Has your opinion of Jim Benning changed?
- Thread starter FreeMcdavid
- Start date
WTG
December 5th
Sure there is some credit.
But let's bring some more things up that do not fall in his favor.
Benning was the Assistant GM in Boston. So, he would have probably known at least some of Boston's scouting list, especially considering he was involved in scouting with Boston. So, if Benning was such a great scout, why did he pick McCann over Pastrnak?
Why did he pick Virtanen over Ehlers and Nylander?
Why did he pass on Tkachuk for Juolevi? Even went so far as comparing Juolevi to Lidstrom. Juolevi and Tkachuk played on the same team so he could have easily scouted them.
I do believe that GMs should know at least the players that they should be picking around in the first round. Especially they should be involved in high picks like top 10 picks. But Benning hasn't really been some magical scouting genius as people like to make him out as.
It's no surprise that most of Benning's magical picks like Hughes, Gaudette, Boeser come from America. Brackett was the regional scout for America.
Again, remove Benning and the scouting would probably remain at the current level. If you wanted to improve your amateur scouting, hire amateur scout. If you want to have someone that can actually manage a NHL team, hire a GM that can actually make competent trades and sign competent players.
Just Linda
Registered User
- Feb 24, 2018
- 6,815
- 6,786
Not convinced any of them are that piece.
I acknowledged EP, Hughes, and Bo. It's the prices around them (other than Bowser, Miller, etc) that they don't have.
So you're putting somewhat of a negative spin on Podkolzin because he, at this current point in time, isn't as good as Hughes or Pettersson? And the barren cupboard of post first round picks he inherited that has now been restocked fairly well gets him no credit either?
The gymnastics people go through to try and spin narratives is astounding. Mind blowing.
This is why i posted the question in such to see if people's opinions have changed. It sounds like a lot of the perception of Benning is from his moves from 3-5 years ago. Its almost like people have a hard time admitting that someone can evolve and become a better person or professional than who they were 3-5 years ago.
Not to mention a potential bonafide starter in Demko. But that was the second round, so that has nothing to do with Benning at all.
Future 1C, 1D, 1G without a top three pick as you say. But let's keep talking about Juolevi and Virtanen, even though Virtanen is turning into a damn fine player.
Like I said he’s not perfect. But I give him full credit for the hits and the misses on our prospects. He’s the guy who has vastly improved what was once close to the worst drafting in the entire NHL by putting the right people into the right positions.
Also, imo the two home runs out weight the lesser misses.
Having said that I do agree with a lot of what you say and feel like he’s not good enough at the rest of his job to take the team to the elite status. He’s middle of the pack for me.
Benning's strength has been in the draft, and that is where he's shined. His weakness's been trades and signings, and nothing's changed there either. As such, the answer is a resounding "no".
CascadiaPuck
Proud Canucks investor.
Ok, but what regression are you seeing at all? I mean, he’s scoring goals at a higher rate than last year and his PPG is higher. 90 points isn’t outside the realm of possibility.
Trades have changed recently. Seeing as how his last three trades were Gudbranson for Pearson, a first for Miller and Carcone for Leivo. All three of those were good trades. Signings I’ll give you though. He just zeroes in on a player and then seems to overpay.
So he acquired two top six players and a third liner without losing a roster player even though the mid to late first rounder obviously is a valuable asset. He did make some horrendous trades before that though. I’m not sold on his trading but it is at least a step in the right direction.
Last edited:
WTG
December 5th
Fair enough, I am sorry if I came off as combative it wasn't my intention.
Bank Shot
Registered User
- Jan 18, 2006
- 11,724
- 7,523
And you can make a pretty good argument that a GM has pretty limited input at the draft table.
Frankie Blueberries
Dream Team
- Jan 27, 2016
- 9,414
- 10,992
My report card for Benning (previously posted on the Canucks board),
*Disclaimer: really long post incoming.
