Time to Change the Oil.

[Puck]

Ahhh criticism from the other side of the floor.... it's just so easy.

Other than having won the draft lottery twice, in a perfect world scenario, how much further along do you think the Canucks could have been over this tenure? A few more picks from rounds 3-5? Would that lift Benning out of this virtual GM basement?

The media (and some on these boards) keep hammering Linden and Benning for what they do or don't say at press conferences. Is anyone really of the belief that Linden would ever consider being truly transparent? The front office is dancing a tight-rope trying to rebuild/rework/reinvent the team while still selling tickets. It's all spin. They may have minor concern about what Botchford writes because the same season-ticket holders and prospective buyers might read it, but their priority is that they have a job to do and they won't tell you what they really think until they are long gone. In the end, it will be the final results that count, not what anyone thought along the way.

This is not meant to be a glowing endorsement of the two of them. They may end up with a failing grade once this all plays out, but what they say along the way is of little consequence.

[Strangelove]

I hate Botchford but...

... politics makes strange bedfellows.

[Strangelove]

Doc, the reason the hockey media and most fans have had so little confidence in Jim Benning is because up until recently he's been making moves that dont make sense for teams in our position...

So you didn't read the post to which you are responding.

Talk about "fingers in ears"...

[Cousin Strawberry]

Doc, the reason the hockey media and most fans have had so little confidence in Jim Benning is because up until recently he's been making moves that dont make sense for teams in our position...

So you didn't read the post to which you are responding.

Talk about "fingers in ears"...

Ah but i did Doc...your first 13 months he makes some seemingly rebuild-like moves as you mention then goes and announces that hes looking at a contender and no more rebuild-like moves that summer...unless the Sutter acquisition counts.

This all fits in with the general consensus that he's been operating like a bumbling buffoon and why everyone all over multiple media outlets rank him as the absolute worst GM in the league.

Jim Benning Predicts 100 Points

Looking around at the experts' preseason predictions, you won't find very many experts pegging the 2015-16 Vancouver Canucks to make the playoffs.

We heard the same song last year—which had some justification considering the team was coming off a 25rd-place finish in 2013-14 and had made wholesale changes in the offseason.

Jim Benning doesn't care what the experts think. Speaking with TSN's Bob McKenzie in Penticton, the Canucks' general manager is expecting another 100-point season for his team.

Benning says "We're going to have some young players come in this year and make our team. We're going to be a faster team, a harder team to play against this year," according to The Score.
http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog/Carol-Sc ... /194/70936

Jim waffles worse than IHOP!

[Cousin Strawberry]

Thought I would quote the whole article....

(MOD SNIP)

(Sorry Dan, but most sites don't allow the quoting of entire articles)

Awwww...wheres the link i posted then? That one was gold

[Blob Mckenzie]

Lol a harder team to play against, more like a harder team to watch. The team has less grit and tenacity than any of the Gillis rosters. I honestly can't think of an NHL roster in event history that's softer than the Elmer Marshmallow crew.

[Cousin Strawberry]

Lol

And after predicting a 100 pt season and the team hitting rock bottom what does Jim do....signs an overpriced free agent in Eriksson and then immediately watches his experiment have an even worse disaster of a season. Saving face finally at the deadline by finding ways to move declining assets for prospects.

Honestly why there is such a heater argument in his favour eacapes me

[SKYO]

Lol a harder team to play against, more like a harder team to watch. The team has less grit and tenacity than any of the Gillis rosters. I honestly can't think of an NHL roster in event history that's softer than the Elmer Marshmallow crew.

LOL I know eh?

Yet when the team or anyone in cyber world suggests trying to trade for a big power forward type player, it's automatic reply 'nope! that canuck player wouldn't fetch such a type.'

It is why it's imperative you, UDL, IN, Mickey and all the old school rock em sock em types HOPE this current team improves this season, so as this team can 'create' valued assets to deal for your beloved gritty/tenacity/size type players who have some skill.

We all are fans of the Canucks team through thick & thin, but we need to have some cohesive thoughts on how to improve the team besides the non-stop attacking of management & the relentless hatred on Sutter and Eriksson.

[Mickey107]

Lol a harder team to play against, more like a harder team to watch. The team has less grit and tenacity than any of the Gillis rosters. I honestly can't think of an NHL roster in event history that's softer than the Elmer Marshmallow crew.

LOL I know eh?

Yet when the team or anyone in cyber world suggests trying to trade for a big power forward type player, it's automatic reply 'nope! that canuck player wouldn't fetch such a type.'

It is why it's imperative you, UDL, IN, Mickey and all the old school rock em sock em types HOPE this current team improves this season, so as this team can 'create' valued assets to deal for your beloved gritty/tenacity/size type players who have some skill.

We all are fans of the Canucks team through thick & thin, but we need to have some cohesive thoughts on how to improve the team besides the non-stop attacking of management & the relentless hatred on Sutter and Eriksson.

