i'm not disagreeing with you with respect to schmidt's play since he got here.

i would also say that it's too early to judge this trade. you make some good points as to why this (seemingly great) trade may not be all that it was advertised to be but it's still early days.

i'll put it this way: i did not like the JTM trade one bit. i thought it was a dumb win-now move which seems to be par for the course for jb.

i was proven wrong by miller's play last year. he was fan-fcuking-tastic. great trade. however... there's still a part of me that thinks it was still a bad trade. not because of how he's played (this season excepted) but where he is and where the team is. by the time i believe the team should be contenders (take the next step), he will be a ufa. if he's played like he's shown last year, he'll be in for a massive payday either here or elsewhere. so basically, you'll have to pony up big just to keep him and if you don't you're letting a big piece of the core go. any player agent will be to exploit that. and if he doesn't deserve the big raise, the trade wasn't worth it anyway.

that's my way of saying that schmidt may look bad right now but it's still too early to evaluate the trade.

full disclosure: i like the schmidt trade. i'd still do it 8 days out of 7. (i acknowledge this opinion may age really, really badly.)
- RealityChecker

The Schmidt trade was great. He has not been the problem. Subtstantially younger and more effective than Edler. I see him as an Edler replacement

No.
- LordHumungous

No chance they pass Edmonton despite what Puck Shack says. They will finish solidly in 6th

Although it is mostly true and most has been water-cooler, fan sites talking points for about 8 years now, I am not sure why the Schmidt deal is not considered another bad move.
Schmidt is here for several more seasons at a cap hit just under 6 million and is not a very good defenseman.
When putting pen to paper and talking about a subject such as this, the writer needs to layout all the concerns, not just the ones that they haven't agreed with.
For some reason, Schmidt is considered a good defenseman by some and his shinyness with this group, shouldn't absolve him from being excluded in this type of conversation.
- Reubenkincade

I don't think it's fair to judge that trade/Schmidt this early. He's played 16 games on a new team in a new system with no preseason, and the team he's playing on is absolute trash right now. It's so bad our anointed Norris winner is playing like a rookie that should be sitting a few games.

The Schmidt trade was great. He has not been the problem. Subtstantially younger and more effective than Edler. I see him as an Edler replacement
- CanuckDon

100% correct but #teamwhiner needs a spin-cycle lol

People are way to attached to 'vets' here. We were fine after the Sedins we'll be fine after Edler-Tanev lol. Just the sooner the better to move on from both. Tanner down...Edler to go lol

No chance they pass Edmonton despite what Puck Shack says. They will finish solidly in 6th
- CanuckDon

No way will the Nucks finish ahead of the Oil. At this point anyways. But there is the Koskinen factor lol.

If Smith finds a groove the Oil will be fine just Tippett needs to play him.

Also, from Drance via the Athletic this morning, the Vancouver versus Toronto rebuild and a good finger pointing at Aquaman:

The Shanaplan vs. “We can build on this”

On April 9, 2014, the Canucks announced that Trevor Linden was the club’s new president.

It was only two days later when the Maple Leafs announced Brendan Shanahan would take over their hockey operations shop.

And so two rebuilds were born.

The seeds for what sprouted into a disastrous week in Toronto for the Canucks weren’t planted in October of 2020 when Jacob Markstrom walked in unrestricted free agency. This doesn’t stem back to the club’s offseason decisions this fall. And it wasn’t about effort or coaching or the club’s preparation on Thursday, or Saturday, or Monday. At least not really.

No, the way the Maple Leafs thoroughly outclassed the Canucks, that’s been seven years in the making.

When the Maple Leafs launched the Shanaplan, Toronto was still scraping up the ashes of the late-season implosion that submarined the team that became the poster child for the shot-based metrics ability to point out unsustainable success.

The Canucks, meanwhile, were picking up the pieces of a successful, progressive experiment in hockey management that was waylaid by John Tortorella’s momentary unfitness.

Both teams were about to enter a major rebuilding period, it’s just that one team really understood it and had a plan. And the other didn’t. Or, it did, but ownership wasn’t ready for that yet and brought in new people.

And so Linden was hired, and he hired Willie Desjardins and Benning, and Benning suggested they could turn things around quickly.

They made the playoffs that first season with a team that was fundamentally already in place and sought to restock the organization while holding on to an aging core. None of it made big-picture sense, and honestly, none of it really worked.

If you haven’t read The Athletic’s Harman Dayal’s brilliant column unpacking this, do yourself a favour and do so now. It explains in excruciating detail how major inconsistencies in management philosophy have sabotaged the Benning era, despite real success at the draft table.

