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

[shiznak]

39 minutes ago, dougieL said:

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.

Those picks weren’t going to fill up the roster at that time, and Benning would’ve had to go into the market and pay for players to fill up his roster anyways.  

 

Again, rebuilding with the Sedins on the team, would have been pointless. 

[Patel Bure]

Patel’s autopsy of the Benning and Green regime.

For me, it was that 2020 off-season that ultimately killed us since it must have confused our players.  
 

After signing Myers and Ferland, along with trading a 1st+ to bring in JT Miller, and using Madden+ for trade for Tyler Toffoli, the Canucks finally made the playoffs via the play-ins, took out the defending champs, and came within a game of making the 3rd round.........and then we unceremoniously, let all four of Markstrom, Tanev, Toffoli, and Stecher walk while keeping the lazy and troubled Virtanen on the team.  
 

For me - it was this off season and this off season alone that turned our biggest team strength (team chemistry) into one of our biggest weaknesses.  
 

The Arizona deal needed to happen in 2020 which would have allowed us to move massive cap space in order to sign those aforementioned 4 players.  Yes, we would have had to lose Demko and Podkolzin in the process, but all of our bad contracts would have been moved while allowing us to simultaneously sign those 4 players.

 

To Arizona:  Podkolzin + Demko + Player Name + Sutter + Baertschi + Roussel + Virtanen + Gaudette for OEL, Garland, Kuemper.

 

Miller-Pettersson-Toffoli

Hoglander-Horvat-Boeser

Pearson-####-Garland

Motte-Beagle-MacEwen

 

OEL-Myers

Hughes-Tanev

Edler-Stecher

 

Markstrom

Kuemper

 

Given the Covid situation in 2020, many players were signing “poo poo” one year heavily discounted contracts with the expectation that they’d sign more normalized contracts a year later.  In other words, the Canucks would have likely been able to sign a really good player for pennies on the dollar and either duplicate or build upon their 2020 bubble playoffs.

 

Instead, I believe that the 2020 off season confused our core players of Myers, Miller, Horvat, Pettersson, Hughes, and Boeser.  
 

On top of all this, it looks like Green’s system all along simply wasn’t conducive to maximizing players’ strengths.  Schmidt came here and stunk, Virtanen is now doing extremely well in the KHL, while OEL can’t produce points with us.  Gudbranson seems to have rediscovered his game while Chris Tanev doesn’t seem to be injury prone anymore largely due to Calgary’s superior puck possession game.  Green’s shocking lack of creativity and innovative systems has also sunk this team.

 

Given the way that Benning had tried to rebuild this team since the 2015 playoff loss, it was absolutely imperative that Benning ran with that Markstrom, Tanev, and Stecher  contingent because those were the guys that went through the battles with our core and those were the guys that held the fart down while we transitioned.  
 

Given the way that Benning chose to rebuild this team, losing both Demko and Podkolzin so that we could clear bad contracts AND hold onto those aforementioned four players was absolutely imperative.  Benning needed to pull the trigger on the OEL/Garland deal in 2020 much faster........but didn’t since Benning completely lost the context.  Benning may have made the right moves on paper, but he sold out his core in the process. 

[timberz21]

5 hours 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.

 

 

My question is, was he saying this because he truly believe it and ordered that process, or as the face of the franchise was being a good team player and selling the strategy his hockey OP put up?  I know he was President and technically at the top of the food chain, but he was much more of a PR role than actual hockey OPs role.

[AV.]

Did Jim write this topic?

[hammertime]

2 hours ago, vannuck59 said:

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.

Hughes? and honestly Juolevi looked like a really safe top4 d pick at the time. Injuries happened.

Edited November 15, 2021 by hammertime

[Provost]

The OP is full of assumptions to, and only selectively remembering things to suit their narrative.

 

They did start retooling it immediately, they just had contracts on the books that meant they couldn’t just do scorched earth attempt to tank for years.  
 

Right off the hop Kesler was traded, Garrison was traded.  Benning was allowed to immediately put his stamp on the club and you can go Google many times him saying that they were just a couple years away from being competitive again.
 

