Judd Brackett

[TheRealistOptimist]

It's amazing how many people will go out of their way not to give Benning credit for anything good that happens with this organization under his control, because they have already made up their minds he is not good. 

I've heard hockey people say GM's are mostly responsible for the 1st round picks and after that then it comes down to the scouting staff. 

But now people only want to give Benning credit for the 1st round picks which are perceived as bad picks or misses. And every good pick was in spite of Jim Benning and was only made because of Judd Brackett. 

Then in other situations people want to give Benning credit for scouting in Boston when he was never a scout in Boston, he was the Director of Player Personnel for 1 year and then AGM for 7 years. Meanwhile the Bruins had a Director of Player Scouting for the whole time Benning was in Boston. During Benning's time in Boston there were 3 different Directors of Player Scouting (Scott Bradley, Wayne Smith and Keith Gretzky) and 1 Assistant Director of Player Scouting (Scott Fitzgerald). Furthermore @lmm wants to give Jeff Gorton credit for the Bruins success because of 3 1/2 months of being an interim GM for Boston in 2006. So what is it, is it the GMs, AGMs or the Directors of Player Scouting who should get the credit for drafting?

We have also heard people claim that the Canucks drafts have turned around under the direction of Judd Brackett and how he has directed his scouts. Meanwhile Brackett himself has talked about how it was Benning who had given them a clear direction in terms of how he wants the scouts to scout and what kind of players he wanted. Furthermore Ray Ferraro just the other day on TSN 1040 (May 5th) said that he ran into Benning at the prospects tournament in Penticton the year Benning first got hired and after talking for a minute, Benning told Ferraro he was just on his way to a meeting to help scouting staff learn how he wanted them to scout.

Let's not forget that while Judd Brackett was just an amateur scout during the Gillis era, he did not have very much success. It was not until Benning got hired that the Canucks/Brackett started having a lot of success (still yet to be fully determined). So is that a coincidence or maybe was it the newly appointed GM with a scouting background who righted the "drafting" ship, so to speak.  

I think a lot of people need to remember Benning has been praised throughout is career as having a good scouting background and that, that was a strength of his. I think you are always going to think highly of yourself in that category and I think rightfully so and are going to want to continue to be involved in that department and process (I mean just look at all of us and how we think we know better than the scouts, yet none of us are actual scouts). So, now imagine a Gillis guy (Brackett) who had very little success in the draft prior to you (Benning) being hired, starts to improve and have some success under your guidance and now he is trying to cut you (Benning) out of the scouting process by asking for full autonomy over the Amateur Scouting Department. I think that would rub a lot of people and each and everyone of us the wrong way. 

Personally, I think Brackett has tasted a little bit of success and is building up a positive reputation around the league and mostly with peers among the scouting community and now he wants MORE. More in this case comes in the form of autonomy over the scouting staff though and not more in terms of title and or money, at least according to reports. But if I am Jim Benning I am never giving up full control over a department (scouting) that is viewed as my strength as a hockey executive. 

In the end, in my opinion - This basically comes down to a situation where about 50% or at very least the loud minority of the Canucks fan base dislikes Jim Benning in the role of GM and will never give him credit and can't wait until he is gone. 

Even members of the media, who are clearly not pro-Jim Benning people are letting their bias show and reporting one side of the argument as if it's the only side. 

 

Just remember this we all have never heard of Directors of Scouting like Scott Bradley (Boston Bruins 98-08) who drafted guys like Bergeron, Krejci, Lucic, Marchand and more all outside of the 1st round of the drafts. 

[DeNiro]

1 hour ago, Provost said:

Haha, you are stuck trying to cling to an increasingly indefensible position... now resorting to illogical Conspiracy theories.

 

If the relationship between Benning and Brackett was solid then there is literally

no way that rumours originating from other clubs “pries him away from

us.”  That makes zero sense here in reality.  Those two guys KNOW their relationship and history, they don’t have to get it from the rumour mill.

 

There are too many independent reporters and hockey guys with independently verified inside sources indicating they don’t have a good working relationship.... yet your random fan theory which doesn’t gene make sense is supposed to outweigh app

of that.

“Independently verified sources” lol

 

This is the problem with today’s age. People believe everything they read on the internet so these so called insiderz can bait people hook line and sinker. Anybody with a twitter account can be an insider.

