Canucks Managerial Thread II

[Cupless44]

I even said you can remove Schroeder from the list. I honestly would have re signed him, and I guess that would have been correct since he had a better year offensively than Vey while playing better than Vey defensively.

Santorelli was a home town guy and could have been re-signed. Why do you think I said we got zero value? We let him walk for no reason.



You think teams lose that much depth within one year? I guess that would make Gillis an asset management genius since he certainly didn't lose that much quality depth in a single year. Not only that, but Gillis didn't have the option to sell at deadlines early in his tenure because they were actual cup contenders. You can't trade Ehrhoff at the deadline when you're looking to win a cup. When Gillis did let people walk, it was to replace someone like Wellwood with Malhotra. I loved Wellwood, but we needed him in the playoffs and then let him walk to sign Malhotra. That is more acceptable with letting 18 goals in Matthias walk to get Prust. Much more acceptable than moving Garrison so you can get Vey and Sbisa.

Yet the immortal Santorelli hasnt even been able to find his annual one year for league minimum contract this year.

People are still going on about this. Seriously?

 

[F A N]

I even said you can remove Schroeder from the list. I honestly would have re signed him, and I guess that would have been correct since he had a better year offensively than Vey while playing better than Vey defensively.

Santorelli was a home town guy and could have been re-signed. Why do you think I said we got zero value? We let him walk for no reason.

How did Schroeder have a better year offensively and how was he better defensively than Vey? Regardless, Schroeder was a fringe NHL player. Benning chose to move on.

Santorelli was offered a 1 year contract and he thought he could get a 2 year deal from some team. I think it's ridiculous to criticize Benning for not getting "value" out of Santorelli by simply not agreeing to his contract demands.

As for the pending UFAs last year, it's not like those guys could have netted 1st round picks. The Canucks were a playoff team and Richardson was injured.

I think it's pretty stupid to consider re-signing a player "getting value" and criticizing a GM for keeping a pending UFA and complimentary player for the playoff drive. It's like if Benning re-signed Matthias to a one year contract he "got value" for him and then if he didn't trade him at the next deadline and let him walk he gets criticized for getting "zero value." I guess every GM that let a star player age and retire should be criticized for getting "zero value?"

When Gillis did let people walk, it was to replace someone like Wellwood with Malhotra. I loved Wellwood, but we needed him in the playoffs and then let him walk to sign Malhotra. That is more acceptable with letting 18 goals in Matthias walk to get Prust. Much more acceptable than moving Garrison so you can get Vey and Sbisa.

Gillis let plenty of players walk. I don't remember Gillis trading a single pending UFA.

 

[Cupless44]

I have no problem with Benning having his vision. Although I disagree with it, that's totally acceptable. What isn't acceptable is throwing away everyone who doesn't fit his vision for a loss. You want to keep Miller over Lack? That's questionable at best, but move Lack for a fair price. You think Sbisa is going to be a top 4 guy but you can't fit him? Questionable, but move a guy for fair value to give him a spot. Don't throw away a top 4 defender in Garrison for low value and throw in a pick to boot.

Benning's team could be fantastic, but what could have been is amazing as well.

Bonino over Sutter
Dorsett at 1.5 (fair value), or 2.3 with Kassian over Prust

Edler Tanev
Hamhuis Green
Hutton Garrison

Lack
Markstrom

We could have that D and goaltending at the same cap as what we have now which has Bartkowski and Sbisa in place of Green and Garrison. Even if you want someone other than Green, it's 6M in cap space to spend on a quality defender. Ehrhoff, Martin, whoever. In fact, with Green and Ehrhoff, our D is even on their natural side more than now where we have 5 left defenders.

I'd argue we're better at D, better at goaltending, and honestly better up front with those changes.

