[Article] Canucks: Trevor Linden slams former GM Jim Benning in Sportsnet 650 interview

[timberz21]

On 11/9/2023 at 10:07 AM, Jeremy Hronek said:

 

Because, you always need to be sure.  Even if you really love one prospect and are 99% sure that you're going to draft him, you still need to do a comprehensive analysis on other picks and prospects just to be sure. For example, what if Pettersson had been drafted earlier?  Then what?     Doing a comprehensive analysis and proper due diligence is the smart thing to do.

Of course you always need to do your due diligence and put in the work….

 

But the way I understand it, coming from Linden, the work had been done and the team had done their due diligence.  Seems like they were making the finals touches on their list and EP was slated at #5 or higher.   That’s when JB was trying to get “his guy”, Glass or whomever, in front by doing some extra work and review to get his way.

 

but I wasn’t in that room so who knows,

but that’s how I saw it.

[Jeremy Hronek]

[iinatcc]

3 hours ago, chaoticmonkey said:

At the end of the day it doesn't matter. Benning listened to his scouts and made the right pick. If you blame him for bad picks you have to give him credit for the good picks.

 

Also it's funny that Linden said he thought the team had to look at 2020 as the time to compete. When did he make his remarks about it not being fair for the Sedins to do a full rebuild?

 

It's true that at the end of the day Benning took the advice of the scouting department and should be credited for making the right decision. The problem is that once Linden left Benning gutted Scouting Department (at least it's autonomy).

 

And to your point on Linden. Thomas Drance made a very good point recently that Linden was inexperienced and made a lot of mistakes in first few years as president. However what this topic of Pettersson showed that he was finally figuring it out establishing clearer processes, organization, and structure that fostered more collaboration throughout the organization. And that this example on building a better processes didn't apply to just the scouting but other functions.

 

The tragedy here is, according to Drance, is that Linden left the organization (and likely aspirations in  hockey operations management) at the time when Linden was coming onto his own as a president of hockey operations. He was learning and figuring things out which resulted, as this case shows, a more effective scouting department. 

 

And the years of poor management after linden left probably resulted in some wasted seasons with the Pettersson/Hughes core. 

 

 

So this is my opinion now ... 

It's probably no coincidence that after Linden left we started to hear about problems in the organization a year later. Such as stories of Benning and Weisbrod "keeping to themselves" in decision making process, the people within the organization taking sides and joining groups, and the press conference with Stan Smyl seemed to all but confirm those rumors.

 

 

[conquestofbaguettes]

1 hour ago, The Duke said:

Yeah. Regarding McCann, Forsling (and the 2nd round picks) I defended the process at the time, and with better targets it could have been a fine strategy.  But, like a lot of things in that era, we didn’t just take the less popular strategic approach - we also either targeted duds (Gudbranson, Clendenning, Vey) or got unlucky with injuries (Baer, Sutter) or whatever.  

Better targets is an aside. Like I said it happens to teams all the time. And most the time the players don't become anything. Like the vast majority of ahl players don't become nhl players. For every 1 Forsling, there are 30 Adam Gaudettes that go basically nowhere.  It barely registers as a worthwhile point to focus on imo.

 

As for the duds, as I stated above those trades at that time didn't really matter for the long term goal. The goal there was to ice a team that could compete while ALSO building for the future with some the picks and prospects and they had. Some picks went out the door to fuel the now, and some were used to build the future. Dual goals.

 

All those trades weren't all expected to be part of some future core but rather to keep asses in the seats at the time. Ie.  We have jobs avail. Come play for a losing rebuilder and we'll pay you a bit more to do so. All it was and all it was supposed to be for most.

 

1 hour ago, The Duke said:

And I agree, he was really just a PR hire.  If we’re going to revisit Linden-as-president, he said the “not fair to rebuild with the sedins” and was prez when Benning made a lot of (with hindsight) costly errors to speed up the process - with literally nothing to show for it. That’s the opposite of tanking. I’m just saying it would have been nice if he had pushed for a middle ground instead of advocating one extreme and presiding over the other.  All with the benefit of hindsight, of course.

Ah i see whats happening here.

 

Yes, they first retooled to give Hank and Danny another shot because the "organization felt indebted to them for all they did."

 

And then after Hank and Danny retired they started "rebuilding."

