You realize when you get hired for any job on earth, you can't just go in and completely do whatever the (frank) you want right? On day one after getting hired, you don't have the free-reign to tell your boss/owner of the company, "hey dude, you've been doing a sh^t job for the last x amount of years, so i'm gonna go ahead and completely tear this (frank)er down and build it back up my way." That's not how business/reality operates.
Like in every job on the planet, he still has to follow orders. So coming in and blaming him for not taking the club in the direction that you wanted it, its kinda insane. In reality, the kinda changes you expected him to make are not that simple. He, like everyone else that's been hired for a job, doesn't want to get fired, and i'm sure has to follow some sort of mandate. So for example,on day 3, he comes into work and goes, its pump and dumps from here on out a$$holes, or I'm trading the Sedins! I'm pretty (frank)ing well sure, he gets poop canned, for even suggesting that.

And here's a list of the trades he's made, its really not that bad. I'm not saying he's a great GM, but I'm not gonna sit here and pretend I could've done a better job.

https://thecanuckway.com/...im-benning-trade-history/
- Brooks_Light

I'm well aware that he has a president and owner to answer to. I don't really care who's choice it was to go in that direction, my original post was simply stating that that direction set back this team a few years and it was a stupid one with little or maybe mid-range upside and plenty of downside.

Where in my post did I say that he should have came in and traded all the vets? I simply stated that they should have used the sign and flip strategy way back then instead of throwing away picks/prospects for other team's prospects. Prospects that those teams deemed expendable and prospects who couldn't crack those team's rosters. Kind of like the same way everyone applauds Benning for doing with Shinkaruk.

The stopgap vet signings would have satisfied the "let's try to be competitive with the Sedins while retooling" mandate that apparently was laid out and still given the team flexibility to recoup assets at the TDL and add draft picks if things went down the drain(which it has every year since the Flames series).

That's impossible. Benning wouldn't draft the same players as other GM's, how am I suppose to just guess who he'd pick?

I had this same argument back then, I'd rather take the more volatile asset in the 2nd or 3rd rounder over the AHL prospect.

Draft Pick = Lower floor, higher ceiling asset

Prospect other team is willing to trade = higher floor, lower ceiling asset

For a rebuilding team, the goal is to find future difference makers and core players. The asset with the lower floor, but higher ceiling is the one I'd want.
- Nucker101

Just go with the ones that were drafted. Assume JB is not less dim then those GM's.

You assume and generalize too much between draft and prospect ceilings they do not equal those equations. Either one could have both. For example, Bertuzzi & Naslund were traded prospects thier ceiling was later realized. Dahlen and Goldy could be same.

Ron Stewart was also a dual sport pro n played for the Ottawa Roughriders
- Nighthawk

That little fuker killed him ? He was like 5'7 Russ Jackson Whitt Tucker and Ron Stewart were my favorites .

That was a different Ron Stewart

That little fuker killed him ? He was like 5'7 Russ Jackson Whitt Tucker and Ron Stewart were my favorites .
- VANTEL

Those years were a fun team indeed 👍

Just go with the ones that were drafted. Assume JB is not less dim then those GM's.

You assume and generalize too much between draft and prospect ceilings they do not equal those equations. Either one could have both. For example, Bertuzzi & Naslund were traded prospects thier ceiling was later realized. Dahlen and Goldy could be same.
- Nuck4U

That's pointless, we all know that GM's draft lists are completely different after the top 5 or 10. Plus isn't Benning considered a strong drafter by yourself and many other Canuck fans? We should assume he would have found some decent prospects with those picks that he traded.

Naslund put up 52 points in 66 games for Pittsburgh as a 22 year old in the NHL before he came to Vancouver.

Bertuzzi was traded by one of the dumbest GM's of all time, I'm guessing he flashed higher upside on those crappy Islander teams than what Milbury "thought". But yeah, he was a rare case of a late bloomer.

How many other cases like that have their been in the cap era? Quality prospects are worth more than ever, if a team is willing to trade one for a veteran to push them over the top then that's fine, but if a team is looking is to trade a prospects for a draft pick these days, that should raise some red flags.

That's pointless, we all know that GM's draft lists are completely different after the top 5 or 10.

Naslund put up 52 points in 66 games for Pittsburgh as a 22 year old in the NHL before he came to Vancouver.

Bertuzzi was traded by one of the dumbest GM's of all time, I'm guessing he flashed higher upside on those crappy Islander teams than what Milbury "thought". But yeah, he was a rare case of a late bloomer.

How many other cases like that have their been in the cap era? Quality prospects are worth more than ever, if a team is willing to trade one for a veteran to push them over the top then that's fine, but if a team is looking is to trade a prospects for a draft pick these days, that should raise some red flags.
- Nucker101

I'm looking forward to Part 48 from him.

