Bravo Benning. The D is pretty much rebuilt.

[Horse McHindu]

This isn't in retrospect, though. This was the obvious choice at the time. That is the glaring issue.

Also, you keep saying "let Juolevi develop," as if there's any question as to if that will happen or not, and I don't really understand why. You're kind of all over the map here.

That’s the nature of the draft. You win some, you lose some.

The same people bashing Benning for the OJ and Virtanen picks have stayed completely silent in terms of praising Benning for Boeser, Pettersson, and Hughes. Just because a guy doesn’t live up to his billing, doesn’t mean he has to ‘bust’ like a Nail Yakupov.

As to your last point (“let OJ develop”),

1) the kid is 20
2) with two major injuries, he hasn’t had that much playing time these past two years. Therefore, all of this “D+3” and “D+4” is ridiculous in my opinion.

Give Juolevi time to develop. For starters, moving Juolevi would be dumb and pointless because his value is too low. Secondly, Hughes is going to be our alpha and future top pairing guy now and so this takes tons of pressure of Juolevi. The emergence of Hutton has also changed the complexion of our defense moving forward.

Give OJ tons of time to develop in Utica and who knows.......maybe at the age of 23 (I’m just using ‘23’ as an arbitrary age), he takes a significant leap.

I don’t see how I’m being “all over the map” here.

 

[Horse McHindu]

I mean, yeah. It would be even worse if they accidentally burned down the arena. Whoopee.

I don't really get your point? People shouldn't be disappointed because the absolute worst case hasn't come to be? A high pick is an opportunity to get a young impact player under the team's control for many years. Not getting that is bad. Period. The fact that Juolevi hasn't yet stabbed Elias Pettersson or whatever doesn't really change that.

It sucks that guys like Juolevi and Virtanen haven’t lived up to their billing (and likely won’t), but......

1) they are still very young and have lots of time to improve.

2) just because someone doesn’t live up to billing, doesn’t mean they have to be complete busts either. Again - becoming a Christian Erhoff / Raffi Torres caliber player would be a helluva lot better than becoming Brandon Gormley / Nail Yakupov.

 

[Peter10]

It sucks that guys like Juolevi and Virtanen haven’t lived up to their billing (and likely won’t), but......

1) they are still very young and have lots of time to improve.

2) just because someone doesn’t live up to billing, doesn’t mean they have to be complete busts either. Again - becoming a Christian Erhoff / Raffi Torres caliber player would be a helluva lot better than becoming Brandon Gormley / Nail Yakupov.

The problem is that at this stage Juolevi is trending more towards a Gormley like career than an Ehrhoff one.

 

[Johnny Canucker]

The problem is that at this stage Juolevi is trending more towards a Gormley like career than an Ehrhoff one.

Juolevi is terrible. Where would he go in a re-draft ? 3rd / 4th round?

 

[Horse McHindu]

The problem is that at this stage Juolevi is trending more towards a Gormley like career than an Ehrhoff one.

Perhaps, but still.....

1) He’s 20
2) He’s had two major injuries thus far which has caused him to miss lots of time. That’s why this whole, “aha! D+3! You suck bro!” argument is bunk.
3) We wouldn’t be able to get much for him in the way of trade, and so we’re better off trying to develop him.
4) With the drafting of Hughes, combined with the emergence of Hutton, there is far less pressure on Juolevi to be a top pairing guy for us.

There’s not one team out there that aces every single 1st round selection. People keep talking about Tkachuk and Ehlers, but I’m pretty sure Calgary and Winnipeg have made their fair share of blunders as well.

People on here love to bash Juolevi and Virtanen, but why doesn’t anyone give Benning props for Boeser, Pettersson and Hughes? Why doesn’t anyone on here bash Philadelphia and New Jersey for taking Patrick and Hischier over Pettersson? Do people really buy into the whole, “it’s Bennings fault whenever we make a bad pick, but Brackett’s Skill whenever we make a good pick?” So biased.

The other night when Biega turned the puck over to Pavelski, how come he barely got criticized? Is it because he earns the league minimum? Can you imagine the reaction on here if Gudbranson has made that pass?

