Is this THAT bad?...really...

[180sret]

28 minutes ago, Provost said:

Yes, it is just an arbitrary number you have thrown out.  You just made a couple of random assumptions not based in any reality except your wishful thinking.

 

There is no rational expectation that “the team will have learned to play with each other” in two years... we will have at least as much, if not more, roster churn between now and then as we have had in the past few years.  We have to replace half our defence still in that time.

 

What expectation could we have that Benning won’t keep making the same contract and pro scouting mistakes he has had up until now?  That is just wishful thinking.

 

There ie no such thing as a “logical progression”.  That is some weird fallacy that people invent in their heads to feel better about having a terrible team.  Progression isn’t linear at all, as a matter of fact... history shows us that bad teams tend to stay bad a lot more often than a team shows significant linear improvement.  We are more likely to be still missing the playoffs two years from now as making the playoffs.  You can say we have some better young players now than we did 7 years ago... but our results are the same, and that is the only metric that matters.

 

Players get old fast and come off their ELC and get paid market rates even faster.  One of our best “windows” was these most recent years when we had two superstars making no money.  We squandered that by having a roster filled with players making millions who wouldn’t get picked up if put on the waiver wire.  Horvat is going to be 28 and nearing the end of his prime by the start of your “plan”.. if we don’t start competing for the playoffs for a couple years, it takes a bunch of kicks at the can to make a real run and he could be retired or be overpaid on a bad contract by that point.

 

Everything you said was arbitrary and wishful thinking.

 

 

I gotta disagree on some of what you said. It seems you look at the team very black or white( wins, losses) while I see a team learning the hard work to win at this level. I believe we have the skill to compete but are learning the details to be consistent.

 

During the losing streak I see a team of individuals cheating for offense. Gaps were way to large as forwards were not supporting the D, which led to turnovers and goals against. The team needed some practice time to get them on the same page. A lot of posters on here were screaming that it's coaching and systems, buts thats not what I saw. Last night I saw Canucks Hockey for the full 60 minutes. It's not perfect but very entertaining and should supply us with wins moving forward. Not to say they start cheating again but if they keep their gaps tight and play D first, this is the team we saw in the first 2 rounds of playoffs.

 

I'm more than willing to watch team and present management play this out. Some stability is needed for this team to move forward. You and some others disagree, thats ok, I just hate when the kneejerk reactions start flinging poo everywhere without actually looking at the causes for the losses.

 

Thats my take, and I'm sticking to it lol. Yes, I'll drink the Teams "cool aid" over that toxic crap the haters drink!

[Provost]

1 minute ago, 180sret said:

I gotta disagree on some of what you said. It seems you look at the team very black or white( wins, losses)

Umm wins and losses... that is literally how sports work and are measured and is the entire point.  No grey area, there is a winner and there is a loser every game.

 

Moral victories and “better effort” don’t count in the standings.  Those are just ways to rationalize losing.

 

Over a very short sample size of losing you can argue “process”.  Sometimes just random bad luck occurs in a streak even if you are playing well.  no one gets to argue it is just process and it is really the effort that counts for seven years.

[180sret]

Just now, Provost said:

Umm wins and losses... that is literally how sports work and are measured and is the entire point.  No grey area, there is a winner and there is a loser every game.

 

Moral victories and “better effort” don’t count in the standings.  Those are just ways to rationalize losing.

 

Over a very short sample size of losing you can argue “process”.  Sometimes just random bad luck occurs in a streak even if you are playing well.  no one gets to argue it is just process and it is really the effort that counts for seven years.

Like I said, some are very black or white. Do you look forward? See any good as the team learns? Sorry, sucks to be you.

[The Lock]

2 hours ago, Provost said:

Yes, it is just an arbitrary number you have thrown out.  You just made a couple of random assumptions not based in any reality except your wishful thinking.

 

There is no rational expectation that “the team will have learned to play with each other” in two years... we will have at least as much, if not more, roster churn between now and then as we have had in the past few years.  We have to replace half our defence still in that time.

