Francesco Aquillini and Jim Benning --Tales of a Rebuild: Misconceptions, Misery, and Money

[Blue]

Benning and Aqua man made 2 mistakes. You can still remain competative without maxing out the cap which really hinders your rebuild. So don't do that. That means , no Luis Errickson. We should have signed a distressed asset like Valeri Nichushkin instead. Low dollar deals.

 

The other mistake they made was fighting downward momentum in a season. If Demko gets injured and you're out of the playoffs anyway , then don't keep trying to win. Embrace fate and embrace the slide and get a better draft pick.

 

And live to fight the next season

[Alflives]

Our owner fired the guy who was GM during our most successful era and replaced him with our worst GM ever. 

[Bob Long]

29 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Our owner fired the guy who was GM during our most successful era and replaced him with our worst GM ever. 

 

sad but true. I do believe Aqua had good intentions but unfortunately Linden didn't shop harder for a GM. 

 

But now Aqua initiated the JR/Allvin era who are doing good things. 

[conquestofbaguettes]

37 minutes ago, Blue said:

Benning and Aqua man made 2 mistakes. You can still remain competative without maxing out the cap which really hinders your rebuild

Not if your goal is ALSO to lessen financial losses best you can while doing so. That's just the reality of business. You need a product worthy of actual consumption. You build a thing the best product you can and hope for the best. It is mere idealism to expect any different from most ANY business trying to squirm their way to your disposable income with their luxury entertainment consumer culture bullshit.

 

Sure, we can go over any and every trade, signing, or pick and say shoulda coulda woulda. In the end the examination itself is somewhat an exercise in banality. It still misses the point why ownership and the org chose the path to "stay competitive" in the first place.

 

In the end, this or that thing didn't matter that much in the long run. (Minus a few key things like the OEL buyout) or lack of depth due to focus on the now rather than future. But they still hit where they really needed to. (1C, 1D, 1G, 2C, 2W) etc. And added some decent prospects on along the way with Podz, Hogs.

 

Their overal decisions mostly just pushed back the time frame to when things would turn around is all. And lest we forget an unforeseeable pandemic and flat cap on top of that stifling forward progress even further.

 

Of course assets were squandered, of  course some trades were better off not happening. You could argue every single one of them was bad by that standard. In fact many do!

 

But it's simply not this wholly black or white affair that some make it out to be. Especially when they completely ignore the larger context to those decisions in the first place.

1 hour ago, Blue said:

The other mistake they made was fighting downward momentum in a season. If Demko gets injured and you're out of the playoffs anyway , then don't keep trying to win. Embrace fate and embrace the slide and get a better draft pick.

 

Which is idealism in the worst way possible.  As POHO Rutherford stated in a media avail last year, "I thought we were tanking? We're pretty close to the bottom. But I would never, running the team, go and tell the coach or the players 'don't play hard for this game'. They have a job to do, to come to work every game and try to win that game.”

[conquestofbaguettes]

52 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

sad but true. I do believe Aqua had good intentions but unfortunately Linden didn't shop harder for a GM. 

 

But now Aqua initiated the JR/Allvin era who are doing good things. 

 

A first time President with zero experience in the back offices as a GM, or scout or anything else shoved into the role for mostly PR pandering purposes picked the wrong guy?

 

Hard to believe that could be a possibility.  

 

Also, it's unfounded conjecture anyway. We don't know how much "shopping " he did to make such a decision... or if he even picked Jim at all in fact. We know Aqua hired Boudreau himself. How do we know he didn't do that with Benning too?  And if we do want to give Linden the benefit of the doubt, he did go on record stating,

 

“Jim brings a wealth of hockey experience as a builder and talent evaluator that will benefit this team for years to come,” said Linden in a statement. “We are aligned on how we want to build this team and Jim’s level of commitment to building a championship team is exciting. I look forward to re-introducing him to Vancouver on Friday.”

 

PR bullshit? Or is Trevor the esteemed, experienced, credible guy with the amazing plan we should always believe.  Lol

 

I'm definitely with you on JR and PA. They've done excellent work thus far.

[Ballisticsports]

9 minutes ago, conquestofbaguettes said:

 

A first time President with zero experience in the back offices as a GM, or scout or anything else shoved into the role for mostly PR pandering purposes picked the wrong guy?

 

Hard to believe that could be a possibility.  

