[Speculation] Is Schmidt on the move?

[Alflives]

22 minutes ago, Nicklas Bo Hunter said:

Philly likely getting Hamilton. 

 

The only they would do a schmidt deal is if Ghost was part of the deal. It would likely have to be something like this:

 

Schmidt+lockwood 9th overall+ 

 

For

 

Konecny+ ghost+ 13th overall.

 

Still doubt they would do it. 

I doubt Benning does that.  Ghost is a cap dump.  Philly would need to take Rooster or a cap dump from us.  

[CaptKirk888]

28 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

The entire climate nowadays is that people (of all ages) have become consumed by this millenial generation outlook that everything someone says that you dont like is somehow personally offensive. Personally, I dont care if my opinion bothers you. Rebut it. Or ognore it. Whichever works best for you. But dont insinuate that anyone else's opinion should be silenced because you have a hard time dealing with what they have to say. Free speech is a thing for a reason.

 

People need to get back to the approach where they could separate their need to personally attack or label another person from arguing a differing opinion.

 

People who immediately give out subjective labels without arguing a single point of discussion are the biggest waste of time on this forum. 

 

Making an argument that rumors can still be true even if Benning says they are not isnt a particularly negative thing to say. Its just an actual fact. Its the same as saying a rumor could still be false even if a reporter says its true. Its just a fact.

 

People should think critically for themselves rather than just blindly believe whatever they are told because it fits their pre determined narrative about Benning, or a certain player, or a media member. 

I really shouldn’t be responding, but I will. I am not offended by any of your comments. I have not refuted your comments because I feel that other posts have done that adequately. No need for redundancy. Yes, you have free speech, but I find that it is you that has a problem with opposing ideas or prospective on the subject at hand. You seem to be overly sensitive that others don’t share your views. Perhaps you should take a deep look at yourself before you admonish others. I know you will respond to this as to defend yourself and your opinion but I will respectfully ignore it.

[JohnTavares]

16 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Aren’t you on IR? 

The fact you think Konecny for Schmidt is a fair deal just shows that after 50k posts, you really don't know anything about hockey.

Edited July 5, 2021 by JohnTavares

[Bertuzzipunch]

22 minutes ago, Nicklas Bo Hunter said:

Chicago is gonna get Jones. I heard they are going hard to get Seth Jones and Caleb Jones. 

Personally i wouldnt be comfortable paying jones 7 mill or higher. Hes good but not a 7-9 mill dollar dman.

[JohnTavares]

1 hour ago, Bertuzzipunch said:

Same as myers for them. Philly isnt going thru a rebuild and not giving up 2 24 yr olds lol

Yup. Canucks fan have a syndrome where we overrate our own players and underrate other teams players.

Myers and Konecny are not going anywhere - we don't have the assets for these type of players. Anyone even suggesting these names are just out of touch with reality.

[Bertuzzipunch]

Just now, JohnTavares said:

Yup. Canucks fan have a syndrome where we overrate our own players and underrate other teams players.

Myers and Konecny are not going anywhere - we don't have the assets for these type of players. Anyone even suggesting these names are just out of touch with reality.

Yeah even our 9OA aint getting either player.

[Alflives]

3 minutes ago, JohnTavares said:

The fact you think Konecny for Schmidt is a fair deal just shows that after 50k posts, you really don't know anything about hockey.

[Me_]

9 hours ago, JohnTavares said:

The fact you think Konecny for Schmidt is a fair deal just shows that after 50k posts, you really don't know anything about hockey.

And after 1,000+ posts but 268 likes, your opinion counts?

 

Ya. K.

 

Edited July 6, 2021 by Me_

[Dazzle]

1 hour ago, wallstreetamigo said:

The entire climate nowadays is that people (of all ages) have become consumed by this millenial generation outlook that everything someone says that you dont like is somehow personally offensive. Personally, I dont care if my opinion bothers you. Rebut it. Or ognore it. Whichever works best for you. But dont insinuate that anyone else's opinion should be silenced because you have a hard time dealing with what they have to say. Free speech is a thing for a reason.

 

People need to get back to the approach where they could separate their need to personally attack or label another person from arguing a differing opinion.

 

People who immediately give out subjective labels without arguing a single point of discussion are the biggest waste of time on this forum. 

 

Making an argument that rumors can still be true even if Benning says they are not isnt a particularly negative thing to say. Its just an actual fact. Its the same as saying a rumor could still be false even if a reporter says its true. Its just a fact.

 

People should think critically for themselves rather than just blindly believe whatever they are told because it fits their pre determined narrative about Benning, or a certain player, or a media member. 

This is all fine and dandy, but you're the same guy that thinks we can know about something from hearing it. And you're also the same guy who thinks we should take everything with a grain of salt. This is a contradiction that you haven't resolved. It's kind of surprising that you are dodging questions.

 

As for the media, you're also the guy who is taking into account a rumour floating around long enough might mean it has legs.

 

You've also largely defended his the media has done things. Not a peep has been said from you about how and why Hughes name could get identified, despite your claim that the media has ethics.

[wallstreetamigo]

1 hour ago, CaptKirk888 said:

I really shouldn’t be responding, but I will. I am not offended by any of your comments. I have not refuted your comments because I feel that other posts have done that adequately. No need for redundancy. Yes, you have free speech, but I find that it is you that has a problem with opposing ideas or prospective on the subject at hand. You seem to be overly sensitive that others don’t share your views. Perhaps you should take a deep look at yourself before you admonish others. I know you will respond to this as to defend yourself and your opinion but I will respectfully ignore it.

Lol i dont care if anyone shares my views or not. If people dont, I am happy to hear their take on why in a respectful conversation. The problem is many here do not have the ability to disagree without being disagreeable or just trolling for upvotes by reducing someone else's opinion down to a one liner response.

 

"You are wrong" without any actual context doesnt prove anything to anyone. Other than you have no ability to argue your viewpoint when someone disagrees with you.

 

You added nothing to the conversation at all. So you had no opposing opinion or viewpoint to actually respond to or I would have.

 

Saying a rumor could be true even though Benning denies it isnt actually refutable by anyone. Its just a simple fact. No one here really knows for sure. GM's lie and mislead in the media all the time. Benning is no exception. There are several examples of it with him just like with every other GM.

[N4ZZY]

On 7/4/2021 at 11:12 AM, wallstreetamigo said:

The Aquilinis not wanting to be patient for a rebuild is definitely the problem. Even to this day. The Canucks have never committed to an actual rebuild. They have drafted high and accidentally rebuilt their core through the draft due to the spectacular failure of Benning's annual retool to make the playoffs moves. If even some of his retool moves had worked out even as he expected them to, the Canucks would have been a middle of the pack team and drafted much lower.

 

The point though is he never would have been hired in the first place if he wanted to rebuild right off the start. Gillis was fired because he finally decided that was the direction to go.

 

You are essentially saying that Benning came into the role as a yes man and has "listened to the dumb owners". Thats true. But he never woukd have gotten the job if he didnt.

Yeah. Well, if he wanted the job, then he would’ve done or said anything the owners wanted to hear. 

 

That’s how you get work, no? 

 

[Bell]

1 hour ago, Bertuzzipunch said:

Personally i wouldnt be comfortable paying jones 7 mill or higher. Hes good but not a 7-9 mill dollar dman.

Plus it will probably be an 8 year deal.  Hard Pass

[wallstreetamigo]

46 minutes ago, Dazzle said:

This is all fine and dandy, but you're the same guy that thinks we can know about something from hearing it. And you're also the same guy who thinks we should take everything with a grain of salt. This is a contradiction that you haven't resolved. It's kind of surprising that you are dodging questions.

 

As for the media, you're also the guy who is taking into account a rumour floating around long enough might mean it has legs.

 

You've also largely defended his the media has done things. Not a peep has been said from you about how and why Hughes name could get identified, despite your claim that the media has ethics.

The media typically has a lot more info, sources, and context than the average person does. If they are reporting it, that generally means they have verified it to the best degree they can. Does that mean they are always correct? Of course not. They have a tough job for sure.

 

Anything the media says should always be taken with a grain of salt. That doesnt mean everything they say is to be disbelieved though just because you have the view that unless they are cheerleading for Benning that nothing they report is fair. Anything a team or player says in response should likewise be taken with a grain of salt. They have their own reasons to craft a narrative too. More so than the media tbh. 

 

Rumors persist for different reasons. The longer a rumor persists, the more likely it is to have some truth to it. Disproven rumors die quickly. A player not immediately shutting down the rumor certainly keeps it going. Thats not some heinous crime against the Canucks, its just the way media works. And if people werent always starving for Canucks news it would probably not work that way as much. 

 

The media in Vancouver certainly has its share of hacks like anywhere else. But I do defend the main media players because I know and deal with them. They do have a lot of integrity compared to a lot of other places media. I actually find that collectively as a group they go pretty easy on Benning and the Canucks overall.

[wallstreetamigo]

4 minutes ago, N4ZZY said:

Yeah. Well, if he wanted the job, then he would’ve done or said anything the owners wanted to hear. 

 

That’s how you get work, no? 

 

Exactly. Which is why blaming Aquilini, or Gillis, or anyone else is not realistic. Benning wanted the job and to get it he made his own decision on how to move forward with the group based on what his bosses wanted. Thats his choice, no one else's.

 

I dont blame him at all for that actually. No chance he gets the job any other way. 

[Bertuzzipunch]

I love listening to myself talk 

[Angry Goose]

Well, I generally trust RD, although he has been wrong/speculated at times. If true though, I guess Schmidt is out!  

[wallstreetamigo]

2 hours ago, Bertuzzipunch said:

Personally i wouldnt be comfortable paying jones 7 mill or higher. Hes good but not a 7-9 mill dollar dman.

He will very likely be paid 7+ long term which although a good dman and one that the Canucks could use skill wise, definitely should be another teams headache contract imo.

 

I know many disagree but I would not be comfortable paying Hughes 7+ mil for 8 years at this point either. Not until he proves consistently he has more than one tool in the toolbox. Myers and Schmidt are both overpaid for what they bring too. Good players but not exceptional value vs their contracts. 

 

More and more, players actual value to a team rises and falls based on what their contract is. Its no longer about just the on ice ability, its relative to the % of the cap they take up too. 

 

The Canucks badly need guys like Hoglander, Podkolzin, Rathbone, Juolevi, Lockwood, Woo, etc. to become everyday cost controlled players who smooth out the cap overpayments in other areas. 

 

I am perfectly fine with Hoglander and Podkolzin in our top 6 next year and Rathbone or Juolevi on a 2nd pairing. Other thanPodz of course, I think the other 3 have earned a real, unsheltered opportunity. Next offseason big adjustments can be made if they arent cutting it. 

[Sean Monahan]

17 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

I would say I was actually old enough to be considered an actual fan in 1979. Before that I watched them, collected hockey cards, etc. but didnt play hockey myself yet so really didnt know enough to be considered a fan of the team. 

 

Lets put it this way. I am old enough to remember when people could have a discussion about hockey with people who had different opinions without getting all millenial sensitivity training butthurt and have to cry about how negative so and so hurt their feelings.

 

Not sure why any criticism automatically equals negativity.

I find it kinda funny (really funny) that the people who spend the most time b*tching about millennials are the people that raised millennials. 

7 hours ago, timberz21 said:

A fantastic D....that the Hawks could've gotten for a 3rd rounder.   He followed that up with a bad season, his price certainly didn't go up.  

 

Keith can still play and his 5M$ contract isn't a burden.   Chicago will actually get value in return from the Kraken or Oilers, without sacrificing Kubalik or crossing their finger that Beagle goes on the IR.  I don't think this is a selloff, this is both party wanting to move on, Keith getting closer to his family and Chicago getting more ice-time to their prospects or freeing money for free agency.

 

Keith can still play- in a literal sense, yeah sure. Can he play effectively? Not really. 

[wallstreetamigo]

2 minutes ago, Sean Monahan said:

I find it kinda funny (really funny) that the people who spend the most time b*tching about millennials are the people that raised millennials. 

 

Keith can still play- in a literal sense, yeah sure. Can he play effectively? Not really. 

Why do you think the people who bitch loudest are the ones who raised them? Haha. My kids are pretty well grounded but are not completely immune to the way society has shifted. Some of their friends though? Holy crap. 

[Sean Monahan]

Just now, wallstreetamigo said:

Why do you think the people who bitch loudest are the ones who raised them? Haha. My kids are pretty well grounded but are not completely immune to the way society has shifted. Some of their friends though? Holy crap. 

Because the vast majority of people who I see complain about millennials fall in the Boomer generation, the people who raised millennials. This is only my experience as a mid-late millennial. I don't find there to be a stark difference between millennials and Gen X for the most part. I also find most of the complaints to be exaggerated or downright untrue. 

 

There's morons in every generation. It's nothing new. You've probably seen this quote before, but if you haven't, can you guess who said it?

 

 

Quote

They [Young People] have exalted notions, because they have not been humbled by life or learned its necessary limitations; moreover, their hopeful disposition makes them think themselves equal to great things -- and that means having exalted notions. They would always rather do noble deeds than useful ones: Their lives are regulated more by moral feeling than by reasoning -- all their mistakes are in the direction of doing things excessively and vehemently. They overdo everything -- they love too much, hate too much, and the same with everything else.