Sign in to follow this  
Fred65

Judd Brackett

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, Toews said:

What is your source that Benning didn't draft Tkachuk because of character concerns? I have yet to hear any concerns coming out of Ottawa or Calgary regarding either of those players. Funnily enough Jared McCann a Benning draft pick is considered a locker room cancer because of something Beth Bartowski and Andrey Pedan said. Its almost like any player we pass on or trade suddenly becomes public enemy number 1 over here.

It is funny how people can have such different perspectives about the same market and fanbase. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Toews said:

What is your source that Benning didn't draft Tkachuk because of character concerns? I have yet to hear any concerns coming out of Ottawa or Calgary regarding either of those players. Funnily enough Jared McCann a Benning draft pick is considered a locker room cancer because of something Beth Bartowski and Andrey Pedan said. Its almost like any player we pass on or trade suddenly becomes public enemy number 1 over here.

It was talk at the draft.  I don't remember the source.  I don't think I'm going out on a limb here.

  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TheRealistOptimist said:

It is funny how people can have such different perspectives about the same market and fanbase. 

I like consistency. I don't mind people changing their stances with new evidence but I can't respect flip-floppers whose opinions change when it becomes inconvenient to hold a particular position. Its logically incongruous to argue that Benning drafts character players but then he also drafted McCann (locker room cancer as per Andrey Pedan and Beth Bartowski). Benning also tried to sign Lucic... But somehow selecting Tkachuk would be a step too far. By no means are the people who get themselves into these logic pretzels representative of the fan base, no more so than the average HFCanucks poster.

  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Toews said:

I like consistency. I don't mind people changing their stances with new evidence but I can't respect flip-floppers whose opinions change when it becomes inconvenient to hold a particular position. Its logically incongruous to argue that Benning drafts character players but then he also drafted McCann (locker room cancer as per Andrey Pedan and Beth Bartowski). Benning also tried to sign Lucic... But somehow selecting Tkachuk would be a step too far. By no means are the people who get themselves into these logic pretzels representative of the fan base, no more so than the average HFCanucks poster.

He drafted McCann and traded him a year later. Reports suggest that Benning wanted Bleackley at the time and he was picked a spot before us and was left picking who they thought was BPA at the time, which may be a blessing in disguise but also pissed Benning off that the scouts had missed out on Pastrnak altogether.

 

It is possible that it came down between Juolevi or Tkachuk and they went with a positional need on top of the potential character issue. We will see over time if this ever comes out or not though, but they go through player interviews and perhaps they got a vibe they didn't like then. Just as an example, no one would've questioned Duchene's character, but almost as soon as he was traded from Colorado, they seemed to turn things around. Some behind the scenes stuff comes out and you start to see his character flaws that we may have never known had it not been for the incident. So it's not an impossibility that character didn't come into play, but it's also not a huge reach to go for a highly ranked dman at the time. Most pundits had OJ ranked around 7-8, so it's not like it was a major reach. Similarly, EP was ranked around 7-12 and had be picked the supposed BPA at the time, then we should've gone with Glass. It paid off with EP, OJ has had some bad luck and unfortunately it hasn't worked out for us yet.

 

As for Lucic, I'm stumped on that one, but I guess there may be a different mantra toward drafting prospects for character to try and get players that will want to sign with the Canucks (particularly college prospects) and guys that are driven to get to the next level (and thus why some of our later picks have been punching above their weights). The Lucic target is really the only outlier towards a non-character type player and maybe it was overlooked to supposedly give the Sedins some protection (unlike someone like Tkachuk who's more agitator than enforcer).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
16 hours ago, DeNiro said:

Butterfly effect.

 

If we draft Tkachuk we might not end up drafting Pettersson and therefore wouldn’t be in a position to trade for Toffoli.

 

That lineup was very unlikely to ever exist.

Tkachuk’s 13 goals wouldn’t have made us any better. He was also one of the most penalized players in the league and our PK was dog-doo in 2016. I’m not even sure if Mathew would have made the team, that year or play a big role.
 

WD is known to play vets and ease rookies into rounded NHL players. I’ll even take a bold guess that, he’d be in WD doghouse with the amount of stupid penalties he takes. 

 

So it’s still a high chance we end up with Pettersson or even Hischier.

