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

[Bob Long]

Just now, Coconuts said:

 

PK Subban thinks Jordan Subban is going to be the best Subban brother, he's gonna be our answer on D 

 

all the Subbans 

[Coconuts]

2 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

all the Subbans 

 

Do you think it's too late to bring Koltsov over, maybe Shirokov

 

We like Russians right?

Edited November 21, 2023 by Coconuts

[6of1_halfdozenofother]

Just now, Coconuts said:

 

Do you think it's too late to bring Koltsov over 

 

Only if he can't convince Chubarov to pick up his car from the rink.

[Bob Long]

1 minute ago, Coconuts said:

 

Do you think it's too late to bring Koltsov over, maybe Shirokov

 

We like Russians right?

 

we do. We really do.

 

If we could poach Romanov out of the Islanders, that would be an -ov I'd like to add. They need offence, what could we send with Hogs to make that happen?

[6of1_halfdozenofother]

4 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

 

PK Subban thinks Jordan Subban is going to be the best Subban brother, he's gonna be our answer on D 

 

Those Subban Bros definitely weren't Benning Bros.  Especially after Jordan got cast away like a used condom by Benning.

[Bob Long]

1 minute ago, 6of1_halfdozenofother said:

 

Those Subban Bros definitely weren't Benning Bros.  Especially after Jordan got cast away like a used condom by Benning.

 

[LillStrimma]

25 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:

I got over Benning over a year ago. You still whine about him. 

I only talk about him when it’s relevant. When Linden or Gillis get bashed.

 

What do you think of Allvin? 
Don’t you find it amusing that he is the kind of GM I talked about the whole time while Benning made wrong decisions.

Funny that it was a swede also…

[conquestofbaguettes]

2 hours ago, LillStrimma said:

Dahlen… What do you think Petey thought of Benning after Benning threw Dahlen to the wolves? 
What kind of leader throw young prospects to the wolves? 
Benning was a rotten apple so good riddance and this isn’t hate.

It’s a logic analysis how a modern leader handle different situations.

 

So, please, don’t say a word about hate because hate is something completely different driven by feelings.

 

You're saying every prospect that didn't 100% hit is the big bad Bennings fault?  Heh.

 

Dahlen was a lack luster player that couldn't stick in the national league. Extremely common tale around the league regardless of GM or organization.

 

Fruit hanging so low it's laying on the ground fermenting

[Coconuts]

2 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

we do. We really do.

 

If we could poach Romanov out of the Islanders, that would be an -ov I'd like to add. They need offence, what could we send with Hogs to make that happen?

 

Probably at least a 2nd, but I'd be a bit surprised if they gave up on Romanov this early considering they gave up the 13OA in 2022 for him 

 

I think they'd probably prefer a prospect over a pick though, picks don't help them compete now 

 

Hoglander + Raty maybe? I'm just spitballing 

 

We'd also have to juggle the cap, Romanov has a 2.5M cap hit 

 

I just don't see it, Isles aren't as strong on LD as they are RD and Romanov is a cost controlled RFA

 

I think they're supposedly dangling Wahlstrom

[6of1_halfdozenofother]

5 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

 

The more you know...

US Version:

 

vs. Japanese (Famicom) version:

 

And so now you know.  

[LillStrimma]

Just now, conquestofbaguettes said:

 

You're saying every prospect that didn't 100% hit is the big bad Bennings fault?  Heh.

 

Dahlen was a lack luster player that couldn't stick in the national league. Extremely common tale around the league regardless of GM or organization.

 

Fruit hanging so low it's laying on the ground fermenting

Why don’t you talk about what I was talking about? 
Prospects being thrown to the wolves or under the bus…  Benning was a bad man there and it sends a rotten signal downwards in the organisation and if you don’t understand that I can’t help you.
 

 

For me Dahlen is at his level now in Timrå.

He’s to small to be good in NHL.

Especially with all the other small ones drafted by Bennings scouts. 

[AnthonyG]

6 minutes ago, LillStrimma said:

For me Dahlen is at his level now in Timrå.