Then spent his early years trading away high picks for journeymen and whiffing on top ten draft selections.

 

He kept changing course and giving different messages each year about what type of team and players they needed.  Then getting tunnel vision on certain UFAs and signing them to bad contracts. 
 

Then it was power struggles internally to push out other voices that weren’t him and Weisbrod.  Linden didn’t quit, he got stabbed in the back by Benning who negotiated with the owner to cut Linden out and report directly to him.  Then Benning did the same thing to Brackett when our drafting finally started doing well for the first time in more than a decade.  You can find Benning publicly saying just prior to that whole saga that he promoted Gear so he and Weisbrod could take a bigger role in the day to day management of the scoring department…. You know Brackett’s job that he was doing well.

 

Benning pushed out other voices and decision makers so there isn’t anyone else to blame for the fact the team has continually gotten worse over his tenure.  The only teams doing worse were cap floor teams, so no GM in the league managed less wins per dollar spent than Benning.  No active GM has his tenure and a worse winning record.

 

For years people blamed Gillis, then Linden, then the different coaches… The constant variable is Benning.  It lands on him.  The owner isn’t suggesting all these bad trades and signings.
 

 

[Chris12345]

3 hours 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.

Baer in Las Vegas?

[48MPHSlapShot]

I really do think Benning is just a surrogate for Aquilini, and when Linden decided enough was enough and wanted to go scorched earth, he was chased out.

 

If this is the case, it won't matter who is brought in to replace Benning. The cancer will still remain.

[wallstreetamigo]

3 hours 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. 

 

Any GM who looked at any of those guys as potential core players should have been immediately punted into the core of the sun.

[wallstreetamigo]

31 minutes ago, Provost said:

The OP is full of assumptions to, and only selectively remembering things to suit their narrative.

 

They did start retooling it immediately, they just had contracts on the books that meant they couldn’t just do scorched earth attempt to tank for years.  
 

Right off the hop Kesler was traded, Garrison was traded.  Benning was allowed to immediately put his stamp on the club and you can go Google many times him saying that they were just a couple years away from being competitive again.
 

Then spent his early years trading away high picks for journeymen and whiffing on top ten draft selections.

 

He kept changing course and giving different messages each year about what type of team and players they needed.  Then getting tunnel vision on certain UFAs and signing them to bad contracts. 
 

Then it was power struggles internally to push out other voices that weren’t him and Weisbrod.  Linden didn’t quit, he got stabbed in the back by Benning who negotiated with the owner to cut Linden out and report directly to him.  Then Benning did the same thing to Brackett when our drafting finally started doing well for the first time in more than a decade.  You can find Benning publicly saying just prior to that whole saga that he promoted Gear so he and Weisbrod could take a bigger role in the day to day management of the scoring department…. You know Brackett’s job that he was doing well.

 

Benning pushed out other voices and decision makers so there isn’t anyone else to blame for the fact the team has continually gotten worse over his tenure.  The only teams doing worse were cap floor teams, so no GM in the league managed less wins per dollar spent than Benning.  No active GM has his tenure and a worse winning record.

 

For years people blamed Gillis, then Linden, then the different coaches… The constant variable is Benning.  It lands on him.  The owner isn’t suggesting all these bad trades and signings.
 

 

This

/end thread

[ken kaniff]

1 hour ago, AV. said:

Did Jim write this topic?

I think so. Not sure why people defend him like he’s their family. 8 years and people still make excuses for his awful management

[Warhippy]

I stand by my previous statement.  End of Sept we and much of the hockey world touted our roster as one of the deepest we've seen since 2012 in Vancouver.  We were excited.  Then the season started and we see the EXACT same coaching issues and development problems we've seen since Green started.

 

Same zone entries.

Same defensive lapses

same PP issues.

Same ice time problems for younger and more energetic players

Success and effort are not rewarded

Buying in to a failing system is rewarded

Now the PK is utter garbage as well.

