Has your opinion of Jim Benning changed?

[Frankie Blueberries]

Comparing drunk driving to a hockey forum is just plain dumb. You should feel very embarrassed.

It's an analogy [mod]. And a very accurate one at that.

 

[BCNate]

It's an analogy [mod]. And a very accurate one at that.

Pretty f'n stupid analogy. I'm done with my conversation with you. My point above still stands.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

Pretty f'n stupid analogy. I'm done with my conversation with you. My point above still stands.

Why is the analogy stupid? You need to elaborate because it makes perfect sense to me.

 

[Diamonddog01]

Lol! We should probably have restricted the discussion to non Canuck fans. It’s just turned into a spill over of Canuck fans from the Canuck board. I’d actually be interested in hearing other fans opinions.

Yup. It's too bad as it's an interesting topic however this is why we (Canuck fans) can't have nice things

 

[The Winter Soldier]

Benning has built an impressive nucleus of talented young players. He's not perfect, but there is no denying the Canucks look poised to be a good team.

 

[4Twenty]

I guess Tyler Myers at 5 more years at 6 million AAV is a good deal to you?
What about Roussel at 2 more years for 3 million AAV?
You already mentioned Beagle and his 3 million AAV

If you could say, hey look, Benning made some UFA mistakes in the past but over the past few years he's gotten better, I'd give him some credit. But every year, he finds a new way to spend too much money on the wrong UFAs. There's roughly 20 million worth of bloat on that payroll signed for two or more seasons. They have 18-20 million of cap space for next season (depending on cap increase) and only have 14 players signed. 8-9 players to sign and 18 million to do it. Add in that Markstrom and Stetcher will almost certainly want raises.

So no, I don't think drafting in the top 10 which has become way more of an exact science the past decade is impressive enough to make me overlook the 20ish million in poorly allocated long term cap space by Benning.

Here's a pretty well read Panthers fans take. It seems like this guy has at least dug deeper than "look at the prospects".

 

[crowi]

No. It seems he is just getting lucky. Imagine keeping your job by getting lucky. That really should tell all there is.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

His drafting success (which is largely due to having five top 10 picks in six years) has not outweighed the negatives from his UFA signings, contract extensions, general cap management, and trading. He has gotten better with trades as of late, so I'm willing to change my opinion in the future, but his time in Vancouver has still been a failure when you evaluate all of his job duties.

 

[Killer Orcas]

So if the Canucks had this money who would they spend it on? Panarin? or Tavares? Lol. You know what they would likely spend it on?; third and forth liners lol Or more likely they would just wouldn't spend it. They likely wouldn't be much better off. That 20M only really helps if you can use it on big time players and I think we can agree those are very hard to find as UFAs.

Well I guess when it's time to re-sign our own RFA's you'll either think differently or you really don't see wasting resources. Wasting cap space is never smart especially when it stops you from signing someone down the road.

 

[Rydgar]

Best drafting GM we've ever had. The problem with his drafting legacy is that his late round draft picks are still developing but from what we've seen, they've been excellent. Beyond the first round there is Demko, Gaudette, Tryamkin, Madden, Lind, and Rathbone over his tenure. I feel the argument about drafting top 10 a lot is quite disingenuous. None of them when picked were NHL ready high-end blue chippers like Mcdavid, Matthews, Eichel, J. Hughes, Dahlin, Ekblad, Svechnikov and Laine. There is a massive difference in drafting top 2-3 than drafting 5-10. In a re-draft, all of Boeser, Petey, and Hughes would be picked much higher than where they were.

 

[absolute garbage]

Friendly reminder that

1) General managers don't actually do the drafting, if you want to give credit to someone you can thank the Canucks US based scouts who have done great over multiple regimes now in continuing to pick up studs from US leagues no matter who the GM happens to be

and

2) Given Benning's miserable failures at trying to build a competitive team and ending up in the basement picking high year after year (thanks, NHL welfare state), a situation from where maggie the monkey would've come up with a high-end up young player or two, it turns out that the Canucks drafting success hasn't actually been any better than expected.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

Well I guess when it's time to re-sign our own RFA's you'll either think differently or you really don't see wasting resources. Wasting cap space is never smart especially when it stops you from signing someone down the road.

Or getting a 1st round pick for Marleau.

 

[wetcoast]

Id say thats accurate.

How would you weigh those 3 factors though?

would you rather have a GM thats great at Signings but awful at Drafting and Trades?

Perfect world, your GM is outstanding in all 3 of those facets but its not a perfect world.

How hard is it to get 3 things right?

Or at least in your favour?

Also his draft record overall is being over rated here due to 3 first rounders not the overall quality.

 

[Hansen]

It wasnt the plan from the owner to Rebuild as long as the Sedin Twins were on the team. They felt they owed it to them to try and re-tool on the fly and to get into the playoffs.

Since the Twins have retired, the transition to becoming competitive and young again has been smoother.

There has literally been zero change in the teams approach to "rebuilding" since 2014, never mind since the Sedins retired

 

[Beezeral]

But they aren’t. They play in the Pacific, and are playing for 1st in the division.

Yes, they are up against the cap, but have a ton of prospects who will push for spots in the next year or 2 to coincide with expiring veteran deals. Their 2 best players are 20 and 21.

The Canucks have an excellent young core, a deep but not elite prospect pool, and a deep roster that can roll 4 lines. There is no reason to assume they won’t continue to progress.

