Benning ~ Not all bad (Discussion)

[Dazzle]

2 hours ago, Gally said:

Difference is we won back to back presidents trophies under Gillis. We've never even been a contending team under Benning. Drafting under Gillis obviously wasn't great but he was better in every single other area than Benning and it could've likely been fixed by clearing out the amateur scouting staff which was long overdue at that point. This isn't even mentioning the fact that Gillis saw this roster after 2013 and wanted to retool which ended up being part of the reason he was fired. Keeping Gillis could've saved us years of frustration if we got ahead of things and executed a proper rebuild after that first round loss to the Sharks.

Of course, the biggest Gillis defenders will use the president trophies as an excuse for his poor drafting. And we see even more excuses here. It's always a "but" with Gillis, which is just typical of a Gillis defender.

 

Do you realize how poor of a drafting/developing record Gillis had? Aside from Horvat, Hodgson and Hutton, Gillis:

 

a) traded picks that he could've used to 'push' for the playoffs. Hindsight is 20/20, of course. The trade for Derek Roy was pretty awful. Cost a 2nd round pick or two.

b) didn't DRAFT well (poor picks, especially the Mallet)

c) traded Grabner + 1st for Ballard (later, Ballard was bought out by GIllis) - overall a bad trade.

d) traded the only goaltending prospect we had to fill another hole that he couldn't do through a draft. (Gillis mishandled the Luongo affair)

 

So essentially, you are defending Gillis for poor drafting/developing, mishandling Luongo, as well as the strengths he INHERITED. You're totally ok with this because Gillis won back to back President trophies, which have largely been consisted from pieces from another regime.

 

Ok then.

[J.I.A.H.N]

I do think there are other area's that were good and bad, that should be discussed..............

 

Trading for Miller, Toffoli, Schmidt, OEL and Garland, were all great trades, and were his last ones (Of the big kind)

 

Letting Markstrom, Tanev, Toffoli and Edler walk for free is just crazy, and he should have moved heaven and earth to obtain assets, for them if we could not afford them

 

Loosing McEwen and Gadjovich, who are both playing regularly on other teams, is a mistake of minor proportion

 

And trading Joulevi, and Schmidt before firing Green....................

 

Benning is responsible for all these in one way or another...............Good or bad.............he gets the credit

[Nuxfanabroad]

Canucks vs Habs? Howz'bout dat? Benning & Disco suit Bergevin both had lengthy terms at the helm(& comparable in Cdn markets).

 

We're lucky that JB left the franchise a helluva' lot more young, quality pieces.

[Devron]

I will never understand some peoples opinion of letting Markstrom go for nothing. I don’t know if there’s a GM out there that would trade their starting goalie when playoffs are on the line. Makes zero sense from a management stand point. Fantasy leagues and dreams sure I get it.

[DSVII]

1 hour ago, Dazzle said:

Of course, the biggest Gillis defenders will use the president trophies as an excuse for his poor drafting. And we see even more excuses here. It's always a "but" with Gillis, which is just typical of a Gillis defender.

 

Do you realize how poor of a drafting/developing record Gillis had? Aside from Horvat, Hodgson and Hutton, Gillis:

 

a) traded picks that he could've used to 'push' for the playoffs. Hindsight is 20/20, of course. The trade for Derek Roy was pretty awful. Cost a 2nd round pick or two.

b) didn't DRAFT well (poor picks, especially the Mallet)

c) traded Grabner + 1st for Ballard (later, Ballard was bought out by GIllis) - overall a bad trade.

d) traded the only goaltending prospect we had to fill another hole that he couldn't do through a draft. (Gillis mishandled the Luongo affair)

 

So essentially, you are defending Gillis for poor drafting/developing, mishandling Luongo, as well as the strengths he INHERITED. You're totally ok with this because Gillis won back to back President trophies, which have largely been consisted from pieces from another regime.

 

Ok then.

10 times out of 10. I will take a GM who knows how to manage assets over a GM that can just draft. 

 

Demko I give credit. But Jim's picks that he picked up were so high in the 1st round any of us with a hockey news mag could hit 50% of the time  

[Viper007]

1 hour ago, J.I.A.H.N said:

I do think there are other area's that were good and bad, that should be discussed..............

 

Trading for Miller, Toffoli, Schmidt, OEL and Garland, were all great trades, and were his last ones (Of the big kind)

 

Letting Markstrom, Tanev, Toffoli and Edler walk for free is just crazy, and he should have moved heaven and earth to obtain assets, for them if we could not afford them

 

Loosing McEwen and Gadjovich, who are both playing regularly on other teams, is a mistake of minor proportion

 

And trading Joulevi, and Schmidt before firing Green....................

