The Management Thread | Live, Play, Repeat Edition

[m9]

What's funny is that I heard the Toffoli comments and then read the article. Hidden in there was this gem:

---
Canucks general manager Jim Benning said Wednesday that he had to address pressing priorities because his club could score, but needed to defend better and not force goalies to steal games.
---

Seems to be working out well so far this season.

 

[4Twenty]

@sting101 @Pastor Of Muppetz

What’s your thoughts on the ran out of time and had to drop salary comments from JB?

 

[Burke's Evil Spirit]

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.

Add Sbisa, Del Zotto, Gagner to this list. Just shit sandwich on top of shit sandwich.

 

[4Twenty]

Add Sbisa, Del Zotto, Gagner to this list. Just shit sandwich on top of shit sandwich.

Del Zotto was low key a good pick up imo.

He shouldn’t have played all 82 that first season but as a #5 he actually got good results.

edler-Tanev
Hutton-Stecher
MDZ-Biega

actually got good results.

But Pouliot and Gudbranson had to be used.

The ghost of Sam Gagner still costing us cap space 4 years later, because Benning needed less than $1m in space for his fake Stanley cup bubble playoff last year is just stupidity at its finest.

 

[bandwagonesque]

Was Demko a prospect last season?


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

@bandwagonesque

No, I didn’t.

He’d never played a major role in the NHL yet so I’d say he was a prospect. In any case the more important distinction was his age. And this is why this whole argument is disingenuous. The poster I responded to is including a 24-year-old Markstrom in an account of the 2014 team’s prospects but not, say, Hoglander, a second round pick from two drafts ago currently playing in the top 6, in an account of this team’s prospects. You’re well aware that doesn’t make sense. And it’s silly — it’s easy to produce an argument for why Benning should be fired without resorting to this.

 

[4Twenty]

No, I didn’t.

He’d never played a major role in the NHL yet so I’d say he was a prospect. In any case the more important distinction was his age. And this is why this whole argument is disingenuous. The poster I responded to is including a 24-year-old Markstrom in an account of the 2014 team’s prospects but not, say, Hoglander, a second round pick from two drafts ago currently playing in the top 6, in an account of this team’s prospects. You’re well aware that doesn’t make sense. And it’s silly — it’s easy to produce an argument for why Benning should be fired without resorting to this.

What does Höglander have to do with why Markstrom at the same age as Demko wasn’t a “prospect” to you?

 

[xtra]

@sting101 @Pastor Of Muppetz

What’s your thoughts on the ran out of time and had to drop salary comments from JB?

To be fair benning only had from mid feb to early October to have a plan on how he could approach free agency. Benning can’t comprehend things that fast

 

[tantalum]

.

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?

I'm not sure you need to go that deep in a potential conspiracy. You only need a meddling owner and weak GM. The other potential people don't need to be around to end up in the same place.

But I get what you're saying. I wouldn't go so far as to say those people are anti-canuck but I would say they are incompetent, weak and a sycophant in the same vein as Benning.

I also cringe when I see things like Benning is a nice guy and down to earth etc. He isn't. He's just as arrogant as Gillis and actually more arrogant. Gillis may have been perceived as arrogant to the media because he was tight lipped and wouldn't suffer fools..and was terrible at disguising it.

But in his role as GM he wasn't anything of the sort. That's why he hired people with different opinions and listened to them. Where the rubber meets the road with the job, Benning's arrogance far exceeds that of Gillis. That's why Gillis protected the franchise as much as he could I think (same with Nonis to be honest) and why Benning (and Aquilini) continues to ruin it.

 

[sting101]

@sting101 @Pastor Of Muppetz

What’s your thoughts on the ran out of time and had to drop salary comments from JB?

It's pretty simple. He screwed himself with other poor contracts, couldn't move salary and Aquilini was not gonna buy out anyone. Poor cap management forced tough decisions.

He prioritized defense and getting Holtby to insulate Demko. We could score that wasn't a big problem and Hoglander and Podkolzin were coming.

