Benning ~ Not all bad (Discussion)

[wallstreetamigo]

1 hour ago, iceman64 said:

dude you should know as much as anyone that with the exceptions of names like McDavid, Crosby, OV etc are a crap shoot at best and even 1st overall have turned out be huge busts so the best you can do is make an educated GUESS..  some work, some don't. This isn't going to change anytime soon, unless someone has a crystal ball the rest of us don't know about..  it will remain risky at best. 

That was and is my argument to giving away a 1st on JT Miller, why risk a crap shoot shot in the dark, against something already there and proven? 

But of course the media and a LOT of fans said otherwise.. wonder how that dose of crow tasted? 

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.

Edited December 18, 2021 by wallstreetamigo

[appleboy]

Every player in the league was scouted and either drafted or signed out of some league some where.

Scouting and drafting is rather important.  Otherwise you just get other people's left overs .

The eight years of Jim brought us some decent players. He could have brought us a lot more if he had of focused on keeping our picks and acquiring more. Jim shot himself in the foot by thinking he could somehow speed things up.

Right now he would have a lot more young talent and a ton of cap space.

[Maddogy]

Firing J.B. gives the owner a fresh start. J.B. knows too much about what went on during the past 7 years. J.B. knows how much of this mess was the owner’s fault. J.B. remembers the times when he gave certain advice to the owners but he was overruled.

 

Working with a new management team is also a fresh start for the ownership.

Edited December 18, 2021 by Maddogy

[wallstreetamigo]

5 hours ago, kilgore said:

Yup, that's how I remember it.

I think most fans who followed the team with any regularity, were kind of expecting a rebuild of some kind when JB came in.  Most had already heard Tort's quote by then about the core being "stale". And probably agreed.  Most were all just expecting the hammer to drop.

 

Then......miracles of miracles.....this highly touted new GM, who helped Boston, the team that beat our a** in 2011.  Heck it worked so well bringing back Messier and Keenan, why not try it again?  Not that JB helped draft any of the key players on that Boston team. He came just after. the Marchand, Kessel, Lucic draft in 2006.  This is who came in while he was AG:

 

 

2007
Hamill ----------GP 20
Cross -----------GP 3
Reul ------------GP 0
Goulet ----------GP 0
Ostricill ---------GP 0
Knackstedt -----GP 0
2008
Colborne -------GP 194
Sauve ----------GP 0
Hutchinson -----GP 58
Arniel -----------GP 1
Tremblay -------GP 0
Goggin ----------GP 0
2009
Caron -----------GP 157
Button ----------GP 0
Macdermid ------GP 10
Randall ----------GP 0
Sexton ----------GP 0
2010
Seguin ----------GP 396
Knight ----------GP 0
Spooner --------GP 90
Cunningham ---GP 40
Florek -----------GP 0
McIntyre --------GP 0
Trotman ---------GP 0
Chudinov --------GP 0
2011
Hamilton --------GP 217
Khocklachev ----GP 9
Camera ---------GP 0
Ferlin ------------GP 0
O'Gara -----------GP 0
Vorden -----------GP 0
2012
Subban ----------GP 1
Gryxelchek ------GP 0
Griffith -----------GP 32
Payne ------------GP 0
Benning --------- GP 0
Hargrove ---------GP 0
2013
Arnesson ---------GP 0
Cehlarik ----------GP 0
Fitzgerald --------GP 0
Blidh -------------GP 0
Sherman ---------GP 0
Dempsey ---------GP 0

 

 

Not too impressive.  A few hits, but a lot of misses.  Who knows how much influence he even had with those picks, but I don't understand why anyone in Vancouver ownership or media thought he was this genius drafter.

But anyways, we all were led to believe that.  And his first pick was.....Virtanen! Off to a rockin start. Only after Linden convinced him that he needed a new amateur scouting department and director in Judd Brackett, who could work 24/7 on amateur scouting did things start to come around. With Judd's specialty in Eastern American leagues we pilfered players like Boeser, and Demko who were picked lower in the draft.

