Around the league (signings, RFAs injuries)

[Ronning's Ghost]

Benning's model.
Well let's see. He has said that to win Championships you need:

Some of this may sound argumentative, so let me begin by saying thank you, this is exactly the kind of information I was looking for, and appreciate your engaging me in this way.
It seems to me that what you have provided gives us two things to talk about: his model, and his execution of the model to date.

A true number on D man. He is on record of trying somehow to get one in Vancouver and all things being equal he will draft a D man in the first round, but will always take the BPA. This is not an easy task to accomplish but he recognizes the need.

Model: This is a widely held position, and one for which there is some evidence.
Execution: OK, let’s call this one “pending”. However, if he is going to acquire this player through the draft, and Canucks are going to win the Cup in 2018, whoever he drafts is going to have to develop very quickly.

He has said you need a true number one goaltender. He signed Miller. Rightly or wrongly, he wanted a proven number one.

Model: I think there have been a few championship teams that have had no better than competent goaltending, but I certainly agree that great goaltending is highly valuable, if you can get it.
Execution: Signed Miller, but more importantly – since no one is predicting the Canucks to win the Cup for the duration of Miller’s contract – drafted Demko. We can call this one “on target”.

He has said you need to be big, strong, tough down the middle. Still looking to get that in the line up. But he has Horvat going, he added Sutter and Granlund. Far from where we need to be in this regard but he's working on it.

Model: not a controversial position
Execution: He has also acquired Vey and McCann, who also do not fit this model. Really, neither do Granlund and Sutter (195 lbs. is not big by the standards of NHL centres). He is following a circuitous route, and these are assets to be flipped later ? Then why the NTC for Sutter ? Not only are the Canucks far from where Benning thinks they need to be, nothing he has done so far (that I know about) has moved them any closer.

He has said you need the right combination of youth, size, speed and veteran presence. For the most part he is drafting big dudes. But he has drafted a few smaller skilled type players.

There's not enough information content here to analyse. What is the “right combination” ?

He has said he wants to be a tough hard team to play against.

This probably an example of where I need more knowledgeable fans to interpret the hockey euphemisms. Does this mean take more penalties ? Have more instigators ? More rats ? More enforcers ? Or is he just expressing a preference for body checks over stick checks, or maybe the need for a commitment to disciplined team defence ?

Said he wants players that want to compete every night. Character players that play for each other.

More code. Does “character” mean no drug addicts ? No rats ? Players who play by “the code” ? No (deep breath, Doc) assholes ? Good in the community ?

Would it help if he said I want to follow the Boston model. Or I want to follow the LA model. Seems to me those are the closest comparables I can think of in terms of what type of team he wants to build.

Actually, as I said, this really has helped improve my understanding of (at the very least your interpretation of) Benning's model. Benning himself has denied any plans to follow the Boston model, but I can understand where a new GM coming to Vancouver might be reluctant to express a preference for the way things were done in Boston. But if reading between the lines shows you that’s what he really wants, I appreciate your sharing that.

I still really don't understand what it is you don't understand. Is he supposed to stand up and say:

A version of what you wrote that he might actually say (or his advocates might say on his behalf) might go:

I Jim Benning believe in the Boston or LA model. Therefore I will target players with the following attributes, that I believe are missing from the organization. [One helpful poster offered “Young fast, skilled…with a degree of toughness”. I found your descriptions of “a true number one Dman” and “big, strong, and tough” down the middle more helpful in their greater specificity, but which is truly Benning’s greater priority ? To try to be more fair to this point, he has specified players in their early 20s, and he has gone and acquired some.] We will get players of position Q with attributes W through the draft, and fill in players of type Z through free agency. [Press: “Do you mean a player like Lucic ?” Mr. Benning: “that is/is not an example of a kind of player I think Vancouver needs”.]

There really isn't a magic formula. It's trying to develop depth and consistency. To win the cup a lot of things have to go right. Luck, injuries, other teams play…. Fact is he is no different from 29 other GMs. I think they all have a similar vision. Some are better at drafting. Some are better making trades. Some get incredibly lucky with draft position. Some organizations are better at developing.

You need to be competitive to start.... Hockey is really about process and the play of the whole team. Once competitive then you can start trying to pick up the last piece or two that puts you over the top. But luck has a lot to do with it.

Here we come to the crux of the matter. With time to reflect, I think the better way to express what I was trying to ask might have been: “Could the Benning apostles explain to me why the Canucks are going to win the Stanley Cup in 2018 (and/or 2019, 2020, etc.) while actively trying to avoid drafting in the top five in the mean time ? Specifically, what competitive advantage will they hold over their rivals, and how will they have achieved this ? In particular, what will Benning have done better than, or differently from, his competitors that will confer this advantage.

If I understand your answer correctly, you believe that there is no such advantage to be had, and the Canucks will have – at best – the same chance as anyone else. This kool-aid is not so sweet.

[Ronning's Ghost]

I'd say in any model, the Sedins are an asset.

To be clear, I agree that the Sedins have been, and to only a slightly diminished degree, remain, great hockey assets. However, they do not seem to fit the Benning model, as HW has graciously explained it to me.

