Former Canucks Thread 2023-24 Edition

[EpochLink]

Brandon Sutter is the epitome of the Jim Benning era. Good old moron thought he can centre the 3rd line, he couldn’t even do that.

Wish him the best in retirement but he was the absolute drizzling shits.

 

[M2Beezy]

The last name on a long list of nobodys... another Benning classic...

 

[MS]

I will forever remember him for a hat trick game in late season where the wins don’t f***ing matter and we would’ve benefited from a higher pick.

I don’t miss Sutter one bit.

His big season-ending run was in the Quinn Hughes year so it didn’t end up hurting them.

 

[LordBacon]

His big season-ending run was in the Quinn Hughes year so it didn’t end up hurting them.

We benefited from Detroit making an absurd pick.

 

[MS]

We benefited from Detroit making an absurd pick.

They took the consensus #3 rated player at #6. It looks horrible in hindsight but on draft day Zadina was being hyped as a massive steal for them - certainly not absurd.

 

[Kryten]

Brandon Sutter is the epitome of the Jim Benning era. Good old moron thought he can centre the 3rd line, he couldn’t even do that.

Wish him the best in retirement but he was the absolute drizzling shits.

Thats not true, the moron thought he could centre the 2nd line

 

[Burke's Evil Spirit]

Brandon Sutter is the epitome of the Jim Benning era. Good old moron thought he can centre the 3rd line, he couldn’t even do that.

Wish him the best in retirement but he was the absolute drizzling shits.

Brandon Sutter is the epitome of the Jim Benning era in that he:

1 - Chose the wrong problem to solve (Tried to get a 2nd line center when he already had Sedin-Horvat)
2 - Failed to solve it (Sutter is not a 2nd line center)
3 - Bled value elsewhere to do so (Lost Bonino and a 2nd)

 

[RobertKron]

Thats not true, the moron thought he could centre the 2nd line

Yeah, we often forget that one of the reasons they were stoked to acquire Sutter was because they thought he'd take some of the offensive responsibility away from Horvat, because - to paraphrase their own words - Horvat had felt obligated to go out and put up a bunch of points to help the team and they didn't want him to do that anymore.

 

[Jyrki21]

Hey, I deserve some credit too!

Confirmed with Link: - Jake Virtanen charged with sexual assault

It was the wrong pick since Day 1. Bad player, worse person. He will always represent the Benning era for me.

forums.hfboards.com

Can confirm:

 

[Kryten]

Yeah, we often forget that one of the reasons they were stoked to acquire Sutter was because they thought he'd take some of the offensive responsibility away from Horvat, because - to paraphrase their own words - Horvat had felt obligated to go out and put up a bunch of points to help the team and they didn't want him to do that anymore.

Which was even more ridiculous since Bonino already brought that aspect and showed being a better point producer and playmaker before acquiring him and after trading him with an add for Sutter.

 

[LordBacon]

They took the consensus #3 rated player at #6. It looks horrible in hindsight but on draft day Zadina was being hyped as a massive steal for them - certainly not absurd.

Fair enough.

 

[rypper]

"We're signing him to take the hard match-up minutes so Horvat can play up the lineup!"

The team proceeds to play him on the Sedins wing and bury Horvat in tough minutes as a young player.

 

[F A N]

Brandon Sutter is the epitome of the Jim Benning era. Good old moron thought he can centre the 3rd line, he couldn’t even do that.

Wish him the best in retirement but he was the absolute drizzling shits.

Sutter was a very capable 3rd line C. He just wasn't the same after his body started falling apart.

Brandon Sutter is the epitome of the Jim Benning era in that he:

1 - Chose the wrong problem to solve (Tried to get a 2nd line center when he already had Sedin-Horvat)
2 - Failed to solve it (Sutter is not a 2nd line center)
3 - Bled value elsewhere to do so (Lost Bonino and a 2nd)

Yeah, we often forget that one of the reasons they were stoked to acquire Sutter was because they thought he'd take some of the offensive responsibility away from Horvat, because - to paraphrase their own words - Horvat had felt obligated to go out and put up a bunch of points to help the team and they didn't want him to do that anymore.

