Benning

Welcome to the main forum of our site. Anything and everything to do with the Vancouver Canucks is dicussed and debated here.

Moderator: Referees

User avatar
herb
CC Legend
Posts: 3020
Joined: Sun Sep 26, 2004 3:17 pm
Location: Mars

Re: Benning

Post by herb »

Blob Mckenzie wrote:But what if it hanstrings the teem ?
Then you Garrison the bum to retirement in sunny Florida!
User avatar
herb
CC Legend
Posts: 3020
Joined: Sun Sep 26, 2004 3:17 pm
Location: Mars

Re: Benning

Post by herb »

The guy's been a point producer since 2006-07. He's still in his prime years. He hasn't been injured much. He'd be in a secondary role here behind Hank Sedin. He wouldn't hinder anybody's development here as our young guys who are getting close to NHL ready are either wingers or should start in the bottom six.

What's the risk, really?
User avatar
JonT21
CC Veteran
Posts: 102
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 8:24 pm

Re: Benning

Post by JonT21 »

If we somehow managed to get iginla, stastny and maybe somehow get santorelli and also get rid of burrows and hansen then I think we would be set for a decent lineup up front.

dank-hank-iginla
jensen-stastny-kassian
santorelli-bonino-higgins
matthias-richardson-dorsett

or

dank-hank-jensen
santorelli-stastny-iginla
higgins-bonino-kassian
matthias-richardson-dorsett

Jensen,kassian,higgins, bonino, and santorelli could move around a lot in the top 9 to shake things up every once in a while like anaheim did with their team last year. Matthias should only go no higher then the 3rd line tbh unless santorelli is truly not interested in coming back.

*I forgot about Vey lol replace him with santorelli I guess....
User avatar
Lancer
CC Legend
Posts: 3124
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 10:41 am
Location: Kingston, Ontario

Re: Benning

Post by Lancer »

The more I hear the talking heads in many outlets discuss what Benning's done over the last couple of days, the more I wonder if there really was a hate-on for Gillis by the end of it.

Don't get me wrong - Benning's managed to do some good things out there. Could he have managed a bigger return on Kesler? Perhaps, and the signings thus far haven't really explained his clearing of the cap decks with the Garrison buy-out. More may come, but not even a hint of it at this point. Miller for $6 mill, when he was probably the only guy knocking on Miller's door to sign seems a bit much.

Yet everybody in the media are showering him with roses for what he's been able to do. Nothing terribly effusive, but I was half-expecting them to shake their heads and hack on him and the Canucks like they've done for years and... nothing really. Everybody is wondering where the offense is going to come from, but that's just obvious.

Not saying Benning has done anything but a reasonable job to this point given what he took on when he got into the job, but it just seems he's getting a much cushier ride from the talking heads than Gillis ever received. Makes you wonder just how despised Gillis was in hockey circles, and why he certainly had to go.
Love the Sport. Love the Team.

Hate the League.
User avatar
meangradin
AHL Prospect
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 8:53 am
Location: Ulsan, SK

Re: Benning

Post by meangradin »

in the end, jb's work will be evaluated by the moves he makes, and that has started in a major way. mg, like all before him were judged by how well they do, not did. way to early for me to form an opinion of his on ice moves, but i don't mind either of the free agent moves; although he overpaid on both fronts, but hey, it's only cap money and both improve the quality of the team. one thing i did notice and was surprised to hear was how hands on he is with scouting. i heard him say about vey that he saw him play over 40 times. basically, he is staking his reputation as an evaluator of talent, a deficiency that sank mg, and isn't shying away from it.

but he could turn out to be another jagoff!
User avatar
sagebrush
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1034
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 12:36 pm
Location: around the bend

Re: Benning

Post by sagebrush »

Lancer wrote:Yet everybody in the media are showering him with roses for what he's been able to do. Nothing terribly effusive, but I was half-expecting them to shake their heads and hack on him and the Canucks like they've done for years and... nothing really. Everybody is wondering where the offense is going to come from, but that's just obvious.
The local media (excepting TG) are still in the honeymoon phase. When the team has a rough patch, more hatchets will come out.
Less Canucks embarrassment please.
User avatar
Todd Bersnoozi
CC Legend
Posts: 3724
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2005 4:14 pm

Re: Benning

Post by Todd Bersnoozi »

coco_canuck wrote:What is this vision? To load up on expensive vets with the cap room we have, be competitive in terms of chasing a playoff spot, translation: slightly above mediocre, and hope you have the young talent that can push over the next 2-3 years to maybe peak and have another shot at the cup with aging core pieces like Hank, Daniel, Bieksa, Burrows (if he isn' moved) and Hamhuis before they're done?