 

Here is former Canucks AGM Chris Gear talking about that era and how it all played out and why:

 

Edited November 11, 2023 by conquestofbaguettes

[conquestofbaguettes]

26 minutes ago, iinatcc said:

 

It's true that at the end of the day Benning took the advice of the scouting department and should be credited for making the right decision. The problem is that once Linden left Benning gutted Scouting Department (at least it's autonomy).

 

And to your point on Linden. Thomas Drance made a very good point recently that Linden was inexperienced and made a lot of mistakes in first few years as president. However what this topic of Pettersson showed that he was finally figuring it out establishing clearer processes, organization, and structure that fostered more collaboration throughout the organization. And that this example on building a better processes didn't apply to just the scouting but other functions.

 

The tragedy here is, according to Drance, is that Linden left the organization (and likely aspirations in  hockey operations management) at the time when Linden was coming onto his own as a president of hockey operations. He was learning and figuring things out which resulted, as this case shows, a more effective scouting department. 

 

And the years of poor management after linden left probably resulted in some wasted seasons with the Pettersson/Hughes core. 

 

 

So this is my opinion now ... 

It's probably no coincidence that after Linden left we started to hear about problems in the organization a year later. Such as stories of Benning and Weisbrod "keeping to themselves" in decision making process, the people within the organization taking sides and joining groups, and the press conference with Stan Smyl seemed to all but confirm those rumors.

 

That's all speculation.

 

 

[conquestofbaguettes]

44 minutes ago, timberz21 said:

That’s when JB was trying to get “his guy”, Glass or whomever, in front by doing some extra work and review to get his way.

Pure speculation.

 

And I don't buy that for a second.

[iinatcc]

1 hour ago, conquestofbaguettes said:

 

That's all speculation.

 

 

Maybe but Drance mentioned it a few years back, the folks in Canucks Central had the same observation, and all those stories during the dying days of Benning tenure. There's too much not consider all this having some merit 

[filthy animal]

1 hour ago, iinatcc said:

Maybe but Drance mentioned it a few years back, the folks in Canucks Central had the same observation, and all those stories during the dying days of Benning tenure. There's too much not consider all this having some merit 

 

Yup, many more echoed the same sentiment on how the organization was ran to the mud with Benning. Its his word against many others. People seemed to forget that Benning lied quite a bit to the fanbase so hes hardly trustworthy

[filthy animal]

Im noticing the Benning Bros in this thread have either

 

a) jumped off the Benning bandwagon and finally stepped into reality (thank gawd)

 

b) wanting this thread to end

 

c) are in complete denial

[filthy animal]

6 hours ago, conquestofbaguettes said:

Ie. Gillis sold picks to go on the cup run, and their drafting was poop too.  Didn't leave the next regime much to build with. 

 

Not that I blame Gillis. Strike while the iron is hot. But... that is what it looks like when you take your shot and miss.

 

At least Gillis had a shot

 

Gillis sold picks for a cup run? You mean a 3rd and a 4th and a few C level prospects to get lapierre and higgins?

 

And yet your all for trading a 1st and 2nd rounder for garland and oel JUST to sneak in to the playoffs.

 

Trading picks to win the cup, bad move. Trading picks to just to be in the playoffs, by all means why not!

 

 

[Jeremy Hronek]

One thing I'll say:

 

I know Linden is receiving a bit of heat for appearing to have bad-mouthed Benning (and there may be truth to this to some extent), but I think Sat Shah, Dan Riccio, Blake Price, and Matt Sekeres are more to blame for this. They are the ones that asked these questions to Linden and Linden simply answered their questions.  

[6of1_halfdozenofother]

9 hours ago, Jeremy Hronek said:

 

"At the columbine..."

 

[DSVII]

5 hours ago, filthy animal said:

Im noticing the Benning Bros in this thread have either

 

a) jumped off the Benning bandwagon and finally stepped into reality (thank gawd)

 

b) wanting this thread to end

 

c) are in complete denial

d.) The Ouroboros : "well Linden is ultimately responsible because he hired Benning."

[conquestofbaguettes]

5 hours ago, filthy animal said:

 

At least Gillis had a shot

 

Gillis sold picks for a cup run? You mean a 3rd and a 4th and a few C level prospects to get lapierre and higgins?

