Scott Mellanby generating buzz as potential Canucks GM candidate

[hammertime]

 

28 minutes ago, VforVasili said:

I find this obsession with bringing in a GM and coach with loads of experience pretty funny. Just sat at a game with a bunch of Sens fans all bemoaning the fact that they kept bringing in old men with stale ideas and what they really needed was someone with a new approach. 

 

 

This^^^^ 

 

I don't want tired old hacks who were relevant 20 years ago. 

 

 

 

 

[Mike Vanderhoek]

10 minutes ago, ilduce39 said:

I find it funny that a lot of the people who complained ad nauseam about Benning are now shifting their ire to ownership on the eve of his dismissal. 
 

Do they enjoy the whinging? Or is it just fear of being let down if they get their hopes up?  Is it an intentional shift - is there a level of self awareness here - or is it a subconscious survival instinct to preserve the negative narrative?  
 

It’s really fascinating - since you’d have to assume they know there’s no ousting a literal billionaire who owns the team.  The shift in narrative sets them up for a lifetime of complaining. 
 

I think a lot of fans vicariously pretend they’re part of ownership for the team and play with the idea of firing / hiring people who align with their views on the team. Often enough, you’ll at least get to see the people you don’t agree with fired… that’s pro sports. But “we need to get rid of ownership” ?  We are nowhere near that ever happening.

This mindset which for whatever reason is gaining steam is absolutely insane. People need to realize the pockets it takes to have an NHL club, let alone spend to the cap each year. Fans suggesting sell the team or " fire ownership " whatever the heck that means have no club how fortunate as fans we are to have an NHL opportunity here.

 

I remember times when the team was close to moving, ownership was ripped for not being local, and the dreaded " meddling " suggestions like the owner of a professional sports team in any market around the world never gives their two cents or has to be answered to.

[BlakeQuinnAndEggs]

4 minutes ago, Mike Vanderhoek said:

I don't think to be honest you would be hearing a lot of "no's" from potential candidates for a GM and/or coaching position if we are generalizing that known top 10 or so names of people available. As the perception by the fan base is as has been mentioned already shifting to suggesting ownership is a bigger and bigger problem here I personally think that is crap and most potential candidates would be at the least exploring the option of coming to Vancouver.

There would be a lot of "no's " because the nhl circle is small and word travels and everyone and their dog knows the aqualinis meddle. A true hockey mind wants autonomy.

 

Remember that Trevor Linden was head of the PA for a long time as a player, and a lot of his peers from back then are now in front office positions and it was very public how he stepped down suddenly. And I'm sure they all know why. The writing is on the wall it just hasn't been confirmed.

 

I'm on the fire Green and Benning train but the longer this drags on the more I see it clearly that the main problem is ownership.

[combover]

3 minutes ago, Mike Vanderhoek said:

I don't think to be honest you would be hearing a lot of "no's" from potential candidates for a GM and/or coaching position if we are generalizing that known top 10 or so names of people available. As the perception by the fan base is as has been mentioned already shifting to suggesting ownership is a bigger and bigger problem here I personally think that is crap and most potential candidates would be at the least exploring the option of coming to Vancouver.

I disagree 

the top end GMs got their reputation from not being puppets and building teams that actually perform. Why would any put that reputation on the line for an owner that has fired every gm president that spoke a different direction going back to Burke. 
the day Gillis said this team needed to be rebuilt ..fired. Linden we need to rebuild…fired 

Benning we can retool while staying  competitive… still here in fact promoted gm/president.lol. 

just a coincidence I guess that the gm with one of the worst franchise records holds his job so long couldn’t be it’s because he’s a yes man puppet with no self respect. 
 

top gms/presidents won’t risk their careers and reputations and I don’t blame them. 

[DeNiro]

11 minutes ago, Mike Vanderhoek said:

I don't think to be honest you would be hearing a lot of "no's" from potential candidates for a GM and/or coaching position if we are generalizing that known top 10 or so names of people available. As the perception by the fan base is as has been mentioned already shifting to suggesting ownership is a bigger and bigger problem here I personally think that is crap and most potential candidates would be at the least exploring the option of coming to Vancouver.

I disagree.