 

When JB came in, most fans believed the hype in the media, why wouldn't we? We were excited to give this new highly touted GM from Boston a chance.  So when this presumably knowledgeable hockey man came out in one of his first press conferences and said he thought he could turn the team around quickly, no need for a strip down, and don't even say the word "rebuild".....we naturally were excited that we were wrong!  That this hockey team building expert said we don't need one!   Wooo Hooo!   Playoffs baby!!!!  We Want To Believe!  I don't have to regurgitate what happened in the next 7 years.

It’s even less impressive when you realize that the two highest gp draft picks on that list were also the result of trading Kessel who was drafted by Gorton. 

[appleboy]

3 hours ago, Maddogy said:

Firing J.B. gives the owner a fresh start. J.B. knows too much about what went on during the past 7 years. J.B. knows how much of this mess was the owner’s fault. J.B. remembers the times when he gave certain advice to the owners but he was overruled.

 

Working with a new management team is also a fresh start for the ownership.

Smyl knows.

[iceman64]

On 12/18/2021 at 11:29 AM, Crabcakes said:

Benning made a ton of deals this past year and last year, he let a number of glue players slide.  The result was the loss of team identity that Smyl has been talking about.  Failure to know his team is what Benning was guilty of.  

 

The thing is, this can be recovered from but it takes time.  I think that they may have been starting to find their jam but certainly the coaching and management change jump started the recovery.

 

Green was unable to make the adjustments necessary for what ever reason.  They were playing to cover their deficiencies vs playing to their strengths.  

 

I feel a sense of relief because there is now trust in the new guy at the helm.  He's a great communicator for starters and the trust that Rutherford can get the job done helps the entire organization.  The team has come together all of a sudden and is playing like the team that we thought we would have.  

 

The roster is all Bennings so give him credit.  The fiasco that was the last 2 years is also Bennings and was largely unnecessary.  Moving on from Markstrom was probably the right call in hindsight but at the cost of losing a big personality in the room.  Marky was well loved.  Add to this, the unnecessary loss of Tanev, Toffoli and Stecher and you have no need to make the OEL and Garland deal. 

 

 

So if I'm tracking with you, it would have been ok to keep a middling D (at best) in Stech, an often injured, AGING pair of Dmen in Tanev and Edler both and they all would have wanted term? Think about that for a second, that would have been the worst thing to do. Plus Toffi would have been redundant as well with Podz showing up.. Demko making Markstrom redundant as well..

 Just no... Those were all the right moves... 

 The Nux have a horrific past when it comes to injuries, in the last 5 years especially but even before that, for years and then keeping players with long histories of injuries like Eddie and Tanev would be just asking for more.. not a good idea. 

Edited December 19, 2021 by iceman64

[Crabcakes]

47 minutes ago, iceman64 said:

So if I'm tracking with you, it would have been ok to keep a middling D (at best) in Stech, an often injured, AGING pair of Dmen in Tanev and Edler both and they all would have wanted term? Think about that for a second, that would have been the worst thing to do. Plus Toffi would have been redundant as well with Podz showing up.. Demko making Markstrom redundant as well..

 Just no... Those were all the right moves... 

 The Nux have a horrific past when it comes to injuries, in the last 5 years especially but even before that, for years and then keeping players with long histories of injuries like Eddie and Tanev would be just asking for more.. not a good idea. 

It's true that Edler would have had to be replaced but it's much easier to replace left handers than right handers.  Tanev, at 30 last year, I would have been ok with a 4 year contract or even 5 when you consider how good he is defensively and what a great puck mover he is.  And he hasn't had injury issues in Calgary.  Stecher is a 3rd pair guy who can play up the line up.  You call that middling but I would take him over Poolman, Burroughs, Schenn or Bowey.  And Toffoli showed himself as a very good fit in the short time he was here.  Consider that Benning gave up a 2nd, Madden and Schaller for a rental at this stage of the cycle.  It was a bad idea to make the deal and then he let him walk without even a phone call to the agent which compounded the error.   All it would have taken is a little respect from Benning while he was off chasing rainbows.

