CanadianRugby Posted May 21, 2023 Share Posted May 21, 2023 Watching CDC turn on Benning after having fought against an army of his loyalists on here for years. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted May 21, 2023 Share Posted May 21, 2023 7 hours ago, IBatch said: Not defending JB, but Chatfield wasn't promptly discarded, he was called up. And did get some criticism on this site ... McAan at the time reports of entitlement and nobody liked him in the locker room. Something about his Mom too. Rubbed the young players the wrong way. At the time nobody was complaining he was traded for Guddy. Forsling is absolutely a cautionary tale about making sure you know what you have before pulling the trigger. Unlike Chatfield (again he was waiver eligible at the time), he's actually carved himself into the regular lineup of a deep defensive core. McAaan... why wasn't he protected? Maybe his character issues still persist, PIT didn't have to do that did they. Stupid thing is for us, we haven't had an impact player from the draft after the second round since Edler and Hansen were drafted by Nonis. That's just gross. Mayne Brisbois can become our Forsling next season and start changing that? McCann was traded to Florida who traded him to Pittsburgh who traded him to Toronto who didn't protect him in the expansion draft. That's a whole lot of stupid GM's apparently. It wasn't just his attitude that rubbed the wrong way. He was Virtanen's party buddy and the two often showed up to practise hungover. I believe splitting the two up was part of the reason and his attitude made him the obvious choice to move of the two. The only "cautionary tale" is hindsight is 20/20. People seem to ignore Forsling was claimed off waivers by Florida. He's just another example of a late bloomer. Late bloomers rarely make on the team that drafted them. He wasn't "given up on" by Benning as he was traded 7 months after being drafted. Benning new exactly what he had - a longshot prospect. Given a 5th rounder takes time, he was simply a trade piece the other team wanted. He certainly didn't work out for Chicago. There's two sides in every trade. If you want something you need to give something that the other team actually wants in return. Chicago, still a contender, wanted futures for a waiver elligible prospect. If anything Chicaco "gave up" on Forsling too soon. But he was waiver elligible and hadn't secured a roster spot there. The very same reason they looked to move Clendenning. It's not so much giving up too early as it's simply not wanting to lose a guy, unlikely to clear waivers, for nothing. Something we're facing with Rathbone and Hoglander now. Too good to clear waivers, but are they good enough to make the team? Personally I think Hogs is good enough to be in the NHL. But is he good enough to be the best option to be on our team? I believe Rathbone will be moved and Hogs is a coin toss depending on forwards being moved for cap space. Waivers prevent teams from holding on to players just in case they are a late bloomer. Forsling was a late bloomer and hindsight is 20/20. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timråfan Posted May 21, 2023 Share Posted May 21, 2023 5 minutes ago, CanadianRugby said: Watching CDC turn on Benning after having fought against an army of his loyalists on here for years. Wasn’t I the only one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iinatcc Posted May 21, 2023 Share Posted May 21, 2023 2 hours ago, Timråfan said: Lol, so it was suicide alert when Benning was GM? The difference in quality is amazing so if you’re not impressed it must have been really bad before. I mean this management group hasn't really done anything to impress me. What is wrong with that? It's not like I have up on them either. It's all about the results which have yet to come. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timråfan Posted May 21, 2023 Share Posted May 21, 2023 18 minutes ago, iinatcc said: I mean this management group hasn't really done anything to impress me. What is wrong with that? It's not like I have up on them either. It's all about the results which have yet to come. Nothing, but you can choose to be on a positive note since the aquisition of a player like Hronek is rare with this club. Just the small tiny bit that Yzerman choose to do business with PA could be impressive since Benning wasn’t close to get such a trade. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewbieCanuckFan Posted May 21, 2023 Share Posted May 21, 2023 (edited) 1 hour ago, Baggins said: McCann was traded to Florida who traded him to Pittsburgh who traded him to Toronto who didn't protect him in the expansion draft. That's a whole lot of stupid GM's apparently. It wasn't just his attitude that rubbed the wrong way. He was Virtanen's party buddy and the two often showed up to practise hungover. I believe splitting the two up was part of the reason and his attitude made him the obvious choice to move of the two. IMHO, the Pens dealt him because he was too expensive to keep on their budget. Their plan seems to be pay their stars the big money (eg., Crosby, Malkin, etc.) and then try to build a team around that. Doesn't mean McCann was crap necessarily but too "expensive for what they wanted". Same reason why they dealt Sutter to us for Bonino. Not because they felt Sutter was garbage but rather because they thought acquiring a cheaper alternative would give them more cap flexability for additional roster adjustment. And the same thing happened when Bonino had some success and basically priced himself out of the Pens lineup. They got rid of him. As for why Toronto didn't keep them. Who the **** knows about that organization. They were given a gift in winning the lottery and done jack**** with it (and as the movie Army of Darkness would say "and jack left town"). At least that's how I looked at it. Edited May 21, 2023 by NewbieCanuckFan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iinatcc Posted May 21, 2023 Share Posted May 21, 2023 45 minutes ago, Baggins said: McCann was traded to Florida who traded him to Pittsburgh who traded him to Toronto who didn't protect him in the expansion draft. That's a whole lot of stupid GM's apparently. It wasn't just his attitude that rubbed the wrong way. He was Virtanen's party buddy and the two often showed up to practise hungover. I believe splitting the two up was part of the reason and his attitude made him the obvious choice to move of the two. The only "cautionary tale" is hindsight is 20/20. People seem to ignore Forsling was claimed off waivers by Florida. He's just another example of a late bloomer. Late bloomers rarely make on the team that drafted them. He wasn't "given up on" by Benning as he was traded 7 months after being drafted. Benning new exactly what he had - a longshot prospect. Given a 5th rounder takes time, he was simply a trade piece the other team wanted. He certainly didn't work out for Chicago. There's two sides in every trade. If you want something you need to give something that the other team actually wants in return. Chicago, still a contender, wanted futures for a waiver elligible prospect. If anything Chicaco "gave up" on Forsling too soon. But he was waiver elligible and hadn't secured a roster spot there. The very same reason they looked to move Clendenning. It's not so much giving up too early as it's simply not wanting to lose a guy, unlikely to clear waivers, for nothing. Something we're facing with Rathbone and Hoglander now. Too good to clear waivers, but are they good enough to make the team? Personally I think Hogs is good enough to be in the NHL. But is he good enough to be the best option to be on our team? I believe Rathbone will be moved and Hogs is a coin toss depending on forwards being moved for cap space. Waivers prevent teams from holding on to players just in case they are a late bloomer. Forsling was a late bloomer and hindsight is 20/20. Forsling was starting to show qualities NHL D-Man at age 23 and 24. Bieksa was a 5th round and made it to the NHL around that age. Most D-Men drafted late tend to take that timeline to develop to an NHL'er. As for Forsling moving from Chicago to Carolina. Chicago traded Forsling for an NHL D-Man their playoff run so it's not like Chicago gave Forsling up for nothing . Carolina, looking at their roster that season, probably had no room for Forsling in the main roster and waived him to develop in the minors and happened to get claimed. So i don't think him going to two organziaitions had less to Chicago and Carolina incorrectly assessing Forsling than organizational circumstances and the moment. Benning was a complete mis-assessment as well as inpatience. Like if both Clendenning and Forsling had the same ceiling and skillset as how Benning saw it why would Chicago give up a more NHL ready player over a long term prospect considering Chicago, at the time, wasn't exactly thinking of the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IBatch Posted May 21, 2023 Share Posted May 21, 2023 1 hour ago, Baggins said: McCann was traded to Florida who traded him to Pittsburgh who traded him to Toronto who didn't protect him in the expansion draft. That's a whole lot of stupid GM's apparently. It wasn't just his attitude that rubbed the wrong way. He was Virtanen's party buddy and the two often showed up to practise hungover. I believe splitting the two up was part of the reason and his attitude made him the obvious choice to move of the two. The only "cautionary tale" is hindsight is 20/20. People seem to ignore Forsling was claimed off waivers by Florida. He's just another example of a late bloomer. Late bloomers rarely make on the team that drafted them. He wasn't "given up on" by Benning as he was traded 7 months after being drafted. Benning new exactly what he had - a longshot prospect. Given a 5th rounder takes time, he was simply a trade piece the other team wanted. He certainly didn't work out for Chicago. There's