Meanwhile, Toronto went about doing everything the Vancouver market was calling for over the last five years.

The Maple Leafs embraced analytical thinking about all manner of problems. Shanahan spent one year evaluating things and then deposed the head coach and general manager he inherited, steering in a major way into a scorched-earth rebuild. Every veteran was sold at the deadline, with a stable of veterans signed to one-year deals for that express purpose. Cap space was weaponized with the Leafs intentionally sewering the books in trades for Colin Greening, Nathan Horton and David Clarkson among others. They retained salary in the Phil Kessel deal.

Between 2014 and 2020, the Maple Leafs made 60 selections at the NHL Entry Draft, averaging an extra pick-and-a-half per season. The Canucks, meanwhile, made 48 over the same time frame.

The intentionality of Toronto’s rebuild and the fitfulness of Vancouver’s stands out above all, though, in fairness, it should be noted that the Leafs also had some lottery luck that landed them Auston Matthews. Lottery luck isn’t really a thing for the Canucks, of course.

The Maple Leafs haven’t had playoff success, but they had a plan, they executed it and they’re now years ahead of Vancouver, with bloated second contracts making things a bit difficult going forward, but they have real cost certainty in place and a specific understanding of the tightrope they’ll have to walk in constructing their team during a fixed Stanley Cup window.

The Canucks are going to be capped out again this summer once Hughes and Pettersson and Demko get their second contracts, limiting their flexibility to improve a team that already isn’t particularly good.

Think about it this way: Going into the offseason before the final entry-level years of Matthews’ and Mitch Marner’s contracts, the Maple Leafs had the cap flexibility to take a run at a top unrestricted free agent and landed John Tavares. They ended up losing in seven games in the first round, to a Boston Bruins team that ended up one win away from winning the Stanley Cup.

In the final entry-level years of Pettersson’s and Hughes’ contracts, meanwhile, the Canucks didn’t have the cap space to retain Tyler Toffoli, who signed for $4.25 million per year.

In fairness to Benning, though, while the contract work has been brutal — particularly from 2015-2018 — the differences between these clubs and the plans they’ve executed starts at a higher level than the general manager’s office.

Shanahan and Maple Leafs general manager Kyle Dubas report to a board of technocratic business people. They make quarterly reports. They’re given certain budget parameters that are predictable and fixed and manage them with discretion.

Dubas, while still an assistant general manager, was once called into a board meeting to explain the concept of PDO and how it underlined the club’s long-term philosophy, James Mirtle reported in 2016. The Maple Leafs are run like a high-functioning, real-world business.

The Canucks ownership’s influence tends to take on a more involved and arbitrary shape. And that hangs over everything.

Ownership didn’t agree with the Mike Gillis plan to essentially trade everything aside from the Sedin twins in 2014, and it was partly what brought about regime change. In came a new group, talking about a quick rebuild, which became a fitful, messy one.

Ownership wanted to accelerate things again in 2018, hastening Trevor Linden’s departure.

Ownership didn’t extend Benning before the 2019 NHL Entry Draft, creating strange optics — and unfair ones — around the Miller trade.

Ownership was all-in on the 2019-20 season and then cut off the financial faucet this offseason because of the economic strain of the pandemic. That resulted in the club radically altering its direction and cutting more than 20 percent of the player personnel budget this offseason.

Instead of being permitted to address some of their problems by spending — which could have been alleviated this offseason by using devices such as ordinary course buyouts, or using their big Canadian marketplace buying power like the Canadiens did on the trade market to take advantage of an unprecedented, pandemic-driven buyers market — the Canucks were counting pennies and stuck with their inefficient contracts.

Mass layoffs, no extension for the head coach, no substantive extension talks with their best young players; it has all contributed to a funky vibe.

Benning will get the brunt of the blame in this market, and that’s part of the game for an NHL general manager, but make no mistake, the Canucks’ problems run deeper.

i'm not disagreeing with you with respect to schmidt's play since he got here.

i would also say that it's too early to judge this trade. you make some good points as to why this (seemingly great) trade may not be all that it was advertised to be but it's still early days.

i'll put it this way: i did not like the JTM trade one bit. i thought it was a dumb win-now move which seems to be par for the course for jb.

i was proven wrong by miller's play last year. he was fan-fcuking-tastic. great trade. however... there's still a part of me that thinks it was still a bad trade. not because of how he's played (this season excepted) but where he is and where the team is. by the time i believe the team should be contenders (take the next step), he will be a ufa. if he's played like he's shown last year, he'll be in for a massive payday either here or elsewhere. so basically, you'll have to pony up big just to keep him and if you don't you're letting a big piece of the core go. any player agent will be to exploit that. and if he doesn't deserve the big raise, the trade wasn't worth it anyway.

