Benning ~ Not all bad (Discussion)

[wallstreetamigo]

8 minutes ago, iceman64 said:

Sorry had to jump in on this, say Demko wouldn't have done as well? Holts is hardly just a 1B guy, on his game he could have easily stepped in for an entire season, Virtanen was someone we already had invested in and it was only covid that really ended up with us losing Toffi, well the majority of it, but the 5 mil + expected for cap raise before covid hit was the difference and JV had shown a lot better until his lack of maturity caught up with him but either way it's was a gamble that Podz would show up and take a roster spot on a ELC so we should have been sitting a lot better plus another 5 mil or more for the 2nd year which we never got and then getting dinged for Luongo's 3 mil until the end of the this season would have had money for better players at the end of this season even with Bo and Brock needing raises.. 

By the time he got signed to Vancouver, Holtby had seriously struggled for a couple of years on a much stronger team. He was hardly a risk free 1A at that point. As we saw, he wasn’t even a 1B and he kind of sucked in Van which was hardly unexpected. 
 

Regarding Virtanen, have you ever heard the saying don’t throw good money after bad? It’s used regularly in the investment world. It means just because a stock drops in price doesn’t automatically mean it’s a good investment to buy more. It means sometimes you need to cut your losses. Which is exactly what they should have done with Virtanen. 
 

Regarding Toffoli, I don’t buy into the theiry that you shouldn’t keep good players because you might have other players become good. And I struggle finding any actual winning/strong team who takes that approach.

[iceman64]

2 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

By the time he got signed to Vancouver, Holtby had seriously struggled for a couple of years on a much stronger team. He was hardly a risk free 1A at that point. As we saw, he wasn’t even a 1B and he kind of sucked in Van which was hardly unexpected. 
 

Regarding Virtanen, have you ever heard the saying don’t throw good money after bad? It’s used regularly in the investment world. It means just because a stock drops in price doesn’t automatically mean it’s a good investment to buy more. It means sometimes you need to cut your losses. Which is exactly what they should have done with Virtanen. 
 

Regarding Toffoli, I don’t buy into the theiry that you shouldn’t keep good players because you might have other players become good. And I struggle finding any actual winning/strong team who takes that approach.

well first let's use OEL as an example, he struggled before he got here.. but still a top pairing guy.. Holtby same thing as any player and any GM will tell you the exact same thing but they wouldn't have to but JB did that with Demko over Markstrom and it worked out great. You win some, you lose some..

 I agree with your saying you can only do so much before throwing a player away but at the same time, when a player starts to turn the corner you might say alright, one more shot and that's the ONLY reason I'd do the same and I would have. 

 And JB said he would have kept Toffoli if not for the cap remaining flat.. and I'd have let him go too knowing I had two shots at players who would have been signed for cheaper in JV and even cheaper in Podz on ELC.. 

 All he was doing was trying to juggle cap until covid lifted and cap space raising and Roberto off the books.. you can see the logic in it even if you'd have done it a different way, I didn't like everything he did either but it wasn't all as bad as some made it out to be..

[iceman64]

On 12/18/2021 at 12:56 PM, wallstreetamigo said:

So if drafting is such a crapshoot then how can people suggest Benning is better than anyone else? Wouldn’t the argument be he is just luckier than some?

 

Drafting is actually incredibly detailed and in many ways scientific. There are always human factors involved but teams invest a lot of money and time into it. It’s really not a crap shoot.

Actually If that was true, we wouldn't see any top 3 picks become busts, not because of scientific reasons but emotional ones.. and you and I have both seen it in JV, he had all the tools and physicality to become a top tier top 6 player but not in the head which is pretty hard to judge with a 18 year old and for the record, I don't agree JB was some drafting Guru either, I doubt he'd even call himself that and all he'd say is some worked and some didn't... Any GM would say that because it's true. 

[wallstreetamigo]

7 minutes ago, iceman64 said:

well first let's use OEL as an example, he struggled before he got here.. but still a top pairing guy.. Holtby same thing as any player and any GM will tell you the exact same thing but they wouldn't have to but JB did that with Demko over Markstrom and it worked out great. You win some, you lose some..

 I agree with your saying you can only do so much before throwing a player away but at the same time, when a player starts to turn the corner you might say alright, one more shot and that's the ONLY reason I'd do the same and I would have. 