Which was even more ridiculous since Bonino already brought that aspect and showed being a better point producer and playmaker before acquiring him and after trading him with an add for Sutter.

IIRC, Benning didn't really talk about Sutter being the 2C. He saw him as being bigger and faster than Bonino, is right-handed, and a matchup C who is a good playoff performer.

The trade may have been reactionary, but people forget that Bonino looked real slow against Calgary in the playoffs and by that time it looked like Horvat had surpassed Bonino. Bringing in a right handed C to handle the tough defensive matchups made a lot of sense. Of course Willie had other ideas and the previously durable Sutter missed more than 2 games in his first season as a Canuck. Who knows what would have happened if Sutter stayed healthy. In his first season here before he was injured, all of the Canucks' losses were one goal games.

Bonino sucked in Pittsburgh until Hagelin and Kessel were put on his line. The Bonino after that was a different player. No question that Bonino ended up being the better player but at the time of the trade many did see Sutter as an upgrade.

 

[Burke's Evil Spirit]

IIRC, Benning didn't really talk about Sutter being the 2C. He saw him as being bigger and faster than Bonino, is right-handed, and a matchup C who is a good playoff performer.

This is ridiculous revisionism. Benning name dropped Patrice Bergeron when he acquired Sutter. He signed him to a $22M contract extension featuring the first retroactive NTC in NHL history. He was acquired to be a 2C.

 

[Bojack Horvatman]

Can confirm:

This must of been made before OEL. Because there is no way OEL isn’t on Benning’s Mt Rushmore now. Actually OEL deserves a statue of his own like Joseph Seed.

 

[MS]

"We're signing him to take the hard match-up minutes so Horvat can play up the lineup!"

The team proceeds to play him on the Sedins wing and bury Horvat in tough minutes as a young player.

No, they literally said they were signing him to take the offensive pressure off Horvat. It was their plan to bury Horvat in tough minutes. Somehow they thought it was hard/big pressure for a young player to score in soft minutes but no biggie to bury a 20 y/o in the team's hardest defensive minutes. Keep in mind this was just after the bizarre 'it was nice of Bo to score, but we really want him to get back to focusing on not scoring' comments from Willie. They had no plans to develop Horvat offensively and were trying to turn him into a pure defensive 3C.

_____________

I've posted this before and hopefully this is the last time I'll ever post it, but the thinking in the Sutter trade still absolutely blows my mind:

The chain of logic here is so bad it's actually difficult to comprehend.

The move was made because :

1) They wanted to develop Bo Horvat as a defensive center (WRONG) and felt the best way to do this would be to bring in a better offensive center to 'take the pressure off having to score' and bury him in tough defensive minutes (IDIOTIC).

2) They felt that Nick Bonino was too slow to be effective in the playoffs (HILARIOUSLY WRONG).

Then, they identified Brandon Sutter, a guy who once went through an entire season with 1 primary assist, as that offensive upgrade on Bonino (WRONG) and decided that swapping Sutter for Bonino would be worth the massive difference in cap hit (WRONG).

Then, despite the fact that they were trading a better player on a better contract for a worse player on a worse contract to a team in cap hell with no leverage, somehow put themselves in the position where they added assets and draft picks to the transaction (WRONG).

Then, before ever watching the player play and seeing how he fit into their roster, they gave him a massive extension which was the biggest contract ever for a guy who had never hit 40 points, with a retroactive NTC (WRONG).

__________

Basically, they took themselves from a position where they had an ideal situation with Horvat-Bonino as their #2-3 centers with Bonino taking a defensive load to free up a young player to play some softer minutes, downgraded on Bonino at both ends of the rink, nearly tripled their cap hit, chained themselves to an albatross contract, and buried Horvat in defensive minutes which nearly wrecked him the following season. And then watched Bonino nearly win a Conn Smythe while Sutter has never played a playoff game as a Canuck (edit : originally wrote this in 2019). You couldn't f*** something up so thoroughly in so many different ways if you were trying. They literally got every single thing about this trade wrong.