 

What expectation could we have that Benning won’t keep making the same contract and pro scouting mistakes he has had up until now?  That is just wishful thinking.

 

There ie no such thing as a “logical progression”.  That is some weird fallacy that people invent in their heads to feel better about having a terrible team.  Progression isn’t linear at all, as a matter of fact... history shows us that bad teams tend to stay bad a lot more often than a team shows significant linear improvement.  We are more likely to be still missing the playoffs two years from now as making the playoffs.  You can say we have some better young players now than we did 7 years ago... but our results are the same, and that is the only metric that matters.

 

Players get old fast and come off their ELC and get paid market rates even faster.  One of our best “windows” was these most recent years when we had two superstars making no money.  We squandered that by having a roster filled with players making millions who wouldn’t get picked up if put on the waiver wire.  Horvat is going to be 28 and nearing the end of his prime by the start of your “plan”.. if we don’t start competing for the playoffs for a couple years, it takes a bunch of kicks at the can to make a real run and he could be retired or be overpaid on a bad contract by that point.

 

Everything you said was arbitrary and wishful thinking.

What is reality exactly? Certainly what you've provided me here isn't that.

 

It's way to easy to flip what you are saying. What expectation could we have that Benning will keep making mistakes? Is that also just wishful thinking? Your argument here makes no sense.

 

There absolutely is a logical progression. Logic is everywhere. Logic is what helps us make decisions. We weigh our options based on logic and act accordingly. Not everything will go to plan. That's also logical. You act accordingly. You want to throw out logic? Well good luck not being worse than Mike Milbury. No such thing as logical progression? So do we just not have plans? What exactly are you saying here?

 

You talk about fallacies and yet here you are throwing logic out the window. Ironically, if I never mentioned logic, or was against logic. I bet you'd be for logic and arguing that way, because that's the only explanation I can think of as to why you're going on about this stuff in the first place.

 

And then there's this whole "players get old fast" argument. A good career of a player is 10 years. A lot go longer than that and the ones that go shorter than that were shortened either because they didn't have the skills in the first place or had some unforeseen (and probably unfortunate) circumstances. That's the part you can't account for, again, logically.

 

But hey, if you want to throw out logic and logical progressions, be my guest. But to answer my own first question, to be logical is often to also be realistic. So for you to say I'm being unrealistic and yet somehow "justify" throwing logic out the window, realism requires logic. Realistic goals ARE logic. If you are throwing logic out the window, then it's you sir you needs to learn was being realistic is.

 

I get it. You think the time is now. You're disappointed at this team, but don't start talking to me about how "logical progression" doesn't exist since that very logical progression is how you've made your decision to also be upset. This very post you've presented to me is basically stating "oh logical progression doesn't exist" and then you go on to talk about the timeline of players as if that's not logical progression? Really? In fact, I'd argue that most of your posts on this very forum talk about logical progression: every player you want to trade for, every prospect you talk about: logical progression. If it's not that what is it? How do you make your decisions? With magic? Guessing? Not knowing what you're talking about? How do you come up with ideas without logic?

Edited February 14, 2021 by The Lock

[alt kilgore]

12 minutes ago, 180sret said:

Like I said, some are very black or white. Do you look forward? See any good as the team learns? Sorry, sucks to be you.

apologies to Provost, but I just want to jump in to say this is so mayor of wrongsville.  Those of us that can be honest in our assessment of how this team has been managed in the last 7 years, and find fault, are not pleased about it. Its about facing the reality of our situation, recognizing it, accepting it happened, and we will all move on. Because there is no other choice.

 

You speak of "black and white".  And then adopt a very black or white position.  It seems for you, everything is white, no time for black. (racism not implied).  Which is all you see as an alternative.  Some of us feel its important to look at the grey areas too. And think its important to honestly evaluate those areas that mistakes were made, in order to move on.  I would sure hope Aquaman and  Benning have learned from their first year here and the "we can turn it around quickly". 