5 assists in 6 games for Vey. Bring him back in a couple years with Tree.
- manvanfan

right a flat lining lower level AHL forward is great comparison to KHL developing 23 year old D.

How long will mono keep Dahlen out of commission?

How long will mono keep Dahlen out of commission?
- Nighthawk

Who knows with Mono, in July Jeremy Bracco got mono but he's currently about to start the Leafs rookie camp.I supposed thats encouraging. I had mono once and was out of commission from late October till Xmas.

Who knows with Mono, in July Jeremy Bracco got mono but he's currently about to start the Leafs rookie camp.I supposed thats encouraging. I had mono once and was out of commission from late October till Xmas.
- Brooks_Light

I had mono in elementary school and recall it was nearly a month to get over it.

That's pointless, we all know that GM's draft lists are completely different after the top 5 or 10. Plus isn't Benning considered a strong drafter by yourself and many other Canuck fans? We should assume he would have found some decent prospects with those picks that he traded.

Naslund put up 52 points in 66 games for Pittsburgh as a 22 year old in the NHL before he came to Vancouver.

Bertuzzi was traded by one of the dumbest GM's of all time, I'm guessing he flashed higher upside on those crappy Islander teams than what Milbury "thought". But yeah, he was a rare case of a late bloomer.

How many other cases like that have their been in the cap era? Quality prospects are worth more than ever, if a team is willing to trade one for a veteran to push them over the top then that's fine, but if a team is looking is to trade a prospects for a draft pick these days, that should raise some red flags.
- Nucker101

You don't need to have an exact match for accuracy. The exercise is how much better are those draft picks compared to the return. Like did it harm or help the rebuild. But you keep deflecting. Maybe your point was overblown that filling the age gap was wrong.

It's harder to do sign and trade moves when your team is full of vets you want to move. So the push for that back then wasn't realistic. It is now. They have accumulated young talent who are on the cusp of breaking into NHL.

I don't think JB is a brilliant GM or some guru drafter. I just don't think the flack he gets from you and others on this thread is as warranted. JB's got mixed results so far on his moves. Not bad for a rookie GM. We will soon see if the moves are good enough to stay on as he has to show real change.

You don't need to have an exact match for accuracy. The exercise is how much better are those draft picks compared to the return. Like did it harm or help the rebuild. But you keep deflecting. Maybe your point was overblown that filling the age gap was wrong.

It's harder to do sign and trade moves when your team is full of vets you want to move. So the push for that back then wasn't realistic. It is now. They have accumulated young talent who are on the cusp of breaking into NHL.

I don't think JB is a brilliant GM or some guru drafter. I just don't think the flack he gets from you and others on this thread is as warranted. He's got mixed results so far.

Turn arounds are fluid and take a course given the cards dealt and business realities. If JB's biggest moves work out then he gets to stay on. If not, then someone else will get a swing at it.
- Nuck4U

1) Deflecting? There's nothing to deflect, what I said is 100% true. If Benning is a decent or very good drafter then yes 100% those prospects would help much more than Vey/Dorsett/Gudbranson/Baertschi/Pedan/Clendening/Larsen/Granlund

And even if stupidly assume that he takes the exact same players, I'd take McCann/McKeown/R.Andersson/Asplund/Shinkaruk/Forsling etc over the package of guys listed above easily.

2) Why is it harder to do sign a trade stopgap vets? The team had room to sign Eriksson and trade for Sutter(Bonino)/Dorsett/Gudbranson/Etc so why not just sign a couple of more short term UFA's instead of those guys and also keep the picks/prospect and save yourself from long term boat anchors like Eriksson?

I don't care who's to blame out of the 3 stooges in charge, but the plan was flawed and executed poorly. just seems like an ass backwards re-tool..usually teams start to trade for guys like Gudbranson/Sutter/Dorsett when the prospect pool is deep enough and the NHL roster needs veteran help. Not when it's already cluttered with vets and the prospect pool is still not deep enough.

I applauded the Bieksa/Garrison/Hansen/Burrows moves and when people were freaking out over the Lack deal, I defended Benning. I'll defend the decent moves he's made if I like them, but so far the bad outweighs the good in my opinion, whether it's due to bad direction from his superiors or just bad execution over a flawed plan anyway is up for debate.

1) Deflecting? There's nothing to deflect, what I said is 100% true. If Benning is a decent or very good drafter then yes 100% those prospects would help much more than Vey/Dorsett/Gudbranson/Baertschi/Pedan/Clendening/Larsen/Granlund

And even if stupidly assume that he takes the exact same players, I'd take McCann/McKeown/R.Andersson/Asplund/Shinkaruk/Forsling etc over the package of guys listed above easily.

2) Why is it harder to do sign a trade stopgap vets? The team had room to sign Eriksson and trade for Sutter(Bonino)/Dorsett/Gudbranson/Etc so why not just sign a couple of more short term UFA's instead of those guys and also keep the picks/prospect and save yourself from long term boat anchors like Eriksson?