Benning has done a good job of clearing salary and I would hate to saddle the team with a couple of bad contracts that do little but keep the Canucks in Calgary Flames mode...or at least the Flames of yesteryear.
Yeah, I'm a bit mixed on Benning so far as well. I think the Canucks needed to rebuild and stock up with a bunch of good young players/prospects; however, Benning has been true to his word, he wants to the Canucks to fight for a playoff spot.

Kesler trade: I dunno, I personally would of went for picks/prospects rather than roster players (Bonino and Sbisa) at the moment. The 10th pick would of been a great return as something to build off of. I guess getting the #24th pick was decent in getting McCann.

Cleared out Booth and Garrison to make cap space. Basically used that money to pick up Miller and Vrbata. I don't mind Miller as we could use a veteran goalie, although I would of preferred an experienced goalie who is cheaper and would sign for less term. I'm not a big fan of the Vrbata signing though. He reminds of the Rucinsky/Hlavac/Bulis types. Soft euros with good skill, will help with some scoring in the regular season, but tend to disappear in the ruff tuff playoff games. I guess that's Benning's objective, just make the playoffs. Anything he gets out of these guys and his team afterwards is just gravy. Instead of Vrbata, I'd rather just go with our present wingers to put with the Sedins (plug in Jensen, Kassassian or good old Burr, whoever is playing well). Rather just resign Santos @ $1.5M, put him on the wing or something.

Used some 2nd/3rd round picks to grab Vey (unproven player) and Dorsett (elite 4th liner). Again, I'd rather use the picks to get some prospects who have greater potential. I think those type of players u can generally grab in the UFA market or waivers or swap of prospects, don't have to give up a decent pick (2nd/3rd rounder). I guess at that point in the draft, the picks are a bit of a crap shoot and I guess it's important to have depth if u want to win. I will say this though, not sure if I'm really a big fan of the GM getting players who his coach likes (ie: the Medicine Hat connection). Kind of like when Neil Smith just went out and got whatever Mike Keenan wanted with the Rangers, although it did work and they won it in 94. Generally, the GM just goes out and gets the best players who he thinks will best suit his team, the coach just works with what is given to him. I guess Willie isn't exactly asking for NHL veterans in the likes of Tikkanen, McTavish, Graves, Beukeboom, Larmer, Noonan and Matheau whose services would cost a lot to acquire. Maybe Willie knows something about these players as they could be undiscovered gems who could turn out to be excellent NHLers; on the other hand, maybe they simply are what they are presently projected as... fringe NHLers (a Lonny Bohonos and Mike Brown). Time will tell.

Gotta say, the comments that Benning (and even Trev) made about Edler being a #1 D-man was a huge bad sign that made me question their ability to evaluate talent. I know Benning was out east and probably didn't see the Canucks much and Trev was away from the game, but surely they must of watched some of the games that we were watching. After all, they are former players and supposedly professionals in their positions. At this point of the game, Edler has the potential to be a #2-#3 D-man at best. He has nice size and skillz, but is inconsistent, has confidence issues and is a bit of a softie. He was at his best when he had good players around him to take the pressure and responsibilities off him (especially Ehrhoff and a bit Salo). Isn't Benning the guy who said about Seguin, just as a leopard can't change its stripes, can we really expect Sequin to change? He is what he is. If we keep him around, we're going to be sitting around here again next season asking the same question. If Benning is banking on Edler to be that #1 guy, he's going to be in for a rude awakening. Edler can still be a good player in a supportive role, but he is not the Doughty/Chara/Pronger types who can play 30+ mins a game, play in all situations and carry the defense core on their backs.

Overall, I'm not exactly doing cartwheels with all that has transpired the past few days. I really think the team needs a proper rebuild, load up on prospects/picks and go for the McDavid sweepstakes. Instead, under Trev and Benning, they have revamped parts of the team on the fly. I don't think they have addressed the root of the problem though, an aging core in need of younger players who can take the load off them and become the new go to guys to carry the team. Youngs guys who can play right now and be players that our current veterans can pass the torch to. We have some potential young guys who may become our future core players (ie: BoHo, Shinkaruk, Virtanen, McCann, etc), but prospects are never a 100% guarantee and they are at least 2+ years away from being impact players in the NHL.