 And JB said he would have kept Toffoli if not for the cap remaining flat.. and I'd have let him go too knowing I had two shots at players who would have been signed for cheaper in JV and even cheaper in Podz on ELC.. 

 All he was doing was trying to juggle cap until covid lifted and cap space raising and Roberto off the books.. you can see the logic in it even if you'd have done it a different way, I didn't like everything he did either but it wasn't all as bad as some made it out to be..

OEL struggled defensively his last 3 or so years in Arizona. Not entirely because the team sucked. He, like Schmidt last year, has been decent defensively but offensively has fallen off a cliff this year. 5 points in 28 games is not exactly top pairing level offense. OEL is a good player but at 7+ mil there needs to be an expectation of more consistent offensive production. 
 

Holtby was not anywhere near a starting quality goalie in Vancouver. 3.67 GAA and .889 sv% is brutal. He was an unnecessary expense that will now cost us cap next year due to being bought out. Benning had no faith in Demko. He just couldn’t manage to keep Markstrom. 
 

Why trade for Toffoli only to let him walk though? Covid didn’t keep him from signing Toffoli. His trying to get OEL and his mammoth contract did. Lost him Tanev too. The cap was there without ridiculous signings like Holtby and Virtanen. Even easier without all the overpriced UFA guys he signed them couldn’t get rid of. 

[wallstreetamigo]

8 minutes ago, iceman64 said:

Actually If that was true, we wouldn't see any top 3 picks become busts, not because of scientific reasons but emotional ones.. and you and I have both seen it in JV, he had all the tools and physicality to become a top tier top 6 player but not in the head which is pretty hard to judge with a 18 year old and for the record, I don't agree JB was some drafting Guru either, I doubt he'd even call himself that and all he'd say is some worked and some didn't... Any GM would say that because it's true. 

Drafting and development are linked. But they are still two sides to the coin. 
 

I know tons of guys who have been drafted and I can tell you the process they go through is insanely complex and detailed. Every possible thing about them physically and mentally is measured and analyzed to the absolute highest extent possible. Teams aren’t throwing darts at a dartboard here. It’s very scientific actually.

 

They are still human beings and many factors both within and outside their control ultimately determine how they develop. 
 

Virtanen was well known to have limited drive and hockey sense when he was drafted. 

Edited December 20, 2021 by wallstreetamigo

[iceman64]

17 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

OEL struggled defensively his last 3 or so years in Arizona. Not entirely because the team sucked. He, like Schmidt last year, has been decent defensively but offensively has fallen off a cliff this year. 5 points in 28 games is not exactly top pairing level offense. OEL is a good player but at 7+ mil there needs to be an expectation of more consistent offensive production. 
 

Holtby was not anywhere near a starting quality goalie in Vancouver. 3.67 GAA and .889 sv% is brutal. He was an unnecessary expense that will now cost us cap next year due to being bought out. Benning had no faith in Demko. He just couldn’t manage to keep Markstrom. 
 

Why trade for Toffoli only to let him walk though? Covid didn’t keep him from signing Toffoli. His trying to get OEL and his mammoth contract did. Lost him Tanev too. The cap was there without ridiculous signings like Holtby and Virtanen. Even easier without all the overpriced UFA guys he signed them couldn’t get rid of. 

excuse me, actually Holtby did ok actually under the circumstances of the D needing major upgrades on 2 aging Dmen who could only be counted on when healthy and were injured a LOT..

 Look no one would have let Toffi walk if they had the extra money to make it happen, I bet JB would have offered him 5 mil, exactly how much the cap should have rose but that AND not knowing what Petey and Hughie were going to be asking and on top of it wanting to go after OEL and Garland (in case JV or Podz didn't work out so can you sort of see the reasoning behind it? 

Plus give it another 2-3 seasons and a top pairing D will be a lot higher than OEL.. that's a given so at least JB had some method in his thinking that gave us a real top pairing D, not just a guy like Hughes who has the potential to be that.. 

[wallstreetamigo]

1 hour ago, iceman64 said:

excuse me, actually Holtby did ok actually under the circumstances of the D needing major upgrades on 2 aging Dmen who could only be counted on when healthy and were injured a LOT..

 Look no one would have let Toffi walk if they had the extra money to make it happen, I bet JB would have offered him 5 mil, exactly how much the cap should have rose but that AND not knowing what Petey and Hughie were going to be asking and on top of it wanting to go after OEL and Garland (in case JV or Podz didn't work out so can you sort of see the reasoning behind it? 

