The Management Thread | Live, Play, Repeat Edition

[DS7]

This just isn’t true. The buyout would only have saved about 2.3M in salary this season. Now if you wanted to move out Virtanen as well you’d be in business, and in hindsight that might have been the right move.

True, but the option to keep him was there. It was not a constraint of time or cap.

How much more times can we use the term hindsight in place of what this actually this, a lack of foresight from management?

 

[4Twenty]

Markstrom wasn’t a prospect — he was 24 and had played an entire season as a 1b in Florida and led the team in starts. So what you’re really doing is comparing players 24 or under, in which case ... well, you seem to be leaving a few players out.

Good morning. Please respond this time.

Edit* I’m @bandwagonesque ing you so you can actually have a hockey issue discussion with me instead of a post content discussion. I want to hear from you.
What is your opinion on disappointments in the 22-29 range vs that at 5-6 overall?

Also this goes out to everyone who reads my posts: how does team quality impact draft picks opportunities?

Does Adam Gaudette, Tryamkin, heck even Virtanen ever get looks during the greatest period of excellence in franchise history? I have my doubts.


Hoglander, Boeser, Mccann, Demko look like real draft hits and that’s strong. Stronger than Gillis’ record for sure. And I think these 3 get the look in a different era. The rest look like roster filler/space holders to me.

3 of these 4 were drafted while Gillis holdovers still had a large voice so it is interesting.

Benning needs to find a Hoglsnder/McCann on defence soon.


One other thing. Evaluating the Canucks drafting between regimes makes sense when comparing regimes. It means nothing when evaluating the current dude though. Where do the Canucks fall vs the rest of the leagues teams over the same period?

That’s an interesting subject.

 

[I am toxic]

Markstrom wasn’t a prospect — he was 24 and had played an entire season as a 1b in Florida and led the team in starts. So what you’re really doing is comparing players 24 or under, in which case ... well, you seem to be leaving a few players out.

Marky was a prospect.

One can nitpick about irrelevant things, for example HFBoards at one time (may still) define a goalie prospect as playing less than 45 NHL games by age 24. At the time Benning inherited Marky as a prospect, Marky was 24 years and a half years old, and had played about 47 games on record, but one or two of those starts were stepping in for just a few minutes from the starter.

Thank you Bandy, for bringing balance to the discussion, and being balanced in you criticism of Benn . . . oh, I mean, for balancing . . . things.

PS I feel for you, I really do. Defending the indefensible is a thankless task, and yet you never shirk from your duty

 

[tantalum]

I think they can exceed the cap by 10% in the offseason. Couldn't he have signed Toffoli and moved money later? With Ferland (and his uninsurable contract) on the LTIR, by not signing Harmonic, Hawryluk and Motte and even delaying bringing over Hoglander, I think he would have been within spitting distance of Toffoli's contract. He could have also demoted Roussel or Beagle.
Anyway, I am sure there are other ways he could have found the cap space include a trade of Sutter or Virtanen. The will wasn't there and his remarks are revisionist history.

The reality is that this team is not closer to winning a Cup than the team he took over 7 years ago.
Why hasn't he already been replaced? The bar for every other GM in Nucks recent history was so much higher and they were all let go? How has the GMJB and Weisbrod regime lasted this long?
Considering their truly awesome salary cap mismanagement, it's hard to imagine they are making ownership richer than an alternative regime. They must please ownership in a way that they don't please the team's followers.

The real answer is that Benning didn't actually want to re-sign Toffoli but couldn't own giving up futures for the 12 games.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

This just isn’t true. The buyout would only have saved about 2.3M in salary this season. Now if you wanted to move out Virtanen as well you’d be in business, and in hindsight that might have been the right move.

We didn't need hindsight to have known that it would be the right move, that's just disingenuous, bandy. I guarantee if you had made a poll last offseason, giving the options of keeping either Toffoli or Sutter and Virtanen, the former would have ran away with it.

 

[timw33]

You can't defend this kind of stuff. Especially coming from a cocky front office that told us they were about character and then shovelled the ****iest character down our throats for 7 years.

 

[Burke's Evil Spirit]

A terrible indictment of a brutal oaf of a manager who only wants jobs for his buddies and no one else.

 

[Canucks1096]

When did Miller win a cup?

He was talking about Toffoli, he has one cup and not two

We didn't lose JT Miller, Miller still play for the Canucks.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

You can't defend this kind of stuff. Especially coming from a cocky front office that told us they were about character and then shovelled the ****iest character down our throats for 7 years.

I'm curious how much this situation has to do with Tanev and Markstrom being Gillis acquisitions.
Benning's ego and incompetence are a dangerous combination. What a dip shit.

 

[4Twenty]

Well y’know ahh shucks we ran out of time.

Aww shucks nobody wants the players I told every GM is available via the trade portal.

Awww shucks nobody wants the junk on offer for a 3/4th liner.

 

[Izzy Goodenough]

Dysfunctional much: https://post.futurimedia.com/ckstam/playlist/listen-29620.html

 

[y2kcanucks]

You can't defend this kind of stuff. Especially coming from a cocky front office that told us they were about character and then shovelled the ****iest character down our throats for 7 years.

