Canucks Managerial Thread II

[fancouver]

This is why the Gilman firing is so frustrating.

Even if Benning wants complete control, you can't ignore that Gilman was masterful at what he did. Obviously his role was reduced in Vancouver, but there is no way he shouldn't have been allowed to manage contract negotiations and manage the teams cap.

Gilman being fired was a headscatcher, but it has more to do with philosophy and direction of the team.

Gillis and Gilman wanted to have a upbeat, fast and skilled team. I think Benning is still old-school and wanted some knuckledraggers on the team.

Plus, not shocking to have a new GM fire the old GM's assistants. The ol' cleaning house trick.

 

[arttk]

And here we are with a guy called John Weisbrod who graduated from Harvard, yet we have the same fanbase criticizing him for not knowing anything. The double standard here is quite the feat.



I never questioned the value of post-secondary education in general, so it's pointless asking why people pursue MBAs and BBAs.

And you omitted the last part of my post when I mentioned Yzerman has been doing great as a GM.

It can be done.

Yes with his fancy English degree. He does have invaluable experience in tanking two franchise, Orland Magic and Calgary Flames and shown a deep understanding in cap rules by being involved in that ROR offer sheet.

 

[tantalum]

And here we are with a guy called John Weisbrod who graduated from Harvard, yet we have the same fanbase criticizing him for not knowing anything. The double standard here is quite the feat.

It's not a double standard when the person in question has proven himself to be a know nothing despite the degree he holds (which has nothing to do with business)....

 

[Scurr]

Gilman being fired was a headscatcher, but it has more to do with philosophy and direction of the team.

Gillis and Gilman wanted to have a upbeat, fast and skilled team. I think Benning is still old-school and wanted some knuckledraggers on the team.

Plus, not shocking to have a new GM fire the old GM's assistants. The ol' cleaning house trick.

You have to assume that a lot of the "value" arguments that people make here would have been brought up by Gilman. Clearly, Benning didn't trust him. Benning can't keep ignoring it completely forever, though. I was happy to get away from the previous regimes philosophy but you certainly can't completely ignore value forever. You have to hope he hires someone he trusts that can merge the philosophies better going forward.

 

[Ho Borvat]

Gilman being fired was a headscatcher, but it has more to do with philosophy and direction of the team.

Gillis and Gilman wanted to have a upbeat, fast and skilled team. I think Benning is still old-school and wanted some knuckledraggers on the team.

Plus, not shocking to have a new GM fire the old GM's assistants. The ol' cleaning house trick.

Well, these are obviously areas of weakness for Benning and Co. (contracts, and cap management), so the loss of Gilman is a huge blow.

It would be like running a company, and firing your most senior accountant in the hopes that one of your marketing guys can take over his role because he agrees with the CEOs philosophy and direction of the organization.

So even if their philosophies didn't mesh, this management group is significantly worse off without Gilman (there is plenty of evidence to support this).

You have to assume that a lot of the "value" arguments that people make here would have been brought up by Gilman. Clearly, Benning didn't trust him. Benning can't keep ignoring it completely forever, though. I was happy to get away from the previous regimes philosophy but you certainly can't completely ignore value forever. You have to hope he hires someone he trusts that can merge the philosophies better going forward.

What is there not to trust with Gilman though? Even if his role is reduced, and his job is more refined to focus primarily on contract negotiations/cap management, it doesn't really have an impact on the "philosophy" of the team.

I would hope that both Benning and Gilman share the philosophy that managing the cap efficiently is crucial.

 

[fancouver]

Yes with his fancy English degree. He does have invaluable experience in tanking two franchise, Orland Magic and Calgary Flames and shown a deep understanding in cap rules by being involved in that ROR offer sheet.

It's not a double standard when the person in question has proven himself to be a know nothing despite the degree he holds (which has nothing to do with business)....

This exactly what I mean. OP says Vancouver front office has no level of experience or education.

I respond by saying that's not the case; we clearly have a guy from Harvard.

Then your retort was by mocking his 'fancy' English degree.

And FWIW, Harvard is still Harvard with an acceptance rate of under 6%. Only the brightest minds can even go there. Anything from that school is considered a huge accomplishment.

You have to assume that a lot of the "value" arguments that people make here would have been brought up by Gilman. Clearly, Benning didn't trust him. Benning can't keep ignoring it completely forever, though. I was happy to get away from the previous regimes philosophy but you certainly can't completely ignore value forever. You have to hope he hires someone he trusts that can merge the philosophies better going forward.

Totally, I understand the firing, but still acknowledge Gilman's contributions to the team. He was seriously a cap-cruncher and we need a guy like that. But it didn't make sense having him around when the team was going in a totally new direction influenced by Aquilini.

 

[DL44]

Tonnes of pure speculation in here now...

 

[VanillaCoke]

Tonnes of pure speculation in here now...

Welcome to HFboards.

 

[DL44]

Welcome to HFboards.

