Has your opinion of Jim Benning changed?

[WetcoastOrca]

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

Not really. People provided differing views. Some think it’s worse than others. I’m sure you think your view is right and provided your reasons. Others disagree and provided good critical analysis as well. Most Canuck fans are probably somewhere in the middle.

 

[Disappointed EP40]

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.

The fact the team has to make these moves to get into decent financial shape is terrible.

Especially with how much is being paid to the bottom six.

 

[Beezeral]

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.

their core assets are a 90ish point team in a bad division. They need to add to that core because as Canucks fans say, there is good talent waiting in the wings, but not great talent. Canucks are essentially where the Florida Panthers were 3 years ago but with 20 million of bad cap on the books. You seem satisfied with that. If I was a Canucks fan, I wouldn't be.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

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

I agree with that. Regardless of what you think of Benning the product on the ice is so much more fun to watch than it was a few years ago when we played boring grinding hockey and had trouble scoring.
Hockey is entertainment for most people and this current crew puts on a pretty good show most nights. Watching Petterson and Hughes alone is worth the price of admission for me.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

their core assets are a 90ish point team in a bad division. They need to add to that core because as Canucks fans say, there is good talent waiting in the wings, but not great talent. Canucks are essentially where the Florida Panthers were 3 years ago but with 20 million of bad cap on the books. You seem satisfied with that. If I was a Canucks fan, I wouldn't be.

They are on pace for 97 points if you want to be accurate. Essentially in the same place as the Panthers now, not 3 years ago. And while they do have some really bad contracts they don’t have any as bad as that Bobrovsky one. I wouldn’t be happy with that albatross as a fan of the team tbh.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

Not really. People provided differing views. Some think it’s worse than others. I’m sure you think your view is right and provided your reasons. Others disagree and provided good critical analysis as well. Most Canuck fans are probably somewhere in the middle.

There's certainly been a spike in chest puffing and arrogance by the Benning supporters on here since the All Star break began. I don't think that's a coincidence, but to each their own.

 

[clunk]

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.

Yup. This is where the 'great drafting GM' comes from. The Canucks have probably the best US scouts in the league, all under the command of Brackett. Admittedly, though, Benning is the one that promoted him deservedly, and he deserves props for that. They've been able to keep us from having sub par drafts.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

There's certainly been a spike in chest puffing and arrogance by the Benning supporters on here since the All Star break began. I don't think that's a coincidence, but to each their own.

Lots of chest puffing and arrogance by both sides imo.

 

[PG Canuck]

There's certainly been a spike in chest puffing and arrogance by the Benning supporters on here since the All Star break began. I don't think that's a coincidence, but to each their own.

Just like how the over the top pro-tankers puff their chest when the Canucks lose two games in a row. Lets stop acting innocent.

 

[BCNate]

Su

their core assets are a 90ish point team in a bad division. They need to add to that core because as Canucks fans say, there is good talent waiting in the wings, but not great talent. Canucks are essentially where the Florida Panthers were 3 years ago but with 20 million of bad cap on the books. You seem satisfied with that. If I was a Canucks fan, I wouldn't be.

Sure, but they are on pace for 97 points with a rookie as their top D and sophomore as their #1 C. Being in a bad division only helps their cause to go deep int the playoffs. This core needs time more than anything, they are still very young and still a long way from the top. I don't believe Hughes, Horvat, Virtanen, Boeser, EP have peaked yet. So yes, I am satisfied to see how they progress and ride it out with this group. Of course there will be adds/losses and tweaks as time goes on. but they have a very solid base.

They are probably 3 years away from being true contenders. Who knows what their cap situation will be then.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

Lots of chest puffing and arrogance by both sides imo.

It's more reactionary from the Benning critics than anything else; it's a byproduct of certain posters gloating about the standings without putting any real substance in their arguments. Both sides obviously have their warts, but the Benning critics seem more keen on having real debates that are well thought out and rely on facts/stats, and are more willing to admit when they are wrong (in my experiences).

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

Just like how the over the top pro-tankers puff their chest when the Canucks lose two games in a row. Lets stop acting innocent.

Oh yeah, there are bad posters on both sides (I just mentioned this in my post above before seeing your post now). Generally speaking, there appear to be more Benning supporter troll accounts (i.e. not debating in good faith, purposefully mischaracterizing others' positions, being condescending and arrogant, and then disappearing when an argument doesn't go their way....and then having the same argument a week later). Both sides have their trolls, but cumulatively based on my experience here, the Benning supporters seem worse. They often reject well reasoned arguments backed by logic because LoOk At ThE StAnDiNgS aNd Da PrOsPeCtS.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

It's more reactionary from the Benning critics than anything else; it's a byproduct of certain posters gloating about the standings without putting any real substance in their arguments. Both sides obviously have their warts, but the Benning critics seem more keen on having real debates that are well thought out and rely on facts/stats, and are more willing to admit when they are wrong (in my experiences).

