So now that you've got that off your chest, Bubbles, your thoughts regarding the 12 picks traded and the 9 picks acquired would be appreciated.Blob Mckenzie wrote:This is what happens when parents feed their babies paint chips and shoot whiskey into their veins. This post is awful.RoyalDude wrote:Traded Picks - 12Island Nucklehead wrote:Huh? Benning has acquired lots of picks in his time here. He just seems to send them out the door as fast as he acquires them.ukcanuck wrote: What you seem to be not taking into consideration is that the players Benning might have had to flip for extra 2/3/4th round picks were not wanted or tradable, most would have cleared waivers.
It has taken 3 years just to get to the point where we have a Hansen or a tanev to bring to the table without getting laughed out of the conversation.
He's acquired 9 draft picks since showing up. He's traded away 12.
7th round pick along with Garrison to Tampa - If that's what it takes to get rid of Big Boom Shot, then good riddance.
2nd rounder for Gudbranson - LOVE IT!
4th rounder for Gudbranson - LOVE IT!
5th for Prust - Thank You Montreal for relieving us of a Coke Head AHL'er Drunk that Gillis traded for with our 10th overall pick
2nd rounder to help get Sutter - LOVE IT!
3rd rounder for Dorsett - Getting good services out of him despite injury this season
3rd rounder to help unload Kesler and get Luca "More Goals, More Assists than Garrison" Sbisa and Bonino. LOVE IT!
3rd round pick for Pedan as well as relieving us of the AMAZING GILLIS 2nd rounder - Mallet. This one is not over yet
2nd round pick for Sven Baertschi - WINNNNN!
7th for some decent services of Etem - Nice
5th for Larsson - Whooopdie dooooo. Decent services. How often do you get decent services from a 5th round pick?
2nd round pick for Vey - Ya win some, ya lose some. He did this for his coach. Not uncommon
Acquired Picks (counting 9)
2nd round pick for Garrison - BRILLIANCE!
1st round pick for Kesler - BRILLIANCE! Hello Gudbranson!
3rd round pick for Kesler - BRILLIANCE!
3rd round pick for Lack - BRILLIANCE! Hello Brisebios
7th round pick for Lack - BRILLIANCE! Eddie "only 4 games played this season" Lack
7th round pick for McNally - Getting something for NOTHING! BRILLIANCE!
2nd round pick for Old Man Bieksa. BRILLIANCE! Hello Sutter
3rd round pick for Bonino. BRILLIANCE! Hello Lockwood
5th round pick for Gudbranson. BONUS! BRILLIANCE!
Overall? A MAJOR WIN FOR BENNING!
The Great Jim Benning Debate! (And personal insult thread)
Moderator: Referees
- Chef Boi RD
- MVP
- Posts: 10905
- Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 6:36 pm
- Location: Vancouver
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
Hey Trump, I’m ANTIFA.
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
if I remember correctly those were moves to restock an empty cupboard left behind by a decade of trying to win now.Island Nucklehead wrote:Huh? Benning has acquired lots of picks in his time here. He just seems to send them out the door as fast as he acquires them.ukcanuck wrote: What you seem to be not taking into consideration is that the players Benning might have had to flip for extra 2/3/4th round picks were not wanted or tradable, most would have cleared waivers.
It has taken 3 years just to get to the point where we have a Hansen or a tanev to bring to the table without getting laughed out of the conversation.
He's acquired 9 draft picks since showing up. He's traded away 12.
What I assumed you meant was that The Genius has not been a seller at the deadline and flipped roster pieces for Extra picks than get you a healthy environment to slot in a "generational talent" when and if it comes.
Im just saying going bubbles on benning for not getting something back for players at the deadline is to not admit that the club was old tired and worn out. The Fonz was correctomundo
-
- MVP
- Posts: 462
- Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 5:25 pm
- Location: New Westminster
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
So you have resiled from your position that Virtanen is actually (somehow) a Gillis pick ?RoyalDude wrote:I don't think Benning will have shot blanks in the first round of the 2014 entry draft.
- Blob Mckenzie
- MVP
- Posts: 9339
- Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
- Location: Oakalla
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
Ronning's Ghost wrote:So you have resiled from your position that Virtanen is actually (somehow) a Gillis pick ?RoyalDude wrote:I don't think Benning will have shot blanks in the first round of the 2014 entry draft.
Well yeah I mean Elmer threw the scouts a bone. GMs always throw bones like a 6th overall pick to scouts. I can see a 2nd or 3rd rounder being a bone but no way in hell a top 10 pick. Then again if Virtanen actually becomes a decent player it will be because Elmer chose him. These guys are special RG. Something tells me if they chose Ehlers, Nylander or Ritchie , that would definitely have not been a Gillis pick.