The negativity on here is just insane at times. People need to relax. Juolevi is a 20 year old kid and has plenty of time to turn things around.

 

[xtra]

Why is everyone so certain that Hughes is going to be an alpha- I’d love to see anyone show me a list of 5 #1 dmen that are his size with his dzone issues

 

[MS]

Why is everyone so certain that Hughes is going to be an alpha- I’d love to see anyone show me a list of 5 #1 dmen that are his size with his dzone issues

He projects as a 2nd pairing guy who you shelter at ES with high o-zone starts. Same as Barrie or Krug or Gostisbehere.

The notion that a player his size with his defensive issues will be a #1 guy in the NHL is pretty absurd.

 

[DarrenX]

He projects as a 2nd pairing guy who you shelter at ES with high o-zone starts. Same as Barrie or Krug or Gostisbehere.

The notion that a player his size with his defensive issues will be a #1 guy in the NHL is pretty absurd.

Hughes is developing nicely but people are pencilling him in as a 1D/Norris candidate before he's played a single professional game. It's a bit weird.

 

[Peter10]

Perhaps, but still.....

1) He’s 20
2) He’s had two major injuries thus far which has caused him to miss lots of time. That’s why this whole, “aha! D+3! You suck bro!” argument is bunk.
3) We wouldn’t be able to get much for him in the way of trade, and so we’re better off trying to develop him.
4) With the drafting of Hughes, combined with the emergence of Hutton, there is far less pressure on Juolevi to be a top pairing guy for us.

1) correct
2) The main injury problems started in the 2018 off season. He wasnt looking all that great before that. Has nothing to do with D+3 if his D+1 and 2 didnt show the desired progress
3) I am not arguing to trade him (unless someone would give great value)
4) Just because we drafted another dman very early in the draft does not absolve making the wrong choice 2 years prior

Nobody here is hoping that Juolevi will fail, in fact I would argue all (most) hope he turns out to have a great career. However, there is a difference between hope and expectation and this is why so many here dont come to an agreement with you on this topic. You still seem to argue it is likely he will turn out a great player just because there were others before who developt slowly most others here however, still hope for the same but just dont think it is a likely outcome.

 

[Yultron]

Perhaps, but still.....

1) He’s 20
2) He’s had two major injuries thus far which has caused him to miss lots of time. That’s why this whole, “aha! D+3! You suck bro!” argument is bunk.
3) We wouldn’t be able to get much for him in the way of trade, and so we’re better off trying to develop him.
4) With the drafting of Hughes, combined with the emergence of Hutton, there is far less pressure on Juolevi to be a top pairing guy for us.

There’s not one team out there that aces every single 1st round selection. People keep talking about Tkachuk and Ehlers, but I’m pretty sure Calgary and Winnipeg have made their fair share of blunders as well.

People on here love to bash Juolevi and Virtanen, but why doesn’t anyone give Benning props for Boeser, Pettersson and Hughes? Why doesn’t anyone on here bash Philadelphia and New Jersey for taking Patrick and Hischier over Pettersson? Do people really buy into the whole, “it’s Bennings fault whenever we make a bad pick, but Brackett’s Skill whenever we make a good pick?” So biased.

The other night when Biega turned the puck over to Pavelski, how come he barely got criticized? Is it because he earns the league minimum? Can you imagine the reaction on here if Gudbranson has made that pass?

The negativity on here is just insane at times. People need to relax. Juolevi is a 20 year old kid and has plenty of time to turn things around.

Absolute outstanding post just an outstanding post you really nailed it. Every GM makes mistakes . Virtanen at the time was one helluva player scoring 45 goals as a 17 year old as was high of everyone’s draft charts. Juolevi was 17 and had one the Memorial Cup and was by far the Knights best defenseman. It really sucks for Juolevi because if he was healthy right now he would probably be in the NHL and yes he has two major surgeries but is far from a bust. He is only 20 still and will have a long successful NHL Career as a solid top 4 defenseman . If he was 23 we could call him a bust but he’s 20 and had a really good yet short 1st professional season this year with 13 points in 18 games. And like the other poster said Hughes takes so much pressure off him as our future #1 defenseman meaning Juolevi can slot in as our #2 top left handed defenseman. And Virtanen is that much closer from becoming a 20/20 40 point power forward for us long term and has really taken a step forward this season.