 

I can only speak for myself, but I do look forward with hope, if that's what you want to hear. I AM excited about the future for the team. And when a , hopefully, new GM can clean up Jim's mess, we can be real contenders. The point is the blown opportunity while Petey and Hughes are on ELC. In part because of a lack of ability to properly access the team when he came in, and at other crucial points.  That or allowed himself to be a puppet of the owner's insta-contender visions , which is worse frankly.  But then continued to mis-evaluate where this team was and even while paying to get rid of Gagner, and realizing LE was not who they thought he was, he reloaded on a new round of badly evaluated veteran players, topping off the cap for years.  Maybe we can get both Hughes and Petey on bridge deals as a way to get in enough truly talented support. But that is risky. And kicks the can down the road.

 

It all started with a vision of a "quick turnaround" by nixing draft choices and dealing away promising prospects to load up on veteran leaders.  Making the playoffs and contending again was the stated goal for each year early on. The word "rebuild" was banned from the org.  But instead JB did a pss poor job of evaluating veteran support talent with almost every FA acquired playing below what they were projected.  And so, in effect, he was doing an "accidental" rebuild anyways, as we lost enough that we got fairly high draft picks. (Without the shedding of old contracts and keeping an eye on the cap part). And Judd Brackett saved his bacon there. Who he thanked by turfing him out.  Yeah I'm still pssed at that dumb move. Its bad enough to lose talent brought in, but to lose a brilliant director of AS that worked his way up for 12 years in the organization? And in such a short time helped us get what we got?.....I just can't. I'll be curious now watching how the Wild do with their picks vs. Canucks.

 

But back to the point. You realize don't you, that one can be critical of past mistakes, and accept how those mistakes are going to affect your favourite hockey team in the next couple years, and still be a huge fan, and still want the best for them?  And still cheer when they win. Still celebrate the wins, both on the ice and on the trade floor.  I can have the best of both worlds.  I think it sucks to be someone who can only allow themselves to see half the picture.

 

 

 

 

[The Lock]

For the record, I don't look at black and white either. I see a lot of grey. What I don't however respect is being attacked just because I set my own expectations while not being as upset over what's happening right now.

[King Heffy]

7 hours ago, dank.sinatra said:

I agree the power play needs to find creative ways to generate new looks but other than that I think you're off.

 

I'm not completely sold on Baumer but I'd like to see what he can do with a set of six NHL quality defensemen before I write him off. 

 

This roster has a handful of very good players. Yet this roster is not a good roster at all.

 

Benn and Juolevi are not NHL quality defensemen. Myers has his moments but generally does more harm than good. Edler is a beast and I love him but ideally he's playing third pair minutes at this stage in his career. Hughes without Tanev is... not very good defensively, yet at least. Schmidt is adjusting to a new team in what is probably the hardest year ever to adjust to a new team and at times that has showed but overall I think he's performed admirably.

 

The coaching staff was vocal about upgrading the d-core in the off-season. Instead it looks like they've been dealt an even worse hand than before.

 

I wouldn't call it a systems issue. It's a roster issue. 

Our defensemen are NHL quality.  The entire group is underperforming and I would like to see how they do with a real coach who has a coherent system.  Baumer is the problem here.

[The Lock]

Just now, King Heffy said:

Our defensemen are NHL quality.  The entire group is underperforming and I would like to see how they do with a real coach who has a coherent system.  Baumer is the problem here.

Yeah, I honestly look at the problems as much of a team mentality issue than I do the actual players and I honestly don't understand this whole mentality of "we need to blow up the team" at the moment. Well... I do understand it, I just think it's as narrow-minded as you can get.

[Provost]

34 minutes ago, The Lock said:

What is reality exactly? Certainly what you've provided me here isn't that.

 

It's way to easy to flip what you are saying. What expectation could we have that Benning will keep making mistakes? Is that also just wishful thinking? Your argument here makes no sense.

