the brunt of the blame for the overall lack of direction.

 

 

I agree, on the last paragraph: that ultimately, Aquaman has only himself to blame and spending to the cap every year doesn't absolved him from the current disaster cause it is him who chose this leadership group and JB is only doing what he is allowed to do.  

[48MPHSlapShot]

Whether or not Linden is partially to blame is irrelevant now. He's gone. Aqua should be taking more of the blame though. He's the one that pushed for a "rebuild on the fly". He's the one cheaping out on management and coaches. He's the one that handcuffed Gillis in his final year.

[shiznak]

There was no point in starting a rebuild with the Sedins in our lineup. They were going to play out their careers in Vancouver. So the team had no choice but to try and compete with them on our team, despite their skills declining.

Edited November 15, 2021 by shiznak

[ShawnAntoski]

7 minutes ago, shiznak said:

There was no point in starting a rebuild with the Sedins in our lineup. They were going to play out their careers in Vancouver. So the team had no choice but to try and compete with them on our team, despite their skills declining.

Yeah, trading the Sedins' would had caused a riot in this city; and Trevor did it to save the city.

[shiznak]

3 minutes ago, ShawnAntoski said:

Yeah, trading the Sedins' would had caused a riot in this city; and Trevor did it to save the city.

Not only that, but no team was willing to take on 14M in cap space for two aging players. 
 

So, Trevor was right that the correct time was to rebuild after they had retire. 

[dougieL]

18 minutes ago, shiznak said:

There was no point in starting a rebuild with the Sedins in our lineup. They were going to play out their careers in Vancouver. So the team had no choice but to try and compete with them on our team, despite their skills declining.

The team could have chosen to rebuild around them and not gone after players like Erickson and Gudbranson, or trade picks for players like Dorsett and Very. They didn't have to try to compete. 

[dougieL]

12 minutes ago, ShawnAntoski said:

Yeah, trading the Sedins' would had caused a riot in this city; and Trevor did it to save the city.

I'm not suggesting that we should have traded the Sedins. However, we didn't have to trade picks for players in order to try to build a competitive team around them. We could have kept them and still rebuilt by trading away players for picks, or at least not trading picks for players.

[shiznak]

9 minutes ago, dougieL said:

The team could have chosen to rebuild around them and not gone after players like Erickson and Gudbranson, or trade picks for players like Dorsett and Very. They didn't have to try to compete. 

They did built around them.
 

Doofus was a free asset that only cost us cap. No one knew he was going to be that bad, coming off a 30 goal year. Gudbranson was also coming off a stellar playoff, and was 24yrs old. He would  probably be apart of this core, if he played like he did in Florida.

Dorsett was traded for a 3rd rounder that never amounted to anything. Vey was a 22yrs old  rookie who did extremely well in the minors. Bärtschi was also looked promising, until he got concussion issues that derailed his career. 
 

Like I said, rebuilding with the Sedins would have been pointless. It’s like how Detroit tried to rebuild with Zetterberg.

[Nuxfanabroad]

1 hour ago, dougieL said:

I have heard (not necessarily here) people say that we haven't rebuilt properly or that it's been 8 years of mediocrity under the Benning regime.

 

People are forgetting that for the 2014-15 to 2017-18 seasons, Linden said publicly that it would be unfair to the Sedins to rebuild (the articles can be easily found on Google). In these seasons, we signed Erickson, traded for Gudbranson, traded picks for players, and traded for and re-signed Sutter, among other moves.

 

Only AFTER the Sedins retired did Linden start pushing the proper rebuild. First off, the hypocrisy of this pivot is stunning and not acknowledged enough. Him quitting over the owners not buying into this vision is ludicrous considering his refusal to rebuild while the Sedins were clearly done (combined 14m cap hit, neither exceeded 60pts in any of the last 3 seasons of their career).

 

Second, it is difficult to imagine that the Canucks fan base would have the patience for a full rebuild that would start in the 2018-19 season. If a proper rebuild takes 5 years, this season AND next season might still well be a lottery seasons. We would essentially lose the primes of Demko, Horvat, and part of Boeser's, if they even remained with us through this hypothetical rebuild. 

 

With the drafting of Hughes and the anticipation of Pettersson becoming a quality player, along with the pain of the previous 3 seasons, I could see why the owners wanted Benning to accelerate the process.

 

So no, the rebuild was not done properly, but it is not all on Benning. Sure, Benning has made some questionable moves, but which GM hasn't? The owners, along with Linden, have to bear the brunt of the blame for the overall lack of direction.