 

A person on an Internet forum is just as credible as a mystery source. Choosing to believe that these “sources” have intimate knowledge of Benning and Bracketts relationship is no more believable than my “conspiracy theory” that other teams would want to create drama for us.

 

You’re choosing to believe this simply because it fits the narrative you already believe.

[DeNiro]

1 hour ago, WHL rocks said:

This quarantine is really messing with people's minds.

 

Now people starting to believe there's a conspiracy by opposing team scouts to spread falsehoods about Canucks in order to steal Brackett from us.. 

 

I'd think these scouts would be better served to try and get promoted to position of chief scout rather than start rumours in hopes of stealing Brackett to be their boss..

You don’t know how competitive people in sports organizations are then.

 

Wouldnt be the first time a story is planted, wouldn’t be the last.

[Curmudgeon]

1 hour ago, TheRealistOptimist said:

Then in other situations people want to give Benning credit for scouting in Boston when he was never a scout in Boston, he was the Director of Player Personnel for 1 year and then AGM for 7 years.

Whew. That's good, because if he was the top scout, how would he explain Boston's draft picks over his seven years as AGM:

 

2007 - Zach Hamill, Tommy Cross, Denis Reul, Alain Goulet, Radim Ostrcil, Jordan Knackstedt

2008 - Joe Colborne, Maxime Sauve, Michael Hutchinson, Jamie Ariel, Nicolas Tremblay, Mark Goggin

2009 - Jordan Caron, Ryan Button, Lane McDermid, Tyler Randell, Ben Sexton

2010 - TYLER SEGUIN, Jared Knight, RYAN SPOONER, Craig Cunnigham, Justin Florek, Zane McIntyre, Maxim Chudinov, Zach Trotman

2011 - DOUGIE HAMILTON,  Alexander Khokhlachev,  Anthony Camara, Brian Ferlin, Rob O’Gara, Lars Volden

2012 -MALCOLM SUBBAN, Matt Grzelcyk, Seth Griffith, Cody Payne, MATT BENNING, Colton Hargrove

2013 - Linus Arnesson, Peter Charlie, Ryan Fitzgerald, Wiley Sherman, Anton Blidh, Mitchell Dempsey

[Provost]

1 hour ago, DeNiro said:

 

This is the problem with today’s age. 

Actually I think my he big problem with today’s age is random internet people deciding their opinions are supposed to hold any sort of weight compared with people who actually do it for a living.

 

So as a random internet person, you don’t even know what you don’t know.  These guys are in rinks and dressing rooms all the time.  They have long term relationships with members of the organization.  They don’t lie about stuff, they can be mistaken and can speculate... but they don’t make up stories.

 

[Squamfan]

1 hour ago, Curmudgeon said:

Whew. That's good, because if he was the top scout, how would he explain Boston's draft picks over his seven years as AGM:

 

2007 - Zach Hamill, Tommy Cross, Denis Reul, Alain Goulet, Radim Ostrcil, Jordan Knackstedt

2008 - Joe Colborne, Maxime Sauve, Michael Hutchinson, Jamie Ariel, Nicolas Tremblay, Mark Goggin

2009 - Jordan Caron, Ryan Button, Lane McDermid, Tyler Randell, Ben Sexton

2010 - TYLER SEGUIN, Jared Knight, RYAN SPOONER, Craig Cunnigham, Justin Florek, Zane McIntyre, Maxim Chudinov, Zach Trotman

2011 - DOUGIE HAMILTON,  Alexander Khokhlachev,  Anthony Camara, Brian Ferlin, Rob O’Gara, Lars Volden

2012 -MALCOLM SUBBAN, Matt Grzelcyk, Seth Griffith, Cody Payne, MATT BENNING, Colton Hargrove

2013 - Linus Arnesson, Peter Charlie, Ryan Fitzgerald, Wiley Sherman, Anton Blidh, Mitchell Dempsey

He was in charge of scouting tho

[DeNiro]

10 minutes ago, Squamfan said:

He was in charge of scouting tho

Chiarelli was ultimately in charge of making the picks though. His direction was size and toughness which didn’t account for the game changing.

[theo5789]

29 minutes ago, Provost said:

Actually I think my he big problem with today’s age is random internet people deciding their opinions are supposed to hold any sort of weight compared with people who actually do it for a living.

 

So as a random internet person, you don’t even know what you don’t know.  These guys are in rinks and dressing rooms all the time.  They have long term relationships with members of the organization.  They don’t lie about stuff, they can be mistaken and can speculate... but they don’t make up stories.

