Canucks Managerial Discussion | Part 18

[absolute garbage]

I like it how few of posters have once again managed to switch the discussion to drafting, which is the ONLY area still yet to be determined what comes to whether the Canucks suck at it under Benning or not.

Clinging to the last piece of hope. The sad part is even if he proves to be a drafting genius, he should still get fired as the GM (and demoted to replace Delorme or something). You guys are fighting to lose.

 

[MS]

And.. Like.. I don't know what you guys do for a living, but, that is exactly what an executive does.. And should do. His first month or so he is just observing, seeing where the team is at, assessing things from a distance, identifying strengths and weaknesses. Taking inventory of his staff, basically. I could not imagine any execute doing g anything different their first few weeks, and I have worked under some pretty crazy aggressive execs.

It's just totally normal, makes sense, and is in line with what Benning himself said. Again I would implore anyone who thinks it's different to please provide some details on what they think Benning did instead.

Pretty much.

It's logical, it's what we see whenever a GM change happens in this sport, and it's what Benning himself said happened.

But somehow we have this completely false narrative that WonderScout Benning came in and instantly fixed our horrible drafting overnight and is completely responsible for every player picked in that draft.

I wonder why he decided not to fix things in Boston.

Benning, possible more than anyone I've ever seen in hockey,l management, says exactly what he thinks, I believe. This was, in fact, was one of the reasons people liked him when we hired him, because he was "transparent" unlike the "arrogant" Gillis.

But now, because what he says lines up perfectly with what he does, and because what he does (and says) is pretty dumb, we are supposed to pretend that actually he doesn't in fact say what he thinks, but actually does the opposite of what he says while somehow making it seem like he's doing what he says! The guy is a world class genius, clearly.

It's just completely laughable.

The only way for some people to stay in denial is just to completely ignore everything he says or pretend he's just making it up, when he's in fact the most honest guy I've ever seen in hockey management.

 

[Jimson Hogarth*]

I like it how few of posters have once again managed to switch the discussion to drafting, which is the ONLY area still yet to be determined what comes to whether the Canucks suck at it under Benning or not.

Clinging to the last piece of hope. The sad part is even if he proves to be a drafting genius, he should still get fired as the GM (and demoted to replace Delorme or something). You guys are fighting to lose.

What do I care if Benning is fired or demoted? I only care that he gets another draft or two.

 

[sting101]

And.. Like.. I don't know what you guys do for a living, but, that is exactly what an executive does.. And should do. His first month or so he is just observing, seeing where the team is at, assessing things from a distance, identifying strengths and weaknesses. Taking inventory of his staff, basically. I could not imagine any execute doing g anything different their first few weeks, and I have worked under some pretty crazy aggressive execs.

It's just totally normal, makes sense, and is in line with what Benning himself said. Again I would implore anyone who thinks it's different to please provide some details on what they think Benning did instead.

I agree.

But what are you guys even implying? Was quoted as saying he sat back and observed the scouting "process"....."interjected on a couple occasions" And then he walked to the podium and drafted Virtanen already decided on....McCann who he wanted, Demko who he wanted and then deferred to his staff and their list by the sounds of it.

It's most probable that the Canucks compiled their lists......Benning had his own.....he sat and listened to the scouts and their reasons for each player being where in their top 210. He at this point probably asked a multitude of questions pertaining to each player, why and what they thought of some of his conflicting views. On draft day players fall and rise.....McCann was obviously a pleasant surprise and JB was on video resisting Snows desire to move to 23 he took the player he wanted. Demko was heavily scouted by JB.....some scouts had him in the middle of the 1st round.

If there's a narrative that a hugely active scout that was now a GM was just sitting back without influence to his top picks.....that's what's ridiculous.

 

[Jimson Hogarth*]

I agree.

But what are you guys even implying? Was quoted as saying he sat back and observed the scouting process......interjected on a couple occasions. And then he walked to the podium and drafted Virtanen already decided on....McCann who he wanted, Demko who he wanted and then deferred to his staff and their list by the sounds of it.

It's most probable that the Canucks compiled their lists......Benning had his own.....he sat and listened to the scouts and their reasons for each player being where in their top 210. He at this point probably asked a multitude of questions pertaining to each player, why and what they thought of some of his conflicting views. On draft day players fall and rise.....McCann was obviously a pleasant surprise and JB was on video resisting Snows desire to move to 23 he took the player he wanted. Demko was heavily scouted by JB.....some scouts had him in the middle of the 1st round.

If there's a narrative that a hugely active scout that was now a GM was just sitting back without influence to his top picks.....that's what's ridiculous.

Yea which pick was it that Benning sat back on?

1st pick- Virtanen- everyone blames Benning for that choice

2nd pick- McCann- Benning denies Snow

3rd pick- Demko- NCAA is Benning territory

4th pick- Tryamkin- first Russian selected in years after an intentional bias freeze out.

Which picks are these people talking about ?

 

[y2kcanucks]

What do I care if Benning is fired or demoted? I only care that he gets another draft or two.

You should care, because he sucks in his current role as GM.

Added to our amateur scouting team...sure. Why not? Kept as a GM? Absolutely not.

Linden and Weisbrod have to go too.

 

[valkynax]

Would love to see the team add some bite by bringing Ladd home.

I feel that Ladd gonna cost as much as Lucic with less upside.

I do want to entertain the idea of bringing in Okposo, if Benning's able to do so without over inflated contract.

 

[mrmyheadhurts]

STOP the personal attacks and the flaming:

Flaming: Do not post any messages that harass, insult (name calling), belittle, threaten or mock other members. Debates are fine, but critique the opinion, not the person. Personal attacks are not permitted. Do not call other posters trolls. Do not use sweeping generalizations and plural pronouns to cloak personal attacks. For example if a poster(s) states that he thinks 'x' is a good idea, replying that "Anyone who supports 'x' is an idiot" is a personal attack. Do not start threads to call out and embarrass other members. We do not permit any forums to be used to demean/insult the fans of other teams. This is viewed as generalized flaming.


I think I've been pretty patient here but some of you insist on discussing each other instead of hockey. If you want to get into that nonsense take it to pms. Thread bans and infractions if it continues, I have no other choice.

 

[coldsteel79]

He said he took the 2014 draft as an opportunity to sit back and watch our scouting process in order to evaluate what was happening, and let the existing guys do the work as they normally would. Said he interjected on 'some' players while compiling their draft list.

The notion that he came in, took charge of that draft, and waved a magic wand to make our drafting 'real good' is just total hogwash.

He had 'some' impact, sure. But clearly the existing guys did as well.

Except that "impact" was making different picks than what the scouting staff wanted for "some" picks which could easily be 5 of the picks

 

[Cupless44]

That's after the fact though; much like saying the Ducks would've paid more for Kesler simply by the HUGE contract extension they gave him. Would be wrong (IMHO) to hold that against Benning (Kesler trade).

Or that Benning REALLY REALLY wanted Pizza in the Kesler trade by the insane contract extension he gave him.

In it wasnt after the fact.

It was clear as day at the time that Cam Talbot and Martin Jones were more sought after on the open goalie market than Lack. There was very little buzz around Lack.

The last year has proven that some of these guys making their living doing this, know a thing or two.

 

[Cupless44]

Guess they also knew the Canes would have a goalie coach that would mess with Lack's technique in net.

Just stop with the goalie coach excuse for poor Eddie Lack. Ryan Miller had to adjust to a new goalie coach and has been given absolutely no quarter on this board.

 

[MS]

Except that "impact" was making different picks than what the scouting staff wanted for "some" picks which could easily be 5 of the picks

The 'some' related to names on their 100-150 person draft list, not picks themselves. We have no idea what impact that had. It could have substantially affected the draft or not at all.

 

[Ryp37]

Just stop with the goalie coach excuse for poor Eddie Lack. Ryan Miller had to adjust to a new goalie coach and has been given absolutely no quarter on this board.

http://www.vancouversun.com/sports/...canes+netminder+back+self/11632607/story.html

"excuse"

 

[Cupless44]

http://www.vancouversun.com/sports/...canes+netminder+back+self/11632607/story.html

"excuse"

Boo hoo. Like Lack is the only goalie who has had issues or growing pains with a new goalie coach. Luongo and Miller both did with Melanson. Comes with the territory of being a good NHL goalie.

Hard to believe we are still talking about Lack. You realize Carolina is in the market this off season for a #1 goaltending upgrade? Likely moving on from Cam Ward, but yet another team that sees Lack as a back up.

http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog/Thom...canes-Offseason-Outlook-Part-1-of-4/231/76897

That is one of several articles I have seen with the same message.

Lack is an average NHL goalie, a back up to most around the league. At 28 his own team doesn't see him as the starting solution. Sweden doesn't see him as a solution ona watered down World Championship team. He wasn't in huge demand last summer and no Benning could not have gotten a high pick for him.

