Rush17 Posted November 18, 2017 Share Posted November 18, 2017 On 11/13/2017 at 12:57 PM, bloodycanuckleheads said: Actually, the tank is over now - and not because anything's been accomplished. This summer, Benning finally realized that tanking doesn't actually work anymore (thanks to the stupid lottery rules). So, he tanked all last year and only got the 5th overall pick (while far better teams ended up with the best picks). He literally threw away an entire season. It's shocking that everyone here loves him so much. The first few years, he thought we were a decent team and tried to win, even though our team was god-awful. Then he threw away an entire season. And, now, at least he's trying to win - but he's done too much damage - so we're bound for the worst spot imagineable: not bad enough to get the good picks (absent of luck), but not good enough to make the playoffs. We are in the middle of a lost-decade thanks to him. And, I haven't even mentioned the fact that he made some abysmal choices when he did have those high picks (Virtanen, Juolevi). this is the stealth tank. not a tank tnak. so much different they are! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush17 Posted November 18, 2017 Share Posted November 18, 2017 On 11/13/2017 at 12:57 PM, bloodycanuckleheads said: Actually, the tank is over now - and not because anything's been accomplished. This summer, Benning finally realized that tanking doesn't actually work anymore (thanks to the stupid lottery rules). So, he tanked all last year and only got the 5th overall pick (while far better teams ended up with the best picks). He literally threw away an entire season. It's shocking that everyone here loves him so much. The first few years, he thought we were a decent team and tried to win, even though our team was god-awful. Then he threw away an entire season. And, now, at least he's trying to win - but he's done too much damage - so we're bound for the worst spot imagineable: not bad enough to get the good picks (absent of luck), but not good enough to make the playoffs. We are in the middle of a lost-decade thanks to him. And, I haven't even mentioned the fact that he made some abysmal choices when he did have those high picks (Virtanen, Juolevi). Not to mention... we got the guy they had at the top of their draft board in Pettersson. Whats wrong with picking 5th if you get your guy and it turns out hes a stud dominating the SEL LOL. GJ benning. I think last year was more of "holding off on promoting green" so he had a chance to start from game 1 with his new club not take on mop up duties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flickyoursedin Posted November 18, 2017 Share Posted November 18, 2017 49 minutes ago, Rush17 said: Not to mention... we got the guy they had at the top of their draft board in Pettersson. Whats wrong with picking 5th if you get your guy and it turns out hes a stud dominating the SEL LOL. GJ benning. I think last year was more of "holding off on promoting green" so he had a chance to start from game 1 with his new club not take on mop up duties. I don’t know if this is true or just something he said to make EP feel better about Vancouver. If it was always 100% EP why in his draft video does he say if the two forward and two dmen go like we think maybe we move down a spot or two. Almost makes it sound like if any of the top 4 of the last draft fell to us Vancouver doesn’t move the pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bloodycanuckleheads Posted November 18, 2017 Share Posted November 18, 2017 1 hour ago, Rush17 said: Whats wrong with picking 5th if you get your guy and it turns out hes a stud dominating the SEL LOL. Ummm, we could have traded down several spots and still got Pettersson. So, we could have had him AND a pick. Instead, we just got him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kungfudru Posted November 18, 2017 Share Posted November 18, 2017 25 minutes ago, bloodycanuckleheads said: Ummm, we could have traded down several spots and still got Pettersson. So, we could have had him AND a pick. Instead, we just got him. I'm fine with not taking the risk and keeping our pick to draft Pettersson. The NYR were high on him and you never know who would have traded up to select him before us. 2 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuck73_3 Posted November 18, 2017 Share Posted November 18, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, bloodycanuckleheads said: Ummm, we could have traded down several spots and still got Pettersson. So, we could have had him AND a pick. Instead, we just got him. Or don't and just pick the guy you want in the first place with ZERO risk of losing him. Petterson was and is a great pick and will be a stud for us, seriously stop whining about a possible trade that no team may have been interested in making in the first place... Edited November 18, 2017 by canuck73_3 1 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush17 Posted November 18, 2017 Share Posted November 18, 2017 1 hour ago, bloodycanuckleheads said: Ummm, we could have traded down several spots and still got Pettersson. So, we could have had him AND a pick. Instead, we just got him. incorrect. Benning was positive the rangers would of taken him at 7. the 6th pick team didnt seem to want to move up for the price. so what would you do? benning was looking at trading down to 8 but once the rangers got to 7 he had to stay at 5 to secure his guy. you act like you know what could of happened. yet if you actually followed all the media around it there was no other way. 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush17 Posted November 18, 2017 Share Posted November 18, 2017 7 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said: Or don't and just pick the guy you want in the first place with ZERO risk of losing him. Petterson was and is a great pick and will be a stud for us, seriously stop whining about a possible trade that no team may have been interested in making in the forst place... exactly. we got to studs in round 2. we don't need to be greedy. id rather secure a first line c over adding another 2nd round pick. pettersson is the real deal and 76% of cdc feels he will be our future first line c. we should be thankful we got Columbus' 2nd and run with it. pettersson is lighting it up in the SEL. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuck73_3 Posted November 18, 2017 Share Posted November 18, 2017 1 minute ago, Rush17 said: exactly. we got to studs in round 2. we don't need to be greedy. id rather secure a first line c over adding another 2nd round pick. pettersson is the real deal and 76% of cdc feels he will be our future first line c. we should be thankful we got Columbus' 2nd and run with it. pettersson is lighting it up in the SEL. I just don't see a logical reason to possibly lose the exact player we want to trade down and add a pick in what the 98th overall-120th or lower. Makes no sense. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bloodycanuckleheads Posted November 18, 2017 Share Posted November 18, 2017 6 minutes ago, Rush17 said: incorrect. Benning was positive the rangers would of taken him at 7. Wrong! Here's a quote from Benning himself: Quote “Like I had no idea, and they might have taken Pettersson if he was there.” Notice the phrases 'I had no idea' and 'might have'? He didn't trade down because he thought someone might have taken Petterson. But, you're forgetting that, if he had traded down and the Rangers did take him - that would have meant that Benning had a pick and the choice between multiple higher-ranked players. That's not really losing at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush17 Posted November 18, 2017 Share Posted November 18, 2017 3 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said: I just don't see a logical reason to possibly lose the exact player we want to trade down and add a pick in what the 98th overall-120th or lower. Makes no sense. I agree. hes just a narcissist benning hater. if pettersson was putting up these numbers in the SEL last year he would be in the conversation for 1st overall. in fact more then 1 gm said if pettersson was heavier he would of been 1st on their draft board. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted November 18, 2017 Share Posted November 18, 2017 Just now, bloodycanuckleheads said: Wrong! Here's a quote from Benning himself: Notice the phrases 'I had no idea' and 'might have'? He didn't trade down because he thought someone might have taken Petterson. But, you're forgetting that, if he had traded down and the Rangers did take him - that would have meant that Benning had a pick and the choice between multiple higher-ranked players. That's not really losing at all. That's good logic. But you got to be happy JB ended up with Petersson regardless, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush17 Posted November 18, 2017 Share Posted November 18, 2017 1 minute ago, bloodycanuckleheads said: Wrong! Here's a quote from Benning himself: Notice the phrases 'I had no idea' and 'might have'? He didn't trade down because he thought someone might have taken Petterson. But, you're forgetting that, if he had traded down and the Rangers did take him - that would have meant that Benning had a pick and the choice between multiple higher-ranked players. That's not really losing at all. you are proving our point. thanks for that. and from other media i heard he was actually pretty confident they would of taken him. so gg 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted November 18, 2017 Share Posted November 18, 2017 Just now, Rush17 said: I agree. hes just a narcissist benning hater. if pettersson was putting up these numbers in the SEL last year he would be in the conversation for 1st overall. in fact more then 1 gm said if pettersson was heavier he would of been 1st on their draft board. There was talk after the draft that, if Petersson was 10 - 20 pounds heavier, he should have been the first overall pick. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush17 Posted November 18, 2017 Share Posted November 18, 2017 1 minute ago, Alflives said: There was talk after the draft that, if Petersson was 10 - 20 pounds heavier, he should have been the first overall pick. yeah a lot of the pundents were saying that after the fact. we were lucky makar and heskanians stock rose so quickly at the end. (how do you spell his name again? heskanian? that's not it) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted November 18, 2017 Share Posted November 18, 2017 (edited) Just now, Rush17 said: yeah a lot of the pundents were saying that after the fact. we were lucky makar and heskanians stock rose so quickly at the end. (how do you spell his name again? heskanian? that's not it) Heiskanen? (Loser, because he is not on our team) Edited November 18, 2017 by Alflives 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bloodycanuckleheads Posted November 18, 2017 Share Posted November 18, 2017 3 minutes ago, Rush17 said: you are proving our point. And you are ignoring my point: we could have had Pettersson + a pick OR a higher-ranked-player + a pick. Both of those options are better than just Pettersson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted November 18, 2017 Share Posted November 18, 2017 (edited) 3 hours ago, Rush17 said: this is the stealth tank. not a tank tnak. so much different they are! its more like "try to win but still get Dahlin"? Edited November 18, 2017 by Jimmy McGill 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush17 Posted November 18, 2017 Share Posted November 18, 2017 2 minutes ago, Alflives said: Heiskanen? (Loser, because he is not on our team) yeah i clearly dont care enough to Google it lol. thanks for the correction. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush17 Posted November 18, 2017 Share Posted November 18, 2017 2 minutes ago, bloodycanuckleheads said: And you are ignoring my point: we could have had Pettersson + a pick OR a higher-ranked-player + a pick. Both of those options are better than just Pettersson. Could have. and we could have lost Pettersson too so you have no valid point. We got our guy argubly one of if not the best guy. so why are you all sour over not risking losing our guy? could you imagine how deflated jim would feel if we lost our guy because we got greedy? we have a sure fire #1 c in either pettersson or horvat so lets chill and enjoy watching these guys develop instead of complaining about what else we could have done? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now