 

May I remind you of this:

 

This from a writer from a "reputable" company like TSN. They could very easily leave out key points that could change the whole tone. Surely this isn't a one time outlier from the media/independent sources. Of course there are simple errors, but then writers would generally backtrack on these things when they are called out for it. Someone like JD Burke could admit that he might've wrong on his opinion of the Miller trade, but instead he doubles down on it. You don't earn credibility that way.

 

So for example if a scout that was interviewed said "Benning was scouting Cody Glass in 2015, he was never a Pettersson guy at that point" and the blurb that comes out is simply "Benning was never a Pettersson guy", then I guess it must be taken as full truth?

 

We have seen the live footage with our eyes of Benning beaming for EP and blowing our cover to trade down. Benning is quoted for fearing trading down because they might miss out on him. Doesn't sound like someone that had no interest in Pettersson as portrayed.

 

So while there is likely some truth towards the potential that Brackett leaving, all this other drama about who picked who and who did what is really just drama and speculation. If Brackett is truly leaking out real information, then that's more on his character and hopefully whoever is considering hiring takes note. Because this type of character doesn't fit into what Benning has said of respect throughout the organization.

 

The problem with the media saying a scout told me this and that is that there is no accountability. No one knows what that scout really said and if they really said it at all. They say what a dedicated partial fanbase wants to hear to create controversy then they are getting the clicks that their employer likes to see.

 

I think people need to be able to process the information being told and learn to question things rather than just be spoon fed what they want to hear. Otherwise many could've taken the Markstrom "quote" and questioned his entire character with the way he called out his teammates, but it didn't jive with what we know of Markstrom and the real truth eventually came out.

[mll]

39 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

Chiarelli was ultimately in charge of making the picks though. His direction was size and toughness which didn’t account for the game changing.

Ryan Spooner, Dougie Hamilton for toughness.  They signed undersized Krug in 2012.  D Matt Grzelcyk picked in 2012 is 5'9.  Benning spent all of the 2013/14 regular season with the Bruins and they picked Pastrnak that year.  

 

[spook007]

7 hours ago, Jester13 said:

And this is it, no one is giving Benning credit for the picks - not even Benning would give himself credit. He's getting credit for putting together a great team of scouts, instilling quality guidelines of what he wants in players - speed, skill, shots, character - collaborating with his team, trusting his team (Petey over Glass), and pulling the trigger on more hits than misses. 

 

For some reason, tho, Brackett is getting all the credit for everything that has gone right and Benning is getting slammed. It just doesn't compute.

 

Maybe it has something to do with Brackett whining to the media, or, and more likely, maybe it has something to do with...

 

JD FRICKIN BURKE?! 

 

Seriously, how the heck is anyone still listening to this guy? 

This...... +10

 

Nuff said. Mic drops....

Edited May 13, 2020 by spook007

[DeNiro]

6 minutes ago, mll said:

Ryan Spooner, Dougie Hamilton for toughness.  They signed undersized Krug in 2012.  D Matt Grzelcyk picked in 2012 is 5'9.  Benning spent all of the 2013/14 regular season with the Bruins and they picked Pastrnak that year.  

 

 

Hamilton - 6’6”
Colbourne - 6’5”

Caron - 6’3”

Sauve - 6’2”

Hutchinson - 6’3”
Cross - 6’3” 

MacDermid - 6’3”

Reul - 6’3”

Florek - 6’4”

Sherman - 6’6”

Knackstedt - 6’3”

Trotman - 6’3”

O’Gara - 6’4”

Dempsey - 6’4”

Payne - 6’2”

Cehlerik - 6’2”

 

See a pattern?

 

It wasn’t a coincidence. Of 43 players drafted during Bennings time 32 of them were 6’0” or bigger and the majority were over 200lbs. That was the philosophy under Chiarelli.

[spook007]

5 hours ago, TheRealistOptimist said:

It's amazing how many people will go out of their way not to give Benning credit for anything good that happens with this organization under his control, because they have already made up their minds he is not good. 

I've heard hockey people say GM's are mostly responsible for the 1st round picks and after that then it comes down to the scouting staff. 

But now people only want to give Benning credit for the 1st round picks which are perceived as bad picks or misses. And every good pick was in spite of Jim Benning and was only made because of Judd Brackett. 