Sorry, this is one that you guys hang on Benning that is way over dramatized.

 

[Ryp37]

Boo hoo. Like Lack is the only goalie who has had issues or growing pains with a new goalie coach. Luongo and Miller both did with Melanson. Comes with the territory of being a good NHL goalie.

Hard to believe we are still talking about Lack. You realize Carolina is in the market this off season for a #1 goaltending upgrade? Likely moving on from Cam Ward, but yet another team that sees Lack as a back up.

http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog/Thom...canes-Offseason-Outlook-Part-1-of-4/231/76897

That is one of several articles I have seen with the same message.

Lack is an average NHL goalie, a back up to most around the league. At 28 his own team doesn't see him as the starting solution. Sweden doesn't see him as a solution ona watered down World Championship team. He wasn't in huge demand last summer and no Benning could not have gotten a high pick for him.

Sorry, this is one that you guys hang on Benning that is way over dramatized.

And if the Canucks had Lack they might have finished...3rd last, and with the extra cap savings they could have taken a bad contract at the deadline to receive a better return instead of...nothing

 

[Hit the post]

Just stop with the goalie coach excuse for poor Eddie Lack. Ryan Miller had to adjust to a new goalie coach and has been given absolutely no quarter on this board.

Miller has enough clout (big money contract/NTC/seasoned vet) to ignore what his goalie coach might want him to do unlike a backup goalie (eg., I don't see him adjusting his style at all - assuming it was ever asked).

You get paid $6 million - you tend to get more of the blame than you might deserve. Would Pizza get half the posts on this board if he were paid $1.5 million? I doubt it (as that's pretty much the going rate for an unremarkable #6 left side D - which is what he is).

 

[RandV]

Except that "impact" was making different picks than what the scouting staff wanted for "some" picks which could easily be 5 of the picks

So then you're back to saying he basically ran the draft by himself, which is exactly what he said he didn't do.

 

[Canucker]

Boo hoo. Like Lack is the only goalie who has had issues or growing pains with a new goalie coach. Luongo and Miller both did with Melanson. Comes with the territory of being a good NHL goalie.

Hard to believe we are still talking about Lack. You realize Carolina is in the market this off season for a #1 goaltending upgrade? Likely moving on from Cam Ward, but yet another team that sees Lack as a back up.

http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog/Thom...canes-Offseason-Outlook-Part-1-of-4/231/76897

That is one of several articles I have seen with the same message.

Lack is an average NHL goalie, a back up to most around the league. At 28 his own team doesn't see him as the starting solution. Sweden doesn't see him as a solution ona watered down World Championship team. He wasn't in huge demand last summer and no Benning could not have gotten a high pick for him.

Sorry, this is one that you guys hang on Benning that is way over dramatized.

Not really...Trading Lack, even if you don't believe he is a true #1 goalie, when you admit you could have traded the $6m/year Miller for a decent return is a pretty big error IMO. I like Lack, he was a good team guy, popular with teammates and fans, and could have provided every bit the same performance that Miller did and still allowed Markstrom to take over the reigns as #1. I don't think it's " over dramatized" so much as its just another mistake you can lay at Benning's feet.

 

[MS]

Boo hoo. Like Lack is the only goalie who has had issues or growing pains with a new goalie coach. Luongo and Miller both did with Melanson. Comes with the territory of being a good NHL goalie.

Hard to believe we are still talking about Lack. You realize Carolina is in the market this off season for a #1 goaltending upgrade? Likely moving on from Cam Ward, but yet another team that sees Lack as a back up.

http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog/Thom...canes-Offseason-Outlook-Part-1-of-4/231/76897

That is one of several articles I have seen with the same message.

Lack is an average NHL goalie, a back up to most around the league. At 28 his own team doesn't see him as the starting solution. Sweden doesn't see him as a solution ona watered down World Championship team. He wasn't in huge demand last summer and no Benning could not have gotten a high pick for him.

Sorry, this is one that you guys hang on Benning that is way over dramatized.

So you would have preferred to have had Markstrom and Miller at $7.5 million on the roster last year instead of Markstrom and Lack for $2.5 million?

Lack is not a Vezina winner. But he's a solid goalie at a cheap price. The reason this is an issue is that our stupid GM spent $6 million on a lateral move in net instead of investing it in other areas of the team that needed it more.

And yeah, the coaching he received in Carolina was a joke and it's pretty well documented why, and nothing like what happened here with Miller.