If you want to run with Miller, Sbisa and Bartkowski instead, no problem. You better get value though for the players you move to make spots. If you think McCann is going to be better than Sedin and you want to move them, go for it, but don't move them for a couple 3rds because you believe in McCann. If you waste value in every trade, eventually you're not going to be able to acquire the assets to match your vision. If you gain value in every trade, which should be impossible, you will always be able to improve your team and get the players that you vision. Even in trades where we have all the leverage, we end up paying more. Pens had to deal Sutter, and got an equal or superior player in Bonino while the other team adds picks and Bonino has a very good cap hit. It's insane. Sbisa had no leverage, he would probably be playing in Europe this year if we hadn't signed him. We gave him a massive raise. Even if Sbisa does turn into a top 4 guy, we could have signed him to the same term at 1 million surely and been in an excellent place moving forward.

Lack was moved for what he was worth on the market. He was not going to fetch the return of better younger goalies like Martin Jones or Cam Talbot

 

[Cupless44]

Because in reality Kassian is one of the better forwards on the team and we would all see plain as day that he earned a spot.

Glad we have someone running the team who throws away draft picks in case the fans don't like him anymore . That's just as damning, though. If Kassian gets picked up, it means clearly he's worth at least a conditional 7th, meaning he had some value and we didn't have to pay to get rid of him. We could have got a cond 7th or something and it still would have been a better trade for us. If Kassian clears, nobody would have a leg to stand on, as he clearly had no value around the league. Benning could say he tried to trade him but nobody wanted him, and Kassian clearing waivers would vindicate him.

How about all the posters step forward who said Benning gave up a good young forward that would have a good career and come back to haunt us?

I wasn't concerned at the time because he will have a marginal career or be out of the league in a year or two.

Actually most of those posters are probably now here, doing a 180 spin to now blame Benning for not solving Kassian's problems.

 

[vanuck]

Clearly many here have never been to The Warehouse on Granville

I have. It was there that I spotted Tanev and Stanton having a cold one...

 

[Intangibos]

On this board people are quite used to y'all questioning every single thing about the general manager and questioning his intelligence and calling him a moron.

In this thread you are grasping poorly to put blame on Benning for a situation you don't understand.

We're questioning his decisions because they're mostly bad. I've said repeatedly I like the Baertschi trade, I don't just have a vendetta against the guy. Chicago gets Forsling for an AHL-NHL tweener in Clendening, we waive Corrado. We pay a second for an AHL-NHL tweener C who we hope to make the jump, NJ paid a conditional 7th. There is nothing wrong with questioning Benning's moves because the majority of them are pretty suspect.

LOL you are lamenting the loss of Santorelli, Schroeder and DALPE??

Try and pull yourself together. NHL teams are moving on from marginal talents all the time.

Try and read? I specifically said you can remove Schroeder and Dalpe from the list, but they're very comparable to Vey who we paid a second for. Santorelli is absolutely better than Vey AINEC. He played very well for us in his year here and was one of the bright spots on our awful team.

Yet the immortal Santorelli hasnt even been able to find his annual one year for league minimum contract this year.

People are still going on about this. Seriously?

Santorelli is better than Vey, period. He was good in his year here and should have been extended.

How did Schroeder have a better year offensively and how was he better defensively than Vey? Regardless, Schroeder was a fringe NHL player. Benning chose to move on.

Santorelli was offered a 1 year contract and he thought he could get a 2 year deal from some team. I think it's ridiculous to criticize Benning for not getting "value" out of Santorelli by simply not agreeing to his contract demands.

As for the pending UFAs last year, it's not like those guys could have netted 1st round picks. The Canucks were a playoff team and Richardson was injured.

I think it's pretty stupid to consider re-signing a player "getting value" and criticizing a GM for keeping a pending UFA and complimentary player for the playoff drive. It's like if Benning re-signed Matthias to a one year contract he "got value" for him and then if he didn't trade him at the next deadline and let him walk he gets criticized for getting "zero value." I guess every GM that let a star player age and retire should be criticized for getting "zero value?"


Gillis let plenty of players walk. I don't remember Gillis trading a single pending UFA.

