Jeremy Hronek

Oh boy. Attitudes sure change in a hurry eh? How many goals did Kuzmenko score for us again last year?

Yes he praises Cody Glass, but how does that imply that Benning wanted Glass over Pettersson? I am open to the evidence if I am presented with actual evidence instead of Prince Charles' urine. Can you find me that exact quote? I can find you the link/article where Benning explicitly states that he likes Cale Makar, and heavily infers that this is whom he may have selected had he been available. Funny - in this article, Benning also states why he/they clearly liked Pettersson over Glass! https://theprovince.com/sports/hockey/nhl/vancouver-canucks/draft-notebook-if-makar-was-available-canucks-could-have-been-sweating @Riddikulus

The hockey media in Vancouver can be quite toxic. I remember even back in 2017, Dave Pratt was talking about the 2011 Boston Bruins. Constantly. During the 6 years that had passed, the Kings, Blackhawks, and Penguins had won multiple cups. Hockey pundits from all over were trying to figure out "the LA, Chicago, and Pittsburgh," models while our media had our noses up Boston's sphincter trying to figure out what they had for breakfast. "-Tryamkin can be our Chara." -"Kassian can be our guy that takes care of Lucic." (LOL by the way) -"Horvat will be our Patrice Bergeron." -"Brendan Leipsic can be our Marchand." -"Jim Benning will make us like Boston." Never before in my life had I ever seen a city so mindfucked over a sporting loss.........and our toxic media contributed significantly to that. Even after June 15th 2011, what's the first thing I saw when I visited Metrotown mall and walked by Sportschek? Boston Bruins jerseys in stock right in the front of the shop. Think you would have seen Canucks jerseys being sold in Beantown had we won the cup?

All of the above is speculative. There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that Benning wanted Glass over Pettersson. There is evidence to suggest that Benning may have wanted to trade his 2017 1OA as part of a packaged deal to land Makar or Heiskanen (since Benning openly stated that he loved the elite defensemen in that draft), but no other evidence of anything else.

Boston is playing damn near perfect hockey. Why would they make such a significant trade and risk altering their team chemistry?

And Markstrom. When Benning was named GM, he determined that Markstrom needed more time to develop in the minors while getting more starts. He saw a benefit in Markstrom working more closely with Ian Clark. If you recall at the time, fans were a little upset because they felt that Lack/Markstrom should have been our tandem while there was no real need to sign Ryan Miller. Benning clearly made the right call here. No, I definitely see and appreciate the work that Jim Rutherford had to do when he arrived as President of Hockey Operations, but why only blame Benning here? Why doesn't Trevor Linden get any blame? After all, Linden was the President from 2014-2018 right? What kind of infrastructure did Linden build? Well for one thing, Benning was following Ownership's wishes of not going too deep into a rebuild. Secondly, of course Benning and his entourage had a mindful eye for the future. Why was Higgins replaced with Baertschi? Why was Bieksa traded for a 2nd? Why was Burrows traded for Dahlen? Hansen for Goldobin? Thomas Vanek for Tyler Motte? What about 2020 post bubble off-season? Why did we choose Demko over Markstrom? Why Virtanen over Toffoli? Why did we walk from Tanev? Why, despite our pleasant 2nd round surprise that year, did we need not choose to be more aggressive with our sweeteners in terms of moving bad contracts? (i.e. Podkolzin as a sweetener to move Sutter, Baertschi, etc.). By the way, I was NOT fan of the way Benning handled our 2020 post bubble off-season (which is why I ultimately soured on him), but to make a statement that "he wasn't looking out for the long term interests of this club," is ludicrous. I completely agree with you on both of those guys but you also have to keep in mind that Benning didn't have much to start with either. His only good prospect was Horvat (which was developed by Benning by the way). As mentioned earlier, we also saw how Benning developed Markstrom in the correct way (although I will concede that he screwed up big time with McCann and Virtanen). Mike Gillis' dreadful amateur scouting was the reason for our barren prospect pool by the way (although I was still a fan of Gillis in many other aspects of the GM role - he helped turn our good team into a great one). Still, when Benning got here, he was handcuffed with a core that was past their primes, of which many had unmovable contracts (Sedins' + Edler) which would have made deep rebuilding almost impossible. @Elias Pettersson

I mean, that's fine if it's true but then why do so many (toxic) media members and fans blame Jim Benning for the Virtanen pick? You can't have it both ways right? So now, going by your logic, the only real stinker of a pick that Benning had was Olli Juolevi. 2014: Not relevant for Jim Benning 2015: Boeser 2016: Juolevi 2017: Pettersson [pretend Linden overruled Benning] 2018: Hughes 2019: Hoglander + Podkolzin (jury is still out on Podkolzin) -2 home-runs in Hughes and Boeser (should be three if we count Pettersson) -1 decent pick in Hoglander -1 failed pick in Juolevi -1 pick we still don't know (Podz). Miller and Garland were direct results of two 1st round transactions.

