Stop with "bleeds assets" bullshit, in his tenure he's stockpiled assets. Who cares if some picks get traded, he lands top quality players in late rounds and he used picks to get deals done. Swapping a pick for sutter and a second for gudbranson is not "bleeding assets" it's getting shit done, unless you want to stay with the status quo. Now all he needs to do is get his dad on the scouting team(the genius behind the price pick), and the Canucks will have the best drafting in the league.Blob Mckenzie wrote:Calling out a gm who mangles the salary structure, bleeds assets and targets 3rd and 4th line players and calls them foundational players is urinating. Cool beans.
The Great Jim Benning Debate! (And personal insult thread)
Moderator: Referees
-
- AHL Prospect
- Posts: 16
- Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2016 2:35 pm
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
- Hockey Widow
- CC Legend
- Posts: 16112
- Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
Truly there are one, maybe two do overs I wish for.
1) Vey for a 2nd. I understand why he made the deal but it was a flop.
2) Kassian and a 5th for Prust. Even knowing what we now know about Kassian and given Prust's injury I'd like that one over. Prust wasn't going to help us win a championship but I get he wanted to add character and grit. In hindsight I'd rather he waived Kassian. But the loss was only a 5th.
Those are the only two trades I think, in hindsight, that were bad deals. Ok, maybe the Shinkaruk deal. I don't hate the deal but I don't love it either. Time will tell on that one for sure.
I'm ok with every other deal he has made.
Signings? A tad high for Dorsett and Sbisa, maybe a year too long for each, but no trade protection. They aren't contracts that are or will become anchors. The only other signing that is debatable is Sutter. I have to reserve judgment until I see him play for a full year. Then I'll offer a more informed opinion.
I'm fine with Miller. He gives us a chance to win every night, allowed us to nurse Markstrom and not rush to sign Demko. A solid number one place holder for the organization. Vrbata was a great signing, for one year. Then he disappeared but in the first year he was heralded as the best UFA signing for that year.
Ericksson is ok. Sure I would have loved a four year deal but we wern't getting that. 6 M seems to be the asking price this year. But like Sutter I want to see him play for a year. All in all though I'm ok with that signing, better than Lucic IMHO.
Baertschi, Larson, Etem, Rodin, low risk high reward type of deals.
Love the Gradbruson deal. His best yet.
He also managed to move out a few NTC, Garrison, Bieksa, Kesler. Got two picks for Lack. Got nothing for Hamhuis or Vrbata. We all know how that all played out and it's hard to find fault in that given what we know went down.
His drafting has been stellar. Virtanen, McCann, Boeser, Trymakin, Demko, Juolevi, Brisbois. Three potential top four Dmen right there. A future number one in net and two potential top six forwards ( three if you count McCann but since he's gone....)
He's also sign a couple of college players, Stecher the most notable. As well other draft picks are starting to look good but who knows how they will turn out. So far he has all his picks for 2017 plus an extra second in 17 or 18 from Columbus. He has said, after this year's draft, that he is now at a point that he has organization depth at every position so he wants to keep his future picks. We all know however if there is a hockey deal out there that finds us able to get a true top six scorer with grit he may go back to the well once more. But I trust him to do that as I think his track record speaks for itself.
Benning may not be a genius but he isn't a fraction as bad as he is made out to be.
On the coaching ranks, he's got a great staff in place in Utica, managed to keep Melansen interested in coaching Demko enough that he will actually be the development coach. Meanwhile, Cloutier gets to work with Markstrom again, a guy Markstrom credits with turning his career around in Utica. Then he adds Jarvis to the NHL mix to help WD.
He's not an analytics guy. Says it has its place. The overwhelming amount of criticism comes from the analytics ranks. Not everyone I appreciate that. I'm thinking Blob here. I get his frustrations, dont agree with most of it but I understand it. But almost all the bitching comes from analytics.
Dim Jim is ok in my books. He takes a lot of crap that is for the most part misinformed tripe. Most of it from people who can't fathom wtf he's doing because in their mind we are in a full scale re-build, no matter how many times he tells them we are not. No matter how often he explains its a transition, stay competitive, provide leadership and character, allow the kids to develop slowly and where possible with protected minutes, all while trying to make the playoffs then........
