The Great Jim Benning Debate! (And personal insult thread)
Moderator: Referees
- Blob Mckenzie
- MVP
- Posts: 7836
- Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
- Location: Oakalla
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
Yes Gillis didn't draft well and yes he made a few blunders most notably the Ballard trade. This however is a Benning thread so maybe we ( well most of us ) can get back on track and discuss Elmer. I hope to god the hemorrhaging of draft picks has finally stopped. Three 2nds and a third that were handed away could have put four more good prospects in the pipeline. Have a look at some of the youngsters taken in the 2nd round of the last three drafts it will make you puke. More lottery tickets = more chances at an impact player.
We all know the cupboard was pretty bare when Elmer got here but the bottom line is that he is on his way to no playoffs in 3 /4 seasons and a dearth of high end young talent. He is coming up to his fourth draft and badly needs a homerun or three.
We all know the cupboard was pretty bare when Elmer got here but the bottom line is that he is on his way to no playoffs in 3 /4 seasons and a dearth of high end young talent. He is coming up to his fourth draft and badly needs a homerun or three.
“I don’t care what you and some other poster were talking about”
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
Well, what did you expect in a rebuild?Blob Mckenzie wrote: We all know the cupboard was pretty bare when Elmer got here but the bottom line is that he is on his way to no playoffs in 3 /4 seasons and a dearth of high end young talent. He is coming up to his fourth draft and badly needs a homerun or three.
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
And sorry Blob, but three 2nds and one 3rd wouldn't have changed anything.
From 6 years of Gillis, the team got 11 NHL games out of his 2nd round picks - 8 from Sauve, 3 from Rodin.
Other than May Ray, the only other 2nd round pick of the Canucks to have had an impact in the past 20 years was Artem Chubarov.
From 6 years of Gillis, the team got 11 NHL games out of his 2nd round picks - 8 from Sauve, 3 from Rodin.
Other than May Ray, the only other 2nd round pick of the Canucks to have had an impact in the past 20 years was Artem Chubarov.
- Blob Mckenzie
- MVP
- Posts: 7836
- Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
- Location: Oakalla
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
I expected it and I have no problem with it. The Aquilinis on the other hand ...........ESQ wrote:Well, what did you expect in a rebuild?Blob Mckenzie wrote: We all know the cupboard was pretty bare when Elmer got here but the bottom line is that he is on his way to no playoffs in 3 /4 seasons and a dearth of high end young talent. He is coming up to his fourth draft and badly needs a homerun or three.
“I don’t care what you and some other poster were talking about”
- Blob Mckenzie
- MVP
- Posts: 7836
- Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
- Location: Oakalla
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
Go back and have a look at the last three drafts and see some high prospects picked in round 2ESQ wrote:And sorry Blob, but three 2nds and one 3rd wouldn't have changed anything.
From 6 years of Gillis, the team got 11 NHL games out of his 2nd round picks - 8 from Sauve, 3 from Rodin.
Other than May Ray, the only other 2nd round pick of the Canucks to have had an impact in the past 20 years was Artem Chubarov.
“I don’t care what you and some other poster were talking about”
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
Guess it depends what you want.ESQ wrote:Well, what did you expect in a rebuild?Blob Mckenzie wrote: We all know the cupboard was pretty bare when Elmer got here but the bottom line is that he is on his way to no playoffs in 3 /4 seasons and a dearth of high end young talent. He is coming up to his fourth draft and badly needs a homerun or three.
Just get it running on all eight cylinders again. or
Do a frame-off restoration where there is no chance of any rust anywhere for many years and the engine is brand new with twice the horse power.
Just a stupid car joke but it's just that you can rebuild or you can REBUILD.
"evolution"
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
2015 - 2 2nd rounders have become NHLers - Aho and CarloBlob Mckenzie wrote: Go back and have a look at the last three drafts and see some high prospects picked in round 2
2014 - 1 (Dvorak)
2013 - 2 (Lehkonnen and Petan)
2012 - 5 (McCabe, Sisssons, Tierney, Martinook, Severson)
2011 - 6 (Gibson, Jenner, Saad, Nieto, Granlund, Kucherov, Rask)
Except for Kucherov and maybe Aho, I wouldn't consider any of those first-line players, or even potential first-liners. I'd say that's pretty fair approximation of the value of 2nd rounders - a 1/3 chance to get a decent 3rd line player.
- Blob Mckenzie
- MVP
- Posts: 7836
- Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
- Location: Oakalla
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
Sigh.... these guys have been taken in the last three years and there are a dozen more guys I could name that will be damn good NHLers like Montour, Greenway, Chlapik, Point and a host of others. They are still organizational assets and should absolutely not be thrown in as overpayment for 3rd liners (Sutter) , bottom pairing d men ( Gudbranson) , or just given away for AHL talent like Pedan or Vey.
By your rationale maybe the team should just decline picking in the 2nd and 3rd rounds
By your rationale maybe the team should just decline picking in the 2nd and 3rd rounds
“I don’t care what you and some other poster were talking about”
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
Nah, I'm just saying we shouldn't act like trading away 3 2nd rounders in 3 years means that we're not in the middle of a re-build and/or that Benning has fucked up the re-build.Blob Mckenzie wrote: By your rationale maybe the team should just decline picking in the 2nd and 3rd rounds
2nd rounders are nice, but only 1 in 100 will turn a franchise around (e.g. PK Subban).
