Toggle sidebar

Canucks Management and Ownership Thread v30.0 (Post #186)

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
Bleach Clean said:
At the 17:30 mark JD Burke references Botchford's article about Evander Kane. He says that Botchford implies that Ownership may have prevented a transaction. That it was green lit by Benning, but that Aqua put on the breaks. I think that's significant in what it means in their confidence in Benning right now.
Click to expand...

Uh, connecting this with Friedman's report that Buffalo was only interested in Tanev is... worrying.
 
Bleach Clean said:
At the 17:30 mark JD Burke references Botchford's article about Evander Kane. He says that Botchford implies that Ownership may have prevented a transaction. That it was green lit by Benning, but that Aqua put on the breaks. I think that's significant to what it means for their confidence in Benning right now.

http://canucksarmy.com/2016/11/23/canucks-army-podcast-episode-5-2016-2017

Further, Kuzma implied that a year end GM change is perhaps more likely, instead of canning the coach, where that GM gets to make the call on Desjardins based on a fresh assessment of roster strength.
Click to expand...

I have a really hard time believing if anything like this went down that Aquilini was the wise one in rejecting a Tanev for Kane deal.

Consider the teams recent history. While Benning was fully complicit in taking Virtanen over Nylander/Ehlers, we going into that draft that Aquilini wanted the local kid. Looking at Benning's history, trading or being involved in moving guys like Seguin and Kassian we know he has a strong aversion to the young party hard types.

You never know but it just feels like if anything like this happened it should have been the other way around, Aquilini being fine with a Kane/Tanev deal but Benning saying no.
 
Considering Aquaman also tried to force Nonis to Trade Edler+ for Brad Richards and he was canned for standing his ground then failing to make the playoffs...I would say its not Aquallini's MO to reject Tanev for Kane.

But people change.. maybe
 
WinterEmpire said:
Considering Aquaman also tried to force Nonis to Trade Edler+ for Brad Richards and he was canned for standing his ground then failing to make the playoffs...I would say its not Aquallini's MO to reject Tanev for Kane.

But people change.. maybe
Click to expand...

This is all very interesting. Only thing I can think of is ownership could also be paying attention to the fan base & know how badly that trade would have been viewed by hardcore/part time fans. I know that hasn't been the case in the past but it seems like fans are getting more & more vocal about wanting a rebuild.
 
RandV said:
I have a really hard time believing if anything like this went down that Aquilini was the wise one in rejecting a Tanev for Kane deal.

Consider the teams recent history. While Benning was fully complicit in taking Virtanen over Nylander/Ehlers, we going into that draft that Aquilini wanted the local kid. Looking at Benning's history, trading or being involved in moving guys like Seguin and Kassian we know he has a strong aversion to the young party hard types.

You never know but it just feels like if anything like this happened it should have been the other way around, Aquilini being fine with a Kane/Tanev deal but Benning saying no.
Click to expand...

To me, it doesn't feel like that. My feeling is that if Benning really wants a player, and I do think that he wants Kane... and wants the 20+ goals he sees in Kane in the line-up ASAP (plus "bringing him home" in his mind, like bringing Lucic home, in his mind), that he'd rationalize the asking price every which way he can.

I do think (or would like to think) that if anything like this went down, that it was indeed Aquillini who blocked the deal - and consequently shut the trade talks down when it seemed like it was heating up. I don't necessarily think that just because it was wise, that because it was wise is necessarily the reason why the deal would be rejected. I think it might have just happened to be wise, without attaching Aquillini to the voice of reason.

Aquillini allegedly rejected the Kesler deal at the trade deadline, after Gillis worked to get a deal done... presumably because of fan perception after the Luongo deal (I can see this being the rational given to Gillis). But my personal feeling is that Aquillini rejected the Kesler deal because he decided that Gillis was on borrowed time, and shut Gillis down on anything significant until Gillis could be gone. I think (hope) this could be similar. I think a period of time usually happens from when an owner decides to fire a GM, and when an owner can actually fire the GM. I'd really like to think that Aquillini has decided that Benning is on borrowed time, and has shut him down... until all of his ducks are in a row.
 
wasn't it reported there was ownership interference in the hamhuis tdl non-trade also?

and benning still has a job a season later.
 
WinterEmpire said:
Considering Aquaman also tried to force Nonis to Trade Edler+ for Brad Richards and he was canned for standing his ground then failing to make the playoffs...I would say its not Aquallini's MO to reject Tanev for Kane.

But people change.. maybe
Click to expand...

I thought the rumor for the Richards trade was something even bigger than Edler +. I think it involved Kesler, Edler etc?
 
krutovsdonut said:
wasn't it reported there was ownership interference in the hamhuis tdl non-trade also?

and benning still has a job a season later.
Click to expand...

Yeah, my understanding is that Aquillini thought that Hamhuis should have gotten more than what Benning presented him with, and Aquillini got Benning to go back to get more... and Benning then came back with nothing, even less than before.

I guess, similarly, Benning could have presented Aquillini with a Kane for Tanev deal, and Aquillini got Benning to go back to get more (or called the deal off all together with Tanev involved), and this shuts the deal down all together... but then that would attach Aquillini to "the voice of reason".

But if "the voice of reason" or "shutting Benning down", either one works for me... as long as Kane isn't here, and Tanev is.
 
