The Great Jim Benning Debate! (And personal insult thread)

[Blob Mckenzie]

He's ahead of Hamhuis with Hutton catching up.

Have you watched a game sober this season?

I'm curious if the goggles are painted black.

Speaking of "painted black" if you ever want back on the bandwagon, you're sitting at the very back, brother.

Is that the Canucks bandwagon? I have always been on it Doctah.

If it's the Elmer Idiot wagon , well then it's true I've never been on that shitty rig.

[Strangelove]

Is that the Canucks bandwagon? I have always been on it Doctah.

If it's the Elmer Idiot wagon , well then it's true I've never been on that shitty rig.

You're talking mutiny and I'll have none of it.

NONE... do you hear?!!

[Topper]

Is that the Canucks bandwagon? I have always been on it Doctah.

If it's the Elmer Idiot wagon , well then it's true I've never been on that shitty rig.

You're talking mutiny and I'll have none of it.

NONE... do you hear?!!

Is there a bounty?

[Blob Mckenzie]

Is that the Canucks bandwagon? I have always been on it Doctah.

If it's the Elmer Idiot wagon , well then it's true I've never been on that shitty rig.

You're talking mutiny and I'll have none of it.

NONE... do you hear?!!

Is there a bounty?

Wow two of my oldest buddies ganging up on me. Feels like the Hatfields and the Mcoys. I call Devil Ance Hatfield

[Strangelove]

[Topper]

A year ago, the Kane Mutiny

Now Blobby on the Bounty

[Ronning's Ghost]

I think we can all agree (and this board being what it is, I’m certain I’ll find out if I’m wrong) that a GM deserves to be judged on the totality of his work, and that it takes several seasons to assess the quality of the overall trend his work produces. As corollary to that, I think most of us also agree that exactly how the 2016 Canucks are constituted or perform is not really important to arriving at any judgement of how well Benning is doing his job, which has never been to win the Cup in 2016. I also accept that sometimes a team has to get worse before it can get better.

One problem for the credibility of this management group is that they themselves deny this. By stating that it is important to make the playoffs every year, and not embarrass themselves once they get there, they create a short term goal (if, in my opinion, an irrelevant one) that they can be shown to have missed. Worse, they can be shown to have deviated from what they insist is an important part of the process. On the other hand, I have accepted that they do not necessarily have the option of saying what they mean all the time, and so transparency is not something the fan base can really expect.

My questions, then, for the forum on Jim Benning’s performance, are what are the reasonable criteria for success, and more especially, on what schedule ? Obviously, winning the Stanley Cup counts as success. As a possible reasonable alternative, some posters have emphasized the degree of luck involved in winning a Cup, and might allow that a several dominant regular seasons that ended in deep playoffs runs should also count as success, in that the formula for winning the Cup was would appear to have been in place, but perhaps the team did not just get the necessary breaks.

By either standard of success, what is a reasonable timetable for this management group to achieve it with this team ? Benning has said it will take four years. If the Canucks win the Stanley Cup in any of 2018, 2019, or 2020, I will enthusiastically agree that Jim Benning is a brilliant GM, eminently worthy of the title ‘hockey genius’. But what if they don’t ? What if the Canucks’ performance declines during that period ? Would that make Blob right ? If not, what Canuck performance level, over what period, would have current Benning advocates change their respective positions to align with Blob’s ?

Topper has alluded that it is not entirely balanced to assess Benning’s performance without assessing Linden’s. Beyond the fact that Linden hired Benning, I don’t know enough about how that management team functions to guess where Benning’s influence stops and Linden’s starts. I believe that traditionally, GM’s are usually allotted 2 coach hirings in their tenure before they are written off as unsuccessful. For example, Gillis was given the opportunity to replace Vigneault (however free or constrained his options may have been) before he was dismissed. I would apply an extension of the same principle, and say that if Benning does not succeed, Linden deserves one more GM hiring before any assessment is attempted of his quality as a hockey executive.

For my own part, I am skeptical of what I have seen from this management group so far, but, in keeping with my first paragraph, I also think it’s too early to make an evaluation. This is not what I thought the road to a Stanley Cup would look like, but I also accept that the described route might not be the same as the planned route, and the people planning the route may understand more about what is necessary, and what is possible, in this process than I do.

