If Not For 1 Fatal Mistake Jim Benning May Still Be Our GM

[Industrious1]

His record after 8 seasons at the helm is...not good.

 

That alone is worth the firing, owner wouldn't even have to get into the details.

 

Natural part of hockey.  

[Wanless]

I think he will get another job

 

his biggest flaw was his trust in green

[MaxVerstappen33]

35 minutes ago, Wanless said:

I think he will get another job

 

his biggest flaw was his trust in green

If yesterday wasn't a one off , i think he will easily get another job. 

 

 

[spook007]

Guess we'll see now with Boudreau coaching the team, how good the team is or if Benning team building really is as bad as some suggest.

On paper it looked like a great team, except for a Defensive D-man and some toughness...

 

Yesterday was one game only, but a refreshing one....

 

Be interesting to see, how much needs the team needs to be changed to become a playoffs team.

[Alienhuggyflow]

23 hours ago, Chris12345 said:

I think he made a lot of mistakes but hindsight is easy.....PK for one was amateur hour.

The thing is every GM makes mistakes but at the end of the day I think he left the team in a position that the next GM will have a much easier  job than what Benning had.

 

That being said firing him Sadly was 100% the right move but not for his moves player wise but for not getting rid of his coaches.

 

I was hoping TG wasn't the issue but it's pretty obvious he was.

Finding out that TG basically ignored Shaw and let Baumer run the D and the pk is unforgivable,  his constant blending and refusal to change the pk personal when after literally a morning skate our D and PK looked completely different cemented to how wrong and nieve I was about him.

 

Myers, Poolman, looked better then any point as nucks and seeing Petey, Horvat and Podz on the pk had me thinking like why was this not tried by him when we literally have the worst pk after 25 games in 50+ years.

 

Benning brought in a core I truly believe in but if a new coach can come in and see things that he or the coach he backed couldn't after 1 day that's unexcusable to me.

 

Who ever the next GM is I hope it's someone who has experience getting the missing pieces to be cup contenders opposed to someone who is better suited for a team rebuilding. 

 

[Chris12345]

56 minutes ago, Alienhuggyflow said:

The thing is every GM makes mistakes but at the end of the day I think he left the team in a position that the next GM will have a much easier  job than what Benning had.

 

That being said firing him Sadly was 100% the right move but not for his moves player wise but for not getting rid of his coaches.

 

I was hoping TG wasn't the issue but it's pretty obvious he was.

Finding out that TG basically ignored Shaw and let Baumer run the D and the pk is unforgivable,  his constant blending and refusal to change the pk personal when after literally a morning skate our D and PK looked completely different cemented to how wrong and nieve I was about him.

 

Myers, Poolman, looked better then any point as nucks and seeing Petey, Horvat and Podz on the pk had me thinking like why was this not tried by him when we literally have the worst pk after 25 games in 50+ years.

 

Benning brought in a core I truly believe in but if a new coach can come in and see things that he or the coach he backed couldn't after 1 day that's unexcusable to me.

 

Who ever the next GM is I hope it's someone who has experience getting the missing pieces to be cup contenders opposed to someone who is better suited for a team rebuilding. 

 

Yea I wasn't a Benning fan but the scenario reminds me of Burke/Nonis/Gillis

[*Buzzsaw*]

I am of two minds about Benning.

 

I think Benning made some decisions which were excellent, some decisions which were goodbut unfortunately also made some decisions which were horrible.  He also was unfortunate to have some 'bad luck' in that some of the players he picked or groomed were emotionally or physically flawed.

 

His biggest mistake was his inability to pick coaches with the high level skill necessary to elevate teams to contender status.  His two choices for coaches were both AHL level... ok when a team is primarily composed of 18-22 year old players who need to learn the basics, but not with the knowledge and understanding of how to teach complex offensive/defensive systems.

 

Overall I would rate him as a generally excellent judge of high level offensive talent... he showed that with some great drafts and two great trades... one for Miller and one for Garland/OEL.  He was not as good a judge of defensive talent.

 

Drafting:

 

Excellent:

 

Boeser

Pettersson

Hughes

Hoglander

Podkolzin

Tryamkin

 

Trades

 

Excellent

 

Miller

OEL/Garland

 

Both of the above trades cost a 1st rounder, but have since proven to be worthwhile.  (jury still theoretically out on OEL/Garland as we are only 20 games in, but at this point looks like they will be a good investment.

 

Where he failed was in his judgement of the mid level players who are needed to make up the 3rd and 4th lines or the 5/6 D positions.

He spent a huge number of 2nd, 3rd etc. round picks on players who simply were not worth it.  I won't list all the players, you can see them if you look back at the rosters for the last 8 years.  He also made some free agent signings which were not worthwhile.  Louie being the most obvious.

