DeNiro Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 well, everything i've read on the topic has said he was instrumental in the process, and it makes no sense to make up something out of nowhere that's so easily refutable. add to that the fact that your baseless assumptions and guarantees are worth precisely zilch, i'll go ahead and take the word of reputable sources instead. even when i disagree with you, which is most of the time, i still usually at least respect your views. this is an absolute joke though. Scouts don't make trades. You're basing your whole argument off a blurb on the Predators website. So I wouldn't exactly say your source is rock solid. Saying "facilitated" can mean a variety of different things. You're using it as an argument that it means he was "instrumental" in the trade, which likely isn't true. I'm not saying I would be unhappy with Fenton, but I think you're giving him too much credit in this case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tearloch7 Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 "Facilitated", in my experience, means 'ensured said instructions were carried out as directed' .. not a decision making task, but rather a 'deliverable duty'. "Executioner Snidely successfully 'facilitated' the death sentence of that vile and convicted Murderess, Miss Plum" Juries and rulers dictate, facilitators execute said dictates! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tas Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 Scouts don't make trades. You're basing your whole argument off a blurb on the Predators website. So I wouldn't exactly say your source is rock solid. Saying "facilitated" can mean a variety of different things. You're using it as an argument that it means he was "instrumental" in the trade, which likely isn't true. I'm not saying I would be unhappy with Fenton, but I think you're giving him too much credit in this case. no, i'm taking the term "instrumental" from various things i read after googling "selanne trade paul fenton". you're either ignoring or are unaware of the fact that fenton was an ex-jet and therefore had the necessary connections within the organization to "facilitate" the trade. the biography wouldn't go out of its way to mention that trade specifically if it wasnt true. it was the only trade mentioned specifically in the entire thing. fenton's resume is solid enough that it doesn't need to be padded with lies, and in this case it makes no sense anyway. i guarantee that he had a larger role in the process than you're giving him credit for, seemingly only to support your argument that benning is a superior gm candidate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 no, i'm taking the term "instrumental" from various things i read after googling "selanne trade paul fenton". And yet you have failed to provide any of these so called sources. Hmm... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tas Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 And yet you have failed to provide any of these so called sources. Hmm... do your own research. i'm content with the bio and didn't find what i was looking for while searching, which was an actual breakdown of the trade and the specific roles of the parties involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSniper88 Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 reading this article Benning seems to make very good decisions as AGM, he seems to know how to build a winning team before the cup win in 2011 -traded Raycroft for rights for Tuuka Rask -traded up in 2006 draft for Marchand -got Ference and Kobasew for Primeau and Brad Stuart -one of few mistakes McQuaid for 2007 pick Jamie Benn -got Johnny Boychuk from Colorada for Matt Hendricks -got Recchi from Tampa for AHLers -traded Kessel who was a cancer for 3 top picks which 2 ended up as Seguin and Hamilton - got Seidenberg and rights for Matt Barkowski for Byron Bitz, Craig Weller and 2nd - got Gregory Campbell and Nathan Horton for Dennis Wideman, 1st ,3rd - got Chris Kelly from Senators for 2nd rounder - got Rich Peverley for Wheeler and Staurt from Thrashers All these players acquired played a prominent role in 2011, seems to me that he can help pull of good trades aswell as draft.http://www.nucksmisconduct.com/2014/5/10/5702732/canucks-news-a-look-at-jim-benning Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 -one of few mistakes McQuaid for 2007 pick Jamie Benn He traded a 5th not Jamie Benn. No guarantee the Bruins would have chosen him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6string Posted May 11, 2014 Share Posted May 11, 2014 He traded a 5th not Jamie Benn. No guarantee the Bruins would have chosen him.actually mcquaid may now be available with the emergence of kevan miller, the bruins are so young n deep on their blueline...just sayin' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knucklehd Posted May 11, 2014 Share Posted May 11, 2014 Fingers crossed benning chooses Van! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BurgerKing Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 http://bruins.nhl.com/club/page.htm?id=38866 The link shows that Benning joined the Bruins in july of 2006, essentially after the draft they picked Lucic and Marchand. No credit given for Seguin, Kessel...i guess, but Kessel was at one point expected to go number 1 that year. Hamilton i would say is it's too early, but he is definately not a bust. Other than that there is Krug, Spooner, Colborne, Caron and Subban that stand out. Credit for seeing the potential in Reilly Smith. However responsible for super bust Hamill, Couture went right after. Boston`s drafting since Benning has been pretty average, no? Is this guy really the draft guru that we were promised? Who ever was incharge of bruin`s scouting from 03-06 really cleaned up, is he available? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BurgerKing Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 Actually, Gary Valk was saying just this very thing this afternoon, suggesting that Benning might decline the Canucks offer and take the Capitals GM job for a couple of reasons: 1) he'd prefer to stay in the Eastern Conference where has spent his entire career and maybe even more importantly 2) he'd look at the landscape in the West and see that the Canucks don't have the team to compete with the California teams for the foreseeable future and possibly for a few years, and that our prospect depth might be a little lacking. Anyways, it might not be the fait accompli everyone believes it to be. I disagree with point 2, many of the top players on boston were drafted from 03 to 06, the didn't become the team they are until the Kessel trade in 09. So there will be a 4-6 year turnaround time from now for his picks to actually become legit players, who knows what the landscape will look like at that point. For point 1) I did read somewhere that he spends his summers in Portland OR. Also does anyone really consider Gary Valk an astute hockey guy? Really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BurgerKing Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 Not going to get too hung up on Benning. And i'm not going to pretend that 'inside' people know anything. Nobody saw Torts as realistic until it started actually happening. Same with the Hodgson trade, Luongo trade, Gillis firing, Bertuzzi trade. Far too often these "insiders" find out the same time we do. For the most part they provide a tabloid service, something to spark discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BurgerKing Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 actually mcquaid may now be available with the emergence of kevan miller, the bruins are so young n deep on their blueline...just sayin' I just like your profile pick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canorth Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 Same with the Hodgson trade, Luongo trade, Gillis firing, Bertuzzi trade. Far too often these "insiders" find out the same time we do. For the most part they provide a tabloid service, something to spark discussion. Very true. Even look more recently at the trade deadline. I can't think of a single transaction that happened that any of these reporters had an a leg up on. They all looked surprised (at the actual trades) and very much out of the loop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostsof1915 Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 So if so many folks on CDC want Benning, why are they cheering for Boston in the playoffs? The sooner Boston loses, the sooner we get our new GM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merci Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 So if so many folks on CDC want Benning, why are they cheering for Boston in the playoffs? The sooner Boston loses, the sooner we get our new GM. Because Boston rules, and it influences a Ritchie pick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chompers14 Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 Apparently a strong candidate of Benning is Bruins farm team coach for 4 years. @News1130Sports: If Jim Benning gets the #Canucks gm job, Providence coach Bruce Cassidy should get serious consideration for Vancouver coaching job. Here's an article I found on how he misused his players in the play-offs. Cassidy firing a matter of money, pride Jim Kelley [ARCHIVE] ESPN.com | December 11, 2003 It's neither shocking nor surprising now when a coach gets fired in the National Hockey League. The Washington Capitals were in last place with an 8-18-1-1 record under Bruce Cassidy, a coach who couldn't maximize the talents of superstar forward Jaromir Jagr and went so far over the top in a recent rant in the media that he had to apologize to the entire team. Bruce Cassidy was 47-47-9-7 behind the Capitals' bench. So when Cassidy got axed Wednesday, the only real question was, what took so long? There are two answers: money and pride. Surprised Jagr wasn't a reason? Don't be. "This is not about Jaromir Jagr," Capitals general manager George McPhee told ESPN.com Wednesday. "I have no problems with the way Jaromir has been playing for the past two months. This was just something where our team had spiraled down to a point where I felt I had to step in." Money is the easy part to understand. While