two sides in every trade. If you want something you need to give something that the other team actually wants in return. Chicago, still a contender, wanted futures for a waiver elligible prospect. If anything Chicaco "gave up" on Forsling too soon. But he was waiver elligible and hadn't secured a roster spot there. The very same reason they looked to move Clendenning. It's not so much giving up too early as it's simply not wanting to lose a guy, unlikely to clear waivers, for nothing. Something we're facing with Rathbone and Hoglander now. Too good to clear waivers, but are they good enough to make the team? Personally I think Hogs is good enough to be in the NHL. But is he good enough to be the best option to be on our team? I believe Rathbone will be moved and Hogs is a coin toss depending on forwards being moved for cap space. Waivers prevent teams from holding on to players just in case they are a late bloomer. Forsling was a late bloomer and hindsight is 20/20. Maybe we should pin this at the top of the thread. Chatfield? Really. Wonder what might happen if OJ finally figures things out. Heads might implode! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IBatch Posted May 21, 2023 Share Posted May 21, 2023 1 minute ago, iinatcc said: Forsling was starting to show qualities NHL D-Man at age 23 and 24. Bieksa was a 5th round and made it to the NHL around that age. Most D-Men drafted late tend to take that timeline to develop to an NHL'er. As for Forsling moving from Chicago to Carolina. Chicago traded Forsling for an NHL D-Man their playoff run so it's not like Chicago gave Forsling up for nothing . Carolina, looking at their roster that season, probably had no room for Forsling in the main roster and waived him to develop in the minors and happened to get claimed. So i don't think him going to two organziaitions had less to Chicago and Carolina incorrectly assessing Forsling than organizational circumstances and the moment. Benning was a complete mis-assessment as well as inpatience. Like if both Clendenning and Forsling had the same ceiling and skillset as how Benning saw it why would Chicago give up a more NHL ready player over a long term prospect considering Chicago, at the time, wasn't exactly thinking of the future. And Naslund was traded for Stajanov. Let's just move on. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iinatcc Posted May 21, 2023 Share Posted May 21, 2023 (edited) 16 minutes ago, Timråfan said: Nothing, but you can choose to be on a positive note since the aquisition of a player like Hronek is rare with this club. Just the small tiny bit that Yzerman choose to do business with PA could be impressive since Benning wasn’t close to get such a trade. But what has the team done to earn positivity? If the Filip Hronek trade works out long term I will admit this was a good move just like how I admitted I was wrong about the Miller trade. This team hasn't earned the benefit of the doubt yet so any move should be looked with some skepticism. Edited May 21, 2023 by iinatcc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iinatcc Posted May 21, 2023 Share Posted May 21, 2023 (edited) 3 minutes ago, IBatch said: And Naslund was traded for Stajanov. Let's just move on. I didn't bring Forsling up. To me it just that plain and simple all ... this was on Benning and I don't think he deserves any defense on the McCann and Forsling moves. It was a man being impatient and sacrificed the future of the team Edited May 21, 2023 by iinatcc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timråfan Posted May 21, 2023 Share Posted May 21, 2023 Just now, iinatcc said: But what has the team done to earn positivity? If the Filip Hronek trade works out long term I will admit this was a good move just like how I admitted I was wrong about the Miller trade. This team hasn't earned the benefit of the doubt yet so any move should be looked with some skepticism. Nahh, that is what some of us call PTBSD. Without Bennings failed trades you wouldn’t think like that. Also Greens inapt coaching skills so players like Schmidt comes here and become Loui the second. A normal view without the PTBSD is ”wow, a top RHD, amazing… Finally someone good on the right side”. If it doesn’t pan out we deal with the negative emotions when it happens, not before it happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iinatcc Posted May 21, 2023 Share Posted May 21, 2023 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Timråfan said: Nahh, that is what some of us call PTBSD. Without Bennings failed trades you wouldn’t think like that. Also Greens inapt coaching skills so players like Schmidt comes here and become Loui the second. A normal view without the PTBSD is ”wow, a top RHD, amazing… Finally someone good on the right side”. If it doesn’t pan out we deal with the negative emotions when it happens, not before it happens. That's part of it isn't it? If let's say someone with the track record of Joe Sakic or Yzerman did something