Canucks Managerial Thread II

[Drop the Sopel]

At the time with the draft thread everyone following along wanted Barbashev, who was viewed as being bigger, more physical, and better offensively. Drop the Sopel mentioned Gillman but I don't recall him ever coming up in the discussion...

People were trying to push the narrative that Benning was trying to convince Gilman and co. that McCann was the right pick at 24, even though Gilman wanted no part of it. It was the draft video where Benning was talking about McCann's puck ripping ability while Gilman apparently was rolling his eyes at what a fool Benning was for thinking this was the right pick.

 

[Scurr]

I think most people would concede "good team" it's "powerhouse" that people are rightfully arguing.
---
The question is -can a GM take a good team, 'bleed value' and make 'atrocious talent evaluations' and still end up with a good team?

Yes, this.

I'm surprised that people always associate good management with good performance. Or bad management with bad performance. It need not be the case.

There are good managers making good moves that will have their team struggle this year.

Over the long haul, when bad moves mount past a threshold though, the team crumbles. It breaks at a certain point. But short term, depending upon what is already in place, the team's performance can belie the performance of the GM.

To be clear… I wasn't arguing management is good or that good team = good management. I'm arguing against hysteria and hyperbole. I don't think it has been nearly as bad as the theme around here indicates and I was curious whether a good team would change anything. Question answered.

 

[arttk]

People were trying to push the narrative that Benning was trying to convince Gilman and co. that McCann was the right pick at 24, even though Gilman wanted no part of it. It was the draft video where Benning was talking about McCann's puck ripping ability while Gilman apparently was rolling his eyes at what a fool Benning was for thinking this was the right pick.

https://youtu.be/4pKhfuV7rlE?t=1m16s (I give up embedding)

1:35, see Benning just going through the List that the scouts has put together and McCann I assume is next on the list. Don't see Gilman saying anything at all, or showing any kind of objections when Benning told Snow that he is going to be drafting McCann. Gilman is pretty much emotionless for the whole video.

What you are describing is at 2:29 when Benning is briefing Gilman on what McCann is like, the same thing he did with Virtanen to Linden at the beginning of the video.

You only see Gilman giving the face when Benning describes McCann as honest.

Stop stretching your imagination.

 

[Drop the Sopel]

Stop stretching your imagination.

It was never my narrative. I know it sounds like an absurd argument, and I said as much at the time it was made.

Want a good laugh? Go read the McCann draft thread. Not one post about how McCann would have been the guy Gillis drafted - instead Benning is torn to shreds by the same people routinely criticizing him today over taking the 'low upside' McCann over much better prospects still left on the board.

Then you had opinions from non-Canuck fans where the general consensus was that McCann was a steal at 24 and an outstanding selection.

You don't need to convince me it was a laughable opinion.

 

[arttk]

It was never my narrative. I know it sounds like an absurd argument, and I said as much at the time it was made.

Want a good laugh? Go read the McCann draft thread. Not one post about how McCann would have been the guy Gillis drafted - instead Benning is torn to shreds by the same people routinely criticizing him today over taking the 'low upside' McCann over much better prospects still left on the board.

Then you had opinions from non-Canuck fans where the general consensus was that McCann was a steal at 24 and an outstanding selection.

You don't need to convince me it was a laughable opinion.

Any debate within the draft day threads are always full of arguments.
This is HFboards and majority of the boards are armchair scouts.

The only thing that was prominent in the draft day thread was people was disappointed we didn't get Barbashev (sp) and there was a super long pissing match about it. Hell people still want him right now. Most of the argument was around how are we still not drafting Russians now that MG is gone and with Bennig's dumb meat and potatoes talk, people were speculating wtf that meant.

If you look at the video, you'll see Benning checking off the list. Unless you suggest Benning came in and made his own list, it's laughable to say the scouts had nothing to do with it.

I am guessing coming in, he spent the most time on who to draft for the #6 pick and told the scouts his preference for the next pick and the scouts came up with a list for that.

 

[me2]

People were trying to push the narrative that Benning was trying to convince Gilman and co. that McCann was the right pick at 24, even though Gilman wanted no part of it. It was the draft video where Benning was talking about McCann's puck ripping ability while Gilman apparently was rolling his eyes at what a fool Benning was for thinking this was the right pick.

You mean the bit where Gilman says "I like him, he's got good hands".