I think with all the changes, the Canucks definitely have a chance to battle for a playoff spot, but just like the last 2 seasons, not sure if they have the horses to go very far. Not much difference from the teams that MG put out the last couple years. Benning even said his objective was to make the playoffs as anything can happen once u go to the dance. He's right, a hot goalie or some lucky bounces can help an underdog team go far; however, more often than not, those cinderella teams eventually run out of gas by the 4th round and get knocked out by the better team (ie: 1982 Canucks, 2012 Devils, 2014 Rangers). Like Coco said, I just hope we don't become the new version of the Flames. A middle of the pack team that was always trying to make the playoffs, sometimes making it, but more often than not just missing it. As a result, not being crappy enuff to land that top pick and nab those generational superstars who can make it much easier to help turn around a franchise and make it a true contender.

Overall, I'm mixed on Benning. I applaud him for going out and getting what he wants, but not sure if what he's doing is the right thing. Is the team truly better with all the changes he made or is it just a flip flop? Just smoke and mirrors, cosmetic changes that don't really make the team any much better or worst. I'm skeptical and not really sold right now, it'll be interesting to see how the season unfolds. We'll see how things play out. As fans, that's why we watch the games, cuz u never really know how well or poor the team will play. Even though I laid my fair share of criticisms to MG, I wonder if he was given the chance to reset the team and go with the uptempo game he wanted our team to play, maybe he would of taken the club in a direction more to my liking and acquired players that I think would better help our team moving forward.
User avatar
Hockey Widow
CC Legend
Posts: 19129
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm

Re: Benning

Post by Hockey Widow »

^^^^^^


:cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers: :cheers:
The only HW the Canucks need
Boston Canucker
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 816
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 7:30 am

Re: Benning

Post by Boston Canucker »

Thus far, I'm very impressed with Benning, which is not to say that every move/pickup/draft pick will be golden. There will be fails along the way, but he comes off as a steady, smart hand at the wheel. I look forward to seeing 3-5 years down the road how his drafting plays out, as the key to building a long term contender is not really tanking but drafting well wherever you pick. LA is the model there. I don't expect this team to be in the playoffs next year, but I like the general direction of things.
User avatar
Island Nucklehead
MVP
MVP
Posts: 8392
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 2:27 pm
Location: Ottawa

Re: Benning

Post by Island Nucklehead »

Boston Canucker wrote:Thus far, I'm very impressed with Benning, which is not to say that every move/pickup/draft pick will be golden. There will be fails along the way, but he comes off as a steady, smart hand at the wheel. I look forward to seeing 3-5 years down the road how his drafting plays out, as the key to building a long term contender is not really tanking but drafting well wherever you pick. LA is the model there. I don't expect this team to be in the playoffs next year, but I like the general direction of things.
You win.


It can also be the Bruins model: with Bergeron, Lucic, Krejci and Marchand (4 of their top-5 scorers last season) all taken outside the 1st round.
User avatar
Spock
CC Veteran
Posts: 51
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 8:11 am
Location: Planet Vulcan, City: Reno

Re: Benning

Post by Spock »

Todd Bersnoozi wrote:
coco_canuck wrote:What is this vision? To load up on expensive vets with the cap room we have, be competitive in terms of chasing a playoff spot, translation: slightly above mediocre, and hope you have the young talent that can push over the next 2-3 years to maybe peak and have another shot at the cup with aging core pieces like Hank, Daniel, Bieksa, Burrows (if he isn' moved) and Hamhuis before they're done?

Benning has done a good job of clearing salary and I would hate to saddle the team with a couple of bad contracts that do little but keep the Canucks in Calgary Flames mode...or at least the Flames of yesteryear.
Yeah, I'm a bit mixed on Benning so far as well. I think the Canucks needed to rebuild and stock up with a bunch of good young players/prospects; however, Benning has been true to his word, he wants to the Canucks to fight for a playoff spot.

Kesler trade: I dunno, I personally would of went for picks/prospects rather than roster players (Bonino and Sbisa) at the moment. The 10th pick would of been a great return as something to build off of. I guess getting the #24th pick was decent in getting McCann.