 

Also, it's unfounded conjecture anyway. We don't know how much "shopping " he did to make such a decision... or if he even picked Jim at all in fact. We know Aqua hired Boudreau himself. How do we know he didn't do that with Benning too?  And if we do want to give Linden the benefit of the doubt, he did go on record stating,

 

“Jim brings a wealth of hockey experience as a builder and talent evaluator that will benefit this team for years to come,” said Linden in a statement. “We are aligned on how we want to build this team and Jim’s level of commitment to building a championship team is exciting. I look forward to re-introducing him to Vancouver on Friday.”

 

PR bullshit? Or is Trevor the esteemed, experienced, credible guy with the amazing plan we should always believe.  Lol

 

I'm definitely with you on JR and PA. They've done excellent work thus far.

Things changed upon hiring JB as early as 2016 (GM has short term vision) From the Sun

 

Benning said Tuesday he plans to be active in free agency this summer, hinting he could go after one of the few big-ticket forwards available. But president of hockey operations Trevor Linden, Benning’s boss, said the team must be wary about committing money long term because two years from now Canucks centre Bo Horvat, defenceman Ben Hutton and goalie Jacob Markstrom will be earning significantly more on their next contracts.

Linden and Benning’s positions may appear to be incompatible, but something will change.

In sports, it always does.

But here’s what is not changing: after auditioning 10 rookies this season and using 19 players who didn’t appear in Vancouver last year, the transition toward youth will continue next season and this imperative trumps everything — including making the playoffs. 

“Last summer, we continued down the path of getting younger, and we will continue to do that,” Linden told reporters after Benning and head coach Willie Desjardins co-starred in the official press conference that followed the Canucks’ worst season in 17 years.

“We’ve always said we want to make the playoffs, want to be competitive. But we’ve never taken our eye off the future. We’ve never mortgaged the future to make the playoffs, and we’re not going to do that now.” (When TL plans got changed TL left, his job was long term health )

 

“We knew we were going to have to go down this path, and the risk we were going to run was exactly what we saw this year,” Linden said. “That was always the scary part of it — you’ve got an older group, you know you’ve got to get younger, you know you’ve got to plan and develop the next core. And how that meshes together is the challenge. We were hoping for the best, and it didn’t work out this year.”

The news conference was an oxymoron. There was little news.

 

After TL there was reports of those close to TL that he felt betrayed by JB

 

 

[Bob Long]

18 minutes ago, conquestofbaguettes said:

 

A first time President with zero experience in the back offices as a GM, or scout or anything else shoved into the role for mostly PR pandering purposes picked the wrong guy?

 

Hard to believe that could be a possibility.  

 

Also, it's unfounded conjecture anyway. We don't know how much "shopping " he did to make such a decision... or if he even picked Jim at all in fact. We know Aqua hired Boudreau himself. How do we know he didn't do that with Benning too?  And if we do want to give Linden the benefit of the doubt, he did go on record stating,

 

“Jim brings a wealth of hockey experience as a builder and talent evaluator that will benefit this team for years to come,” said Linden in a statement. “We are aligned on how we want to build this team and Jim’s level of commitment to building a championship team is exciting. I look forward to re-introducing him to Vancouver on Friday.”

 

PR bullshit? Or is Trevor the esteemed, experienced, credible guy with the amazing plan we should always believe.  Lol

 

I'm definitely with you on JR and PA. They've done excellent work thus far.

 

Actually heard it from Trevor at a season ticket event, he didn't shop around. I have a lot of respect for him but he got that first one wrong.

[AnthonyG]

7 hours ago, DSVII said:

 

Oh Anthony, sometimes I wake up and wonder when I'm actually going to read a post that is actually coherent and has a good argument. Like i said in our past forum, your posts are ironically the best argument against your own position, more than anything I can conjure. So i'll just quote this again to double the effect. Thank you very much.

Care to actually “conjure” proof? Facts? Anything of actual substance? You have the weakest argument going. You talk circles without actually putting much substance into your argument. If you can call it that.
 

7 hours ago, DSVII said:

Benning was brought in to build a sustainable playoff team. He failed. 2014-15 was mostly a Gillis roster. And 2020 was a once in a lifetime event (and gave Benning 2 years of undeserved tenure)

Wrong. Dead wrong. He was brought in to rebuild. Hence not moving any 1st round picks for 6 consecutive drafts. His major additions were all UFAs. Those are not playoff building moves. impactful trades are.

 

 

lmao mostly a Gillis roster? Is that something to brag about?

Richardson, Matthias, Kassian, Lack, Biega, Corrado? Lol thats basically the extent of the “largely Gillis roster”

 

 

7 hours ago, DSVII said:

Benning’s respectable scouting background goes back to Buffalo. But basically ends in Boston. He didn't build that core according to your very own standards of judgement. And his scouting skillset never left the 2000s.

Lol what? I’m losing more and more respect for your posts the further this goes on. So his scouting just stops in Boston yet he put together Bostons draft book? Boston was worried he would take Pastrnak at 23 but McCann fell in the draft and we took BPA. 
 

You’ve just decided that his scouting skillset left him all of the sudden when he got to Vancouver? Lol sorry what??  
Weird because after he left, Boston hasnt drafted shit outside MacAvoy.

Buddy his drafting from 2014-2020 was far more successful than over 70% of the league.

 

His scouting skillsets that “never left the 2000’s” has iced far more NHLers than teams with better draft positions. 

 

7 hours ago, DSVII said:

I also note you gave the credit for the Abbotsford Canucks to Benning in a previous post which is incorrect. He moved the team over to Abby yes, but Gillis created the farm system and laid the groundwork from JB, which he neglected to fill with is draft picks. Again he rushes his picks to the NHL, look what he did to McCann and Virtanen. Why do you think draft busts like Yakupov happen?

Umm buddy the Moose were around loooooong before Gillis. Benning moved our farm system into our very own backyard where we can monitor player development closely. Nice try bud but you are grasping desperately at straws for help. He filled an NHL team with talent first. How do you expect someone to replace the aged out core AND fill the cupboards through the draft in under 8 years. Get a grip on reality man. 55 picks and you expect how many hits to be NHL ready as well as almost ready?

 

tell me who beat Virtanen and McCann out of a spot? They earned it because there wasnt any competition to keep them out of the lineup. Gaunce? Shitkaruk? Cassels? Those guys sound like much competition? Why do you think he built up a ton of experience in the locker room? To help mould guys. Where did Virtanen go after that? To the minors. What happened after that? He came back up and progressed each season.

 

McCann? Look at the postage stamps. Toronto paid a pick to grab McCann

and expose him at the expansion draft lol.

 

7 hours ago, DSVII said:

And yes, you've rehashed this enough, top 3 picks are useless because Brock Boeser was drafted 23rd overall blah blah blah. Doesn't change how the league works. Doesn't change how cup winners are built. And again you don't know how draft capital works.  Otherwise you'd be taking that into consideration with Gillis (here's a challenge,  pick another Mid GM to compare Benning to, like Chevy, Dubas or Brad Treliving, the Gillis rehash is getting tiring) 

 

Omg man how much more pathetic does your argument get? “Top 3 picks are useless” then you go on to state 75% success rates at JBs draft position that he “missed” on. Lol what?

 

Idgaf about your “draft capital” you cant even provide legitimate material on draft capital to back your statement up. You can have as much draft capital as you want, if you suck at drafting its a waste. If you fail to develop players its a waste once again. You can have Less draft capital and proper development and have actual success. 
 

or keep throwing shit at the walls and hope something sticks.

 

 

Heres something for you. Take Bennings 1st round draft positions from 2014-2019 and move back one year and see what you wind up with, continue that back as far as you want, Jim Benning was superior. 

 

8 hours ago, DSVII said:

You say Edmonton, I say Pittsburgh, Chicago, LA, Tampa Bay, Colorado, New York.  Heck even Toronto made the playoff bar.

Yea and go do some digging and go look at how long it took to build those cores. Also how many top 4 picks and it STILL took an average of 7 years. Also how many of those had generational talent? 
 

8 hours ago, DSVII said:

And while Benning gets credit, I'm not building shrines for the guy because he hit 50% of picks in the range where NHL players selected have a 75-100% probabilty of being NHL regulars. But hey feather in his cap. He met the expectation. 

Care to provide statistical proof? Please provide some sort of actual research for once. You can toss numbers around all you want, you’re literally making it up.

 

The odds of an NHL player and the chances of an IMPACTFUL NHL player are not the same. 
 

8 hours ago, DSVII said:

Besides, I don't see anyone running up to Benning's door to hire him for his 'stellar' work in Vancouver. I'm morbidly curious which organization takes that poison pill first, but I'm suspecting his time as a GM is done.

 

You answered it yourself, Benning sat on it for weeks and the value was gone. Gillis wanted them sold months ago. 

 

 

 

Keep yelling at those clouds my dude. Fight the good fight. 

lol his contract just came up. Whos to say he even wants to be part of the game anymore? Maybe he would like a quiet life? You just know for a fact no one has considered him?

 

this is honestly the weakest most desperate attempt to move goal posts and find any way to attempt to put blame on someone else. Benning sat for a few weeks? How about Gillis who sat on it for years? John Tortorella called him out when he said it was stale. It stunk.

 

its been a slice bud, keep telling yourself you know a thing or two about a thing or two. So far I havent seen you put anything of your own into conversation, just spewing the same clueless opinions as the rest of the mob mentality 

[conquestofbaguettes]

25 minutes ago, Ballisticsports said:

GM has short term vision

You mean ownerships vision to keep a competitive product on the ice for the duration. That wasn't the GMs call.

 

And it's interesting Linden felt "betrayed." He's the one that failed to figure out 1) why he was actually hired and 2) what the demands of the business are.

 

Frankly, I'm surprised Trevor Linden Fitness is still alive given the financial reality even he has to deal with to keep a business afloat.

 

His "plan" for the Canucks was the equivalent of replacing the entire floor at one of his gyms with nothing but exercise balls and one shiny new state of art machine in the middle.

 

But somehow expecting people to still come spend money on the place.  Sure some of the hardcore of the hardcore brand loyal consumers will still come, but for the vast majority not a chance.

[conquestofbaguettes]

36 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

Actually heard it from Trevor at a season ticket event, he didn't shop around. I have a lot of respect for him but he got that first one wrong.

He thought he had the right man for the right job at the time. Good bad or otherwise. Frankly I don't think it even mattered that much who the GM was for that time period. If it wasn't Benning et al. enacting that "stay competitive" mandate it would have been someone else dealing with same shitty situation and same demands on the table.

 

Whether a different GM would have done exactly the same moves in exactly the same way with what was available in the marketplace we'll never really know. But it's not a stretch to think it wouldn't be all that different  either.

 

Having said that, ownership obviously thought he was the right guy after the fact. They kept him around for 8 years and all.  And you don't keep a guy around that long if you he's not meeting whatever expectations you have on your investments, whatever that looks like.

[filthy animal]

3 hours ago, conquestofbaguettes said:

You mean ownerships vision to keep a competitive product on the ice for the duration. That wasn't the GMs call.

 

And it's interesting Linden felt "betrayed." He's the one that failed to figure out 1) why he was actually hired and 2) what the demands of the business are.

 

Frankly, I'm surprised Trevor Linden Fitness is still alive given the financial reality even he has to deal with to keep a business afloat.

 

His "plan" for the Canucks was the equivalent of replacing the entire floor at one of his gyms with nothing but exercise balls and one shiny new state of art machine in the middle.

 

But somehow expecting people to still come spend money on the place.  Sure some of the hardcore of the hardcore brand loyal consumers will still come, but for the vast majority not a chance.

 

Yeah, a nobody in a forum criticizing Lindens business accumen, too funny. You guys should compare bank accounts, we know whos gonna be on the short end of that debate, just like many of your takes.

 

Better spruce up that linkedin profile son

 

 

[LillStrimma]

7 hours ago, conquestofbaguettes said:

Comes with territory. You're trying to convince a vet to come to a loser rebuilding team.

They know they don't have a shot at a cup so what's the incentive? If you want to help train new kids to play the right way and instill a good work ethic, that's the place for you.  Not everyone wants that. Some are still chasing cups. Maybe others got their time in the sun and are looking to boost their retirement and trust funds for their kids. Who the fuck knows.

 

But "competitive" here never meant make the playoffs of else. But rather winning enough games that would keep asses in seats and eyeballs on the TV ie. Keep fan interest higher than it otherwise would have.   Of course the product still stinks... just not as much.

 

And acquiring players that can at least play at an NHL level, ice a half assed roster  regardless of price (price i might add didn't really matter that much at that time because of where they were actually at in terms of team development) helps to do that.

 

Over and over I see people make the mistake of thinking that every single move had to be or was supposed to be made with that future goal of a team in mind. When the reality is most of them were made for the needs of "the now." (Now meaning that previous time period.)   Of course some decisions were made with future in mind, trial and error on reclamation projects and the like, nevertheless trying to balance the needs of the now and the future product slowly being designed. It's a fine line. And of course we can argue what was too far over the line, what was too much sacrifice of a future product, and know I might even agree with a great deal of it. Nevertheless... is what it is.

100%!

 

And that's the rub!   How do you meet the demands of the business in the now and also not sacrifice too much of the future.  Because you're 100% correct.  And of course some ideas worked out. Others not so much.  The particular moves don't interest me so much as that initial decision to take the 'stay competitive' approach they did in the first place.

 

For example, if that management group was given the green light, if Gillis or Linden was given the green light to tank would we have seen the vast majority of moves we did? Signing X vet, trading for X vet, etc. etc. Absolutely not.

 

They aren't stupid people. They know what needed to happen. What the ideal would be. We all know it! But that's not the reality they had to deal with. There are just so many other things which dictate what they can or cannot do. Especially if we want to get into the rumors about an overly meddling ownership group like the Aquillini's.

I didn't like it.  Roussel either. Hell, I didn't like the vast majority of things they did all those years.  I'm not sure that was ever made explicitly clear here. I mentioned in the original post even I know there are better, more ideal ways to "rebuild" a club than the path they ultimately chose.

 

But that doesn't negate the financial reality laid at a billion dollar companies feet and the decisions they have to make. Like I said, easy for us to say "just lose on purpose and lose a fuck ton of money while doing so."  But we have no financial stake in that investment.  And if we did we might feel differently about it, too.

 

This was never about blame of anyone. If anything it's a blame on the system,  forcing a team/a product we are emotionally invested in doing "stupid" things to itself when another path is so clearly obvious a better, more efficient choice. But the fuck can you do.

Well, the bit I disagree with you about is the little bit about business and value of the team.

With a more intelligent, modern leader/GM the Canucks had been more popular, achieved more fans around the globe wich had led to a better valuation of the team.

At the same time the team had achieved more success leaving the fan base in a happier place, less medication ahainst depression etc so it would have been a win win.

[conquestofbaguettes]

2 minutes ago, LillStrimma said:

Well, the bit I disagree with you about is the little bit about business and value of the team.

With a more intelligent, modern leader/GM the Canucks had been more popular, achieved more fans around the globe wich had led to a better valuation of the team.

At the same time the team had achieved more success leaving the fan base in a happier place, less medication ahainst depression etc so it would have been a win win.

I'll copy paste this portion from the last comment I made to someone else:

 

"Frankly I don't think it even mattered that much who the GM was for that time period. If it wasn't Benning et al. enacting that "stay competitive" mandate it would have been someone else dealing with same shitty situation and same demands on the table.

 

Whether a different GM would have done exactly the same moves in exactly the same way with what was available in the marketplace we'll never really know. But it's not a stretch to think it wouldn't be all that different  either."

 

We can hypothesize all we want about what someone else may or may not have been able to actually do. But unless we keep those underlying realities in mind while we engage in such mental masterbation ie. the financial demands and the lack of assets in the system to actually build around (no thanks to Gillis) then it won't amount to much. It's like rock and hard place. Even the best GM in the history of sport wouldn't able to change THAT aspect. Even Trevor Linden couldn't. Not sure why anyone thinks someone else would be able to.

[LillStrimma]

22 minutes ago, conquestofbaguettes said:

I'll copy paste this portion from the last comment I made to someone else:

 

"Frankly I don't think it even mattered that much who the GM was for that time period. If it wasn't Benning et al. enacting that "stay competitive" mandate it would have been someone else dealing with same shitty situation and same demands on the table.

 

Whether a different GM would have done exactly the same moves in exactly the same way with what was available in the marketplace we'll never really know. But it's not a stretch to think it wouldn't be all that different  either."

 

We can hypothesize all we want about what someone else may or may not have been able to actually do. But unless we keep those underlying realities in mind while we engage in such mental masterbation ie. the financial demands and the lack of assets in the system to actually build around (no thanks to Gillis) then it won't amount to much. It's like rock and hard place. Even the best GM in the history of sport wouldn't able to change THAT aspect. Even Trevor Linden couldn't. Not sure why anyone thinks someone else would be able to.

It is just rhetoric garbage you spew here. For real...

 

The hand dealt by Gullis wasn't the problem. 
the problem was the inept GM/coaches handling the situation.

Just take Loui Eriksson. 
To make that acquisition good you have to analyse why he and the twins played great together. What made Loui good in Dallas etc. 

Csn we mesh that up here in the Canucks with how Green thinks the game?

Both Green and Benning seemed clueless what to do.

 

So make the Canucks greater would have been an easy goal for almost every other GM.

FA has lost a lot of money sticking with Benning. 

[conquestofbaguettes]

1 hour ago, LillStrimma said:

It is just rhetoric garbage you spew here. For real...

 

The hand dealt by Gullis wasn't the problem. 
the problem was the inept GM/coaches handling the situation.

Just take Loui Eriksson. 
To make that acquisition good you have to analyse why he and the twins played great together. What made Loui good in Dallas etc. 

Csn we mesh that up here in the Canucks with how Green thinks the game?

Both Green and Benning seemed clueless what to do.

 

So make the Canucks greater would have been an easy goal for almost every other GM.

