The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 Benning is the worst GM in the league. Been saying that for a bit of time now. It's possible that he gets hand cuffed by Vancouver's owners but Vancouver has been GM after GM of bad decisions and he's by far the worst. Truly atrocious asset management. I love how, in all the outrage over the non-trading of Hamhuis, everyone is forgetting that these bozos failed to move Vrbata (!!!!). An absolutely astonishing display of either managerial ineptitude, or disastrous ownership meddling. Either way, Van fans are (for once) right to be outraged. I've seldom seen such incompetence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machine of Loving Grace Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 Truly atrocious asset management. I love how, in all the outrage over the non-trading of Hamhuis, everyone is forgetting that these bozos failed to move Vrbata (!!!!). An absolutely astonishing display of either managerial ineptitude, or disastrous ownership meddling. Either way, Van fans are (for once) right to be outraged. I've seldom seen such incompetence. Last week, after most thought the Canucks were still shooting for the playoffs, Benning announced that he was making all UFAs available. That's Hamhuis, Vrbata, Bartowski, Weber, Prust, and non-UFA Higgins. He didn't trade a single one. He instead gave up a first round pick in the 2013 NHL Entry Draft scoring at close to a point per game in the AHL for Utica for a 2011 second rounder having considerable trouble scoring in Calgary. He also traded a fifth rounder for another guy. The claim about Vrbata is that he had a list of teams and none of those teams wanted him, but insiders were saying all he had to do was hold some cap space to make a deal. Hold some cap space for a UFA (what we did with Weise) and he could have got an asset in return. Someone in Boston was saying the Bruins were interested in having Bartkowski back and they don't know why they couldn't get a deal done. After the "Dallas made an offer and Benning didn't get back to them" talk, I wonder if Benning just... fell asleep. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 Last week, after most thought the Canucks were still shooting for the playoffs, Benning announced that he was making all UFAs available. That's Hamhuis, Vrbata, Bartowski, Weber, Prust, and non-UFA Higgins. He didn't trade a single one. He instead gave up a first round pick in the 2013 NHL Entry Draft scoring at close to a point per game in the AHL for Utica for a 2011 second rounder having considerable trouble scoring in Calgary. He also traded a fifth rounder for another guy. The claim about Vrbata is that he had a list of teams and none of those teams wanted him, but insiders were saying all he had to do was hold some cap space to make a deal. Hold some cap space for a UFA (what we did with Weise) and he could have got an asset in return. Someone in Boston was saying the Bruins were interested in having Bartkowski back and they don't know why they couldn't get a deal done. After the "Dallas made an offer and Benning didn't get back to them" talk, I wonder if Benning just... fell asleep. This is the same guy who lost Frankie Carrado - no big superstar, but an organizational piece - on waivers for no reason. The only way you can excuse Benning is if he's got a meddlesome ownership that is constantly throwing spanners in the works. Other than that, it's just ridiculous...as you say, not ONE of the Garage Sale Seven dealt at the deadline. Unbelievable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted March 2, 2016 Author Share Posted March 2, 2016 The only way you can excuse Benning is if he's got a meddlesome ownership that is constantly throwing spanners in the works. Other than that, it's just ridiculous...as you say, not ONE of the Garage Sale Seven dealt at the deadline. Unbelievable. There's a rumour floating around that ownership nixed the Hamhuis to Dallas deal as they thought the Stars should have been offering more. But if ownership is that meddlesome, Benning's still shown himself to be a lousy GM thus far. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueKross Posted March 2, 2016 Share Posted March 2, 2016 I think that there has to be any number of teams disappointed at the dead line. I think GM's balked at the price of doing business and/or the need. It was brought up that injured players could be traded. It is more likely that that contract would go from a contending team to a non contending team. It is highly unlikely a contending would take on any cap space with a injury variable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.