The Great Jim Benning Debate! (And personal insult thread)

[Mickey107]

I agree with Reef. The great D men can take over a game, elevate those around them, are consistent regardless of their teammates. Edler is a very good 2-4 guy. I just can't see him as that guy that can carry the team, break it open, turn it up a notch when we need a goal or play 30+ minutes shutting down the other team. Every team would love one of those but there are only a handful in the league at any given time. There are a lot more 1a and 1b types than true number one.

They are hard to find, are seldom traded and often don't reach FA.

Wow, you guys don't remember too good.

[Hockey Widow]

For arguments sake, let's say Edler was that once do you still think he is?

[Mickey107]

Edler was never a #1 D - Man, he is above average but played on a great team that made him look good.

A true #1 D Man has the ability to make others better not benefit from a great team.

You need to go back and look at your old tapes between 2008 & 2012

[bckev]

For those that think Edler isn't that good. The canucks were in the playoff hunt before he got injured.

[Hockey Widow]

For those that think Edler isn't that good. The canucks were in the playoff hunt before he got injured.

I'm not saying Edler isn't a good player, I've said a 2-4 D man. But I don't put him up there with the elite defenders in the league. Perhaps he is OUR number one. Ok, but he still isn't at the elite level

[Zamboni Driver]

Benning overpaid for Miller on the downside of his career, it's a waste to tie up $6 mil in a (supposedly) blue chip goalie if you are rebuilding during those 3 years.

Miller is an average #1 goaltender on an average #1 goaltender salary:

http://www.canuckscorner.com/forums/vie ... 80#p251580

(the numbers are slightly dated now, but you get the picture)

BTW are you one of those "Must Leave Lotsa Capspace to Ensure Suckage Guys"?

Because, we've been through this a gazillion times and

Not. Gonna. Happen.

That's the point, we didn't need to pay $6 mil for a #1 goalie for a team in rebuild mode.

I

Now if he could just trade Sbisa I'd be a happy camper

"

And how exactly did signing Miller effect the Markstrom decision? Oh I get it, we could have kept Lack because we're sure he is gonna be a number one. It's exactly because Benning didn't know if Lack or Markstron could be a number one that he felt he had to sign one.

And as Doc says we do have Thatcher Demko and hopefully we get him signed. Not sure how signing Miller impacts that though.

Landing what number one D? Who was available that he could not sign because we had Miller? Ehrhoff, Franson?? What FA D did we miss out on? Or was there a trade we couldn't do because we didn't have the cap? Why do you assume signing Miller means Benning doesn't know we need a number one on D. In fact he has repeatedly said he believes you do need a true number one on D to be a contender. The real problem is he thinks we have that in Edler but that's another debate

We'll never really know, because we rarely get the full story.

Yes I would have liked to see them get Franson, I'd rather have him than the Pizza man

Frankly, I'd rather that they played last season with Lack & Markstrom, and have had Bieksa play out his contract as a Canuck. Not like Miller had a Vezina/Jennings year anyways

I've mentioned it before, but I'm fundamentally opposed to asking players to waive NTC's, after they've taken a pay cut to get an NTC.
I know some here have the attitude "Just f*** 'em", but what comes around goes around, and if we get a reputation that we don't honor contracts then blue chip D men don't choose to sign here.

[Lancer]

+1

Edler is a #1 Dman on an average team - not totally unlike Boychuk in the Brooklyn or Kronwall in Detroit. He's not an elite Dman of the likes of Keith, Doughty or Weber.

It's more of a statement on the club than the player that the team's blueline unraveled when he and Tanev went down.

All well and good that Benning is looking for that stud #1 Dman for the upcoming core, but one hopes that he can build some resilience in the blueline depth. If anything killed the team's season, it was this: the depth Benning thought he had wasn't there and his choice of depth options (Bartkowski, re-signing Webber) backfired. One hopes he's learned that lesson.

[Strangelove]

Benning overpaid for Miller on the downside of his career, it's a waste to tie up $6 mil in a (supposedly) blue chip goalie if you are rebuilding during those 3 years.

Miller is an average #1 goaltender on an average #1 goaltender salary:

http://www.canuckscorner.com/forums/vie ... 80#p251580

(the numbers are slightly dated now, but you get the picture)

BTW are you one of those "Must Leave Lotsa Capspace to Ensure Suckage Guys"?

Because, we've been through this a gazillion times and

Not. Gonna. Happen.

That's the point, we didn't need to pay $6 mil for a #1 goalie for a team in rebuild mode.

Sure we did... we needed to trade Lack for a pick because it's a rebuild.



HW: "Just curious as to how Benning could have better used that 6 million to help us."

ZD: "Perhaps landing that elusive #1 D that we've never had."

HW: "Landing what number one D? Who was available that he could not sign because we had Miller? Ehrhoff, Franson??"

ZD: "We'll never really know, because we rarely get the full story."



Yeah you're all over the map... not making sense here.

You suggest we could have signed some phantom #1 dee for $6M

... and that somehow that would have been better for the rebuild.

You suggest we should not have a proven #1 goaltender during a rebuild

... but feel we should have a #1 dee during a rebuild.

You need to organize your thoughts better than this imesho.