 

There absolutely is a logical progression. Logic is everywhere. Logic is what helps us make decisions. We weigh our options based on logic and act accordingly. Not everything will go to plan. That's also logical. You act accordingly. You want to throw out logic? Well good luck not being worse than Mike Milbury. No such thing as logical progression? So do we just not have plans? What exactly are you saying here?

 

You talk about fallacies and yet here you are throwing logic out the window. Ironically, if I never mentioned logic, or was against logic. I bet you'd be for logic and arguing that way, because that's the only explanation I can think of as to why you're going on about this stuff in the first place.

 

And then there's this whole "players get old fast" argument. A good career of a player is 10 years. A lot go longer than that and the ones that go shorter than that were shortened either because they didn't have the skills in the first place or had some unforeseen (and probably unfortunate) circumstances. That's the part you can't account for, again, logically.

 

But hey, if you want to throw out logic and logical progressions, be my guest. But to answer my own first question, to be logical is often to also be realistic. So for you to say I'm being unrealistic and yet somehow "justify" throwing logic out the window, realism requires logic. Realistic goals ARE logic. If you are throwing logic out the window, then it's you sir you needs to learn was being realistic is.

 

I get it. You think the time is now. You're disappointed at this team, but don't start talking to me about how "logical progression" doesn't exist since that very logical progression is how you've made your decision to also be upset. This very post you've presented to me is basically stating "oh logical progression doesn't exist" and then you go on to talk about the timeline of players as if that's not logical progression? Really? In fact, I'd argue that most of your posts on this very forum talk about logical progression: every player you want to trade for, every prospect you talk about: logical progression. If it's not that what is it? How do you make your decisions? With magic? Guessing? Not knowing what you're talking about? How do you come up with ideas without logic?

We have objective reality and actual results to form opinions on.  I never made any predictions on the future, just posted that yours were rooted in your imagination and not based in fact like you insist they are.  You countered a post that was stating actual objective facts by just giving magical predictions and assumptions of what would happen in the future.

Logical progression in the terms you used it were that it is logical that the team would progress and get better in two years.

That just isn't true and I gave some examples of the reason why it isn't.  We may get better and we may get worse in two years.  It isn't a fallacy to say you aren't able to predict the future, nor it is logical for you to counter real life objective facts with a bunch of made up assumptions.

Yes, players get old fast.  The average length of a career is 5 years.  The league has also gotten younger really quickly and players fall off faster.  Lots of real life examples of that.  Lucic was a premiere player in the league, when he hit 28-29 he fell off a cliff.  Eriksson the same.  Players contributing in a meaningful way into their 30's is now an anomaly and not the norm.  Horvat is 28 in two years when you grand plan is just starting to take shape, it doesn't leave much runway for many runs at the Cup before he isn't a significant contributor, he is not a speedy player so is one of those guys that is ripe to lose his legs at 30.

The rest of your post is just random nonsense.  Your definition of me throwing out logic is refusing to predict the future and also to ignore the past.  You also said you never mentioned logic, when you literally typed "This is a taking into account a logical progression of the team" as rationale for your whimsical predictions.

As a matter of fact, your predictions are highly illogical.  You used no logical basis for your "logical" predictions.  The ones you used were simply objectively false.
The team will have a bunch of new faces (hopefully) in two years, so it doesn't make any sense that they would have learned to play better together by then.  We had a defence that knew how to play together last year because they had been with the team a long time.  That didn't make them good, and we won't even have that going forward as most of the D faces will be new to playing with each other.

I already covered the "teams just logically progress" falsehood... that just isn't true.  That isn't a prediction on my part, look at the worst teams over the last decade and most of them have stayed the worst teams.  Most of the good teams have stayed good teams.  Just a very few teams went from the bottom of the pack to realistic contenders.
 

Edited February 14, 2021 by Provost

[180sret]

7 minutes ago, kilgore said:

apologies to Provost, but I just want to jump in to say this is so mayor of wrongsville.  Those of us that can be honest in our assessment of how this team has been managed in the last 7 years, and find fault, are not pleased about it. Its about facing the reality of our situation, recognizing it, accepting it happened, and we will all move on. Because there is no other choice.