What I find hilarious is for years Benning talked about mentors and leadership and went out and overpaid bad players for that. Yet the guys who were actually mentoring our young players (Tanev for Hughes, Markstrom for Pettersson) were let go because we couldn't afford them.

I still feel it was the right call to not bring back Tanev or Markstrom, but the fact that we didn't have the money to improve the team after letting those two big pieces go is the problem.

 

[I am toxic]

You can't defend this kind of stuff. Especially coming from a cocky front office that told us they were about character and then shovelled the ****iest character down our throats for 7 years.

Sbisa, plays like crap. Gets an extension and a raise.

Sutter, never plays a game. Gets an extension and a raise. Plays like crap.

Gudbranson, plays like crap. Gets an extension and a raise.

Chris Tanev. First NHL jersey is a Canucks jersey. Plays 10 years. Never a complaint. Lays himself in front of shots without hesitation. Gets bones broken blocking shots. Contributes everywhere on the ice and off the ice.

Treated. Like. Crap.

Just like Hammer.

This management team not only cannot competently manage their way out of a wet paper bag, they display the character of garbage. Like when - you - go - to - the - Kent - Avenue - transfer - station, and - you - hold- your - breath - as - long - as - you - can - as - you - toss - shit - into - the - pit garbage. Not the nice smelling scented garbage like when your SO tosses out the old potpourri for new, while lighting incence.

Accordingly, rather than focus on these highly relevant matters that have impacted the club for over half a decade and will impact it for the next half decade, I think it best if we focus on nitpicking over whether 24 and half year old Marky with 47 games was a prospect or not, according to one website's narrow definition.

 

[Peter10]

He was talking about Toffoli, he has one cup and not two

We didn't lose JT Miller, Miller still play for the Canucks.

He was talking about Miller being pissed off.

And thanks, I know that Miller is still a Canuck, I am not an idiot

 

[bandwagonesque]

Marky was a prospect.

One can nitpick about irrelevant things, for example HFBoards at one time (may still) define a goalie prospect as playing less than 45 NHL games by age 24. At the time Benning inherited Marky as a prospect, Marky was 24 years and a half years old, and had played about 47 games on record, but one or two of those starts were stepping in for just a few minutes from the starter.

Thank you Bandy, for bringing balance to the discussion, and being balanced in you criticism of Benn . . . oh, I mean, for balancing . . . things.

PS I feel for you, I really do. Defending the indefensible is a thankless task, and yet you never shirk from your duty

In reference to team building the distinction of age obviously is more important than the subjective distinction of who is a prospect and who isn’t. By invoking Markstrom you’re opening up a comparison between players of his age and younger on the two teams, which you’re avoiding actually addressing because it’s inimitable to your argument. And for the millionth time, I’m not defending Benning and agree completely with your general view that’s he’s done a poor job of team building. I’m asking you to argue that point in a way that’s logical and coherent.

 

[4Twenty]

Vey - raise
Granlund - raise
Baertschi - raise
Gudbranson - 3 year extension

No issues paying Eriksson, Myers, Beagle, Roussel, Sutter top of the market value.

Terrified of arbitration loses Stecher and Hutton for free.

 

[4Twenty]

In reference to team building the distinction of age obviously is more important than the subjective distinction of who is a prospect and who isn’t. By invoking Markstrom you’re opening up a comparison between players of his age and younger on the two teams, which you’re avoiding actually addressing because it’s inimitable to your argument. And for the millionth time, I’m not defending Benning and agree completely with your general view that’s he’s done a poor job of team building. I’m asking you to argue that point in a way that’s logical and coherent.

Was Demko a prospect last season?


guessing you didn’t “see” this one either?

@bandwagonesque

 

[bandwagonesque]

Good morning. Please respond this time.

Edit* I’m @bandwagonesque ing you so you can actually have a hockey issue discussion with me instead of a post content discussion. I want to hear from you.
What is your opinion on disappointments in the 22-29 range vs that at 5-6 overall?

Also this goes out to everyone who reads my posts: how does team quality impact draft picks opportunities?

Does Adam Gaudette, Tryamkin, heck even Virtanen ever get looks during the greatest period of excellence in franchise history? I have my doubts.


Hoglander, Boeser, Mccann, Demko look like real draft hits and that’s strong. Stronger than Gillis’ record for sure. And I think these 3 get the look in a different era. The rest look like roster filler/space holders to me.

3 of these 4 were drafted while Gillis holdovers still had a large voice so it is interesting.

Benning needs to find a Hoglsnder/McCann on defence soon.


One other thing. Evaluating the Canucks drafting between regimes makes sense when comparing regimes. It means nothing when evaluating the current dude though. Where do the Canucks fall vs the rest of the leagues teams over the same period?

That’s an interesting subject.

I had no idea you addressed this question to me because I often don’t bother reading your replies. Maybe I’ll get around to it.

 

[VibinCanuck]

It would be monumentally stupid to have Benning run the Pettersson/Hughes/Demko RFA extensions after last off-season with how Markstrom, Tanev, Stecher and Toffolli come away feeling disrespected.

