Francesco Aquilini says "I have no plans to make changes."

[kanucks25]

2 minutes ago, Dazzle said:

I'm still waiting to hear what you have to say about drafting and player development because I clearly mentioned they were two inseparable processes.

None of what you said refutes the below:

 

On 2/14/2021 at 5:28 PM, kanucks25 said:

Benning's ability to draft outside the top-10 is grossly overexaggerated. Here are a couple facts:

1) It took 6 years (Demko) for any of Benning's 2nd round picks to play games in the NHL

2) No draft pick after the 2nd round (or top 40) (Demko, Hoglander) has made any sort of significant impact on this team.

- Gaudette has a decent amount of GP but as a depth player and is still struggling to establish his role or himself as player

- Tryamkin played 1 season as a depth D-man and hasn't been seen since, that was several years ago when we were just starting the dumpster fire years
- EDIT: Forsling has played NHL games... none for the Canucks, because he was traded for a nothing player.

And I did answer this:

 

2 minutes ago, Dazzle said:

I'm still waiting to hear what you have to say about drafting and player development because I clearly mentioned they were two inseparable processes.

With:

 

On 2/18/2021 at 5:22 PM, kanucks25 said:

Related, but not the same.

 

Scouting a player and estimating their progression/ceiling when they're 16, 17, 18 years-old is different than nurturing and developing an 18+ year-old when he's already drafted to the NHL and in your organization.

 

[kanucks25]

5 minutes ago, the grinder said:

i provided the facts   demko hoglander and gaudette  all fit  the criteria  of being 2 rounders or under  that do contribute  to the team , and you say i didn't comprehend it , lol    that makes you look real bad now  

You've quoted posts that clearly indicate that the criteria wasn't followed.

 

I said name any non 1st-rounder that significantly contributed to the team in Benning's first 5 seasons (6 including playoffs).

Demko, Hoglander and Gaudette don't work here.

 

I said name any non top-40 pick that has significantly contributed to the team at any time?

Demko, Hoglander and Gaudette don't work here. (Gaudette is not a significant contributor)

[Me_]

[aGENT]

21 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

You've quoted posts that clearly indicate that the criteria wasn't followed.

 

I said name any non 1st-rounder that significantly contributed to the team in Benning's first 5 seasons (6 including playoffs).

Demko, Hoglander and Gaudette don't work here.

 

I said name any non top-40 pick that has significantly contributed to the team at any time?

Demko, Hoglander and Gaudette don't work here. (Gaudette is not a significant contributor)

Yes. A long as you carefully arrange goal posts (including ignoring we didn't have 2nd rounders a couple of those early years), your statement is technically 'correct'.

 

When you have to curate and qualify your statement that much though to suit a narrative, perhaps you're not being intellectually honest with your broader statement that 'Benning's drafting is overrated'.

[Dazzle]

4 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Yes. A long as you carefully arrange goal posts (including ignoring we didn't have 2nd rounders a couple of those early years), your statement is technically 'correct'.

 

When you have to curate and qualify your statement that much though to suit a narrative, perhaps you're not being intellectually honest with your broader statement that 'Benning's drafting is overrated'.

Kanucks25 has made it abundantly clear that he will shift his argument multiple times in order to 'fit in' what he wants to believe.

Poor @kanucks25  - I pity you for not being able to see things for what they are, rather than what you want them to see. I always enjoy reading his posts when I want to see what a typical CDC user looks like.

Edited February 21, 2021 by Dazzle

[kanucks25]

5 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Yes. A long as you carefully arrange goal posts (including ignoring we didn't have 2nd rounders a couple of those early years), your statement is technically 'correct'.

 

When you have to curate and qualify your statement that much though to suit a narrative, perhaps you're not being intellectually honest with your broader statement that 'Benning's drafting is overrated'.

It was claimed that Benning is a good drafter, and what I posted refutes that.

 

What am I going to say? "None of Benning's draft picks are good"? Of course not, a bunch are, but that's expected when almost all of your said good picks are from the top of the draft. You or I could draft top 10 in 5 drafts, just take the overall consensus each time, and end up okay.

 

As we all know, there's a strong correlation between how high a player is picked and his impact in the NHL, especially when you break it down round by round.

 

So what makes a good drafter? One that can draft quality from where it's mathematically unlikely that you do.

 

So, that's where my argument comes in. What has Benning done in this regard? What evidence can we point to?

 

Because one season of Tryamkin playing like an average bottom-pair D-man ain't it.

 

And a non-everyday player in Gaudette ain't it.

 

Rathbone and Lind and Lockwood ain't it; they're all just sniffing the NHL right now.

 

- It took 5-6 years for any non-1st rounder to make an impact on this team.

- No non top-40 pick has made an impact on this team.

