The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Welcome to the main forum of our site. Anything and everything to do with the Vancouver Canucks is dicussed and debated here.

Moderator: Referees

User avatar
Hockey Widow
CC Legend
Posts: 12634
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Post by Hockey Widow » Sun Jul 01, 2018 5:52 pm

Blob Mckenzie wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 5:49 pm
Hockey Widow wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 5:38 pm
Blob Mckenzie wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 5:31 pm
Hockey Widow wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 5:27 pm
Blob Mckenzie wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 5:24 pm
The six picks he puked away
As opposed to the ten picks he acquired?
12 out and 10 in. Do you know of another rebuild in recent history where the rebuilding team trades more picks than they acquire. Let’s not forget one pick was a gift from the league
Calgary, off the top of my head.
How’s that working out for them? They are in marginally better shape than Vancouver

You win Blob. I bow to your wisdom and managerial abilities. I think I’ll step back from the whole Benning debate. Hopefully that debate can be kept in one thread from now on. Makes it much easier to ignore.
The only HW the Canucks need

User avatar
Blob Mckenzie
CC Legend
Posts: 10052
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Post by Blob Mckenzie » Sun Jul 01, 2018 6:01 pm

Wids it isn’t that I need to win. Fact is myself and a few others, usually you as well debate the moves one by one. Some we like , some we don’t. There is a crew here with a massive agenda that thinks EVERY move Jet Black makes is amazing. I’m ok with the signings as long as some driftwood is swiftly cleaned up. You can’t wait for very long to move out those slugs because a few teams have the same issue.

Today was ok. It isn’t as bad as hfboards makes it out to be and it isn’t as good as Doc and his puppets make it out to be. It’s somewhere in the middle. They still have to purge.

Here’s a question for you. Would you rather have two of Pat Maroon, James Neal or David Perron? Not saying it was possible but they are vets and two of them would be similar to the combined cost of the 4th line brigade Elmer signed up
TELL ME HOW MY ASS TASTES

Hank
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1958
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 2:33 pm

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Post by Hank » Sun Jul 01, 2018 6:59 pm

Blob Mckenzie wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 6:01 pm

Here’s a question for you. Would you rather have two of Pat Maroon, James Neal or David Perron? Not saying it was possible but they are vets and two of them would be similar to the combined cost of the 4th line brigade Elmer signed up
Then where would your youngsters play? These are exactly the type of vets you don't want for a rebuilding team even if they were willing to come. They would want money, term and even more protection so you can't just dump them anywhere you want. <Cough, Edmonton>

They would only be interested in their own interests. At least, the brigade would protect our important pieces. They wouldn't be in the way of our best assets but could fill in until they're ready. Isn't this the whole point now?

Are you saying Beagle's resume wouldn't be good in a mentorship/leadership role here? Or a Dorsett-like player like Roussel wouldn't embolden the team? Would Archibald, Gaunce, the Megnas & Chaputs of the world help develop EP, Brock, Hughes, etc. to their full potential? I don't think so.

I'm sure contending teams would line up for players of this ilk if it doesn't work out here for them anymore. The limited protection wouldn't matter much by then. Also expansion.
Try to focus on 1 year from now...

User avatar
RoyalDude
CC Legend
Posts: 11192
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 6:36 pm
Location: Vancouver

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Post by RoyalDude » Sun Jul 01, 2018 7:16 pm

Blub is talking out of his ass again, all we need now is the Berryman to tell us how it tastes. Perron, Neal, Maroon??? Blub the comedy is killing me.
"I just want to say one word to you. Just one word. Are you listening? - Plastics." - The Graduate

User avatar
Blob Mckenzie
CC Legend
Posts: 10052
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Post by Blob Mckenzie » Sun Jul 01, 2018 7:22 pm

RoyalDude wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 7:16 pm
Blub is talking out of his ass again, all we need now is the Berryman to tell us how it tastes. Perron, Neal, Maroon??? Blub the comedy is killing me.
Another weak post.. you off to the Astoria tonight?
TELL ME HOW MY ASS TASTES

Hank
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1958
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 2:33 pm

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Post by Hank » Sun Jul 01, 2018 7:23 pm

If Roussel wasn't available, maybe Komarov would have been a good pickup? 19 pts last year, same term and money. Market value.

And Beagle getting more than Riley Nash? Simply pedigree. Plus Nash has only had one proven good year.
Try to focus on 1 year from now...

User avatar
Blob Mckenzie
CC Legend
Posts: 10052
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Post by Blob Mckenzie » Sun Jul 01, 2018 7:27 pm

RoyalDude wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 7:16 pm
Blub is talking out of his ass again, all we need now is the Berryman to tell us how it tastes. Perron, Neal, Maroon??? Blub the comedy is killing me.
You off to the American tonight ? Maybe a show at the Leopold hotel?

I’m hopping the train to try some craft beers at Port Moody and listening to the tunes of Barney Bentall and the Legendary Hearts
TELL ME HOW MY ASS TASTES

Hank
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1958
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 2:33 pm

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Post by Hank » Sun Jul 01, 2018 7:33 pm

Barney Bentall & the Legendary Hearts, 54-40, The Odds... I've always liked some of these local bands that made it (somewhat) big.
Try to focus on 1 year from now...

User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 16596
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Post by Strangelove » Sun Jul 01, 2018 7:36 pm

Hockey Widow wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 5:52 pm
You win Blob. I bow to your wisdom and managerial abilities. I think I’ll step back from the whole Benning debate. Hopefully that debate can be kept in one thread from now on. Makes it much easier to ignore.
And he does it without watching the games! :lol:
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!