How did Schroeder not have a better year than Vey? He put up the exact same point pace as Vey, but didn't have the luxury of 20 games on the PP with the Sedins. He is also cheaper, and more effective defensively. He is objectively better than Vey. His weakness is his size but Vey isn't exactly strong on the puck or along the boards. So if Vey is worth a 2nd rounder, then Schroeder isn't worthless. If Schroeder is worthless, then so is Vey, so it's odd we're not allowed to criticize.

Giving Santorelli a 2 year contract after his year here was more than reasonable. It also doesn't matter if a player isn't worth a first, you should still move them. Gillis kept players because we were president trophy winners and cup contenders. In his final year here he wanted to rebuild but was blocked by management. Matthias should have been traded at the deadline for a 3rd. Instead we keep him for a 'playoff run' but also don't think enough of him to sign him. If we aren't fans of him, why aren't we moving him at the deadline? Benning is losing assets faster than he can acquire them, and that's the problem. That's why we have Cracknell as our C depth. Can you not grasp the difference in situations between Gillis' 1st place teams and Benning trying to reach the playoffs with almost the identical roster that was 25th in the league the year prior? Get some picks and rebuild. Why is our GM who's specialty is drafting not acquiring draft picks?

Lack was moved for what he was worth on the market. He was not going to fetch the return of better younger goalies like Martin Jones or Cam Talbot

Not sure how Lack is worse than Jones. I didn't realize no GM can ever get fleeced. Filip Forsberg was only worth Martin Erat, the market dictated value LOL

How about all the posters step forward who said Benning gave up a good young forward that would have a good career and come back to haunt us?

I wasn't concerned at the time because he will have a marginal career or be out of the league in a year or two.

Actually most of those posters are probably now here, doing a 180 spin to now blame Benning for not solving Kassian's problems.

I do believe Kassian will have a good career, but even if he doesn't improve at all, he is still an effective 3rd liner by every advanced statistic. Do you discredit advanced statistics entirely? I don't think they are the most important thing like some people do, but generally an effective player by advanced stats is an effective player in reality. Kassian drove possession and was one of our more effective scorers. Even if he never gets any better at all, he is still an effective player who we for some reason paid to get rid of when we could have gotten rid of him for free. I'm sorry if this is too complicated, but there is no point arguing it if you can't grasp it. We paid to get rid of someone that could have been discarded for free. It would be like if we paid a 5th round pick to get rid of Garrison when he would be picked up on waivers.

 

[vanuck]

I'm not sure why the snide remarks about another poster's objectivity and state of mind are necessary. ****ing ironic considering the pleas for people to stop throwing insults at Benning.

 

[Intangibos]

I'm not sure why the snide remarks about another poster's objectivity and state of mind are necessary. ****ing ironic considering the pleas for people to stop throwing insults at Benning.

Because it's all that they have left. It's no coincidence it's always the same people doing it. Then again this post is doing the same thing, I suppose. At least I include reality in my posts, so that's nice.

 

[F A N]

How did Schroeder not have a better year than Vey?

How is 25 games in the NHL putting up 3 goals and 8 points and spending half a year in the AHL a better year than a full year in the NHL playing 75 games and putting up 10 goals and 24 points? Please explain this to me.

It also doesn't matter if a player isn't worth a first, you should still move them. Gillis kept players because we were president trophy winners and cup contenders. .

The Canucks haven't been "cup contenders" in at least 2 of Gillis' last 3 years. Playoff teams don't tend to move pending UFAs unless the return is very good and when they really "can't afford to let them walk." The moves you want Benning to make are moves people make in video games.

 

[Cupless44]

We're questioning his decisions because they're mostly bad. I've said repeatedly I like the Baertschi trade, I don't just have a vendetta against the guy. Chicago gets Forsling for an AHL-NHL tweener in Clendening, we waive Corrado. We pay a second for an AHL-NHL tweener C who we hope to make the jump, NJ paid a conditional 7th. There is nothing wrong with questioning Benning's moves because the majority of them are pretty suspect.



Try and read? I specifically said you can remove Schroeder and Dalpe from the list, but they're very comparable to Vey who we paid a second for. Santorelli is absolutely better than Vey AINEC. He played very well for us in his year here and was one of the bright spots on our awful team.



Santorelli is better than Vey, period. He was good in his year here and should have been extended.



How did Schroeder not have a better year than Vey? He put up the exact same point pace as Vey, but didn't have the luxury of 20 games on the PP with the Sedins. He is also cheaper, and more effective defensively. He is objectively better than Vey. His weakness is his size but Vey isn't exactly strong on the puck or along the boards. So if Vey is worth a 2nd rounder, then Schroeder isn't worthless. If Schroeder is worthless, then so is Vey, so it's odd we're not allowed to criticize.

Giving Santorelli a 2 year contract after his year here was more than reasonable. It also doesn't matter if a player isn't worth a first, you should still move them. Gillis kept players because we were president trophy winners and cup contenders. In his final year here he wanted to rebuild but was blocked by management. Matthias should have been traded at the deadline for a 3rd. Instead we keep him for a 'playoff run' but also don't think enough of him to sign him. If we aren't fans of him, why aren't we moving him at the deadline? Benning is losing assets faster than he can acquire them, and that's the problem. That's why we have Cracknell as our C depth. Can you not grasp the difference in situations between Gillis' 1st place teams and Benning trying to reach the playoffs with almost the identical roster that was 25th in the league the year prior? Get some picks and rebuild. Why is our GM who's specialty is drafting not acquiring draft picks?



Not sure how Lack is worse than Jones. I didn't realize no GM can ever get fleeced. Filip Forsberg was only worth Martin Erat, the market dictated value LOL



I do believe Kassian will have a good career, but even if he doesn't improve at all, he is still an effective 3rd liner by every advanced statistic. Do you discredit advanced statistics entirely? I don't think they are the most important thing like some people do, but generally an effective player by advanced stats is an effective player in reality. Kassian drove possession and was one of our more effective scorers. Even if he never gets any better at all, he is still an effective player who we for some reason paid to get rid of when we could have gotten rid of him for free. I'm sorry if this is too complicated, but there is no point arguing it if you can't grasp it. We paid to get rid of someone that could have been discarded for free. It would be like if we paid a 5th round pick to get rid of Garrison when he would be picked up on waivers.

I don't like every move Benning has made and have never had a problem saying so. Sbisa and trading for Clendening poor moves without question. But there are times it just gets taken to ridiculous levels and this thread is one of them.

All the posters who slammed the Kassian trade because they never understood the true situation, even now after being informed, are now turning it around and now blaming Benning for not helping poor Zack enough. Again without the proper information on what the organization has done to work with this payer through his problems. Laughable.

This is when certain posters like me say enough. It is attacking Benning just for the sake of attacking Benning because that is what is fashionable here.

As far as you saying what value Benning should have got for Kassian maybe clue in that the guy is toxic. They offered him around the league and no one wanted him. In the end Benning found one team and found some sort of return that he saw some value in whether you like Prust or not. Time will tell if he can contribute more than a guy suspended in rehab. The fact that he had to throw in a 5th to get Bergevin to take a chance on this problem should tell you something about how few teams wanted to take this on. Judging by his searing words, Bergevin is not to happy he took a chance on Kassian.

As for you not being sure how Lack isn't as good as Jones. Your first clue was when a rival from the same division gave their state rival the high cost of a first round draft choice for him. The second will be when you watch him in SJ this year and see how good he is, a true #1 goaltender

 

[Cupless44]

Last thing I will post about the ridiculous notion that Benning and management treated poor Zack badly and didn't work with him is to post something from the excellent Elliott Freedman.

Not much debate about which organization worked with Kassian and gave him a chance to show he could be a professional.

"Canadiens coach Michel Therrien confirmed Tuesday what was widely suspected, that Zack Kassian had already been through Stage One of the NHL/NHLPA Substance Abuse Program.

It had been rumoured that was the case in Vancouver, but the Canucks never confirmed it at the time, nor should they have. Stan Smyl spent a ton of time working with Kassian, but it’s very clear the Canadiens are already out of patience.

It’s extremely unlikely he will play for Montreal this season. Can only hope the possibility his NHL career could be over scares him to the proper path."