If you were to grade Benning on all major aspects of being a GM, he would undoubtedly fail miserably. It really is as simple as evaluating all of the major facets and job duties of a GM and then evaluating Benning holistically. Each trade/signing needs to be evaluated in isolation to assess its merits, and then all moves will be viewed cumulatively to assess how Benning has done. The majority of his bad moves looked bad at the time that they were made, so no point in trying to use a hindsight excuse for Benning here. And please, no one post "but the draft pick we traded turned into X who isn't very good!" because that's not viewing the trade in isolation.
I'll try to demonstrate what I mean about this assessment though (I might not include the lesser/irrelevant players or things like ELCs for the sake of brevity):
1. UFA Signings - Fail
I would give him an F (more bad contracts/players than good, aka a letter grade under 50%). Of course this is a mix of both quantitative and qualitative data (not all contracts are viewed equally given their impact in terms of varying term, cap hit, and salary).
Good:
Rafferty
Stecher
Benn
Bad:
Eriksson - probably the most impactful contract given out in the worst way possible. Nothing more needs to be said.
Gagner - not much needs to be said here.
Schaller - 2 years was too much term at $1.9 million, especially when he only played half the season last year. He's a player who is easily replaceable with a 4th liner getting paid league minimum.
Beagle - 4 years at $3 million is insane for a 4th line centre. Once again, fairly easily replaceable with a guy like Richardson. He's not a terrible player, this is just a bad use of cap space in prioritizing the wrong position that is easily replaceable, and the combination of term/cap make it a dumb move.
Bartkowski - barf. At least the term/cap wasn't bad, so it didn't cripple the team or anything, but still an atrociously bad player.
Average/Mediocre:
Miller - we needed a stop-gap starter and Miller was a decent option while Markstrom developed.
Vrbata (one good season, one bad)
Roussel
Vanek
Nilsson
Del Zotto (I wanted to include this as 'bad', given how terrible he was, but we ended up with a late draft pick)
Fantenberg
*I did not include Myers/Ferland as it's still way too early to fairly judge them given their longer term. I tend to lean towards 'bad' given the longer term and Myers' defensive gaffes, along with Ferland's health problems, but I see an argument to be made for each side which is why I have not included them.
2. Trades - Fail
Good:
Lack for 3rd round pick. I remember people complaining at the time that it wasn't a lot (some thought we could get Edmontons' early 2nd round pick at the time). I think this was a decent trade (could fall under average); this was probably the market for goalies and we got fair value. Once again, I'm not going to judge this trade based on what our 3rd round pick became, because that falls under the 'Drafting' assessment.
Burrows for Dahlen.
Hansen for Goldobin + 4th round pick.
Bieksa for a 2nd.
Carcone for Leivo.
Gudbranson for Pearson.
Bad:
53rd overall for Baertschi - given the prospects available at 53rd overall (Andersson, but also Dunn and Cirelli getting drafted shortly after), and what Baer has provided for this team, I'd say this is a fail. Some might disagree and that's fine; I can see the argument that we may have drafted a bust if we had kept the pick. This could also go into the 'average' category of trades.
Forsling for Clendening - bad at the time it was made. Forsling looked like he was on his way to become a bottom pairing dman; Clendening couldn't even skate.
Bonino + 2nd round pick for Sutter + 3rd (the difference in draft picks was only 9 spots IIRC). Bonino had 2 years left at $1.9 million per and was coming off a fairly good season as our #2 centre. He had more value than Sutter, and Sutter was the wrong player to target for our roster. I think we'd be in a better position if we literally did nothing and kept Bonino, let his contract expire and him walk, and have more cap space available as a result.
5th round pick for Larsen - he was useless.
Kassian + 5th round pick for Prust - " ". I get that Kassian had his issues with substance abuse, but throwing in a 5th round pick was unnecessary to offload him.
Mallet + 3rd for Pedan - waste of a 3rd round pick.
50th overall for Vey - waste of a 2nd round pick.
Jensen + 6th round pick for Etem. No reason to include that draft pick based on both prospects being project players at this time.
Pedan + 4th round pick for Pouliot.
McCann + 33rd overall + 4th round pick for Gudbranson + 5th round pick. Worst trade Benning has made during his tenure here. There were plenty of great prospects available at 33rd overall, this set us back big time.