Reverend Mayhem said:
Yeah but who knows about that really...if they did nix that I have no idea why Benning is even here right now,
Click to expand...

My guess would be that Aqua's are working on finalizing what to replace Benning with, rather than fire him and then take over themselves pending a hiring process for a President/GM.
 
Since Linden ****ed Gilman out of the GM job in Vegas, they should offer him President/GM position.

Gilman surely doesn't like ownership, but if they admit their mistake, the **** you factor of taking Linden's job might be worth it.
 
Reverend Mayhem said:
Yeah but who knows about that really...if they did nix that I have no idea why Benning is even here right now,
Click to expand...

The DAL owner and Aquaman have bad blood between them.

Although Benning may have nixed a Kane deal I believe there is a different underlying reason for it.
 
NeoCanuck said:
I thought the rumor for the Richards trade was something even bigger than Edler +. I think it involved Kesler, Edler etc?
Click to expand...
I remember Raymond being in it too. I think Botchford wrote that when Gillis claimed they were leaning toward taking another deal, Aqua told him to go higher.

MarkMM said:
My guess would be that Aqua's are working on finalizing what to replace Benning with, rather than fire him and then take over themselves pending a hiring process for a President/GM.
Click to expand...

I would think they're just going to pull out the mat on Benning and introduce the new guy, like they did with Nonis/Gillis. I've always assumed Linden would get another GM, but I'd be shocked if the Aquamen actually let him choose it based on how this has gone. Though it's hard to imagine them bringing in someone like Dale Tallon and having him work under Linden.

I wonder if what this has come down to is Linden dying on the Willie hill and punting on his GM instead.
 
oyvey said:
I remember Raymond being in it too. I think Botchford wrote that when Gillis claimed they were leaning toward taking another deal, Aqua told him to go higher.



I would think they're just going to pull out the mat on Benning and introduce the new guy, like they did with Nonis/Gillis. I've always assumed Linden would get another GM, but I'd be shocked if the Aquamen actually let him choose it based on how this has gone. Though it's hard to imagine them bringing in someone like Dale Tallon and having him work under Linden.

I wonder if what this has come down to is Linden dying on the Willie hill and punting on his GM instead.
Click to expand...

I think Linden would step down. I honestly don't think he anticipated the level of backlash he would receive with this job. They literally had to cancel those town halls because they were getting ripped to shreds by us.
 
I think it's fair to suggest that ownership jumps in perhaps too early or atleast earlier than other ownership teams. But in every regime I don't think it starts out that way. I think Nonis, Gillis and this pathetic crew all got complete freedom. It was when results weren't there or the team was trending in the wrong direction they have seemingly stepped in. I don't read much into the possibility that had to approve a Kane deal..that isn't unusual given it's a bigger money player. I do read that Benning is on a short leash if they blocked it. That does scream an ownership group that is losing patience and trust in the management group.

But they are correct in this case (I'm not convinced they were with Gilles and should have given him another year to make the retool).

I do think Linden is going to be given a choice here...either he step down or he replaces Benning. Linden seems to Fully believe in Benning and the direction so I'm guessing he'll step down at some point.
 
y2kcanucks said:
I think Linden would step down. I honestly don't think he anticipated the level of backlash he would receive with this job. They literally had to cancel those town halls because they were getting ripped to shreds by us.
Click to expand...

There's no excuse for the cancellation of the town halls. Clearly it was too much for Linden to take. He states that he went into this job with his "eyes open" but I don't believe him. I think he thought that everyone would just continue to worship him as they had in the past and never question anything he did.

I will say that some of the questions they fielded in those town halls were from complete goons. A lot of people that were more interested in mugging for the camera and pretending they were pundits than actually making a point. I am pretty sure a lot of the "regular" callers from 1040 were in that audience.
 
Beansy said:
There's no excuse for the cancellation of the town halls. Clearly it was too much for Linden to take. He states that he went into this job with his "eyes open" but I don't believe him. I think he thought that everyone would just continue to worship him as they had in the past and never question anything he did.

I will say that some of the questions they fielded in those town halls were from complete goons. A lot of people that were more interested in mugging for the camera and pretending they were pundits than actually making a point. I am pretty sure a lot of the "regular" callers from 1040 were in that audience.
Click to expand...

my favourite part from the town hall is Jim Benning talking about sbisa and the fan after who says sbisa would be " amazing " in the playoffs LMAO

32:50
 
VanJack said:
I've been as critical about the Canuck drafting as anyone, but still don't have any problem with Juolevi over Tkachuk.....there's no way this guy would have five goals with the Canucks anyway....the way Willie uses young players, he'd have been stapled to the pressbox every time he made a mistake or in Tkachuk's case, took a bad penalty. Sorry, but scoring wingers, even tough ones, are far easier to unearth in the draft than impact d-men. And they're already got guys like Boeser and Lockwood in the pipeline anyway.
Click to expand...

remind me when they drafted Lockwood?
 
Last edited:
banme said:
Uh, connecting this with Friedman's report that Buffalo was only interested in Tanev is... worrying.
Click to expand...


That would have been disastrous, but I'm sure other names must have been discussed despite BUF's interest being keyed to Tanev.


Bgav said:
Wow just caught up hopefully the kuzma thing turns out to be true
Click to expand...


It's significant insight from a known management shill. I was very surprised to hear it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom