This is in response to
@MarkusNaslund19 regarding the assessment of Benning:
Ok, so I had to dig through some threads and my older posts because I knew that I had commented on your premise before. (Not to you, to others)
To reiterate your frame: Benning’s moves over the last 3-4 years have been more net positive than net negative, and that HFVan have been assessing them incorrectly over that span. At the same time, Benning’s moves have been “terrible” before this time period. If any of that is incorrect, please correct me.
Now immediately, I think we have to agree that a GM’s tenure is evaluated by the full timeline of his office? Otherwise, both of us will be left cutting up the sample size in the way that best proves each person's point. I’m fine with using the point at which he was hired, how about you?
----
Next, the lens by which I judge moves is via probability, not possibility. A move could work out, but is it likely to do so when it is made? This is the key question.
(Backdrop: This team has the 26th best Points Percentage among all teams during the Benning era)
| Move | Process | Precedent | Result | Overall |
| Waiving Edler | N/A | N/A | N/A | I don’t know where you’re getting this? |
| Miller trade | Yes, HFVan (majority) was rightly against this deal. The team dealt a 1st while being 28th in P% the 2 years prior. | I can’t think of a team that has done this. Can you? | Worked out. The pick was locked in the 20th position after 2019-20. | Overall, I think the trade was fine. Terrible process, Very good result. |
| Motte/Vanek trade when pick was sought | Benning had a habit of not selling for picks and the Canucks took on a cap dump alongside in Jussi Jokinen. | Again, teams in Van’s position usually sell assets for picks, not projected 4th liners. | Motte turned out to be a good 4th liner that plays fewer games. | Shrug, it’s ok? 4th liners are relatively cheap to come by. |
| Shinkaruk/Granlund | Dealt a prospect with middling value for a pending waiver wire dump. | Usually, teams would give a higher profile prospect a shot first. | Canucks got the "better" player in Granlund. | Was the utility of Granlund over and above a random waiver wire pick up? If not, why make the deal? |
| Choosing Markstrom over Lack | They had to deal one goalie eventually. | Same as process. | Markstrom was way better. Lack faltered. | I think HFVan wanted to keep both, IIRC. It wasn’t about choosing. Miller vs. Lack was more heated. |
| Green ruining Boeser/Hughes | Coaching isn’t infallible. | Same as process. | Didn’t hurt Boeser or Hughes. | I don’t recall this? I recall Green being criticized for Goldobin and coaching scared. |
| Boeser/Carlo | Yes, this was absolutely a fear, IIRC. Benning chose Virtanen in 2014. | Usually, low producing Dmen don’t transition well. | They picked the right player. | Good draft by Brackett/Benning. The driving force behind the perception was the Virtanen pick. |
| Toffoli | Sent good futures without knowing they could secure TT. | Bubble teams aren’t this aggressive. | Toffoli walked. | Terrible asset management. |
| Tanev | They let him hang for the entire year. | Usually a vet asset like this is traded at the TDL. Or, signed to support deal. | Tanev walked after being told to wait. | Terrible asset management. |
| Markstrom | Usually one goalie is retained. JM needed to be traded earlier. | The older goalie is moved. | Markstrom walked for nothing while negotiations went to the wire. | Terrible all around. |
| Schmidt | Took advantage of a cap-strapped team chasing an FA. | Reminded of the Ehrhoff deal. Shrewd. | Schmidt traded for the same return 1 year later. | Probably fair overall in value, but still suspect asset wise. Schmidt was probably their best defender last year. |
| Trading 9th overall | Trades the 9th to fix his earlier errors. Then adopts someone else’s more egregious error. | Teams with terrible P% seldom trade top10 picks. | We’ll see. | TBD, but looks poor. |
[TBODY]
[/TBODY]
--------------------------------------------------------
On Benning's post 2017 work:
The post-2017 timeline is farce, but let's entertain it for a moment.
These are the questionable moves on Benning's ledger:
2017-18:
Signings:
Gudbranson -- 1 yr, $3.5 mil
Gagner -- 3 yrs, $3.15 mil per
Del Zotto -- 2 yrs, $3 mil per
Nilsson -- 2 yrs, $2.5 mil per
Gudbranson -- 3 yrs, $4 mil per
Other:
Tryamkin gone to KHL
2018-19:
Signings:
Granlund -- 1 yr, $1.475 mil
Pouliot -- 1 yr, $1.1 mil
Schaller -- 2 yrs, $1.9 mil per
Roussel -- 4 yrs, $3 mil per
Beagle -- 4 yrs, $3 mil per
Baertschi -- 3 yrs, $3,367 mil per
Trades:
Mazanec -- '20 7th
Spooner -- Gagner
Dahlen -- Karlsson
Other: Dowd gone for Beagle
2019-20:
Benn -- 2 yr, $2 mil per
Myers -- 5 yr, $6 mil per
Ferland — 4yr, $3.5 mil per
Pope -- Beiga
Toffoli -- Schaller, Madden, '20 2nd, Cond. '22 4th
Now if you're looking at that list and thinking 'I like most of what he's done here over that span', I'd love to hear the rationale.
Re-signed Gudbranson twice. Signed Myers to a terrible contract. Ferland has been a total dud. Del Zotto, Gagner, Beagle and even Roussel. Beartschi for 3.4m dollars per in the minors...
I could pick that list apart. For every move, I could provide better comparable signings or trades within the same time frame.
This is an imaginary timeline and these are the moves distinguished to be on the good side of the ledger. This is a good performance from Benning...? Well, then what is a bad performance from Benning exactly?
Transaction Record Reference:
Jim Benning Era Transaction Summary