This is the core of the team, and you cannot even have a small percentage risk of your stars possibly wanting out after a negotiation with Benning.

I don't know how any rational individual can spend their money like this. Every NHL franchise has grown in value EXCEPT the Canucks the last 7 years, losing 75 million in value. That's Benning's legacy, in a nutshell.

 

[4Twenty]

I had no idea you addressed this question to me because I often don’t bother reading your replies. Maybe I’ll get around to it.

Oooooooh.

That’s pretty rude.

You have no problem replying to me when you’re not addressed. I replied and edited to @ you.

you absolutely knew.

Your problem is you couldn’t care less to have discussion.

Tuck your tail and run every time.

 

[mathonwy]

.

The real answer is that Benning didn't actually want to re-sign Toffoli but couldn't own giving up futures for the 12 games.

This assertion assumes that what Benning personally wants actually matters.

Based on objective analysis of his meek personality and overall lack of business acumen, I personally lean towards the side of Jimbo being a minor cog in the overall decision making machinations of the Canucks front office.

A 'puppet' wearing the title of General Manager if you will for Aquaman obviously ... but ... also for other unseen and non-Canucks-friendly partners.

Partners that became part of the Canucks organization at the exact same time Benning became "GM".

I've mentioned rats in the front office before and I still believe it.

Letting Marky, Tanev and Leivo walk to Calgary is as anti-Canucks as you can get.

.....

When Gillis was GM, the one thing that was consistent was every transaction he facilitated he did so for the good of the long term future of the Canucks franchise.

I'm sure Aquaman was doing everything in his stupid greasy bitch-ass power to make Gillis's life difficult and Gillis could have very easily just razed earth and cleaned out the Canucks but he didn't. He traded Schneider for Horvat and Luo for Markstrom and Matthias. Our captain and the 1G that took us to round 2 game 7.

These aren't deals that fell into his lap. He made them happen in a very vey difficult anti-Canucks trade market.

Gillis bled Canucks colors.

And to all those anti-Gillis fans, I hear what you're saying.

Gillis was a cock and really should have been a lot of nicer.

He REALLY should have.

But.. if you can get past the feeling that he was talking down to you and judge him on his actions, you will see he did everything in his power to protect our salary cap and protect us from our moron owner and it cost him his job and CAREER. Still can't get a job. f*** yourself Aquaman ya f***ing asshole.

I actually didn't vote on who the #1 GM is but I think I just convinced myself who that is and that's Mike Gillis.

I know Gilly left Jimbo with nothing but that aside, Gilly also had our back till the bitter end.

Right?

 

[Hansen]

It would be monumentally stupid to have Benning run the Pettersson/Hughes/Demko RFA extensions after last off-season with how Markstrom, Tanev, Stecher and Toffolli come away feeling disrespected.

This is the core of the team, and you cannot even have a small percentage risk of your stars possibly wanting out after a negotiation with Benning.

I don't know how any rational individual can spend their money like this. Every NHL franchise has grown in value EXCEPT the Canucks the last 7 years, losing 75 million in value. That's Benning's legacy, in a nutshell.

I agree big time, whether its Benning or Gear or whoever, the ball was dropped in a serious way that reflects poorly on our organizational integrity.

And you can tell that Petey is not putting up with it, his move to can his agent and go with Hughes' shows that he's ready to throw hands in these negotiations.

 

[4Twenty]

Gillis sat down with every player and explained how much they could afford to pay them and where they fit.

This is management.

 

[Peen]

It would be monumentally stupid to have Benning run the Pettersson/Hughes/Demko RFA extensions after last off-season with how Markstrom, Tanev, Stecher and Toffolli come away feeling disrespected.

This is the core of the team, and you cannot even have a small percentage risk of your stars possibly wanting out after a negotiation with Benning.

I don't know how any rational individual can spend their money like this. Every NHL franchise has grown in value EXCEPT the Canucks the last 7 years, losing 75 million in value. That's Benning's legacy, in a nutshell.

They cannot wait until the offseason to make this move.

Benning is going to make another move to save his job for another - as MS says - "fake stanley cup of being a meme 8th seed" if the opportunity presents itself.

We also need to start planning for the expansion draft. We need someone smart who can convince teams they have a problem and that we can be the one to solve their issue by taking on guys who might be exposed to seattle.

"Oh, you saw what Vegas did. Why let them get off easy? You have x, y, z that is going to be exposed but I can offer you this"

There are SO many good players that are going to be available.

 

[xtra]

In reference to team building the distinction of age obviously is more important than the subjective distinction of who is a prospect and who isn’t. By invoking Markstrom you’re opening up a comparison between players of his age and younger on the two teams, which you’re avoiding actually addressing because it’s inimitable to your argument. And for the millionth time, I’m not defending Benning and agree completely with your general view that’s he’s done a poor job of team building. I’m asking you to argue that point in a way that’s logical and coherent.

This is extremely flawed cause you can’t compare a forwards development to a goalies and say at age X they are the same.


There have been 44 goalies who played in the Nhl at 19 in history as opposed countless forwards that have played.

goalie development and how long they are considered a prospect is completely different than a forwards.