User avatar
Meds
CC Legend
Posts: 5817
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Post by Meds » Sun Jul 01, 2018 7:40 pm

Blob Mckenzie wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 6:01 pm
Here’s a question for you. Would you rather have two of Pat Maroon, James Neal or David Perron? Not saying it was possible but they are vets and two of them would be similar to the combined cost of the 4th line brigade Elmer signed up
Didn't James Neal leave Vegas because he wanted more than the $5M he was making last year? He probably also wants more term than they were willing to give. Neal only scored 44 points, some big goals at times, but 44 points is not worth that kind of cash and term.

Perron just got $4M for 4 years.

Neal and Perron would probably have cost us $10M combined for the same term. Both would be welcome additions to the team, but in the case of Perron I don't know that you get the tenacious compete level and leadership that Benning is looking for. I would personally prefer him to Roussel though.

User avatar
RoyalDude
CC Legend
Posts: 11192
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 6:36 pm
Location: Vancouver

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Post by RoyalDude » Sun Jul 01, 2018 7:55 pm

Hank wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 7:23 pm
If Roussel wasn't available, maybe Komarov would have been a good pickup? 19 pts last year, same term and money. Market value.

And Beagle getting more than Riley Nash? Simply pedigree. Plus Nash has only had one proven good year.
Vancouver is not the most desirable place to play right now, one time it was, that’s no more, the weather, its a rebuild, playing under a microscope, Canadian dollar, media attention and a frenzied fan base, expensive city to live in, etc.

We have no idea what went on behind the scenes, players will take less to play where they want to. The Canucks aren’t exactly Shangrila right now. I believe the premium we paid priced that.

It’s July 1st, crazy money season, you want to play? Buck up or shut up
"I just want to say one word to you. Just one word. Are you listening? - Plastics." - The Graduate

User avatar
Hockey Widow
CC Legend
Posts: 12634
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Post by Hockey Widow » Sun Jul 01, 2018 8:22 pm

Blob Mckenzie wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 6:01 pm
Wids it isn’t that I need to win. Fact is myself and a few others, usually you as well debate the moves one by one. Some we like , some we don’t. There is a crew here with a massive agenda that thinks EVERY move Jet Black makes is amazing. I’m ok with the signings as long as some driftwood is swiftly cleaned up. You can’t wait for very long to move out those slugs because a few teams have the same issue.

Today was ok. It isn’t as bad as hfboards makes it out to be and it isn’t as good as Doc and his puppets make it out to be. It’s somewhere in the middle. They still have to purge.

Here’s a question for you. Would you rather have two of Pat Maroon, James Neal or David Perron? Not saying it was possible but they are vets and two of them would be similar to the combined cost of the 4th line brigade Elmer signed up
See that’s the point. Would you rather have “x” does imply “x” was possible. And the players you mention would take top six roles, except Maroon, which goes against let the kids play.

Yes, they still have to purge and I’m hoping Benning can grab some picks.
The only HW the Canucks need

User avatar
sagebrush
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 930
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 12:36 pm
Location: around the bend

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Post by sagebrush » Thu Jul 05, 2018 11:07 am

An interesting article that summarizes & investigates what many have been thinking ...

Barring trades, there won’t be much competition at Canucks training camp.
"We do have to be careful with what we do this summer,” said Trevor Linden a few months ago. “We're okay with being young next year. We're going to be extremely young, we know that.”
The Canucks’ actions on July 1st seemed to bely his words, as they added three older veterans that will prevent the team from getting “extremely” young.
Jim Benning claimed that the message his players were meant to get from these signings is that the competition is on.
Some might argue that Beagle, Roussel, and Schaller will play in the bottom-six, where the Canucks’ youth won’t play. It’s a baffling argument; who says that young players can’t play on the third and fourth lines?
Unless the Canucks make some trades this summer, there won’t really be any spots to battle for in training camp, as roster decisions could come down to who’s waiver eligible and who isn’t, rather than merit.
Sure, there will be injuries, and players will get called up, but for players hoping to make the team out of training camp, the Canucks’ free agent signings didn’t say “We want competition at camp,” but “You can’t make these roster spots out of camp.”
Are these moves (Beagel, Roussel, Schaller) the mark of a genius, as some here would say?

Is Trevor Linden more than a shill, purchased for the value of his good will with the fans?

User avatar
Reefer2
MVP
MVP
Posts: 3517
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 8:47 am

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Post by Reefer2 » Thu Jul 05, 2018 12:09 pm

IMO - these 3 new guys are not barring young guys from playing on the team on any line. I do not assume young guys will be brought in to be piss and vinegar, very few can do that. Right now I do not see any prospect that would fit that role.

User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 16596
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!

Post by Strangelove » Thu Jul 05, 2018 5:19 pm

Reefer2 wrote:
Thu Jul 05, 2018 12:09 pm
IMO - these 3 new guys are not barring young guys from playing on the team on any line. I do not assume young guys will be brought in to be piss and vinegar, very few can do that. Right now I do not see any prospect that would fit that role.
Good call Reef, obviously you understand Canucks' present situation a lot better than that schmuck eastern writer.

I like where he assumes in July that "roster decisions could come down to who’s waiver eligible and who isn’t, rather than merit."

Wot a schmuck amirite?
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!

Post Reply