-
Posts
13,496 -
Joined
-
Days Won
5
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Everything posted by AV.
-
ffs, we've hired a member of the Chipmunks. We're finished. Stanley Cup drought will continue.
-
[Report] Canucks name Émilie Castonguay as assistant GM
AV. replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
Agreed. A law background and a former player agent. It's like bringing in Gillis again. Better days ahead, book it! -
[Report] Canucks name Émilie Castonguay as assistant GM
AV. replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
4 years*. On that note, I feel horrible for whichever fanbase had their GM sign that deal. Poor people must have suffered with decision-making like that happening. -
[Report] Canucks name Émilie Castonguay as assistant GM
AV. replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
Mostly known for her work as a player agent. She likely brings a good understanding of the CBA and will probably provide insights into contracts, player needs/wants, etc. It's a good type of skillset to have on board.- 307 replies
-
- 10
-
-
-
-
-
[Report] Canucks name Émilie Castonguay as assistant GM
AV. replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
FFS, we're assembling a super team. Stanley Cup comes to Vancouver within the next 5-6 years - believe me. Life is great.- 307 replies
-
- 15
-
-
-
-
-
[Rumour] J.T. Miller Trade/Contract Talks
AV. replied to Podzilla's topic in Trades, Rumours, Signings
Rangers will probably make their move for Miller in the coming month or so. Of course, it's on us to get some goodies back from them. -
[Report] Canucks hire Rachel Doerrie in an analytics role
AV. replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
What's the most telling thing about the comments made from him and his pals is how painfully unaware of how sexist they're being when they say things like "well, I'd hire Botterill, so this doesn't have anything to do with gender". It's the gendered equivalent of "I can't be racist; I have friends from __ race" But here's the kicker: By their own terrible standards and prerequisites, Rachel Doerrie is actually more qualified for her role than Jennifer Botterill (currently) is for any role, seeing as Doerrie has worked in a similar position in the past and has worked for multiple hockey organizations, whereas Jennifer Botterill has not yet worked with any organizations in any hockey ops roles. So, really, this has never been about qualifications or "best fit" for these bitter bros, and has a lot to do with Doerrie personally, seeing as she previously criticized this team, and in particular, one individual that thankfully isn't working with the team any more. They can't stand to see somebody (a woman, at that) who criticized the team be hired for a job, and they despise it so much, they've gone to the lengths of creating false narratives that she's some sort of unprofessional person on social media, when in reality, the hockey world has had nothing but great things to say about her. Talk about sad, fragile men They can try to hide behind blanket statements stating that they hope Doerrie does well, but if they genuinely felt that way, they wouldn't feel the need to caution this hire like they have. -
[Report] Canucks hire Rachel Doerrie in an analytics role
AV. replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
Nope. Answer the question properly instead of saying something lacking substance like "professionalism is many things". If she was so "unprofessional" on Twitter and on these podcasts, why has this not been more of an issue to a vast number of people? Why didn't more hockey people see it to be an issue? It ONLY seems to be an issue for a few Canucks fans, and when you refuse to answer this, this looks like you're suggesting that those Canucks fans are right about her and everybody else has been wrong about her. Why is that? This is the ONLY question that need to be answered, despite your best efforts to deflect onto other topics and other people - all of which you are bringing up. You've gone out and said that remarks made in this thread aren't solely rooted in misogyny. So, elaborate on her unprofessionalism here. -
[Report] Canucks hire Rachel Doerrie in an analytics role
AV. replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
That didn't answer my question. You said that her remarks on Twitter and on podcasts raised questions about her professionalism. Presumably, this implies conduct and reputation. If that's true, that she has such a bad, unprofessional reputation, why has nobody else from the hockey world discussed this or mentioned this about her? Why has this notion only been pushed a small group of Canucks fans? -
[Report] Canucks hire Rachel Doerrie in an analytics role
AV. replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
If her professionalism was such an issue, why is it only a small sect of Canucks fans (the same ones who happened to be supporters of Benning, the GM she publicly criticized) and literally nobody else from the hockey world that seem to raise this? If she was such a polarizing and unprofessional figure, surely there would have been more discussion from local and national media commenting on this, no? Instead, virtually everybody from the media and other hockey spaces have spoken positively about this hire and have commented on how well equipped she is to help the Canucks. -
[Report] Canucks hire Rachel Doerrie in an analytics role
AV. replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
Thing is, his point is still true. Even if there is, as you say, disproportional instances around the world (or outside of North American confines) of "white" people being discriminated against because of the colour of their skin, it's just that - discrimination. Those particular instances of discrimination are hardly structural, systemic, or universal to qualify it as "reverse racism". Going back to this topic, the NHL, as we all know, is a structure created, governed, and maintained by people who are predominantly White (for simplicity's sake, let's say people who are ethnically European, stem from European diasporas, or stem from European colonial settler backgrounds), heterosexual, and male (we could probably extend this to able-bodied, as well). There is far less reticence among that group of power brokers when one of their own is brought into the fray than when an individual who doesn't possess those aspects in their own positionality is brought in Just this week, the Montreal Canadiens hired Kent Hughes - a man that, while not unfamiliar to the NHL, had no previous experience working in front office settings. Yet, I'm willing to bet that hardly anybody demanded he'd have to prove his competence or demonstrate his belongingness in the same way that's being demanded of Doerrie now by some users. The OP did a great job of outlining Doerrie's previous work experiences that could quite clearly demonstrate that not only was she qualified for this role, but she could be an impactful asset to our hockey ops. Everybody in this thread should have been intrigued, if not ecstatic, to see a different skill set being brought in to help improve this team. Instead, we had a few individuals choosing to take a few Tweets and podcast snippets to invalidate all of that, and in the process, come off as bitter or misogynistic. -
[Report] Canucks hire Rachel Doerrie in an analytics role
AV. replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
Massive day in CDC history. -
Mafia: Hollywood & The Box Office Flops - GAME OVER - MAFIA WON!!!
