Dazzle
Members-
Posts
11,843 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
7
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Everything posted by Dazzle
-
Look at the draft picks that Benning traded that weren't 1st and 2nd round picks. And when you actually look at the list of players acquired, know that there's a long list of posters who complain about these depth players using 3rd round picks and below. The problem isn't about the picks. The problem is about the posters whining about trading these picks, and then lying to themselves that trading away picks IN THIS scenario is completely different than what Benning did. So people had complained about Benning trading away picks, but now we are ok trading away players for picks now, for a team that is 5 points out of a playoff spot, just one day before the deadline? What if Dermott is no good?
-
So you are retooling with the foundation that Benning built - does this mean he built something that the Canucks could work with, or did he "ruin" the franchise as some people like to think? Miller's good, but we'll end up loving an asset so much that we'll forget to get something back for them. This is essentially what happened under Gillis and Benning regimes.
-
That's the funny thing about this though. The trades that took place in previous regimes were lauded for improving the team - that is, until people went back into time later and cherrypicked the draft picks that were traded. I don't know if a team that is 5 points outside the bubble, and having only a day before the deadline, should be trading picks. Shouldn't we be gaining them? I mean, what kind of team does Allvin see us to be? People SHOULD be confused by the trade.
-
I'm just laughing at the posters who complained about picks being traded, instead of using it to populate the prospect pool. Then praise JR who hasn't done anything up (roster wise) up until this point All the while advocating the trading of said picks. Makes you wonder if people are just salty about who's the GM, rather than the actual moves themselves.
-
The only thing constant here is this bickering that only appears after losses.
- 45 replies
-
- 11
-
-
-
-
-
[GDT] Flames @ Canucks l Saturday, March 19/22 l 7:00 pm PT - GO CANUCKS
Dazzle replied to -DLC-'s topic in Canucks Talk
What good does extending a long-ass contract for Miller do? The team also has to deal with the salary cap. Cheap young players are the way to build a team, and you only can do that when you draft. -
[GDT] Flames @ Canucks l Saturday, March 19/22 l 7:00 pm PT - GO CANUCKS
Dazzle replied to -DLC-'s topic in Canucks Talk
This would be a huge mistake not to trade him. We can use this time to regroup the team, reassess our assets, and make the playoffs next year if we are so lucky. -
[GDT] Flames @ Canucks l Saturday, March 19/22 l 7:00 pm PT - GO CANUCKS
Dazzle replied to -DLC-'s topic in Canucks Talk
It should be noted that her husband is the Calgary assistant GM. -
Lamikko has been such a great pickup. I liked him in the first game, and he's grown pretty fast with other fans too.
-
[Rumour] Canucks and Laffs (Liljegren)
Dazzle replied to AngryElf's topic in Trades, Rumours, Signings
So this is probably how this rumour was 'constructed': Canucks asks about Leaf players, just to kick the tires. Leafs want to get rid of TL, so his name comes up. The Leafs/Leafs media spin this into the Canucks being interested in TL, so this gives ample opportunity for trade speculation (i.e. what can we rob off the Canucks?) Canuck fans, in turn, use this opportunity to 'dump' players that they perceive to be too expensive. I'm guessing the Canucks aren't close to acquiring TL, if at all. A defensively susceptible defenseman on a team that is not well known to be overly defensive? Come on guys. This rumour is probably made up to generate clicks. -
So many hypotheticals in order to prop up your 'point' Not much of a point if you are relying on speculation rather than facts. Fact: The Canucks HAD a choice to defer the 1st rounder, so this is actually protected. We used that to pick Podkolzin. And given that we did finish better the next year, it was very much a calculated move that worked out. Let's face it. You are spinning your summer tires on a dirt road. The so-called 'gotcha' moment is you simply contradicting yourself. I didn't expect you to admit anything, and your post demonstrates that.
