Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[Report] Ben Hutton to become UFA


Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, oldnews said:

Hutton's minutes are so overplayed and extracted out of context. 

There's a reason he wasn't qualified - and that reason is not only arbitration rights (which I think people mistakenly assumed would drive up his salary/cap hit) 

Well when those “people” are the GM and Assistant GM who literally said in clear language in interviews that they were mainly worried about an arbitration decision (that they couldn’t walk away from) based on his playing minutes... I take their word for it rather than your smarmy one saying that everyone else is wrong...

Edited by Provost
  • Like 1
  • Wat 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Provost said:

Well when those “people” are the GM and Assistant GM who literally said in clear language in interviews that they were mainly worried about an arbitration decision (that they couldn’t walk away from) based on his playing minutes... I take their word for it rather than your smarmy one saying that everyone else is wrong...

Oh look - it's the guy that always whines/dramatizes when I engage one of his posts - but ironically, can't stop engaging himself - with the usual smarm that is your signature.

 

If both Benning and Weisbrod said in plain language that they were concerned that Hutton's minutes would gain him a raise in arbitration it should be easy for you to produce a quote to that effect.

 

I think you're attributing assumptions made by media like Kuzma and Canucksmarmy - to Benning.  

 

What Benning actually said was that they were talking to his agent, trying to find common ground and work out a contract before July 1st.   That can just as easily be interpreted as being unwilling to pay the 2.8 qualifying offer if accepted - as an unwillingness to go to arbitration.

 

The whole "Hutton might get 4 milllion in arbitration" thing looked like a media fluff production -  if you can produce a quote 'in clear language' as you claim, from the GM or AGM that shows this came from management comments - fill your boots = let's see it.

 

 

 

Edited by oldnews
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/30/2019 at 11:13 PM, Provost said:

I am saying Benning didn’t mess up.  Paying $4 million for Hutton (what he would have likely gotten in arbitration)

would have been dumb.

 

They apparently tried to get him to sign for a reasonable deal and it didn’t fly.  Hutton’s camp miscalculated his value on the market and may end up with most of their dance partners having moved on and spent their cap.  

 

I see you're in this thread serving up lots of 'realism' for Hutton and his camp.

 

I'm sure you weren't one of those guys selling the "Hutton is a legit top 4" line  ^_^

 

Ironically, at the same time as you're hindsight schooling his agent, you're trying to sell the line that the market value illusions and 4 million arbitration risks (that you evdiently believed) were shared, even fueled  by Benning = well done, you sure know how to ride a contradiction.

  • Wat 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, oldnews said:

Oh look - it's the guy that always whines/dramatizes when I engage one of his posts - but ironically, can't stop engaging himself - with the usual smarm that is your signature.

 

If both Benning and Weisbrod said in plain language that they were concerned that Hutton's minutes would gain him a raise in arbitration it should be easy for you to produce a quote to that effect.

 

I think you're attributing assumptions made by media like Kuzma and Canucksmarmy - to Benning.  

 

What Benning actually said was that they were talking to his agent, trying to find common ground and work out a contract before July 1st.   That can just as easily be interpreted as being unwilling to pay the 2.8 qualifying offer if accepted - as an unwillingness to go to arbitration.

 

The whole "Hutton might get 4 milllion in arbitration" thing looked like a media fluff production -  if you can produce a quote 'in clear language' as you claim, from the GM or AGM that shows this came from management comments - fill your boots = let's see it.

 

 

 

....don't you get tired of this same script every time?

1.  You make a claim that everyone else in the world is wrong/stupid/mistaken/an idiot/etc, backed up only by your mistaken belief that you know more than all the posters here, the media, people with decades of experience in the NHL.
2.  Someone corrects you with facts and you are proven wrong.
3.  You attack them personally
4.  You keep trying to revise and wheedle the argument differently that you really weren't wrong in the first place.

So here goes, yet again:
A direct link to Benning stating that it was the worry about the arbitration number based on how many minutes Hutton played.  It took about 2 minutes of searching to find it again.  About 47 minutes into this clip:
https://www.tsn.ca/radio/vancouver-1040/benning-on-contract-extension-captaincy-boeser-and-more-1.1354807

For an extra bit of gravy... here is Hutton's ACTUAL AGENT on the other side of the table saying the exact same thing:
https://www.sportsnet.ca/650/sportsnets-starting-lineup/andy-scott-cap-squeeze-pushed-ben-hutton-vancouver/

 

So... you are 100% entirely wrong... yet again.  Both sides of the negotiation talk about how the worry around the arb number based on Hutton's minutes was the main factor.  Bring on the part where it doesn't really mean what we think they said out of their own mouths, or that you really didn't say what you actually said and are actually right.