that's my way of saying that schmidt may look bad right now but it's still too early to evaluate the trade.

full disclosure: i like the schmidt trade. i'd still do it 8 days out of 7. (i acknowledge this opinion may age really, really badly.)
- RealityChecker

I have posted a link on here several times now, that shows some pretty scary numbers about Schmidt. I would think it is why they chose to get rid of him(possibly other issues as well)
Schmidt is a player that cost 50,000 less than Myers, who many complain about, but is in my opinion a better defenseman.
So basically, the salary is the same, as is the term and age is very similar, as to when the 2 were acquired, yet one cost a valued draft pick, one didn't.

I don't think it's fair to judge that trade/Schmidt this early. He's played 16 games on a new team in a new system with no preseason, and the team he's playing on is absolute trash right now. It's so bad our anointed Norris winner is playing like a rookie that should be sitting a few games.
- NewYorkNuck

Exactly. Schmidt will come around. Maybe the coaching change will help his play

i'm not disagreeing with you with respect to schmidt's play since he got here.

i would also say that it's too early to judge this trade. you make some good points as to why this (seemingly great) trade may not be all that it was advertised to be but it's still early days.

i'll put it this way: i did not like the JTM trade one bit. i thought it was a dumb win-now move which seems to be par for the course for jb.

i was proven wrong by miller's play last year. he was fan-fcuking-tastic. great trade. however... there's still a part of me that thinks it was still a bad trade. not because of how he's played (this season excepted) but where he is and where the team is. by the time i believe the team should be contenders (take the next step), he will be a ufa. if he's played like he's shown last year, he'll be in for a massive payday either here or elsewhere. so basically, you'll have to pony up big just to keep him and if you don't you're letting a big piece of the core go. any player agent will be to exploit that. and if he doesn't deserve the big raise, the trade wasn't worth it anyway.

that's my way of saying that schmidt may look bad right now but it's still too early to evaluate the trade.

full disclosure: i like the schmidt trade. i'd still do it 8 days out of 7. (i acknowledge this opinion may age really, really badly.)
- RealityChecker

It’s like you looked into my soul and pulled out exactly what I was thinking.

Reading the Athletic this morning, Thomas Drance is chuckin it at Benning this morning...

I have posted a link on here several times now, that shows some pretty scary numbers about Schmidt. I would think it is why they chose to get rid of him(possibly other issues as well)
Schmidt is a player that cost 50,000 less than Myers, who many complain about, but is in my opinion a better defenseman.
So basically, the salary is the same, as is the term and age is very similar, as to when the 2 were acquired, yet one cost a valued draft pick, one didn't.
- Reubenkincade

Possible other issues like... the cap? They just signed/were signing Petro. If they hadn't have signed him, Schmidt would still be with the Knights.

Reading the Athletic this morning, Thomas Drance is chuckin it at Benning this morning...
- Pacificgem

Ya, I posted his take and Harman's take from yesterday. Not too good. If this was in the courts that'd be some pretty damning substantial evidence

Ya, I posted his take and Harman's take from yesterday. Not too good. If this was in the courts that'd be some pretty damning substantial evidence
- NewYorkNuck

At the end of his article he squarely blames Francesco Aquilini and the impacts of the pandemic regarding cutting off the money faucet, however, before that he goes through the "Shanaplan" vs the "Benning Plan" and basically says what a poor job Benning's done outside of drafting.

I hit the "Boom! Glad you really enjoyed it." button at the end

I have posted a link on here several times now, that shows some pretty scary numbers about Schmidt. I would think it is why they chose to get rid of him(possibly other issues as well)
Schmidt is a player that cost 50,000 less than Myers, who many complain about, but is in my opinion a better defenseman.
So basically, the salary is the same, as is the term and age is very similar, as to when the 2 were acquired, yet one cost a valued draft pick, one didn't.
- Reubenkincade

you definitely may be proven right.

i am not a myers fan (never have been.) the difference between the two, for me, is that i've had the same opinion of myers' play for several years. aside from this year, i've generally liked schmidt's play.

i've never looked deeply into schmidt's numbers prior to him getting here so you could be right that what we see is what we get. i just think that his play is symptomatic of how the team is playing. that might be just blind hope though.

Also, from Drance via the Athletic this morning, the Vancouver versus Toronto rebuild and a good finger pointing at Aquaman:
- NewYorkNuck

Another great article, too bad team pom-pom won't read it.