 

 

Pretty much agree with this assessment.

 

Can Green now.

Give JB 'til the end of season, with the understanding that NO FUTURES are spent in deals.

[iinatcc]

1 hour ago, dougieL said:

I have heard (not necessarily here) people say that we haven't rebuilt properly or that it's been 8 years of mediocrity under the Benning regime.

 

People are forgetting that for the 2014-15 to 2017-18 seasons, Linden said publicly that it would be unfair to the Sedins to rebuild (the articles can be easily found on Google). In these seasons, we signed Erickson, traded for Gudbranson, traded picks for players, and traded for and re-signed Sutter, among other moves.

 

Only AFTER the Sedins retired did Linden start pushing the proper rebuild. First off, the hypocrisy of this pivot is stunning and not acknowledged enough. Him quitting over the owners not buying into this vision is ludicrous considering his refusal to rebuild while the Sedins were clearly done (combined 14m cap hit, neither exceeded 60pts in any of the last 3 seasons of their career).

 

Yes you do have a point, but at the same time, I am looking how teams like Boston, Anaheim, and San Jose (this year) have bounced back while still having their older core in the lineup. Boston had a spell from 2014 to 2016 years when they were in a decline but bounced back due to good decision making by the management. And same goes for the California team now it seems those team still had their older core players and were quite bad the last 2 seaons but retooled their team that they are in the playoff picture again.

 

I don't have a comparison worksheet exactly what Benning did differently with those teams but it's clear the results rom the other teams, despite being in a similar situation, are getting better results

 

 

  

1 hour ago, dougieL said:

Second, it is difficult to imagine that the Canucks fan base would have the patience for a full rebuild that would start in the 2018-19 season. If a proper rebuild takes 5 years, this season AND next season might still well be a lottery seasons. We would essentially lose the primes of Demko, Horvat, and part of Boeser's, if they even remained with us through this hypothetical rebuild. 

 

That is possible but 8 years later and here is where the team is now. There are no shortcuts to a rebuild or even a retool and the hypotheticals you mentioned sadly is what is happening now. So management put themselves into a situation that they should have known would have made things worse down the line.

 

1 hour ago, dougieL said:

So no, the rebuild was not done properly, but it is not all on Benning. Sure, Benning has made some questionable moves, but which GM hasn't? The owners, along with Linden, have to bear the brunt of the blame for the overall lack of direction.

This is a point that keeps brining up here and yes GM's make mistakes but the difference with other GM's and Benning is that other teams are able to recover from those mistakes or have done something right elsewhere to minimize the impact of their mistakes. 

 

In Benning's tenure he's overpaid for UFA's, traded away young prospects for almost nothing, traded away picks for "intangible" players, didn't resign core pieces last season etc. 

 

The only thing Benning did well is drafting but it's not good enough to make up for his other bad moves especially since he likes to give away draft picks like candy.

 

 

[dougieL]

38 minutes ago, shiznak said:

They did built around them.
 

Doofus was a free asset that only cost us cap. No one knew he was going to be that bad, coming off a 30 goal year. Gudbranson was also coming off a stellar playoff, and was 24yrs old. He would  probably be apart of this core, if he played like he did in Florida.

Dorsett was traded for a 3rd rounder that never amounted to anything. Vey was a 22yrs old  rookie who did extremely well in the minors. Bärtschi was also looked promising, until he got concussion issues that derailed his career. 
 

Like I said, rebuilding with the Sedins would have been pointless. It’s like how Detroit tried to rebuild with Zetterberg.

I think you're missing my point. We should have *rebuilt before* they retired. Keep them, but don't go after high priced free agents, don't trade away picks for players (you say the third amounted to nothing but who is to say we wouldn't have picked another player), and instead trade away players that still had value for picks.

 

Instead, Linden (and maybe ownership) wanted to respect the Sedins by trying to surround them with good players, even though by then they had become clearly ineffective. There was no way we could win under that salary cap when 14m were spent on players producing as little as the Sedins.

 

[shiznak]

27 minutes ago, dougieL said:

I think you're missing my point. We should have *rebuilt before* they retired. Keep them, but don't go after high priced free agents, don't trade away picks for players (you say the third amounted to nothing but who is to say we wouldn't have picked another player), and instead trade away players that still had value for picks.