 

You speak of "black and white".  And then adopt a very black or white position.  It seems for you, everything is white, no time for black. (racism not implied).  Which is all you see as an alternative.  Some of us feel its important to look at the grey areas too. And think its important to honestly evaluate those areas that mistakes were made, in order to move on.  I would sure hope Aquaman and  Benning have learned from their first year here and the "we can turn it around quickly". 

 

I can only speak for myself, but I do look forward with hope, if that's what you want to hear. I AM excited about the future for the team. And when a , hopefully, new GM can clean up Jim's mess, we can be real contenders. The point is the blown opportunity while Petey and Hughes are on ELC. In part because of a lack of ability to properly access the team when he came in, and at other crucial points.  That or allowed himself to be a puppet of the owner's insta-contender visions , which is worse frankly.  But then continued to mis-evaluate where this team was and even while paying to get rid of Gagner, and realizing LE was not who they thought he was, he reloaded on a new round of badly evaluated veteran players, topping off the cap for years.  Maybe we can get both Hughes and Petey on bridge deals as a way to get in enough truly talented support. But that is risky. And kicks the can down the road.

 

It all started with a vision of a "quick turnaround" by nixing draft choices and dealing away promising prospects to load up on veteran leaders.  Making the playoffs and contending again was the stated goal for each year early on. The word "rebuild" was banned from the org.  But instead JB did a pss poor job of evaluating veteran support talent with almost every FA acquired playing below what they were projected.  And so, in effect, he was doing an "accidental" rebuild anyways, as we lost enough that we got fairly high draft picks. (Without the shedding of old contracts and keeping an eye on the cap part). And Judd Brackett saved his bacon there. Who he thanked by turfing him out.  Yeah I'm still pssed at that dumb move. Its bad enough to lose talent brought in, but to lose a brilliant director of AS that worked his way up for 12 years in the organization? And in such a short time helped us get what we got?.....I just can't. I'll be curious now watching how the Wild do with their picks vs. Canucks.

 

But back to the point. You realize don't you, that one can be critical of past mistakes, and accept how those mistakes are going to affect your favourite hockey team in the next couple years, and still be a huge fan, and still want the best for them?  And still cheer when they win. Still celebrate the wins, both on the ice and on the trade floor.  I can have the best of both worlds.  I think it sucks to be someone who can only allow themselves to see half the picture.

 

 

 

 

Why are you ( and others) so hung up on "past mistakes"? They may have been proven to be "mistakes" long after the fact, but you couldn't see the logic in those moves when made? You have NO proof of Brackett saving anyones bacon, that is your OPINION. I can respect your OPINION and would hope you can respect my (and others) OPINION. You choose to be negative on this management, thats your right, I like this management, I see good things happening. I get pissed when people accuse me of homerism and cool aid drinking. I've been waiting over 50 yrs for this club to win, and now I'm at least hopeful that may happen soon. I prefer my stance, at least I can smile lol

[The Lock]

13 minutes ago, Provost said:

We have objective reality and actual results to form opinions on.  I never made any predictions on the future, just posted that yours were rooted in your imagination and not based in fact like you insist they are.  You countered a post that was stating actual objective facts by just giving magical predictions and assumptions of what would happen in the future.

Logical progression in the terms you used it were that it is logical that the team would progress and get better in two years.  That just isn't true and I gave some examples of the reason why it isn't.  We may get better and we may get worse in two years.  It isn't a fallacy to say you aren't able to predict the future, nor it is logical for you to counter real life objective facts with a bunch of made up assumptions.

Yes, players get old fast.  The average length of a career is 5 years.  The league has also gotten younger really quickly and players fall off faster.  Lots of real life examples of that.  Lucic was a premiere player in the league, when he hit 28-29 he fell off a cliff.  Eriksson the same.  Players contributing in a meaningful way into their 30's is now an anomaly and not the norm.  Horvat is 28 in two years when you grand plan is just starting to take shape, it doesn't leave much runway for many runs at the Cup before he isn't a significant contributor, he is not a speedy player so is one of those guys that is ripe to lose his legs at 30.