 

And yet your all for trading a 1st and 2nd rounder for garland and oel JUST to sneak in to the playoffs.

 

Trading picks to win the cup, bad move. Trading picks to just to be in the playoffs, by all means why not!

 

 

Gillis left the next regime with zero prospects in the pipeline to build around due to shit drafting, and virtually zero assets that would fetch 1st round picks. Gillis left a mess.

 

Also, you're wrong. It was never "playoffs of else."

 

Listen to the interview with former Canucks AGM Chris Gear. He explained all of it like 9 months ago in perfect English.

 

 

 

Gillis didn't even build the bulk of that 2011 team.  That team was by and large the work of Dave Nonis and Brian Burke.  Gillis just got to take the credit of others work.

 

Also, Benning's core, the core Rutherford and Allvin chose to continue building around, will also "have a shot" soon enough. So not sure what you're trying to say there.

Edited November 11, 2023 by conquestofbaguettes

[conquestofbaguettes]

7 hours ago, iinatcc said:

Maybe but Drance mentioned it a few years back, the folks in Canucks Central had the same observation, and all those stories during the dying days of Benning tenure. There's too much not consider all this having some merit 

 

And Benning just broke radio silence after two years to call bullshit on it.

 

Its all speculatory crap. Just because some talking head says it (especially coming from Drance) does not make it reality. 

[conquestofbaguettes]

17 minutes ago, DSVII said:

d.) The Ouroboros : "well Linden is ultimately responsible because he hired Benning."

e.) It's all horseshit.

 

 

[Bob Long]

Just now, conquestofbaguettes said:

e.) It's all horseshit.

 

 

[iinatcc]

35 minutes ago, conquestofbaguettes said:

 

And Benning just broke radio silence after two years to call bullshit on it.

 

Its all speculatory crap. Just because some talking head says it (especially coming from Drance) does not make it reality. 

 

He didn't call BS on the organizational problems after Linden left. 

 

I never doubted Benning's response and it's irrelevant on my point whether he personally prefered Glass or Pettersson 

Edited November 11, 2023 by iinatcc

[DSVII]

17 minutes ago, conquestofbaguettes said:

e.) It's all horseshit.

 

 

It is all horseshit. I agree 100% with Seravelli. And also believe Linden's side of the story of what happened. Corroborated by former scouts. It's important the org learns the right lessons on constructing a management team going forward.

 

That being said. In the interview Seravelli really needs to ask Sekeres and Price: "you guys are on a run. Why did you in the media ask Linden those questions and start this whole chain of distraction?"

 

5 hours ago, Jeremy Hronek said:

One thing I'll say:

 

I know Linden is receiving a bit of heat for appearing to have bad-mouthed Benning (and there may be truth to this to some extent), but I think Sat Shah, Dan Riccio, Blake Price, and Matt Sekeres are more to blame for this. They are the ones that asked these questions to Linden and Linden simply answered their questions.  

Wholeheartedly agree

 

 

[chaoticmonkey]

10 hours ago, iinatcc said:

 

It's true that at the end of the day Benning took the advice of the scouting department and should be credited for making the right decision. The problem is that once Linden left Benning gutted Scouting Department (at least it's autonomy).

 

And to your point on Linden. Thomas Drance made a very good point recently that Linden was inexperienced and made a lot of mistakes in first few years as president. However what this topic of Pettersson showed that he was finally figuring it out establishing clearer processes, organization, and structure that fostered more collaboration throughout the organization. And that this example on building a better processes didn't apply to just the scouting but other functions.

 

The tragedy here is, according to Drance, is that Linden left the organization (and likely aspirations in  hockey operations management) at the time when Linden was coming onto his own as a president of hockey operations. He was learning and figuring things out which resulted, as this case shows, a more effective scouting department. 

 

And the years of poor management after linden left probably resulted in some wasted seasons with the Pettersson/Hughes core. 

 

 

So this is my opinion now ... 

It's probably no coincidence that after Linden left we started to hear about problems in the organization a year later. Such as stories of Benning and Weisbrod "keeping to themselves" in decision making process, the people within the organization taking sides and joining groups, and the press conference with Stan Smyl seemed to all but confirm those rumors.