 

Benning is responsible for all these in one way or another...............Good or bad.............he gets the credit

It's hard to get assets when all the other teams were preparing for the expansion draft also.  They offered Tanev/Edler contracts.  They didn't accept them (they got offered more elsewhere).  Markstrom you were going to lose for sure anyways.  And that turned out to be the right choice.  Toffoli has been talked about to death here.  The way he's playing this year, not a big loss.  He only played well last season, and 1/6 of the season was against the canucks who he torched.  Canucks were only getting Toffoli if they moved out contracts, and at that time it was the OEL deal.  The Canucks did the right thing, since Arizona wanted Demko.  That's a no fly zone which killed that deal.  In hindsight, I'm wondering if the Canucks signed JV because Arizona wanted him in the deal too?  Hmmm .... something to think about.

[Toyotasfan]

His loyalty to Green ended his career, if he had pulled the trigger sooner, or let Green Walk at the end of last season he would have saved himself.

Lots of low points: for a drafting genius he badly missed with Joulevi and Virtanen. Going with Virtanen over Tofolli ,losing Tanev, Louie Player Name’s contract, and even though I like OEL, that contract is a tough cap issue for a long time.

[Gurn]

8 minutes ago, Toyotasfan said:

His loyalty to Green ended his career

It ended his job as Canuck G.M. I'm quite sure he will find other work in the league.

[J.I.A.H.N]

59 minutes ago, Viper007 said:

It's hard to get assets when all the other teams were preparing for the expansion draft also.  They offered Tanev/Edler contracts.  They didn't accept them (they got offered more elsewhere).  Markstrom you were going to lose for sure anyways.  And that turned out to be the right choice.  Toffoli has been talked about to death here.  The way he's playing this year, not a big loss.  He only played well last season, and 1/6 of the season was against the canucks who he torched.  Canucks were only getting Toffoli if they moved out contracts, and at that time it was the OEL deal.  The Canucks did the right thing, since Arizona wanted Demko.  That's a no fly zone which killed that deal.  In hindsight, I'm wondering if the Canucks signed JV because Arizona wanted him in the deal too?  Hmmm .... something to think about.

You can trade any expiring contract after the schedule is over and make them conditional........................and the year Toffoli walked he had value. I was talking about when he walked, not when he died. And on Markstrom, yes  he was leaving but that does not exclude a late season trade, that kicks in "IF" he is signed by the trading team...........

He would have been an up grade for 15 teams at the very least..................that is called "Futures" in contract lingo

[Viper007]

1 minute ago, J.I.A.H.N said:

You can trade any expiring contract after the schedule is over and make them conditional........................and the year Toffoli walked he had value. I was talking about when he walked, not when he died. And on Markstrom, yes  he was leaving but that does not exclude a late season trade, that kicks in "IF" he is signed by the trading team...........

He would have been an up grade for 15 teams at the very least..................that is called "Futures" in contract lingo

Unless the team really wants him and think they can sign him, they will NOT give up futures.  And considering it was Edmonton or Calgary that were going for Markstrom, they would not do ANYTHING to make the Canucks get any value.  Regarding Toffoli, the canucks wanted to sign him.  They couldn't unload the contracts to get him.  And Arizona wanted Demko in the deal that would free up the contracts.  That was a NO GO.

[J.I.A.H.N]

1 minute ago, Viper007 said:

Unless the team really wants him and think they can sign him, they will NOT give up futures.  And considering it was Edmonton or Calgary that were going for Markstrom, they would not do ANYTHING to make the Canucks ge to lt any value.  Regarding Toffoli, the canucks wanted to sign him.  They couldn't unload the contracts to get him.  And Arizona wanted Demko in the deal that would free up the contracts.  That was a NO GO.

Viper

 

Benning had a real bad habit of leaving everything to the last minute in negotiations

 

He had plenty of time to establish what he wanted to do.............there is no excuses

 

The truth is, every GM has his way, and that is the way they do it

 

Benning had done the exact same thing many times before

 

Dying by your convictions is a mistake, especially if you don't learn

 

He had times to make deal, even if it was in some cases the year before

 

Having a constantly running 5 year plan, means you have an idea of what you want to do

 

prior to being forced into doing something you did not want to do, because you never thought about it in time.

 

If he was not doing that, we that is when you get fired, or at least should!

 

You do not wait until the wheels fall off on a rollercoaster. Bad for business!

[Viper007]

1 minute ago, J.I.A.H.N said:

Viper

 

Benning had a real bad habit of leaving everything to the last minute in negotiations

 

He had plenty of time to establish what he wanted to do.............there is no excuses

 

The truth is, every GM has his way, and that is the way they do it

 

Benning had done the exact same thing many times before

 

Dying by your convictions is a mistake, especially if you don't learn

 

He had times to make deal, even if it was in some cases the year before

 

Having a constantly running 5 year plan, means you have an idea of what you want to do

 

prior to being forced into doing something you did not want to do, because you never thought about it in time.