 

[Cupless44]

And if the Canucks had Lack they might have finished...3rd last, and with the extra cap savings they could have taken a bad contract at the deadline to receive a better return instead of...nothing

I agree with you completely about that. At the time I wanted to keep Lack and Markstrom. I have wanted a rebuild since 2012 and saw no reason to spend 6 mil on a veteran goalie in the first place.

But I accepted that a veteran goalie was a reality with this management, and I thought keeping Markstrom was the right move, which it is.

I like Lack and wanted to keep him, but the difference with me is...I got over it. And I don't over value him and call Benning out fir not getting as much as younger goalies who were more in demand on the meadket. By the time it is said and done I think Bricebois will be a fair return for what Lack is.

 

[geebaan]

Miller has enough clout (big money contract/NTC/seasoned vet) to ignore what his goalie coach might want him to do unlike a backup goalie (eg., I don't see him adjusting his style at all - assuming it was ever asked).

You get paid $6 million - you tend to get more of the blame than you might deserve. Would Pizza get half the posts on this board if he were paid $1.5 million? I doubt it (as that's pretty much the going rate for an unremarkable #6 left side D - which is what he is).

That literally why people get mad. If he was paid like Biega, then who gives a ****?

 

[geebaan]

I agree with you completely about that. At the time I wanted to keep Lack and Markstrom. I have wanted a rebuild since 2012 and saw no reason to spend 6 mil on a veteran goalie in the first place.

But I accepted that a veteran goalie was a reality with this management, and I thought keeping Markstrom was the right move, which it is.

I like Lack and wanted to keep him, but the difference with me is...I got over it. And I don't over value him and call Benning out fir not getting as much as younger goalies who were more in demand on the meadket. By the time it is said and done I think Bricebois will be a fair return for what Lack is.

What about Brisebois makes you think that? No matter how you slice it, our GM ended up getting the worst return, just like in his other deals, and just like at the deadline. Are we not allowed to be critical anymore?

 

[Cupless44]

So you would have preferred to have had Markstrom and Miller at $7.5 million on the roster last year instead of Markstrom and Lack for $2.5 million?

Lack is not a Vezina winner. But he's a solid goalie at a cheap price. The reason this is an issue is that our stupid GM spent $6 million on a lateral move in net instead of investing it in other areas of the team that needed it more.

And yeah, the coaching he received in Carolina was a joke and it's pretty well documented why, and nothing like what happened here with Miller.

No just wanted I wanted the Lack and Markstrom combo. Not rocket science to go cheaper for a rebuilding team. But the actual management here felt it important to develop Markstrom with a veteran around. Lack proven this year he is not yet an accomplished or seasoned NHL goaltender so I decided not to live with the decision.

I just got over it and don't think this is a trade that has to be dissected a year later. I have no problem with those that say Miller should have gone because I agree. I just don't inflate who Lack is and what his value around the league really is. He should not have got the same return as Martin Jones...and he didn't.

 

[Proto]

I wonder what the fascination in this thread is for posters who legitimately believe and have stated that they don't care about anything the team does as long as Benning drafts well -- they seemingly don't even care if he acquires extra picks or better picks or really anything, as long as Benning is drafting.

What's the purpose of defending that position endlessly over and over without any variation on the argument or position? It's been this way for 12 months without any adjustment for the season that just happened. What's the point? I honestly don't get it.

I rarely post here and go days without reading the board anymore and when I do I'm amazed these same arguments are being repeated time and again. I'd argue that it's barely even a discussion of current management. It's basically "well, my position is that regardless of anything that happens, as long as Benning is GM that's all that matters at this point because he can draft."

Perplexing.

 

[geebaan]

I wonder what the fascination in this thread is for posters who legitimately believe and have stated that they don't care about anything the team does as long as Benning drafts well -- they seemingly don't even care if he acquires extra picks or better picks or really anything, as long as Benning is drafting.

What's the purpose of defending that position endlessly over and over without any variation on the argument or position? It's been this way for 12 months without any adjustment for the season that just happened. What's the point? I honestly don't get it.

I rarely post here and go days without reading the board anymore and when I do I'm amazed these same arguments are being repeated time and again. I'd argue that it's barely even a discussion of current management. It's basically "well, my position is that regardless of anything that happens, as long as Benning is GM that's all that matters at this point because he can draft."

Perplexing.

Exactly. He's losing assest on every trade? He's signing overpriced contract? Blatant disregard for the salary cap? Meh, just draft baby! I am sure once the drafting is good, he trade all those people hes drafted, over spend to resign them, and lose actually valuable pieces thanks to the salary cap.