Page 30 of 103

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2017 2:52 pm
by Chef Boi RD
Blob Mckenzie wrote:
RoyalDude wrote:
Island Nucklehead wrote:
ukcanuck wrote: What you seem to be not taking into consideration is that the players Benning might have had to flip for extra 2/3/4th round picks were not wanted or tradable, most would have cleared waivers.

It has taken 3 years just to get to the point where we have a Hansen or a tanev to bring to the table without getting laughed out of the conversation.
Huh? Benning has acquired lots of picks in his time here. He just seems to send them out the door as fast as he acquires them.

He's acquired 9 draft picks since showing up. He's traded away 12.
Traded Picks - 12

7th round pick along with Garrison to Tampa - If that's what it takes to get rid of Big Boom Shot, then good riddance.
2nd rounder for Gudbranson - LOVE IT!
4th rounder for Gudbranson - LOVE IT!
5th for Prust - Thank You Montreal for relieving us of a Coke Head AHL'er Drunk that Gillis traded for with our 10th overall pick
2nd rounder to help get Sutter - LOVE IT!
3rd rounder for Dorsett - Getting good services out of him despite injury this season
3rd rounder to help unload Kesler and get Luca "More Goals, More Assists than Garrison" Sbisa and Bonino. LOVE IT!
3rd round pick for Pedan as well as relieving us of the AMAZING GILLIS 2nd rounder - Mallet. This one is not over yet
2nd round pick for Sven Baertschi - WINNNNN!
7th for some decent services of Etem - Nice
5th for Larsson - Whooopdie dooooo. Decent services. How often do you get decent services from a 5th round pick?
2nd round pick for Vey - Ya win some, ya lose some. He did this for his coach. Not uncommon

Acquired Picks (counting 9)

2nd round pick for Garrison - BRILLIANCE!
1st round pick for Kesler - BRILLIANCE! Hello Gudbranson!
3rd round pick for Kesler - BRILLIANCE!
3rd round pick for Lack - BRILLIANCE! Hello Brisebios
7th round pick for Lack - BRILLIANCE! Eddie "only 4 games played this season" Lack
7th round pick for McNally - Getting something for NOTHING! BRILLIANCE!
2nd round pick for Old Man Bieksa. BRILLIANCE! Hello Sutter
3rd round pick for Bonino. BRILLIANCE! Hello Lockwood
5th round pick for Gudbranson. BONUS! BRILLIANCE!

Overall? A MAJOR WIN FOR BENNING!
This is what happens when parents feed their babies paint chips and shoot whiskey into their veins. This post is awful.
So now that you've got that off your chest, Bubbles, your thoughts regarding the 12 picks traded and the 9 picks acquired would be appreciated.

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2017 5:23 pm
by ukcanuck
Island Nucklehead wrote:
ukcanuck wrote: What you seem to be not taking into consideration is that the players Benning might have had to flip for extra 2/3/4th round picks were not wanted or tradable, most would have cleared waivers.

It has taken 3 years just to get to the point where we have a Hansen or a tanev to bring to the table without getting laughed out of the conversation.
Huh? Benning has acquired lots of picks in his time here. He just seems to send them out the door as fast as he acquires them.

He's acquired 9 draft picks since showing up. He's traded away 12.
if I remember correctly those were moves to restock an empty cupboard left behind by a decade of trying to win now.

What I assumed you meant was that The Genius has not been a seller at the deadline and flipped roster pieces for Extra picks than get you a healthy environment to slot in a "generational talent" when and if it comes.


Im just saying going bubbles on benning for not getting something back for players at the deadline is to not admit that the club was old tired and worn out. The Fonz was correctomundo

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2017 5:43 pm
by Ronning's Ghost
RoyalDude wrote:I don't think Benning will have shot blanks in the first round of the 2014 entry draft.
So you have resiled from your position that Virtanen is actually (somehow) a Gillis pick ?

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2017 5:52 pm
by Blob Mckenzie
Ronning's Ghost wrote:
RoyalDude wrote:I don't think Benning will have shot blanks in the first round of the 2014 entry draft.
So you have resiled from your position that Virtanen is actually (somehow) a Gillis pick ?