In saying that i still don't like signing 28yr old 2nd line wingers to long term deals especially given that the original info was 5 x 5.5 and would have left him as the only forward signed beyond 2023 Just because Montreal got a bargain deal doesn't mean we would have. I have already said that 4yrs and 4.25 was a deal i would have done.

You have to see how Pettersson and Hughes fit the financial future first. Get fans back in attendance. If there was time to reset it's this year.

Also why are you so mad about it. You have been going off about not being even close to a contender and then you want to sign older players to legacy contracts?

 

[Izzy Goodenough]

"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."

Thanks for sharing this. I find this truly one of the most baffling facts in the whole GMJB/Weisbrod fiasco.

 

[Wall of Wonder]

So tired of the mismanagement of the Canucks. I need to stay away from this team sigh. Causes way to much stress.

 

[m9]

It's pretty simple. He screwed himself with other poor contracts, couldn't move salary and Aquilini was not gonna buy out anyone. Poor cap management forced tough decisions.

He prioritized defense and getting Holtby to insulate Demko. We could score that wasn't a big problem and Hoglander and Podkolzin were coming.

In saying that i still don't like signing 28yr old 2nd line wingers to long term deals especially given that the original info was 5 x 5.5 and would have left him as the only forward signed beyond 2023 Just because Montreal got a bargain deal doesn't mean we would have. I have already said that 4yrs and 4.25 was a deal i would have done.

You have to see how Pettersson and Hughes fit the financial future first. Get fans back in attendance. If there was time to reset it's this year.

Also why are you so mad about it. You have been going off about not being even close to a contender and then you want to sign older players to legacy contracts?

If this is true, do you think this was the time to trade for Schmidt locked in for 5 more years? Or sign a backup goalie to a big ticket 2nd year (when those other guys get paid) instead of a cheaper alternative? Or give a streaky depth winger a 2 year contract instead of 1? Or chasing guys like OEL who was on a massive deal?

I am fine with the idea of giving maximum flexibility for the future, but nothing really indicated that's what they were going for.

 

[CherryToke]

What's funny is that I heard the Toffoli comments and then read the article. Hidden in there was this gem:

---
Canucks general manager Jim Benning said Wednesday that he had to address pressing priorities because his club could score, but needed to defend better and not force goalies to steal games.
---

Seems to be working out well so far this season.

And those pressing priorities somehow translated to chasing OEL and his albatross contract while letting Tanev walk..

 

[Izzy Goodenough]

Stark:

"Mr Booth
@MrBooth_7
1st line $12M
2nd line $10.5M
1st D pair $3M
Bottom 6 & healthy scratches $27M
Goalies $5M

Someone who is good at the economy please help me budget this. My nhl franchise is dying."

 

[timw33]

The reframing has already begun: this year was actually a reset, and was never supposed to be the team taking a step forward and building first sliver of sustained success in six years.

Never supposed to build off of the team that made it to G7 of the QSFs, in fact, all the expectations were set that we were going to step back and it was clear thats the plan management and ownership were working with!

 

[Fatass]

And those pressing priorities somehow translated to chasing OEL and his albatross contract while letting Tanev walk..

Isn’t the cap cost for Schmidt + Holtby + Jake more than Tanev and Tofoli?

 

[CherryToke]

Isn’t the cap cost for Schmidt + Holtby + Jake more than Tanev and Tofoli?

Schmidt + Holtby alone is more

imagine if he actually acquired OEL

 

[4Twenty]

It's pretty simple. He screwed himself with other poor contracts, couldn't move salary and Aquilini was not gonna buy out anyone. Poor cap management forced tough decisions.

He prioritized defense and getting Holtby to insulate Demko. We could score that wasn't a big problem and Hoglander and Podkolzin were coming.

In saying that i still don't like signing 28yr old 2nd line wingers to long term deals especially given that the original info was 5 x 5.5 and would have left him as the only forward signed beyond 2023 Just because Montreal got a bargain deal doesn't mean we would have. I have already said that 4yrs and 4.25 was a deal i would have done.

You have to see how Pettersson and Hughes fit the financial future first. Get fans back in attendance. If there was time to reset it's this year.