I disagree. I see a lot of Benning supporters providing well thought out posts including stats and facts. I’ve never seen either side admit when they are wrong in my experience or engage in a real debate. For the most part it’s just people entrenched in their opinions shouting over the other side. Pretty much like US politics to be honest. I think the reason you feel that the anti Benning crew are more reasonable is that you agree with them.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

I disagree. I see a lot of Benning supporters providing well thought out posts including stats and facts. I’ve never seen either side admit when they are wrong in my experience or engage in a real debate. For the most part it’s just people entrenched in their opinions shouting over the other side. Pretty much like US politics to be honest.

I'm not saying Benning supporters don't provide good arguments. Just generally speaking, I think the critics are more likely to put out arguments that are more logical and air tight. Ultimately it obviously comes down to each person's bias and what they want to believe.

The thing is though, most Benning critics were actually supporters at one point in time. I mean we all want the Canucks to do well (aside from tank nation, but they still want the team to do well in the long-term) and hiring a person who was the assistant GM of a Cup winning team with scouting experience obviously seemed like a great idea at the time. What I'm getting at, is that Benning critics appear to be more open-minded and willing to change their mind on someone, as they have transitioned from supporting to criticizing Benning based on the decisions he has made along the way. Can't say the same for the other side.

A lot of it is likely blind loyalty to the Canucks. I would have felt that way when I was 10 - 20 years old.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

I'm not saying Benning supporters don't provide good arguments. Just generally speaking, I think the critics are more likely to put out arguments that are more logical and air tight. Ultimately it obviously comes down to each person's bias and what they want to believe.

The thing is though, most Benning critics were actually supporters at one point in time. I mean we all want the Canucks to do well (aside from tank nation, but they still want the team to do well in the long-term) and hiring a person who was the assistant GM of a Cup winning team with scouting experience obviously seemed like a great idea at the time. What I'm getting at, is that Benning critics appear to be more open-minded and willing to change their mind on someone, as they have transitioned from supporting to criticizing Benning based on the decisions he has made along the way. Can't say the same for the other side.

A lot of it is likely blind loyalty to the Canucks. I would have felt that way when I was 10 - 20 years old.

Again I see the same logic and stats from both sides. Equally valid arguments and passion from both camps. None better than the other. I don’t think it’s blind loyalty at all.
In fact I think the bulk of Canuck fans don’t fall into pro Benning or anti Benning but are pro some moves and anti other moves. The fact that we’ve now divided people and labelled them as pro Benning or anti Benning really shuts down any reasonable discussion and exchange of ideas. It’s kind of sad for me and defeats the purpose of a hockey discussion board.
Anyways I’m off my soap box and this will be my last post on it.

 

[Diamonddog01]

Just like how the over the top pro-tankers puff their chest when the Canucks lose two games in a row. Lets stop acting innocent.

Ah to be young and innocent again...

 

[4Twenty]

I'm not saying Benning supporters don't provide good arguments. Just generally speaking, I think the critics are more likely to put out arguments that are more logical and air tight. Ultimately it obviously comes down to each person's bias and what they want to believe.

The thing is though, most Benning critics were actually supporters at one point in time. I mean we all want the Canucks to do well (aside from tank nation, but they still want the team to do well in the long-term) and hiring a person who was the assistant GM of a Cup winning team with scouting experience obviously seemed like a great idea at the time. What I'm getting at, is that Benning critics appear to be more open-minded and willing to change their mind on someone, as they have transitioned from supporting to criticizing Benning based on the decisions he has made along the way. Can't say the same for the other side.

A lot of it is likely blind loyalty to the Canucks. I would have felt that way when I was 10 - 20 years old.

They don't really provide good arguments.

But da prospects isn't a good argument.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

They don't really provide good arguments.

But da prospects isn't a good argument.

It's like if a kid failed all his courses in high school, but then said but da summer school and then his parents were happy for him.

 

[4Twenty]

Dude the drop is massive after the first round. If you really believe that the 0.25% or whatever difference in statistical success rate of 5th round picks somehow means Benning shouldn't get credit for Gaudette I'm not sure what to say. I mean, sure that might be a bit higher in the 2nd round but it's still a fairly marginal difference statistically and less than 5% imo.

I think this conversation as run it's course at this point.

Do you think Benning specifically identified Adam Gaudette?

I don't. I believe this, because the following draft, on video, he was speaking as if he had no clue about Jonah Gadjovich, a player they were willing to use a top 60 pick on.

This is why I don't think it makes a ton of sense to evaluate a GM's ability based on the amateur draft.

 

[Diamonddog01]

Do you think Benning specifically identified Adam Gaudette?

I don't. I believe this, because the following draft, on video, he was speaking as if he had no clue about Jonah Gadjovich, a player they were willing to use a top 60 pick on.

This is why I don't think it makes a ton of sense to evaluate a GM's ability based on the amateur draft.

I'm not sure. I do know Benning has taken numerous scouting trips during his tenure and I believe he specifically scouted Northeastern on one trip from what I recall. I think he makes the final decision, just as he does with trading and contracts. There may be more staff but from internal videos I've seen usually the group in the room discuss players, or trades, or whatever and eventually come to a consensus decision with the GM ultimately having responsibility. To respond in part to your earlier comment about GM's having less responsibility for the draft because there are more scouts I just don't think that's an accurate view of the situation. A GM is responsible for what happens during his tenure, full stop. If you are going to try to minimize his successes in the draft you can't then turn around and pin all of the poor trades and contracts solely on him imo as they all involved a group of individuals.