Last edited by Blob Mckenzie on Tue Feb 07, 2017 6:41 pm, edited 2 times in total.
“I don’t care what you and some other poster were talking about”
- Island Nucklehead
- MVP
- Posts: 1218
- Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 2:27 pm
- Location: Ottawa
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
You assumed wrong. I'm talking about Benning's incoherent strategy to make the playoffs, retool while remaining competitive transition avoid undertaking an obviously-required rebuild.ukcanuck wrote:if I remember correctly those were moves to restock an empty cupboard left behind by a decade of trying to win now.Island Nucklehead wrote:Huh? Benning has acquired lots of picks in his time here. He just seems to send them out the door as fast as he acquires them.ukcanuck wrote: What you seem to be not taking into consideration is that the players Benning might have had to flip for extra 2/3/4th round picks were not wanted or tradable, most would have cleared waivers.
It has taken 3 years just to get to the point where we have a Hansen or a tanev to bring to the table without getting laughed out of the conversation.
He's acquired 9 draft picks since showing up. He's traded away 12.
What I assumed you meant was that The Genius has not been a seller at the deadline and flipped roster pieces for Extra picks than get you a healthy environment to slot in a "generational talent" when and if it comes.
Im just saying going bubbles on benning for not getting something back for players at the deadline is to not admit that the club was old tired and worn out. The Fonz was correctomundo
- Cousin Strawberry
- MVP
- Posts: 8357
- Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:19 pm
- Location: in the shed with a fresh packed bowl
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
This is the heart of the debate i suppose. The hockey world (including quite a few fans) dont see whats happening here as forward momentum.Island Nucklehead wrote: You assumed wrong. I'm talking about Benning's incoherent strategy to make the playoffs, retool while remaining competitive transition avoid undertaking an obviously-required rebuild.
So who is right? Benning and his fans or pretty well the rest of the hockey world...time will tell
If you need air...call it in
-
- MVP
- Posts: 462
- Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 5:25 pm
- Location: New Westminster
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
You posted about the rest of the hockey world while I was composing my post. Sometimes I wonder if we are too close to the issue to have good perspective.Uncle dans leg wrote:This is the heart of the debate i suppose. The hockey world (including quite a few fans) dont see whats happening here as forward momentum.Island Nucklehead wrote: You assumed wrong. I'm talking about Benning's incoherent strategy to make the playoffs, retool while remaining competitive transition avoid undertaking an obviously-required rebuild.
So who is right? Benning and his fans or pretty well the rest of the hockey world...time will tell
Have any respected hockey minds around the league actually weighed in on the Canucks' ownership/management group and their course of action ? I don't mean some hack trying to generate clicks (http://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/106461 ... l-managers), but someone with real credibility, like Scotty Bowman or someone like that.
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
Well, since you want to count Hodgson being traded as Gillis giving away our 10th overall pick for Kassian, then you have to count McCann as part of the price for Gudbranson. So that means Gudbranson and a 5th, cost us a 1st, 2nd, and 4th round pick.RoyalDude wrote:Traded Picks - 12Island Nucklehead wrote:Huh? Benning has acquired lots of picks in his time here. He just seems to send them out the door as fast as he acquires them.ukcanuck wrote: What you seem to be not taking into consideration is that the players Benning might have had to flip for extra 2/3/4th round picks were not wanted or tradable, most would have cleared waivers.
It has taken 3 years just to get to the point where we have a Hansen or a tanev to bring to the table without getting laughed out of the conversation.
He's acquired 9 draft picks since showing up. He's traded away 12.
7th round pick along with Garrison to Tampa - If that's what it takes to get rid of Big Boom Shot, then good riddance.
2nd rounder for Gudbranson - LOVE IT!
4th rounder for Gudbranson - LOVE IT!
5th for Prust - Thank You Montreal for relieving us of a Coke Head AHL'er Drunk that Gillis traded for with our 10th overall pick
You old fact cherry-picker you.

Somewhere in NW BC trying (yet again) to trade a(nother) Swede…..
- Cousin Strawberry
- MVP
- Posts: 8357
- Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:19 pm
- Location: in the shed with a fresh packed bowl
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
Good point.Ronning's Ghost wrote:You posted about the rest of the hockey world while I was composing my post. Sometimes I wonder if we are too close to the issue to have good perspective.Uncle dans leg wrote:This is the heart of the debate i suppose. The hockey world (including quite a few fans) dont see whats happening here as forward momentum.Island Nucklehead wrote: You assumed wrong. I'm talking about Benning's incoherent strategy to make the playoffs, retool while remaining competitive transition avoid undertaking an obviously-required rebuild.