 

I think it’s widely known that ownership meddles with their GMs. Any good GM wants complete autonomy in their position and I don’t think they’ll get that here.

 

Either way I don’t see us hiring a GM until Montreal does. All the top GMs available would want a job there over Vancouver right now.

[hammertime]

24 minutes ago, ilduce39 said:

I find it funny that a lot of the people who complained ad nauseam about Benning are now shifting their ire to ownership on the eve of his dismissal. 
 

Do they enjoy the whinging? Or is it just fear of being let down if they get their hopes up?  Is it an intentional shift - is there a level of self awareness here - or is it a subconscious survival instinct to preserve the negative narrative?  
 

It’s really fascinating - since you’d have to assume they know there’s no ousting a literal billionaire who owns the team.  The shift in narrative sets them up for a lifetime of complaining. 
 

I think a lot of fans vicariously pretend they’re part of ownership for the team and play with the idea of firing / hiring people who align with their views on the team. Often enough, you’ll at least get to see the people you don’t agree with fired… that’s pro sports. But “we need to get rid of ownership” ?  We are nowhere near that ever happening.

This is one of the major reasons we can't have nice things. The Media in Vancouver preys on the manic fanbase stirring us into a frenzy is so easy to do. Fire everyone and sell the team. Better yet re locate the team because the fan base here doesn't deserve one. 

 

Show a little support damn it. If I was a player there is no way I would sign in Van. Most negative fans in the league. 

[combover]

31 minutes ago, ilduce39 said:

I find it funny that a lot of the people who complained ad nauseam about Benning are now shifting their ire to ownership on the eve of his dismissal. 
 

Do they enjoy the whinging? Or is it just fear of being let down if they get their hopes up?  Is it an intentional shift - is there a level of self awareness here - or is it a subconscious survival instinct to preserve the negative narrative?  
 

It’s really fascinating - since you’d have to assume they know there’s no ousting a literal billionaire who owns the team.  The shift in narrative sets them up for a lifetime of complaining. 
 

I think a lot of fans vicariously pretend they’re part of ownership for the team and play with the idea of firing / hiring people who align with their views on the team. Often enough, you’ll at least get to see the people you don’t agree with fired… that’s pro sports. But “we need to get rid of ownership” ?  We are nowhere near that ever happening.

Most have been saying owners have been part of the problem since they got full control 

Burke even had said it. 
the Benning defenders are getting desperate to find a new excuse to try to berate and belittle those who as it turns out we’re right. 
ownership here is part of the problem it’s not a new sentiment. 

 

Aquallinis would be great owners they are passionate fans and willing to spend if only just took a step back let the professionals do what they get paid to do.
The meddling isn’t a “ narrative”  

the “narrative” is those that have spent 3/4 of a decade defending a failure are now desperate. 

 

[Mike Vanderhoek]

17 minutes ago, combover said:

I disagree 

the top end GMs got their reputation from not being puppets and building teams that actually perform. Why would any put that reputation on the line for an owner that has fired every gm president that spoke a different direction going back to Burke. 
the day Gillis said this team needed to be rebuilt ..fired. Linden we need to rebuild…fired 

Benning we can retool while staying  competitive… still here in fact promoted gm/president.lol. 

just a coincidence I guess that the gm with one of the worst franchise records holds his job so long couldn’t be it’s because he’s a yes man puppet with no self respect. 
 

top gms/presidents won’t risk their careers and reputations and I don’t blame them. 

And you don't think a club that has provided the resources needed for their management and coaching personnel to the level the Canucks have under Aquilini would be an attractive aspect ? The team spends to the cap limit, ownership has shown a propensity to give patience with their management group.

 

As for GMs leaving or any personnel for that matter under differing views well you do want everyone on the same page so unsure how Burke leaving at the end of his era or Gillis being a one dimensional GM publicly stating the team was headed for a stage he was not suited for is an ownership flaw.

 

Nobody suggests ownership is perfect or maybe they are just hitting in at average, but under Aquilini the team hoarded Division Titles, won two Presidents Trophies and nearly won a Stanley Cup. They had a extremely talented GM who was able to surround a core with depth the likes we have never seen before or since, Alain Vigneault was one of those high end coaches who came here and did extremely well.