Also why are you so mad about it. You have been going off about not being even close to a contender and then you want to sign older players to legacy contracts?

28-32 is a legacy deal?

im mad because our team is run by a rube.

Exclusive rights for 8 months. Ran out of time.

Couldn’t do it unless he dumped salary.

He just traded for a legacy contract to an older player as well.

edit* I’m also pretty sure you and pom have said cap space and the bad contacts weren’t issues. I guess we had to wait and see.


Edit2* this idea that this year was a good year to reset in the face of you and pom regularly stating support for going all in with veteran signings in 2018 and 2019 offseason because you can’t perpetually rebuild only to take a shocking reboot after the magical (and lucky) bubble run is hard to reconcile.

The bad spending that has largely been swept under the rug costing quality players on good contracts is something we were told wasn’t going to happen.

Of course I’m mad. If you’re not you don’t care and just want to devils advocate for incompetence.

I want a contender. I want someone I can believe in to build one. 7 seasons. The job gets even more daunting with the contracts on the horizon. Yet you guys still want this bumbling idiot to run the show.

last edit* the floated number being a baseline to excuse Benning’s incompetence was stupid when it was used for Myers and it’s even worse with a guy who was already here and fit like a glove.

 

[Fatass]

Schmidt + Holtby alone is more

imagine if he actually acquired OEL

Why didn’t we just keep Tanev and Tofoli? Would buying out Sutter freed up enough cap (not getting Schmidt, Holtby, and signing Jake) to keep Marky too?
I just wonder about our management’s asset management and assessment of players’ abilities to help us win. I think they’re bad at both.

 

[sting101]

If this is true, do you think this was the time to trade for Schmidt locked in for 5 more years? Or sign a backup goalie to a big ticket 2nd year (when those other guys get paid) instead of a cheaper alternative? Or give a streaky depth winger a 2 year contract instead of 1? Or chasing guys like OEL who was on a massive deal?

I am fine with the idea of giving maximum flexibility for the future, but nothing really indicated that's what they were going for.

I don't think the necessity for a winger out weighed the need to help the D and have a goalie that could insulate Demko if he had some struggles.

The allocation for Holtby and Schmidt was the same as Marky Tanev but we were able to theoretically upgrade in Schmidt and not lose the franchise goalie in doing so and are only on the hook for 2yrs vs 6. I'm ok with this even though it's hilarious how the 1st year after has them playing the cast offs 9 times each and of course it haunts us because were the Canucks.

 

[Fatass]

I don't think the necessity for a winger out weighed the need to help the D and have a goalie that could insulate Demko if he had some struggles.

The allocation for Holtby and Schmidt was the same as Marky Tanev but we were able to theoretically upgrade in Schmidt and not lose the franchise goalie in doing so and are only on the hook for 2yrs vs 6. I'm ok with this even though it's hilarious how the 1st year after has them playing the cast offs 9 times each and of course it haunts us because were the Canucks.

Imo Tanev looks to be a better player than Schmidt. And certainly Marky is way better than Holtby.

 

[VanillaCoke]

Just an incompetent bumbling dumb doofus.

 

[4Twenty]

Why didn’t we just keep Tanev and Tofoli? Would buying out Sutter freed up enough cap (not getting Schmidt, Holtby, and signing Jake) to keep Marky too?
I just wonder about our management’s asset management and assessment of players’ abilities to help us win. I think they’re bad at both.

It should be plainly obvious why Tanev wasn’t a priority.

Benning has no clue how to evaluate defensman.

 

[4Twenty]

The reframing has already begun: this year was actually a reset, and was never supposed to be the team taking a step forward and building first sliver of sustained success in six years.

Never supposed to build off of the team that made it to G7 of the QSFs, in fact, all the expectations were set that we were going to step back and it was clear thats the plan management and ownership were working with!

The reset after signing a $6m Dman. Traded a 1st and 3rd for a prime piece to contend with. And paid a 2nd and top prospect for rental.

It’s mental.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

I think it might be time that we start a Fire Benning thread. It makes more sense than yet another Tank thread, which a lot of people seem to hate.