the Capitals had some success under Cassidy, who was hired in June 2002, management initially believed many of the team's problems were not of his making, including some communication problems with Jagr and a seriously weakened defense. Things began to change last season after Cassidy's falling-out with veteran defenseman Calle Johansson during the playoffs. That was a precursor to more heated disagreements with Jagr and then last week's rant. After the Caps were outshot 41-9 in a 3-0 loss to the New Jersey Devils, Cassidy incorporated players' personal lives and their family situations in his on-ice complaints, a no-no in the hockey world and an action for which he was forced to apologize. Before the tirade, Capitals management was hoping to get through the season with Cassidy. After all, what was the point of firing a coach the year before a potential lockout season? With a work stoppage looming, firing a coach this season means eating his salary and signing a new coach to a contract that includes a season he likely won't have to work. That all changed after it became clear that Cassidy, who had never before coached in the NHL, had lost the team. The pride in question is McPhee's. Hiring Cassidy, the American Hockey League's coach of the year in 2002, was a major risk because of his lack of NHL experience. However, because the Capitals had waited so long to fire Ron Wilson, Cassidy and Glen Hanlon were the only attractive candidates available. Hanlon, who replaces Cassidy after serving as his assistant, apparently lost out in the interview process. Initially, it looked as if hiring Cassidy would work. He was 39-29-8-6 in his first season and came within one win of capturing the Southeast Division title, before losing to the Tampa Bay Lightning in the first round of the playoffs 4-2 after winning the first two games. Considering the team missed the playoffs the season before, it all seemed to validate Cassidy's credentials. General managers last a lot longer than coaches in the NHL, but they get only a couple of kicks at canning a coach before they have to pay for the decisions as well. McPhee now has two coaching strikes against him. With only a handful of exceptions, general mangers rarely get more than three. "We had a great first year with Bruce," McPhee said. "We had missed the playoffs the year before, and he did a great job bringing us back. But after we lost [Game 3] to Tampa Bay, it seems we were never the same team. We lost momentum and we were never the same team after that." Firing Cassidy shouldn't be construed as management backing a player over a coach. A source close to the team told ESPN.com on Wednesday that the firing and the much-rumored possible trade of Jagr should be viewed as separate situations. Cassidy was fired because he didn't lose one player; he lost all of them. Once that happens, a coach is finished. Last Thursday's rant guaranteed that. Meanwhile, the Capitals can afford to wait for the right time to deal Jagr. If a trade happens, it will revolve solely around money -- how much the Caps have to eat of the four years and $44 million remaining on Jagr's contract, and what they might get in return. According to McPhee, Jagr has been playing as well or better during the last two months than at any other time since he's been in Washington. Under Hanlon, it's at least conceivable that he could play better and the team would rise with him. Under those circumstances, the Caps could keep Jagr. If they don't, he becomes -- at the very least -- an easier player to trade. Cassidy was just the opposite; management couldn't wait any longer. Jim Kelley is the NHL writer for ESPN.com. Submit questions or comments to his mail bag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB007 Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 So if so many folks on CDC want Benning, why are they cheering for Boston in the playoffs? The sooner Boston loses, the sooner we get our new GM. No one is cheering for Boston. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 No one is cheering for Boston. The odd two are (unfortunately). Would love to see Montreal just dominate Game 6 and 7. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucksnihilist Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 I believe that the most important thing in a new GM is NOT that he is a genius and can out-smart other GMs - pick the best player consistently, and do other things better than anyone else. Not going to happen anyways. What is important is that this GM is inclusive, and can get feedback from other hockey people. Because more minds = a better decision, almost every time. Proven in psychology experiments (don't ask for source, just google) and proven this last MG stretch... MG was working on an island and it showed. Hopefully Linden already has some contacts and people who can actually give him good advice / counsel ... and Benning seems to have those connections as well. That is HUGE and bodes well if it comes to pass. Just don't go off the board again - it's great if your off the board guy makes all the connections and isn't a prick... but... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.