- Lancer
- CC 2nd Team All-Star
- Posts: 458
- Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 10:41 am
- Location: Kingston, Ontario
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
2nd rounders for prospects that can help is not a bad thing IMHO. The fact that Vey shit the bed is a bit of a boner but GM's will make those mistakes. Baerstchi has turned out okay and Granlund - well jury's out until next season but he showed well until his season was ended with surgery. We'll see how he does next year either on the 2nd or 3rd line.
Both players fit the mold of players who were further along in development. Benning deserves some patience with both players until they hit UFA.
Both players fit the mold of players who were further along in development. Benning deserves some patience with both players until they hit UFA.
Love the Sport. Love the Team.
Hate the League.
Hate the League.
- Island Nucklehead
- MVP
- Posts: 1219
- Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 2:27 pm
- Location: Ottawa
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
The guys we've traded draft picks for aren't likely to turn a franchise around, either. Not sure what the point is.ESQ wrote:Nah, I'm just saying we shouldn't act like trading away 3 2nd rounders in 3 years means that we're not in the middle of a re-build and/or that Benning has fucked up the re-build.Blob Mckenzie wrote: By your rationale maybe the team should just decline picking in the 2nd and 3rd rounds
2nd rounders are nice, but only 1 in 100 will turn a franchise around (e.g. PK Subban).
I think the unnerving thing isn't any of these deals in islolation, but the trend to throw draft picks around freely in so many deals. It's not just Baertschi/Vey/Granlund, but adding picks to Kassian for Prust, adding a pick to Jensen for Etem, trading down for Sutter, packaging essentially two top-35 picks for Gudbranson. The trend is the guy doesn't mind throwing picks away, precisely at a time when the Canucks need the picks.Lancer wrote:2nd rounders for prospects that can help is not a bad thing IMHO. The fact that Vey shit the bed is a bit of a boner but GM's will make those mistakes. Baerstchi has turned out okay and Granlund - well jury's out until next season but he showed well until his season was ended with surgery. We'll see how he does next year either on the 2nd or 3rd line.
Both players fit the mold of players who were further along in development. Benning deserves some patience with both players until they hit UFA.
Yeah yeah, none of those picks alone make a difference, but this team could easily have 8-10 more prospects right now, and the on-ice performance would be no different.
- Blob Mckenzie
- MVP
- Posts: 7836
- Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
- Location: Oakalla
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
So two of say Montour, Raddysh, Point or Dvorak wouldn't greatly assist this rebuild at all ?ESQ wrote:Nah, I'm just saying we shouldn't act like trading away 3 2nd rounders in 3 years means that we're not in the middle of a re-build and/or that Benning has fucked up the re-build.Blob Mckenzie wrote: By your rationale maybe the team should just decline picking in the 2nd and 3rd rounds
2nd rounders are nice, but only 1 in 100 will turn a franchise around (e.g. PK Subban).
“I don’t care what you and some other poster were talking about”
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
What franchise did PK Subban turn around?ESQ wrote:Nah, I'm just saying we shouldn't act like trading away 3 2nd rounders in 3 years means that we're not in the middle of a re-build and/or that Benning has fucked up the re-build.Blob Mckenzie wrote: By your rationale maybe the team should just decline picking in the 2nd and 3rd rounds
2nd rounders are nice, but only 1 in 100 will turn a franchise around (e.g. PK Subban).
- Hockey Widow
- CC Hall of Fan Member
- Posts: 2384
- Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
Benning year one screwed us. Management walked away after a 100+ point season thinking all we needed was a couple of upgrades to compete. Thinking our vets had more in the tank than they did. It dictated what happened year two which was in part excused due to a tremendous amount of injuries. By mid year three reality set in.
I'm not sure Benning could have gotten anything more for the vets he did trade with perhaps the exception of the two he couldn't trade, Vrbata and Hamhuis. But if year one was handled like now then we wouldn't have had a Vey, or Etem, or Clendenning or Granlund or Baertschi or Gudbranson, or Miller or Sutter or Eriksson or......but to delete all of that is throwing the baby out with the bath water. It's not all bad.
Two ways of looking at the entire body or work, some bad, some good, but none of it happens in isolation.
I'm not sure Benning could have gotten anything more for the vets he did trade with perhaps the exception of the two he couldn't trade, Vrbata and Hamhuis. But if year one was handled like now then we wouldn't have had a Vey, or Etem, or Clendenning or Granlund or Baertschi or Gudbranson, or Miller or Sutter or Eriksson or......but to delete all of that is throwing the baby out with the bath water. It's not all bad.
Two ways of looking at the entire body or work, some bad, some good, but none of it happens in isolation.
The only HW the Canucks need
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
Word Benning traded a shitload of picks, but to be fair he also accumulated picks as well.
traded 12 picks away
acquired 10 picks.
traded 12 picks away
acquired 10 picks.
Can the Canucks just win a Cup within the next 5 years.