Then in other situations people want to give Benning credit for scouting in Boston when he was never a scout in Boston, he was the Director of Player Personnel for 1 year and then AGM for 7 years. Meanwhile the Bruins had a Director of Player Scouting for the whole time Benning was in Boston. During Benning's time in Boston there were 3 different Directors of Player Scouting (Scott Bradley, Wayne Smith and Keith Gretzky) and 1 Assistant Director of Player Scouting (Scott Fitzgerald). Furthermore @lmm wants to give Jeff Gorton credit for the Bruins success because of 3 1/2 months of being an interim GM for Boston in 2006. So what is it, is it the GMs, AGMs or the Directors of Player Scouting who should get the credit for drafting?

We have also heard people claim that the Canucks drafts have turned around under the direction of Judd Brackett and how he has directed his scouts. Meanwhile Brackett himself has talked about how it was Benning who had given them a clear direction in terms of how he wants the scouts to scout and what kind of players he wanted. Furthermore Ray Ferraro just the other day on TSN 1040 (May 5th) said that he ran into Benning at the prospects tournament in Penticton the year Benning first got hired and after talking for a minute, Benning told Ferraro he was just on his way to a meeting to help scouting staff learn how he wanted them to scout.

Let's not forget that while Judd Brackett was just an amateur scout during the Gillis era, he did not have very much success. It was not until Benning got hired that the Canucks/Brackett started having a lot of success (still yet to be fully determined). So is that a coincidence or maybe was it the newly appointed GM with a scouting background who righted the "drafting" ship, so to speak.  

I think a lot of people need to remember Benning has been praised throughout is career as having a good scouting background and that, that was a strength of his. I think you are always going to think highly of yourself in that category and I think rightfully so and are going to want to continue to be involved in that department and process (I mean just look at all of us and how we think we know better than the scouts, yet none of us are actual scouts). So, now imagine a Gillis guy (Brackett) who had very little success in the draft prior to you (Benning) being hired, starts to improve and have some success under your guidance and now he is trying to cut you (Benning) out of the scouting process by asking for full autonomy over the Amateur Scouting Department. I think that would rub a lot of people and each and everyone of us the wrong way. 

Personally, I think Brackett has tasted a little bit of success and is building up a positive reputation around the league and mostly with peers among the scouting community and now he wants MORE. More in this case comes in the form of autonomy over the scouting staff though and not more in terms of title and or money, at least according to reports. But if I am Jim Benning I am never giving up full control over a department (scouting) that is viewed as my strength as a hockey executive. 

In the end, in my opinion - This basically comes down to a situation where about 50% or at very least the loud minority of the Canucks fan base dislikes Jim Benning in the role of GM and will never give him credit and can't wait until he is gone. 

Even members of the media, who are clearly not pro-Jim Benning people are letting their bias show and reporting one side of the argument as if it's the only side. 

 

Just remember this we all have never heard of Directors of Scouting like Scott Bradley (Boston Bruins 98-08) who drafted guys like Bergeron, Krejci, Lucic, Marchand and more all outside of the 1st round of the drafts. 

Great post. +10

[TheRealistOptimist]

3 hours ago, Squamfan said:

He was in charge of scouting tho

So if Benning was the AGM and in charge of scouting, then why are you giving Brackett all the credit for the Canucks drafts? Reports are saying that Brackett wanted full autonomy over scouting if he was going to stay (I'm assuming leaving at this point), meaning someone else Benning/Weisbrod is currently in charge of scouting. So why in this case won't you give Benning credit, it's because that doesn't suit your narrative.

You see, your post is the perfect example of trying to do anything to discredit Jim Benning and it's probably cause you just don't like him as our GM. 

 

[SilentSam]

No hockey in this town so the media continues to make things up.

opinions.   nothing valid,.  Nothing noting any interveiw or words spoken.

Theyve turned a hockey scout who may have aspirations to move ahead somewhere else,  into a disgruntled employee with grievances because he won’t sign . .   and he hasn’t spoken a word about it.

 

i can not name one solid journalist in this town..  none do there own homework or player study,  they don’t watch Utica games,. They don’t watch International games.

Just all Beer, BBQ, and bad gas..  belching up really poor opinions.

 

[SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME]

Serious question: what if John Weisbrod is actually the “genius” of our scouting group?

 

I know, crazy talk, right?

 

Right?

 

But here’s the thing: Weisbrod’s scouting background is New England. That was his area when he was an amateur scout. That’s where his connections are.

 

And where have the Canucks really had their big wins at the draft? 
 