RIP. I remember him being a talented yet inconsistent goaltender when it mattered most but I still wish him and his loved ones nothing but the best during these difficult times.

Sutter is actually the first guy that came to my mind. Despite the fact that he's an older man now with breasts, I still think he's a pretty good coach. I'd actually be a bit concerned as a rival if Sutter went to Edmonton.

I don't think Ovie will catch Gretzky. He looks significantly slower and older this year. Will be happy to be proven wrong however.

No, Benning was "quietly" doing this due diligence as a scout for the Boston Bruins (i.e. having scouted numerous prospects throughout that entire year). He then brought that knowledge with him after being named the GM of the Canucks and collaborated with the Canucks' scouting staff. I feel like you already know this but are deliberately being obtuse here in an effort to prove some kind of point. You're better than this EP, I've been reading your posts for awhile now. You're a good poster but you're way out to lunch here. Yes, lots of guys fall in a draft and the smart GM's pick these guys up.......as Benning did. ????? You've mentioned several times as to how such and such draft was horrific but the truth of the matter is that NHL teams are considered to have had a successful draft if just ONE guy from a particular draft becomes a long term core player on said team. Yes, sometimes a team is lucky enough to draft two long term core players in one draft but more times than not, this doesn't happen. The Dallas Stars have recently done exceptionally well but this is far from being the norm. Most successful teams have a handful of players that are drafted and developed by said team the other 50-65% are either traded for or signed via UFA. As far as Andersson/Baertschi goes, the Canucks had almost nothing in that 20-23 age range at the time (i.e. guys that should have been replacing the old guard). Hence, Benning tried to rectify this situation with the hope being that if some of these reclamation projects could pan out with more opportunity, the Canucks could move guys like Bieksa, Higgins, Hansen, Burrows, for more picks and prospects (Bieksa was moved for a 2nd, Hansen for Goldobin, Burrows for Dahlen, Higgins was replaced by Baertschi).

So basically what you're saying, is that prior to May 23 2014, Benning, as a member of the Boston Bruins scouting team, had absolutely zero information about the upcoming draft that was going to take place later that Summer in 2014? (and had zero insights and input to give as a result?). Interesting..... So it's just luck that Benning and his team were high on Boeser while the 22 GM's in front of him were not? That's ridiculous and this incredibly biased take is a little disturbing.

I'm not interested in any of the above players but *might* be interested in Garland for Evander Kane as some other posters have suggested. Kane only has two years on his contract after this year. He would definitely add something to the Canucks in terms of his physical play and ability to stick up for teammates. His possible negative influence in the locker room would be a bit of a concern however. I'd hang on to both Silovs and Suter. Silovs is trending to be a legit long term Demko replacement when TD's contract expires while Suter's defensive play has been outstanding (and he's starting to score as well).

Agreed that 2016 was god awful but that doesn't negate the fact that Benning and his entourage had done fairly well in the previous two drafts with Demko, Boeser, and Jared McCann. Even if one (strains?) to argue that Benning didn't want Pettersson, he had plenty of wins in other years (Hughes, Hoglander, Demko, and Boeser). The jury is still out on Podkolzin while JT Miller was a pretty big win for us. Benning may have liked Cody Glass but there is still no evidence out there to suggest that Benning wanted Glass over Pettersson (other than the words of a few toxic media members - looks like you and I have similar views about Thomas Drance). Even Linden himself doesn't say this. Benning himself has gone on record stating that he loved Cale Makar (and some of the defensemen that weren't going to be there at #5.....and so I'm assuming Heiskanen here), but he never once said that Cody Glass was his guy. It's media fabrication.

My personal take is that all three men had similar visions when they first started (i.e. can't do a full blown rebuild since the twins and Edler have unmovable contracts + little to nothing in the prospect pool) and so they should try and strive to make the playoffs while simultaneously transitioning to a new core (i.e. rebuild, but not in the traditional sense). As time went on however, they simply grew apart (i.e. Linden wanted to be more aggressive with the rebuild) and then this philosophical difference reached its peak in 2018 when the twins retired. I don't see any evidence of backstabbing whatsoever.

What evidence do you have that supports this? Even in Linden's most recent interview, all he said was that him and Ownership/Benning had diverging philosophies. While all parties agreed that attempting to do a full blown rebuild here with the twins was impossible, Linden wanted to be more aggressive with the rebuild once the twins retired. Other than the "rats" in the Canucks' media, there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that Benning "stabbed Linden in the back" or "went behind his back."

