Patel Bure Posted November 23, 2021 Share Posted November 23, 2021 6 minutes ago, wai_lai416 said: Lol you seriously picking on the 2014 draft where we busted on virtanen and then got rid of McCann? And then comparing it with the 2015 draft where it seems like 2/3 of the picks in the 1st round all turned out to be decent? Busting on a 23rd pick is not even close to busting on a top 10 pick. Let alone busting on multiple that sets the organization back so many years. Wasting multiple years bottom feeding and got absolutely nothing for it Yes Virtanen was a bust but where does Thatcher Demko go in a 2014 redraft? Sometimes, it’s just the way she goes. We aren’t the only team in the league to have made a gaffe with our lottery pick. Calgary and Winnipeg benefitted from our 2014 and 2016 gaffes but look at how they’ve performed at the draft in the years following as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted November 23, 2021 Share Posted November 23, 2021 2 minutes ago, Patel Bure said: Horvat never played in the AHL but his development was protected at the NHL level. He wasn’t simply “gifted” the 2nd line C spot despite an impressive 2015 playoffs. Brandon Sutter was brought in to help take defensive pressure off of Bo so that Bo wouldn’t be over-exerted while he developed. Markstrom was developed in the AHL, but it was Benning’s decision to bring in Ryan Miller so that Markstrom would get more playing time in the A, while also insulating Eddie Lack as the #1. One reason why Tanev was never traded for a 1st in 2016 or 2017 (despite all the pundits screaming for it), was because Tanev’s presence allowed us to maximize the development of Hutton and Stecher while indirectly supporting the development of Markstrom. Player development isn’t just related to who is or isn’t in the AHL. Quinn Hughes also benefitted greatly from Tanev’s presence. Considering my specific point was that the Canucks haven’t developed anyone IN THEIR SYSTEM rather than just drafting guys who were already developed enough to make the NHL right away. And it’s interesting to me that it seems the young impact players on this team are actually regressing development wise right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted November 23, 2021 Share Posted November 23, 2021 Can’t believe there are still people who defend the overpriced garbage players Benning brought in to teach this core how to win. No wonder now that the core has taken over they still don’t know how to win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guntrix Posted November 23, 2021 Share Posted November 23, 2021 1 hour ago, GB5 said: I still say that Benning has had one of the best success rates in the drat of any Canuck GM in history. Maybe that shows hiw futile this team has been at drafting over the years but this regime has been fairly decent. The problem is with asset management. Too many developed players being let go too early to try to gain an older "more developed" player form another team or failing to recognize the potential of the players already in the fold. Has any other regime had as many high draft picks as Benning has? We need to contextualize. For example, it’s ludicrous to compare Benning’s and Gillis’ draft records for the simple reason that Gillis’ top draft picks were mostly late firsts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patel Bure Posted November 23, 2021 Share Posted November 23, 2021 4 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said: Your guess is wrong. I was born in the early 70’s and have been a Canucks fan my whole life. The Benning led Canucks have actually never had a “rebuild”. They had an accidental mini rebuild based on a string of annual retool failures that led to them drafting high. Had even some of Benning’s retool moves worked out anywhere close to how he told us they would, no EP, no Hughes, no Podkolzin, etc. What anti Benning and anti Green people were right about is it would be another year of excuses and blaming outside factors when the team once again didn’t play well. And I don’t consider a play in during a shortened year “making the playoffs”. They were not even in a playoff spot at the time actually and were sliding hard. They were gifted a playoff spot. Had even a handful of more games been played it’s very likely they would not have been in the playoffs. Benning spent to the cap during rebuilding years because he believed all those overpaid players would help the team win. Don’t believe me? Look up what the man himself said every time. “They were gifted a playoff spot” errrr no they weren’t buds. They had to play the Wild in the play-ins and won fair and square. Once they GOT IN to the playoffs, they took out the defending cup champs, and then lost in 7 in the 2nd round. Yes the Canucks were sliding hard prior to the Covid stoppage, but we were also playing much tighter defensively before the covid break and won 2 of our last 3 against two 2nd round calibre teams in NYI and Colorado respectively. Demko was starting to acclimate to the #1 role as well. And you know what? Sometimes you put yourself in a position to be lucky. We won almost every game during that January if I recall correctly and so from a point percentage standpoint, we earned the right to qualify for the play-ins. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted November 23, 2021 Share Posted November 23, 2021 15 minutes ago, Baggins said: Brackett was promoted in 2015. It was the Gillis scouting department wh It was the summer after the Virtanen draft that Benning had a meeting telling them what he wanted them looking for and started making personell changes. Not sure how much of the Virtanen choice was Benning as the Bruins scouts hadn't got together when Benning was hired and they weren't going to be drafting any where near top 10. It wouldn't surprise me if Benning went with our (Gillis') scouts on that first pick. He'd likely have had a bit more more information from Bruin scouts on prospects in the mid to bottom of the first round onwards. But even then the Bruin scouts were still in the field when Benning was hired. It may have even been Aquilini was high on the local boy. I don't think he gets very involved in the actual choices but you never know. I doubt Benning came in and outright ignored the teams scouting department in that particular draft though. Lol let’s blame Gillis for the Virtanen pick. Honestly man, you are better than that. Benning is supposedly a super scout. And coming from Boston. Do you really believe he didn’t take the big power winger to rebuild in the Bruins image? Then shied away from Tkachuk the next year because he thought Virtanen was his Tkachuk? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patel Bure Posted November 23, 2021 Share Posted November 23, 2021 3 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said: And it’s interesting to me that it seems the young impact players on this team are actually regressing development wise right now. And if you accurately predicted that this would happen, then my hats off to you. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted November 23, 2021 Share Posted November 23, 2021 2 minutes ago, Patel Bure said: “They were gifted a playoff spot” errrr no they weren’t buds. They had to play the Wild in the play-ins and won fair and square. Once they GOT IN to the playoffs, they took out the defending cup champs, and then lost in 7 in the 2nd round. Yes the Canucks were sliding hard prior to the Covid stoppage, but we were also playing much tighter defensively before the covid break and won 2 of our last 3 against two 2nd round calibre teams in NYI and Colorado respectively. Demko was starting to acclimate to the #1 role as well. And you know what? Sometimes you put yourself in a position to be lucky. We won almost every game during that January if I recall correctly and so from a point percentage standpoint, we earned the right to qualify for the play-ins. At least you admit that playoff berth was luck not a playoff worthy team built by Benning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted November 23, 2021 Share Posted November 23, 2021 18 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said: Goalies are the only players this organization has developed. And that seems to be mostly Ian Clark related. Horvat never played in the AHL and was not developed in the Canucks system. He was never developed in the AHL because he was already good enough to be an NHL player at age 20. Same with Pettersson, Hughes, Höglander, Podkolzin, Boeser. Theses players never needed any development in the AHL. Demko and Markstrom were developed in the AHL because very few goalies can play in the NHL at age 20. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted November 23, 2021 Share Posted November 23, 2021 1 minute ago, Patel Bure said: And if you accurately predicted that this would happen, then my hats off to you. I actually figured EP would struggle tbh. He is not a dump and chase type player so a lot of his struggles are directly related to how Green wants the team to play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted November 23, 2021 Share Posted November 23, 2021 Just now, Elias Pettersson said: He was never developed in the AHL because he was already good enough to be an NHL player at age 20. Same with Pettersson, Hughes, Höglander, Podkolzin, Boeser. Theses players never needed any development in the AHL. Demko and Markstrom were developed in the AHL because very few goalies can play in the NHL at age 20. Exactly my point. The Canucks don’t know how to develop players that aren’t already nhl ready. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patel Bure Posted November 23, 2021 Share Posted November 23, 2021 4 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said: I actually figured EP would struggle tbh. He is not a dump and chase type player so a lot of his struggles are directly related to how Green wants the team to play. So, is this Benning’s fault? Seems to me like Benning’s only fault here is that he is too loyal to Green. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted November 23, 2021 Share Posted November 23, 2021 2 minutes ago, Patel Bure said: So, is this Benning’s fault? Seems to me like Benning’s only fault here is that he is too loyal to Green. Considering the impact that loyalty is having on several players, yes it’s Benning’s fault. He is allowing it to continue when he is the only one who has the power to change it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patel Bure Posted November 23, 2021 Share Posted November 23, 2021 7 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said: At least you admit that playoff berth was luck not a playoff worthy team built by Benning. That’s not what I said. What I said was that sometimes in life, you put yourself in a position to be lucky. If the Canucks hadn’t completely dominated their January, maybe we wouldn’t have qualified for the play-ins based on points percentage. Also - I don’t see how you can say that we were not playoff worthy. We qualified by defeating Minnesota, followed by winning our 1st round match up and then pushing Vegas to a 7 game series in our 2nd round. Technically speaking, our 2020 playoffs was tied for 4th overall best season in terms of performance (tied with 2003). Only 1982, 2011, and 1994 were more impressive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patel Bure Posted November 23, 2021 Share Posted November 23, 2021 Just now, wallstreetamigo said: Considering the impact that loyalty is having on several players, yes it’s Benning’s fault. He is allowing it to continue when he is the only one who has the power to change it. Now this we can agree on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ballisticsports. Posted November 23, 2021 Share Posted November 23, 2021 (edited) Guys there is no denying JB Canucks have had the worse results ever in the history of the team Lets break it down Team Conference Standing 70-74 - from 6th to 1st overall 76-80- 4th to 2nd 84-91- 5th to 1st 97-01- 7th to 2nd 05-06 - 4th-1st 07-08 5th- 1st 13-14 - 5th- 2nd 15-20 - 6th,7,7,5,3,7th PLAYOFF QUALIFYING 70-73- Not qualify 76-77- Not qualify 84 - Not qualify 86,87 - Not qualify 89- Not qualify 96-00- Not qualify 05 - Not qualify 07 - Not qualify 13 - Not qualify 15- Not qualify 16 - Not qualify 17- Not qualify 18 - Not qualify 19 - Had to qualify 20 - Not qualify 21 - Looks like another Not qualify No way just because a GM kept our team down as long as he has to get high draft picks in EVERY single round and had way more chances than everyone (but Quinn as GM) that you can put him as one of the best GM's ! In 50 years the Canucks qualified for Playoffs 27 x, plus one they had to qualify for ThIs futility has never been as bad or as long in the History of the Canucks Edited November 23, 2021 by ba;;isticsports 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewbieCanuckFan Posted November 23, 2021 Share Posted November 23, 2021 16 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said: Exactly my point. The Canucks don’t know how to develop players that aren’t already nhl ready. Excluding goalies. developing goalies has been a strength of the organization since going back to the Nonis days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted November 23, 2021 Share Posted November 23, 2021 8 minutes ago, Patel Bure said: That’s not what I said. What I said was that sometimes in life, you put yourself in a position to be lucky. If the Canucks hadn’t completely dominated their January, maybe we wouldn’t have qualified for the play-ins based on points percentage. Also - I don’t see how you can say that we were not playoff worthy. We qualified by defeating Minnesota, followed by winning our 1st round match up and then pushing Vegas to a 7 game series in our 2nd round. Technically speaking, our 2020 playoffs was tied for 4th overall best season in terms of performance (tied with 2003). Only 1982, 2011, and 1994 were more impressive. Sorry to tell you but there have been many more playoff years that have actually been more impressive IMO. We didn’t “push” Vegas to 7 games. Demko did by himself. In every other way the Canucks were absolutely dominated in that series. The blues played like crap so good on the Canucks for taking advantage. I have seen 1st and 2nd round losses by the Canucks that I would rank as more impressive actually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted November 23, 2021 Share Posted November 23, 2021 3 minutes ago, NewbieCanuckFan said: Excluding goalies. developing goalies has been a strength of the organization since going back to the Nonis days. As I stated. Goalies are a different beast development wise though. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaxVerstappen33 Posted November 23, 2021 Share Posted November 23, 2021 I don't think the infrastructure we have is bad at developing players. I just dont. Other organizations have reputations for damaging players in development. Oilers and Islanders are the most obvious examples. I am 50/50 on Benning. I think it could be a lot worse. We bombed on Joulevi. But we basically made up for it with the defacto #1 over all in Petterson. There was a lot of hype around Cody Glass, the good ol tough Canadian kid. But Benning resisted that urge and picked the Euro instead. And it was the right call. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now