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

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
Cornuck
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 8198
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 11:39 am
Location: Everywhere

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Post by Cornuck » Mon Apr 18, 2016 4:58 pm

Sounds like a new post with a poll is needed! :D
2019-20 - Playoff Bound

User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 21969
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Post by Strangelove » Mon Apr 18, 2016 5:16 pm

Aaronp18 wrote:
Zamboni Driver wrote: No, but add in Sbisa's $3.6 and you have more than 6.
Who? Seriously, what #1 Dman has signed with a new team in the past 2 years? Oh and BTW, you can't just lump Miller's $6M and Sbisa's $3.6 together considering they weren't signed at the same time. Miller signed in 2014 and Sbisa signed his extension in 2015. So you still only has $6M.

So who would it be for $6M?
Zamboni Driver wrote: I never said they could, I said they could have tried.
How exactly do you know they didn't try? You've already stated we don't know the whole story!
Zamboni Driver wrote: So would have other options.
Seriously, what other options?

You have Miller's $6M, who would you have spent that on instead of him? And it would have left us with Lack and Markstrom (who played like shit in FLA and only regained form after some great goalie coaching in Utica, something he never received in FLA).

We would've been a complete disaster in net without Miller last year!
Image

As I said before ZD, you're not just making any sense.

You generally disagree with yourself and you are generally disagreeable.

No offense dude...
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!

User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 21969
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Post by Strangelove » Mon Apr 18, 2016 5:17 pm

Hank wrote: Where are all those "Hiller is better at $5million" posters now?
Image
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!

User avatar
Island Nucklehead
MVP
MVP
Posts: 8352
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 2:27 pm
Location: Ottawa

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Post by Island Nucklehead » Mon Apr 18, 2016 5:22 pm

I'm kinda hoping we can find out what Lucic and Miller on the same team looks like. Could be a neat way to get a few more teams on that no-trade list.

User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 21969
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Post by Strangelove » Mon Apr 18, 2016 5:31 pm

Island Nucklehead wrote:I'm kinda hoping we can find out what Lucic and Miller on the same team looks like. Could be a neat way to get a few more teams on that no-trade list.
That was a long time ago!



They're both professionals, they'll work it out. :mex:
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!

User avatar
Doyle Hargraves
CC Legend
Posts: 15964
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Post by Doyle Hargraves » Mon Apr 18, 2016 5:50 pm

If Miller, Sbisa , Dorsett and Sutter weren't signed to their hideous deals and instead replaced by minimum wage guys , the team would have a shitpile of cash to bring in three high end ufa instead of one.Its not like the aforementioned four players are any better than 600 k a year scrubs. Why do I have the feeling Ive said this before? Lucic, Ladd/Eriksson/Okposo and Demers/Goligoski could have really sped up the rebuild

At this point however Id rather see the deigos take the cheque book away from Elmer considering the past few signings he has butchered.The rebuild could have been a fair bit quicker with a few less blunders but right now one year deals for older players would seem to be a better idea.Flog them at the deadline for picks and prospects.
“ROR IS OVERRATED, MACKINNON IS A BUM, TAVARES IS DONE”

User avatar
Hockey Widow
CC Legend
Posts: 15119
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Post by Hockey Widow » Mon Apr 18, 2016 5:53 pm

Blob Mckenzie wrote:If Miller, Sbisa , Dorsett and Sutter weren't signed to their hideous deals and instead replaced by minimum wage guys , the team would have a shitpile of cash to bring in three high end ufa instead of one.Its not like the aforementioned four players are any better than 600 k a year scrubs. Why do I have the feeling Ive said this before?

At this point however Id rather see the deigos take the cheque book away from Elmer considering the past few signings he has butchered.The rebuild could have been a fair bit quicker with a few less blunders but right now one year deals for older players would seem to be a better idea.Flog them at the deadline for picks and prospects.

Now this makes sense. At least it is a coherent argument. No Miller, Dorsett, Sbisa, Sutter. Instead Lack, Markstrom, Stamkos, Lucic and Shattenkirk!
The only HW the Canucks need

User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 21969
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Post by Strangelove » Mon Apr 18, 2016 6:00 pm

Blob Mckenzie wrote:but right now one year deals for older players would seem to be a better idea.Flog them at the deadline for picks and prospects.
OMG he's gone full Leaf! :crazy:
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!

User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 21969
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Post by Strangelove » Mon Apr 18, 2016 6:06 pm

Blob Mckenzie wrote:If Miller, Sbisa , Dorsett and Sutter weren't signed to their hideous deals...
Lol, you used to only quibble about those contracts only being a few $100K too high

(aside from the Sbisa contract of course, which you've always despised)

What happened Blobby? :eh:
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!

