Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Tonight's summer summit streamed online?


GM PLACE ROCKS

Recommended Posts

We all have different opinions, but we're all supposed to be Canucks fans first. Your negativity and calling out of people with positive outlooks on our team moving forward makes my head hurt.

Being a Canucks fan and being a fan of the Canucks management are two different things; I'm a fan of the former and not of the latter. It's fine to be optimistic about the future. I just like to base my opinions on evidence and not wishful thinking. From my point of view so far, Benning is bad for the team and its future. Therefore, as a Canucks fan, I don't want Benning around and if I can help people see that he is bad for the team through evidence that's what I'll do. Believe me I wish everything was great but I just feel that the need to put a positive spin on a negative situation is counter-productive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being a Canucks fan and being a fan of the Canucks management are two different things; I'm a fan of the former and not of the latter. It's fine to be optimistic about the future. I just like to base my opinions on evidence and not wishful thinking. From my point of view so far, Benning is bad for the team and its future. Therefore, as a Canucks fan, I don't want Benning around and if I can help people see that he is bad for the team through evidence that's what I'll do. Believe me I wish everything was great but I just feel that the need to put a positive spin on a negative situation is counter-productive.

The guy has been here for 1 full season. 1. How can you not allow him some longer leash? It blows my mind. You're aware of the complete and total train wreck our team was going into last season right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The guy has been here for 1 full season. 1. How can you not allow him some longer leash? It blows my mind. You're aware of the complete and total train wreck our team was going into last season right?

It is not so much his actions which lead me to be against him (although I do not like what he has done). You're correct, it is too early to judge based on actions. But rather my concerns and thus opinion of him is driven more by his philosophy and outlook. This can be exemplified in his justifications for his actions, what he says he wants his team to look like, behind the scenes clips, etc. They all point to a very antiquated approach to hockey (character, leadership, grit, etc). I'm not saying those things are bad things, but rather he seems to reject (or perhaps is just unaware) of the advancements in hockey insight the past several years. For example, when he re-signed Sbisa he justified it saying that he was among the lowest in turnovers for defenceman and highest in hits on our team. Anyone with a passing familiarity with analytics understands that those are not good stats for a player to have. For me his approach is far too old school.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is not so much his actions which lead me to be against him (although I do not like what he has done). You're correct, it is too early to judge based on actions. But rather my concerns and thus opinion of him is driven more by his philosophy and outlook. This can be exemplified in his justifications for his actions, what he says he wants his team to look like, behind the scenes clips, etc. They all point to a very antiquated approach to hockey (character, leadership, grit, etc). I'm not saying those things are bad things, but rather he seems to reject (or perhaps is just unaware) of the advancements in hockey insight the past several years. For example, when he re-signed Sbisa he justified it saying that he was among the lowest in turnovers for defenceman and highest in hits on our team. Anyone with a passing familiarity with analytics understands that those are not good stats for a player to have. For me his approach is far too old school.

Ahhh I see okay and that's more than fair enough. If you don't agree outlook on what it takes to be a Stanley cup winner than that's completely different then hating on a guy for trying to rebuild on the fly. This has to be quite possibly the most difficult market in hockey to do that, and the one thing I like the most is that he has a vision, and isn't afraid to make moves to put that vision into actuality.

This team has been well overdue for a change for years, and I'm happy that it's coming about finally. Whether I agree or don't with some of his moves doesn't really matter, it's where we end up that is the important thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The idea is that if you get BPA you can turn around and trade that player for the same or slightly lesser in a different role. Thats why generally speaking thats how every team drafts in the 1st round or two.

It's a conservative approach but they want to maximize their probability of at least getting a player. What could be worse than to swing and miss in the first round? It's pathetic. Remember the Patrick White year?

If you draft for need, you are limiting the field and lowering your chances.

You can always trade for need later.

Top 5 or 10 often are picked for need because almost all of them become players. They often go for need in the lower rounds as well because from the 4th round on, you only have a 10% chance of getting a player so expectations are low.

Fellas, I completely agree with you. I was asking Supra who claims you can't trade your team's top prospects for other team's top prospects until the other team has given up on them.

He claims in another thread that trading from depth to shore up a weakness at another position never happens.

alright. give me an example of a prospect trade that has happened that wasn't because of

A: a dispute between the player/agent and the team

B: an obvious fleecing of one gm to another

C: both prospects being low quality and teams taking a shot in the dark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is not so much his actions which lead me to be against him (although I do not like what he has done). You're correct, it is too early to judge based on actions. But rather my concerns and thus opinion of him is driven more by his philosophy and outlook. This can be exemplified in his justifications for his actions, what he says he wants his team to look like, behind the scenes clips, etc. They all point to a very antiquated approach to hockey (character, leadership, grit, etc). I'm not saying those things are bad things, but rather he seems to reject (or perhaps is just unaware) of the advancements in hockey insight the past several years. For example, when he re-signed Sbisa he justified it saying that he was among the lowest in turnovers for defenceman and highest in hits on our team. Anyone with a passing familiarity with analytics understands that those are not good stats for a player to have. For me his approach is far too old school.

Do you seriously think you know better than a man whose life has revolved around hockey for most of his existence?

If you do think so, you are highly mistaken.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you seriously think you know better than a man whose life has revolved around hockey for most of his existence?

If you do think so, you are highly mistaken.

Has it already been ten minutes? Another appeal to authority argument? Come on, my positions are so strong that you have to resort to illogical fallacies, try harder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fellas, I completely agree with you. I was asking Supra who claims you can't trade your team's top prospects for other team's top prospects until the other team has given up on them.

He claims in another thread that trading from depth to shore up a weakness at another position never happens.

It doesn't. You've yet to give me a good example of a trade that has happened without those factors. And it can't be from in your EA world where you traded Seth Jones for Nathan Mackinnon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Critics of Benning's moves do not necessarily think they are masterminds. I think that what a lot of critics want is a clear statement of the strategy.

This is 'effing hilarious because CDC couldn't keep their panties untwisted when the Hamhuis and Vrbata rumours sprang up, and you want GM to tell a bunch of mouthbreathers his entire strategy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gillis never hinted to any personnel moves or management moves. This management team wanted to be more transparent.

Question is are they being too obvious by publicly putting out statements in the media on how they feel about certain players and compromising the trade value of players?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...