 

I guess my point is ownership contributed and provided resources needed for the club to have its two most successful periods, while utilizing high end coaches, GMs and hall of fame level players. The snag is on the Benning era in which the team was obviously trying to think outside the box on retooling versus a full rebuild, this required a reset a few years in to Benning's tenure and thus the patience on Benning. 

 

I think as ownership from what it sounds like is looking to make changes again with their management group, it seems to me they will aim for more experience and a winning pedigree which with the core they have in place should fit where they need to move forward. 

[ilduce39]

17 minutes ago, combover said:

Most have been saying owners have been part of the problem since they got full control 

Burke even had said it. 
the Benning defenders are getting desperate to find a new excuse to try to berate and belittle those who as it turns out we’re right. 
ownership here is part of the problem it’s not a new sentiment. 

 

Aquallinis would be great owners they are passionate fans and willing to spend if only just took a step back let the professionals do what they get paid to do.
The meddling isn’t a “ narrative”  

the “narrative” is those that have spent 3/4 of a decade defending a failure are now desperate. 

 

The focus on being “right” or “wrong” is exactly what’s wrong with this part of the fan base.  Sports fandom is a passive indulgence in tribalism.  It’s fun to be optimistic and cheer for players you get to know who represent your city.  
 

In a 32 team league betting that the team won’t win isn’t some big-brain exercise, especially when I didn’t see any of the complainers call: “Pettersson is going to suck and the PK is going to be historically bad” as the reason for the team’s issues.  You can’t just mindlessly bleat negativity and claim victory when you had zero idea about how the team ended up there.  

 

Same with white washing Gillis and Linden as some kinds of saviours when Linden presided over the worst moves of the Benning era and Gillis left the team with what must be a historically barren prospect pool.

 

I buy that FA wanted to do a quick turnaround to prop up the Sedins again… but there was a stretch of 4-5 years where Benning didn’t move any top picks and we sat comfortably at the bottom of the standings. 
 

The recent push (Miller and Garland for 1sts - plus the Toffoli deal) was only after we landed Petey and Hughes and IMO, you add in Bo, Boeser and Demko and I don’t think it’s unreasonable that ownership/management decided to try and kick start around that core. 
 

It’s pretty silly to proclaim “Meddling ownership” and draw a convoluted line to a bad PK and slumping star player.  It’s just as likely the crappy media and social media fans are being a drag on the team.  That’s another major thread for the past 8 years.  

[appleboy]

Do our owners meddle . I think so!  Lets say they are overly interested in day to day hockey operations.

 

Is that a bad thing? I think that would only be in regards to the team direction.  Rebuild kind of stuff.  ( I think they made a choice between what Linden wanted to do and Jim's choice of direction)    It would have been better if Jim and Linden were on the same page. 

 

Do they want to win? Yes!  Are they willing to back it up with their check book. Most of the time, yes.

 

Do they get involved in making trade decisions , draft choices and so on?  I really doubt that. I think the only part of that decision they might make is to OK the financial side of the move.

 

 

[Bathgate]

2 hours ago, Jester13 said:

Agreed. Green et al should be the first to go, imo, as the coaching is the most glaring issue. See how they perform with a new coach for the rest of the year, and if they still perform as poorly, fire Benning and then let the new GM retool and put his stamp on things. FA wanting to keep Green shows he has no idea what he's doing as an owner, as it shows he doesn't know poor coaching when he sees it. This is a glaring red flag, and one of many. 

I believe the problem is personnel. Not having an extra pk defenceman and a right handed center. Signing an unvax player and being unaware of sutter's longtimers status was poor mgmt. Then the debacle of training camp of who they traded/lost on waivers was unacceptable.

 

[lmm]

3 hours ago, MaxVerstappen33 said:

Mellanby has been around a lot of management teams. I'm not against him.

 

Which GM hasn't been an X player though ? Same goes for coaches. They are all x players.

 

Ideally I'd like to go with a non x player for GM. Players making big paychecks their whole life at a young age , probably aren't ideal asset managers. 