Cleared out Booth and Garrison to make cap space. Basically used that money to pick up Miller and Vrbata. I don't mind Miller as we could use a veteran goalie, although I would of preferred an experienced goalie who is cheaper and would sign for less term. I'm not a big fan of the Vrbata signing though. He reminds of the Rucinsky/Hlavac/Bulis types. Soft euros with good skill, will help with some scoring in the regular season, but tend to disappear in the ruff tuff playoff games. I guess that's Benning's objective, just make the playoffs. Anything he gets out of these guys and his team afterwards is just gravy. Instead of Vrbata, I'd rather just go with our present wingers to put with the Sedins (plug in Jensen, Kassassian or good old Burr, whoever is playing well). Rather just resign Santos @ $1.5M, put him on the wing or something.

Used some 2nd/3rd round picks to grab Vey (unproven player) and Dorsett (elite 4th liner). Again, I'd rather use the picks to get some prospects who have greater potential. I think those type of players u can generally grab in the UFA market or waivers or swap of prospects, don't have to give up a decent pick (2nd/3rd rounder). I guess at that point in the draft, the picks are a bit of a crap shoot and I guess it's important to have depth if u want to win. I will say this though, not sure if I'm really a big fan of the GM getting players who his coach likes (ie: the Medicine Hat connection). Kind of like when Neil Smith just went out and got whatever Mike Keenan wanted with the Rangers, although it did work and they won it in 94. Generally, the GM just goes out and gets the best players who he thinks will best suit his team, the coach just works with what is given to him. I guess Willie isn't exactly asking for NHL veterans in the likes of Tikkanen, McTavish, Graves, Beukeboom, Larmer, Noonan and Matheau whose services would cost a lot to acquire. Maybe Willie knows something about these players as they could be undiscovered gems who could turn out to be excellent NHLers; on the other hand, maybe they simply are what they are presently projected as... fringe NHLers (a Lonny Bohonos and Mike Brown). Time will tell.

Gotta say, the comments that Benning (and even Trev) made about Edler being a #1 D-man was a huge bad sign that made me question their ability to evaluate talent. I know Benning was out east and probably didn't see the Canucks much and Trev was away from the game, but surely they must of watched some of the games that we were watching. After all, they are former players and supposedly professionals in their positions. At this point of the game, Edler has the potential to be a #2-#3 D-man at best. He has nice size and skillz, but is inconsistent, has confidence issues and is a bit of a softie. He was at his best when he had good players around him to take the pressure and responsibilities off him (especially Ehrhoff and a bit Salo). Isn't Benning the guy who said about Seguin, just as a leopard can't change its stripes, can we really expect Sequin to change? He is what he is. If we keep him around, we're going to be sitting around here again next season asking the same question. If Benning is banking on Edler to be that #1 guy, he's going to be in for a rude awakening. Edler can still be a good player in a supportive role, but he is not the Doughty/Chara/Pronger types who can play 30+ mins a game, play in all situations and carry the defense core on their backs.

Overall, I'm not exactly doing cartwheels with all that has transpired the past few days. I really think the team needs a proper rebuild, load up on prospects/picks and go for the McDavid sweepstakes. Instead, under Trev and Benning, they have revamped parts of the team on the fly. I don't think they have addressed the root of the problem though, an aging core in need of younger players who can take the load off them and become the new go to guys to carry the team. Youngs guys who can play right now and be players that our current veterans can pass the torch to. We have some potential young guys who may become our future core players (ie: BoHo, Shinkaruk, Virtanen, McCann, etc), but prospects are never a 100% guarantee and they are at least 2+ years away from being impact players in the NHL.

I think with all the changes, the Canucks definitely have a chance to battle for a playoff spot, but just like the last 2 seasons, not sure if they have the horses to go very far. Not much difference from the teams that MG put out the last couple years. Benning even said his objective was to make the playoffs as anything can happen once u go to the dance. He's right, a hot goalie or some lucky bounces can help an underdog team go far; however, more often than not, those cinderella teams eventually run out of gas by the 4th round and get knocked out by the better team (ie: 1982 Canucks, 2012 Devils, 2014 Rangers). Like Coco said, I just hope we don't become the new version of the Flames. A middle of the pack team that was always trying to make the playoffs, sometimes making it, but more often than not just missing it. As a result, not being crappy enuff to land that top pick and nab those generational superstars who can make it much easier to help turn around a franchise and make it a true contender.