Perhaps it's fair to say that there's idiocy on both sides? Back in 2019/2020 for instance, a lot of "Canucks fans" (at HFCanucks, Twitter, media, etc.) were actually angry that the Canucks qualified for the post-season that year because their precious little 'advanced analytics' were off the mark (hint - the advanced analytics actually weren't......their ability to evaluate things comprehensively was ;-)). What was happening that year if I recall correctly, is that the Canucks had a very high winning percentage throughout much of December and January. They would often race out to leads and then play an ill-advised shut down game in which they were "playing not to lose," instead of "playing to win".........which often resulted in the Canucks bleeding high danger chances and Markstrom needing to play out of his mind. What the pundits were conveniently ignoring at the time, was that the Canucks were constantly racing out to those leads when they were playing "normal" hockey. They are/were experts at knowing what the advanced analytics were saying but struggled mightily with the why.

Silovs definitely looking like a realistic heir apparent to Demko one day.

You know what makes me upset? The media, not Benning (or even Linden), are the only ones that have said that Benning wanted Cody Glass over Elias Pettersson. Thinking back to that time, Benning did say that he absolutely loved Cale Makar (and even Heiskanen) since Benning specifically mentioned how he liked some of the defensemen in that draft but that they would probably get selected by the time it was our turn. It was more conceivable that Benning had suggested ideas about trying to move up in the draft (with 5OA at play) rather than wanting Cody Glass. The media in Vancouver, along with a large majority of Canucks Twitter (X) and HF Canucks are flat out toxic.

As a Canucks fan, I care about this...........why? What I'll say is this. The Oilers need to start having serious conversations with Draisaitl and McDavid with regards to their future intentions. If both players are noncommittal, then you need to start thinking about moving both players for boatloads of picks, prospects, etc. Find a new core, and lock em long term like Ottawa has done to their players.

Huh? 2014: Demko (Virtanen, 100 NHL points, probably the equivalent of a mid 3rd round pick when all is said and done) 2015: Boeser 2017: Pettersson (for the sake of your argument, lets say JB wasn't responsible for Pettersson) 2018: Hughes 2019: Hoglander (jury is still out on Podkolzin) 2020: JT Miller (trade) 2021: Conor Garland (trade) Seven of the above players are currently playing for the Canucks - 8 if you include the Myers signing. Yes, Benning ultimately failed as a GM but that doesn't negate a lot of the positives that he brought. Up until the 2020 bubble 2nd round appearance, Benning surrounded our developing core with strong veteran leadership even if they were overpaid (i.e. Beagle, Sutter, Roussel, Pearson, Myers, Miller, etc.). Those players, combined with Edler, Tanev, and Markstrom, helped cultivate a very strong locker room which greatly aided us during the bubble (in which we qualified for the playoffs against Minnesota, defeated a superior Blues team in Round 1, and took a far superior Vegas team to 7 games in round 2). While our outstanding goaltending was a big reason for this, our tight knit lockerrom was a very close 2nd. Now - what happened during the 2020 post bubble off-season, that's a different story (and why I ultimately parted ways with being a 'BenningBro'), but what we experienced from 2015-2020 was a classic rebuild that was done correctly in my opinion. We transitioned from the Sedin core to a new core while bringing in strong veteran leadership to help bring them up.

I can't see the Sens moving Zub to be honest.

This season is a marathon.......not a sprint. We weren't going to go 79-2-1 this season, nor were we going to play out of our minds each and every game. We will have our ups and downs this season. It's not about how hard you get hit but how fast you get back up. Come out hard against the Canadiens tomorrow and make a statement.

True but I also found Linden's indirect insinuation that "empowering the scouts was necessary since Benning had been incompetent up to that point," was unprofessional. Lets look at Benning's drafting history. 2014: Demko + Virtanen. Demko has the approximate value of a 6OA while Virtanen (100 NHL points) is probably the equivalent of a 3rd round pick and so these guys cancel each other out to a large extent. 2015: Boeser 2016: FAIL (Juolevi) 2017: Pettersson 2018: Hughes 2019: Hoglander + Podkolzin (jury is still out on Podkolzin) 2020: JT Miller 2021: Connor Garland I feel like Linden could have given a little more credit to Benning in this interview for the current product. Even if one wants to make the argument that Pettersson wasn't a Benning guy, there's still Demko, Boeser, Hughes, and Hoglander.........with Miller and Garland being direct results of our 2020 and 2021 1sts.

-Something around Connor Garland for Mason Marchment (I doubt the Stars accept this trade but go with me here). -Beauvillier + SmallAdd for Zadorov Kuzmenko-Pettersson-Mikheyev PDG-Miller-Boeser Marchment-Suter-Hoglander Joshua-Bluegar-Lafferty Hughes-Zadorov Cole-Hronek Soucy-Myers Demko DeSmith While we probably still wouldn't be able to beat Vegas, maybe the above line-up gives us a bit of physical pushback?