AV. replied to falcon45ca's topic in White Noise
Sorry, I'll be holding you to it. -
[Report] Canucks hire Rachel Doerrie in an analytics role
AV. replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
So, you admit you don't know how those comments were phrased and yet, you still write this whole story to say that I'm wrong anyway? I have no reason to lie, neither does anybody else who also called out those comments for what they were. Like I said, moderators also perceived those comments as misogynistic. On that note, I appreciate your attempt to discuss misogyny but given your own personal history (i.e defending Evander Kane against Anna Kane), you really aren't in a position to discuss what is and isn't misogyny. Come to think of it, your lack of knowledge on women in general probably explains all those cringe dating threads you used to make . Anyways, we're veering off-topic. Rachel Doerrie is cool hire. Wish her the best in this position to help our team. -
[Report] Canucks hire Rachel Doerrie in an analytics role
AV. replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
Those sentiments were used to do exactly what you just described - invalidate her hiring and question her belongingness on the team. -
[Report] Canucks hire Rachel Doerrie in an analytics role
AV. replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
Except the sentiments made by some users weren't "hmm, I wonder why we hired Rachel over this other candidate?". They were a lot closer to "ugh, the analytics girl from Twitter" Even if for one second we believe the intent in those posts weren't to be misogynistic, it doesn't change the fact in how it was delivered came across that way. Mods obviously perceived the same way since they hid/removed those posts. -
[Report] Canucks hire Rachel Doerrie in an analytics role
AV. replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
Yeah, they wouldn't share those stories.. https://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl-fines-leafs-for-tampering-1.802383 -
[Report] Canucks hire Rachel Doerrie in an analytics role
AV. replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
Lol. How does one *act* professional? Like, was she supposed to share the stories in a certain way, use specific words, etc? She was an employee for a professional NHL team. The likelihood of having sources within the game is probably high and she may even share the same sources as the "legitimate" guys. The stories are far from baseless. If Brian Burke, or Kevin Bieksa, or any other former hockey guy told those stories, would you believe it? They're not a journalists, either, let me remind you. -
[Report] Canucks hire Rachel Doerrie in an analytics role
AV. replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
Do you demand the same of Darren Dreger, Pierre LeBrun, Elliotte Friedman, etc to also "share their sources" when they report news or share what they've heard? -
[Report] Canucks hire Rachel Doerrie in an analytics role
AV. replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
Who said the stories were baseless? -
[Report] Canucks hire Rachel Doerrie in an analytics role
AV. replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
But there is no "track record". It's been made out to seem that way because a few fans of ours are still bitter about what she said re: the previous GM and some things she had heard about some of our players. None of that is problematic. -
[Report] Canucks hire Rachel Doerrie in an analytics role
AV. replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
The difference is, if J.D. Burke was hired, nobody would be saying that for him to be successful here, he would need to "keep his mouth shut". It's pretty obvious why that particular comment is being made here -
[Report] Canucks hire Rachel Doerrie in an analytics role
AV. replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
This thread has nothing to do with me. I came in and posted that Benning fans took another loss because the person we had just hired happened to be one of his criticizers in a public space. That was it. I didn't call out anybody, didn't tag anybody, just left things as they were. I felt it was pretty good justice that we hired her, considering she took backlash from supporters on here, and on Twitter, when her comments were originally made. The only obsessed bunch here is the group of fans that sleep with tears in their eyes at night, wishing Benning was still in a job lmfao.