Average/Mediocre:
Kesler for Bonino, 24th overall, and Sbisa. I take issue with Sbisa, and Bonino was not a great piece for a rebuilding team (would have preferred a younger/future asset). I would have put this into the "Bad" category, but I'm giving Benning the benefit of the doubt here that ownership pressured him into finding a replacement for Kesler, which explains why Bonino was included, as well as Kesler's 2 team trade list limiting the options for trade partners.
Shinkaruk for Granlund - neither team really benefited from it in the end. Granlund wasn't really a great NHLer so if you disagree with this assessment then I will concede that it is the most meaningless 'trade victory' that I've ever seen.
3rd round pick for Dorsett - Dorsett was a useful player for us and no one could have foreseen such a crazy career ending injury (although his play style certainly indicated a shorter shelf life).
Garrison + 7th round pick for a 2nd round pick.
Holm for Leipsic.
Subban for Dowd.
Vanek for Motte and Jokinen (could also be under 'bad' for no real useful futures being included).
Dahlen for Karlsson - too early to tell but could be a nothing trade.
Gagner for Spooner - trash for trash.
*Not including the Miller trade as it is WAY too early to properly judge, we don't even know where our draft pick will end up.
3. Contract extensions. Fail.
The 'bad' contracts here have had a much bigger impact on this team's future than the good ones have had (and I was generous with the 'good' contract extensions as I feel most of them just got market value and not a discount).
Good:
Horvat
Tanev
Markstrom
Bad:
Sbisa
Dorsett
Sutter
Gudbranson
Average:
Boeser
Stecher
Virtanen
Edler
4. Drafting - C
We've been pretty average in drafting in the top 10. Some huge hits, some huge misses. We have done relatively poorly in terms of later round picks, when compared to some of the better drafting teams. We should have more NHLers from our 2nd - 7th round picks at this point, almost 6 years into Benning's tenure.
5. CBA knowledge and cap management - Fail
This one I'd give less weight to as the other categories. It's become fairly clear that Benning is not great at managing the cap based on how our bottom 6 is getting paid, along with Spooner being bought out and Baertschi being in the AHL with a cap hit of $3.36 million. This is going to really impact the team once Pettersson, Hughes, and Demko finish their ELCs and also if they hit their contract bonuses, along with Boeser coming off his 3 year contract.
Benning has also attempted to tender a noncompliant contract to Tryamkin that was rejected by the league, along with being charged with tampering. These are more embarrassing and competency issues rather than having a huge impact on the team, but they still speaks to his ability under this category.
6. Asset management - Fail
So many UFAs wasted for nothing (Hamhuis, Miller, Vrbata) . So many draft picks thrown into trades at a time that we needed to rebuild (see above trades). So many poor trade targets (Gudbranson, Vey, Pouliot, Clendening, Sutter, Prust, Larsen, Granlund, etc.) where we wasted assets.
Conclusion: if you somehow think Benning deserves a passing letter grade based on the above factors, you have a lot of explaining to do. I personally don't think it's possible to prove Benning is anything but a failure based on the objective facts available, but to each their own.
*Disclaimer: really long post incoming.
If you were to grade Benning on all major aspects of being a GM, he would undoubtedly fail miserably. It really is as simple as evaluating all of the major facets and job duties of a GM and then evaluating Benning holistically. Each trade/signing needs to be evaluated in isolation to assess its merits, and then all moves will be viewed cumulatively to assess how Benning has done. The majority of his bad moves looked bad at the time that they were made, so no point in trying to use a hindsight excuse for Benning here. And please, no one post "but the draft pick we traded turned into X who isn't very good!" because that's not viewing the trade in isolation.
I'll try to demonstrate what I mean about this assessment though (I might not include the lesser/irrelevant players or things like ELCs for the sake of brevity):
1. UFA Signings - Fail
I would give him an F (more bad contracts/players than good, aka a letter grade under 50%). Of course this is a mix of both quantitative and qualitative data (not all contracts are viewed equally given their impact in terms of varying term, cap hit, and salary).
Good:
Rafferty
Stecher
Benn
Bad:
Eriksson - probably the most impactful contract given out in the worst way possible. Nothing more needs to be said.