FA has lost a lot of money sticking with Benning. 

 

Yes, the hand Gillis dealt is a fact of life. He sold the farm to chase a cup and left them nothing that would command top dollar for in the marketplace and nothing in the pipeline. Having said that I don't blame him for doing it. You need to strike while the iron is hot and those years were the time to do it. Nevertheless, the fallout was real. All that followed in the coming years is what it looks like when you take your shot and miss.

 

What's past is prologue, my friend. And he doesn't get off the hook anymore than anyone else for their part in the mess.

 

The Sedins weren't going anywhere. The organization felt indebted to them for all they did. To think trading them was ever a realistic option is pure fantasy.  In fact, if you look at Pittsburgh right now they're doing exactly the same thing.  Loading up trading for a guy like Karlsson to give Sid, Geno, Letang et al. a shot at that another cup before they retire too.

 

We can say of course they should trade them anyway. Don't retool. Sell or all. Start rebuilding now.  Its the obviously the smartest, most efficient way to maximize every asset and every dollar you can. But you're dealing with human beings here. No trade, no more clauses. And frankly it would be insulting to treat your star players who gave so much for so many years like cattle. Take em out behind the tool shed and put a bullet in their head when they've outlived their top monetary value. That shit might work in GM mode on CHEL but life is not like a video game.

 

Secondly, bringing up Loui Eriksson is like the lowest of low hanging fruit there is.

 

The club knew they were retooling. They knew the Sedins weren't going anywhere and they wanted to give them one more shot before retirement. So, what do you do.  Eriksson and the Sedins played together at the Worlds just before that and they had great chemistry. It looked like it could work. And Eriksson reportedly had multiple offers from teams.  But he CHOSE Vancouver to play with Hank and Danny. That was the driver. It just didn't end up working at the NHL level is all. And NOBODY could have foreseen his play would drop off a fucking cliff like it did.

 

And funnily enough, of all the terrible free agent signings that took place that summer, Eriksson's contract wasn't even the worst one! But shit happens. Afterall, every team tends to have a contract or two they'd rather not have or dead money on the cap they'd rather not have. (Look at Minnesota oof.)

 

Expecting every trade and every signing to work out 100% of the time is complete idealism. And free agency is free agency after all. Shit happens.

 

Green was and still is a very good coach. There's a reason he was a front runner for the Panthers job before they went with Paul Maurice. And there's a reason he's now working with Lindy Ruff in New Jersey.

 

Speaking of having a job, Benning has been out of the league for a couple years now. But Gillis has been out of club offices for over a decade. He applied for GM jobs on 3 or 4 different occasions and nobody wants him! The glorious genius that is Mike Gillis can't get a job with a team. Reports of New Jersey, FAIL, Florida Panthers, FAIL, and even had his presentation leaked online when he applied in Pittsburgh lol. FAIL.

 

You know... I'm beginning to think this whole mythology surrounding Gillis' genius is complete horseshit.

 

Because it is.

 

Benning lost Canucks Sports and Entrainment Group a lot of money?

 

Sure. That must be why he lasted 8 years. Losing the bosses money hand over fist is great incentive to keep a guy around that long. Because that's totally real life.

 

And sure, another GM could have TOTALLY changed everything which even Trevor Linden as president couldn't do. The most pleasant of fictions.

 

Rhetorical garbage you say?

 

I suggest you take a nice hard look in that mirror, bud.

Edited November 19, 2023 by conquestofbaguettes

[LillStrimma]

41 minutes ago, conquestofbaguettes said:

 

Yes, the hand Gillis dealt is a fact of life. He sold the farm to chase a cup and left them nothing that would command top dollar for in the marketplace and nothing in the pipeline. Having said that I don't blame him for doing it. You need to strike while the iron is hot and those years were the time to do it. Nevertheless, the fallout was real. All that followed in the coming years is what it looks like when you take your shot and miss.

 

Two seasons with a good GM, not even a great. Just an intelligent GM that could form a unity between Utica/Canucks. 
Find the gems that need another playground while giving the Sedins a few years more.

 

41 minutes ago, conquestofbaguettes said:

What's past is prologue, my friend. And he doesn't get off the hook anymore than anyone else for their part in the mess.

 

He gets off the hook because he was fired instead of the Canucks going his route.

So we don’t know how it would be if he was in charge.

We know how Benning handled it all with Ferland as the most moronic figurehead of Bennings tenure here.

Not Loui and OEL because those deals could have been great if the coaches and other players were more aligned, lack of analysis made that bed.

Ferland was just utter stupidity.