Those aren't "careful goal posts", those are unfortunate facts that prove my point.

[aGENT]

2 hours ago, kanucks25 said:

What am I going to say? "None of Benning's draft picks are good"? Of course not, a bunch are, but that's expected when almost all of your said good picks are from the top of the draft. You or I could draft top 10 in 5 drafts, just take the overall consensus each time, and end up okay.

But there's in fact a boat load of later draft picks (not just early 1sts) that are doing well and/or trending well (you can probably even include Boeser there). So again it's not intellectually honest.

 

We didn't have a 2nd round pick 2 of his first 3 years. Gee, I wonder why only the one guy (a goalie, who notoriously take longer) was the only guy to make it, and only after your carefully crafted and arbitrary window to suit your narrative? Funny that. 

 

This is how I know you're trolling and not worth further response. 

Edited February 21, 2021 by aGENT

[iceman64]

5 hours ago, kanucks25 said:

A team that was 5th in goals, 4th on the PP, had the Selke winner and the Art Ross & Ted Lindsey winner was simply not good enough and relied too much on goaltending?

 

I was right, you never even watched hockey at that time lmao

your such an _____..  do you even think before you speak? troll..

[iceman64]

2 hours ago, aGENT said:

But there's in fact a boat load of later draft picks (not just early 1sts) that are doing well and/or trending well (you can probably even include Boeser there). So again it's not intellectually honest.

 

We didn't have a 2nd round pick 2 of his first 3 years. Gee, I wonder why only the one guy (a goalie, who notoriously take longer) was the only guy to make it, and only after your carefully crafted and arbitrary window to suit your narrative? Funny that. 

 

This is how I know you're trolling and not worth further response. 

Yeah Troll is right.. he doesn't think out his responses and ends up looking like a fool but whatever, done with him too

[CanadianRugby]

Maybe there'd be a lot less arguing if we all accept that...

 

The Benning Bros will say Benning is not perfect, no GM is.  Then go on to defend literally any and every move that's been made.  Nothing short of multiple more seasons of missing the playoffs will change their minds.

 

While the Benning haters (hey that's me) are so soured by his refusal to rebuild early on and the bad contracts.  That nothing short of seeing a legit elite team will change their minds.  

 

But what the hell am I talking about?  Arguing about sports is why we're here. Fight!

[ilduce39]

Looking at Treliving in Calgary (who, IMO, has built a pretty good squad on paper) just shows how precarious a GM job in sports is.  
 

IMO even if I gave the guy very little benefit of the doubt I’d say as long as JB is hamstrung by the cap let him keep drafting gems.  How many teams have had 4 straight Calder finalists? 
 

The anti-JB crowd wanted a stockpile of (not picks) but good young players over this run... and that’s exactly what we have.  We can all see the cap situation - it’s fine in one and a half years.  Let’s chill out and enjoy all Canadian grudge matches while Hoggy and Juolevi come into form.

Edited February 21, 2021 by ilduce39

[the grinder]

6 hours ago, kanucks25 said:

You've quoted posts that clearly indicate that the criteria wasn't followed.

 

I said name any non 1st-rounder that significantly contributed to the team in Benning's first 5 seasons (6 including playoffs).

Demko, Hoglander and Gaudette don't work here.

 

I said name any non top-40 pick that has significantly contributed to the team at any time?

Demko, Hoglander and Gaudette don't work here. (Gaudette is not a significant contributor)

lol what a load of crap    demko is a 2 nd rounder  so that works    , hoglander 40 th over all  is on the team so that works  , gaudette a fifth rounder is on the team    demko contributes  every time he plays    , Hoglander is in 1 st year and  is contributing  , Gaudette passed others on the depth  chart  and plays on the team  ( say what you want about production he is on the 3rd line ). 

 So i guess  Demko winning games  in the regular season and playoffs is not contributing to the team because that what you are saying ?!  

 

   so   is demko a 2 nd rounder ?               check yes he is   36 th over all

   has demko  won games in the playoffs ?     yes he did

   has demko won in the regular season ?        yes he has 

has demko stolen a playoff game ?               even the Vegas players have said he did 

 

is hoglander a 2nd rounder   ?      double check     hoglander was drafted 40 th overall 

is hoglander  playing on the 2 nd line ?                   yes he is 

is hoglander  getting points  ?                               yes he has nine points tied for 7 th in scoring on the canucks in his first year   

 

 so there are the facts   so i named  a non first rounder  and a a top 40 pick  or did u just pick 40th to move the goal posts lol

[Gurn]

Fun game, and I will always be right, no one can prove me wrong.

MY assertion:

J.B. did a lousy job of drafting. not one player that  he drafted between Feb 14/21 and Feb 15/21 has made the NHL.

Prove me wrong, Benning sucks.