Plus give it another 2-3 seasons and a top pairing D will be a lot higher than OEL.. that's a given so at least JB had some method in his thinking that gave us a real top pairing D, not just a guy like Hughes who has the potential to be that.. 

I laugh when people try to present it that the moves of the last 2 summers were some well constructed, coordinated plan by Benning. Half the moves contradict the other half. Much like Benning’s entire tenure. He got focused on OEL and forgot to even talk to his own pending UFA. What kind of idiot does that?
 

He had the cap to sign Tanev or Toffoli or even both. He CHOSE not to even give them the respect to talk to their agents to see what they might accept. Both those players would be better than OEL at 7 mil for 6 more years and Pearson at 3.25 mil for 3 more years respectively. The extra 2.5 mil or so would have allowed them to upgrade the D too.

 

Holtby was garbage largely because Green’s system relied on goalies having to be lights out just to stay in games. But also because he just wasn’t worth the money they gave him in the first place. A 3.67 gaa and .889 save% is garbage no matter how much you try to sugar coat it. He was 3.11 gaa and .897 save % the previous season on a very strong team. So really it was pretty obvious it was a case of too optimistic an outlook on him by Benning. If it sounds familiar it’s because he did the same thing with pretty much every player he brought in. Had a completely unrealistic view of what they actually were. Instead relying on his best case scenario outlook. 
 

Funny how durable Tanev has been since leaving Van. With the system they played it’s no wonder D got constantly injured.

 

[iceman64]

46 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

I laugh when people try to present it that the moves of the last 2 summers were some well constructed, coordinated plan by Benning. Half the moves contradict the other half. Much like Benning’s entire tenure. He got focused on OEL and forgot to even talk to his own pending UFA. What kind of idiot does that?
 

He had the cap to sign Tanev or Toffoli or even both. He CHOSE not to even give them the respect to talk to their agents to see what they might accept. Both those players would be better than OEL at 7 mil for 6 more years and Pearson at 3.25 mil for 3 more years respectively. The extra 2.5 mil or so would have allowed them to upgrade the D too.

 

Holtby was garbage largely because Green’s system relied on goalies having to be lights out just to stay in games. But also because he just wasn’t worth the money they gave him in the first place. A 3.67 gaa and .889 save% is garbage no matter how much you try to sugar coat it. He was 3.11 gaa and .897 save % the previous season on a very strong team. So really it was pretty obvious it was a case of too optimistic an outlook on him by Benning. If it sounds familiar it’s because he did the same thing with pretty much every player he brought in. Had a completely unrealistic view of what they actually were. Instead relying on his best case scenario outlook. 
 

Funny how durable Tanev has been since leaving Van. With the system they played it’s no wonder D got constantly injured.

 

ok back to square one, Holtby was on par with his teams declining D, not as good as it was, shots against went up but OV and co. matched and bettered shots for so they remained strong like you said BUT when shots against goes up and then the goalies numbers match then obviously it's less his fault and more on the team and on top of that, it's not like he didn't have a cup ring and a vezina under his belt but like you said, and we both agree upon that our D has been taking a beating waiting for an upgrade but seriously as much as I loved Tanev, Edler and Toffoli, all three were a step away from redundant which we still can't afford to this day. Oh and Markstrom too. 

And c'mon, for once in a LONG time of Tanev's career he manages not to have a year without a long layoff due to a injury or 3 has zero to do with style of play, and if you watched his comments on his injuries, a lot he chalked up to simple bad luck but even so he's beat up and has been for some time... taking out 4 years of a risk under those circumstances? not something I'd do. Yeah Jimbo made mistakes but that wasn't one of them... and Podz on his ELC is working out just fine so Toffi didn't need to be signed at all.  

 

Edited December 20, 2021 by iceman64

[IBatch]

3 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

OEL struggled defensively his last 3 or so years in Arizona. Not entirely because the team sucked. He, like Schmidt last year, has been decent defensively but offensively has fallen off a cliff this year. 5 points in 28 games is not exactly top pairing level offense. OEL is a good player but at 7+ mil there needs to be an expectation of more consistent offensive production. 
 