Usually you see the occasional fact thrown in, but.....

 

[Vtownfan]

T
And FWIW, Harvard is still Harvard with an acceptance rate of under 6%. Only the brightest minds can even go there. Anything from that school is considered a huge accomplishment.
.

And I'm sure he would make an excellent English Prof. What he hasn't proven to date is he is a good sports executive. Gilman was fired because I'm sure he was a dissenting voice on 1) Giving Sbisa a 3 year deal for that kind of money when he was still eligible to be arbitrated. That is just giving money away. 2) Giving Dorsett 4 years at 2.6mil.

Crawford was fired because he probably had Nylander ahead of Virtanen last draft and his pro scouting wasn't fitting Benning's. Hello Linden Vey.

 

[arttk]

This exactly what I mean. OP says Vancouver front office has no level of experience or education.

I respond by saying that's not the case; we clearly have a guy from Harvard.

Then your retort was by mocking his 'fancy' English degree.

And FWIW, Harvard is still Harvard with an acceptance rate of under 6%. Only the brightest minds can even go there. Anything from that school is considered a huge accomplishment.



Totally, I understand the firing, but still acknowledge Gilman's contributions to the team. He was seriously a cap-cruncher and we need a guy like that. But it didn't make sense having him around when the team was going in a totally new direction influenced by Aquilini.

I don't have issue against English degrees, there are a lot of people with irrelevant degrees that manage to become good at what they do.
I have issue with the guy who has one and leveraged that to climbed high enough in the sporting world to help tank 2 franchises in two different leagues.

He has shown to be competent at nothing but helping franchise tank, one where he was literally the architect of it and the other one he was in the senior team.

 

[fancouver]

I don't have issue against English degrees, there are a lot of people with irrelevant degrees that manage to become good at what they do.
I have issue with the guy who has one and leveraged that to climbed high enough in the sporting world to help tank 2 franchises in two different leagues.

He has shown to be competent at nothing but helping franchise tank, one where he was literally the architect of it and the other one he was in the senior team.

Fair enough, but your initial response sounded more like a sarcastic remark regarding his degree of choice.

I am not high on Weisbrod either. Just pointing out the facts that Canucks management does indeed have 'high level education' in the front office when asked.

 

[arsmaster*]

A degree in english means nothing in the business world. Harvard or not, most english degrees get you jobs in a library, stacking books.

 

[arttk]

Fair enough, but your initial response sounded more like a sarcastic remark regarding his degree of choice.

I am not high on Weisbrod either. Just pointing out the facts that Canucks management does indeed have 'high level education' in the front office when asked.

Honestly it's not even about just high level education. It's more relevant experience to running a business. There are tons of entrepreneur who has no degree who end up being good at business by starting/managing their own business.

Yzerman don't have a degree, but Ken Holland told him under his wing and taught him how to run a sports business and it seems like he has put the right people in place to handle things he has no expertise in.

Benning based on what he has done with the Canucks has shown that he has literally zero clue what to do when it comes to asset valuation, trade negotiations, cap related issues and contract management, pro scouting, hell scouting of his own players and general employee management. The fact that he fired the guys who are expert in that because "they didn't agree with him" should set off alarm bells.
Not being knowledgable about something is not bad if he is willing to listen, he is not knowledgable and not willing to listen at the same time.

 

[Ernie]

A degree in english means nothing in the business world. Harvard or not, most english degrees get you jobs in a library, stacking books.

You could say the same about a business degree in the business world.

 

[arttk]

A degree in english means nothing in the business world. Harvard or not, most english degrees get you jobs in a library, stacking books.

A degree from a high esteemed institution gets you in the door in a lot of places. The degree doesn't matter, it's what you do afterwards that matters. The CEO of Goldman has a history major, didn't stop him from learning and becoming one of the most powerful person in the world.

Problem with Weisbrod is all he has to show is him being involved in the tanking of 2 sports franchise. How many sports executive have a record like that and still manage to stay in the business as an executive?

 

[arsmaster*]

You could say the same about a business degree in the business world.

For sure, but I was countering the idea that having a degree in english means anything about anything in the hockey management world where there is more to it than "he can rip it".

I'm not a big fan of institutional learning facilities anyways, I know plenty of people who never got further than grade 10 that are infinitely more intelligent than people I know who spent 6 years in post secondary.

I'll even go as far as stating than I don't believe in English Degrees period. Who ****ing cares....

business and technical writing, plus common sense = more than you'll ever get out of an english degree. I think college/university is a cash grab and a waste of time (that said, I will definitely be pushing my children to attend university, but not an Arts degree LOL).

 

[Bleach Clean]

You have to assume that a lot of the "value" arguments that people make here would have been brought up by Gilman. Clearly, Benning didn't trust him. Benning can't keep ignoring it completely forever, though. I was happy to get away from the previous regimes philosophy but you certainly can't completely ignore value forever. You have to hope he hires someone he trusts that can merge the philosophies better going forward.