Gagner - not much needs to be said here.
Schaller - 2 years was too much term at $1.9 million, especially when he only played half the season last year. He's a player who is easily replaceable with a 4th liner getting paid league minimum.
Beagle - 4 years at $3 million is insane for a 4th line centre. Once again, fairly easily replaceable with a guy like Richardson. He's not a terrible player, this is just a bad use of cap space in prioritizing the wrong position that is easily replaceable, and the combination of term/cap make it a dumb move.
Bartkowski - barf. At least the term/cap wasn't bad, so it didn't cripple the team or anything, but still an atrociously bad player.
Average/Mediocre:
Miller - we needed a stop-gap starter and Miller was a decent option while Markstrom developed.
Vrbata (one good season, one bad)
Roussel
Vanek
Nilsson
Del Zotto (I wanted to include this as 'bad', given how terrible he was, but we ended up with a late draft pick)
Fantenberg
*I did not include Myers/Ferland as it's still way too early to fairly judge them given their longer term. I tend to lean towards 'bad' given the longer term and Myers' defensive gaffes, along with Ferland's health problems, but I see an argument to be made for each side which is why I have not included them.
2. Trades - Fail
Good:
Lack for 3rd round pick. I remember people complaining at the time that it wasn't a lot (some thought we could get Edmontons' early 2nd round pick at the time). I think this was a decent trade (could fall under average); this was probably the market for goalies and we got fair value. Once again, I'm not going to judge this trade based on what our 3rd round pick became, because that falls under the 'Drafting' assessment.
Burrows for Dahlen.
Hansen for Goldobin + 4th round pick.
Bieksa for a 2nd.
Carcone for Leivo.
Gudbranson for Pearson.
Bad:
53rd overall for Baertschi - given the prospects available at 53rd overall (Andersson, but also Dunn and Cirelli getting drafted shortly after), and what Baer has provided for this team, I'd say this is a fail. Some might disagree and that's fine; I can see the argument that we may have drafted a bust if we had kept the pick. This could also go into the 'average' category of trades.
Forsling for Clendening - bad at the time it was made. Forsling looked like he was on his way to become a bottom pairing dman; Clendening couldn't even skate.
Bonino + 2nd round pick for Sutter + 3rd (the difference in draft picks was only 9 spots IIRC). Bonino had 2 years left at $1.9 million per and was coming off a fairly good season as our #2 centre. He had more value than Sutter, and Sutter was the wrong player to target for our roster. I think we'd be in a better position if we literally did nothing and kept Bonino, let his contract expire and him walk, and have more cap space available as a result.
5th round pick for Larsen - he was useless.
Kassian + 5th round pick for Prust - " ". I get that Kassian had his issues with substance abuse, but throwing in a 5th round pick was unnecessary to offload him.
Mallet + 3rd for Pedan - waste of a 3rd round pick.
50th overall for Vey - waste of a 2nd round pick.
Jensen + 6th round pick for Etem. No reason to include that draft pick based on both prospects being project players at this time.
Pedan + 4th round pick for Pouliot.
McCann + 33rd overall + 4th round pick for Gudbranson + 5th round pick. Worst trade Benning has made during his tenure here. There were plenty of great prospects available at 33rd overall, this set us back big time.
Average/Mediocre:
Kesler for Bonino, 24th overall, and Sbisa. I take issue with Sbisa, and Bonino was not a great piece for a rebuilding team (would have preferred a younger/future asset). I would have put this into the "Bad" category, but I'm giving Benning the benefit of the doubt here that ownership pressured him into finding a replacement for Kesler, which explains why Bonino was included, as well as Kesler's 2 team trade list limiting the options for trade partners.
Shinkaruk for Granlund - neither team really benefited from it in the end. Granlund wasn't really a great NHLer so if you disagree with this assessment then I will concede that it is the most meaningless 'trade victory' that I've ever seen.
3rd round pick for Dorsett - Dorsett was a useful player for us and no one could have foreseen such a crazy career ending injury (although his play style certainly indicated a shorter shelf life).
Garrison + 7th round pick for a 2nd round pick.