[aGENT]

8 hours ago, the grinder said:

lol what a load of crap    demko is a 2 nd rounder  so that works    , hoglander 40 th over all  is on the team so that works  , gaudette a fifth rounder is on the team    demko contributes  every time he plays    , Hoglander is in 1 st year and  is contributing  , Gaudette passed others on the depth  chart  and plays on the team  ( say what you want about production he is on the 3rd line ). 

 So i guess  Demko winning games  in the regular season and playoffs is not contributing to the team because that what you are saying ?!  

 

   so   is demko a 2 nd rounder ?               check yes he is   36 th over all

   has demko  won games in the playoffs ?     yes he did

   has demko won in the regular season ?        yes he has 

has demko stolen a playoff game ?               even the Vegas players have said he did 

 

is hoglander a 2nd rounder   ?      double check     hoglander was drafted 40 th overall 

is hoglander  playing on the 2 nd line ?                   yes he is 

is hoglander  getting points  ?                               yes he has nine points tied for 7 th in scoring on the canucks in his first year   

 

 so there are the facts   so i named  a non first rounder  and a a top 40 pick  or did u just pick 40th to move the goal posts lol

No, no... You clearly don't get it. They had to contribute specifically in the first 5, arbitrary years of Benning's tenure to suit my narrative.

 

Because Demko didn't play 'meaningful' games until year 6 and then we didn't have 2nd round picks for two years. See! 'Proof' that Benning's drafting sucks!  

 

We'll also just ignore that Calder candidate, All Star player and one of the better one shot scorers in the league in Boeser wasn't in fact also an 'early 1st pick because we sucked' too while we're at it. Ok? 

[JM_]

9 minutes ago, aGENT said:

No, no... You clearly don't get it. They had to contribute specifically in the first 5, arbitrary years of Benning's tenure to suit my narrative.

 

Because Demko didn't play 'meaningful' games until year 6 and then we didn't have 2nd round picks for two years. See! 'Proof' that Benning's drafting sucks!  

 

We'll also just ignore that Calder candidate, All Star player and one of the better one shot scorers in the league in Boeser wasn't in fact also an 'early 1st pick because we sucked' too while we're at it. Ok? 

Benning didn't pick McDavid, over and over and over..... 

[Honky Cat]

11 hours ago, ilduce39 said:

Looking at Treliving in Calgary (who, IMO, has built a pretty good squad on paper) just shows how precarious a GM job in sports is.  
 

IMO even if I gave the guy very little benefit of the doubt I’d say as long as JB is hamstrung by the cap let him keep drafting gems.  How many teams have had 4 straight Calder finalists? 
 

The anti-JB crowd wanted a stockpile of (not picks) but good young players over this run... and that’s exactly what we have.  We can all see the cap situation - it’s fine in one and a half years.  Let’s chill out and enjoy all Canadian grudge matches while Hoggy and Juolevi come into form.

They've got some fine young players too

I like Mangiapane,Valimaki,Andersson, Tkachuk, but I would take our players everyday of the week.

Imagine the uproar around here if JB traded a 1st (who would be Noah Dobson), and a 2nd for Travis Hamonic.?

[Honky Cat]

11 hours ago, CanadianRugby said:

Maybe there'd be a lot less arguing if we all accept that...

 

The Benning Bros will say Benning is not perfect, no GM is.  Then go on to defend literally any and every move that's been made.  Nothing short of multiple more seasons of missing the playoffs will change their minds.

 

While the Benning haters (hey that's me) are so soured by his refusal to rebuild early on and the bad contracts.  That nothing short of seeing a legit elite team will change their minds.  

 

But what the hell am I talking about?  Arguing about sports is why we're here. Fight!

Was it his (Bennings) refusal not to rebuild, or was it Lindens/ownerships?

It was publicly stated by Linden that there would be no rebuild , months before Benning even signed on as GM

The Sedins had their new contacts (2013), and ownership had denied Gillis a rebuild that year.

Linden couldn't even bring himself to say the 'r' word, until 2017.?

This doesnt excuse Benning of some of his poorer moves in the first 3 years.

My point is, its exceeding common for 'Benning haters' like yourself to blame Benning 100% for the organizational direction. Which is completely misguided imo.

[aGENT]

39 minutes ago, Honky Cat said:

Was it his (Bennings) refusal not to rebuild, or was it Lindens/ownerships?

It was publicly stated by Linden that there would be no rebuild , months before Benning even signed on as GM

The Sedins had their new contacts (2013), and ownership had denied Gillis a rebuild that year.

Linden couldn't even bring himself to say the 'r' word, until 2017.?

This doesnt excuse Benning of some of his poorer moves in the first 3 years.

My point is, its exceeding common for 'Benning haters' like yourself to blame Benning 100% for the organizational direction. Which is completely misguided imo.

