Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[PGT] Los Angeles Kings at Vancouver Canucks | Dec. 06, 2021

Rate this topic


-Vintage Canuck-

Recommended Posts

Just now, wesley said:

So it was all Green's fault. Then why did they fire Benning? He built a great team, no?::D

Tbh I thought Benning did a reasonable job with the roster he iced this year. 
I was pretty impressed with how he managed to dump our worst contracts and bring in 2 extremely good players.. Giving up our 1st seemed like underpayment for that. 

Ultimately ownership doesnt know for sure whether it's coaching or the roster construction.. New personnel all around was needed for the fresh start. 

I wouldn't be surprised though if the Canucks go on a pretty great run the rest of the season. 

  • Cheers 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Devron44 said:

You need to get there first how about. Usually you get knocked out a couple times to even get a sniff of the SCF with the same core 

Ya that happens when you build a contender… and it brings in revenue along the way.
 

When your so focused on just building a playoff bound team or trying to make playoffs to save your job the opposite happens. (See Vancouver canucks playoff history since 2014)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ABNucksfan said:

Ya that happens when you build a contender… and it brings in revenue along the way.
 

When your so focused on just building a playoff bound team or trying to make playoffs to save your job the opposite happens. (See Vancouver canucks playoff history since 2014)

I’m fully aware of our history. It doesn’t change my opinion of Markstrom or that year. What you are referring to should have been started long before Markstrom. It wasn’t in the cards with the Sedins and Ownership. The re-tool era was a kick in the nuts but what was done is done. Happy the Sedins retired Canucks and happy to move forward from here on too 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Keeping Toffoli and Tanev isn’t hindsight. It was obviously a huge mistake letting them go at the time. 
 

Every team has moves they would like to take back. The key is not having a half dozen of them on your roster at premium dollars at any one time. Every GM makes mistakes. But the path to my potential lineup really isn’t that hard to realistically see. Just too much wasted cap to make it a reality.

Yeah but the best trade-offs available at the time weren't immediately obvious. JV was a young 1st round pick that had been on pace for 20+ goals the year prior. It would have been difficult to not qualify him. 

He definitely made his bed with the bad contracts he had - LE & company, but he was pretty hamstrung during those offseasons. He was going to have to let some people go, just unfortunate it was Tanev and Toffoli. 

Remember too that Tanev got injured a lot (probably the way he was being deployed) so that had to factor in - commit 4m+/year when he was only giving us an average of 2/3 of the season? Hard to justify that. 

  • Cheers 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, ABNucksfan said:

Oh ya thanks for the reminder, another reason to trade Markstrom when his value was high. Demko was protected anyway. 

Of course he was protected.  We didn't have to protect Markstrom (which we would've automatically since he wanted a NMC).  Only time to trade Markstrom was right before the UFA period.  Unfortunately it was Edmonton/Calgary that probably asked, and the Canucks probably didn't want to trade him to a divisional rival.  Too bad he signed with one anyways.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, eeeeergh said:

Yeah but the best trade-offs available at the time weren't immediately obvious. JV was a young 1st round pick that had been on pace for 20+ goals the year prior. It would have been difficult to not qualify him. 

He definitely made his bed with the bad contracts he had - LE & company, but he was pretty hamstrung during those offseasons. He was going to have to let some people go, just unfortunate it was Tanev and Toffoli. 

Remember too that Tanev got injured a lot (probably the way he was being deployed) so that had to factor in - commit 4m+/year when he was only giving us an average of 2/3 of the season? Hard to justify that. 

Kinda too bad van was set on drafting Virtanen. When he played in Calgary he had a bad reputation here. And was known to be arrogant and cocky. Treated most people around him like they were nothing and he was the best. Serves him right playing in Russia now.  (Thorough background checks would have hopefully caught this)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

In regards to Toffoli, Benning's mistake was trading for him in the first place.

What did that turn into anyway. Who was the pick? Not sure Madden makes the bigs but I never did look into the pick 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

Ok...who's for the goal song to be:

 

"Bruce, there it is!"

 

 

LMFAO.   That's awesome.  

 

I didn't watch tonight's game as I was contemplating hanging up my fandom for awhile, but that chant right there may have sold me on sticking around. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, shazzam said:

Dang Benning, you put together a good team

He sure shazzam........he sure did.   Lord knows where this team would be if Boudreau had started off coaching this team this season......or even last season for that matter when we had Nate Schmidt.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, eeeeergh said:

Yeah but the best trade-offs available at the time weren't immediately obvious. JV was a young 1st round pick that had been on pace for 20+ goals the year prior. It would have been difficult to not qualify him. 

He definitely made his bed with the bad contracts he had - LE & company, but he was pretty hamstrung during those offseasons. He was going to have to let some people go, just unfortunate it was Tanev and Toffoli. 

Remember too that Tanev got injured a lot (probably the way he was being deployed) so that had to factor in - commit 4m+/year when he was only giving us an average of 2/3 of the season? Hard to justify that. 

The Virtanen situation was a perfect case in point that Benning had lost his objectivity because he drafted Virtanen. His weaknesses and character flaws were or should have been evident at that point to any GM willing to see them.
 

If Virtanen was seen by Benning as how you describe then they didn’t have to not qualify him. They could have traded him for a good return. That they couldn’t says everything we need to know about that loss of objectivity. 
 

Edit: And this is not meant to slag on Benning. It happens to a lot of GM’s that they get too attached to players or to the need to be proven right for drafting them. That’s why a new GM and set of eyes is sometimes necessary.

Edited by wallstreetamigo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...