The rest of your post is just random nonsense.  Your definition of me throwing out logic is refusing to predict the future and also to ignore the past.

 

Dude, objective reality IS logical progression. That how objective reality exists.

 

Also, let me point out that with all of this, no one can predict the future. I'm not saying we absolutely will be better in 2 years. I'm talking about where we should be logically at that time. SHOULD does not mean WILL. Stop putting words in my mouth. Seriously.

 

You talk about average career lengths, but that number's going to be skewed by the player who only ever play a few games in the NHL. It's higher than 5. Horvat's the oldest player in our crop so of course you're going to use him as an example and ignore Pettersson or Hughes or any player that goes against this. Also, 28 mean's Horvat's in his prime at that point. That's just going to help.

 

The rest of my post of course is going to seem like random nonsense to you. It must be valid though given you're not even going to bother to defend yourself with it.

 

Look. If you are going to start attacking me like you have, I'm very much going to attack back. We can agree to disagree if you'd like or we can devolve this whole thing to kindergarten class gibberish. I think you're way overreacting in all of this at the end of the day. Here, have a Snickers....

Edited February 14, 2021 by The Lock

[alt kilgore]

3 minutes ago, 180sret said:

Why are you ( and others) so hung up on "past mistakes"? They may have been proven to be "mistakes" long after the fact, but you couldn't see the logic in those moves when made? You have NO proof of Brackett saving anyones bacon, that is your OPINION. I can respect your OPINION and would hope you can respect my (and others) OPINION. You choose to be negative on this management, thats your right, I like this management, I see good things happening. I get pissed when people accuse me of homerism and cool aid drinking. I've been waiting over 50 yrs for this club to win, and now I'm at least hopeful that may happen soon. I prefer my stance, at least I can smile lol

 

News flash:  past mistakes, as well as past successes, affect the present.  And I live in the present.

 

Who controls the past now controls the future
Who controls the present now controls the past
Who controls the past now controls the future
Who controls the present now?

 

 

"Testify"  RATM

 

I can smile too.  I thoroughly enjoyed our last win.  As someone who has watched since '92.  But I also can frown when there is reason too.  In fact, I can smile and frown, at different aspects at the same time!  Must suck to only wear the Jokers grin all the time.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[The Lock]

@Provost

 

Anyway, this discussions not worth my time nor my effort. I'm not going to debate anymore with you unless if this gets more civil and you can act like an adult. I enjoy debates, but not debates that go nowhere. I want to learn in a debate and I can be convinced but you're approach in all of this has done the opposite.

 

Have a nice day.

[Provost]

1 minute ago, The Lock said:

Dude, objective reality IS logical progression. That how objective reality exists.

 

Also, let me point out that with all of this, no one can predict the future. I'm not saying we absolutely will be better in 2 years. I'm talking about where we should be logically at that time. SHOULD does not mean WILL. Stop putting words in my mouth. Seriously.

 

You talk about average career lengths, but that number's going to be skewed by the player who only ever play a few games in the NHL. It's higher than 5. Horvat's the oldest player in our crop so of course you're going to use him as an example and ignore Pettersson or Hughes or any player that goes against this. Also, 28 mean's Horvat's in his prime at that point. That's just going to help.

 

The rest of my post of course is going to seem like random nonsense to you. It much be valid though given you're not even going to bother to defend yourself with it.

 

Look. If you are going to start attacking me like you have, I'm very much going to attack back. We can agree to disagree if you'd like or we can devolve this whole thing to kindergarten class gibberish. I think you've way overreacting in all of this at the end of the day. Here, have a Snickers....

 

OK sparky... you were the one calling out other posters for being wrong.  Getting your panties in a knot when it is pointed out that you are justifying why everyone else is wrong by using just your imagination is kind of strange.

