The Management Thread | We live Page to Page here

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

I was responding to a post that included 2016

The Sedin's played until 17/18 and the team's goal never changed with them

This is what you said...
"Feel free to provide any evidence that the Canucks weren't trying to make the playoffs and win a cup during Benning's entire tenure"

and I provided you with with two years...Every teams goal is to make the playoffs (they have to say that every year)..but that last Sedin year, and the following year, there are no moves to suggest they were seriously going for a playoff push.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

In what world did Sutter/Roussel/Eriksson/Beagle/etc help our young stars "develop faster". The much talked about "3 straight Calder" guys came and were instant stars. Maybe if you consider forcing Bo to become a matchup C due to ineptitude of these "mentors" and the coaching staff.

Beagle and Roussel were specifically brought in to be mentors.(as there was a void of veteran leadership after the Sedins left)...How do you know they had no impact in the dressing room..?

 

[Intangibos]

Beagle and Roussel were specifically brought in to be mentors.(as there was a void of veteran leadership after the Sedins left)...How do you know they had no impact in the dressing room..?

Because it's f***ing stupid. They had an impact in wasting cap space which made us lose Tanev and Toffoli which we know had an impact in the dressing room.

 

[AwesomeInTheory]

This has been utterly hilarious.

 

[Cornwallace]

I specifically said those two years...Gudbranson and Eriksson were traded to reinforce the playoff push for the Sedins (signalled before Benning even got here)..That was the 'rebuild on the fly' years...2014-17.

There's nothing to suggest were really serious about making a playoff push in 2017-18, or 2018-19.

I'd disagree, Benning just wasn't really in a position to go big game hunting.

While the signings didn't really work out they picked up players like Del Zotto, Gagner, Vanek, Schaller, and Roussel.

Benning has made it clear that he believes you just need to make the playoffs to have a chance at the cup. In my opinion the moves he made were in an attempt to get into the playoffs and thus by his own standards an attempt at the cup.

 

[geebaan]

Would you trade Tampa’s management for ours? Mostly a question for the Benning bros. If you say it’s not about him let’s test the theory.

 

[Jyrki21]

Today I learned that 34% basically is the same as 11%.

Mathematics is fun!

Every draft pick either makes it or they don't, so 1 of 2 = 50%

 

[Pavel96]

This has been utterly hilarious.

It really has. It's as if the level of stupidity of Jim's moves is directly proportional to the level of effort that the 24/7, transparent shilling exudes. And at this point, I find both to be quite entertaining.

 

[arttk]

Beagle and Roussel were specifically brought in to be mentors.(as there was a void of veteran leadership after the Sedins left)...How do you know they had no impact in the dressing room..?

Look at last year when the whole dressing room was rattled. How could that happen when all the “stabilizing” mentors were still on the team.

 

[Catamarca Livin]

What Would constitute for success around here? I think it would honeslty help discussion if we got that outta the way. The (im guessing) wildly different expectations for success seem to cause a lot of argument.

Personally if we dont make the final 4 or bottom 5 then i would feel this season is a failure. Thats just me though.

Final 8 success! Top 3 division success. Failure missed playoffs. Bottom 5 would be a disaster.

 

[F A N]

Would you trade Tampa’s management for ours? Mostly a question for the Benning bros. If you say it’s not about him let’s test the theory.

I don’t think a yes or no answer proves what you think it does. I would trade Petey for McDavid and I love Petey and support locking him up long term.

 

[AwesomeInTheory]

It really has. It's as if the level of stupidity of Jim's moves is directly proportional to the level of effort that the 24/7, transparent shilling exudes. And at this point, I find both to be quite entertaining.

I honestly thought that there was discussion to be had, but things have just gotten more and more demented.

 

[Melvin]

Are you sure you want anyone looking at the 2916 draft?

those guys are only -2900 years old right now. The future is bright.

 

[BrentSopelsHair]

One pick of 32, has a 34% chance.
That's about 1% chance.

Math is fun, trust me

This is truly elite posting, no notes to give

 

[racerjoe]

Today I learned that 34% basically is the same as 11%.

Mathematics is fun!

if I could go back to high school and convince my teachers of this I might have gotten a better grade….

 

[AwesomeInTheory]

It’s like Steiner math, but real.

 

[Melvin]

Sometimes I kinda wish I could see the posts you guys are seeing. Not really, but kinda. I feel like reading these posts can’t be good for your brains.

 

[LickTheEnvelope]

I have to think that Barbashev's 2 years, 2.25 mil is going to be the basis for the Dickinson contract.

Dickinson average a couple more mins a game but their stats are comparable.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

I'd disagree, Benning just wasn't really in a position to go big game hunting.

While the signings didn't really work out they picked up players like Del Zotto, Gagner, Vanek, Schaller, and Roussel.

Benning has made it clear that he believes you just need to make the playoffs to have a chance at the cup. In my opinion the moves he made were in an attempt to get into the playoffs and thus by his own standards an attempt at the cup.

Del Zotto,,Vanek and Schaller were just placeholders...bottom of the barrel UFA signings to fill out the roster, and have a reason for people to buy a ticket, and watch a competitive team..None of these players moved the needle...There was nothing to suggest they were 'going for it'.

Gagner was just an all round bad signing,..Roussel was signed (along with Beagle) as a mentor for the young core players.

Its your opinion that these were players were going to get the Canucks into the playoffs, but in reality..the team was in a holding position until the cavalry (Boeser,Hughes,Petterson) arrived.


Eriksson was signed in 2016, the next impact UFA player was signed 3 years later (Myers) , when Benning indeed 'went all in'.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Because it's f***ing stupid. They had an impact in wasting cap space which made us lose Tanev and Toffoli which we know had an impact in the dressing room.

Yes..they were signed to too much term..There's no argument from me on that.

 

[SamInVan]

Jim Benning's record speaks for itself.

The past 6 seasons:
.446
.565
.494
.445
.421
.457

The exact same team or the past 6 years.

There is no defending this.

Benning gots to go....asap.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Jim Benning's record speaks for itself.

The past 6 seasons:
.446
.565
.494
.445
.421
.457

The exact same team or the past 6 years.

There is no defending this.

Benning gots to go....asap.

When you're transitioning from an old core to a new one..there's usually a considerable amount of losing involved..

Look at DET,OTT,NJD,LAK..

 

[J Corso]

I'm having flashbacks to my brother who insisted that the odds of winning the 6/49 lottery are 50/50 because you either win the prize or you don't.

 

[Intangibos]

Yes..they were signed to too much term..There's no argument from me on that.

But you understand this is the issue, right? It was too much term, too much money, and they were the wrong players to target. Every bad player we bring in for "off-ice leadership" is a downgrade of our on-ice product.

Christ hire some athletes from other sports as consultants or something if it's such a problem for our players to see what it's like to be a professional athlete without the help of people like Beagle or Roussel. Want someone who has "been there" and won the cup? There are plenty of retired players that can come in and give motivational speeches or whatever you seem to think will help, they don't need to take the odd shift where they get hemmed in their own zone to teach the other players some abstract lesson on keeping their legs moving.

How does having these losers on our roster help our team? Posters like you always say "veteran leadership", but they're a liability on the ice, create worse matchups for our young players, cause roster problems where we lose actual contributing players, and nobody has ever told me why this so called veteran leadership has to include an on-ice presence that is almost always underwhelming instead of just giving some former champ some assistant coach role.

In a cap world, you need to spend as much of that cap as possible on players that are actually good at hockey.

 

[Mr. Canucklehead]

Alright everyone, enough dunking on the guy. Moving on.