 

41 minutes ago, conquestofbaguettes said:

The Sedins weren't going anywhere. The organization felt indebted to them for all they did. To think trading them was ever a realistic option is pure fantasy.  In fact, if you look at Pittsburgh right now they're doing exactly the same thing.  Loading up trading for a guy like Karlsson to give Sid, Geno, Letang et al. a shot at that another cup before they retire too.

 

We can say of course they should trade them anyway. Don't retool. Sell or all. Start rebuilding now.  Its the obviously the smartest, most efficient way to maximize every asset and every dollar you can. But you're dealing with human beings here. No trade, no more clauses. And frankly it would be insulting to treat your star players who gave so much for so many years like cattle. Take em out behind the tool shed and put a bullet in their head when they've outlived their top monetary value. That shit might work in GM mode on CHEL but life is not like a video game.

 

I’m not sure if Gillis would have done that since he got fired. Floating ideas isn’t the same as implement them.

The Sedins could have played sheltered minutes a few years more than they did.

But what did the Sedins say? Did they want to stay or did they want to get a shot at the cup? 
When you talk about taking your stars out you already made your mind up.

So what did the Sedins really think? 

 

41 minutes ago, conquestofbaguettes said:

Secondly, bringing up Loui Eriksson is like the lowest of low hanging fruit there is.

 

In what way? Why won’t we talk about that since it’s one of Bennings most flagrant analysing mistakes where he with his pro scouts and Green couldn’t understand what player Loui was in NHL contra WC.

41 minutes ago, conquestofbaguettes said:

The club knew they were retooling. They knew the Sedins weren't going anywhere and they wanted to give them one more shot before retirement. So, what do you do.  Eriksson and the Sedins played together at the Worlds just before that and they had great chemistry. It looked like it could work. And Eriksson reportedly had multiple offers from teams.  But he CHOSE Vancouver to play with Hank and Danny. That was the driver. It just didn't end up working at the NHL level is all. And NOBODY could have foreseen his play would drop off a fucking cliff like it did.

 

You know about rhetoric huh… You actually don’t understand why Benning had such a bad judgement when he went for Loui with Green as the voach? 

41 minutes ago, conquestofbaguettes said:

And funnily enough, of all the terrible free agent signings that took place that summer, Eriksson's contract wasn't even the worst one! But shit happens. Afterall, every team tends to have a contract or two they'd rather not have or dead money on the cap they'd rather not have. (Look at Minnesota oof.)

 

Expecting every trade and every signing to work out 100% of the time is complete idealism. And free agency is free agency after all. Shit happens.

 

Green was and still is a very good coach. There's a reason he was a front runner for the Panthers job before they went with Paul Maurice. And there's a reason he's now working with Lindy Ruff in New Jersey.

 

Green wasn’t that good. He is probably ok but in NHL you need to step up. You have to understand every player, what makes them tick. Which areas are they good at and then try to amplifie that goodness.

when did Green do that? 

41 minutes ago, conquestofbaguettes said:

Speaking of having a job, Benning has been out of the league for a couple years now. But Gillis has been out of club offices for over a decade. He applied for GM jobs on 3 or 4 different occasions and nobody wants him! The glorious genius that is Mike Gillis can't get a job with a team. Reports of New Jersey, FAIL, Florida Panthers, FAIL, and even had his presentation leaked online when he applied in Pittsburgh lol. FAIL.

 

As it seems Gillis was a bit of an ass.

And in the old school club of inbreedibg the quality if leadership gets worse for every year.

So Bennings dad was probably quite good at what he did. Benning less and if this continues the sheltered minutes Benning son received maybe leave him in a worse place than his dad.

It’s definately better to have to fight for the place you have than to get it because som kind of favour.

41 minutes ago, conquestofbaguettes said:

You know... I'm beginning to think this whole mythology surrounding Gillis' genius is complete horseshit.

 

Because it is.

 

 

Maybe, I only know that other people say he was ahead of other teams in NHL when he was GM.

If that is genius to make some of those adjustments or just normal GM work day in and day out(as I would think) I don’t know.

But Benning might have been so low standard that Gillis is a genius compared with him.

 

41 minutes ago, conquestofbaguettes said:

Benning lost Canucks Sports and Entrainment Group a lot of money?

 

Sure. That must be why he lasted 8 years. Losing the bosses money hand over fist is great incentive to keep a guy around that long. Because that's totally real life.

 

Why do you think I spoke so often about how much money the owner lose because of Bennings actions? 
Some owners don’t know how and when a GM tells them thei version of how the owner is satisfied because they don’t know better.