 

Talk of middling, lets look at the present right side of the D corps.  You could argue that the whole bunch are 3rd pair caliber players on good teams.  They're completely void of top 4 RHD!  Don't get me wrong, defense would still be the number 1 issue but when you give up a player like Tanev for nothing, you are letting a player slide who plays one of the most difficult positions to replace. 

 

This is all about bad asset management and just being negligent about it.  Benning was over due getting fired imo.

 

 

[Guest]

38 minutes ago, Crabcakes said:

It's true that Edler would have had to be replaced but it's much easier to replace left handers than right handers.  Tanev, at 30 last year, I would have been ok with a 4 year contract or even 5 when you consider how good he is defensively and what a great puck mover he is.  And he hasn't had injury issues in Calgary.  Stecher is a 3rd pair guy who can play up the line up.  You call that middling but I would take him over Poolman, Burroughs, Schenn or Bowey.  And Toffoli showed himself as a very good fit in the short time he was here.  Consider that Benning gave up a 2nd, Madden and Schaller for a rental at this stage of the cycle.  It was a bad idea to make the deal and then he let him walk without even a phone call to the agent which compounded the error.   All it would have taken is a little respect from Benning while he was off chasing rainbows.

 

Talk of middling, lets look at the present right side of the D corps.  You could argue that the whole bunch are 3rd pair caliber players on good teams.  They're completely void of top 4 RHD!  Don't get me wrong, defense would still be the number 1 issue but when you give up a player like Tanev for nothing, you are letting a player slide who plays one of the most difficult positions to replace. 

 

This is all about bad asset management and just being negligent about it.  Benning was over due getting fired imo.

 

 

You could argue that but that argument would be wrong. Myers would be a top 4 dman on almost all teams. Poolman and Hamonic are debatable. 

 

The fact that Tanev has been mostly healthy for one season and a quarter is a minor miracle. 

[Crabcakes]

1 hour ago, VancouverHabitant said:

You could argue that but that argument would be wrong. Myers would be a top 4 dman on almost all teams. Poolman and Hamonic are debatable. 

 

The fact that Tanev has been mostly healthy for one season and a quarter is a minor miracle. 

You don't win arguments by calling me wrong.  I've heard plenty who have argued that and often times I agree.  Myers is borderline imo.  You could call him a 4/5.  He happens to be playing as well as he ever has at the moment.  I expected better when he was acquired but he gets exposed on a regular basis because he just doesn't have the foot speed.  They don't call him the giraffe for nothing.

 

It's 2 1/4 for Tanev and it's because he has custom built shin guards and skate guards.  It's a mystery why nobody thought to have them made years ago.

 

 

[wallstreetamigo]

On 12/15/2021 at 6:27 PM, 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.

It actually sounded like Edler was not offered a contract at all and Tanev was only talked to by the Canucks after he got the offer from Calgary. 
 

They kept Virtanen over Toffoli. At least Toffoli is still playing in the NHL which is better than Virtanen’s situation. Benning should have already known all he needed to know about Virtanen and cut him loose. Toffoli would be a good player to have now tbh. Would give us 3 quality scoring lines that can play the way Boudreau wants them to. If Benning signed Virtanen to trade him he would be a tool. RFA rights can be traded. He clearly CHOSE Virtanen, 
 

Not sure they really made the choice to go with Demko. They wasted cap signing Holtby who was the opening night starter for Green. Benning tried to keep Markstrom according to reports. So we avoided losing Demko by him not being able to keep Markstrom. 