 

If he was not doing that, we that is when you get fired, or at least should!

 

You do not wait until the wheels fall off on a rollercoaster. Bad for business!

You need a willing partner to make trades.  Can't trade with yourself.  COVID also didn't help in this situation.  I'm sure the Canucks thought the cap would go up and that they could sign him.  Unfortunately it didn't.  In hindsight though, it's worked out for the better in my opinion.  I would rather have Garland than Toffoli.

[mll]

16 minutes ago, J.I.A.H.N said:

You can trade any expiring contract after the schedule is over and make them conditional........................and the year Toffoli walked he had value. I was talking about when he walked, not when he died. And on Markstrom, yes  he was leaving but that does not exclude a late season trade, that kicks in "IF" he is signed by the trading team...........

He would have been an up grade for 15 teams at the very least..................that is called "Futures" in contract lingo

 

Conditional picks upon re-signing are no longer allowed.  

 

 

[J.I.A.H.N]

3 minutes ago, Viper007 said:

You need a willing partner to make trades.  Can't trade with yourself.  COVID also didn't help in this situation.  I'm sure the Canucks thought the cap would go up and that they could sign him.  Unfortunately it didn't.  In hindsight though, it's worked out for the better in my opinion.  I would rather have Garland than Toffoli.

He is not paid to make excuses, only results

 

But in saying that, it is why I made this thread.................he did alot of good too!

 

Yes, Garland over Toffoli, but that is alot of asset for nothing.............meaning Toffoli walked

[J.I.A.H.N]

3 minutes ago, mll said:

 

Conditional picks upon re-signing are no longer allowed.  

 

 

I think they were then. I think?????

 

But if not good point, but there are other ways to get something shinny

Edited December 16, 2021 by J.I.A.H.N

[Viper007]

2 minutes ago, J.I.A.H.N said:

I think they were then. I think?????

 

But if not good point, but there are other ways to get something shinny

Assets are going to be lost if you're trying to make the playoffs.  Am I glad he made that Toffoli deal?  Yes.  Does it suck that he didn't re-sign him?  Yes.  Does JB need to work on asset management.  Most definitely.  Maybe he'll learn and do better in his next position (if he gets one).

[lmm]

3 hours ago, Nuxfanabroad said:

Canucks vs Habs? Howz'bout dat? Benning & Disco suit Bergevin both had lengthy terms at the helm(& comparable in Cdn markets).

 

We're lucky that JB left the franchise a helluva' lot more young, quality pieces.

Current rosters show both clubs with 14 players born in 1995 or later

[DefCon1]

8 hours ago, Warhippy said:

Benning rightfully gets heat.

 

He let some assets walk.

He traded out a number of picks.

He traded prospects allowing them to find homes in other organizations, even as depth players.

 

But the ONLY thing that has changed is the coach and look at the team benning built go.

 

So while he is absolutely guilty of a number of things, we're watching HIS team play and lauding HIS team's efforts.

He built a good core but Benning isnt a good closer GM or a GM that can put the finishing touches for a cup run. I would hire Benning as a GM for a rebuild and fire him once the rebuild is done but the team needs supporting cast. Bennings only great asset was his drafting. So he might be hired as head of the amature scouting dept.

[DefCon1]

1 hour ago, Viper007 said:

Assets are going to be lost if you're trying to make the playoffs.  Am I glad he made that Toffoli deal?  Yes.  Does it suck that he didn't re-sign him?  Yes.  Does JB need to work on asset management.  Most definitely.  Maybe he'll learn and do better in his next position (if he gets one).

That is a big deal when you want a cup contender. You need someone that doesnt piss away assets yearly. I mean the Canucks have leaked a lot of assets that their prospect pool is very weak now. Keeping 3rd round and 2nd round picks, Madden and even getting value for someone lile Markstrom would have made our prospect pool deeper than it is now. He also made boneheaded moves like McCann and 2nd for Gudbranson.Trading Forsling for a Clendening bum. Those assets would have made the Canucka a better team. Forsling would have been on our top pairing right now instead of poolman. That is the reason why Benning isnt a good GM if you want to build a cup contender. If you just want a good young core, then Benning is good for that.

[mll]

1 hour ago, J.I.A.H.N said:

I think they were then. I think?????

 

But if not good point, but there are other ways to get something shinny

No.  It was part of the changes introduced ahead of the Edmonton bubble.  The return to play and changes to the CBA were approved as a package.

 

Benning also wanted to extend Toffoli but once he qualified Virtanen he no longer had the necessary cap space and didn't have the time to create more room.