Holm for Leipsic.
Subban for Dowd.
Vanek for Motte and Jokinen (could also be under 'bad' for no real useful futures being included).
Dahlen for Karlsson - too early to tell but could be a nothing trade.
Gagner for Spooner - trash for trash.
*Not including the Miller trade as it is WAY too early to properly judge, we don't even know where our draft pick will end up.
3. Contract extensions. Fail.
The 'bad' contracts here have had a much bigger impact on this team's future than the good ones have had (and I was generous with the 'good' contract extensions as I feel most of them just got market value and not a discount).
Good:
Horvat
Tanev
Markstrom
Bad:
Sbisa
Dorsett
Sutter
Gudbranson
Average:
Boeser
Stecher
Virtanen
Edler
4. Drafting - C
We've been pretty average in drafting in the top 10. Some huge hits, some huge misses. We have done relatively poorly in terms of later round picks, when compared to some of the better drafting teams. We should have more NHLers from our 2nd - 7th round picks at this point, almost 6 years into Benning's tenure.
5. CBA knowledge and cap management - Fail
This one I'd give less weight to as the other categories. It's become fairly clear that Benning is not great at managing the cap based on how our bottom 6 is getting paid, along with Spooner being bought out and Baertschi being in the AHL with a cap hit of $3.36 million. This is going to really impact the team once Pettersson, Hughes, and Demko finish their ELCs and also if they hit their contract bonuses, along with Boeser coming off his 3 year contract.
Benning has also attempted to tender a noncompliant contract to Tryamkin that was rejected by the league, along with being charged with tampering. These are more embarrassing and competency issues rather than having a huge impact on the team, but they still speaks to his ability under this category.
6. Asset management - Fail
So many UFAs wasted for nothing (Hamhuis, Miller, Vrbata) . So many draft picks thrown into trades at a time that we needed to rebuild (see above trades). So many poor trade targets (Gudbranson, Vey, Pouliot, Clendening, Sutter, Prust, Larsen, Granlund, etc.) where we wasted assets.
Conclusion: if you somehow think Benning deserves a passing letter grade based on the above factors, you have a lot of explaining to do. I personally don't think it's possible to prove Benning is anything but a failure based on the objective facts available, but to each their own.
To say nothing has changed is disingenuous ,
As pointed out to you Benning has recently traded for JT Miller Pearson, Leivo. All are a big reason the Canucks are in 1st place in the division this late in the season.
Signings have been his weakness and the figures he signs them for can be questioned but there is no questioning that guys like Meyers, Fatenberg, Benn, Roussell, Beagle have all helped get the Canucks get to where they are and where they want to be which is the playoffs. He has also signed guys like Rafferty and Bailey which has significantly helped our prospect development in Utica.
so yeah, much has changed.
dKs89
Registered User
- Oct 22, 2016
- 308
- 451
This is a team that is clearly on the rise, a team the is first in the division with games in hand on all but one team chasing them. A team filled with young, exciting talent. This team has so much skill.
Yet somehow, there’s a pro tank thread. A thread that only allows pro tank posts. You find all kinds of posts suggesting “there’s nothing good about this team” and subtly suggesting that they are an injury to EP40 or Markstrom away from collapsing.
It’a one of the most bizarre things. Instead of you know, being a reasonable fan and maybe hoping your GM improves and supporting that idea (which recent drafts and trades objectively show he has), you have guys celebrating prospects failures waving “I told you so!!” hoping for injuries, and hoping the team collapses and doesn’t succeed. So blinded by venom towards Benning. So much of it for the right to say “I was right!!”
It’s just actually incredible to see. As a Canucks fan I can clearly recognize Benning has made some ill-advised moves. Some bad signings. Bad trades. OTOH, I can see he’s drafted a 1C, a 1D, a first ling winger with #23 overall. Virtanen has improved drastically, showing much better hockey IQ and skill than anyone would’ve reasonably expected. Acquiring Leivo, Pearson and Miller has contributed massively to the Canucks having good depth. Even an acquisition like Myers, who perhaps hasn’t offensively lived up to his contract, is still eating valuable minutes which has led to reduced ice time for Edler and Tanev. All of a sudden Tanev hasn’t missed a game. Edler has lower ice time. So much talk of Cap yet when Petey and Hughes need extensions, 50m+ of space at this current time will be freed. Obviously when that day comes it won’t be that much, but the point is a lot of bad to not good contracts will be off.