He’s to small to be good in NHL.

Especially with all the other small ones drafted by Bennings scouts. 

Hughes and Hoglander say hello
Burke made that comment about Hughes. How’d that pan out?

also you’re confusing Gillis with Benning

Hodgson, Subban, Shinkaruk, Schroeder

 

 

[Dr. Crossbar]

31 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

all the Subbans 

 

All the Subbans are belong to us.

[Bob Long]

24 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

 

Probably at least a 2nd, but I'd be a bit surprised if they gave up on Romanov this early considering they gave up the 13OA in 2022 for him 

 

I think they'd probably prefer a prospect over a pick though, picks don't help them compete now 

 

Hoglander + Raty maybe? I'm just spitballing 

 

We'd also have to juggle the cap, Romanov has a 2.5M cap hit 

 

I just don't see it, Isles aren't as strong on LD as they are RD and Romanov is a cost controlled RFA

 

I think they're supposedly dangling Wahlstrom

 

Huh. I doubt hogs moves the needle then.

 

We really don't have a swap of that kind. 

 

Why don't they just sign Phil?

[AK-19]

It's amazing how the drafting records of poorly performing teams seem to be so much better than the average team. Almost like there's a reason for it. 

[crobar]

Couldnt read all the posts here but there seems to be a lot of long winded nothingness going on. Bye bye Gillis, Benning, Dahlin and all the other whined about past crap. I am having FUN this year watching the team play. Enjoy the now.

[Coconuts]

6 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

Huh. I doubt hogs moves the needle then.

 

We really don't have a swap of that kind. 

 

Why don't they just sign Phil?

 

If they're willing to move Wahlstrom they'd probably want a more long term asset

[conquestofbaguettes]

3 hours ago, SV. said:

So, what is the point of this thread then?  You keep oscillating between these positions where Benning deserves credit for doing the best he could in the circumstances he was given but also holding that he can't be blamed for screwing up under ownership's mandates.  Then, you're saying that ownership know best and aren't dumb people, but would have just hired yes-men, anyway.  People already know that ownership sucks.  Them sucking doesn't mean that Benning somehow sucks less.

If that's your take away I think you may have missed the point. My entire post isn't about Benning or even Aquillini in particular-- It's the about market reality of running a business, the system itself which forces ownership and their subsequent employees on a certain path which is by and large out of all of their control.

 

As I stated in my original post:

 

"If you're a GM in that situation, what can you even do? And to that I say, if it wasn’t Benning and co. doing the job of "staying competitive" it would've been someone else in that seat at that time doing exactly the same thing with exactly the same blueprint and demands on the table.

Am I defending Benning and his management squad? Perhaps. I think they are, for the most part, scapegoats making the best of a tough situation.
Of course we can discuss all the "bad" moves. But how we judge a particular move during that time for the most part doesn't even matter.

 

We must first ask, was that move means to an ends in terms stop gap fillers to be competitive in now? Or was it a perceived future piece to build around moving forward.
Each decision is largely context dependant on the demands/needs being filled in a particular way.
Even though the common criticisms tend to be strictly focused on future results and nothing but.

Lest we forget, Benning and co. lasted 8 years. By this we can reasonably deduce that their work kept the dollars and viewership levels to an adequate level for ownership. They did the best they could to balance the needs of the present and the needs of the future.

Of course it's easy to blame the ownership group putting the needs of the business above longer term gains that could otherwise be achieved at faster rate... IN THEORY. Just as a tank rebuild always sounds great in theory.
But it was simply never a realistic scenario in this market-- never was and probably never will be. And I bet if you asked Francesco directly, even he personally would've preferred to take a different approach.

But... business is business.

Am I defending the billionaires at the helm? Not so much. But criticizing their chosen path with some ideal in mind is sure easy for us to say... especially considering we have zero financial stake in the business. And if we did I wonder if we'd feel the same way about how things played out.

 

Perspective is everything."