I don't care who's to blame out of the 3 stooges in charge, but the plan was flawed and executed poorly. just seems like an ass backwards re-tool..usually teams start to trade for guys like Gudbranson/Sutter/Dorsett when the prospect pool is deep enough and the NHL roster needs veteran help. Not when it's already cluttered with vets and the prospect pool is still not deep enough.

I applauded the Bieksa/Garrison/Hansen/Burrows moves and when people were freaking out over the Lack deal, I defended Benning. I'll defend the decent moves he's made if I like them, but so far the bad outweighs the good in my opinion, whether it's due to bad direction from his superiors or just bad execution over a flawed plan anyway is up for debate.
- Nucker101

Just scroll on by ...

1) Deflecting? There's nothing to deflect, what I said is 100% true. If Benning is a decent or very good drafter then yes 100% those prospects would help much more than Vey/Dorsett/Gudbranson/Baertschi/Pedan/Clendening/Larsen/Granlund

And even if stupidly assume that he takes the exact same players, I'd take McCann/McKeown/R.Andersson/Asplund/Shinkaruk/Forsling etc over the package of guys listed above easily.

2) Why is it harder to do sign a trade stopgap vets? The team had room to sign Eriksson and trade for Sutter(Bonino)/Dorsett/Gudbranson/Etc so why not just sign a couple of more short term UFA's instead of those guys and also keep the picks/prospect and save yourself from long term boat anchors like Eriksson?

I don't care who's to blame out of the 3 stooges in charge, but the plan was flawed and executed poorly.
- Nucker101

Your package lists no NHL caliber players. But at least Sutter, Guddy, Sven and Granlund are NHL assets that either help the turnaround or get moved for those who do. On balance that's a win in rebuilding.

You can trade so many players on a team in a season. It's NHL reality that limits trading partners. So priorities is the answer. Move the ones on team first before bringing in others to flip. As for the other moves they were for longer term recoup or development.

1) Vey/Dorsett/Gudbranson/Baertschi/Pedan/Clendening/Larsen/Granlund

I'd take McCann/McKeown/R.Andersson/Asplund/Shinkaruk/Forsling etc over the package of guys listed above easily.
.
- Nucker101

Are you kidden? That list is fawking terrible - if you truly think those players are better than Sutter, Guddy, Sven, Granlund, Stecher, Dahlen, Goldobin, then the real problem is yours assessment of talent.

I think Botch is a fog horn sensationalist but he's bringing light to Rodin here:

http://theprovince.com/sp...make-canucks-breakthrough

Carol has Rodin in top 6 out of camp. The China trip should determine his fate. It could be waivers.

If Rodin shines early then it's a good sign to push vets like Gagner and Vanek. Adds to the age gap player group like Granlund and Sven. Prospects like Goldy then have to really shine to earn a look this season.

Are you kidden? That list is fawking terrible - if you truly think those players are better than Sutter, Guddy, Sven, Granlund, Stecher, Dahlen, Goldobin, then the real problem is yours assessment of talent.
- Brooks_Light

Stecher-Dahlen-Goldobin are irrelevant to the discussion as they werent a part of trades to "fill the age gap", just saying

Are you kidden? That list is fawking terrible - if you truly think those players are better than Sutter, Guddy, Sven, Granlund, Stecher, Dahlen, Goldobin, then the real problem is yours assessment of talent.
- Brooks_Light

lol


Why are you comparing them to players that they weren't traded for?

Stecher-Dahlen-Goldobin are irrelevant to the discussion as they werent a part of trades to "fill the age gap", just saying
- WhiteLie

What's shaking ladies?

I think Botch is a fog horn sensationalist but he's bringing light to Rodin here:

http://theprovince.com/sp...make-canucks-breakthrough

Carol has Rodin in top 6 out of camp. The China trip should determine his fate. It could be waivers.

If Rodin makes waves then it's a good sign to push vets like Gagner and Vanek. Adds to the mid age player group of Granlund and Sven. Prospects like Goldy then have to really shine to earn a look this season.
- Nuck4U

I view Rodin the same as Vanek. Not a long term piece at 26, but could be a great TDL acquisition for a team looking for scoring punch (if thats what he is capable of)

lol


Why are you comparing them to players that they weren't traded for?
- Nucker101

He get's a little fired up.

lol


Why are you comparing them to players that they weren't traded for?
- Nucker101

Can you show the lists? I'd be curious. only one I think was a full-donkey play was forsling for clendenning.

I view Rodin the same as Vanek. Not a long term piece at 26, but could be a great TDL acquisition for a team looking for scoring punch (if thats what he is capable of)
- WhiteLie

Perhaps but he doesn't have NHL history for similar value. Right now, I think JB sees him as a fill in age gap player. If he works out then he gets a longer extension to add value by trade or impact to turnaround.