New England.

 

Of course, this is also Judd Brackett’s area. And Judd gets all the credit. Gaudette, Rathbone, Madden, McDonough, all taken as a matter of fact that these were “Brackett picks.” 
 

But how much do we really know?

 

I mean, with Rathbone, it was really Weisbrod on the draft floor pushing for the pick. And we have the video for that one.
 

And McDonough? Well, if Brackett was supposedly “shut down” on day two of the 2019 draft, then who would be the guy pushing for a pick from New England Prep and the Northeastern pipeline? 
 

Maybe John Weisbrod?

 

And what if, just what if, that Northeastern pipeline is a Weisbrod connection? What if it’s John Weisbrod who knows people inside NU and can get the inside track on all the kids they recruit? What if it was John Weisbrod who pushed for Gaudette and Madden?

 

I mean, Weisbrod attended Harvard and played four seasons, winning an NCAA championship with the Crimson. Served as an NHL amateur scout for the New England region. Served as an NHL director of collegiate scouting. Worked in the Bruins front office. Clearly the guy has deep connections in New England. Is it really that crazy to think that John Weisbrod has actually had a lot of influence on our draft picks from that region? The very region that, one could easily argue, has been the difference between the Canucks having a successful amateur scouting record (especially when it comes to day two drafting), under Benning, versus just a middling one?

 

I know it sounds crazy. Everyone knows that our success in New England is because of Judd Brackett. 
 

But Judd was here long before we started hitting home runs out of New England draft picks. Judd was here from 2008 onwards. And from 2008-2013, we drafted... hang on, lemme check: Patrick McNally and Matthew Beattie out of New England.
 

You know who arrived in 2014, just when we started to really get hits with our picks from that region? 
 

John Weisbrod.

 

2014 onwards, we draft Demko (Boston College), Gaudette (Cedar Rapids, Northeastern recruit), Jack Rathbone (Dexter School, Harvard recruit), Tyler Madden (Tri-City, Northeastern recruit), and Aiden McDonough (Cedar Rapids, Northeastern recruit).

 

Look, I’m not saying that Weisbrod necessarily was the driving force behind those picks. Maybe it was all Brackett. And I know Judd is well respected in the scouting community. I’m confident he does really good work. But it’s entirely possible that the myth of Judd Brackett has grown just a little bit beyond what the reality of his contributions actually are. Only the people inside the Canucks front office really know. But if Judd was the lonely genius on the Canucks scouting staff, solely responsible for every hit we’ve had at the draft table the past six years, I can’t really see any reason why Benning wouldn’t just open up the chequebook and pay Brackett whatever he wants, while guaranteeing Judd full autonomy to run the draft. However, if Brackett has just been an effective scouting director (which is no small thing but also not quite deserving of a “draft god” reputation), it’s a lot easier to understand why Benning might feel reluctant to just give Brackett the keys to the kingdom. Especially if Jim’s best buddy John has actually been much more of the factor in the Canucks draft successes than anyone realizes (outside of the team).

 

Of course, this whole post is just a little late night speculation, but it does make one think, doesn’t it?

 

Or maybe I just need to go to bed? 
 

* * * * *
 

OK, full disclosure, I’m kinda having fun with this post, especially in building an argument that Weisbrod is really the “draft god.” But if I’m being completely honest, it’s really not possible that Weisbrod is the lone genius, when it comes to our New England success. One of the things we do know is that Jim Madigan (Northeastern Head Coach) and Judd Brackett are really good friends, and I think they’re even neighbours at their Cape Cod summer homes, so the Northeastern pipeline is very likely a Brackett thing, at least to some extent (Benning and Weisbrod know Madigan as well). And New England is an area where all three of Brackett, Weisbrod, and Benning have deep connections. Mostly I was just playing around with the idea that Weisbrod might have had some role in some of our success drafting in New England, and I think it’s very likely he does. Of course, Brackett has a big role, and deserves lots of credit. Although maybe not the full “draft god” status he enjoys with Canucks fans. I think many of the other guys in our scouting group also deserve a lot of credit. And ideally, all three of Brackett, Weisbrod, and Benning can find a way to continue to work together at the top. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it, and our amateur scouting is one of the least broke things on this team. At least when it comes to the results. Who know what the relationships are really like between these guys? Maybe things are as “acrimonious” as the rumour-mongers suggest. But hopefully, at the end of the day, these guys can all be pros and find a way to continue to work together.