 

Edited by shiznak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, NewbieCanuckFan said:

He's still being getting sheltered minutes (to cover for his defensive deficiences) from what I can see.   As I said, there's no denying his offensive skills.  But you can't rely on that to get in the NHL.  Look at AHL allstar Jordan Subban as an example.

are there any stats to back that up? I don't know if the AHL records zone and PK time but that would back that up, I haven't heard that before. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/18/2020 at 11:28 AM, NewbieCanuckFan said:

He's still being getting sheltered minutes (to cover for his defensive deficiences) from what I can see.   As I said, there's no denying his offensive skills.  But you can't rely on that to get in the NHL.  Look at AHL allstar Jordan Subban as an example.

The coaches in Utica, if I recall correctly, were saying Juolevi was playing in every situation. He wasn't being sheltered. It was to the point I was worried they might be overworking his potentially injury prone body. Not even sure where the "defensive deficiencies" are coming from. Have heard nothing from anyone in that regard. He's not shutdown but he's not a liability either, not to the Jordan Subban level you are using as an example. If not for his injuries last season I for sure think he would have been first call up this season. But I could be wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, N7Nucks said:

The coaches in Utica, if I recall correctly, were saying Juolevi was playing in every situation. He wasn't being sheltered. It was to the point I was worried they might be overworking his potentially injury prone body. Not even sure where the "defensive deficiencies" are coming from. Have heard nothing from anyone in that regard. He's not shutdown but he's not a liability either, not to the Jordan Subban level you are using as an example. If not for his injuries last season I for sure think he would have been first call up this season. But I could be wrong.

He plays very passively defensively based on what I've seen of Comets games.  Others might see it differently.  I suspect part of that might have been as a result of him being understandbly overly cautious of re-injurying parts of his body.  Read the Comets thread on the HFboards where Comets fans watch games significantly more than I do (many of them attend games at the arena).  I seriously doubt he was anywhere near being the 1st callup at any point this past season but again, just my opinion (not stating it as a fact).

Edited by NewbieCanuckFan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


from the description ..... "Dan Murphy, Iain MacIntyre and Satiar Shah break down what went wrong between the Canucks brass and Judd Brackett, and what it will mean if he leaves the organization." 
 

Really hope this is just the usual media drivel, lol. Would hate to see him go!

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Laheys Liquor said:


from the description ..... "Dan Murphy, Iain MacIntyre and Satiar Shah break down what went wrong between the Canucks brass and Judd Brackett, and what it will mean if he leaves the organization." 
 

Really hope this is just the usual media drivel, lol. Would hate to see him go!

Lots in this interview.....Playoffs, Brackett, The Cap

 

On Brackett, if there are philosophical differences between Brackett and the Canucks that Brackett won't back down from, that's reason enough to let him go.  The team, from the owner down through the players in Utica need to be on the same page.  Strategies are worked out and pitched to ownership in bi-annual meetings (incidentally, we know that the team holds a round of meetings at Christmas, we found this out when they decided to call it a rebuild and traded Burrows and Hansen and Linden later resigned).  They're saying that the Brackett issue first came to light in January or February 2020.  So it is possible that Benning has pitched to ownership that he wanted to make a deal that would put them over the top and make the playoffs.  Enter Tyler Toffoli.  On paper, he was a pure rental, soon to be UFA.  Schaller (cap dump), Madden (prospect), 2nd, conditional 4th sounds like a heavy price to pay for a team that doesn't really have a shot at the cup this year.  I don't like it myself unless Benning can sign Toffoli but that looks like a hard thing to do (but not impossible).  Brackett may very well feel gutted as he likely has lost his top 2 picks and the draft is deep.

 

The importance of competing and making the playoffs goes back to 2014 so this is not new to the strategy but seemed to be on the back burner since 2017 when the talk shifted to rebuild.  Brackett may very well feel blind sided but I don't think that this is any kind of a deviation from the long term strategy.  In fact, I think it is more a case of getting back in line with that strategy after a "quick" rebuild.   