Well yeah I mean Elmer threw the scouts a bone. GMs always throw bones like a 6th overall pick to scouts. I can see a 2nd or 3rd rounder being a bone but no way in hell a top 10 pick. Then again if Virtanen actually becomes a decent player it will be because Elmer chose him. These guys are special RG. Something tells me if they chose Ehlers, Nylander or Ritchie , that would definitely have not been a Gillis pick.

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2017 5:52 pm
by Island Nucklehead
ukcanuck wrote:
Island Nucklehead wrote:
ukcanuck wrote: What you seem to be not taking into consideration is that the players Benning might have had to flip for extra 2/3/4th round picks were not wanted or tradable, most would have cleared waivers.

It has taken 3 years just to get to the point where we have a Hansen or a tanev to bring to the table without getting laughed out of the conversation.
Huh? Benning has acquired lots of picks in his time here. He just seems to send them out the door as fast as he acquires them.

He's acquired 9 draft picks since showing up. He's traded away 12.
if I remember correctly those were moves to restock an empty cupboard left behind by a decade of trying to win now.

What I assumed you meant was that The Genius has not been a seller at the deadline and flipped roster pieces for Extra picks than get you a healthy environment to slot in a "generational talent" when and if it comes.

Im just saying going bubbles on benning for not getting something back for players at the deadline is to not admit that the club was old tired and worn out. The Fonz was correctomundo
You assumed wrong. I'm talking about Benning's incoherent strategy to make the playoffs, retool while remaining competitive transition avoid undertaking an obviously-required rebuild.

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2017 6:32 pm
by Cousin Strawberry
Island Nucklehead wrote: You assumed wrong. I'm talking about Benning's incoherent strategy to make the playoffs, retool while remaining competitive transition avoid undertaking an obviously-required rebuild.
This is the heart of the debate i suppose. The hockey world (including quite a few fans) dont see whats happening here as forward momentum.
So who is right? Benning and his fans or pretty well the rest of the hockey world...time will tell

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2017 6:58 pm
by Ronning's Ghost
Uncle dans leg wrote:
Island Nucklehead wrote: You assumed wrong. I'm talking about Benning's incoherent strategy to make the playoffs, retool while remaining competitive transition avoid undertaking an obviously-required rebuild.
This is the heart of the debate i suppose. The hockey world (including quite a few fans) dont see whats happening here as forward momentum.
So who is right? Benning and his fans or pretty well the rest of the hockey world...time will tell
You posted about the rest of the hockey world while I was composing my post. Sometimes I wonder if we are too close to the issue to have good perspective.

Have any respected hockey minds around the league actually weighed in on the Canucks' ownership/management group and their course of action ? I don't mean some hack trying to generate clicks (http://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/106461 ... l-managers), but someone with real credibility, like Scotty Bowman or someone like that.

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2017 7:11 pm
by Meds
RoyalDude wrote:
Island Nucklehead wrote:
ukcanuck wrote: What you seem to be not taking into consideration is that the players Benning might have had to flip for extra 2/3/4th round picks were not wanted or tradable, most would have cleared waivers.

It has taken 3 years just to get to the point where we have a Hansen or a tanev to bring to the table without getting laughed out of the conversation.
Huh? Benning has acquired lots of picks in his time here. He just seems to send them out the door as fast as he acquires them.

He's acquired 9 draft picks since showing up. He's traded away 12.
Traded Picks - 12

7th round pick along with Garrison to Tampa - If that's what it takes to get rid of Big Boom Shot, then good riddance.
2nd rounder for Gudbranson - LOVE IT!
4th rounder for Gudbranson - LOVE IT!
5th for Prust - Thank You Montreal for relieving us of a Coke Head AHL'er Drunk that Gillis traded for with our 10th overall pick
Well, since you want to count Hodgson being traded as Gillis giving away our 10th overall pick for Kassian, then you have to count McCann as part of the price for Gudbranson. So that means Gudbranson and a 5th, cost us a 1st, 2nd, and 4th round pick.

You old fact cherry-picker you. :sly:

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2017 7:25 pm
by Cousin Strawberry
Ronning's Ghost wrote:
Uncle dans leg wrote:
Island Nucklehead wrote: You assumed wrong. I'm talking about Benning's incoherent strategy to make the playoffs, retool while remaining competitive transition avoid undertaking an obviously-required rebuild.
This is the heart of the debate i suppose. The hockey world (including quite a few fans) dont see whats happening here as forward momentum.
So who is right? Benning and his fans or pretty well the rest of the hockey world...time will tell
You posted about the rest of the hockey world while I was composing my post. Sometimes I wonder if we are too close to the issue to have good perspective.

Have any respected hockey minds around the league actually weighed in on the Canucks' ownership/management group and their course of action ? I don't mean some hack trying to generate clicks (http://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/106461 ... l-managers), but someone with real credibility, like Scotty Bowman or someone like that.
Good point.
Living in alberta i listen to both calgary 960 and 1260 in edmonton regularly. Occasionally they weigh in on our team and after the usual fan pandering about why they hate us they will delve into whats the issue in a fairly objective way....sometimes with half decent guests including former GMs and guys like Bob Mcakenzie and Ray Ferraro. Most will make sure they profess their respect for Benning and end it with faily candid critisism of what the hell is going on in vcr.
My impression is that the hockey world doesnt see much promise in whatever it is that Benning and Linden are doing.
The consensus is that the actual rebuild will inevitably happen after the Sedins are gone and the flailing attempts made to remain competitive right now are a total waste of time and seriously damaging Bennings reputation.

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2017 8:05 pm
by Chef Boi RD
23 goals for Grabner! WTF Gillis?

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Posted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 3:43 am
by Island Nucklehead
Uncle dans leg wrote:
My impression is that the hockey world doesnt see much promise in whatever it is that Benning and Linden are doing.
The consensus is that the actual rebuild will inevitably happen after the Sedins are gone and the flailing attempts made to remain competitive right now are a total waste of time and seriously damaging Bennings reputation.
Yep. This is the sense I get out this way as well. People are confused about the strategy, they note it hasn't worked most places it's been attempted. If the Sedins were in their early 30's it might have had a chance, but there's not enough youth coming fast enough, and management isn't interested in stockpiling assets for the future. Que dude crowing about Boesser and Gaudette as though other NHL teams don't have good prospects.

People blame the coach, but he's been handed easily one of the worst rosters in the league and told to make the playoffs. Mission: Impossible.

All the talk of competitiveness is a joke.

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Posted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 5:19 am
by BingoTough
Island Nucklehead wrote:
Uncle dans leg wrote:
My impression is that the hockey world doesnt see much promise in whatever it is that Benning and Linden are doing.
The consensus is that the actual rebuild will inevitably happen after the Sedins are gone and the flailing attempts made to remain competitive right now are a total waste of time and seriously damaging Bennings reputation.
Yep. This is the sense I get out this way as well. People are confused about the strategy, they note it hasn't worked most places it's been attempted, and that if the Sedins were in their early 30's it might have had a chance, but there's not enough youth coming fast enough, and management isn't interested in stockpiling assets for the future. Que dude crowing about Boesser and Gaudette as though other NHL teams don't have good prospects.

People blame the coach, but he's been handed easily one of the worst rosters in the league and told to make the playoffs. Mission: Impossible.

All the talk of competitiveness is a joke.
Fake news!

I'm inclined to agree, except WD is far from blameness. His deployment of the players he does have has been questioned a number of times. Feels like we're following in Calgary's footsteps.

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Posted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 7:19 am
by Blob Mckenzie
Elmer doesn't feel an urgent need to upgrade the young talent pool on the team of coming up through the system. He said there's more than enough young talent. He said that gem last week and Botchford reported it in the provies. You can't even make this shit up with this guy.

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Posted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 7:38 am
by Chef Boi RD
Blob Mckenzie wrote:Elmer doesn't feel an urgent need to upgrade the young talent pool on the team of coming up through the system. He said there's more than enough young talent. He said that gem last week and Botchford reported it in the provies. You can't even make this shit up with this guy.
After the horrific collapsing of the pre-Benning Canucks by the lone Architect of it - Mike Gillis, a team Mike inherited so rich in potential thank you to the fine workings in the accumalation of exvellent young talented hockey players by the previous GMs, our new fearless leader - Benning, who inherited Mikes team, a team totally decimated of any quality and quantity in young talented players a team filled with only old men past their prime with untradeable contracts, how could one forsee this ship being righted over night?

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Posted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 8:06 am
by Blob Mckenzie
As usual you missed the point. Elmer said the organization is chock full of young talent and doesn't need to add any more youngsters.