Critics are not viewing this through Benning's lens. They have made up their minds what they think we are or should be doing and when Benning's decision don't jive with their opinions they slam him instead of recognizing that everything he has done has been 100% true to his plan.
I'm looking forward to this season, more so than the last two. I predict we make the playoffs. Win at least one round, maybe two, but get stopped there. That's ok. Hopefully then some of those critics will then finally understand what the process was and start giving Benning some of the credit he so richly deserves.
1) Vey for a 2nd. I understand why he made the deal but it was a flop.
2) Kassian and a 5th for Prust. Even knowing what we now know about Kassian and given Prust's injury I'd like that one over. Prust wasn't going to help us win a championship but I get he wanted to add character and grit. In hindsight I'd rather he waived Kassian. But the loss was only a 5th.
Those are the only two trades I think, in hindsight, that were bad deals. Ok, maybe the Shinkaruk deal. I don't hate the deal but I don't love it either. Time will tell on that one for sure.
I'm ok with every other deal he has made.
Signings? A tad high for Dorsett and Sbisa, maybe a year too long for each, but no trade protection. They aren't contracts that are or will become anchors. The only other signing that is debatable is Sutter. I have to reserve judgment until I see him play for a full year. Then I'll offer a more informed opinion.
I'm fine with Miller. He gives us a chance to win every night, allowed us to nurse Markstrom and not rush to sign Demko. A solid number one place holder for the organization. Vrbata was a great signing, for one year. Then he disappeared but in the first year he was heralded as the best UFA signing for that year.
Ericksson is ok. Sure I would have loved a four year deal but we wern't getting that. 6 M seems to be the asking price this year. But like Sutter I want to see him play for a year. All in all though I'm ok with that signing, better than Lucic IMHO.
Baertschi, Larson, Etem, Rodin, low risk high reward type of deals.
Love the Gradbruson deal. His best yet.
He also managed to move out a few NTC, Garrison, Bieksa, Kesler. Got two picks for Lack. Got nothing for Hamhuis or Vrbata. We all know how that all played out and it's hard to find fault in that given what we know went down.
His drafting has been stellar. Virtanen, McCann, Boeser, Trymakin, Demko, Juolevi, Brisbois. Three potential top four Dmen right there. A future number one in net and two potential top six forwards ( three if you count McCann but since he's gone....)
He's also sign a couple of college players, Stecher the most notable. As well other draft picks are starting to look good but who knows how they will turn out. So far he has all his picks for 2017 plus an extra second in 17 or 18 from Columbus. He has said, after this year's draft, that he is now at a point that he has organization depth at every position so he wants to keep his future picks. We all know however if there is a hockey deal out there that finds us able to get a true top six scorer with grit he may go back to the well once more. But I trust him to do that as I think his track record speaks for itself.
Benning may not be a genius but he isn't a fraction as bad as he is made out to be.
On the coaching ranks, he's got a great staff in place in Utica, managed to keep Melansen interested in coaching Demko enough that he will actually be the development coach. Meanwhile, Cloutier gets to work with Markstrom again, a guy Markstrom credits with turning his career around in Utica. Then he adds Jarvis to the NHL mix to help WD.
He's not an analytics guy. Says it has its place. The overwhelming amount of criticism comes from the analytics ranks. Not everyone I appreciate that. I'm thinking Blob here. I get his frustrations, dont agree with most of it but I understand it. But almost all the bitching comes from analytics.
Dim Jim is ok in my books. He takes a lot of crap that is for the most part misinformed tripe. Most of it from people who can't fathom wtf he's doing because in their mind we are in a full scale re-build, no matter how many times he tells them we are not. No matter how often he explains its a transition, stay competitive, provide leadership and character, allow the kids to develop slowly and where possible with protected minutes, all while trying to make the playoffs then........
Critics are not viewing this through Benning's lens. They have made up their minds what they think we are or should be doing and when Benning's decision don't jive with their opinions they slam him instead of recognizing that everything he has done has been 100% true to his plan.
