Confirmed with Link: Lawrence Gilman, Lorne Henning, Eric Crawford AND Mike Burnstein fired

Status
Not open for further replies.

Lonny Bohonos

Registered User
Apr 4, 2010
15,645
2,060
Middle East
Well if Botchford is to be believed, the core players are already a bit upset. So this will push that along.

Overall, I think firing Burnstein is not that big a deal to the general workings of the club. He was a constant, yes. And he was regarded as one of the best in the business, but they might have a better alternative in mind...?

Its not a big deal in that he only a trainer and no one will die.


But as a long term guy and as someone who should be quote unquote untouchable it certainly sends the message that no one is safe.



All depends on how how the guys viewed him.
 

SeawaterOnIce

Bald is back in style.
Sponsor
Aug 28, 2011
18,034
22,798
Only a matter of time till Benning starts firing the fans.

Again, this is politics and Benning is demonstrating he is a dinosaur. I even said to expect this nonsense last year.
 

tantalum

Hope for the best. Expect the worst
Sponsor
Apr 2, 2002
25,500
14,717
Missouri
He's a well respected guy who works close with the players. Having a good friend who is an NHL trainer, the players are close to these guys and depend on them. It will not sit lightly with the players.
 

shortshorts

Registered User
Oct 29, 2008
12,637
99
Kind of makes you wonder if this is an ownership cost cutting scheme. Canucks are losing money...why not axe staff and pass along their responsibilities to people who already work there?

>Trying to cut money
>Signs Sbisa and Dorsett to long-term raises
 

Phrasing

Registered User
Nov 16, 2007
4,900
3,219
Burnstein is a shocker...wow. He's been with the team ever since Larry Ashley passed, has he not?

With all the talk about other members in the organization picking up the responsibilities as opposed to new hires, all I can think is they are:

A) getting rid of dissenters; and

B) reducing overhead.

All at the cost of possibly angering the core players and staff, losing diversity of thought, and losing respect among other outside players/staff/management.
 

BloatedGuppy

Registered User
Jun 29, 2007
4,307
232
Vancouver
With all the talk about other members in the organization picking up the responsibilities as opposed to new hires, all I can think is they are:

A) getting rid of dissenters; and

It makes absolutely no sense to suggest Burnstein was somehow a "dissenter" and giving management angry feedback on their personnel moves. It seems a bit pie in the sky. Do you seriously believe a guy would scuttle a 19 year career and a stable city/family situation because he wanted to give the GM gears over the insufficient return on the Lack and Kassian trades?
 

DL44

Status quo
Sep 26, 2006
17,946
3,872
Location: Location:
With all the talk about other members in the organization picking up the responsibilities as opposed to new hires, all I can think is they are:

A) getting rid of dissenters; and

B) reducing overhead.

All at the cost of possibly angering the core players and staff, losing diversity of thought, and losing respect among other outside players/staff/management.

Yeah.. i guess the Aqualinis aren't CDN$-crash-proof....
It's a wake up call/reminder that 15-18 yrs wasn't that long ago where the Canucks were bleeding money..
 

xtra

Registered User
May 19, 2002
8,324
4,766
Vancouver
Visit site
The saddest part of all this is that even when burks and nonis where here I could see some semblance of a plan that they were aiming for. However with Benning or I guess weisbrod cause he seems to be in charge is that I can't discern what the plan is. Getting younger? Traded away lack and kassian for miller and prust. Get better? Sign sbisa and trade bieksa.
 

VanJack

Registered User
Jul 11, 2014
22,706
16,183
Pretty apparent that this is a team cutting costs at all costs.....obviously anticipating a rougher road ahead with a hit on revenues from reduced attendance; merchandize sales and Rogers Arena revenues and the lower loony....more players on expiring contracts....for years we've been a team at the top of the cap world; no doubt in the years ahead this team will save money by not spending to the cap; we'll be closer to Florida and Arizona than to the league heavyweights; Too bad....the Aquaman could have solid this team when it was at the top of the market.:help:
 

bossram

Registered User
Sep 25, 2013
16,689
17,137
Victoria
First they fire anyone with a different opinion in the management group so they can all be happy with their groupthink.

Then fire the well-like trainer who is regarded as one of the best because....?