 

Latest rumor is that Daniel Brieir is in the running for GM of the Habs. That's dumb. 

just off the top of my head

Scotty Bowman

Stan Bowman

'David Poile

Barry Trotz

Jon Cooper

[MJDDawg]

2 minutes ago, appleboy said:

Do our owners meddle . I think so!  Lets say they are overly interested in day to day hockey operations.

 

Is that a bad thing? I think that would only be in regards to the team direction.  Rebuild kind of stuff.  ( I think they made a choice between what Linden wanted to do and Jim's choice of direction)    It would have been better if Jim and Linden were on the same page. 

 

Do they want to win? Yes!  Are they willing to back it up with their check book. Most of the time, yes.

 

Do they get involved in making trade decisions , draft choices and so on?  I really doubt that. I think the only part of that decision they might make is to OK the financial side of the move.

 

 

While they may not get directly involved in day to day decisions, when a GM feels that it's necessary to make the playoffs the next season in order to keep his job, then that GM is not going to necessarily make the best personnel decisions, especially for the longer term. 

 

It's why Benning kept his job and Linden was turfed. Jimbo told the owner what the owner wanted to hear. And here we are back again where we started. A non-playoff team with no high end prospects on the farm, fewer draft picks and at max salary cap.

 

Mellanby does nothing for me and if anything, because of their prior relationship makes me believe that the owner has no intention of not continuing to meddle and until that changes our team will remain a bottom feeder for a few more years. Especially in light of where our divisional teams are in their cycles of development.

 

I'd prefer someone new who along with a new president will tell the owners during the interview process to take a hike and stay out of the hockey operations as a condition of their taking the job. 

 

I kinda hope that we look to a guy like Chris MacFarland of the Av's to be the GM. If lack of experience is a concern, pair him with an experienced President of Hockey Op's.

[appleboy]

4 minutes ago, MJDDawg said:

While they may not get directly involved in day to day decisions, when a GM feels that it's necessary to make the playoffs the next season in order to keep his job, then that GM is not going to necessarily make the best personnel decisions, especially for the longer term. 

 

It's why Benning kept his job and Linden was turfed. Jimbo told the owner what the owner wanted to hear. And here we are back again where we started. A non-playoff team with no high end prospects on the farm, fewer draft picks and at max salary cap.

 

Mellanby does nothing for me and if anything, because of their prior relationship makes me believe that the owner has no intention of not continuing to meddle and until that changes our team will remain a bottom feeder for a few more years. Especially in light of where our divisional teams are in their cycles of development.

 

I'd prefer someone new who along with a new president will tell the owners during the interview process to take a hike and stay out of the hockey operations as a condition of their taking the job. 

 

I kinda hope that we look to a guy like Chris MacFarland of the Av's to be the GM. If lack of experience is a concern, pair him with an experienced President of Hockey Op's.

They chose the direction and they have had NO interest in a proper rebuild. That means a GM needs to find a way to balance the improvement at the NHL level with continuing to develop players. 

One good thing is that a new GM or president should come in and be given a few years leeway. This team is a lot closer now then when Linden arrived. They should be able to just continue forward. It could be the perfect timing for the new guy.

[lmm]

1 hour ago, ilduce39 said:

I find it funny that a lot of the people who complained ad nauseam about Benning are now shifting their ire to ownership on the eve of his dismissal. 
 

Do they enjoy the whinging? Or is it just fear of being let down if they get their hopes up?  Is it an intentional shift - is there a level of self awareness here - or is it a subconscious survival instinct to preserve the negative narrative?  
 

It’s really fascinating - since you’d have to assume they know there’s no ousting a literal billionaire who owns the team.  The shift in narrative sets them up for a lifetime of complaining. 
 

I think a lot of fans vicariously pretend they’re part of ownership for the team and play with the idea of firing / hiring people who align with their views on the team. Often enough, you’ll at least get to see the people you don’t agree with fired… that’s pro sports. But “we need to get rid of ownership” ?  We are nowhere near that ever happening.

You must know that when talking about Canuck fans there are more than just positive and negative fans.

there are probably as many variations of + fans as - fans and an equal number of swing fans

Above you have probably nailed one type of negative fan.

The ironic fans that amuse me are the ones who yammer on about "Character guys"  - Never want Kane/Kane/Marchand around our group

but accepted Schmidt, and before that they accepted Linden as a figure head. 