As an aside, I've been saying from Day One (lo these many years) that with the Sedins

... Canucks need to focus on surrounding them with speed + toughness.

Perhaps the Strangelove model is superior, or at least better articulated.

[5thhorseman]

Don't get so worked up analysing everything RG. There's no evidence that Benning was a genius in his previous roles and it will be a few years yet before we know the results of his work here. All his draft picks look great, but that's because they are so recent.

The "Benning is a genius" crowd here is just trying to be first on the bandwagon so that in a few years or a decade from now they can pull out a quote and say "told you so, knew it all along" and one-up the next poser, er, I mean poster.

[Ronning's Ghost]

Don't get so worked up analysing everything RG.

Well, you see



and I was hoping some of the posters here could offer some reasons.

Looks like I will have to derive my own kool-aid formulation, though.

[Strangelove]

Malkin to miss 6-8 weeks with an upper-body injury.

GREAT, there's a chance the Pens miss the playoffs now

... in which case the Leaves would get their 2nd round pick (~40th) rather than their 1st rounder (~15th?).

But then I might be a tad obsessive in my hatred of the Leaves.

[Strangelove]

Ding ding ding!!! Winner winner chicken dinner. Most salient points of the entire thread. Benning had a ghastly trade deadline and the fact that some people can't admit that shows their true troll colours .

http://www.canuckscorner.com/forums/vie ... 46#p253846

Time to see a good neurosurgeon Blobert.

[Strangelove]

The "Benning is a genius" crowd here is just trying to be first on the bandwagon so that in a few years or a decade from now they can pull out a quote and say "told you so, knew it all along" and one-up the next poser, er, I mean poster.

OR... they actually believe Benning to be one of the very best in the business.

OR... they're offering up a cure for the "Benning is an Idiot" hysteria of 2015-16.

I mean who the fuck knows eh Horsey.

[Strangelove]

Don't get so worked up analysing everything RG.

Well, you see

I WANT TO BELIEVE

and I was hoping some of the posters here could offer some reasons.

Looks like I will have to derive my own kool-aid formulation, though.

Just believe Cliffy.

[SKYO]

Canucks Corner just keeping it real 5th horseman.

This whole new draft and develop, while also acquiring a few youngsters for picks to blast the youth movement forward, is a technique no one is used to around here in ohhh about never.

[Topper]

aaaaahhhh Skyo, good point. Remember the good old days when second and third round picks were used for veteran reclamation projects instead of rookie/sophomore reclamation projects?

[Topper]

letting an asset like Hamhuis walk away for nothing is piss-poor asset management

Firstly, how's about waiting until a thing actually happens before urinating mmmmkay?

Secondly, pretty tough to trade an old vet who will only waive for 2 teams.

Thirdly, "assets" often make it to UFAgency (or are you criticizing every GM in sports?)

Fouthly, aren't you one of the guys who doesn't want Mr Hometown Discount back?

(if so, how much of an "asset" is he really in your eyes)

Eric Staal was having a terrible season, waived to only 1 team, and got a couple second-rounders in return. And sure guys make it to free agency all the time, smart managers try to maximize their value by getting cap space AND assets in return. Just because I don't want a guy to re-sign doesn't mean he doesn't have value to other teams. Give your head a shake.

Anyways, this is the kind of blind, absurdly pro-Benning nonsense that people are referring to, Doc. If you can't even entertain the notion that Vancouver had a disappointing trade deadline we're really so far apart it's not worth discussing much with you.

Ding ding ding!!! Winner winner chicken dinner. Most salient points of the entire thread. Benning had a ghastly trade deadline and the fact that some people can't admit that shows their true troll colours .

You would have made a trade for making a trade's sake. You would have accepted the garbage offer late in the day. You like being bent backwards over the bike.

[Chef Boi RD]

aaaaahhhh Skyo, good point. Remember the good old days when second and third round picks were used for veteran reclamation projects instead of rookie/sophomore reclamation projects?

The Gillis Special. That and offering his good buddy - Old man with one good leg - 36 year old Matts Sundn a $20 million dollar contract.

[5thhorseman]

The "Benning is a genius" crowd here is just trying to be first on the bandwagon so that in a few years or a decade from now they can pull out a quote and say "told you so, knew it all along" and one-up the next poser, er, I mean poster.

OR... they actually believe Benning to be one of the very best in the business.

OR... they're offering up a cure for the "Benning is an Idiot" hysteria of 2015-16.

I mean who the fuck knows eh Horsey.

Yep, sounds like blind faith to me.

[Tciso]

aaaaahhhh Skyo, good point. Remember the good old days when second and third round picks were used for veteran reclamation projects instead of rookie/sophomore reclamation projects?

The Gillis Special. That and offering his good buddy - Old man with one good leg - 36 year old Matts Sundn a $20 million dollar contract.

He's batting .500 so far. Baertchi is a success, and a top 6 player. Vey is still ok for bottom 6, and power play. Etem (traded for Jensen, so not technically a pick) is only so-so. And, Granlund is still up for debate. Those are still better odds than a 2nd or 3rd round pick.

[Topper]

Those are still better odds than a 2nd or 3rd round pick.

chx dinner