Has your opinion of Jim Benning changed?

[Frankie Blueberries]

I would say Gaudette is our only late round success over a two year period. It’s unreasonable to expect late round picks to be in the NHL that quickly. That’s why they are later picks as they still have a lot of work to do. There are still lots of potential picks from the last three drafts who could end up as NHL players. Too soon to say one way or the other.

It's pretty comical since we wouldn't even have Gaudette but for Gillis trading Diaz for that 5th rounder. We'd literally have no success in drafting outside the top 2 rounds over a 6 year sample size if Gillis didn't acquire that pick.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

I mean I already addressed all of this in my longer, first post above. So it's just going around in circles now. I have no problem giving Benning credit, I already did in my report card post.

I still don't think the Miller trade was necessarily a win. For the sake of argument, let's say that Miller settles in nicely as a ~70 point, 1st line, good two-way player. Not a crazy prediction, I don't think. Would you take that over a top 5-10 pick? I don't know if I would, considering Pettersson, Horvat, and Hughes were all top 5-10 picks. I would have made this type of trade in 1-2 years, not at a time when we had shown 0 promise for making the playoffs (remember, it only logically makes sense to evaluate a trade at the time it was made, not with the benefit hindsight).

It's hard to compare the Canucks' drafting with other teams since the Canucks have one of the worst records in the league over the last few years, and have received five top 10 draft picks since Benning took over. Not only that, but every additional round would be higher as well, so our chances in the 2nd/3rd/4th rounds are also better than 90% of other teams.

True we can’t assess the Miller trade until the season is over. But right now it looks like a home run. A cost controlled first line 70 point guy who has been the most consistent forward for what realistically will likely be a mid to late first. I hated the trade at the time but I’d easily do that trade now seeing the impact it’s had on the team. And Gudbranson for Pearson was also a great trade. It doesn’t erase the whole fiasco that went in getting Gudbranson but in isolation it’s an amazing trade.

As for the drafting, we’re going in circles. I think they’ve done very well without a top three pick.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

It's pretty comical since we wouldn't even have Gaudette but for Gillis trading Diaz for that 5th rounder. We'd literally have no success in drafting outside the top 2 rounds over a 6 year sample size if Gillis didn't acquire that pick.

Nothing comical about it. That was a Benning pick in the fifth round that he deserves credit for. Like I said you want to criticize him for the bad moves then I think it’s only fair you give him credit for the good.
And as I said you can’t say at this point that we had no success in the last three years of the later rounds as that’s simply not a realistic expectation. Later picks are almost always going to take a while to hit the NHL. Just like Gaudette. Still lots of potential hits there.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

True we can’t assess the Miller trade until the season is over. But right now it looks like a home run. A cost controlled first line 70 point guy who has been the most consistent forward for what realistically will likely be a mid to late first. I hated the trade at the time but I’d easily do that trade now seeing the impact it’s had on the team. And Gudbranson for Pearson was also a great trade. It doesn’t erase the whole fiasco that went in getting Gudbranson but in isolation it’s an amazing trade.

All fair points. The only thing I'd add is that if it was up to Benning, we'd have Demers over Pearson based on the chronology of events.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

Nothing comical about it. That was a Benning pick in the fifth round that he deserves credit for. Like I said you want to criticize him for the bad moves then I think it’s only fair you give him credit for the good.
And as I said you can’t say at this point that we had no success in the last three years of the later rounds as that’s simply not a realistic expectation. Later picks are almost always going to take a while to hit the NHL. Just like Gaudette. Still lots of potential hits there.

I'm happy to give him credit for Gaudette, it was a great pick. It looks like a Brackett pick to me, but good for both of them for making it happen. I think it's funny that it would never have happened if Gillis didn't acquire the extra pick. I give credit to both GMs for making it happen.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

All fair points. The only thing I'd add is that if it was up to Benning, we'd have Demers over Pearson based on the chronology of events.

Well if we’re going to play ‘what if’ we will never get anywhere. I prefer to judge him on what he did. I don’t give him a pass for the bad picks he made and I don’t give him a pass for meddling owners. He’s the guy in charge. He gets the blame for his bad moves and the credit for his good ones.
I’d like a change to be honest. If we are going to be a true contender we need a GM who can do a much better job at signing contracts and negotiating the cap. But I also think he’s left a pretty good core for a savvy GM to build a contender. I’m pretty happy with his drafting and his more recent trades.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

I'm happy to give him credit for Gaudette, it was a great pick. It looks like a Brackett pick to me, but good for both of them for making it happen. I think it's funny that it would never have happened if Gillis didn't acquire the extra pick. I give credit to both GMs for making it happen.

Gillis got a fifth round pick. Benning got Gaudette. 99% of my credit goes to Benning on that one.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

Well if we’re going to play ‘what if’ we will never get anywhere. I prefer to judge him on what he did. I don’t give him a pass for the bad picks he made and I don’t give him a pass for meddling owners. He’s the guy in charge. He gets the blame for his bad moves and the credit for his good ones.
I’d like a change to be honest. If we are going to be a true contender we need a GM who can do a much better job at signing contracts and negotiating the cap. But I also think he’s left a pretty good core for a savvy GM to build a contender.

I'm not trying to play 'what if', I'm demonstrating yet another example of poor decision making by Benning. I'm stating who Benning had originally targeted for the Gudbranson trade. It was an agree-upon trade. It wasn't Benning who refused the trade; it was Demers.

Just because something doesn't happen, doesn't mean you can't criticize the events that lead up to the decision. Just like when Benning wanted to trade our 1st (Boeser) for Lucic, and then also wanted to sign Lucic and Eriksson in the same off season. That's indefensibly stupid and it still happened.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

Gillis got a fifth round pick. Benning got Gaudette. 99% of my credit goes to Benning on that one.

Lol it wouldn't have even happened without Gillis. This is like giving credit to the egg and not the chicken. It makes absolutely no sense.

 

[bandwagonesque]

Pettersson, Boeser, and Hughes were all draft picks that we only received because we were so bad.

Boeser was drafted 23rd overall.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

Lol it wouldn't have even happened without Gillis. This is like giving credit to the egg and not the chicken. It makes absolutely no sense.

It makes a ton of sense. A fifth round pick rarely yields an NHL player. That’s what Gillis got. Benning picked Gaudette.
Anyways I’m not going to get into Gillis’ god awful drafting as it will just derail the thread. Gaudette is a Benning pick. And it’s to his credit.
I’ll leave it at that as it appears we are going in circles.

 

[bandwagonesque]

Lol it wouldn't have even happened without Gillis. This is like giving credit to the egg and not the chicken. It makes absolutely no sense.

So Benning drafting a really good player with a late-round pick doesn't count because a GM other than him happened to acquire the pick earlier? That's a completely disingenuous argument.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

Boeser was drafted 23rd overall.

I hope you're able to oversee a trivial detail and understand the actual message being conveyed. Drafting 6th overall, 5th overall, 5th overall again, 7th overall, and 10th overall in a 5 year span is the result of a team failing miserably.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

So Benning drafting a really good player with a late-round pick doesn't count because a GM other than him happened to acquire the pick earlier? That's a completely disingenuous argument.

It goes to his asset management. Benning bleeds picks. The one time he hit on a late round pick happened to be a pick he didn't even acquire. It's just sad, though. But yes, I find some dark comedy in the fact that our only late-round draft success story was the result of a previous GM who actually knew the value of acquiring futures and knew the team needed to rebuild.

 

[bandwagonesque]

I hope you're able to oversee a trivial detail and understand the actual message being conveyed. Drafting 6th overall, 5th overall, 5th overall again, 7th overall, and 10th overall in a 5 year span is the result of a team failing miserably.

It isn't a trivial detail. You said Benning was only able to draft Boeser because the league rewards failure. This is obviously not true. Boeser was drafted 23rd overall.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Canucks last made the playoffs in 2015 (with an aging core and no prospect pool to speak of)...Spent the last 4 years out the playoffs, and are now turning the corner with a promising group of youngsters..

A question to other fanbases (not Canuck fans)....All teams have to inevitably face a rebuild and replace an aging core at a certain point..(Detroit are coming up to year 4..Then you have Buffalo,Arizona etc.)

How many years of non playoff (rebuild) hockey, would you consider acceptable ?

 

[bandwagonesque]

It goes to his asset management. Benning bleeds picks. The one time he hit on a late round pick happened to be a pick he didn't even acquire. It's just sad, though. But yes, I find some dark comedy in the fact that our only late-round draft success story was the result of a previous GM who actually knew the value of acquiring futures and knew the team needed to rebuild.

You didn't say it was comedic -- you said it detracted from the success of the pick. It doesn't and you know it.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

It isn't a trivial detail. You said Benning was only able to draft Boeser because the league rewards failure. This is obviously not true. Boeser was drafted 23rd overall.