 

3 hours ago, SV. said:

And yes, of course it's conjecture.  This whole thread has been dealing in conjecture as the process in how you've tried to interpret this period of failure on the parts of ownership and previous management is predicated on subjective caveats, mental gymnastics, and goalpost shifting alike. 

 

I've been consistent in my answers throughout. All I'm doing is referencing the original thesis here.  So if you think goalposts have been moved and mental gymnastics have occurred I suspect you may have misunderstood the original post.  As we can see above you didn't understand the point of it in the first place so... you tell me.

3 hours ago, SV. said:

At the end of the day, your original post would have saved a ton of time if you had just come out and said "I'm a recovering Benning bro and here's why I think we wrongfully fired him" than to present your opinions as some sort of beacon of truth regarding the reality of rebuilding and business decision-making. 

 

Who said I thought they wrongfully fired anyone? See. This is the problem here. Thinking in terms of false dichotomies will get you nowhere closer to understand.  Anti-pro, us-them, black white. We're talking about a systems issue here- a meso and macro level analysis.

 

 

3 hours ago, SV. said:

  Many of us here don't live in a box that only focuses on Vancouver.  We have, and continue to see, evidence of other markets, bigger and smaller than Vancouver, that have sanctioned proper rebuilds.  And no, not ones where you lose every game and draft high to fix the issues, but ones where you remain competitive while still prioritizing cap-space, asset management, and remaining patient with the process of getting from A to B.  Again, Benning was horrible at doing this, while his successors, under the same constraints, seem to be managing it alright so far.

Not all are markets are equal. And not all teams start at the same starting position.

 

Benning and his successors weren't dealt the same hands. Just as Gillis and Benning weren't dealt the same hands.

 

Infact if anyone JR and AV weren't dealt a hand closer to Mike Gillis. A team already on the rise. Pretty easy to look good when you have an established all-star core to build around and add supplemental pieces 

 

Comparing the current and previous regime is like apples and oranges when you get into the details.

 

But you didn't understand the point of the original post to begin with and have now resorted to accusing of "Benning Bro." So, I wouldn't be surprised if you don't understand why the above is true either.

Edited November 22, 2023 by conquestofbaguettes

[6of1_halfdozenofother]

13 minutes ago, crobar said:

Couldnt read all the posts here but there seems to be a lot of long winded nothingness going on. Bye bye Gillis, Benning, Dahlin and all the other whined about past crap. I am having FUN this year watching the team play. Enjoy the now.

 

56 minutes ago, 6of1_halfdozenofother said:

 

How DARE you slag the arbiter of reason and the sole guardian of truth of the Benning era, the one and only AGM Chris Gear!  

 

 

[conquestofbaguettes]

12 minutes ago, crobar said:

Couldnt read all the posts here but there seems to be a lot of long winded nothingness going on. Bye bye Gillis, Benning, Dahlin and all the other whined about past crap. I am having FUN this year watching the team play. Enjoy the now.

 

Then why'd you even come here then? lol.

Just to make us read your post saying you aren't reading anything... all the while claiming posts full of "nothingness." How would you know. You just said you didn't read anything ! LMAO

[conquestofbaguettes]

48 minutes ago, LillStrimma said:

 Benning was a bad man there and it sends a rotten signal downwards in the organisation and if you don’t understand that I can’t help you.

And if you don't understand how those were largely a product of circumstance due to where the team was at in terms of team development and construction I can't help you. But again, easy to scapegoat X rather than understand the underlying reality of a situation.

[Bob Long]

19 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

 

If they're willing to move Wahlstrom they'd probably want a more long term asset

 

So who else is Lou moving out with him to make cap room?

[SV.]

1 minute ago, conquestofbaguettes said:

If that's your take away I think you may have missed the point. My entire post isn't about Benning or even Aquillini in particular-- It's the about market reality of running a business, the system itself which forces ownership and their subsequent employees on a certain path that is by and large out of their contro.