  • Hydration 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Crabcakes said:

Lots in this interview.....Playoffs, Brackett, The Cap

 

On Brackett, if there are philosophical differences between Brackett and the Canucks that Brackett won't back down from, that's reason enough to let him go.  The team, from the owner down through the players in Utica need to be on the same page.  Strategies are worked out and pitched to ownership in bi-annual meetings (incidentally, we know that the team holds a round of meetings at Christmas, we found this out when they decided to call it a rebuild and traded Burrows and Hansen and Linden later resigned).  They're saying that the Brackett issue first came to light in January or February 2020.  So it is possible that Benning has pitched to ownership that he wanted to make a deal that would put them over the top and make the playoffs.  Enter Tyler Toffoli.  On paper, he was a pure rental, soon to be UFA.  Schaller (cap dump), Madden (prospect), 2nd, conditional 4th sounds like a heavy price to pay for a team that doesn't really have a shot at the cup this year.  I don't like it myself unless Benning can sign Toffoli but that looks like a hard thing to do (but not impossible).  Brackett may very well feel gutted as he likely has lost his top 2 picks and the draft is deep.

 

The importance of competing and making the playoffs goes back to 2014 so this is not new to the strategy but seemed to be on the back burner since 2017 when the talk shifted to rebuild.  Brackett may very well feel blind sided but I don't think that this is any kind of a deviation from the long term strategy.  In fact, I think it is more a case of getting back in line with that strategy after a "quick" rebuild.   

If thats really 'the thing' thats pushed things to breaking, he needs to go to a team thats just starting a rebuild. And thats totally fine if someone wants to be there to watch their picks develop. But if he can't handle some of them being traded thats something he's going to have to work on no matter where he goes potentially. 

 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Tre Mac said:

Brackett good Benning bad.  Questions?

Is Weisbrod the devil?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

If thats really 'the thing' thats pushed things to breaking, he needs to go to a team thats just starting a rebuild. And thats totally fine if someone wants to be there to watch their picks develop. But if he can't handle some of them being traded thats something he's going to have to work on no matter where he goes potentially. 

 

That's only my personal thoughts after having listened to that interview.  Drafting may have become just a little less important to the overall strategy for the short term.

 

My opinion is that drafting is right up there with the most important things a management group does, if not, THE most important thing.  But there is certainly more to it than just drafting.

  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, DeNiro said:

Is Weisbrod the devil?

Nah, he's the Devil's right hand man 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/18/2020 at 8:38 PM, Toews said:

I like consistency. I don't mind people changing their stances with new evidence but I can't respect flip-floppers whose opinions change when it becomes inconvenient to hold a particular position. Its logically incongruous to argue that Benning drafts character players but then he also drafted McCann (locker room cancer as per Andrey Pedan and Beth Bartowski). Benning also tried to sign Lucic... But somehow selecting Tkachuk would be a step too far. By no means are the people who get themselves into these logic pretzels representative of the fan base, no more so than the average HFCanucks poster.

Toews Knows.

 

You’ve left them no room to argue. Well said. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/18/2020 at 8:38 PM, Toews said:

I like consistency. I don't mind people changing their stances with new evidence but I can't respect flip-floppers whose opinions change when it becomes inconvenient to hold a particular position. Its logically incongruous to argue that Benning drafts character players but then he also drafted McCann (locker room cancer as per Andrey Pedan and Beth Bartowski). Benning also tried to sign Lucic... But somehow selecting Tkachuk would be a step too far. By no means are the people who get themselves into these logic pretzels representative of the fan base, no more so than the average HFCanucks poster.

sure but the problem is we have imperfect knowledge and also no one bats 1000. McCann may have had a terrific combine and came across in the interviews as a great kid. People can fake it for short periods. Or maybe when he was 17 he was good, and soured when things didn't go perfectly. Its hard to draft teenagers for character.

 

I still believe that something weird went on behind the scenes with Tkachuk, I suspect Keith is behind it as he's never been shy about his hate for Vancouver. They may have viewed him as a potential problem if Keith was making noises about not signing, etc. I have ZERO to back up my theory btw, its just a feeling based off Keith's history. People were highly shocked when Jim passed over BPA and if it wasn't something odd behind the scenes I can't understand it. Juoleivi at the time was certainly a top 8 in most rankings so it wasn't a major drop but it was pretty shocking at the time. 

  • Burr 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

Toews Knows.

 

You’ve left them no room to argue. Well said. 

I disagree, there's always room to argue. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

I disagree, there's always room to argue. 

No there isn't.

 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.