-
This is pretty much how we can criticize your hypocrisy. Here, you're rather wishywashy about the trade for Miller (at the time), who was in reality probably worth a 1st round pick, given his name around the league, as well as his past performances. He was at the time a proven player, but has since elevated in value. Curiously, you seem to think that Miller WAS an overpayment, especially given that a) it wasn't a protected lottery pick b) the pick had lowered in value, given how the Canucks performed. One way of interpreting this was that the Canucks overachieved that year (which they arguably did), but it also ignores the fact that the team might not have been as bad as people criticized it to be. This, of course, would require one to revise their criticism of Benning, which many people, such as yourself, are not willing to do. Would you then say that Miller was bought at a good price now by Benning, or would you completely ignore this reality, in place of your distorted narratives? And given how you seem to be thinking that a 1st round trade can be worth it depending on the player, would you say the Miller trade IS worth it then? This of course would mean that you suck (as many of us are) at player valuation. Maybe, just maybe, Benning did something right. Does it hurt you that much to admit it? In short, I am criticizing your dishonest slag at a particular individual, which involves the criticism of draft trade picks, while shamelessly using the power of hindsight. Hilarious, the trading of draft picks suddenly become a good idea in your mind right now, while mindlessly talking about equity in a previous quote. All those players you listed were trades that you roundly criticized in hindsight. Who's to say that your proposed draft pick trades don't work as intended? Would you be as quick to criticize yourself for making the exact same decisions as what you have criticized in the past?
-
So by that token, why were the Linden Vey/Sven Baertschi trades often used for criticism under the Benning regime? One can't make the argument of the bolded, while also taking the position that these trades were bad. So did Benning make reasonable moves then, especially since draft picks don't often make the NHL (as you argued)? Or is Benning just bashed for the sake of it? Just a few months ago... I'm criticizing the very points that were brought up by the supposed anti-Benning crowd used to criticize our past GM, whether it was justified or not. Then under new management, we are having posters like you advocate for the dumping of draft picks for what could be a dubious playoff run. And look, what a hypocritical position to be in to talk about trading draft picks for "depth players".
-
No, this is where you're missing the point. Plenty of teams have bolstered their roster for draft picks. Gillis did it all the time, and no one seemed to have an issue about it, even though the trade for a rental Derek Roy was really, really expensive, in hindsight. It cost a couple of draft picks. I suppose if a team that didn't know how to draft under that GM, it wouldn't have been so bad on paper, but this contributes towards the prospect pool erosion. Here's what's wrong with the narrative. Many people have criticized Benning for having a supposedly empty prospect pool (totally a false observation, but let's run with this), you're ok with trading away draft picks then? Better still, we criticized Benning for trading draft picks, but suddenly we're a playoff team that can afford to throw away draft picks? And even funnier is that you want to do it for a depth player, which we already have in Chiasson. I just think the whole narrative about Benning trading draft picks is dishonest because we're seeing people like you advocate for the exact same thing. I don't know how you don't see it.
-
[PGT] New Jersey Devils at Vancouver Canucks | Mar. 15, 2022
Dazzle replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
If you go back to the thread, we have people screaming about how much of an overpayment it was from our end... And now, the trade's now known as the Miller for the hardest spelling names of players ever. -
Are you even listening to yourself? A trade for the SAKE of making a trade. Trades should only happen if and when they benefit the team. Chiasson's no longer hurting the team, and he's proving that he's a decent locker room guy. Could you benefit from an upgrade? Of course, but how much of an upgrade remains to be seen. For all we know, the guy who brings in points is not someone who is well-liked in the locker room. Moreover, we'll have hindsighters come in and say "zomg we're throwing away another pick". Can you imagine if we traded a 2nd round pick for a huge upgrade on Chiasson? Suddenly the talk isn't about throwing away draft picks anymore... it's almost like the discussion about trading picks can be spun in a different way. We cannot afford to throw away picks if we hope to restock the future. If we're going to be making a push, some trades involve high asset picks.