Overall, I'm mixed on Benning. I applaud him for going out and getting what he wants, but not sure if what he's doing is the right thing. Is the team truly better with all the changes he made or is it just a flip flop? Just smoke and mirrors, cosmetic changes that don't really make the team any much better or worst. I'm skeptical and not really sold right now, it'll be interesting to see how the season unfolds. We'll see how things play out. As fans, that's why we watch the games, cuz u never really know how well or poor the team will play. Even though I laid my fair share of criticisms to MG, I wonder if he was given the chance to reset the team and go with the uptempo game he wanted our team to play, maybe he would of taken the club in a direction more to my liking and acquired players that I think would better help our team moving forward.
I have to say that Benning is making a decent first impression with me. I am not in favor of tanking. There are no guarantees with young players/draft picks, and a culture of losing is hard to overcome even with great talent - just look at the Oilers.
"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few... or the one."

Spock of Vulcan
Stardate 2476.8
Zedlee
CC 2nd Team All-Star
Posts: 438
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 1:52 pm

Re: Benning

Post by Zedlee »

Boston Canucker wrote:Thus far, I'm very impressed with Benning, which is not to say that every move/pickup/draft pick will be golden. There will be fails along the way, but he comes off as a steady, smart hand at the wheel. I look forward to seeing 3-5 years down the road how his drafting plays out, as the key to building a long term contender is not really tanking but drafting well wherever you pick. LA is the model there. I don't expect this team to be in the playoffs next year, but I like the general direction of things.
Also very impressed with Benning. Love how he handles media questions...he speaks plainly and thoughtfully without a trace of arrogance. How refreshing after Gillis. Benning/Linden have made a number of solid moves (the Kesler trade, coaching hire, drafts, signings) and I believe that the Canucks are now in the right hands, heading in the right direction.
User avatar
rikster
MVP
MVP
Posts: 658
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 6:41 am

Re: Benning

Post by rikster »

Also very impressed with Benning
.

What I like about Benning is that he seems to agree with the notion that your first loss is your best loss whereas with Gillis it was more about dragging decisions on until the 11th hour...As a players agent that style worked very well for Gillis but as a GM maybe not so well....

I think one of the strongest moves Benning made was a move he made before he made a move....He made it clear that he was not opposed to approaching a player with a movement clause and then went out and confirmed it with the Garrison deal...

Whether it was because of nagging injuries or becomming complacent, Garrison was a disappointment in Vancouver and I felt bad for him having to move from his home town for as long as it took to remind myself that the NHL has guaranteed contracts....

In hindsight one of Gillis biggest mistakes might have been his refusal to approach players with movement clauses and then to make matters worse, the organization brings in Torts to break up the country club atmosphere while declaring that nobody with a no trade clause would be dealt....Hello!!!

For those of us who support Benning, I think we are allowed to do so at times with wobbly knees because Benning has shown that he is not afraid to move out a player before that players best before date has expired and than can cause anxiety with some of us...

If managment are finished with moves until the season gets going I am fine with that....

I kinda like the idea of young players who could be on the big club being asked to continue to develope on the farm and come the trade deadlines if the team is having a repeat performance from last year then I can see Benning moving a number of core players for more youth and picks and then bringing the next wave of players from the farm to the parent team starting next season....

Take care...
User avatar
BladesofSteel
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1852
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 6:29 pm

Re: Benning

Post by BladesofSteel »

Is the team better today? Absolutely. While it's difficult to determine how this years edition will unfold, removing the old boss and coach alone was a significant step in the right direction.

Linden and Benning bring integrity, leadership and character. The new coach will instill a fresh system the players will actually understand, and the leadership group retained will help ease the transition for everyone.

The Canucks were not nearly as poor as their 13/14 record indicates, but a swift and sure shuffle of the deck was imperative.

Don't underestimate the character Linden, Hank, Dank, Bieksa and Hamhuis provide. The leadership this team maintains is something the Sabres, Islanders and Oilers' have lacked for years.

Linden and Benning are doing just fine.
User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 42955
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 12:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: Benning

Post by Strangelove »

rikster wrote: In hindsight one of Gillis biggest mistakes might have been his refusal to approach players with movement clauses and then to make matters worse, the organization brings in Torts to break up the country club atmosphere while declaring that nobody with a no trade clause would be dealt....Hello!!!
Yup.
____
Try to focus on someday.
Post Reply