 

* * * * *
 

OK, now I’m going to bed. 

Edited May 13, 2020 by SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME

[shiznak]

10 hours ago, Canucks Curse said:

ugghhh the Jankowski pick, who cares, look back at that draft, its not like they missed out on any all stars - the rest of the first and second was pretty ho hum, they missed out on some 3-4 d men and some tweener forwards

Calgary (Weisbrod) was reaching pretty far in hopes of Janowski was going to turn out to be a superstar for them. While none of the latter picks never amount to anything. Jankowski was projected to be a late 2nd rounder - mid 3rd round pick (ranked 40 - 55 on most final rankings). The fact that he was picked 20+ spots ahead of his projected spot seems like an unconventional pick. Calgary could’ve traded the 21st pick to move down, gain some assets, and still probably could have pick Jankowski. 

This is my only concern I have with Brackett potentially leaving and Weisbrod being more hands on with the scouting of our future talents. I don’t want to see any off the board picks, in the first round, from our scouting staffs.

 

[theo5789]

2 hours ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

Serious question: what if John Weisbrod is actually the “genius” of our scouting group?

 

I know, crazy talk, right?

 

Right?

 

But here’s the thing: Weisbrod’s scouting background is New England. That was his area when he was an amateur scout. That’s where his connections are.

 

And where have the Canucks really had their big wins at the draft? 
 

New England.

 

Of course, this is also Judd Brackett’s area. And Judd gets all the credit. Gaudette, Rathbone, Madden, McDonough, all taken as a matter of fact that these were “Brackett picks.” 
 

But how much do we really know?

 

I mean, with Rathbone, it was really Weisbrod on the draft floor pushing for the pick. And we have the video for that one.
 

And McDonough? Well, if Brackett was supposedly “shut down” on day two of the 2019 draft, then who would be the guy pushing for a pick from New England Prep and the Northeastern pipeline? 
 

Maybe John Weisbrod?

 

And what if, just what if, that Northeastern pipeline is a Weisbrod connection? What if it’s John Weisbrod who knows people inside NU and can get the inside track on all the kids they recruit? What if it was John Weisbrod who pushed for Gaudette and Madden?

 

I mean, Weisbrod attended Harvard and played four seasons, winning an NCAA championship with the Crimson. Served as an NHL amateur scout for the New England region. Served as an NHL director of collegiate scouting. Worked in the Bruins front office. Clearly the guy has deep connections in New England. Is it really that crazy to think that John Weisbrod has actually had a lot of influence on our draft picks from that region? The very region that, one could easily argue, has been the difference between the Canucks having a successful amateur scouting record (especially when it comes to day two drafting), under Benning, versus just a middling one?

 

I know it sounds crazy. Everyone knows that our success in New England is because of Judd Brackett. 
 

But Judd was here long before we started hitting home runs out of New England draft picks. Judd was here from 2008 onwards. And from 2008-2013, we drafted... hang on, lemme check: Patrick McNally and Matthew Beattie out of New England.
 

You know who arrived in 2014, just when we started to really get hits with our picks from that region? 
 

John Weisbrod.

 

2014 onwards, we draft Demko (Boston College), Gaudette (Cedar Rapids, Northeastern recruit), Jack Rathbone (Dexter School, Harvard recruit), Tyler Madden (Tri-City, Northeastern recruit), and Aiden McDonough (Cedar Rapids, Northeastern recruit).

 

Look, I’m not saying that Weisbrod necessarily was the driving force behind those picks. Maybe it was all Brackett. And I know Judd is well respected in the scouting community. I’m confident he does really good work. But it’s entirely possible that the myth of Judd Brackett has grown just a little bit beyond what the reality of his contributions actually are. Only the people inside the Canucks front office really know. But if Judd was the lonely genius on the Canucks scouting staff, solely responsible for every hit we’ve had at the draft table the past six years, I can’t really see any reason why Benning wouldn’t just open up the chequebook and pay Brackett whatever he wants, while guaranteeing Judd full autonomy to run the draft. However, if Brackett has just been an effective scouting director (which is no small thing but also not quite deserving of a “draft god” reputation), it’s a lot easier to understand why Benning might feel reluctant to just give Brackett the keys to the kingdom. Especially if Jim’s best buddy John has actually been much more of the factor in the Canucks draft successes than anyone realizes (outside of the team).