like this, we would say "oh he has a good track record" let's give him the benfit of the dobut, and this could work out. Allvin is a rookie GM leading an organization that seen so many moves fail. So the skepticism is warranted And I am not being negative ... not impressed is more neutral than anything Edited May 21, 2023 by iinatcc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewbieCanuckFan Posted May 21, 2023 Share Posted May 21, 2023 1 minute ago, Timråfan said: Nahh, that is what some of us call PTBSD. Without Bennings failed trades you wouldn’t think like that. Also Greens inapt coaching skills so players like Schmidt comes here and become Loui the second. A normal view without the PTBSD is ”wow, a top RHD, amazing… Finally someone good on the right side”. If it doesn’t pan out we deal with the negative emotions when it happens, not before it happens. A head coach that Jim Benning hired made Elias look like a bust prospect. Don't forget just how lost that franchise player looked playing under Travis Green. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iinatcc Posted May 21, 2023 Share Posted May 21, 2023 Edit .. to me Filip Hronek is a let's see type thing. But, as Thomas Drance said when the trade happened, Hronek is a good player he will likely make the defense better. But will he make enough of an impact for the team to take the necessary steps forward? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewbieCanuckFan Posted May 21, 2023 Share Posted May 21, 2023 16 minutes ago, IBatch said: And Naslund was traded for Stajanov. Let's just move on. Nope. Harry Neale screwed up big time by trading Anders Elderbrink for John Garrett. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted May 21, 2023 Share Posted May 21, 2023 6 minutes ago, NewbieCanuckFan said: Nope. Harry Neale screwed up big time by trading Anders Elderbrink for John Garrett. Curt Fraser for Tony Tanty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook007 Posted May 21, 2023 Share Posted May 21, 2023 (edited) 12 hours ago, Baggins said: McCann was traded to Florida who traded him to Pittsburgh who traded him to Toronto who didn't protect him in the expansion draft. That's a whole lot of stupid GM's apparently. It wasn't just his attitude that rubbed the wrong way. He was Virtanen's party buddy and the two often showed up to practise hungover. I believe splitting the two up was part of the reason and his attitude made him the obvious choice to move of the two. The only "cautionary tale" is hindsight is 20/20. People seem to ignore Forsling was claimed off waivers by Florida. He's just another example of a late bloomer. Late bloomers rarely make on the team that drafted them. He wasn't "given up on" by Benning as he was traded 7 months after being drafted. Benning new exactly what he had - a longshot prospect. Given a 5th rounder takes time, he was simply a trade piece the other team wanted. He certainly didn't work out for Chicago. There's two sides in every trade. If you want something you need to give something that the other team actually wants in return. Chicago, still a contender, wanted futures for a waiver elligible prospect. If anything Chicaco "gave up" on Forsling too soon. But he was waiver elligible and hadn't secured a roster spot there. The very same reason they looked to move Clendenning. It's not so much giving up too early as it's simply not wanting to lose a guy, unlikely to clear waivers, for nothing. Something we're facing with Rathbone and Hoglander now. Too good to clear waivers, but are they good enough to make the team? Personally I think Hogs is good enough to be in the NHL. But is he good enough to be the best option to be on our team? I believe Rathbone will be moved and Hogs is a coin toss depending on forwards being moved for cap space. Waivers prevent teams from holding on to players just in case they are a late bloomer. Forsling was a late bloomer and hindsight is 20/20. Its just about fitting their narratives... How long do you keep Dmen, before you either let them go or trade them? Hindsight is 20/20... I wonder how many of the folks mentioning Chartfield or Forsling, was complaining that OJ wasn't traded earlier? Edited May 22, 2023 by spook007 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrago Posted May 21, 2023 Share Posted May 21, 2023 2 hours ago, Timråfan said: I bet you only got one tenth of liquid left in your glass. My is still half full til I see how next season goes. I literally said I was giving them the benefit of the doubt till the start of the 2024 season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timråfan Posted May 21, 2023 Share Posted May 21, 2023 2 minutes ago, thrago said: I literally said I was giving them the benefit of the doubt till the start of the 2024 season. And used words like messy, flubbed, traded a tonne of picks, worst salary cap ever… Yeah, benefit of the doubt just after you cut of their head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now