Holtby was not anywhere near a starting quality goalie in Vancouver. 3.67 GAA and .889 sv% is brutal. He was an unnecessary expense that will now cost us cap next year due to being bought out. Benning had no faith in Demko. He just couldn’t manage to keep Markstrom. 
 

Why trade for Toffoli only to let him walk though? Covid didn’t keep him from signing Toffoli. His trying to get OEL and his mammoth contract did. Lost him Tanev too. The cap was there without ridiculous signings like Holtby and Virtanen. Even easier without all the overpriced UFA guys he signed them couldn’t get rid of. 

The OEL thing absolutely mucked things up for him big time first time through.   A valuable week lost ... Demko was too steep a price.   Aside from that we have no idea what else that deal was.    That said, he made up for it and some last summer.   Garland alone beats the odds of a 9th overall and then some.   Retention on OEL .. and what it's meant for QHs this year are real factors as well.   Chychrun...how's he managing this year without OEL helping carry the load?   About as well as QHs did last year with Edler and Schmidt doing the same thing.  

 

I liked what you said about the draft being scientific, have read a lot on it.   Probably one of the better studies out there (google it if you'd like)  is one from a University, comparing 2 decades to now was very insightful (90's-2000's).    Staff has ballooned over the years, teams invest an incredible amount of time and money to get it right compared to the 70's-early 90's, and aside from a tiny bump, 1.3% in development, the odds are virtually the same between a bust and a hit.   Pretty amazing they pay for that.  Tiny improvement.   Ballooned as is scouts and staff to develop them. 

 

A couple tidbits.   The majority of all picks actually get to play at least one game in the NHL.   A fraction of that plays 100 games,  and a portion of those makes it to 200.   NHL scouts have their own margins on what they determine a bust to be as well, and it's also measured in games played.   1st 700 games, 2-3 500, 4-6 400, 7-10 300. The rest of the first round 200.   That's their "par line".    JV under this lens, he'd have made it past the par line with JB last deal if he wasn't who he was.   And maybe still will who knows, just not for us - for sure a bust regardless IMO.   

 

Also an interesting fact is once you get to around 22/23 overall, the odds of a player getting to 100 games right through the entire second round, is virtually the same.   And it's not very good, 50/50.  200 games even harder. Third round 12.5%, all the rounds combined after that,  virtually the same (100 game bar).    It's all there for anyone interested in looking into it.    It also explains why every 8 years or so, we get a winner/pick like Edler.    JB is an above average drafter so far, compared to his peer group as a Canuck - drafting any way you slice it - with the caveat of "so far".    

 

We won't know how many games they play for quite some time yet and who else might come out of the woodwork.    League also treats first and second rounders a lot differently - they get more chances then the rest of the class by far.    It's awesome when someone like Hansen makes the show.   Or Garland even.   And every team needs some of that to succeed.     Every single one of JBs first rounders played games ... even OJ lol.   If OJ went in the third round?   Not as likely.   End up like Brisbois, a career fringe NHL/AHL pro probably.   

 

Why i believe  JB is above average is THN does a thing once a year that takes 10 NHL scouts, and ranks the 21 and unders.    Then takes average drafting position, over that four year period, and sees where everyone lines up.   Before BB and a year or two after aged out, we ranked 2-3 for a period of years, but drafted around 8-10 during that time ... in other words it would be like we drafted 2-3 overall, instead of 8-10.   It's exactly what we needed at the time, despite crap lottery luck, and JV/OJ in the mix.    The one thing it doesn't consider is who has who's picks ... so it's not a perfect system either, but it does give you an idea - and he did that despite not adding significant picks.    On that we had one more first and one less second overall during that time.   People forget he did add picks/seconds...one for the coach and one for Bieksa i think.   I never cared about adding anything past the third round or losing anyone either .. slim odds regardless.   And again we won't really know until maybe 5 years in the future how well he made out.   Just like Quin, Burke, Nonis and MG.    

 

Milford for our franchise set a really high bar.  Over four year he got 10,000 games from his picks .... imagine drafting a 50 goal scorer - multiple actually and sending him away though...asset management matters for sure.   And JB is not the only one who miffed on that too.   Vaive.   Neely ugh.   McCaan lol...and whomever, JB didn't do that either.    But he also didn't draft one of those either, pretty sure of that.  

[JM_]

5 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

I laugh when people try to present it that the moves of the last 2 summers were some well constructed, coordinated plan by Benning. Half the moves contradict the other half. Much like Benning’s entire tenure. He got focused on OEL and forgot to even talk to his own pending UFA. What kind of idiot does that?
 