 

Instead, Linden (and maybe ownership) wanted to respect the Sedins by trying to surround them with good players, even though by then they had become clearly ineffective. There was no way we could win under that salary cap when 14m were spent on players producing as little as the Sedins.

 

And I’m saying they kind of diid rebuild during the tail end of the Sedin era. They traded away Kesler, Bieksa, Burrows, Hansen, and got a lot younger.

 

Bärtschi - 22 yrs old

Vey - 22 yrs old

Etem - 23 yrs old

Sbisa - 25 yrs old

Granlund - 22 yrs old

Gudbrandson - 24 yrs old

Goldobin - 20 yrs old

Stecher - 22 yrs old

Pouliot - 23 yrs old

Leipsic - 23 yrs old

Burmistrov - 25 yrs old

 

All these players under 25; Benning acquired that were suppose to be the next wave of our core players. 

 

[iinatcc]

8 minutes ago, shiznak said:

And I’m saying they kind of diid rebuild during the tail end of the Sedin era. They traded away Kesler, Bieksa, Burrows, Hansen, and got a lot younger.

 

Bärtschi - 22 yrs old

Vey - 22 yrs old

Etem - 23 yrs old

Sbisa - 25 yrs old

Granlund - 22 yrs old

Gudbrandson - 24 yrs old

Goldobin - 20 yrs old

Stecher - 22 yrs old

Pouliot - 23 yrs old

Leipsic - 23 yrs old

Burmistrov - 25 yrs old

 

All these players under 25; Benning acquired that were suppose to be the next wave of our core players. 

 

most of these were reclamation projects or players teams gave up on. Younger is one thing but I don't think anyone were looking at this players and thinking blockbuster 

 

[vannuck59]

I think we should take JBs copy of Money Ball away from him.

JB would not know a good defensemen from a bad one, his failure to draft a top four de-man is very telling.

[vannuck59]

I say put Stan Smyl interim GM running the show and Shaw as coach. fire everyone . Stan bleeds Vancouver colors . Hire the Hunters as your next GM and coach take FAs door pass   away.

[shiznak]

14 minutes ago, iinatcc said:

most of these were reclamation projects or players teams gave up on. Younger is one thing but I don't think anyone were looking at this players and thinking blockbuster 

 

Look what Burakovsky is doing in Colorado. Adam Fox in New York. William Karlsson in Las Vegas. Marty St.Louis in Tampa.

[dougieL]

46 minutes ago, shiznak said:

And I’m saying they kind of diid rebuild during the tail end of the Sedin era. They traded away Kesler, Bieksa, Burrows, Hansen, and got a lot younger.

 

Bärtschi - 22 yrs old

Vey - 22 yrs old

Etem - 23 yrs old

Sbisa - 25 yrs old

Granlund - 22 yrs old

Gudbrandson - 24 yrs old

Goldobin - 20 yrs old

Stecher - 22 yrs old

Pouliot - 23 yrs old

Leipsic - 23 yrs old

Burmistrov - 25 yrs old

 

All these players under 25; Benning acquired that were suppose to be the next wave of our core players. 

 

These players are "young-ish" but you have to consider who we traded for them. We traded picks for Baertschi and Vey. We traded Jensen (22) and a 6th round pick for Etem. To get Granlund we traded Shinkaruk (2 years younger). We traded McCann and a pick for Gudbranson. We traded Pedan and a pick for Pouliot. We traded a pick for Dorsett.

 

Yes we moved out Burrows, Hansen, and Bieksa for younger players, but the plan at the time was to trade young players and picks for older players to fill the 22-25 year old gap so we could compete. We got older on average, not younger, through these moves.

Edited November 15, 2021 by dougieL
Grammar

[Drakrami]

8 years of Benning is 8 years under Benning management. He had 8 years to make this team great. And as of today, our team is sucking like never before. I dont know why/how you are trying to twist and turn reality lol... You should call Trump up and work out that magic, somehow his 4 year term is shouldn't be 4 years because there was COVID, and his term should be extended for another 8-10 years. 

Edited November 15, 2021 by Drakrami

[iinatcc]

47 minutes ago, shiznak said:

Look what Burakovsky is doing in Colorado. Adam Fox in New York. William Karlsson in Las Vegas. Marty St.Louis in Tampa.

And no players like that landed on Benning. And to be fair Adam Fox's situation is entirely different. 

Maybe evaluating talent teams gave up on isn't Benning's strong suit? 

Though he did get Dahlen and gave up on him himself