 

Benning has actually done passably well as GM.  His signings and AAV associated to them have gotten far better.  His pro scouting seems to be doing much better as well.  His drafting speaks for itself and ya, after 8 years it's beyond frustrating to see us STILL here but after Linden left it was Benning pure and simple.  Since then we've seen some pretty decent signings, trades and effort put towards the organization and on ice product but.....

 

Same coach

 

If things don't change start bringin in the Hunters slowly as president and assistant GM or something.  Transition Benning in to purely scouting for a few seasons if he is willing and don't let a new GM turf the youth we have

[grandmaster]

I just don’t get why we never traded the Sedins in their final couple years for picks/prospects. These were assets we let whither away. Yes they were Canuck legends but the team was headed in another direction. We had to do this rebuild.

[Josepho]

2 hours ago, shiznak said:

Those picks weren’t going to fill up the roster at that time, and Benning would’ve had to go into the market and pay for players to fill up his roster anyways.  

 

Again, rebuilding with the Sedins on the team, would have been pointless. 

You do not have to pay significantly (in term or AAV) for players to fill up your roster. There are so many counterexamples to this.

 

Also, why would rebuilding with the Sedins have been pointless? Detroit did it with Zetterberg, the Rangers did it with Lundqvist, the Ducks did it with Getzlaf. What's pointless is trading assets and picks for losers like Gudbranson.

[Warhippy]

Just now, Josepho said:

You do not have to pay significantly (in term or AAV) for players to fill up your roster. There are so many counterexamples to this.

 

Also, why would rebuilding with the Sedins have been pointless? Detroit did it with Zetterberg, the Rangers did it with Lundqvist, the Ducks did it with Getzlaf. What's pointless is trading assets and picks for losers like Gudbranson.

This was discussed ad naueseum.

 

What team would take two contracts worth that much for what they would have been requesting?  There is/was zero chance of splitting them up and they are/were a package deal that was almost $15 million or something on the cap.

 

At that time there was 5 teams in the league that would have taken them but their production was already in the tank and they were slow as hell.

[wallstreetamigo]

1 hour ago, AV. said:

Did Jim write this topic?

That’s silly.

 

The OP isn’t rambling, incoherent, off tangent, and reminiscent of a grandpa yelling at the clouds which is Benning’s style.

[Josepho]

Just now, Warhippy said:

This was discussed ad naueseum.

 

What team would take two contracts worth that much for what they would have been requesting?  There is/was zero chance of splitting them up and they are/were a package deal that was almost $15 million or something on the cap.

 

At that time there was 5 teams in the league that would have taken them but their production was already in the tank and they were slow as hell.

I'm not saying we should've traded them, it was pretty obvious that trading them was never realistic. If anything, they would've been the perfect "mentors" instead of garbage like Sutter and Dorsett or whoever. 

 

But it's just a garbage notion that we couldn't have rebuilt with them on the roster, but it was totally fine for us to finish bottom 5 with them on the roster while mortgaging our futures and our cap flexibility.

[NewbieCanuckFan]

6 hours 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. 

If they were trying to compete, they didn’t do a very good job of that.  After season one, they piled up a ton of losses.  A ton.  7 years later, they achieved a better record than Torts just two seasons.  I call that failing at competing.

Edited November 15, 2021 by NewbieCanuckFan

[Provost]

2 hours ago, AV. said:

Did Jim write this topic?

No, he likely used his bag man Weisbrod to do it for him.

[IBatch]

3 hours ago, Drakrami said:

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. 

He made some good points.   It's not nearly as quick as it used it be,  drafting at the very least needs to be above average.    MG drafted Horvat and Hutton for JB to work with, and the last three years of Nonis drafting wasn't good either.   That's 9 freaking years without much of anything coming up the pipe.    I'm actually pleasantly surprised this much was managed.    No it's not enough.   Anyone thinking it would be enough is also not much of a realist when it comes to hockey under the cap. No buying yourself out of problems anymore.      JB vs Bergevin.   I'd keep JB.    Both long tenured GMs at this point.    Holland and all his superpowers wasn't enough to do it in Detroit.   They are on their second rebuild .... i expect we might soon be back to looking forward to the draft more then anything without some sort of miracle.