 

Of course, this whole post is just a little late night speculation, but it does make one think, doesn’t it?

 

Or maybe I just need to go to bed? 
 

* * * * *
 

OK, full disclosure, I’m kinda having fun with this post, especially in building an argument that Weisbrod is really the “draft god.” But if I’m being completely honest, it’s really not possible that Weisbrod is the lone genius, when it comes to our New England success. One of the things we do know is that Jim Madigan (Northeastern Head Coach) and Judd Brackett are really good friends, and I think they’re even neighbours at their Cape Cod summer homes, so the Northeastern pipeline is very likely a Brackett thing, at least to some extent (Benning and Weisbrod know Madigan as well). And New England is an area where all three of Brackett, Weisbrod, and Benning have deep connections. Mostly I was just playing around with the idea that Weisbrod might have had some role in some of our success drafting in New England, and I think it’s very likely he does. Of course, Brackett has a big role, and deserves lots of credit. Although maybe not the full “draft god” status he enjoys with Canucks fans. I think many of the kids other guys in our scouting group also deserve a lot of credit. And ideally, all three of Brackett, Weisbrod, and Benning can find a way to continue to work together at the top. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it, and our amateur scouting is one of the least broke things on this team. At least when it comes to the results. Who know what the relationships are really like between these guys? Maybe things are as “acrimonious” as the rumour-mongers suggest. But hopefully, at the end of the day, these guys can all be pros and find a way to continue to work together.

 

* * * * *
 

OK, now I’m going to bed. 

I brought up these things about Weisbrod and it fell mostly on deaf ears. I even mentioned that Calgary drafted Tim Harrison from Dexter high school, which also happens to be where Rathbone is from. I wasn't aware that it's known that Weisbrod was responsible for Rathbone though.

 

All people want to remember about Weisbrod is Jankowski and the Macgrady trade in the NBA.

 

I, too, don't think he's the brains behind the operation, but I think he may get more credit than he deserves.

[mll]

1 hour ago, shiznak said:

Calgary (Weisbrod) was reaching pretty far in hopes of Janowski was going to turn out to be a superstar for them. While none of the latter picks never amount to anything. Jankowski was projected to be a late 2nd rounder - mid 3rd round pick (ranked 40 - 55 on most final rankings). The fact that he was picked 20+ spots ahead of his projected spot seems like an unconventional pick. Calgary could’ve traded the 21st pick to move down, gain some assets, and still probably could have pick Jankowski. 

This is my only concern I have with Brackett potentially leaving and Weisbrod being more hands on with the scouting of our future talents. I don’t want to see any off the board picks, in the first round, from our scouting staffs.

 

Calgary were set to pick 14th and had no 2nd round pick that draft.  They couldn't wait until the 3rd round as he was projected to go in the 2nd round.  They moved down to 21st though and got a 2nd round pick (42nd) for moving back.   42nd was probably too close to where he could have been picked by another team.   

 

 

[theo5789]

2 hours ago, shiznak said:

Calgary (Weisbrod) was reaching pretty far in hopes of Janowski was going to turn out to be a superstar for them. While none of the latter picks never amount to anything. Jankowski was projected to be a late 2nd rounder - mid 3rd round pick (ranked 40 - 55 on most final rankings). The fact that he was picked 20+ spots ahead of his projected spot seems like an unconventional pick. Calgary could’ve traded the 21st pick to move down, gain some assets, and still probably could have pick Jankowski. 

This is my only concern I have with Brackett potentially leaving and Weisbrod being more hands on with the scouting of our future talents. I don’t want to see any off the board picks, in the first round, from our scouting staffs.

 

You're assuming that trades could have been made to land them right in the spot where they think they could pick him.

 

“I didn’t want to risk not getting Elias and didn’t want to draft too far down — that’s where you get in trouble,” recalled Benning. “My philosophy was you just take him.”

 

This is Benning's quote in regards to trading down in the Pettersson draft. Jankowski was considered as a late riser and who knows who was offering picks to move up and if in a spot they felt comfortable that he would still be available. Pettersson wasn't as big of a leap, but still ranked lower than where he was picked. Sometimes these gambles pay off, sometimes they don't work out as planned, but there wasn't a whole lot of missed opportunities in the Jankowski year and if anything, he may still be a "1st round pick" in a redraft for that year.

[steviewonder20]

https://thehockeynews.com/news/article/this-seasons-best-free-agent-might-end-up-being-vancouvers-judd-brackett