I'm looking forward to this season, more so than the last two. I predict we make the playoffs. Win at least one round, maybe two, but get stopped there. That's ok. Hopefully then some of those critics will then finally understand what the process was and start giving Benning some of the credit he so richly deserves.
The only HW the Canucks need
- Madcombinepilot
- MVP
- Posts: 4236
- Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 9:54 am
- Location: Saskatoon, Sk.
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
Holy crap, HW.....
We get it already.. You don't have to type it 6 times already...
We get it already.. You don't have to type it 6 times already...
The 'Chain of Command' is the chain I am going to beat you with until you understand I am in charge.
-
- AHL Prospect
- Posts: 16
- Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2016 2:35 pm
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
Well said hw
- BladesofSteel
- CC Hall of Fan Member
- Posts: 1546
- Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 6:29 pm
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
Theres an echo in here
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
Hdub had a point to make! Awesome!
edit: oh shit, maybe a stroke
edit: oh shit, maybe a stroke
Had a 10 game pack in 1987/88, I am a fan OK?
(and I watched GMJB play defense for us)
(and I watched GMJB play defense for us)
-
- CC 2nd Team All-Star
- Posts: 211
- Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:20 pm
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
Great post HW, but one thing to add. We don't have all off our picks for next year.
5th was traded to EDM for Larsen ****Edmonton receives 2017 VAN 4 instead of 2017 VAN 5 if Philip Larsen meets undisclosed performance thresholds.
6th traded to NYR as part of the Etem deal.
But it shouldn't be hard to recover picks in those rounds.
5th was traded to EDM for Larsen ****Edmonton receives 2017 VAN 4 instead of 2017 VAN 5 if Philip Larsen meets undisclosed performance thresholds.
6th traded to NYR as part of the Etem deal.
But it shouldn't be hard to recover picks in those rounds.
- Hockey Widow
- CC Legend
- Posts: 16112
- Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
Man that was weird. Perhaps one of our nice mods can delet a few posts. Last night this board was not responding to anything I did, so I kept doing it. Sorry about that.
I hate technology some days. I still check my math in my head to make sure the calculator is right!!
Between Samsung spell check and hip cupping message boards I do get so frustrated. I apologize for the flood. I will exercise patience next time instead of hitting submit repeatedly!!!
I hate technology some days. I still check my math in my head to make sure the calculator is right!!
Between Samsung spell check and hip cupping message boards I do get so frustrated. I apologize for the flood. I will exercise patience next time instead of hitting submit repeatedly!!!
The only HW the Canucks need
- Hockey Widow
- CC Legend
- Posts: 16112
- Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
You are so right! Thanks.givemeda411 wrote:Great post HW, but one thing to add. We don't have all off our picks for next year.
5th was traded to EDM for Larsen ****Edmonton receives 2017 VAN 4 instead of 2017 VAN 5 if Philip Larsen meets undisclosed performance thresholds.
6th traded to NYR as part of the Etem deal.
But it shouldn't be hard to recover picks in those rounds.
The only HW the Canucks need
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
I couldn't get on at all Sunday, just like last Sunday, no idea?Hockey Widow wrote:Man that was weird. Perhaps one of our nice mods can delet a few posts. Last night this board was not responding to anything I did, so I kept doing it. Sorry about that.
I hate technology some days. I still check my math in my head to make sure the calculator is right!!
Between Samsung spell check and hip cupping message boards I do get so frustrated. I apologize for the flood. I will exercise patience next time instead of hitting submit repeatedly!!!
IMO; Impossible to fairly rank GMs as they are all dealing with an agenda from ownerships, well most of them.
If you consider the theme of get younger but still make the playoffs, JB seems to doing alright but that's a tough task....
"evolution"
-
- CC Hall of Fan Member
- Posts: 1158
- Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2011 9:07 am
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
Absofuckinlutely. You nailed it Doc.Strangelove wrote:As I said before, weak-bladdered Nuckers got their panties in a bunch when a GM with "balls" finally arrived.Blob Mckenzie wrote: The fact you think the negativity towards Elmer is solely in the east is funny.