I would say that you can't or shouldn't "ignore value" period. Ignoring it impacts a trade from the outset. Makes it more dangerous. Has you assume more risk. Colours the public perception of the trade. And if you're wrong... well, you see the result.

Question about being 'Happy' to get away from the previous regime's philosophy of "value"? Is that what you mean to say? I just want to be sure that this is the argument posed before I respond to it.

 

[Scurr]

I would say that you can't or shouldn't "ignore value" period. Ignoring it impacts a trade from the outset. Makes it more dangerous. Has you assume more risk. Colours the public perception of the trade. And if you're wrong... well, you see the result.

No, that wasn't the best way to put it. I think often the value talked about in these trades ignores the function of the team. IMO there's value in things like culture and character. Sometimes, those things need to be looked at over corsi and counting stats.

You're right though… that's not ignoring value. There's value there. Maybe not as much as Benning is putting into it, though, so he needs a stats guy he can trust. Someone that won't just stick up their nose and scoff at the things we can't put a number on but can help Benning measure the value there against the value we can count.

Question about being 'Happy' to get away from the previous regime's philosophy of "value"? Is that what you mean to say? I just want to be sure that this is the argument posed before I respond to it.

The problem I began to have with the previous regime was valuing deals independent from the impact it had on the team. Too many times they put the "value" of a deal ahead of the on ice product. In the end, a GM is a team builder. Gillis started off well in this regard and then lost his way imo.

For instance

It's great to say you're going to have a hard internal cap and keeping Bieksa to 4.6m worked well. But what was the cost to the team losing a PMD that couldn't be replaced? And then to use the "savings" to carry Keith Ballard around at the bottom of the roster… they lost me there.

I think the Garrison contract is another instance. He's a good player. He had a good contract. The defence as constructed, though, was far less than ideal. Really disappointing considering the investment.

The Schneider trade is another example imo. Horvat is saving it but chances are good the team can never replace that level of goaltending. Hopefully, we get lucky and Horvat represents that kind of player.

So yeah… I'm looking for someone that's focused on building a team with an eye on value to do it. IMO Gillis became someone that was looking for value with barely an eye on the team.

 

[mathonwy]

Tonnes of pure speculation in here now...

Evidence based speculation.

JB negotiating based on the player's value to the Canucks versus based on what the market value of a player is pretty much explains every eff up he's made as the Vancouver GM.

It explains every trade that he's lost and it explains every rich contract that he's doled out.

If you piece together the puzzle, it looks pretty ugly.

 

[mathonwy]

I never questioned the value of post-secondary education in general, so it's pointless asking why people pursue MBAs and BBAs.

And you omitted the last part of my post when I mentioned Yzerman has been doing great as a GM.

It can be done.

Sure you did. You said there was zero correlation between post secondary education and running a business which is wrong.

Take a look at the resume of 99% of the successful CEOs out there and you'll find out how wrong you are.

And I really couldn't give two craps about Yzerman as Yzerman is not making the decisions for your Vancouver Canucks.

Jim isn't a smart guy AND he does't have post secondary education. Worst of all, Jim doesn't know what he doesn't know and your Canucks are getting effed because of it.

 

[mathonwy]

No, that wasn't the best way to put it. I think often the value talked about in these trades ignores the function of the team. IMO there's value in things like culture and character. Sometimes, those things need to be looked at over corsi and counting stats.

You're right though… that's not ignoring value. There's value there. Maybe not as much as Benning is putting into it, though, so he needs a stats guy he can trust. Someone that won't just stick up their nose and scoff at the things we can't put a number on but can help Benning measure the value there against the value we can count.

So what you're saying is... JB, general manager of a $800M NHL franchise with annual revenues of $164M and an annual operating income of $46.7M needs someone to hold his hand when talking about market value of an NHL asset. And that someone can't be a dick about it because JB is a sensitive person.

Or...

We could hire someone that DOES understand the market value of an NHL asset, knows what he doesn't know (and brings people onboard to fill that knowledge gap) and is a god damn shark when negotiating with other GMs.

Your choice.

 

[drax0s]

Jim isn't a smart guy AND he does't have post secondary education. Worst of all, Jim doesn't know what he doesn't know and your Canucks are getting effed because of it.

I actually don't follow you here. A "secondary education" can mean a lot of things that wouldn't directly translate into running an organization. Would he be a much better GM with a graduate degree in chemical engineering? civil engineering? It's not like there's a "Life skills 101" class Benning missed.

 

[Verviticus]

i would take a chemical engineer as a gm. in my experience they might not always be the smartest engineers but they're always the most capable

 

[me2]

A degree from a high esteemed institution gets you in the door in a lot of places. The degree doesn't matter, it's what you do afterwards that matters. The CEO of Goldman has a history major, didn't stop him from learning and becoming one of the most powerful person in the world.