Possible other issues like... the cap? They just signed/were signing Petro. If they hadn't have signed him, Schmidt would still be with the Knights.
- NewYorkNuck

Ya Vegas beat reporter said Schmidt was the favourite to be the captain before they brought in AP. Loved by his teamates. Reuby is just sputtering nonsense

I don't wanna post the whole thing, but it starts like this...

-------------------------------------------------

By Thomas Drance Feb 8, 2021

It’s pretty clear that the Vancouver Canucks aren’t capable of measuring up to an elite team like the Toronto Maple Leafs.

So even though the Canucks throttled Toronto on Monday night for 40 minutes and probably deserved to be leading after the second period, when the Leafs showed up for half a period in the third, the Canucks were outclassed and got blown out of the water.

The Leafs scored two quick goals and earned the decisive three-game series sweep. They patted the Canucks on the head, broke a light sweat at Scotiabank Arena and took another two points off of Vancouver.

The Canucks were eager to lean into the positives after the game, positives that in fairness were enormously evident through 40 minutes. They’re a group searching for hope and belief, clearly.

That’s fine and they did play well. The effort was there and so was the execution. That doesn’t make it any easier for Canucks fans to listen to the postgame comments after a 3-1 defeat, the club’s fifth loss in a row.

Ya Vegas beat reporter said Schmidt was the favourite to be the captain before they brought in AP. Loved by his teamates. Reuby is just sputtering nonsense
- CanuckDon

How bout dem Yotes....buzzer beater last night

How bout dem Yotes....buzzer beater last night
- Pacificgem

If they go on a run im ready to jump ship. Yotes 🥰🥰🏆

At the end of his article he squarely blames Francesco Aquilini and the impacts of the pandemic regarding cutting off the money faucet, however, before that he goes through the "Shanaplan" vs the "Benning Plan" and basically says what a poor job Benning's done outside of drafting.

I hit the "Boom! Glad you really enjoyed it." button at the end
- Pacificgem

FA is definitely a problem.

i just have little respect to those that either 1) agree with his "vision;" or 2) disagree but go along just to keep their jobs.

if someone argues, "well, i'd do what my boss says to keep my million dollar job," you're insulting jb greatly. basically, you're saying that jb knows better but is only in it for the money. plus you're saying that jb has no faith in himself to get another job (had he turned down FA by saying that a retool wouldn't work.)

If they go on a run im ready to jump ship. Yotes 🥰🥰🏆
- CanuckDon

That shootout winner by Garland was filthy

FA is definitely a problem.

i just have little respect to those that either 1) agree with his "vision;" or 2) disagree but go along just to keep their jobs.

if someone argues, "well, i'd do what my boss says to keep my million dollar job," you're insulting jb greatly. basically, you're saying that jb knows better but is only in it for the money. plus you're saying that jb has no faith in himself to get another job (had he turned down FA by saying that a retool wouldn't work.)
- RealityChecker

I think it's pretty well known as of now that Benning is simply a "yes man", the article points to this. Anyone who laid out something that Aquilini wasn't onboard with was fired.

Benning just wants to be a GM so he does what he's told or does what he thinks Aquilini wants...my assumption.

if you replace green right now but not jb, what do you do if things don't turn around?

fire jb in the off season and then force a new gm to keep the "new" coach? or allow him to fire the new coach again?

either get rid of both or you're locked into jb for the remainder of his extension.

fire the entire front office in the offseason and bring in someone to re-organize it the way he wants. don't let jb do anything other than move out contracts. if that means firing him and bringing weisbrod as acting gm until the offseason so be it.
- RealityChecker

It's not that I disagree just the I think FA will probably start with Green and see where it goes. FA had JB's back a short while ago can't see him being let go just yet. IMO

GM change would bring about the coaching change anyways. Can't see Benning being removed but Green and a fresh face in the room might be a possibility now.
- LordHumungous

I don't see Aquilini wanting to pay two GMs until 2022. Secondly this is a year where you need strong drafting because of access to drafting. Also I don't know what aquilini told Benning in the summer .

I am sure Luongo is looking forward to coming back to the Looney Bin

I think it's pretty well known as of now that Benning is simple a "yes man", the article points to this. Anyone who laid out something that Aquilini wasn't onboard with was fired.

Benning just wants to be a GM so he does what he's told or does what he thinks Aquilini wants...my assumption.
- Pacificgem

i think that jb believes he can institute his vision within FA's plan. he thinks that his long term moves will balance out the short term stuff.

the problem is that it just keeps them in no-man's land.