 

[nowhereman]

It's more reactionary from the Benning critics than anything else; it's a byproduct of certain posters gloating about the standings without putting any real substance in their arguments. Both sides obviously have their warts, but the Benning critics seem more keen on having real debates that are well thought out and rely on facts/stats, and are more willing to admit when they are wrong (in my experiences).

It's funny you see it that way, lol.

 

[4Twenty]

I'm not sure. I do know Benning has taken numerous scouting trips during his tenure and I believe he specifically scouted Northeastern on one trip from what I recall. I think he makes the final decision, just as he does with trading and contracts. There may be more staff but from internal videos I've seen usually the group in the room discuss players, or trades, or whatever and eventually come to a decision with the GM ultimately having responsibility. To respond in part to your earlier comment about GM's having less responsibility for the draft because there are more scouts I just don't think that's an accurate view of the situation. A GM is responsible for what happens during his tenure, full stop. If you are going to try to minimize his successes in the draft you can't then turn around and pin all of the poor trades and contracts solely on him imo.

Well he couldn't have thought that highly of Gaudette is he drafted a QMJHL overage D before him in the very same round.

I'm not talking about wearing the responsibility of all picks, I agree GM's, have to wear them good or bad. I'm talking about how much of a role the GM specifically has. What do you think about the Gadjovich video then?

Why don't you think it's accurate? Plenty of GM's who transitioned from Assistants or hockey OPs to GM have mentioned that there job is less about hockey and more about managing people. Jim Nill mentioned this to Eliotte Friedman a number of years back. I mean, I think it's case by case and some GM's scout more than others, but I highly doubt Jim Benning is making the list. The player personnel group and the scouts create a list.

I am not trying to minimize his successes, I'm making a general point about all general managers and drafting.

I will reiterate, I think drafting is the part of the job that depends most on others. Sure contracts, and pro player targets are also collaborated on, but I think in those aspects, the GM is making the final decision. I mean, if we had insight that Jim was going off the cuff and not using the list, then sure, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

I feel this way about every GM, not just Jim Benning.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

It's funny you see it that way, lol.

Here's some of the classic Pro-Benning arguments that come up frequently on the Canucks board.

"But Gillis!" (6 years later and things are still Gillis' fault).

"Name a GM who has drafted 3 consecutive Calder finalists" aka "But da prospects"

"But da standings" (which was conveniently ignored for the last 4 seasons)

"If we drafted Tkachuk, we would have been a better team and wouldn't have gotten Pettersson!" (...even though Vegas preferred Glass over Pettersson, so drafting a spot down wouldn't have changed a thing, nevermind that Tkachuk only put up 48 points in his rookie season on a much better team)

"Juolevi still has time to develop and become a great roster player" (but Cody Glass sucks)

 

[Diamonddog01]

Well he couldn't have thought that highly of Gaudette is he drafted a QMJHL overage D before him in the very same round.

I'm not talking about wearing the responsibility of all picks, I agree GM's, have to wear them good or bad. I'm talking about how much of a role the GM specifically has. What do you think about the Gadjovich video then?

Why don't you think it's accurate? Plenty of GM's who transitioned from Assistants or hockey OPs to GM have mentioned that there job is less about hockey and more about managing people. Jim Nill mentioned this to Eliotte Friedman a number of years back. I mean, I think it's case by case and some GM's scout more than others, but I highly doubt Jim Benning is making the list. The player personnel group and the scouts create a list.

I am not trying to minimize his successes, I'm making a general point about all general managers and drafting.

I will reiterate, I think drafting is the part of the job that depends most on others. Sure contracts, and pro player targets are also collaborated on, but I think in those aspects, the GM is making the final decision. I mean, if we had insight that Jim was going off the cuff and not using the list, then sure, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

I feel this way about every GM, not just Jim Benning.

I haven't watched the Gadjovich video so I'm reserve comment until I see it. Sure, plenty of GM's transition from other roles however Benning has specifically expressed a love of amateur scouting, has an extensive background in scouting and has taken documented scouting trips during the regular reason on numerous occasions. Each GM is different, you seem to be generalizing the role of GM's based on specific GM backgrounds or comments. In Benning's case it seems reasonable given his background, regular season trips and comments that he is more focused on scouting than a GM like Nill.

I think pro-scouting depends just as much on others as scouting does, even if there are fewer staff involved. I haven't seen as many videos on trades or RFA contracts but I suspect it's the same. Benning is part of the process that determines that draft list, which is unique (as it is for every team). You are welcome to feel that way about each GM, but personally I think you are overemphasizing the GM's role in some areas and undermining it in others...and if you do agree with Nill's comment then the issue isn't Benning per se, it's merely the staff involved in the areas where this regime has not done well (ie UFA contracts).

 

[crowi]

It's funny you see it that way, lol.

How funny lol.

Some are definitely giving more lol credit lol than Benning deserves.