He had probably just moved on to the next pick and was being bored by hearing the same thing from Benning the 150th time.

 

[Drop the Sopel]

If you look at the video, you'll see Benning checking off the list. Unless you suggest Benning came in and made his own list, it's laughable to say the scouts had nothing to do with it.

Who said anything about the scouts having nothing to do with it? Of course the scouts would have input. Benning would also likely take into account the Bruins scouts thought of McCann as well. In the end, it was Jim's call who to take and based on his pretty obvious desire for 'puck rippers', Jared McCann had the best shot of anyone that made sense at 24 and that's the guy he gambled on.

Drafting McCann was a big black mark on the Benning regime. He was absolutely lambasted over that pick.

The Canucks had made 5 late 1st Rd selections in 5 years in Schroeder, Jensen, Gaunce, Shinkaruk and McCann. McCann was the only selection this board had a major issue with, yet at 19, he's already leapfrogged ahead of the 25, 22, 21 and 20 year olds before him and is the only 1 of the 5 in the NHL right now.

The fact there is only 1 other player taken within 90 picks of McCann that is in the NHL right now is just icing on the cake with that pick. Hopefully this is a sign of things to come.

 

[arttk]

Who said anything about the scouts having nothing to do with it? Of course the scouts would have input. Benning would also likely take into account the Bruins scouts thought of McCann as well. In the end, it was Jim's call who to take and based on his pretty obvious desire for 'puck rippers', Jared McCann had the best shot of anyone that made sense at 24 and that's the guy he gambled on.

Drafting McCann was a big black mark on the Benning regime. He was absolutely lambasted over that pick.

The Canucks had made 5 late 1st Rd selections in 5 years in Schroeder, Jensen, Gaunce, Shinkaruk and McCann. McCann was the only selection this board had a major issue with, yet at 19, he's already leapfrogged ahead of the 25, 22, 21 and 20 year olds before him and is the only 1 of the 5 in the NHL right now.

The fact there is only 1 other player taken within 90 picks of McCann that is in the NHL right now is just icing on the cake with that pick. Hopefully this is a sign of things to come.

So you are suggesting that he memorized the whole list that the Bruins compiled. You do know the moment he left the Bruins, he has to sign a bunch of NDAs and to steal the draft list from his former team is kind of a nono.

Actually, his whole tenure is filled with black marks.
So you can chalk this up to one of the 5 things he didn't do wrong.

Nobody disputes the fact MG's first 3 years, the drafting was bad, you don't simply walk into a scouting department (or any organization in the world) and fire everyone and turn it around. What he did was he took the time to find scouts that weren't **** that got buried in the org and revamped it and added guys and made it better. Takes time to do that and you know what, we are seeing the fruits of his revamp right now. Most of the kids that are looking alright came in his lsat 3 drafts and isn't it interesting that it coincides with his revamp.

Benning walked into an already revamped scouting department. Things are little different compared to MG when he walked into a scouting department that didn't draft **** for like N years.

 

[NoShowWilly]

it is indeed worth another read. draft threads are always good for a laugh. starts about here:

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1697759&page=19

 

[arttk]

it is indeed worth another read. draft threads are always good for a laugh. starts about here:

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1697759&page=19

Wow people really wanted Fabbri, looks like a good pick too.

 

[Drop the Sopel]

Actually, his whole tenure is filled with black marks.
So you can chalk this up to one of the 5 things he didn't do wrong.

Yup, and one of his biggest black marks was the McCann selection.

I for one welcome more of these 'black marks'.

 

[WTG]

it is indeed worth another read. draft threads are always good for a laugh. starts about here:

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1697759&page=19

Surprising how many people compared McCann to Gaunce.

They play nothing alike.

 

[Ainec]

it is indeed worth another read. draft threads are always good for a laugh. starts about here:

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1697759&page=19

I wanted Fabbri too but knew he'd be picked

surprised at the negative reaction towards selecting McCann. He was the obvious pick at our spot considering I thought he'd be taken earlier

 

[arttk]

Yup, and one of his biggest black marks was the McCann selection.

I for one welcome more of these 'black marks'.

So you welcome Sbisa, Miller, overpaying on every contract, giving up 2nd rounders for failed prospects, losing prospects because they don't know cap rules, firing staff members because they have different opinions, favortism, nepotism, hiring people that have a history of massive failure.