So who is right? Benning and his fans or pretty well the rest of the hockey world...time will tell
Have any respected hockey minds around the league actually weighed in on the Canucks' ownership/management group and their course of action ? I don't mean some hack trying to generate clicks (http://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/106461 ... l-managers), but someone with real credibility, like Scotty Bowman or someone like that.
Living in alberta i listen to both calgary 960 and 1260 in edmonton regularly. Occasionally they weigh in on our team and after the usual fan pandering about why they hate us they will delve into whats the issue in a fairly objective way....sometimes with half decent guests including former GMs and guys like Bob Mcakenzie and Ray Ferraro. Most will make sure they profess their respect for Benning and end it with faily candid critisism of what the hell is going on in vcr.
My impression is that the hockey world doesnt see much promise in whatever it is that Benning and Linden are doing.
The consensus is that the actual rebuild will inevitably happen after the Sedins are gone and the flailing attempts made to remain competitive right now are a total waste of time and seriously damaging Bennings reputation.
If you need air...call it in
- Chef Boi RD
- MVP
- Posts: 10905
- Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 6:36 pm
- Location: Vancouver
- Island Nucklehead
- MVP
- Posts: 1218
- Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 2:27 pm
- Location: Ottawa
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
Yep. This is the sense I get out this way as well. People are confused about the strategy, they note it hasn't worked most places it's been attempted. If the Sedins were in their early 30's it might have had a chance, but there's not enough youth coming fast enough, and management isn't interested in stockpiling assets for the future. Que dude crowing about Boesser and Gaudette as though other NHL teams don't have good prospects.Uncle dans leg wrote:
My impression is that the hockey world doesnt see much promise in whatever it is that Benning and Linden are doing.
The consensus is that the actual rebuild will inevitably happen after the Sedins are gone and the flailing attempts made to remain competitive right now are a total waste of time and seriously damaging Bennings reputation.
People blame the coach, but he's been handed easily one of the worst rosters in the league and told to make the playoffs. Mission: Impossible.
All the talk of competitiveness is a joke.
Last edited by Island Nucklehead on Wed Feb 08, 2017 7:08 am, edited 1 time in total.
- BingoTough
- CC Veteran
- Posts: 91
- Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 2:16 am
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
Fake news!Island Nucklehead wrote:Yep. This is the sense I get out this way as well. People are confused about the strategy, they note it hasn't worked most places it's been attempted, and that if the Sedins were in their early 30's it might have had a chance, but there's not enough youth coming fast enough, and management isn't interested in stockpiling assets for the future. Que dude crowing about Boesser and Gaudette as though other NHL teams don't have good prospects.Uncle dans leg wrote:
My impression is that the hockey world doesnt see much promise in whatever it is that Benning and Linden are doing.
The consensus is that the actual rebuild will inevitably happen after the Sedins are gone and the flailing attempts made to remain competitive right now are a total waste of time and seriously damaging Bennings reputation.
People blame the coach, but he's been handed easily one of the worst rosters in the league and told to make the playoffs. Mission: Impossible.
All the talk of competitiveness is a joke.
I'm inclined to agree, except WD is far from blameness. His deployment of the players he does have has been questioned a number of times. Feels like we're following in Calgary's footsteps.
- Blob Mckenzie
- MVP
- Posts: 9339
- Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
- Location: Oakalla
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
Elmer doesn't feel an urgent need to upgrade the young talent pool on the team of coming up through the system. He said there's more than enough young talent. He said that gem last week and Botchford reported it in the provies. You can't even make this shit up with this guy.
“I don’t care what you and some other poster were talking about”
- Chef Boi RD
- MVP
- Posts: 10905
- Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 6:36 pm
- Location: Vancouver
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
After the horrific collapsing of the pre-Benning Canucks by the lone Architect of it - Mike Gillis, a team Mike inherited so rich in potential thank you to the fine workings in the accumalation of exvellent young talented hockey players by the previous GMs, our new fearless leader - Benning, who inherited Mikes team, a team totally decimated of any quality and quantity in young talented players a team filled with only old men past their prime with untradeable contracts, how could one forsee this ship being righted over night?Blob Mckenzie wrote:Elmer doesn't feel an urgent need to upgrade the young talent pool on the team of coming up through the system. He said there's more than enough young talent. He said that gem last week and Botchford reported it in the provies. You can't even make this shit up with this guy.
Hey Trump, I’m ANTIFA.
- Blob Mckenzie
- MVP
- Posts: 9339
- Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
- Location: Oakalla
Re: The Great Jim Benning Debate!
As usual you missed the point. Elmer said the organization is chock full of young talent and doesn't need to add any more youngsters.
“I don’t care what you and some other poster were talking about”