 

 

I'm not debating any of that except how Linden was coming into his own. I really didn't like his comments about his vision being on 2020 when he's on record saying it's not fair for the Sedins to rebuild while they're still here. And we wouldn't trade them. It seems to me that this kind of speculation years later is only going to distract from the great things this core group is doing.

 

It's all water under the bridge so I don't even feel like debating it to be honest, which is also why I'm a little ticked off at him for dredging up dead topics.

[spook007]

19 hours ago, conquestofbaguettes said:

Yeah dude. Chris Gear explains in perfect English why the rebuild went the way it did. Linden was talking "tank" and ownership wasn't hearing it for multiple reasons.

 

As Gear states, they "didn't want to get shelled 6-1 every night."  Wonder why. People don't come out to games when they're losing that badly. People tune out. We know this. And NHL hockey is a business first and foremost. Few teams in ANY league are willing to tank. Especially when you don't have the stars in the pipeline as Gear  mentioned (because Gillis sold the farm before them [which i don't blame him for doing but still the reality of the situation.])

Benning didn't have an easy job. They had two simultaneous goals: Needs of the now, and the needs of the future. What can you do? Exactly what we saw.

 

Of course maybe this or that trade, this or that pick could have been better and maybe sped up the process a bit... but shit happens. Sometimes contracts don't work out, sometimes teams miss on stars at the draft. It happens all the time. The kicker is most the trades didn't matter at that time anyway! With tons of holes in the roster, waiting for that new crop of stars, trying to ice a product to keep asses in the seats. That was the whole point.

 

In the end, as long as you hit where you really really need to (1c, 1d, 1g) you'll have what you need to build around. And the rest will fall into place. And that's exactly what they did (with a few other core additions along the way. Boeser, Miller, Hoglander, Podkolzin...)

 

That's how I view it anyway.

Well put....

This sounds pretty much as it was... hits and misses...

When your owner want to stay competitive, and you have limited resources to deal with, its a tough job.

 

I sometimes wonder whether JR/PA would have accepted the challenge, had we been in the same situation, when they took over, as Benning was, and being told by the owners they couldn't tank for a better draft position.... Maybe they could do better team building wise and maybe they could do better around the cap, but they'd likely also struggle to make a quick transition, rebuilding a new contender....

 

Nevertheless it's water under the bridge now....Lets rock n'roll and enjoy the good times instead.

Edited November 11, 2023 by spook007

[6of1_halfdozenofother]

3 hours ago, chaoticmonkey said:

I'm a little ticked off at him for dredging up dead topics.

 

Except he's not the one running around telling people, "ya wanna hear a story?"  If you're going to blame someone, blame it on Satiar Shah and Dan Riccio - they're the ones who raised the initial question, to which Linden answered candidly.

[chaoticmonkey]

Just now, 6of1_halfdozenofother said:

 

Except he's not the one running around telling people, "ya wanna hear a story?"  If you're going to blame someone, blame it on Satiar Shah and Dan Riccio - they're the ones who raised the initial question, to which Linden answered candidly.

He's been asked similar questions before in the past and he always gave them nothing.

[6of1_halfdozenofother]

1 minute ago, chaoticmonkey said:

He's been asked similar questions before in the past and he always gave them nothing.

 

Sure, and that's his prerogative to disclose or not.  Chances are (and I don't know enough of the back history of this) that this was most likely in response to someone else recently looking to drive narrative in a direction that was not truthful.

 

As for timing, people seem to take issue with this being a "negative" news story in the "positivity" that the team is enjoying, but there will never be a good time (team-wise) for this kind of discussion, because if you do it when things are good, people say you have an ulterior motive, but if you do it when things are bad for the team, then people will say you're kicking the team when it's down.  That's why I'm more inclined to think that he's trying to straighten the record and provide some of the missing context that those of us outside the room won't have.

[RWJC]

Canucks Coffee: Jolts of java for what revisiting landmark 2017 draft really meant

 

Good morning.

 

Let’s start your day with a good cup of strong java, but you may need a second cup, and even a third.

 

There’s always so much to talk about on and off the ice in a city so consumed by the Canucks.

 

They found a way to push their win streak to five games Thursday — and their franchise-best start to 10-2-1 — with a 5-2 victory over the Ottawa Senators that was more about resiliency after surrendering an early two-goal lead.