He had the cap to sign Tanev or Toffoli or even both. He CHOSE not to even give them the respect to talk to their agents to see what they might accept. Both those players would be better than OEL at 7 mil for 6 more years and Pearson at 3.25 mil for 3 more years respectively. The extra 2.5 mil or so would have allowed them to upgrade the D too.

 

Holtby was garbage largely because Green’s system relied on goalies having to be lights out just to stay in games. But also because he just wasn’t worth the money they gave him in the first place. A 3.67 gaa and .889 save% is garbage no matter how much you try to sugar coat it. He was 3.11 gaa and .897 save % the previous season on a very strong team. So really it was pretty obvious it was a case of too optimistic an outlook on him by Benning. If it sounds familiar it’s because he did the same thing with pretty much every player he brought in. Had a completely unrealistic view of what they actually were. Instead relying on his best case scenario outlook. 
 

Funny how durable Tanev has been since leaving Van. With the system they played it’s no wonder D got constantly injured.

 

Its the Tao of Jim. Every good move seemed to have an equal and opposite problem created.

 

But thats not really true. He did leave Rutherford a lot to work with, otherwise he wouldn't have come here.

 

I do agree letting Tanev go, and leaving the way he did kind of soured on management, really hurt the team. Tofffoli is just not worth the angst, he's not that good and no one on the team was that attached to him.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[wallstreetamigo]

52 minutes ago, JM_ said:

Its the Tao of Jim. Every good move seemed to have an equal and opposite problem created.

 

But thats not really true. He did leave Rutherford a lot to work with, otherwise he wouldn't have come here.

 

I do agree letting Tanev go, and leaving the way he did kind of soured on management, really hurt the team. Tofffoli is just not worth the angst, he's not that good and no one on the team was that attached to him.

 

 

 

 

 

 

He did leave Rutherford with some good pieces to work with. He also left him little to no long term cap room to improve the team by going all in on this roster. That’s what I mean by moves that don’t seem to make sense based on a cohesive plan. 
 

Tanev being disrespected the way he was clearly caused some trust issues between the players and management. 
 

It’s not really about Toffoli specifically. He was a good fit and definitely would have made the team better. But its about wasting assets to get him rather than using those assets for something that could have been part of the long term plan for the team. 

[wallstreetamigo]

5 hours ago, iceman64 said:

ok back to square one, Holtby was on par with his teams declining D, not as good as it was, shots against went up but OV and co. matched and bettered shots for so they remained strong like you said BUT when shots against goes up and then the goalies numbers match then obviously it's less his fault and more on the team and on top of that, it's not like he didn't have a cup ring and a vezina under his belt but like you said, and we both agree upon that our D has been taking a beating waiting for an upgrade but seriously as much as I loved Tanev, Edler and Toffoli, all three were a step away from redundant which we still can't afford to this day. Oh and Markstrom too. 

And c'mon, for once in a LONG time of Tanev's career he manages not to have a year without a long layoff due to a injury or 3 has zero to do with style of play, and if you watched his comments on his injuries, a lot he chalked up to simple bad luck but even so he's beat up and has been for some time... taking out 4 years of a risk under those circumstances? not something I'd do. Yeah Jimbo made mistakes but that wasn't one of them... and Podz on his ELC is working out just fine so Toffi didn't need to be signed at all.  

 

Toffoli didn’t need to be traded for in the first place then. Short term, save my job thinking never works out well long term. If you are going to trade assets when you are a bottom feeder it better be for assets coming back that will fit the longer term future. Otherwise it’s just a waste. Being a deadline buyer with that team showed clearly how JB was desperate and lost his perspective and any semblance of patience. 
 

Losing Tanev the way he did clearly shook the culture foundation of the team. Many WERE attached to him. 
 

People always assume it would have taken his current Calgary contract term and dollars to keep Tanev. My point is why would anyone defend letting him go when the GM couldn’t even bother to ask Tanev what it would take? He likely would have taken less dollars and term to stay in a Van. A basic expectation of the GM should be to find out what it would take.

[IBatch]

1 hour ago, JM_ said:

Its the Tao of Jim. Every good move seemed to have an equal and opposite problem created.

 

But thats not really true. He did leave Rutherford a lot to work with, otherwise he wouldn't have come here.