 

As I stated in my original post

 

"If you're a GM in that situation, what can you even do? And to that I say, if it wasn’t Benning and co. doing the job of "staying competitive" it would've been someone else in that seat at that time doing exactly the same thing with exactly the same blueprint and demands on the table.

Am I defending Benning and his management squad? Perhaps. I think they are, for the most part, scapegoats making the best of a tough situation.
Of course we can discuss all the "bad" moves. But how we judge a particular move during that time for the most part doesn't even matter.

 

We must first ask, was that move means to an ends in terms stop gap fillers to be competitive in now? Or was it a perceived future piece to build around moving forward.
Each decision is largely context dependant on the demands/needs being filled in a particular way.
Even though the common criticisms tend to be strictly focused on future results and nothing but.

Lest we forget, Benning and co. lasted 8 years. By this we can reasonably deduce that their work kept the dollars and viewership levels to an adequate level for ownership. They did the best they could to balance the needs of the present and the needs of the future.

Of course it's easy to blame the ownership group putting the needs of the business above longer term gains that could otherwise be achieved at faster rate... IN THEORY. Just as a tank rebuild always sounds great in theory.
But it was simply never a realistic scenario in this market-- never was and probably never will be. And I bet if you asked Francesco directly, even he personally would've preferred to take a different approach.

But... business is business.

Am I defending the billionaires at the helm? Not so much. But criticizing their chosen path with some ideal in mind is sure easy for us to say... especially considering we have zero financial stake in the business. And if we did I wonder if we'd feel the same way about how things played out.

 

Perspective is everything."

 

 

I've been consistent in my answers throughout. All I'm doing is referencing the original thesis here.  So if you think goalposts have been moved and mental gymnastics have occurred I suspect you may have misunderstood the original post.  As we can see above you didn't understand the point of it in the first place so... you tell me.

 

Who said I thought they wrongfully fired anyone? See. This is the problem here. Thinking in terms of false dichotomies will get you nowhere closer to understand.  Anti-pro, us-them, black white. We're talking about a systems issue here- a meso and macro level analysis.

 

 

Not all are markets are equal. And not all teams start at the same starting position.

 

Benning and his successors weren't dealt the same hands. Just as Gillis and Benning weren't dealt the same hands.

 

Infact if anyone JR and AV weren't dealt a hand closer to Mike Gillis. A team already on the rise. Pretty easy to look good when you have an established all-star core to build around and add supplemental pieces 

 

Comparing the current and previous regime is like apples and oranges when you get into the details.

 

But you didn't understand the point of the original post to begin with and have now resorted to accusing of "Benning Bro." So, I wouldn't be surprised if you don't understand why the above is true either.

Thing is, if this is meant to be the conclusion and purpose of your thread - that things are ultimately out of everybody's control and falls predominantly into ownership's hands in their quest to meet and exceed the bottom line for "business" - then why not cross-reference this with other teams around the NHL to properly corroborate and support your ideas?  A comparative analysis would have been much better to perform than whatever this thread is supposed to be.  It makes absolutely no sense to analyze Vancouver in a vacuum, when the majority of people you're preaching to have evidence and context from the rebuilding experiences of other teams to easily refute what you're trying to communicate.  Is it really surprising that nearly everybody in this thread has come in and essentially said "Yeah, no, the ownership is bad but the GM is still responsible here".

[canuck73_3]

1 hour ago, LillStrimma said:

I only talk about him when it’s relevant. When Linden or Gillis get bashed.

 

What do you think of Allvin? 
Don’t you find it amusing that he is the kind of GM I talked about the whole time while Benning made wrong decisions.

Funny that it was a swede also…

I like Allvin and Rutherford and they have done a good job so far. However when it comes to Benning your vitriol for him does not allow you to think critically or objectively.

[NewbieCanuckFan]

1 hour ago, 6of1_halfdozenofother said:

 

Only if he can't convince Chubarov to pick up his car from the rink.

To be fair, Chubie was only guy that proved (at the time) to be a solid NHLer (good defensive 3C) unlike those other "wild cards".  I forgot the story why he never returned (left during the lockout right?)