WWYDW: Rogers Arena And The Home Game Experience

Last night, the Vancouver Canucks visited the recently-renovated TD Garden in Boston, complete with its brand-new seats and plenty of other upgrades – and it was enough to make any Pacific Northwesterner envious.

Back on the home-front, Rogers Arena is still sporting rows of miscoloured seats that really didn’t come all that close to matching the team’s jerseys when they were installed – and now stand out as an anachronistic eyesore.

It’s not just the seats, either. The former General Motors Place opened up in 1995, and 25 years later it is definitely starting to show its age. Fan complaints have ranged from in-arena amenities to parking to DJs, and many have centered around the very atmosphere inside the building during home games.

The Canucks are finally exciting again – but is Rogers Arena an exciting place to watch a hockey game? Perhaps not.

With that in mind, this week we are asking:

Last week, we asked:

Your responses are below!

Solid return? Nope. It would have to be better than solid. Of course, definitions will vary on what that is, but to me you don’t trade the thing the team has been so desperate for over the past few years just because he’s in a rut.

He started the season very well, and there is no reason to think that he can’t return to that kind of form. The very fact this is even a “thing” again just shows how fickle Canuck fans can be.

He’s an absolutely great piece to have through this season’s playoff chase and hopefully playoff run. Either as one of the bottom pairing, or as the “7th” guy if/when there are injuries.

If he’s to be moved, unless the return is better than solid, it should be done at the draft or next season when other D pieces become clearer.

 

Regarding Benn, I would trade him to Pittsburgh. They took Gudbransson last year so surely they would take Benn this year right?

 

I don’t see a reason to do anything with Benn during this season. He provides experience on a reasonable salary, that could prove valuable in a playoff run. During the offseason, decisions will have to be made on Benn, Stecher, Tanev, Juolevi, and Rafferty. That’s the appropriate time to decide what to do.

 

Benn isn’t very good. He has tunnel vision and gets caught watching the puck instead of anticipating the play.

However, playoff hockey is different simply because the refs stop calling things and even up the calls that they do make.

So, he might be ok in the postseason. But if trading him can make the team better, I’m all for it. He’s top of the trade list with Sutter, who probably won’t be traded because Benning sees him as insurance against a centre injury – which is silly given Sutter’s history.

 

What to do? The answer is in the question. He is a depth piece that can play both sides. If an injury occurs, he can slide in. At $2 mil through next year, not a big deal.

 

The Canucks need to shed salary next season. If there’s any sort of reasonable offer on the table for Benn, you take it.

 

If the Canucks are going to make a playoff run, then they need Jordie Benn and would be fools to trade him. Injuries in the playoffs are inevitable, and the Canucks need quality depth defencemen to fill in as needed. Jordie Benn is a competent defenceman and, unless you are upgrading to someone better, it makes no sense to trade him.

 

His time will come. For now, he must channel his inner Eriksson and be patient, until someone on the blue line turns into a patient.

 

Hold on to him unless somebody asks for him at the Trade Deadline.

Insurance is a good thing. Surely, one of the D will get injured. The mere fact that only one D-man has been injured this year (Edler, and the team down-spiralled without him) is really the major reason the team is where it is, in terms of improvement from last year. That, and Miller and Pearson having career years. So why mess with what’s working? Ditch Ferland (retirement) and Schaller first (his contract is up anyway, right?).