 

[Burke's Evil Spirit]

Yeah, we often forget that one of the reasons they were stoked to acquire Sutter was because they thought he'd take some of the offensive responsibility away from Horvat, because - to paraphrase their own words - Horvat had felt obligated to go out and put up a bunch of points to help the team and they didn't want him to do that anymore.

Overpay to fail to solve a problem you didn't have: Benning in a nutshell.

 

[F A N]

This is ridiculous revisionism. Benning name dropped Patrice Bergeron when he acquired Sutter. He signed him to a $22M contract extension featuring the first retroactive NTC in NHL history. He was acquired to be a 2C.

Didn't he specifically say that he wasn't comparing Sutter to Bergeron? Name dropping is not the same as a direct comparison.

I honestly have no idea why so many here were/are fixated on the retroactive NTC. The chances of Sutter being traded that season was slim to none. Things can change and cause a GM to reevaluate, but rarely do GMs trade for a pending UFA, sign him to a long term extension with no trade protection, and trade him before the NTC kicks in. Besides what happened to Jeff Carter, I can't think of a situation close to that.

 

[MS]

Didn't he specifically say that he wasn't comparing Sutter to Bergeron? Name dropping is not the same as a direct comparison.

I honestly have no idea why so many here were/are fixated on the retroactive NTC. The chances of Sutter being traded that season was slim to none. Things can change and cause a GM to reevaluate, but rarely do GMs trade for a pending UFA, sign him to a long term extension with no trade protection, and trade him before the NTC kicks in. Besides what happened to Jeff Carter, I can't think of a situation close to that.

It wasn't that the retroactive NTC really made any functional difference, it was the comical level of over-commitment to a middling bottom-6 forward and it added to the stupidity that at the time (and for quite a while after) was the biggest contract ever given to a forward who had never scored more than 40 points.

If Rutherford/Allvin gave a retroactive NTC to Beauvillier or Joshua tomorrow, the reaction would be the same.

 

[F A N]

If Rutherford/Allvin gave a retroactive NTC to Beauvillier or Joshua tomorrow, the reaction would be the same.

Well I don't know about you but my reaction would be the same.

If they were given 5 year extensions with no trade protections I wouldn't really care if they were given retroactive NTCs. Outside of a sign and trade or an unexpected trade opportunity, I don't expect management to give a long term extension with no trade protection to a player only to change their minds over the next few months.

 

[MS]

Well I don't know about you but my reaction would be the same.

If they were given 5 year extensions with no trade protections I wouldn't really care if they were given retroactive NTCs. Outside of a sign and trade or an unexpected trade opportunity, I don't expect management to give a long term extension with no trade protection to a player only to change their minds over the next few months.

Again, it's the principle of the fact that the first retroactive NTC in NHL history went to a 30-point bottom-6 player who was already getting horribly overpaid in terms of AAV. It triggered people because it spoke to the horrible mis-evaluation/overrating by Benning of this player.

 

[Breakers]

Giving Sutter that extension with term left on his current contract was Benning backing himself into a corner for no reason

It's that same mindset that he had with Pearson............ like Dude, take a franking breath and chill. These guys aren't that important, and they are under contract.
You have way more pressing matters with the cap

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

Giving Sutter that extension with term left on his current contract was Benning backing himself into a corner for no reason

It's that same mindset that he had with Pearson............ like Dude, take a franking breath and chill. These guys aren't that important, and they are under contract.
You have way more pressing matters with the cap

Name a more iconic duo: Benning and sunk cost fallacy.

 

[MS]

Name a more iconic duo: Benning and sunk cost fallacy.

You could run a university course on logical fallacies and cognitive biases using nothing but Jim Benning as examples.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

You could run a university course on logical fallacies and cognitive biases using nothing but Jim Benning as examples.

Or just asset mismanagement. Let’s re-sign garbage players to higher cap hits, let our good players walk as UFAs without getting anything back, trade high draft picks and promising prospects for waiver eligible B prospects, and sign the most expensive UFAs who are in their 30s! I can’t believe he lasted 8 years.