 

41 minutes ago, conquestofbaguettes said:

And sure, another GM could have TOTALLY changed everything which even Trevor Linden as president couldn't do. The most pleasant of fictions.

 

Yes, and Linden could have stayed as a figure head for the organisation.

I thought Allvin had showed you what could be done if your name isn’t Benning.

41 minutes ago, conquestofbaguettes said:

Rhetorical garbage you say?

 

I suggest you take a nice hard look in that mirror, bud.

 

You can always show me how wrong I am by give som proof of your analysing skills.

If not, go to the mirror and take a second look.

[Wiggums]

Anthony G = Benning's son.  

 

Confirmed.  

 

Damn that is some painful stuff to read.

 

[iinatcc]

20 hours ago, Blue said:

Benning and Aqua man made 2 mistakes. You can still remain competative without maxing out the cap which really hinders your rebuild. So don't do that. That means , no Luis Errickson. We should have signed a distressed asset like Valeri Nichushkin instead. Low dollar deals.

 

The other mistake they made was fighting downward momentum in a season. If Demko gets injured and you're out of the playoffs anyway , then don't keep trying to win. Embrace fate and embrace the slide and get a better draft pick.

 

And live to fight the next season

 

I am not to upset with the Eriksson signing to be honest. I am more upset that after this signing turned to a disaster Benning continued the habit of overpaying players way above market value.

 

The bigger problem is that this lead to the OEL trade which was a bigger disaster than the LE signing itself. 

[iinatcc]

13 hours ago, LillStrimma said:

It is just rhetoric garbage you spew here. For real...

 

The hand dealt by Gullis wasn't the problem. 
the problem was the inept GM/coaches handling the situation.

Just take Loui Eriksson. 
To make that acquisition good you have to analyse why he and the twins played great together. What made Loui good in Dallas etc. 

Csn we mesh that up here in the Canucks with how Green thinks the game?

Both Green and Benning seemed clueless what to do.

 

So make the Canucks greater would have been an easy goal for almost every other GM.

FA has lost a lot of money sticking with Benning. 

 

The tragedy of Gillis is that, after the 2011 cup run, he became more reactive than before. Prior to this he was usually one step ahead of the game and had new innovative ideas to improve the team overall. His use of analytics, hiring Gillman to structure the contracts, and using sports science to improve physical performance were ahead of it's time. 

 

I think something snapped after 2011 that made him more of a copy cat and reactive than innovative. 

[LillStrimma]

12 minutes ago, iinatcc said:

 

The tragedy of Gillis is that, after the 2011 cup run, he became more reactive than before. Prior to this he was usually one step ahead of the game and had new innovative ideas to improve the team overall. His use of analytics, hiring Gillman to structure the contracts, and using sports science to improve physical performance were ahead of it's time. 

 

I think something snapped after 2011 that made him more of a copy cat and reactive than innovative. 

Interesting, this would be an interesting topic to go further into.

Was his hands tied going forward?

Was he broken emotionally after the loss?

Is he a hunter, so when he didn’t think he could take the team further he lost the same interest as when he ”hunted”?

[AnthonyG]

1 hour ago, Wiggums said:

Anthony G = Benning's son.  

 

Confirmed.  

 

Damn that is some painful stuff to read.

 

Sorry to hear reading is hard. 
 

[iinatcc]

1 hour ago, Wiggums said:

Anthony G = Benning's son.  

 

Confirmed.  

 

Damn that is some painful stuff to read.

 

 

Anthony G. Benning is such a heel turn name 

[filthy animal]

2 hours ago, Wiggums said:

Anthony G = Benning's son.  

 

Confirmed.  

 

Damn that is some painful stuff to read.

 

 

Just like the rest of his other posts. And hes calling out people too! LOL

 

 

 

 

[Blue]

1 hour ago, iinatcc said:

 

The tragedy of Gillis is that, after the 2011 cup run, he became more reactive than before. Prior to this he was usually one step ahead of the game and had new innovative ideas to improve the team overall. His use of analytics, hiring Gillman to structure the contracts, and using sports science to improve physical performance were ahead of it's time. 

 

I think something snapped after 2011 that made him more of a copy cat and reactive than innovative. 

That sums up Gillis post 2011 to a tee. But he did start talking about rebuild. Then he was let go. He probably would have been a good rebuild GM if he hired a master scout 

[Blue]

2 hours ago, Wiggums said:

Anthony G = Benning's son.  

 

Confirmed.  

 

Damn that is some painful stuff to read.

 

Bullshit. He provides much needed counter balance on Benning. I always take the time to read his posts even if i disagree