Enemies in the east saw the opportunity presented by said urinators and proceeded to jump all over dat dere.
The "funny" part will come in a few years when the entire hockey world will be forced to admit GMJB's genius.
And you are well aware of the fact YOUR Canucks are one of the most hated NHL teams over the last 5 years.
-
- CC Hall of Fan Member
- Posts: 1158
- Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2011 9:07 am
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
Don't be saying sorry Widow. You are one of the best posters on this site.
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
For what it's worth, Boeser is already lighting it up in N.D.
2 games, 6 points..
2 games, 6 points..
"evolution"
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
ND lost a couple key players this year in Stecher and Caggiula so I thought Boeser's numbers may slide or level off, and they still might.micky107 wrote:For what it's worth, Boeser is already lighting it up in N.D.
2 games, 6 points..
ND bringing in Jost will help as it seems he can replace what Caggiula brought, and it's clear what Stecher did for the ND offence. However, it does seem right now that Boeser may be the key cog in the wheel and that's a fantastic sign!
Let's see how things go when they start playing teams within their conference. They play Minnesota Duluth in back-to-backs on Oct 28/29. That'll be a good test to see if ND can hold their #1 ranking and Boeser can maintain his scoring prowess.
I'm pretty pumped about Boeser's potential, maybe at the end of the season once ND is done he can make some AHL appearances. He should also be one of the leaders for the US Team at the World Juniors.
-
- MVP
- Posts: 1002
- Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 5:25 pm
- Location: New Westminster
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
I think that's a fair and well-balanced assessment, which is a welcome change of pace. I disagree on a couple of points, which is to say, I strongly agree with you when you say:Hockey Widow wrote:Benning may not be a genius but he isn't a fraction as bad as he is made out to be.
So, for example, when you say:Hockey Widow wrote:Time will tell on that one for sure.
I feel compelled to note that none of these players has made an NHL All-Star team yet. Promising, encouraging, exciting -- sure, but it's just too early to say more than that.Hockey Widow wrote:His drafting has been stellar.
And when you say:
I would add that this may yet also fall into the wished-for trade do-overs, as well. Canucks fans may yet mourn the loss of Clendening.Hockey Widow wrote:The only other signing that is debatable is Sutter.
Edit: sorry, I was thinking of Forsling, here -- who was part of that trade, in a round-about way.
Also in that category, while I am excited by what Gudbranson may bring to the defence, I can foresee a time when the loss of McCann seems like too great a price, as there is no other clear first line centre heir-apparent in the system. As with the others, only time will tell for certain.
On all the specifics of personnel swaps and draft selections, I concede that Benning faces an erratically moving target in exactly what sort of game the NHL executive will want to sell by the time young players mature. As I have said, on the day that the Canucks ice Strangelove's all-asshole all-stars, a team that would intimidate the Broad Street Bullies, the NHL will decide that it wants to showcase the speed and skill of its stars, every possible infraction will be called, and the Canucks won't have 5 skaters on the ice all season. This makes it hard to know what skill-set to prioritize.
What we can critique now is the plan. As you say:
I have always been suspicious of this sort of "half-way" approach to a transition. Maybe it's all that he and Linden could talk the Little Eagles into. Maybe it's a special case of how to get the most value from a pair of aging super-stars who would be hard to trade and are loyal to the city. Maybe I'm undervaluing the importance of maintaining a culture of intense competition. In any case, if that's really the plan (see "Stealth Tank" conspiracy theory), it's not a plan in which I have great confidence.Hockey Widow wrote:Most of it from people who can't fathom wtf he's doing because in their mind we are in a full scale re-build, no matter how many times he tells them we are not. No matter how often he explains its a transition, stay competitive, provide leadership and character, allow the kids to develop slowly and where possible with protected minutes, all while trying to make the playoffs then........
But it's a results-driven business. If this plan results in a Stanley Cup championship by 2020, then I will cheerfully acclaim Benning's genius, and be happy for Canucks fans everywhere -- especially the ones on this board.