[poll] Which is the worst Benning-era transaction?

[Johnny Canuck]

there have been to many, wtf is he doing moments. maybe he'll get axed when they miss the playoffs next season. unless he can bring in quality free agents, this team is geared for another lottery finish.

for me the sibsa signing was the worst move. mind boggling. i don't see shink succeeding in Calgary, that is already an undersized team as it is. they need to add some truculence up front.

 

[kanucks25]

I don't think we have a single fair value trade.

I think the Baertschi one was fair value, and we might end up winning it.

Bieksa turned into complete crap, I was shocked a team actually saw him as a positive asset. Definitely won that trade.

 

[ayoshi]

I think the Baertschi one was fair value, and we might end up winning it.

Bieksa turned into complete crap, I was shocked a team actually saw him as a positive asset. Definitely won that trade.

2/18 (or whatever) isn't that bad I guess!

 

[kurt]

what a tough choice!

 

[timw33]

I think the Baertschi one was fair value, and we might end up winning it.

Bieksa turned into complete crap, I was shocked a team actually saw him as a positive asset. Definitely won that trade.

Yeah, it's probably what we did with the Bieksa return, mainly squandered it horribly.

 

[J Canuck]

So many to choose from....

Went with Forsling, since Clendenning went bust so very quickly and Forsling could be a name that bothers us for years and years to come. Scouting failure from a guy whose scouting is supposed to make up for his weaknesses.

 

[palefire]

For a laugh I decided to sort Benning's trades by the type of stupidity involved in each one. I ended up with 9 different categories; suggestions welcome. Some trades are stupid in multiple ways. 2nd for Vey is the only one in four categories, so I guess that's my vote for worst.

Futures dealt for castoff prospect where Benning thinks he knows better:
Forsling for Clendenning
2nd for Vey
2nd for Baertschi
Shinkaruk for Granlund
5th for Larsen
Mallet, 3rd for Pedan

Horrifying contract:
Dorsett 4-year $10.6 million contract
Miller 3-year $18 million contract
Sutter 5-year $21.875 million contract
Sbisa 3-year $10.8 million contract

Bleeding draft picks:
Kassian, 5th for Prust
McCann, 2nd, 4th for Gudbranson, 5th
2nd, Bonino, Clenndening for Sutter, 3rd
3rd for Dorsett
2nd for Vey
2nd for Baertschi
Mallet, 3rd for Pedan

Unsatisfying return on a veteran:
Kesler for Bonino, Sbisa, 23rd pick
Garrison, Costello and a 7th for a 2nd
Lack for 3rd, 7th
Moves zero roster players at 2016 trade deadline

Overpayment for a player they targeted:
2nd, Bonino, Clenndening for Sutter, 3rd
3rd for Dorsett
2nd for Vey
2nd for Baertschi

Thinks a terrible roster player on another team is good:
Kesler for Bonino, Sbisa, 23rd pick
3rd for Dorsett
Kassian, 5th for Prust
Bartkowski 1-year $1.75 million contract

Overrates a "meat and potatoes" bottom-half-of-roster player:
McCann, 2nd, 4th for Gudbranson, 5th
2nd, Bonino, Clenndening for Sutter, 3rd

Fetish for players that management/coaches already knew:
2nd for Vey
2nd for Baertschi
Shinkaruk for Granlund
Miller 3-year $18 million contract
3rd for Dorsett
Bartkowski 1-year $1.75 million contract

Total failure to execute:
Moves zero roster players at 2016 trade deadline

Reasonable or irrelevant moves:
Bieksa for 2nd
McNally for 5th
Jensen and 6th for Etem
Fox for futures
Jeffrey for Conacher
Acton for Lain

 

[Pavel96]

David Pratt just said this one of Jim Benning's best trades yet. Pratt (the guy who guaranteed the Canucks would make the playoffs last year 1/3 into the season I think) said he completely disagreed with Ferraro (hmm wonder if he knows more about hockey than Pratt). When someone asked him where the goals would come from in 3-4 years he says "They can worry about that then, it is win now mode." He then said they would address goals through free agency.

Basically he was saying how hard it is to find d men like this and why that validated making the trade. I just dont get it - defensive d men that score absolutely no points are that highly valued that you trade away first round, nhl games played, offensive talent? What about offensive d's?