People really don’t praise Benning enough for drafting pettersson, boeser, Hughes etc as they like to knock on him for Virtanen and Juolevi but his mid round picks and other early round picks have also been impressive and I believe we have the best minor league system in the NHL now that the Sabres have graduated Dahlin and Middlestadt.

We still have Dahlen, Dipietro, Woo, Madden, Lockwood , Lind , Gradjovich etc with another draft coming and another top 10 pick almost gaurenteed with all the injuries we have and the teams below us playing better and with games in hand .

Bright days are ahead for us Vancouver Canucks

 

[Disappointed EP40]

Some fun posts to look at:



Oh so wrong. You're still very pro-Benning despite being wrong in defending him time and time again. Tkachuk was not the next Dal Colle or Hodgson, meanwhile Juolevi has not developed well since being drafted. And no, he was not a much better prospect than Hamhuis. In fact, I was wrong in giving Juolevi too much credit calling him another Hamhuis.



Maybe all the people who keep ****ting all over every single thing Benning and Linden do are right? I mean...the results are there. But hey, I'm glad you loved the Canucks picking a worse prospect.







I think there very much was doubt, and those doubters were proven correct.



Well it's 3 years later...if that's our top 4, ouch.



Okay, I quoted you. You were wrong.



Nicely played? That list is terrible.



Well...Gudbranson certainly isn't on the 2nd pairing, but Juolevi isn't even on the team (Gudbranson shouldn't be either).



Yeah, no. But at least you admitted you were wrong so that's nice



^^^This guy gets it.




No, it wasn't. And it didn't happen.




No, he didn't assmble a solid, young, mobile back end. He assembled junk. I was right 3 years ago, and have been proven right since.




Hutton-Gudbranson together was trash, because Gudbranson is trash.




This post will be remembered as someone actually wanting the Canucks to sign Loui Eriksson.




Yeah no. That's a recipe for an awful defense.





Don't need to exclude Gudbranson and Sutter. They weren't good pieces for the team. But I'm glad you admit Jim's retool looks really bad.









Adam Larsson isn't very good, but he certainly is much better than Erik Gudbranson. Telling someone else to take a hike when you're wrong with your assessment.....

This is just an example that people shouldn't openly ridicule others for their opinions unless they know for certain they're correct. If you're not using anything factual to support your own opinion, then don't ridicule others. Use facts. Educate yourself on analytics, and then you can tell someone to take a hike.

I imagine you were literally salivating, among other things, while making this post.

 

[Disappointed EP40]

Ah but now you're putting words in my mouth or, at very least, telling me what my position is. Extract Benning out of the mix because the discussion becomes very polarized. Then ask the question, was the move good or bad, or the collection moves, good or bad. You can then make an assessment of whether the management is doing a good or a bad job. The problem arises when this assessment is done in the opposite direction....I am anti-Benning therefore every move he makes is either bad or he got kucky. Or, I'm pro-Benning and every move he makes is good to decent or there must have been extraneous circumstances out of his control...
Seeking objective truth doesn't mean one can't form an opinion good or bad. It just means the opinion isn't based in preconceived biases.
See the difference...

Whooosh.

You missed his main point.

If you are objectively assessing all of his moves, you will arrive at a point where the collection of his actions will either be good, or bad, so being neutral isn't possible.

Meaning, there is a right, and a wrong side to be on. Both groups have the aforementioned biases, but one group also includes the objective thinkers who analyze each move properly. (Therefore, those that claim they are "neutral" haven't.)

 

[iceburg]

Whooosh.

You missed his main point.

If you are objectively assessing all of his moves, you will arrive at a point where the collection of his actions will either be good, or bad, so being neutral isn't possible.

Meaning, there is a right, and a wrong side to be on. Both groups have the aforementioned biases, but one group also includes the objective thinkers who analyze each move properly. (Therefore, those that claim they are "neutral" haven't.)

You have to read back to where the conversation started to understand why I interpreted the "neutral" comment as labeling me as neutral. It wasn't a stretch but it was an interpretation. The poster's next comment clarified the point and we moved on to the merits of the labels pro- and anti- Benning. All good.

 

[xtra]

Perhaps, but still.....

1) He’s 20
Are you saying 20 year olds can’t ever be a bust? If not then this point is irrelevant
2) He’s had two major injuries thus far which has caused him to miss lots of time. That’s why this whole, “aha! D+3! You suck bro!” argument is bunk.
So he’s injury prone is what your saying, but even when playing he has been very underwhelming since being drafted.
3) We wouldn’t be able to get much for him in the way of trade, and so we’re better off trying to develop him.
This I agree with
4) With the drafting of Hughes, combined with the emergence of Hutton, there is far less pressure on Juolevi to be a top pairing guy for us.
Less pressure but so far there’s no guarantee that Hughes is a top pairing dman and history says he’s more likely to be a 2nd pairing dman.
Hutton as much as I like isn’t a top 2 dman other than this short stretch.
It also doesn’t make OJ failing any more acceptable.

There’s not one team out there that aces every single 1st round selection. People keep talking about Tkachuk and Ehlers, but I’m pretty sure Calgary and Winnipeg have made their fair share of blunders as well.
Calgary and Winnipeg aren’t my team they are irrelevant other than to deflect the conversation. If you want to talk about their pick failures/success go there.

People on here love to bash Juolevi and Virtanen, but why doesn’t anyone give Benning props for Boeser, Pettersson and Hughes?
Pettersson and boeser are given kudos unless you have posts where people say they were bad picks. And if you do I’ll join you in ridiculing them. Hughes the jury is still out on, like I said earlier he’s more likely to be a second pairing guy.

Why doesn’t anyone on here bash Philadelphia and New Jersey for taking Patrick and Hischier over Pettersson?
Once again philly and New Jersey aren’t our teams if you want to discuss them go to their board and stop deflecting.

Do people really buy into the whole, “it’s Bennings fault whenever we make a bad pick, but Brackett’s Skill whenever we make a good pick?” So biased.
How about you give us consistency: who is in charge of the picks- the gm or the amateur scouting director?

The other night when Biega turned the puck over to Pavelski, how come he barely got criticized? Is it because he earns the league minimum? Can you imagine the reaction on here if Gudbranson has made that pass?
Ones a career 6dmam and ones an ahl dman who we gave up a first round pick and second rounder for and then double down by resigning him to a 4mol contract when he is currently the worst dman in the league statistically.

The negativity on here is just insane at times. People need to relax. Juolevi is a 20 year old kid and has plenty of time to turn things around.
He also has to show something for us to believe he can turn it around cause that comets power play is humming along without him at over 20% and in the top 10. So I’d like to see something else other than just pp points from a dman that had to be sheltered at even strength.

 

[Canucks LB]

Why is everyone so certain that Hughes is going to be an alpha- I’d love to see anyone show me a list of 5 #1 dmen that are his size with his dzone issues

He is a hybrid, other than a guy like EK, there is nobody who is a playing skating Pure playmaking small D-man in the NHL.
There was a massive discussion on this in his prospect thread.
The guys style of play is completely new, who knows if it's going to be amazing or awful in the long run

 

[MS]

He is a hybrid, other than a guy like EK, there is nobody who is a playing skating Pure playmaking small D-man in the NHL.
There was a massive discussion on this in his prospect thread.
The guys style of play is completely new, who knows if it's going to be amazing or awful in the long run

There are several guys like this and they all plateau as sheltered 2nd pairing guys.

 

[Canucks LB]

There are several guys like this and they all plateau as sheltered 2nd pairing guys.