[iceman64]

4 hours ago, Crabcakes said:

It's true that Edler would have had to be replaced but it's much easier to replace left handers than right handers.  Tanev, at 30 last year, I would have been ok with a 4 year contract or even 5 when you consider how good he is defensively and what a great puck mover he is.  And he hasn't had injury issues in Calgary.  Stecher is a 3rd pair guy who can play up the line up.  You call that middling but I would take him over Poolman, Burroughs, Schenn or Bowey.  And Toffoli showed himself as a very good fit in the short time he was here.  Consider that Benning gave up a 2nd, Madden and Schaller for a rental at this stage of the cycle.  It was a bad idea to make the deal and then he let him walk without even a phone call to the agent which compounded the error.   All it would have taken is a little respect from Benning while he was off chasing rainbows.

 

Talk of middling, lets look at the present right side of the D corps.  You could argue that the whole bunch are 3rd pair caliber players on good teams.  They're completely void of top 4 RHD!  Don't get me wrong, defense would still be the number 1 issue but when you give up a player like Tanev for nothing, you are letting a player slide who plays one of the most difficult positions to replace. 

 

This is all about bad asset management and just being negligent about it.  Benning was over due getting fired imo.

 

 

Well to start off with Schaller didn't work out but was brought in like Rous to protect the assets we already had, it wasn't bad at all in that respect, for years we had the Sedins who were punching bags a lot of the time HAD to be addressed, especially towards our new Sedins in the form of Petey and Boeser, and that was the reason he did those deals but that's the best that was out there available and willing to come to a younger team. 

 Stech wasn't all that good sorry, Hughes, Hamonic, Myers, OEL are top 6 and Burr middling D same as Stech. both 3rd pairing D's, Rathbone is "experience" away from passing where is Stech was plus much better at quicker pivots by far. 

 So back to where we were before TG was fired, we still need a D upgrade which we would have already if not for the flat cap thanks to covid but no one saw that coming. However here we are either way, we need help. 

 Keeping old players with long history of injuries was not going to help us and cost us wins as they did when they went down on a regular basis, which is hard for any team having it's 2 best D out that much.

[Gawdzukes]

I liked Benning. I went through years of having a very good hockey team and not a lot of draft picks so I never expected miracles or a quick turnaround. This was especially true after Gillis just handcuffed the team for years. The Sedins expiring never helped either.

 

Having said that you can see that Benning had some faults and clearly some more experienced people would have helped the situation. All in all he's left us with some very good players so it's not a catastrophe or anything. I hope he gets a job again because he does have some quality to him. Maybe just not calling all the shots. Good luck JB. Thanks!

 

 

[iinatcc]

8 hours ago, iceman64 said:

So if I'm tracking with you, it would have been ok to keep a middling D (at best) in Stech, an often injured, AGING pair of Dmen in Tanev and Edler both and they all would have wanted term? Think about that for a second, that would have been the worst thing to do. Plus Toffi would have been redundant as well with Podz showing up.. Demko making Markstrom redundant as well..

 Just no... Those were all the right moves... 

 The Nux have a horrific past when it comes to injuries, in the last 5 years especially but even before that, for years and then keeping players with long histories of injuries like Eddie and Tanev would be just asking for more.. not a good idea. 

Tanev has been healthy last season and this season. Edler didn't get term when he signed with the Kings. 

 

As for the injuries isn't it more a question with depth ? Depth can either reduce the minutes of your to dmen preventing injuries or can be used for other players to step up with an injury occurs. 

 

The fact Benning wasn't able to provide depth in the blue line made both injuries and the inability to navigate around them his responsibility. 

[Baggins]

2 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

It actually sounded like Edler was not offered a contract at all and Tanev was only talked to by the Canucks after he got the offer from Calgary. 
 

They kept Virtanen over Toffoli. At least Toffoli is still playing in the NHL which is better than Virtanen’s situation. Benning should have already known all he needed to know about Virtanen and cut him loose. Toffoli would be a good player to have now tbh. Would give us 3 quality scoring lines that can play the way Boudreau wants them to. If Benning signed Virtanen to trade him he would be a tool. RFA rights can be traded. He clearly CHOSE Virtanen, 
 

Not sure they really made the choice to go with Demko. They wasted cap signing Holtby who was the opening night starter for Green. Benning tried to keep Markstrom according to reports. So we avoided losing Demko by him not being able to keep Markstrom. 