Right but Boeser does not detract from the point I was making. I can concede that Boeser has nothing to do with drafting high. My point still stands. Let's not try to move the goal posts or construct a straw man to distract from my previous point that the only reason we have drafted well is because we've had high picks from consistently failing year after year.

Besides, as I mentioned above, I'd be just as happy with Konecny as Boeser. While the Boeser pick was good, it wasn't a genius pick or anything given who was available on the board.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

You didn't say it was comedic -- you said it detracted from the success of the pick. It doesn't and you know it.

We're talking about two different things and neither one of us is wrong. The pick would not have happened if Gillis didn't make the trade, therefore Benning would have nothing to show for late round picks. That's the truth, I don't care what crazy pro-Benning spin you throw on it, you can't change the facts here.

 

[vcanuck]

the man keeps bringing in top end talent every draft despite never winning the lottery and his trades have improved so much. His UFA signing are slowly getting better as well, no crazy numbers and long ass terms..... except for Ferland.

Podkolzin and stealing Hoglander with the 40th pick... oh and his college free agent signing Brogan Rafferty is not looking too bad either.

 

[Just Linda]

The bolded is confusing to me. It’s basically universally accepted in the hockey world that the most important areas to build around and try to strengthen in a rebuild is down the middle and on the blue line. Then you concede that the Canucks look great down the middle with Pettersson and Horvat and that they finally have a stud young defenceman in Hughes.

It’s also confusing that you mention wingers as a weakness. A team doesn’t need an elite winger to win a cup and there’s numerous examples of that. Regardless, JT Miller and Brock Boeser are outstanding wingers weather they’re considered “elite” or not. Tanner Pearson is a second line winger and Jake Virtanen looks like he’s become one now too.

I think if anything the weakness of this team going forward is not wingers but defence. After Hughes there’s a lot of question marks going forward.

Enough of them meaning high end depth.

EP, Brock, Bo, and QHughes are all great and a lovely core to have. Adding Miller was a nice add too. Podkolzin and Hoglander are likely to add someone who can accompany that core too.

It's just... Who's pressing them for high end depth? Who's ready to make a big leap? What scares me about their future. Is there anyone on that roster who can take over games, take over series? Am I worried about them shutting down other teams or them out gunning anyone? Are they 4 dangerous lines that I need to be wary of? No, not really. It's not built to be scary.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

Right but Boeser does not detract from the point I was making. I can concede that Boeser has nothing to do with drafting high. My point still stands. Let's not try to move the goal posts or construct a straw man to distract from my previous point that the only reason we have drafted well is because we've had high picks.

Besides, as I mentioned above, I'd be just as happy with Konecny as Boeser. While the Boeser pick was good, it wasn't a genius pick or anything given who was available on the board.

Wait? You’re saying that Boeser was a trivial detail and was an ‘ok’ pick for a mid 20’s pick. Wow! You have very high standards for a GM. I think you’re going to be disappointed no matter who is GM.

 

[bandwagonesque]

Right but Boeser does not detract from the point I was making. I can concede that Boeser has nothing to do with drafting high. My point still stands. Let's not try to move the goal posts or construct a straw man to distract from my previous point that the only reason we have drafted well is because we've had high picks.

Besides, as I mentioned above, I'd be just as happy with Konecny as Boeser. While the Boeser pick was good, it wasn't a genius pick or anything given who was available on the board.

Boeser and Konecny were both excellent picks in that they are massively outperforming their draft position and other players drafted around them. The notion that GMs shouldn't get credit for making good picks simply because other good picks were made later is senseless and no intelligent fan takes it seriously.

 

[bandwagonesque]

We're talking about two different things and neither one of us is wrong. The pick would not have happened if Gillis didn't make the trade, therefore Benning would have nothing to show for late round picks. That's the truth, I don't care what crazy pro-Benning spin you throw on it, you can't change the facts here.

This has nothing to do with whether the pick, when and where it was made, was successful, which is what you were purporting to talk about.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

Wait? You’re saying that Boeser was a trivial detail and was an ‘ok’ pick for a mid 20’s pick. Wow! You have very high standards for a GM. I think you’re going to be disappointed no matter who is GM.

No, you've misunderstood the post.

I'm saying that people credit Benning and the Canucks drafting based on the high picks (fans often cite Hughes/Pettersson as the big success stories). We only received the 6th overall, 5th overall x 2, and 10th overall picks because we have been atrociously bad over the last 6 seasons.

Boeser was a good pick at 23 overall. But let's not act like other GMs couldn't have made a good pick there with Konecny and Boeser available.