You know if you just came across less like an arrogant know it all, people wouldn't be so annoyed.  Use language like "I disagree" or "In my opinion"... we all have healthy debates and disagree on here all the time, it is the purpose of the forum.  Charging in on threads calling everyone mistaken and stupid.. when you are the one that is almost always wrong is just asking to be dressed down.

Edited by Provost
  • Cheers 1
  • Wat 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, oldnews said:

I see you're in this thread serving up lots of 'realism' for Hutton and his camp.

 

I'm sure you weren't one of those guys selling the "Hutton is a legit top 4" line  ^_^

 

Ironically, at the same time as you're hindsight schooling his agent, you're trying to sell the line that the market value illusions and 4 million arbitration risks (that you evdiently believed) were shared, even fueled  by Benning = well done, you sure know how to ride a contradiction.

I won't even try to refute this word salad because I can't even grok what all the random false statements mean as far as your intent goes.

Edited by Provost
  • Wat 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, oldnews said:

Edler played 56 games.

Tanev played 55.

Gudbranson played 57 and was dealt.

Pouliot struggled/regressed.

Del Zotto was a tire fire.

Biega was playing between 22 and 26 minutes a night down the stretch = that doesn't make him a top 4 on this team.

 

Hutton's minutes are so overplayed and extracted out of context. 

 

I still can't believe we had Pouliot, Del Zotto, Hutton and Biega all on the roster at the same time.  No wonder we were a mediocre team.  Biega is fine as a 7-8 guy.  Replace the others with Myers, Hughes and Benn and our defence has been upgraded exponentially...

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

I still can't believe we had Pouliot, Del Zotto, Hutton and Biega all on the roster at the same time.  No wonder we were a mediocre team.  Biega is fine as a 7-8 guy.  Replace the others with Myers, Hughes and Benn and our defence has been upgraded exponentially...

Like... 

 

...exponentially.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Provost said:

....don't you get tired of this same script every time?

1.  You make a claim that everyone else in the world is wrong/stupid/mistaken/an idiot/etc, backed up only by your mistaken belief that you know more than all the posters here, the media, people with decades of experience in the NHL.
2.  Someone corrects you with facts and you are proven wrong.
3.  You attack them personally
4.  You keep trying to revise and wheedle the argument differently that you really weren't wrong in the first place.

So here goes, yet again:
A direct link to Benning stating that it was the worry about the arbitration number based on how many minutes Hutton played.  It took about 2 minutes of searching to find it again.  About 47 minutes into this clip:
https://www.tsn.ca/radio/vancouver-1040/benning-on-contract-extension-captaincy-boeser-and-more-1.1354807

For an extra bit of gravy... here is Hutton's ACTUAL AGENT on the other side of the table saying the exact same thing:
https://www.sportsnet.ca/650/sportsnets-starting-lineup/andy-scott-cap-squeeze-pushed-ben-hutton-vancouver/

 

So... you are 100% entirely wrong... yet again.  Both sides of the negotiation talk about how the worry around the arb number based on Hutton's minutes was the main factor.  Bring on the part where it doesn't really mean what we think they said out of their own mouths, or that you really didn't say what you actually said and are actually right.

You know if you just came across less like an arrogant know it all, people wouldn't be so annoyed.  Use language like "I disagree" or "In my opinion"... we all have healthy debates and disagree on here all the time, it is the purpose of the forum.  Charging in on threads calling everyone mistaken and stupid.. when you are the one that is almost always wrong is just asking to be dressed down.

Ignore feature works great :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/14/2019 at 1:07 PM, Provost said:

Well when those “people” are the GM and Assistant GM who literally said in clear language in interviews that they were mainly worried about an arbitration decision (that they couldn’t walk away from) based on his playing minutes... I take their word for it rather than your smarmy one saying that everyone else is wrong...

Right? With his QO and arbitration rights he would have easily commanded around 4M. It's not mistaken, it was common knowledge

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, 5Fivehole0 said:

Right? With his QO and arbitration rights he would have easily commanded around 4M. It's not mistaken, it was common knowledge

Yep, aside from the actual quotes from the team and agent... many reporters mentioned in stories how their sources on the team said it was an issue.  Maybe it wouldn't have hit $4 million, but he had a good enough case that it was a realistic worry.

As much as reporters have to speculate, give opinions, and fill hors of airtime... when they quote someone it is generally true.  They have to maintain long term relationships with players and team brass, intentionally misquoting them gets you shut out and lose your job really fast.

Edited by Provost
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/14/2019 at 12:56 PM, VegasCanuck said:

He'll get picked up somewhere. Surprised that no one has signed him yet.

 

I'd say that JB was pretty bang on not qualifying him.

Yeah Jim was right. I bet Hutton gets a 1 year show me deal. I could see Winnipeg as a great fit as they could need D who can play up the lineup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...