 

[Catamarca Livin]

So many to choose from....

Went with Forsling, since Clendenning went bust so very quickly and Forsling could be a name that bothers us for years and years to come. Scouting failure from a guy whose scouting is supposed to make up for his weaknesses.

Scouting weakness Benning is who picked Forsling in the 5 th round. The trade cannot be good now but he drafted Forsling and deserves a bit of credit for that. Seems like he overrates Ahl players quite often. Or perhaps he is good at evaluating young players peak though the Seguin trade proves otherwise. Hmm his moves are a bit of a mess but his drafting has left the team better off rebuild wise.

 

[CH9]

Accidentally voted Granlund for Shinkaruk (which is still bad, albeit) without considering the Sbisa extension. So those are my top two, with inactivity at the deadline coming in at a solid 3rd.

 

[Eddy Punch Clock]

Thats quite a long list for such a short tenure.

Obviously the worst move involving Benning was his hiring.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

I think it's the Sbisa contract and by a healthy long shot. Even the worst trade (Granlund for Shinkaruk) still has an ultimately unknown outcome. The worst signing (Miller) still played at least marginally competent hockey, and the opportunity cost of the high contract was meaningless given the team's non-competitive status during his tenure.

Sbisa contract is largely available for review, as we've enjoyed two years of Sbisa and have a good idea of how his performance stacks up against the contract. Taking everything into consideration...his age, his RFA status, his previous performances, his projected performances, his role on the team, etc, etc there was nothing to justify the dollar amount or tenure received. Yes, defensemen are vital. Yes, other teams have overpaid equally or worse for similar defensemen. Yes, Sbisa might easily have gotten a similar amount on the open market due to age and pedigree. But Sbisa was not a UFA nor a pending UFA and had a precarious bargaining position. Even if the team fully believed he was capable of taking a dramatic step forward in performance...and I think it's quite clear they DID think that...there was no reason to pay him as if that step forward had already occurred. It was a overt miscalculation.

I will specify I don't think it was particularly dramatic or franchise altering, because an overpayment on a bottom pairing defenseman isn't exactly headline news and the team was going to flounder whether Sbisa was fairly paid or not, but the move could accurately be described as "indefensible", which isn't a charge I would level at any other transaction on the list. Which is not to say they're all good, or even average. It's just to say they're defensible...and Sbisa's contract is not.

 

[Cupless44]

So many to choose from....

Went with Forsling, since Clendenning went bust so very quickly and Forsling could be a name that bothers us for years and years to come. Scouting failure from a guy whose scouting is supposed to make up for his weaknesses.

I voted for trade deadline, but for an actual trade I think the Forsling trade is the worst. Clendening is an awful player who can't even skate. Already bounced to two other teams and will be out of league very soon.

 

[VanillaCoke]

Sven for a 2nd is still bad. Because Sven isn't completely useless it looks okay, but even Calgary admitted it was an overpayment and Sven was on his way to waivers.

 

[JuniorNelson]

Kassian for Prust is worse than it looks on the ice. Canucks give up on a guy with upside (and trade him for an utterly finished plug) because he has a substance abuse issue. Is that how people act in this century? FFS! Why not write a letter to potential signings admitting "We don't have your back"?

 

[Toxic0n]

I knew some would have difficulty understanding.

It was easy to predict Hamhius wasn't going anywhere once he broke his jaw. He was one of our worst dmen prior to injury and the injury brought him back with only a small sample of games left prior to the TDL. It was easy to predict (and I did at the time) that teams would of had difficulty buying him based on how he was playing... but then to add 2 months of inactivity on top of that was going to be a tough sell.

The ONLY point of optimism was Hammer actually playing his best hockey of the season upon his return from injury, albeit a 7-8 game sample size.... but he still wasn't productive, and the team wasn't winning. 7 or 8 games of decent individual defensive hockey wasn't enough to overcome his pre-injury sample of poor play... nor the fact he wasn't 100% and returning to play after 2 months off.
It's a nice thought that teams would of bit on name recognition and previous seasons of work... but they have pro scouts as well watching the games Hamhuis did play this season..

Pretty simple to understand.