Give me 1 name that skates remotely close to Hughes
I have been watching hockey sine I was like 7 years old, and I can't remember seeing a player like Quinn before.

 

[MS]

Give me 1 name that skates remotely close to Hughes
I have been watching hockey sine I was like 7 years old, and I can't remember seeing a player like Quinn before.

Krug and Barrie are both elite skaters.

Hughes might be a bit better but how does being a bit faster rushing the puck turn your defensive play from that of a sheltered 2nd pairing guy to a #1 stud?

He’s just a bit better at one of the strengths of all these guys but not any better at the things that have actually limited them from top-pairing status.

 

[iceburg]

Krug and Barrie are both elite skaters.

Hughes might be a bit better but how does being a bit faster rushing the puck turn your defensive play from that of a sheltered 2nd pairing guy to a #1 stud?

He’s just a bit better at one of the strengths of all these guys but not any better at the things that have actually limited them from top-pairing status.

It's not just speed but his exceptional edge work that makes his skating elite. It adds to his high IQ to make him very elusive. That said, I think some of the plays he was trying in college and the WJC will get eaten up at the next level. He will need to adjust. I see him as a specialist more than a high minute guy. But time will tell.

 

[Hit the post]

Give me 1 name that skates remotely close to Hughes
I have been watching hockey sine I was like 7 years old, and I can't remember seeing a player like Quinn before.

You haven't seen him skate with the likes of Guds or Poo against other NHL opposition as well. We can only hope either Tanev or Edler have enough gas left in the tank.

 

[MS]

It's not just speed but his exceptional edge work that makes his skating elite. It adds to his high IQ to make him very elusive. That said, I think some of the plays he was trying in college and the WJC will get eaten up at the next level. He will need to adjust. I see him as a specialist more than a high minute guy. But time will tell.

Absolutely. His overall skating is phenomenal.

But, again, it isn’t skating ability that is preventing Torey Krug from being a top-pairing all-situations guy. He’s limited by size/strength/defensive ability and could have all the skills in the world but you’re still only going to play him 65% o-zone starts on a 2nd pairing because of his limiting factors.

 

[iceburg]

Absolutely. His overall skating is phenomenal.

But, again, it isn’t skating ability that is preventing Torey Krug from being a top-pairing all-situations guy. He’s limited by size/strength/defensive ability and could have all the skills in the world but you’re still only going to play him 65% o-zone starts on a 2nd pairing because of his limiting factors.

I still hold out hope that his stick work and elusiveness could be effective in the D-zone leading to high percentage retrieval and exits. He isn't going to push anybody off the puck but he's smart enough and skilled enough that he could figure it out. But this is by far the biggest area of uncertainty in his game and his development (or lack of) in this area will dictate his deployment.

 

[MarkMM]

The other night when Biega turned the puck over to Pavelski, how come he barely got criticized? Is it because he earns the league minimum? Can you imagine the reaction on here if Gudbranson has made that pass?

Jebus, did you just out your own lack of reasoning ability??!!!

One is making near the minimum that didn't cost us an asset.

The other we traded a former 1st round pick and a second AND signed him to a $4 million contract with term.

And you're confused as to why one is held to a different standard? Explains a bit your inability to hold Benning to any semblance of a standard of competence.

 

[MS]

Jebus, did you just out your own lack of reasoning ability??!!!

One is making near the minimum that didn't cost us an asset.

The other we traded a former 1st round pick and a second AND signed him to a $4 million contract with term.

And you're confused as to why one is held to a different standard? Explains a bit your inability to hold Benning to any semblance of a standard of competence.

Also Biega generally plays solid games that help the team, while Gudbranson does not.

 

[Bleach Clean]

He projects as a 2nd pairing guy who you shelter at ES with high o-zone starts. Same as Barrie or Krug or Gostisbehere.

The notion that a player his size with his defensive issues will be a #1 guy in the NHL is pretty absurd.

I think I disagree with you on this, but I want you to define 2nd pairing before I do. Do you mean total TOI and QualComp?

He projects as a top pairing Dman to me. Not a #1 because he will not be played in all situations.