 

It’s a good story. It was told at length Thursday night but this is Friday morning and something else is still simmering.

 

A trip down memory lane this week is the first cup of coffee. It’s also the second and probably the third.

First serving: Benning: ‘There is nothing to really talk about’

The game behind the game is always intriguing.

 

How NHL teams build their hockey operations departments and draft strategy consumes hockey-mad markets, but nothing quite like Vancouver.

 

Every team has draft skeletons in its closet, but none seem to rattle like those in Vancouver. Patrick White, Olli Juolevi, Nathan Smith and Jordan Schroeder were major first-round misses.

 

However, what could have potentially been a first-round faux pas in the 2017 draft has, for some reason, bubbled back to the surface after all these years.

 

Why? Good question. I’ll get to that in the final cup.

 

Former Canucks president Trevor Linden took to Sportsnet 650 and CHEK-TV on Wednesday and Thursday respectfully to remind us of what, in his estimation, could have occurred with the club’s fifth-overall selection in the landmark 2017 draft at Chicago that landed Elias Pettersson.

Linden was convinced that general manager Jim Benning was leaning in a different direction and that if he had his choice “he probably would’ve taken a different player.”

 

That player was thought to be Portland Winterhawks centre Cody Glass, while Gabe Vlardi also would have merited some consideration in a draft where nine pivots went in the first 13 selections.

 

Glass was a prototypical junior centre, while Pettersson was where the game was headed with his skill set, responsible game, and tremendous upside. Glass was the present. Pettersson was the future.

 

So, who chose Pettersson?

 

“It was a collaborative decision by our group to make that pick,” Benning said in a text response to me Thursday. “I’m happy the team is playing well.”

 

Pressed for more reaction, Benning offered up this:

 

“There is nothing to really talk about. We really liked five guys in the draft class and we picked fifth. We knew we were going to get a player everyone really liked.”

 

Second serving: Glass was good, Pettersson was electric

 

Benning was big on Glass and also gave Pettersson his proper dues.

The GM was also immersed in a new way of thinking with more voices and amateur scouting director Judd Brackett, understandably, wanting more autonomy.

 

Glass, a 6-foot-2, 178-pound Winnipeg native, played a 200-foot game, scored 70 per cent of his 94 points (32-62) at even strength and 40 per cent of his production came in road games.

 

“He’s good in all three zones and the thing about him is his execution rate with the puck is high,” Benning told me. “He can make a play that leads to a scoring chance.”

 

Benning was also buoyed by what he saw of Pettersson at the 2017 world junior championship. And even though the slick Swede had one assist in six games, Benning couldn’t take his eyes off him.

 

“Every time he touched the puck, he made something happen,” recalled Benning. “That’s the first thing that jumped out at me — his ability and vision to see where everybody was. And with the accurate release on his shot, he didn’t take much time and could rip it.”

 

 

Third serving: Banging the Pettersson extension drum

 

Fast forward and we all know how the 2017 draft comparison has played out and what it probably means in the big picture.

 

Pettersson has amassed 347 points (143-204) in 338 games. Glass, the sixth-overall pick by Vegas Golden Knights, has 58 points (23-35) in 151 games.

 

So, we should all be grateful that Pettersson is playing in Vancouver. That was probably Linden’s message. A reminder to ownership that his consistency and torrid start to this season should be rewarded in short order.

 

If there were any doubts about poise and production, they should be long gone. Pettersson is the real deal.

Even as a rookie, he played a complete and responsible game and was often first on the backcheck. What first-year player does that? His passes were perfect and his shot was lethal.

 

Last season, Pettersson became the first member of his rich draft class to hit the career 300-point mark in 306 games. On March 6, he opened scoring and also potted the shootout winner in a 4-3 decision over Nashville. He was not shy about the accomplishment.

 

“That always feels good,” said Pettersson. “I think a lot of players say they don’t care, but everybody has an ego, so I’m not going to stand here and lie. It’s something I’m really happy about.”

 

How do you not reward that?

 

Ben Kuzma

bkuzma@postmedia.com

 

https://theprovince.com/sports/hockey/nhl/vancouver-canucks/coffee-trevor-linden-elias-pettersson-jim-benning-draft/wcm/1c4b83a3-0c3d-4d1d-8dbd-829713018d3b/amp/