I haven't seen anyone suggesting a mid 70s "Broad Street Bullies", Flyer's line-up.
What's old school? Oh ya, a term from Slap Shot which was made in the 70s, I think referring to Eddie Shore or someone I know nothing about. Anyways, cohesive is a good word. One that I wouldn't use to depict our beloved
team the last few years. The message from management has deviated several times. By pointing that out, is debating not attacking.
I don't hate Eriksson but he's getting a lot of money, so is Sutter for what he really is.
Now this isn't the end of the world but in Eriksson's case, a slump is a slump but the guy needs to get his head together and lose the obvious depression problems that bring the whole team down.
Sutter needs to keep his mouth in check and work on his own game hence being a better veteran presence.

But I'll tell ya who knows. Bo knows! That kid, I mean man, has sent his share of messages.
After an interview, he pumps his fist and says YOUTH!.
And what did he do towards the end of the season? Dropped the gloves and showed yet another aspect of what a "team game", is all about in the NHL. I really don't think it was to show how much money he's worth. Just being a leader.

[Strangelove]

Doc, the reason the hockey media and most fans have had so little confidence in Jim Benning is because up until recently he's been making moves that dont make sense for teams in our position...

So you didn't read the post to which you are responding.

Talk about "fingers in ears"...

Ah but i did Doc...

Ah so much for giving you the benefit of the doubt then.

(my "fingers in ears" comment stands)

your first 13 months he makes some seemingly rebuild-like moves as you mention

But you said... a few times... that he has only made rebuild-like moves "recently".

You sir are waffling like an IHOP !

then goes and announces that hes looking at a contender and no more rebuild-like moves that summer...unless the Sutter acquisition counts.

UMMM... Lord Benning has never called your Vancouver Canucks a "contender".

FTR the "rebuild-like moves that summer" also included trading Bieksa/Lack for 2nd, 3rd, 7th round picks.

Jim Benning Predicts 100 Points

Bob McKenzie asked: "Is the team capable of reaching the 100-point plateau again?"

Jim Benning replied: "Yeah, I think so."

'Anything being possible' means that is the correct way for any NHL GM to answer that question.

You make it sound as though he went out of his way to proclaim Canucks will definitely be a 100 point team.

But agenda-folk such as yourself have no interest in keeping things in their proper perspective right Danny?

Are you capable of better?

Yeah, I think so.

[Strangelove]

Thought I would quote the whole article....

(MOD SNIP)

(Sorry Dan, but most sites don't allow the quoting of entire articles)

Awwww...wheres the link i posted then? That one was gold

Awwww... I did not SNIP a link (you did not post a link in that post).

BTW, before I SNIPPED that post, I ADDED a link to a previous post of yours here:

http://www.canuckscorner.com/forums/vie ... 64#p286964

(I had to google the quote to find the link... you're welcome)

All quoted articles must include URL links FYI Danny.

And, as mentioned, only small fractions of articles can be quoted.

It's about copyright laws... not to mention not cluttering up the board.

[Blob Mckenzie]

Lol a harder team to play against, more like a harder team to watch. The team has less grit and tenacity than any of the Gillis rosters. I honestly can't think of an NHL roster in event history that's softer than the Elmer Marshmallow crew.

LOL I know eh?

Yet when the team or anyone in cyber world suggests trying to trade for a big power forward type player, it's automatic reply 'nope! that canuck player wouldn't fetch such a type.'

It is why it's imperative you, UDL, IN, Mickey and all the old school rock em sock em types HOPE this current team improves this season, so as this team can 'create' valued assets to deal for your beloved gritty/tenacity/size type players who have some skill.

We all are fans of the Canucks team through thick & thin, but we need to have some cohesive thoughts on how to improve the team besides the non-stop attacking of management & the relentless hatred on Sutter and Eriksson.

Just so I have this straight: it's ok to go way over the top to support management and to proclaim every move they make is excellent and to annoint the management as genius and all the draft picks are amazing and if not for injuries it's a great team blah blah blah blah ..... but do NOT EVER criticize ANY MOVES this administration makes no matter how poor they are. That's it in a nutshell right ? Just want to make sure I have this right.

[Strangelove]

We all are fans of the Canucks team through thick & thin, but we need to have some cohesive thoughts on how to improve the team besides the non-stop attacking of management & the relentless hatred on Sutter and Eriksson.

..... do NOT EVER criticize ANY MOVES this administration makes no matter how poor they are. That's it in a nutshell right ? Just want to make sure I have this right.

Aaaaand... inevitably, irrevocably... Blob reaches the "beer on cheerios" tipping point.

[Meds]

We all are fans of the Canucks team through thick & thin, but we need to have some cohesive thoughts on how to improve the team besides the non-stop attacking of management & the relentless hatred on Sutter and Eriksson.

..... do NOT EVER criticize ANY MOVES this administration makes no matter how poor they are. That's it in a nutshell right ? Just want to make sure I have this right.

Aaaaand... inevitably, irrevocably... Blob reaches the "beer on cheerios" tipping point.

I honestly don't think I can tell who trolls more around here.....Doc or Tuna.

Although, on second thought, Tuna more or less confines homemaker to just the one thread.....hmmmm.....

[Strangelove]

^ You honestly don't think Blob deserved criticism for that response Mëds?

Y'know, you're not doing him any favours by ignoring his drinking problem...