I'm not sure why people keep saying that. Virtanen wasn't signed until 10 days after Toffoli bolted. Jake was far more likely re-signed BECAUSE Toffoli signed with Montreal. He'd actually need to have signed Virtanen before Toffoli signed with Montreal to say he kept Virt over Tof.

 

Holtby was insurance. Like any form of insurance it's wasted money if you don't need it and money well spent if you do. Sadly you don't know which it will be until after it plays out. The problem was: which Demko would we get? The 3 game playoff star goalie - or the 27 game regular season mediocre goaie? It made sense to bring in a guy like Holtby as insurance. I'm just glad Demko proved himself and has become a solid #1 goalie. 

[iceman64]

7 minutes ago, iinatcc said:

Tanev has been healthy last season and this season. Edler didn't get term when he signed with the Kings. 

 

As for the injuries isn't it more a question with depth ? Depth can either reduce the minutes of your to dmen preventing injuries or can be used for other players to step up with an injury occurs. 

 

The fact Benning wasn't able to provide depth in the blue line made both injuries and the inability to navigate around them his responsibility. 

With the contracts we still had on from 2012 which had next to zero depth to begin with would have been a challenge to anyone stepping in as GM after Gillis signed long term including Louie, and been paying that for years. 

 So Benning wasn't perfect BUT I'd ask what you would have done in his position and taking into account that Canada is a second class destination to begin with opposed to LA NY etc.. 

 Oh and for Tanev, 2 things, so if you go back and see how many seasons he had injury free in the last 10 years, I bet you find not one and on top of that, some seasons he had more than one... just because he had a year he was actually healthy for a change doesn't mean he's not beat up and aging, which equals a bigger risk and that goes for Edler as well. 

 

[iinatcc]

15 minutes ago, iceman64 said:

With the contracts we still had on from 2012 which had next to zero depth to begin with would have been a challenge to anyone stepping in as GM after Gillis signed long term including Louie, and been paying that for years. 

 So Benning wasn't perfect BUT I'd ask what you would have done in his position and taking into account that Canada is a second class destination to begin with opposed to LA NY etc.. 

 Oh and for Tanev, 2 things, so if you go back and see how many seasons he had injury free in the last 10 years, I bet you find not one and on top of that, some seasons he had more than one... just because he had a year he was actually healthy for a change doesn't mean he's not beat up and aging, which equals a bigger risk and that goes for Edler as well. 

 

That's cop-out question. It's like asking me what would I have done to make Yahoo or Nokia more competitive and relevant today. I'm not qualified to be a CEO of a tech company just like I'm not qualified to run a hockey team. You could ask this same question to just about anything here. 

 

But I suppose if you ask that same question to people in Hockey or even sports management they probably can answer that question.

[wallstreetamigo]

1 hour ago, Baggins said:

I'm not sure why people keep saying that. Virtanen wasn't signed until 10 days after Toffoli bolted. Jake was far more likely re-signed BECAUSE Toffoli signed with Montreal. He'd actually need to have signed Virtanen before Toffoli signed with Montreal to say he kept Virt over Tof.

 

Holtby was insurance. Like any form of insurance it's wasted money if you don't need it and money well spent if you do. Sadly you don't know which it will be until after it plays out. The problem was: which Demko would we get? The 3 game playoff star goalie - or the 27 game regular season mediocre goaie? It made sense to bring in a guy like Holtby as insurance. I'm just glad Demko proved himself and has become a solid #1 goalie. 

Maybe because if Benning hadn’t already decided to keep Virtanen 10 days before signing him and letting Toffoli walk it really would prove the prevailing theory that he never had an actual plan and just reacted to things as they happened?

 

Holtby was unnecessary insurance from the moment he signed. A veteran 1B type could have been had for a fraction of the cost, and would have allowed the team to keep a valuable player. 