[Mickey107]

That's a lot to think about! Problem is, "How involved is ownership?" My guess would be TONS..

[Cousin Strawberry]

A year ago, the Kane Mutiny

Now Blobby on the Bounty

I'm already popeye...

[Topper]

A year ago, the Kane Mutiny

Now Blobby on the Bounty

I'm already popeye...

Years ago a friend thought he had pink eye, turned out to be chlamydia. He considered it a badge of honour.

[2Fingers]

RG - good post.

it is not 1 thing done right/wrong but it is a string of rights/wrongs that defines a GM timeline.

My biggest beef is still a) the lack of movement at the TDD and b) the contracts given out to some players.

a) yes it takes 2 GM to make a deal and I do not understand how Hamhuis could not have garnered a 2nd round pick leading up to TDD. Due to his injury I am ok with giving a pass to JB on this one.

b) yes yes yes I know that these contracts come off and they are short term BUT it does set a precedence for future "like" players that any good player agent will demand the same $$$. If any of you are naïve to think that it doesn't then obviously you have never negotiated a contract. You use any tool to determine the value of you commodity and the agent will say - you signed Sbisa at XX dollars my player is equivalent so he demands the same amount of money.

[Cousin Strawberry]

A year ago, the Kane Mutiny

Now Blobby on the Bounty

I'm already popeye...

Years ago a friend thought he had pink eye, turned out to be chlamydia. He considered it a badge of honour.

He must've had a splashing good time while eating at the Y to land that prize...

[Ronning's Ghost]

RG - good post.

Thank you Reefer.

it is not 1 thing done right/wrong but it is a string of rights/wrongs that defines a GM timeline.

I would say that, outside of the eventual success of a given draft pick relative to draft position, most fans don't have enough information to judge the quality of individual moves because we don't know all the circumstances that surround them. Consider how much more sensible the Kassian trade seemed after the substance abuse issues came out.

What we are entirely qualified and entitled to judge, though, is how well we like the final product. So, given where he started, how long into Jim Benning's tenure before you think it's fair to say whether you like or do not like the direction in which he has taken the team ?

Problem is, "How involved is ownership?" My guess would be TONS..

If that's true, the Canucks are potentially in as tough a position as the Ballard-era leaves, or (if the rumors about the decision to draft Nail Yakupov being ownership-driven are true) the current Oilers. In such a case, I can't imagine the dose of Doc's kool-aid necessary to restore hope.

[Mickey107]

If Arthor G could have hung on as owner, I think we would have had 1 or 2 cups by now.
Orca interfered with everything, including drafting. Quinn went through hell with them!
Benning will be O.K. and be able to swing his magic if he gets a good relationship with the Aquillinis without having to go through Trevor for everything.
I think most owners or ownership groups, the latter being a very bad thing, are pretty involved, it's their money.
The trick is to have a healthy process so it looks like they're invisible.
If Jim Benning hits a home run, or even a solid triple under the watchful eyes above, he'll be good to go moving forward...

[ESQ]

This is not what I thought the road to a Stanley Cup would look like, but I also accept that the described route might not be the same as the planned route, and the people planning the route may understand more about what is necessary, and what is possible, in this process than I do.

This is about the route I expected. This town can't handle a full tank, certainly not to the extent Chicago, LA, Pittsburgh went through.

When Linden said the goal is to make the playoffs, I expected them to alternate post-season with no post-season, as they did in the mid-2000s transition from the WCE era. The last time they transitioned though, the new core were already in their mid-20s and entering their prime years, hardly any rookies were breaking through.

If the Canucks can make the playoffs next year with Pedan, Hutton, Tryamkin, Horvat, McCann, Virtanen, Gaunce, Vey, Etem, Larsen and Granlund on the roster, that would probably make them the youngest team in the post-season. That will be almost half the roster under 25, and a third under 22.

What's most shocking about that projected roster is that only three Gillis-made picks from his 6 drafts. That says a lot about why the transition is in the shape its in.