[Topper]

Edler is a #1 D

He is not one of the small handful of elite defenders.

[Zamboni Driver]

Sure we did... we needed to trade Lack for a pick because it's a rebuild.

Well we'll see where Mr. Brisebois ends up shan't we.

HW: "Just curious as to how Benning could have better used that 6 million to help us."

ZD: "Perhaps landing that elusive #1 D that we've never had."

HW: "Landing what number one D? Who was available that he could not sign because we had Miller? Ehrhoff, Franson??"

ZD: "We'll never really know, because we rarely get the full story."

Yeah you're all over the map... not making sense here.

You suggest we could have signed some phantom #1 dee for $6M

Maybe, we don't and won't know.
I didn't like the Miller deal or the Sbisa one, that's just my opinion.
Money would have been better spent elsewhere IMO, as mentioned earlier.

... and that somehow that would have been better for the rebuild.

You suggest we should not have a proven #1 goaltender during a rebuild

... but feel we should have a #1 dee during a rebuild.

I don't see a 38 year old Miller in the Canucks goal in 2 or 3 years when the kids have developed.
A younger blue chip D would still be playing in 2 or 3 years.

[Strangelove]

You suggest we could have signed some phantom #1 dee for $6M

Maybe, we don't and won't know.

Yes we do know we couldn't have signed a #1 dee for $6M.

Or perhaps now you're talking about trading for a $6M #1 dee?

If so, good luck with that!

You suggest we should not have a proven #1 goaltender during a rebuild

... but feel we should have a #1 dee during a rebuild.

I don't see a 38 year old Miller in the Canucks goal in 2 or 3 years when the kids have developed.
A younger blue chip D would still be playing in 2 or 3 years.

Oh, now it's a younger #1 dee!

Yeah, you're right, Canucks could have acquired a younger #1 dee just as easily as they acquired Miller.

Do you perchance move goalposts for a living?

[SKYO]

I didn't like the Miller deal or the Sbisa one, that's just my opinion.
Money would have been better spent elsewhere IMO, as mentioned earlier.
I don't see a 38 year old Miller in the Canucks goal in 2 or 3 years when the kids have developed.
A younger blue chip D would still be playing in 2 or 3 years.

Miller is great for transitioning to the new core while not blowing the confidence of the team entirely, plus MillerTime gives Markstrom and Demko (eventually) time to develop in a proper gradual way, hence our goaltending isn't of concern right now ala Felix Potvin, Sean Burke, Dan Cloutier, Irbe, Ouellet, Raycroft, Sanford, Snow, Weekes, Essensa days.

Not worrying about goaltending is priceless!

Respect to Nonis to stabilizing our goaltending for once, now we got a pipeline a template so to speak of developing goalies the right way, having Miller here is a godsend while Markstrom gains confidence in a protective way...his few games after Lu left playing with Lack was a disaster.

[Carl Yagro]

I honestly don't know how many times we have to repeat this.

There was no way any GM worth their salt or who valued their employment would start their regime with a Lack and Markstrom tandem. Marky wasn't even a proven AHL goalie 2 years ago.

We keep mocking the Oiler-style 10+ year rebuild, but yet we think we don't need veteran leadership and protection to develop our young kids? Who cares if it costs Aqua an extra 2 million a year if you end up with better players when those kids start making a difference after 2-3 years of development?

Aqua don't care. He'd probably prefer to pay for proven vets than for all the mistakes that are no longer playing or working here.

Nobody in the NHL thinks Taco Lack is a starter. Sweden doesn't even take the Joker seriously with that stupid jack o' lantern grin.

So paying $4.5 million over 3-4 years for a Taco Shack is a better deal? Did he prove he could consistently handle the load over his many years of NHL service where they wouldn't have to throw in a PTSD Markstrom? Where are all those "Hiller is better at $5million" posters now?

Markstrom is better because of his continuing development with Rollie, but also because he is protected by an NHL proven goalie in front of him.

Miller could still be moved before he finishes this contract... unlike the Luongo albatross that took forever and left the team with practically zero leverage. We're still hoping Lu doesn't retire early.

Right on Skyo, Doc, HW. You tell 'em.

[Meds]

Edler is a #1 D

He is not one of the small handful of elite defenders.

Edler is a top pairing D with the RIGHT partner.

Edler without Tanev is a gong show. His numbers showed an amazing reversal after the two of them paired together permanently last season.

I would suggest that the bar to measure a #1 defenseman by includes the criteria that states that he plays like a #1 regardless of who his partner is. Edler does NOT doe this.

I think part of the criteria for an elite guy is someone who elevates the play of his partner and plays at a high level 90% of the time or more.

Edler IS a top-pairing guy on probably every team in the league other than Nashville or Chicago. But if he ends up with the "wrong" partner, he can also play like a bottom-pairing plug. His individual consistency is what prevents him from being a true #1 guy.

For me he will always be one of the foremost examples of a Canuck player who flashed brilliance and would have been amazing trade bait but is instead a missed opportunity.

[Ronning's Ghost]

the depth Benning thought he had wasn't there and his choice of depth options (Bartkowski, re-signing Webber) backfired.

Unless the actual plan was a stealth tank.