 

Crucially he also showed an inability to focuse on keeping or acquiring quality D-Men.  Any Stanley Cup contender has to have as its basis, three essential elements...  1) Elite Goaltending, 2)  A strong defense group which can control the team's D-Zone, and finally and least important, 3) a potent offensive lineup.  Benning neglected the essential 2).  When he did spend draft picks on D-men, he either picked offensively minded defensemen like Hughes, or physically flawed players liked Juolevi.  He compounded the error of not focusing on D by allowing some of his roster to leave or failing to sign them.  Examples would be Tanev, Edler and Tryamkin.  Tanev now looks like a bargain, Edler clearly had one more year in him at a similar price than Poolman.  Both Edler and Tanev were critical parts of the team's leadership group and were missed not only for their play but also their locker room presence.  Tryamkin is the great might have been... someone who could quite possibly could have been a dominant player in the league but who was alienated by a poor coach, (Desjardin was ultimately Benning's responsibility) and an unwillingness by Benning to spend the money to sign him.

 

Benning was unlucky enough to lose players to 'bad luck', for example the injuries/Covid victims, Juolevi/Ferland and Sutter.  But even so, these players had question marks about their physical health early on... maybe it should have been obvious to Benning they were not going to pan out.  Virtanen could also be considered 'bad luck'.... he had a great season and looked to be rounding into a quality player.... but then his character flaws came to the fore and his career went up in smoke.  Again, maybe it should have been obvious to both Green and Benning that this kid was not exactly 'on'... and maybe they needed to trade him for someone else who was more grounded.  If you look at all these examples separately then maybe you can make excuses for Benning... but if you look at them as a pattern... then maybe you think there is some flawed judgement on the part of Benning... or maybe the Canucks' medical staff is not competent?  I really wonder about Ferland... the guy had a clear history of concussions... yet he was signed... even though he had not yet recovered from his last injury.

 

There is also the fact Benning didn't seem to get value for free agents who he spent picks or trades on but whom he didn't plan to re-sign.  Specifically I think it should have been obvious to Benning that with the Expansion Draft, he would need to trade one of either Demko or Markstrom.  At that point both were top tier goaltenders and either would have taken care of the team's needs for at least 5 years.  Benning needed to make a decision early and trade one or the other for assets.  He did nothing and Markstrom walked for nothing.  Same applies to Toffoli... why sign a player like him for a hefty price, (two players and two picks) if you were not going to re-sign him?  It wasn't like the Canucks were a contender who only needed one more piece to go to the finals.  After all that expense, Benning again got nothing and flushed two picks and two players down the drain.  Same applies to Tanev... if he was not going to re-sign him, he should have traded him at the deadline for a pick or prospects.

 

There is no question the biggest error Benning made was extending Green's contract.  It had become obvious in the second half of 2020, that the Lockdown playoffs were a blip, and Green really did not have skills to take the team to the next level.  Despite that, Benning chose to reinforce failure and extend Green.  I think Benning would still be GM if he had let Green go and signed a veteran coach as a replacement. 

 

I also think Green was Benning's fatal flaw in that JB saw the roster through the lense of Green.  That is true of any NHL GM... they have to trust their Coach to tell them who on the team is playing well and who has potential.  Green's judgement was flawed, so that meant Benning got a skewed perspective on the real value of the individual players.  This affected who he re-signed and who he let go.

 

Green also hugely affected the development of the players... (actually the non-development)  so we saw players like Boeser/Pettersson/Horvat actually regress under Green's tutelage.  I believe Green's selection as coach was the core of the failure of this team and management.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 8, 2021 by *Buzzsaw*

[aznmonk]

On 12/6/2021 at 4:25 PM, fanfor42 said:

His terrible offseason after the bubble was the beginning of the end. Gutted the team just when they were on the rise.  Then needlessly rehiring Green after a terrible covid season was the last straw.

 

C'est fini mon ami.

 

 

yeah lost by one goal is or was good for the owners! if green kept going at that rate he would never been fired.  because owner saw a 1 goal lost not blow outs. its all because of our goalie that keeps us in it. with 50 shots per night  

[DSVII]

There's more than one 'fatal' error Benning committed tbh.  But if we were to choose one that permeated in the background. It's not hitching his horses to Green, but to Weisbrod.

 

Isolated him from the rest of the organization, played power politics with the staff and drove the disfunction and inconsistent internal communication that eventually grew toxic. Forcing some quality people to leave (Brackett, Schmidt)

Edited December 8, 2021 by DSVII

[DefCon1]

On 12/6/2021 at 12:50 PM, Chris12345 said:

I think he made a lot of mistakes but hindsight is easy.....PK for one was amateur hour.

I could have told you they made a bad pick hiring and then exte ding Baumgartner even with no hindsight. The guy had no idea about NHL defense even during his playing days and I bet he coached our defense the way he played the game.

[wallstreetamigo]

6 hours ago, DSVII said:

There's more than one 'fatal' error Benning committed tbh.  But if we were to choose one that permeated in the background. It's not hitching his horses to Green, but to Weisbrod.

 

Isolated him from the rest of the organization, played power politics with the staff and drove the disfunction and inconsistent internal communication that eventually grew toxic. Forcing some quality people to leave (Brackett, Schmidt)

Exactly.

 

Weisbrod has been a power hungry cancer everywhere he has been. Was even happier about him being fired than Benning or Green. At least they are decent people. He is a snake.

[wallstreetamigo]

What I am surprised about is that Weisbrod didn’t manage to be the last man standing after submarining Benning. I am certainly happy about that.