Vrbata... well.. 12g, uninterested play (many of those directly vs potential suitors)and injured at the TDL. So hardly shocked.
Add to the fact that allegedly his trade list included non-playoff teams to further hamper a potential transaction...
So yes... i would say its extremely easy to understand.


But also easy to understand why people don't wish to understand.

Yeah, that's nice but what you fail to understand is JB should have been trying to trade Vrbata last off-season after they decided he sucks and he was not going to be playing with the Sedins. Or do you believe that Vrbata had zero value after his 31 goal season?

With Hammer, they should have started exploring potential trade options earlier in the season rather than waiting until the last week before the deadline. If they could not trade him, they should have resigned him.

The bottom line is, we lost two prime assets for nothing. It is a total failure by JB as a GM but I'm not surprised that you would type up a 1000 word essay with excuses as to why JB did nothing wrong. It's par for the course for you, sir.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Canucks give up on a guy with upside...

I don't like the trade either, because post-injury Prust was both an on and off ice disaster...but I think we can close the book on Kassian's "potential" at this point. He'll be turning 26 this upcoming season. He's never broken 30 points. He had 8 points in 36 games last year and was a -7. He's on his 4th team. The guy is the very definition of a journeyman/replacement level player.

I was as fascinated by Kassian's tantalizing demonstrations of skill and power as anyone, but with every year it becomes increasingly unlikely the guy is going to bust out. It's not impossible. It's just extremely improbable.

Ironically, the critical element turned out to be the 5th round pick.

 

[M2Beezy]

Sven for a 2nd is still bad. Because Sven isn't completely useless it looks okay, but even Calgary admitted it was an overpayment and Sven was on his way to waivers.

Really?? Dear heavens i thought that was one of the small amount of good ones. I guess not

 

[Toxic0n]

Ironically, the critical element turned out to be the 5th round pick.

There were a few people saying when the trade happened that the 5th rounder had the most value. I didn't really agree with them but they may have been right.
A 5th rounder for a few months of Prust's "mentorship" and embarrassing fight attempts. Still not his worst trade.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Really?? Dear heavens i thought that was one of the small amount of good ones. I guess not

If Sven continues on his present trajectory of improvement, it will materialize as a gamble that paid off. The debate isn't whether or not history revealed it as a "good trade". The debate would be over whether or not a 2nd was fair value for Baertschi at the time, and whether he could have been had for cheaper.

Which is debateable.

Hence the debate.

 

[Hit the post]

Ironically, the critical element turned out to be the 5th round pick.

We traded a NHL plug for a AHL plug. The 5th round pick just was the icing on the cake.

Trade just reinforces the HORRIBLE pro scouting under this management team (granted, Gilligan had some REAL STINKERS as well).

 

[opendoor]

If Sven continues on his present trajectory of improvement, it will materialize as a gamble that paid off. The debate isn't whether or not history revealed it as a "good trade". The debate would be over whether or not a 2nd was fair value for Baertschi at the time, and whether he could have been had for cheaper.

Which is debateable.

Hence the debate.

What improvement? Baertschi produced less in Vancouver than he did in his first 3 years in Calgary.

 

[M2Beezy]

I thought Baertchi improved quiet a bit but if all we had to give up was a late pick cause would be waver fodder then thats another Benning disaster

 

[Breakers]

Shinkaruk-Granlund
Pointless and useless

Especially considering how much term Shinkaruk had left on his contract.

He still has 2 years left

 

[BloatedGuppy]

What improvement? Baertschi produced less in Vancouver than he did in his first 3 years in Calgary.

There were definitive steps forward in both his on-ice production and the quality of his play as the season moved on, noted by onlookers, the team's coaching staff, and Baertschi himself. If you cannot acknowledge that, or believe your own analysis of the situation to be superior, then we're so far apart on this issue as to make further discussion useless.

I thought Baertchi improved quiet a bit but if all we had to give up was a late pick cause would be waver fodder then thats another Benning disaster

We have nothing but forum mushroom speculation to instigate belief that we could have gotten him for less than we offered. We know the Canucks made the best offer, but other than the verbage used by the Calgary GM we have no idea by how much. I should think speculating that "a late round pick" was sufficient is hilariously excessive, but hilarious excess is basically bread and oxygen around here when stating opinions.