 

[Chairman Maouth]

Knock off the ad hominem attacks please.

Posts in here have been edited.

 

[Toxic0n]

yeah only a bit of that seems like a legit problem to me.

this isn't a "every little thing you can do to help the team" group. this isn't sleep-science gillis and cap-whiz gilman. i wish it was but it's not.

benning works by having a vision and a budget and guys he likes for the team and making it happen.

Not to nitpick, but a "budget"? I'm not even sure Benning knows what a salary cap is.

As I understand it, if we have more than 1 short term injury, we do not have the cap space to call up a replacement and will not be able to dress a full team.

He may have a vision, but numbers are not his strongest suit.

 

[Pip]

Yet the immortal Santorelli hasnt even been able to find his annual one year for league minimum contract this year.

People are still going on about this. Seriously?

Who cares about what kind of contract he gets. Santorelli proved to be a valuable player here as a very versatile player.

 

[MS]

Lack was moved for what he was worth on the market. He was not going to fetch the return of better younger goalies like Martin Jones or Cam Talbot

Lack was the best goalie available and got the worst return.

Jones had had an .898 save % since the first month of his career.

 

[Hit the post]

Stan Smyl spent a ton of time working with Kassian

Didn't he work alot with Krutov as well?

Lack was moved for what he was worth on the market.

Guess that's why the Canucks inferred they rejected a better offer from the Oilers because they were afraid of facing a backup goalie in their conference...

 

[banme*]

Lack was the best goalie available and got the worst return.

Jones had had an .898 save % since the first month of his career.

I think for someone like Martin Jones it's harder to predict his actual ability than simply looking at his NHL numbers thus far. That being said I feel Lack was definitely not worse than the other two, and Talbot is older anyway lol.

 

[Alan Jackson]

This forum, and this thread in particular, has become a parody of an internet message board. People turned on Benning from his first day on the job and are bound and determined to be proven "right", even to the point of wishing failure upon the team you supposedly cheer for. Bizarre.

The team had a good season last year, and is younger, faster and more skilled this year. Things aren't that bad, are they?

I mean, Benning has made some very clear mistakes (in my opinion, anyway), but I can't think of a GM who hasn't made a bad trade or a poor signing. When you're attempting to turn over an entire roster, there are going to be missteps. Maybe instead of attempting to discredit every single thing this administration does, we could focus on the overall direction of the team. I think things are looking up, myself.

I think some if you are in it so deep you can't now turn back, so we see this doubling down of personal insults toward Benning, and they players he's acquired, when things might start to look a little positive. The forum was toxic in the summer and seems not to have gotten any better.

It's too bad, because I used to enjoy reading these boards, engaging in debate with other posters, and reading the opinions of the very knowledgeable posters here. These days, though, the forum has become nothing but a forum for people to bash the GM, the coach, the president, and belittle and mock every thing they do or say.

I wonder, honestly, if even a Stanley Cup would be enough to change the minds of some of you. Would we spend thousands of pages mocking the parade route?

 

[drax0s]

Then trade him for a cond 7th. It's a better trade for us. We don't have to pay to get rid of Kassian because if he has so little value he will just clear waivers.

You know, I probably wouldn't be opposed to picking up Prust for a 5th and conditional 7th.

 

[arttk]

Lack was the best goalie available and got the worst return.

Jones had had an .898 save % since the first month of his career.

Not to mention that Benning "thought" Lack was only a backup.

Obviously a ****ing lie, he knew Lack was better and needed to sell the concept that he is only a backup. If he really though Lack was a just a backup then there would be no reason to be afraid of trading him within the conference. Keeping Lack within the conference will only highlight how stupid the decision to keep Miller is.

 

[arttk]

This forum, and this thread in particular, has become a parody of an internet message board. People turned on Benning from his first day on the job and are bound and determined to be proven "right", even to the point of wishing failure upon the team you supposedly cheer for. Bizarre.

The team had a good season last year, and is younger, faster and more skilled this year. Things aren't that bad, are they?