The good moves massively outweigh the bad.
3 quarters of the things you mentioned here are from 3-5 years ago. Youre quite blinded that you cant see his recent moves and the fact that the Canucks are in 1st place with a chance of having a Calder Finalist 3 years in a row. Youre reality seems to still be stuck on losing guys like Gustav Forsling or the Mccann for Gudbranson trade which was in 2016!! its 2020, wake up my man! let go of the past and see what the team is now, youre missing the ride!
Frankie Blueberries
Dream Team
- Jan 27, 2016
- 9,414
- 10,992
You seem hellbent on defending Benning so I question your motives as well.
Objectively, Benning has failed at more facets of being a GM than he has succeeded at. I'm judging his entire body of work for the Canucks since it has all impacted the current teams' composition.
Goose
Registered User
- Apr 18, 2006
- 3,250
- 3,082
This is a serious question - are you somehow related or connected to Benning?
Of all the hills to die on out here in Internet-land this is an awfully strange one.
No im not and im not even a big Benning supporter. In fact i also hated most of his previous moves when he was under orders from ownership.
However, Im not one to look at the past and be pridefull enough to be able to admitt that a person can grow and become better. Its okay to be wrong and its also okay to change an opinion.
FlameChampion
Registered User
- Jul 13, 2011
- 14,633
- 17,159
It has for me. I think he started pretty poorly as a GM but hes done a good job over several seasons now. Even before the JT Miller trade I thought he had done more good than bad. I personally thought the JT Miller trade was bad when it happened but so far it looks very good for Vancouver and Benning.
Hes made mistakes for sure but I think overall more good then bad.
Hes made mistakes for sure but I think overall more good then bad.
youre solely judging his body of work?
Reality Check:
- Canucks in 1st place in division
-AHL team is in 1st place in division
- Canucks have 3 all stars going to the all- star game- hasnt been done since 2011
- Canucks have a chance to have 3 Calder Finalists in a row
Why do you want to dwell on how we got here 3,4, 5 years ago? We're here!
They dont ask how they ask how many!
- Feb 27, 2002
- 2,149
- 1,278
This question gets asked regularly at HFCanucks of anyone who says anything good about Benning.
It was asked of me over there and I've been around Canuck boards forever...
dKs89
Registered User
- Oct 22, 2016
- 308
- 451
Yes. “Objectively” I cannot help but laugh. C grade for Canucks draft. Super objective! Really, it’s average for teams to have 3 straight years of Calder contenders. Its definitely not unprecedented!! It’s average for teams to get a first line winger at 23. Average drafting to get a first line centre and potential #1D defenseman in B2B years. The only “failure” is Juolevi. And yet, he can still be a player. He’s 21. Actually currently on his best stretch of hockey.
As per usual, the posters claiming to be objective are anything but. Spare me. There’s some glaring bad moves. Glaring sidegrades. Glaring huge wins.
But man Benning is so bad! He traded a third for Pedan! That just weighs this team down. That’s about the crux of it. Many irrelevant moves brought up endlessly as if it had some tangible impact. Oh no not that 4th to 5th round draft pick downgrade, those picks are just so valuable! Forget our first line centre he drafted, that’s just average for #5 overalls at 21 years of age!!
Frankie Blueberries
Dream Team
- Jan 27, 2016
- 9,414
- 10,992
You're not assessing Benning at his job duties. You're just posting results based on system that inevitably awards failure through the draft. Benning has the worst record of any GM over the last few years. Why not post those results and facts? Because they aren't convenient for your warped narrative. I've provided logic and reasoning for my assessment, you have done nothing to challenge that.
Benning was voted the worst GM of all time for the Canucks for a reason.
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Devils team discussion (news, notes and speculation) - season begins!
- Latest: Camille the Eel
-