Fans have already turned. It's been one year. Good job.
 

Phenomenon13

Registered User
Oct 10, 2011
2,479
496
I've always believed that Benning and Linden were the guys that were going to be tasked with tearing the team down. When the team starts to brim over with young players someone else will be brought in to build a contender. Probably in three or four years. It's going to be rough but I'm also glad they're getting on with the rebuild instead of dragging it out.

The returns they have been getting have been disappointing but not out of this world bad. They haven't "won" a trade yet. They've been getting 3rds when they should have got 2nds and stuff like that. Would it be better to put off the rebuild for another year if it meant the picks you get back are slightly better?

Benning has no idea what he is doing...


The ludicrous notion is that we are "intentionally tanking". Benning hands out draft picks like candy to acquire depth players (ex. Dorsett, Prust, etc...) No rebuilding team is going to hand out draft picks for NHL depth players unless its to fill holes and push for the cup. Not to mention, Benning isn't even getting good players or value back in his trades. Every move Benning has made has literally contradicted this notion. Starting with the Kesler trade. Benning literally targeted players like Sbisa and Bonino when young players such as Rakell and Karlsson should have been easily acquirable in that transaction. Furthermore, Benning goes and signs Vrbata, Miller, Richardson, etc... Those are the not the signings of a team trying to tank. Vrbata is a premium asset to acquire. Miller was acquired to give us better goal-tending and Richardson is a decent fourth line center. It may look like tanking when Benning incompetently overpays by resigning literally the two worst players on the team but do not be fooled as rebuilding teams do not acquire veterans nor do they trade picks away to acquire them.

The plan for that Benning has stated is to retool the team. I honestly believe than Benning has no clue what a retool is or has lost sight of the retool. Some of the moves made such as acquiring prime aged - youngish players like Bonino, Sbisa, Baertschi can be seen as inline with the "plan". However, getting rid of players like Lack, Matthias, and Kassian who are players that can help smooth over the transition and remain useful after the retool is completely contradictory to that. All of whom are arguably more valuable than the new transition players brought in. In addition, as mentioned earlier the trading of draft picks for veterans makes no sense as we are going to need more young players for a retool to actually be successful. Otherwise you are only going to end up with small window to contend and then it's back to square one. You know what that sounds an awful like? Trying to win the cup. The retooling (ideal) way is trading proven veteran NHL players to acquire younger non-proven NHL players. Ex. Trading Miller for Markstrom. Our entire philosophy is flawed and makes no sense. This leads me to believe that there is no real plan.
 

opendoor

Registered User
Dec 12, 2006
11,719
1,403
Yeah.. i guess the Aqualinis aren't CDN$-crash-proof....
It's a wake up call/reminder that 15-18 yrs wasn't that long ago where the Canucks were bleeding money..

There are a lot better ways to save money than to fire management and trainers. Replacing Sbisa with someone like Stanton alone would save the team $3M.

If the Canucks aren't looking to compete (and they shouldn't be) there's nothing wrong with not spending to the cap. Calgary didn't even get within $10M of a cap last season for instance.
 

I in the Eye

Drop a ball it falls
Dec 14, 2002
6,371
2,327
There are a lot better ways to save money than to fire management and trainers. Replacing Sbisa with someone like Stanton alone would save the team $3M.

If the Canucks aren't looking to compete (and they shouldn't be) there's nothing wrong with not spending to the cap. Calgary didn't even get within $10M of a cap last season for instance.

No kidding... Replacing Miller with Lack would save about another $5m. That's $8m savings right there (including the Sbisa for Stanton swap) for a cost concerned owner. If we can't be a top of cap spending team, we can't be a top of cap spending team... happens across the league... in certain ownership groups, costs need to be low, and that's well understood by those in the market. Teams who have owners who are concerned about $ aren't big spenders.

If this has anything to do with costs, which it doesn't IMO, than the regime is screwing this up also.

I think this is clearly political. If I was guessing, any second guessing made to Weis Benning, rationalized as an issue with those in management (and the office) being a part of the past regime... not an issue with the moves and (lack of) direction at hand. It's like on here, if you're against the moves, you're against Benning... Can't be against Benning, because against the moves. Anyone who's not on board, here's the door.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad