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

[Edited] The Playoffs are Now out of Reach

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, gurn said:

So you respond to a post by Dazzle and Provost gets upset?

The world is a strange place.

Yeah - couldn't compose himself to simply accept/agree to the olive branch, continued to prattle on endlessly, and then gets triggered when a counterpoint is posted in 'his' thread - a fairly polite one at that.  

 

Evidently believes that offer was a unilateral thing that he doesn't have to acknowledge - and then the ironing of blowing yet another headgasket over it with a spray of weak insults, allegations and name calling = certainly Professor material.

 

I mean, so offensive to point out that Killorn was drafted in 2007 - and isn't really relevent to a discussion of Benning's drafting....er, Tampa picked a good one in the 3rd round 5 General Managers ago!   

 

Anyhow - the offer stands - but it sure looks, once again, like the guy prefers the drama, the over-reactions, the victim playing as an excuse to rant and project....

Edited by oldnews
  • Hydration 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, gurn said:

Did he reply to you? No?

Then walk away, or accept his deal with a yes or no.

Anytime I've seen you reply to his proposal you say yes, then in the same damn post start stirring it up. I mean like immediately, after kind of taking a deal, you start in again.

Did you find a "yes" / agreement anywhere, in any of them? 

 

I didn't see anything resembling an acceptance of any olive branch - if you could point that out for me.

 

He just continued to throw tantrums - as he has here, once again.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Devron44 said:

Dropped from 12 to 2% after one game. Damn 

Different models.  The MoneyPuck one gave 2-3 times the chance of all the rest.

 

When you dig into their methodology, they ignore the first 20 games of the season for their model and they use the years from 2008-2015 for their predictive table or who will win a given game.

 

That explains why they rate the Canucks much higher... we aren’t the team we were then and the first 20 games of this season should certainly be a good indicator of our chances in other games this season 

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Provost said:

Different models.  The MoneyPuck one gave 2-3 times the chance of all the rest.

 

When you dig into their methodology, they ignore the first 20 games of the season for their model and they use the years from 2008-2015 for their predictive table or who will win a given game.

 

That explains why they rate the Canucks much higher... we aren’t the team we were then and the first 20 games of this season should certainly be a good indicator of our chances in other games this season 

For the record, I still stand by the math that I gave and the scenario was for if they started to win more games. It did account for the games already played. Unfortunately, they didn't improve really. Maybe for certain periods, but they didn't in the end.

 

I also mentioned the toughest scenario would be if teams like Toronto or Montreal got worse. Well that worst case scenario kind of happened. I'd argue part of the issue is Montreal starting to lose games and suddenly feeding the teams that we needed to pass, points.

 

But yeah, because of that, even if we played better, my worst fears, that I even expressed in this thread, happened.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, The Lock said:

For the record, I still stand by the math that I gave and the scenario was for if they started to win more games. It did account for the games already played. Unfortunately, they didn't improve really. Maybe for certain periods, but they didn't in the end.

 

I also mentioned the toughest scenario would be if teams like Toronto or Montreal got worse. Well that worst case scenario kind of happened. I'd argue part of the issue is Montreal starting to lose games and suddenly feeding the teams that we needed to pass, points.

 

But yeah, because of that, even if we played better, my worst fears, that I even expressed in this thread, happened.

The craziest thing is even the Ottawa stealing points has backfired since they are in danger of catching us right now.

 

Well danger if we are still worrying about playoffs... opportunity if we are looking to draft position. :)

  • Thanks 1
  • Hydration 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly though, there are a number of teams who should be playing better this season but haven't.

 

I mean look at the lack of production from NY where you see Lafreniere on pace to the worse 1st overall record in decades. Look at Kakko having yet to really figure it out. Or look at their vets like Zibenajad with just 6 points so far. Granted they're in an extremely tough division, but even with that, they should be playing better than they have.

 

Then look at Buffalo who right now is literally tied in points with the Rangers. Skinner's potentially on 4th line duty now (you think the Eriksson contract's bad, this one could be even more fun).

 

The Avalanche, while they have games in hand, are currently out of a playoff spot. Dallas has to literally play at least every 2nd day from now until the end of the season. Nashville's been struggling, etc.

 

It's a weird year.

  • Thanks 1
  • Hydration 1
  • RoughGame 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Provost said:

Ummm... Gaudette has been stapled to the press box and isn’t producing at all.  If that is the rousing success outside the top end of the draft, you have made my point pretty eloquently.  Our “steal” can’t hold down a 3rd line role when the alternative competition is an aging journeyman in Sutter who could be waived and not picked up by most teams in the league.

 

Yes, Tampa is excellent at drafting.  That is why they get an A and Benning doesn’t. that is how grades work, you don’t get to discount someone for being good.  Go around the league and you will find several teams with guys selected later in the draft who are playing pivotal roles for their teams... we don’t have that.

 

Benning has been inconsistent.  As soon showed in a couple of threads... he has barely beaten the pack of random prospect ranking lists.  Of all his picks, Petterson is the clear win.  Hughes gets picked by almost everyone at that spot... Virtanen and Juolevi get replaced by either Ehlers/Nylander and Tkachuk by almost every other list.  Benning is hitting about 50% on those top 10 picks compared with everyone else.  50% isn’t an “A”

 

You claim that people cherry pick parts of your posts, and then you cherry pick picks like the Virtanen/Juolevi as some kind of "proof" that Benning was less competent than other GMs.

 

Lots of teams passed up players like Boeser and to a much lesser extent Hughes. Lots of teams miss "better" picks. Hell Hoglander outperforms most picks in his draft class as a 2nd rounder, including most of the first round picks. That is the reality of drafting. But Benning has selected promising players in all rounds, including the Podkolzin and Arvid Costmar, both of whom are doing well as young players. Then you look at the AHL depth, the players are knocking on the door. That is what you call depth. Something we never had under any other GM, but especially Gillis. 

 

I didn't say that Benning was the best GM in the league. The rating was in comparison to all the other GMs that Vancouver had.

 

Your ability to use reason has always been suspect, Proveau.

  • Thanks 1
  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dazzle said:

You claim that people cherry pick parts of your posts, and then you cherry pick picks like the Virtanen/Juolevi as some kind of "proof" that Benning was less competent than other GMs..

What the heck?  Jesus Murphy this is like shooting fish in a barrel.  Going into a battle of wits when you are unarmed is a terrible strategy on your part!


Hahahahahaha....

 

I literally talked about every top 10 he has picked that has played in the league in that post... Virtanen, Juolevi, Petterson, and Hughes.  I also already wrote about his relative lack of success in the later parts of the draft.  I gave  the entire picture and gave Benning credit for the Petterson pick as a huge win for him.  That is the exact opposite of cherry picking.  You even quoted my post which shows me writing about his other picks WHILE accusing me of not doing that and “cherry picking” just a couple of them...

 

It was responding to your earlier post that success with later picks is just luck and can’t be how you measure a GM’s drafting... so I detailed ALL of his top 10 Picks... excluding Podkolzin  because he hasn’t played a single game to make any judgement one way or another.

 

I didn’t cherry pick anything.  You literally cherry picked a tiny portion of my post to focus on and ignored the rest.

 

 You either don’t know what the term means or are a liar.  You choose ...

 

If I was “cherry picking” I wouldn’t have included the players that didn’t make the point you accuse me of making.  Which I also didn’t even make... If I just cherry picked Virtanen and Juolevi, I would be arguing that Benning is a terrible GM at drafting and not “above average” as I literally said.

 

cher·ry-pick
/ˈCHerēˌpik/
verb
  1. choose and take only (the most beneficial or profitable items, opportunities, etc.) from what is available.

     
     
Edited by Provost
  • RoughGame 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, bbllpp said:

Spent all my energy on this place back in 2010-11 trying to convince 99.9% (no joke, there were at most four of us against the masses) of the CDC that Bieksa was worth more than a bag of pucks.  He and Hammer went on to be one of the best 2 way pairings we ever had, 2011-12 he was second to Karlsson in EV points among D.  CDCers are like Lemmings, once enough are going in a direction there’s just no point fighting it

Yeah, like all the other people who disagree with you. People like Squamfan and Alain Vigneault are posters that for whatever reason have such a massive hard on to criticize Benning for every little aspect. So when you give them evidence that shows that they have weak arguments to support their positions, they go and cry about it. Or in Squam's case, he doesn't respond at all.

 

Funny how that works huh? When you disagree with someone, they refuse to believe you, or the evidence you presented. Instead, they just rehash what they originally said.

Edited by Dazzle
  • Upvote 1
  • RoughGame 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Provost said:

Ya, the difference isn't as stark as folks make it out to be.  Benning has also traded away lots of draft picks even when we weren't in a winning window.  Getting to pick players in the top 10 is a lot more sure to get legit NHL players than picking at the very end of the 1st round because you are winning the President's Trophy and making long playoff runs.

Take last year's draft as an example... take away a top 10 pick and it is entirely likely that we don't get any NHL games out of the players we selected, or at least no meaningful contributors.

In no world of rational opinion can folks still be pinning our lack of success on Gillis like some are.  It is 7 years since he was fired.  

You had so much drivel in the other post so-called "cherrypicking" post, I've decided to point out ONE THING that will show that you have no clue what you're talking about. Is this cherrypicking? I really could go through a lot of your posts, but I don't really have the time.

 

This is EXACTLY where the fundamental difference is; that in one form or another, we are STILL paying the price for GIllis' mistakes.

 

Let's see what Gillis had prior to being fired. This article sums it up rather well for this discussion.

 

https://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl/canucks-fire-general-manager-mike-gillis-1.2602929

 

Quote

While it's still too soon too tell, the draft record during Gillis's tenure may ultimately reflect poorly. The Canucks had contentious dealings with former first round pick Cody Hodgson, since traded to Buffalo for Zack Kassian, and small forward Jordan Schroeder hasn't fully established himself as an NHL player.

The development of Bo Horvath, Nicklas Jensen, Brendan Gaunce and Cole Cassels will determine the full draft picture under Gillis.

With Gillis out, speculation will centre on the likes of Trevor Linden and Bob Nicholson. Former captain Linden has been synonymous with the Canucks for two decades, while Nicholson last week left his leadership post at Hockey Canada after several years."

How many players listed in that article are still with the Canucks? Better still, how many of those players are still in the NHL? LOL.

 

If a team is poorly stocked with players, it could very well take 10 years to recover. This, in NO WAY, says that Benning doesn't deserve blame. Yet for you to say "in no world of rational opinion..", you have put yourself in a position where you can be flat out wrong.

 

Gillis had left the Canucks with next to ZERO assets: We have a declining Sedin twins with no replacement; Kesler who basically nuked whatever value he had; and a bunch of supplementary pieces that clearly wasn't worth much to the team.

There was a lot about Hamhuis being traded and getting some value from him, yet there was talk that Hamhuis didn't waive his NTC, essentially nuking his trade value.

 

https://thecanuckway.com/2016/02/28/vancouver-canucks-asked-dan-hamhuis-to-waive-ntc/

 

So, in other words, whatever Benning could do to start fresh, he couldn't extract full value. LOL the hilarious part are the NTCs - all of them were given by Gillis.

 

Is this really too hard for you to understand? That's why there's no point in writing a huge post telling you how wrong you are, when a simple one like this can do the same.


In summary: we are still paying for Gillis' mistakes. This can be RATIONALLY figured out.

 

 

Edited by Dazzle
  • Hydration 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Dazzle said:

 

 

7 seasons... spending to the cap... and worse in the standings than we started.

 

Yep... that is clearly the fault of someone who hasn’t been in the league since before this song was a hit...

 

Brilliant.

 

Also, you still don’t know what the term “cherry pick” means so I guess you are just going to gloss over the part where you were just caught lying about my posts and are just moving on to changing goalposts and a new argument?

 

 

Edited by Provost
  • Haha 1
  • RoughGame 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...