[iceman64]

46 minutes ago, iinatcc said:

That's cop-out question. It's like asking me what would I have done to make Yahoo or Nokia more competitive and relevant today. I'm not qualified to be a CEO of a tech company just like I'm not qualified to run a hockey team. You could ask this same question to just about anything here. 

 

But I suppose if you ask that same question to people in Hockey or even sports management they probably can answer that question.

It wasn't a cop out question, I asked for exactly that answer, a lot of people are quick to say if this had been done or that had of been done or or or.. at the end of the day even the best GM's will say some of this comes down to a lot of educated guess work and even then there's a lot of risk in anything done. So as easily as some have said just do this or that, and not considering what goes into it as a whole and not see how insanely difficult it is. 

 So a quick comment not aimed at you actually but to any ass clown who thinks it's just that easy and throw a jersey on the ice is nothing but low class and downright embarrassing as the riots were, it's sure going to do more to try and entice players to come here right? 

This is what has me the most pissed, especially since everything from the state of the team was when JB showed up to inherit one of the worst teams in the league that could be best to be described as broken and beyond any quick fix with that many players locked in and a portion of Luongo's cap retained on top of it and at least he had the balls to try and change a team that had done nothing but 2 Cinderella shows with no depth.. all JB got was a screwed team emotionally and contractually a sh_t show. 

 Personally I would have turned down the offer even if I were thrown all the $ I wanted, no way! and especially Vancouver with the fan base and media... what a joke... So are we still going to settle for a mediocre/good regular season team that will never win a cup?  Probably... it's exciting for 80 ish games and a quick bounce out in the first round as usual but that's nothing new.. 

 

[iceman64]

20 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Maybe because if Benning hadn’t already decided to keep Virtanen 10 days before signing him and letting Toffoli walk it really would prove the prevailing theory that he never had an actual plan and just reacted to things as they happened?

 

Holtby was unnecessary insurance from the moment he signed. A veteran 1B type could have been had for a fraction of the cost, and would have allowed the team to keep a valuable player. 

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.. 

[iinatcc]

23 minutes ago, iceman64 said:

It wasn't a cop out question, I asked for exactly that answer, a lot of people are quick to say if this had been done or that had of been done or or or.. at the end of the day even the best GM's will say some of this comes down to a lot of educated guess work and even then there's a lot of risk in anything done. So as easily as some have said just do this or that, and not considering what goes into it as a whole and not see how insanely difficult it is. 

 So a quick comment not aimed at you actually but to any ass clown who thinks it's just that easy and throw a jersey on the ice is nothing but low class and downright embarrassing as the riots were, it's sure going to do more to try and entice players to come here right? 

This is what has me the most pissed, especially since everything from the state of the team was when JB showed up to inherit one of the worst teams in the league that could be best to be described as broken and beyond any quick fix with that many players locked in and a portion of Luongo's cap retained on top of it and at least he had the balls to try and change a team that had done nothing but 2 Cinderella shows with no depth.. all JB got was a screwed team emotionally and contractually a sh_t show. 

 Personally I would have turned down the offer even if I were thrown all the $ I wanted, no way! and especially Vancouver with the fan base and media... what a joke... So are we still going to settle for a mediocre/good regular season team that will never win a cup?  Probably... it's exciting for 80 ish games and a quick bounce out in the first round as usual but that's nothing new.. 

 

So just a few points here

 

1. I disagree with the Jersey throwing in General (though let's admit most of us here found it amusing when its done in other Canadian teams). But the criticisms on Benning especially on his moves and results are still warranted.

 

2. GMs tend to inherit a bad situation and turn things around. Shanahan did so with the Leafs and Lamoriello for the Isles (it can't be easy losing your star player in Free Agency).

 

3. If a player or coach or GM can't handle the pressure of the market and the media. Then they shouldn't be involved in pro sports at the highest level. NBA players and personnel have no problems playing for big market pressure teams like the Lakers where the media is more brutal than Vancouver. If basketball or baseball players can handle the pressure of playing for the Lakers or Yankees I'm sure hockey players can handle the same environment