 

I do agree letting Tanev go, and leaving the way he did kind of soured on management, really hurt the team. Tofffoli is just not worth the angst, he's not that good and no one on the team was that attached to him.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Man great way to explain JB.   None of his moves were terrific really not deadly either.   Suppose that's why he lasted so long.   Bergy was like JB but one level up lol.   What i love about the change is that professionalism is coming back.   One thing MG was exceptional at.  

Edited December 20, 2021 by IBatch

[JM_]

7 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

He did leave Rutherford with some good pieces to work with. He also left him little to no long term cap room to improve the team by going all in on this roster. That’s what I mean by moves that don’t seem to make sense based on a cohesive plan. 

 

We have some middling cap hit players at the moment, but we're not in a cap disaster scenario either. Part of it is we actually have some really good players that are gong to get paid, its not a team full of plugs. We also have some excellent value deals at the moment like Demko and Miller.

 

Now we do have some middling contracts that I'd like to see gone thats for sure. How JR sheds us of Hamonic and Pearson I don't know. Maybe bury Hamonic and buy out Pearson? does that give us enough wiggle room for a legit top 4 d this UFA season? dunno. Can JR pull off a deal moving those two guys without losing too many prospects or picks? again dunno. 

 

just have to wait and see just how good JR is at fixing Jim's middle-meh signings. 

 

I do love what I'm seeing out of Myers tho under BB. If thats the guy we get for 2 more years then that deal is fine.

 

 

7 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

 

 

Tanev being disrespected the way he was clearly caused some trust issues between the players and management. 
 

It’s not really about Toffoli specifically. He was a good fit and definitely would have made the team better. But its about wasting assets to get him rather than using those assets for something that could have been part of the long term plan for the team. 

yup agreed to some degree on wasting assets, I guess thats the deal tho when you get a UFA rental, its risky. But thats Jim, right thing, wrong time. 

[wallstreetamigo]

3 hours ago, IBatch said:

The OEL thing absolutely mucked things up for him big time first time through.   A valuable week lost ... Demko was too steep a price.   Aside from that we have no idea what else that deal was.    That said, he made up for it and some last summer.   Garland alone beats the odds of a 9th overall and then some.   Retention on OEL .. and what it's meant for QHs this year are real factors as well.   Chychrun...how's he managing this year without OEL helping carry the load?   About as well as QHs did last year with Edler and Schmidt doing the same thing.  

 

I liked what you said about the draft being scientific, have read a lot on it.   Probably one of the better studies out there (google it if you'd like)  is one from a University, comparing 2 decades to now was very insightful (90's-2000's).    Staff has ballooned over the years, teams invest an incredible amount of time and money to get it right compared to the 70's-early 90's, and aside from a tiny bump, 1.3% in development, the odds are virtually the same between a bust and a hit.   Pretty amazing they pay for that.  Tiny improvement.   Ballooned as is scouts and staff to develop them. 

 

A couple tidbits.   The majority of all picks actually get to play at least one game in the NHL.   A fraction of that plays 100 games,  and a portion of those makes it to 200.   NHL scouts have their own margins on what they determine a bust to be as well, and it's also measured in games played.   1st 700 games, 2-3 500, 4-6 400, 7-10 300. The rest of the first round 200.   That's their "par line".    JV under this lens, he'd have made it past the par line with JB last deal if he wasn't who he was.   And maybe still will who knows, just not for us - for sure a bust regardless IMO.   

 

Also an interesting fact is once you get to around 22/23 overall, the odds of a player getting to 100 games right through the entire second round, is virtually the same.   And it's not very good, 50/50.  200 games even harder. Third round 12.5%, all the rounds combined after that,  virtually the same (100 game bar).    It's all there for anyone interested in looking into it.    It also explains why every 8 years or so, we get a winner/pick like Edler.    JB is an above average drafter so far, compared to his peer group as a Canuck - drafting any way you slice it - with the caveat of "so far".    

 

We won't know how many games they play for quite some time yet and who else might come out of the woodwork.    League also treats first and second rounders a lot differently - they get more chances then the rest of the class by far.    It's awesome when someone like Hansen makes the show.   Or Garland even.   And every team needs some of that to succeed.     Every single one of JBs first rounders played games ... even OJ lol.   If OJ went in the third round?   Not as likely.   End up like Brisbois, a career fringe NHL/AHL pro probably.   