Objective reality is not logical "progression", at least in terms of progression meaning improvement like you are overtly suggesting.  The universe is filled with chaos, randomness, decay, and entropy.  Virtually no teams in the league have shown any sort of consistent progression like you said it likely and "should" happen.  As above, history has shown us that simply is not likely to be the case.  Rational people can use the past as a predictor of the future, or not try to predict at all.  You are actively saying it is dumb to consider the past and mistakes as a basis for your predictions... but instead want to use just made up fancies and call them logic.

Folks have plenty of reason to be negative about the team.  It has been one of the worst in the entire league for the entirety of this leadership's tenure.  GMs just don't get this sort of runway to be so consistently bad... Benning is one of the longest tenured GMs in the entire league and has one of the worst records of any active GM in the league... certainly much worse than anyone else who has been in their position more than a year or two.  That is objective reality.  Maybe we get better... maybe he is just bad at his job and the cumulative mistakes will have us starting another rebuild in two years.

[kanucks25]

51 minutes ago, The Lock said:

What expectation could we have that Benning will keep making mistakes? Is that also just wishful thinking? Your argument here makes no sense.

Precedence? History? Sample size?

 

 

[The Lock]

Just now, kanucks25 said:

Precedence? History? Sample size?

Yeah, that's what I mean. We use these measures, weigh our options and determine what is reasonable and what isn't reasonable.

[kanucks25]

24 minutes ago, 180sret said:

They may have been proven to be "mistakes" long after the fact, but you couldn't see the logic in those moves when made? 

No. I see this all the time from the apologists but it seems y'all have very selective memory when it comes to Benning's moves in the past.

 

Most of his moves have been very controversial, and there have been many detractors both inside and outside the fan base. Remember the Gudbranson/Travis Yost incident? It became a meme here. I don't see many Yost meme posts over the last year or so. Hmm, I wonder why.

 

Same goes for the Eriksson deal. "Well Eriksson had a good year in Boston and had experience and the Sedins and blah blah blah" it was utter crap from the start and people called it on day 1 of the signing.

[kanucks25]

5 minutes ago, The Lock said:

Yeah, that's what I mean. We use these measures, weigh our options and determine what is reasonable and what isn't reasonable.

Yeah, exactly. You asked:

 

"What expectation could we have that Benning will keep making mistakes?"

 

It's very reasonable to predict that Benning will continue to make mistakes based on his past mistakes.

[The Lock]

4 minutes ago, Provost said:

OK sparky... you were the one calling out other posters for being wrong.  Getting your panties in a knot when it is pointed out that you are justifying why everyone else is wrong by using just your imagination is kind of strange.

Objective reality is not logical "progression", at least in terms of progression meaning improvement like you are overtly suggesting.  The universe is filled with chaos, randomness, decay, and entropy.  Virtually no teams in the league have shown any sort of consistent progression like you said it likely and "should" happen.  As above, history has shown us that simply is not likely to be the case.  Rational people can use the past as a predictor of the future, or not try to predict at all.  You are actively saying it is dumb to consider the past and mistakes as a basis for your predictions... but instead want to use just made up fancies and call them logic.

Folks have plenty of reason to be negative about the team.  It has been one of the worst in the entire league for the entirety of this leadership's tenure.  GMs just don't get this sort of runway to be so consistently bad... Benning is one of the longest tenured GMs in the entire league and has one of the worst records of any active GM in the league... certainly much worse than anyone else who has been in their position more than a year or two.  That is objective reality.  Maybe we get better... maybe he is just bad at his job and the cumulative mistakes will have us starting another rebuild in two years.

Like I said, this just isn't worth my time. I get that you're upset and there's no reasoning with you on any of this. It's not my job to convince you otherwise.

 

That being said, I still stand by everything I've said.

[The Lock]

2 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

Yeah, exactly. You asked:

 

"What expectation could we have that Benning will keep making mistakes?"

 

It's very reasonable to predict that Benning will continue to make mistakes based on his past mistakes.

Yeah and this is logical progression, at least how I define it.

 

This is literally what I've been saying the whole time. So then why are you guys against me on this?

Edited February 14, 2021 by The Lock