Also pretty convenient to simply label people of opposing views as 'Benning Bros who will defend literally every move...' which by the way, isn't true.

 

I never liked the Eriksson signing (which apparently I was unfortunately, abundantly correct on). Didn't care for the Ryan Miller contract at the time either (which I was quite incorrect on).

 

I was happy with and understood the reasoning for the Beagle and Roussel signings while also agreeing they're inefficient cap/'overpaid'. But we had to overpay to get them here and their contracts expire before we really need the cap (especially when everyone expected Pettersson to take at least another year). I'd still do the Beagle contract and while at the time, something like a 'Dorsett replacement' was a solid plan, with hindsight, I'd probably not bother with Roussel (even though I like him as a player).

 

The ability to see the nuance, context and reasoning around moves, even for things that don't work out in hindsight, does not make one a 'blind apologist' as some would have you believe. That's just lazy thinking and a poor substitute for actual debate/discussion.

 

What the schism between 'sides' really boils down to IMO is that some people simply didn't like the way the Canucks decided to rebuild with spending cap or the occasional asset on veteran support, insulation and mentors.

 

Some of us did and/or understand the context and reasoning behind doing so.

 

Happily, whichever side your on, Benning has managed to largely rebuild a new core, with a bunch of potential support player-prospects, regardless (despite his reported 'poor' drafting LMAO).

 

And at least we'll all have the common ground of agreeing that Eriksson's contract is AWFUL 

 

Edited February 21, 2021 by aGENT

[CanadianRugby]

28 minutes ago, Honky Cat said:

Was it his (Bennings) refusal not to rebuild, or was it Lindens/ownerships?

It was publicly stated by Linden that there would be no rebuild , months before Benning even signed on as GM

The Sedins had their new contacts (2013), and ownership had denied Gillis a rebuild that year.

Linden couldn't even bring himself to say the 'r' word, until 2017.?

This doesnt excuse Benning of some of his poorer moves in the first 3 years.

My point is, its exceeding common for 'Benning haters' like yourself to blame Benning 100% for the organizational direction. Which is completely misguided imo.

You could be right, we just don't know.  But the Benning supporters that hate on Gillis never blame the owner for anything in that era.  Yet try to use ownership as an excuse for Benning.  If this team ends up competing for the cup I imagine you'd be giving ALL the credit to Benning, not ownership.  So don't blame the owner or Linden for Benning's team.

 

Our owner didn't give our horrible contracts or trade more draft picks away than he brought in during a "rebuild."  Benning did.  

 

It's awesome that Benning drafted Petey & Hughes.  Though the only reason he had an opportunity to do that was because he iced the worst team in the league.  The reasons we have no depth now is because he was trading draft picks away and signing terrible contracts in a 'win now' mentality with zero results.  That's on him not the owner. 

[Honky Cat]

6 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Also pretty convenient to simply label people of opposing views as 'Benning Bros who will defend literally every move...' which by the way, isn't true.

 

I never liked the Eriksson signing (which apparently I was unfortunately, abundantly correct on). Didn't care for the Ryan Miller contract at the time either (which I was quite incorrect on).

 

I was happy with and understood the reasoning for the Beagle and Roussel signings while also agreeing they're inefficient cap/'overpaid' but we had to overpay to get them here and their contracts expire before we really need the cap (especially when everyone expected Pettersson to take at least another year). I'd still do the Beagle contract and while at the time, something like a 'Dorsett replacement' was a solid plan, with hindsight, I'd probably not bother with Roussel (even though I like him was a player).

 

The ability to see the nuance, context and reasoning around moves, even for things that don't work out in hindsight, does not make one a 'blind apologist' as some would have you believe. That's just lazy thinking and a poor substitute for actual debate/discussion.

 

What the schism between 'sides' really boils down to IMO is that some people simply didn't like the way the Canucks decided to rebuild with spending cap or the occasional asset on veteran support, insulation and mentors.

 

Some of us did and/or understand the context and reasoning behind doing so.

 

Happily, whichever side your on, Benning has managed to largely rebuild a new core, with a bunch of potential support player-prospects, regardless (despite his reported 'poor' drafting LMAO).

 

And at least we'll all have the common ground of agreeing that Eriksson's contract is AWFUL 

 

The reasoning behind the Beagle signing was a 'void of leadership' in the room according to Benning. The Sedins were retiring. At the time of the signing, it wasn't really known if Pettersson would even make the NHL summer of 2018.?.Pettersson and Hughes immediate impact put everything ahead of schedule at that point.

The only thing I didnt like about the 2018 UFA signings was the term, a year too long for both players.

 

Benning claimed after making it to the second round of the playoffs last year that he overpaid for his vets, but they played a key role in all 3 series.