How do the Canucks plan to retain all that great young talent with no cap space? This is what you keep papering over. The cap management has been so bad that you have a team with a 90ish point ceiling and the cap problems of a Stanley cup contender. There just isn’t a good argument as to why the gm who is responsible for this should be getting a pat on the back.

 

[Hansen]

Man I was late to an awesome thread

 

[BCNate]

How do the Canucks plan to retain all that great young talent with no cap space? This is what you keep papering over. The cap management has been so bad that you have a team with a 90ish point ceiling and the cap problems of a Stanley cup contender. There just isn’t a good argument as to why the gm who is responsible for this should be getting a pat on the back.

They really aren't in bad shape cap wise. $3mill to add at the deadline if needed this year, although I think they will not be a significant buyer or seller. Next season they will likely lose Stecher, Shaller, Fantenberg to make the cap work with Virtanen, Motte, Markstrom, Tanev, Gaudette getting raises/new deals. Year after that they have Baertschi, Edler, Sutter, Pearson coming off the books to resign Hughes and EP.

We have a number of solid prospects coming up in the next year or 2 who will need spots.

With that said, they will need to get rid of Eriksson's deal after next season. That will likely cost a high pick and or a quality prospect. That will hurt, but not prevent the team from keeping it's core intact. Luongo's cap recapture penalty hurts pretty bad as well.

They are not in the best spot cap wise, but nothing that will cost them key parts. Having a steady number of guys on ELC's helps to offset some overpaid deals. Horvat and Miller are on bargain deals, that helps huge as well. Keep in mind that Seattle comes in and the cap will likely see a healthy jump as well.

 

[eviohh26]

From fans of other teams. How toxic does our fanbase look ?

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

Man I was late to an awesome thread

OP tried to capitalize on Van being at the top of the Pacific division and it backfired when people provided real critical analyses lol.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

From fans of other teams. How toxic does our fanbase look ?

I would say dysfunctional. There’s nothing toxic about criticizing management and providing examples to support your claims.

Besides, after the last riot I don’t think we can get any more toxic.

 

[Beezeral]

They really aren't in bad shape cap wise. $3mill to add at the deadline if needed this year, although I think they will not be a significant buyer or seller. Next season they will likely lose Stecher, Shaller, Fantenberg to make the cap work with Virtanen, Motte, Markstrom, Tanev, Gaudette getting raises/new deals. Year after that they have Baertschi, Edler, Sutter, Pearson coming off the books to resign Hughes and EP.

We have a number of solid prospects coming up in the next year or 2 who will need spots.

With that said, they will need to get rid of Eriksson's deal after next season. That will likely cost a high pick and or a quality prospect. That will hurt, but not prevent the team from keeping it's core intact. Luongo's cap recapture penalty hurts pretty bad as well.

They are not in the best spot cap wise, but nothing that will cost them key parts. Having a steady number of guys on ELC's helps to offset some overpaid deals. Horvat and Miller are on bargain deals, that helps huge as well. Keep in mind that Seattle comes in and the cap will likely see a healthy jump as well.

They have 18-20 million in cap space for next year and only 14 players under contract. Assuming a 23 man roster, that’s roughly 2 million per slot. Obviously some of those guys will
Sign for 1 mill or less. But assume Markstrom gets a much deserved raise to around 5 million. That’s 13-15 left for 8 guys. Assume Tanev takes 4.5 million again, down to 9.5-11.5 for 7 slots.

Only a homer could look at the Canucks cap situation and think they are in anything other than a horrible spot. They have cup contender problems on a 90 point team.

 

[Disappointed EP40]

Not that bad but not great. Canuck fans just overreact when bad things happen, just like every fan base.

The mistakes he made early and often have been objectively egregious from the get-go.

Trying to say he's been undeserving of the hate he's received because "the fans overreact" is unfair.

 

[BCNate]

They have 18-20 million in cap space for next year and only 14 players under contract. Assuming a 23 man roster, that’s roughly 2 million per slot. Obviously some of those guys will
Sign for 1 mill or less. But assume Markstrom gets a much deserved raise to around 5 million. That’s 13-15 left for 8 guys. Assume Tanev takes 4.5 million again, down to 9.5-11.5 for 7 slots.

Only a homer could look at the Canucks cap situation and think they are in anything other than a horrible spot. They have cup contender problems on a 90 point team.

Then they pay to move Baertschi or Benn or sutter. All on expring deals.

Absolute worst case would be letting Tanev walk and hoping that Rafferty, JOulevi or Brisebois are ready. He is very good, and would be missed for sure, but not exactly going to crater the franchise.

We currently have to resign 4 guys who are currently making 1.5 or less this year, none of who are getting significant raises.

Like I said in my previous post, they are not in the best shape, but also not in a position that they will be losing core assets.

 

[Disappointed EP40]

I'm a pretty anti-Benning fan, but I will say that he's improved significantly in the last couple years. Still prone to giving out dumb contracts during UFA though.

This. I came in looking forward to having him, albeit a Gillis fan, quickly soured after Kesler trade, dumping Garrison, and Vey trade.

While I am still waiting for him to have a season where he acquires more picks than not, am happy he is not getting completely bent like he used to.

 

[nowhereman]

From fans of other teams. How toxic does our fanbase look ?

HFBoards Canucks does not represent the majority of Canucks fans. I think most of the fanbase is fairly optimistic about where things are going.