There was a lot of talk about Linden coming in to smooth things between Aqua and the fans, and very little about Linden's credentials as a President.

 

But back to those stating they want the owner fired.

I have been down on ownership for a long time, longer than this regime, but I feel it is pointless to continue to go on and on because, like you said, you can't fire ownership.

However, at this point, and I am only speaking for myself here, I think it is valuable to let ownership know that another "Rookie Yesman" will not be acceptable.

Do I expect ownership to be fired? No.

but there is plenty wrong with this club at this time, and it starts with ownership.

Without the noise around ownership, many fans and even the owner might think a coaching change is enough, or maybe the GM. Neither will suffice.

 

Ottawa fans called for a new owner.

They did not get it, but we don't hear much from Melnyk these days and the team is starting, (finally) to look as if it is headed in the right direction

 

There are probably some fans that actually think the owner can be fired.

There are some very naive fans on both side of the pro con ledger

[N4ZZY]

2 hours ago, combover said:

I disagree 

the top end GMs got their reputation from not being puppets and building teams that actually perform. Why would any put that reputation on the line for an owner that has fired every gm president that spoke a different direction going back to Burke. 
the day Gillis said this team needed to be rebuilt ..fired. Linden we need to rebuild…fired 

Benning we can retool while staying  competitive… still here in fact promoted gm/president.lol. 

just a coincidence I guess that the gm with one of the worst franchise records holds his job so long couldn’t be it’s because he’s a yes man puppet with no self respect. 
 

top gms/presidents won’t risk their careers and reputations and I don’t blame them. 

I tend to agree with this. 

 

I think it'll be very difficult for a top president or GM to come here unless they are given autonomy to do their work. Meddle, and they'll quit. Aquilini's reputation precedes them, and it goes back way before Benning was hired here, like you've mentioned. 

 

BUT. 

 

As a fan, I think we hold a lot more power than we realize. Especially season ticket holders. We have a voice, and we need to use it to make it known that ownerships direction sucks balls. We don't just want a playoff team. We want a &^@#ing championship contending team. Those are two very different teams, and you build them differently. One takes a ton of patience and deligence, while the other can afford to take short cuts only to be knocked out in the first round. 

 

The bubble playoffs is what I keep Benning referring to. But if that were a full season, we'd have missed the postseason. 

 

[combover]

9 minutes ago, lmm said:

You must know that when talking about Canuck fans there are more than just positive and negative fans.

there are probably as many variations of + fans as - fans and an equal number of swing fans

Above you have probably nailed one type of negative fan.

The ironic fans that amuse me are the ones who yammer on about "Character guys"  - Never want Kane/Kane/Marchand around our group

but accepted Schmidt, and before that they accepted Linden as a figure head. 

There was a lot of talk about Linden coming in to smooth things between Aqua and the fans, and very little about Linden's credentials as a President.

 

But back to those stating they want the owner fired.

I have been down on ownership for a long time, longer than this regime, but I feel it is pointless to continue to go on and on because, like you said, you can't fire ownership.

However, at this point, and I am only speaking for myself here, I think it is valuable to let ownership know that another "Rookie Yesman" will not be acceptable.

Do I expect ownership to be fired? No.

but there is plenty wrong with this club at this time, and it starts with ownership.

Without the noise around ownership, many fans and even the owner might think a coaching change is enough, or maybe the GM. Neither will suffice.

 

Ottawa fans called for a new owner.

They did not get it, but we don't hear much from Melnyk these days and the team is starting, (finally) to look as if it is headed in the right direction

 

There are probably some fans that actually think the owner can be fired.

There are some very naive fans on both side of the pro con ledger

the difference here is Francesco is running the Canucks he’s got two equal partners. The Aquallinis aren’t the problem Francesco is.

paolo has  been very active in charity side he takes an active roll but you rarely hear of him.

fire Francesco is more accurate than the owners. 
 

if a tried proven Gm president came in it would be a huge step in putting the meddling owners to bed. 
Really the only logical reason Jb hasn’t been fired is the fact he’s never once disagreed with FA. 
 all his predecessors including torts (who owners hired) and past gms presidents spoke to a different direction and team needs they were fired. it’s not a coincidence. 
 

firing Jb to hire a new yes man puppet is pointless Francesco needs to be removed from his position in order for this team to have success. 