Even with scouting, who knows what he did to undo the things MG did. Firing Crawford, reinstating Delrome and going back to the Q are things that scares a lot of us here. I think we will see whether or not that will make a difference considering this will be the first year without Crawford since the revamp years ago.

There are better ways to tank.

 

[NoShowWilly]

I wanted Fabbri too but knew he'd be picked

surprised at the negative reaction towards selecting McCann. He was the obvious pick at our spot

the feelings were that the pick was redundant. Horvat looked nowhere near ready offensively. Gaunce was there. Just got bonino. matthias had just been picked up in the luongo trade. Mccann was touted as another 2-way player and a safe pick.

people just need to laugh. i had Virtanen getting hit by a sea bus.

 

[blendini]

So you welcome Sbisa, Miller, overpaying on every contract, giving up 2nd rounders for failed prospects, losing prospects because they don't know cap rules, firing staff members because they have different opinions, favortism, nepotism, hiring people that have a history of massive failure.

Even with scouting, who knows what he did to undo the things MG did. Firing Crawford, reinstating Delrome and going back to the Q are things that scares a lot of us here. I think we will see whether or not that will make a difference considering this will be the first year without Crawford since the revamp years ago.

There are better ways to tank.

Your hate for Benning is getting beyond obsessive. The team is better this year and a lot more fun to watch. What else do you want?

 

[VanillaCoke]

Your hate for Benning is getting beyond obsessive. The team is better this year and a lot more fun to watch. What else do you want?

Repeated positive decisions with smart and sound reasonings.

 

[blendini]

Repeated positive decisions with smart and sound reasonings.

Results are what matters.

 

[Cupless44]

It's a little odd to give GMs credit for their first draft when they get hired over the summer.

When GMs come in they typically instruct scouts to rank players based on their preferences (two way, size, def IQ, etc) but that process takes a full season for scouts, not the one summer pre-draft meeting.

I could see an argument that Benning had major influence on the #6 pick but I doubt he came in and redid our entire draft board.

There are not too many GMs as hands on as Benning when it comes to scouting and attending games themselves. You think he didn't do that in Boston when he was Assistant GM and didn't know the draft eligable players in 2014?

 

[Cupless44]

It was never my narrative. I know it sounds like an absurd argument, and I said as much at the time it was made.

Want a good laugh? Go read the McCann draft thread. Not one post about how McCann would have been the guy Gillis drafted - instead Benning is torn to shreds by the same people routinely criticizing him today over taking the 'low upside' McCann over much better prospects still left on the board.

Then you had opinions from non-Canuck fans where the general consensus was that McCann was a steal at 24 and an outstanding selection.

You don't need to convince me it was a laughable opinion.

Indeed. I heard mostly whining that Benning didn't take Barbashev after he drafted McCann. The consensus McCann was a good pick came from around the league, not here.

 

[Zaddy91]

it is indeed worth another read. draft threads are always good for a laugh. starts about here:

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1697759&page=19

basically affirmation who to take with a grain of salt

 

[RandV]

it is indeed worth another read. draft threads are always good for a laugh. starts about here:

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1697759&page=19

Yeah draft day threads generally aren't for me, I like sitting on my couch watching TSN for their feedback as it happens and jump into individual draft pick threads to get more details on the player.

Part of this is because I don't really follow prospects until they hit the draft, and that's where I start learning about them. But it's easy to notice over the years that there is massive group-think that goes on HFBoards as a whole concerning the ranking of prospects and where they should be picked. Almost without fail draft day 'winners' are teams that took a handful of guys late that the group-think liked and expected to go higher.

So in other words don't read too much into what goes on in draft day threads. Also the worst thing that probably happened that day was likely Benning and Delorme hitting it off over Mackenze Stewart.

 

[Hit the post]

Results are what matters.

Whopp-deeee-fricken-doo.....

Season is but two games old....let's what a bit longer before declaring this seasons version is better than last years model.

 

[coldsteel79]

I think the Stewart pick has more to do with Dave Manson coaching him and seeing something in him and having close ties to jim and brian Benning

 

[RandV]

I think the Stewart pick has more to do with Dave Manson coaching him and seeing something in him and having close ties to jim and brian Benning

Could very well be, I was thinking the WHL is Delorme's neck of the would (and that's a classic Delorme pick) and him & Benning could have bonded over Stewart's inspiring story.

Oh and I'm being half sarcastic here