 

Why i believe  JB is above average is THN does a thing once a year that takes 10 NHL scouts, and ranks the 21 and unders.    Then takes average drafting position, over that four year period, and sees where everyone lines up.   Before BB and a year or two after aged out, we ranked 2-3 for a period of years, but drafted around 8-10 during that time ... in other words it would be like we drafted 2-3 overall, instead of 8-10.   It's exactly what we needed at the time, despite crap lottery luck, and JV/OJ in the mix.    The one thing it doesn't consider is who has who's picks ... so it's not a perfect system either, but it does give you an idea - and he did that despite not adding significant picks.    On that we had one more first and one less second overall during that time.   People forget he did add picks/seconds...one for the coach and one for Bieksa i think.   I never cared about adding anything past the third round or losing anyone either .. slim odds regardless.   And again we won't really know until maybe 5 years in the future how well he made out.   Just like Quin, Burke, Nonis and MG.    

 

Milford for our franchise set a really high bar.  Over four year he got 10,000 games from his picks .... imagine drafting a 50 goal scorer - multiple actually and sending him away though...asset management matters for sure.   And JB is not the only one who miffed on that too.   Vaive.   Neely ugh.   McCaan lol...and whomever, JB didn't do that either.    But he also didn't draft one of those either, pretty sure of that.  

I have always said Benning was one I considered to be an above average drafter.  Not the insane levels of perfect many on here attribute to him. Milford will never be beaten in terms of draft efficiency. Just crazy lol. 
 

The Canucks for a long time have not been as good at development and have given away a lot of good young players for weak returns. It’s kind of a franchise curse at this point. 

[JM_]

1 minute ago, IBatch said:

Man great way to explain JB.   None of his moves were terrific really now deadly either.   Suppose that's why he lasted so long.   Bergy was like JB but one level up lol.   What i love about the change is that professionalism is coming back.   One thing MG was exceptional at.  

JR is like opening a window on a room your dog has been in too long. 

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Toffoli didn’t need to be traded for in the first place then. Short term, save my job thinking never works out well long term. If you are going to trade assets when you are a bottom feeder it better be for assets coming back that will fit the longer term future. Otherwise it’s just a waste. Being a deadline buyer with that team showed clearly how JB was desperate and lost his perspective and any semblance of patience. 
 

Losing Tanev the way he did clearly shook the culture foundation of the team. Many WERE attached to him. 
 

People always assume it would have taken his current Calgary contract term and dollars to keep Tanev. My point is why would anyone defend letting him go when the GM couldn’t even bother to ask Tanev what it would take? He likely would have taken less dollars and term to stay in a Van. A basic expectation of the GM should be to find out what it would take.

Isn’t the title of thread “not all bad” though?  Tofu was great for us in the games he played.  Losing Tanev was bad, for sure.  But look at the 2019 draft getting Pods and Hogs!  That was really good.  

[IBatch]

2 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Isn’t the title of thread “not all bad” though?  Tofu was great for us in the games he played.  Losing Tanev was bad, for sure.  But look at the 2019 draft getting Pods and Hogs!  That was really good.  

Tofu:   Please someone find all the games he played for us, and how many games we won, lost etc.  

[wallstreetamigo]

1 minute ago, Alflives said:

Isn’t the title of thread “not all bad” though?  Tofu was great for us in the games he played.  Losing Tanev was bad, for sure.  But look at the 2019 draft getting Pods and Hogs!  That was really good.  

That’s Benning in a nutshell though. Good move, bad move, meh move, bad move, good move, bad move, meh move, etc.

 

Rutherford is bringing back confidence that management can have an actual plan rather than a series of contradictory moves that don’t make sense when put next to each other.

[Dazzle]

10 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Drafting and development are linked. But they are still two sides to the coin. 
 

I know tons of guys who have been drafted and I can tell you the process they go through is insanely complex and detailed. Every possible thing about them physically and mentally is measured and analyzed to the absolute highest extent possible. Teams aren’t throwing darts at a dartboard here. It’s very scientific actually.

 

They are still human beings and many factors both within and outside their control ultimately determine how they develop. 
 

Virtanen was well known to have limited drive and hockey sense when he was drafted. 

Virtanen was still rated pretty highly by most scouts not named Button. Sure he was raw, but there was definitely nothing to suggest he'd bust.