 

[Drive-By Body Pierce]

1 hour ago, ilduce39 said:

The focus on being “right” or “wrong” is exactly what’s wrong with this part of the fan base.  Sports fandom is a passive indulgence in tribalism.  It’s fun to be optimistic and cheer for players you get to know who represent your city.  
 

In a 32 team league betting that the team won’t win isn’t some big-brain exercise, especially when I didn’t see any of the complainers call: “Pettersson is going to suck and the PK is going to be historically bad” as the reason for the team’s issues.  You can’t just mindlessly bleat negativity and claim victory when you had zero idea about how the team ended up there.  

 

Same with white washing Gillis and Linden as some kinds of saviours when Linden presided over the worst moves of the Benning era and Gillis left the team with what must be a historically barren prospect pool.

 

I buy that FA wanted to do a quick turnaround to prop up the Sedins again… but there was a stretch of 4-5 years where Benning didn’t move any top picks and we sat comfortably at the bottom of the standings. 
 

The recent push (Miller and Garland for 1sts - plus the Toffoli deal) was only after we landed Petey and Hughes and IMO, you add in Bo, Boeser and Demko and I don’t think it’s unreasonable that ownership/management decided to try and kick start around that core. 
 

It’s pretty silly to proclaim “Meddling ownership” and draw a convoluted line to a bad PK and slumping star player.  It’s just as likely the crappy media and social media fans are being a drag on the team.  That’s another major thread for the past 8 years.  

Beautifully said!

[Dazzle]

2 hours ago, DeNiro said:

I disagree.

 

I think it’s widely known that ownership meddles with their GMs. Any good GM wants complete autonomy in their position and I don’t think they’ll get that here.

 

Either way I don’t see us hiring a GM until Montreal does. All the top GMs available would want a job there over Vancouver right now.

That's very silly. Montreal's GM got fired right after making the finals. Job security is far from guaranteed in Montreal. Moreover, one could make the argument that the Canucks are much more stable. They've only had Gillis and Benning from the 2010 period to now. That's pretty significant.

[N4ZZY]

9 minutes ago, combover said:

the difference here is Francesco is running the Canucks he’s got two equal partners. The Aquallinis aren’t the problem Francesco is.

paolo has  been very active in charity side he takes an active roll but you rarely hear of him.

fire Francesco is more accurate than the owners. 
 

if a tried proven Gm president came in it would be a huge step in putting the meddling owners to bed. 
Really the only logical reason Jb hasn’t been fired is the fact he’s never once disagreed with FA. 
 all his predecessors including torts (who owners hired) and past gms presidents spoke to a different direction and team needs they were fired. it’s not a coincidence. 
 

firing Jb to hire a new yes man puppet is pointless Francesco needs to be removed from his position in order for this team to have success. 


 

Yep. I think when you have a line of past presidents, GM’s and even coaches fired for taking a different stance than the one Francesco likes to hear, they're all relieved. That's not good ownership when you fire people that disagree with you. A group of "yes" people in leadership isn't good. It might sound, but that's where good ideas go to die. Disagreements allow for voices to be heard, but also new ideas to come up. It also allows the freedom from other staff to offer their insights, where hiring only yes people don't do that. It's where we are with the Canucks. Jim's a yes man. And look where that's gotten us today. He has a reputation now around the league. A GM with no backbone. Doesn't stand up for himself, and is questionable whether he has a vision for this team, or has he just been riding the vision of the owner? 

 

Making the playoffs and then praying that we go far is not strategic, and lacks foresight, insight, and planning. All things you need to produce a championship calibre team. Benning is not all bad, but man, if he would just have a backbone, I'd have more respect for the man. He seems to just lay down, and have no pushback whatsoever. Really does feel like he's limping his way through his GM career. 

 

Yep. I agree that get any of the other Aquilini brothers, just don't let Francesco run the Canucks, because you know, he's doing a $&!#ty job of that as we've seen. Maybe we need a chant going tonight on national TV.