Mattrek

Very true. I wish those days were still here, but alas they are a time forgotten.

Because that’s where my beliefs belong: paying more to help others less fortunate, investing in the future by spending on education, jobs training programs that take into account the new robotic/ai world soon to be replacing workers, arts and theater programs being funded and rewarded, looking at a universal benefit income, making sure no one gets left behind, protecting our environment, working to better people’s lives and an equal and just world that treats everyone the same. Those are not conservative ideals, those are progressive ideas. I want us to move forward together so that we all succeed in life.

Key example of what I was talking about. The whole thread is worth reading, but here’s the most important snippets. This is possible on every issue, but it requires both sides to listen and engage respectfully.

I’m firmly on the left because the issues I support align with their ideas. I have studied the issues and while not perfect most of the time the left has the better solution. I think the biggest problem is the echo chamber that tells you what the other side believes. Go ahead and ask me what I support as a progressive (no I don’t support banning all guns, no I don’t like abortions, no I don’t support spending money we don’t have unless the return on the investment is justifiable, no I don’t think the left is perfect, no I don’t think fossil fuel production should be shut down immediately, no I don’t agree with open borders as a few positions that the right says the left supports). But most would rather be told what the other side believes rather then asking (no I don’t believe all conservatives are evil or racist as an example). The biggest issue is this. We’re taught to hate another person because of their views and thanks to the tribalism of putting your team winning over doing the right thing for all people we don’t ask the simplest of questions like: what do you believe? I’ve found common ground with pro-gun absolutionists, anti-abortion stalwarts and anti-government types. There is ground where we can agree, but it has to be a WANTED solution and both sides have to be willing to engage respectfully, earnestly and honestly, which quite frankly is very rare. Most prefer to hurl insults, assumptions, deflections, whataboutisms and basically every excuse in the book to avoid it (I’m not unguilty of this either). I agree people need to get some tougher skin, but here’s the thing for either side: if someone tells you they’re offended believe them and apologize. Why is it so hard for people to admit wrongdoing? Criticism should also be welcomed. How is anyone ever to learn without making mistakes? The whole thing has changed to “I’m right, you’re wrong and nothing you say can change my mind” rather then explaining “these are the facts that support why I believe this”. Why not be open minded that you could in fact be wrong? I support equality and caring for one another. If that makes me a SJW, libtard, snowflake or whatever pejorative people come up with so be it. Being a decent person is now a problem with some apparently *shrugs* EDIT: Forgot to mention another big problem. Hating the other side so much that you are willing to ignore facts/data/research/science in order to create an opinion opposite to what the people you hate believe. Now we have basic tenets of society breaking down because of this. “Breaking the law is bad”, “education is good”, “facts matter”, “science matters”, “being compassionate for others is good”, “racist remarks are bad”, I could go on, but you get the idea. Because of this hatred ideas of our society once mostly agreed upon are not in an effort to distinguish themselves from the other side they hate regardless of the factuality and merit behind said position.

And they tax the wazoo out of them while Alberta lets them go for almost nothing. I wouldn’t mind following Norway at all.

I really hope we somehow manage to win the lottery and pick Dahlin and then trade Tanev to a desperate trade deadline team for a top 10 first to pick a top-end winger or another D. This of course assumes Tanev stays healthy and continues his stellar play, but if Benning manages to swing this his silver pedestal I have him on will turn permanently platinum. 2018 has a ton of top tier talent in it and I hope we try to get another first. Rebuild is basically complete at that point and the players just need time. We'd have a 1A, 1B, 2nd and 3rd line in terms of talent/scoring. This lineup of course assumes no trades are made, no free agents signed and no players surprise so it likely won't look like this, but man I get excited thinking about our team looking something like this in only a few years. Dahlen-Pettersson-Virtanen Baertschi/top 6 LW-Horvat-Boeser Goldobin-Granlund-Gadjovich Palmu-Gaudette-Lockwood Juolevi-Top 2 D Hutton-Gudbranson Brisebois-Stecher Holm Demko Markstrom/DiPietro

No one has, so thank you for pointing it out. Man those Benning trades ended up gems for us on paper (we will see where they end up eventually). I've got to say this pick has grown on me as I've thought more about it and done more research into him. I was being a little bit "heightist" and didn't think much of him before, but I'm all on board now. He could be the steal of the draft in the 6th round. Having a 1 in 4 shot that far back once again shows Benning's master drafting skills. P.S. Did you see those arms on this kid? Damn those are some pipes. Looked like the size of Gadjovich's head in that picture. If he's built like that everywhere we've got a stud.

I'm not sure who it was on here, but someone said Mcjesus is asking $14m per year on a long term contract, I don't think Edmonton has the leverage to say no. If they end up paying that amount or anything close they're completely screwed when it comes to the cap and the quality of the rest of the team. When one guy takes up 20% of your cap it's almost impossible to afford quality up and down the lineup. If these rumors are true Edmonton is screwed both now and in the future.

Man reading through this thread was painful. We had 5 pages of talking about Elias Pettersson, 25 pages of bickering over Virtanen/Nylander, Juolevi/Tkachuk and 3 pages of the usual suspects having a total meltdown over Benning murdering their families (well, not really, but with how they go on and on about how awful he is you'd think he'd murdered their families or something). Typical CDC.

Please tell me that was sarcasm.

Gadjovich is "soft"?

They must've been serious about revamping the scouting department. None of these picks today look like a Delorme.

It's never too early for whiskey.

A 3rd rounder for 2 spots? No.

Not going to lie I'm a craft beer drinker, but in a pinch anything will do.

Literally seconds apart. CDC going to CDC.

Every time I hear it it brings back the nightmare of 2011.

Drink in the shower. It's awesome.

If it's the 55th and a 3rd rounder to get a first rounder I do that in a heartbeat.

I'm not upset with the pick, I'm upset we didn't trade down and add an asset as well as getting Pettersson, but I trust Benning and I guess the deal wasn't there. I hope Elias becomes a stud for us.

I tend to be an optimist.

Zero.

To those who have watched the draft before: Is it worth tuning in for? Or is it better to just get the results? The ED was terrible and I don't want to sit through that if I could be doing other things.

He mentioned Glass, Petterson and Vilardi as players he likes. He's in the running, but if Glass is available Benning will pick him. He's a character kind of guy that Benning loves and given what we know: Glass only visiting Vancouver, Benning mentioning Glass first on the list of players he likes, the rumor of Glass and Petterson getting flown to Vancouver for a 2nd interview makes it fairly obvious who he wants. Will he be available is the real question.

Thanks to Benning we've flipped the table. AHL fodder McCann and Shinkaruk (at least so far) got us Gudbranson and Granlund. It's nice to be on the winning end of trades for a change.