I mean, Benning has made some very clear mistakes (in my opinion, anyway), but I can't think of a GM who hasn't made a bad trade or a poor signing. When you're attempting to turn over an entire roster, there are going to be missteps. Maybe instead of attempting to discredit every single thing this administration does, we could focus on the overall direction of the team. I think things are looking up, myself.

I think some if you are in it so deep you can't now turn back, so we see this doubling down of personal insults toward Benning, and they players he's acquired, when things might start to look a little positive. The forum was toxic in the summer and seems not to have gotten any better.

It's too bad, because I used to enjoy reading these boards, engaging in debate with other posters, and reading the opinions of the very knowledgeable posters here. These days, though, the forum has become nothing but a forum for people to bash the GM, the coach, the president, and belittle and mock every thing they do or say.

I wonder, honestly, if even a Stanley Cup would be enough to change the minds of some of you. Would we spend thousands of pages mocking the parade route?

Read until I saw people turned on Benning since the first day.

What a ****ing joke, Benning had a **** ton of support on this forum, almost nobody said anything bad. Even after the Kesler trade we hailed him as trader Jim.
Get your facts straight before trying to act as some Internet message board moral compass.

 

[Aphid Attraction]

This forum, and this thread in particular, has become a parody of an internet message board. People turned on Benning from his first day on the job and are bound and determined to be proven "right", even to the point of wishing failure upon the team you supposedly cheer for. Bizarre.

The team had a good season last year, and is younger, faster and more skilled this year. Things aren't that bad, are they?

I mean, Benning has made some very clear mistakes (in my opinion, anyway), but I can't think of a GM who hasn't made a bad trade or a poor signing. When you're attempting to turn over an entire roster, there are going to be missteps. Maybe instead of attempting to discredit every single thing this administration does, we could focus on the overall direction of the team. I think things are looking up, myself.

I think some if you are in it so deep you can't now turn back, so we see this doubling down of personal insults toward Benning, and they players he's acquired, when things might start to look a little positive. The forum was toxic in the summer and seems not to have gotten any better.

It's too bad, because I used to enjoy reading these boards, engaging in debate with other posters, and reading the opinions of the very knowledgeable posters here. These days, though, the forum has become nothing but a forum for people to bash the GM, the coach, the president, and belittle and mock every thing they do or say.

I wonder, honestly, if even a Stanley Cup would be enough to change the minds of some of you. Would we spend thousands of pages mocking the parade route?

Yes... I have thought this myself... That first line in particular...

 

[Alan Jackson]

Read until I saw people turned on Benning since the first day.

What a ****ing joke, Benning had a **** ton of support on this forum, almost nobody said anything bad. Even after the Kesler trade we hailed him as trader Jim.
Get your facts straight before trying to act as some Internet message board moral compass.

You may want to revisit the Kesler trade thread, and the especially the draft day thread, where at one point he was accused of being a racist anti-Russian, right until the moment he drafted one. It was, frankly, embarrassing.

 

[Aphid Attraction]

The point is there are players with bigger character issues than Kassian by far, who are still excellent hockey players. You wouldn't pay to get rid of O'Reilly or Kane because they get drunk and do stupid stuff. It's not like Kassian is a 4th line plug, he is a solid NHL player who was our second best ES P/60 scorer ahead of the Sedins the last two years. I'm not saying he's an allstar by any means, but he's a useful player who you don't pay to get rid of. Just like you don't see Buffalo paying to get rid of O'Reilly because he had his DUI or Chicago paying to get rid of Kane because he parties all summer and comes to camp out of shape.

In fact, it seems Benning is the only active GM doing these types of deals. Paying to get rid of Kassian and dumping Seguin for a very poor return. Now Seguin is one of the top scorers in the league and Boston is in the dumps. Either Benning is a million steps ahead of 29 other GMs or he is the one guy trailing behind.

Kassian is not the unicorn we hoped he was... Thoes guys are...

 

[castanza]

This forum, and this thread in particular, has become a parody of an internet message board.

Yep, you've summed up the forum in one sentence.