User avatar
Doyle Hargraves
CC Legend
Posts: 15964
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Post by Doyle Hargraves » Mon Apr 18, 2016 6:11 pm

I honestly don't care at this point. I was throwing in my two cents as to why the Miller contract among others was preventing this team from adding high end players which could expedite the rebuild process. But since Elmer fucked that up with those bad signings I say limit his signings this summer to one year deals so he can't hamstring the team even more than he already has. Have another shitty year and a top five pick while developing more youth and then fire the lot of them from Linden on down.
“ROR IS OVERRATED, MACKINNON IS A BUM, TAVARES IS DONE”

JMoose
CC Rookie
Posts: 27
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2016 12:15 pm

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Post by JMoose » Mon Apr 18, 2016 6:19 pm

Blob Mckenzie wrote:If Miller, Sbisa , Dorsett and Sutter weren't signed to their hideous deals and instead replaced by minimum wage guys , the team would have a shitpile of cash to bring in three high end ufa instead of one.Its not like the aforementioned four players are any better than 600 k a year scrubs. Why do I have the feeling Ive said this before? Lucic, Ladd/Eriksson/Okposo and Demers/Goligoski could have really sped up the rebuild

At this point however Id rather see the deigos take the cheque book away from Elmer considering the past few signings he has butchered.The rebuild could have been a fair bit quicker with a few less blunders but right now one year deals for older players would seem to be a better idea.Flog them at the deadline for picks and prospects.
I don't think there is much to argue with there and the only counter to this that I can think of is that who could have foreseen 2 years ago that those players would be permitted to hit the UFA market by their respective clubs. I think Lucic was the only name mentioned back then in any kind of talks because of some rumoured Benning connection and the Bruins being under a cap crunch with ageing players.

I suspect that one of Demers or Goligoski will get extended by Dallas and one of them will have their rights traded at or before the draft. Jim Nil is probably looking at things with one eye on the end of next season when Benn will be up for a new contract, and I would imagine they want to keep Nichushkin this season and let Hemsky walk next year if they can't trade him first.

User avatar
SKYO
CC Legend
Posts: 10964
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:34 pm

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Post by SKYO » Mon Apr 18, 2016 7:05 pm

Blob Mckenzie wrote:I honestly don't care at this point. I was throwing in my two cents as to why the Miller contract among others was preventing this team from adding high end players which could expedite the rebuild process.
But since Elmer fucked that up with those bad signings I say limit his signings this summer to one year deals so he can't hamstring the team even more than he already has. Have another shitty year and a top five pick while developing more youth and then fire the lot of them from Linden on down.
Why try to add high end players last offseason? Plus there was a shitty past couple of offseasons UFA wise, and it was good we had a tank year for a better pick and let the young guys develop further another year.

This offeason and next are much better UFA options, 2017 especially for dmen.
I mean the best dmen avail this offseason is Yandle, Demers and the aging Goligoski? those guys ain't game changers.
Yandle is the best of this bunch and he's probably gonna get paid a shitload.
A long time ago, a baseball player remarked: "If I owned a ballclub, I'd hire a $5,000 coach and a $15,000 scout."

User avatar
Doyle Hargraves
CC Legend
Posts: 15964
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Post by Doyle Hargraves » Mon Apr 18, 2016 7:39 pm

That's what I'm saying. Try to keep up Sopping Cart. He already butcherfucked the teams payroll so don't spend on anything more than one year deals for the next 12 months. Let the new management team have a clean slate to work with in 2017 or 2018. Limit the damage , develop the kids and get another high pick.
“ROR IS OVERRATED, MACKINNON IS A BUM, TAVARES IS DONE”

User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 21969
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Post by Strangelove » Mon Apr 18, 2016 7:49 pm

Lol, Elmer is going to be here long after you're dead and gone Blobby Blananas!

Elmer is going to engineer the first Canucks Stanley Cup Championship team.

Oh it's true!
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!

User avatar
SKYO
CC Legend
Posts: 10964
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:34 pm

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Post by SKYO » Mon Apr 18, 2016 8:35 pm

Blob Mckenzie wrote:If Miller, Sbisa , Dorsett and Sutter weren't signed to their hideous deals and instead replaced by minimum wage guys , the team would have a shitpile of cash to bring in three high end ufa instead of one.Its not like the aforementioned four players are any better than 600 k a year scrubs. Why do I have the feeling Ive said this before? Lucic, Ladd/Eriksson/Okposo and Demers/Goligoski could have really sped up the rebuild
Blob Mckenzie wrote:That's what I'm saying. Try to keep up Sopping Cart. He already butcherfucked the teams payroll so don't spend on anything more than one year deals for the next 12 months. Let the new management team have a clean slate to work with in 2017 or 2018. Limit the damage , develop the kids and get another high pick.
You're grasping at straws to hate on ol' JB.

The main job is to get this team much younger so we can have a new core for the future, and the master plan is well on it's way, the building blocks are being put in place and it's only been under two years to get that done.

Benning and Linden have done a fine job of delicately moving vets out with respect.

Got a lot of young guys developing well in Utica ready to take on more responsibility and seamlessly move up to the big club.
A long time ago, a baseball player remarked: "If I owned a ballclub, I'd hire a $5,000 coach and a $15,000 scout."

Post Reply