CantStoptheBrock
Registered User
- Jun 26, 2020
- 176
- 138
If exposed to the level of scrutiny directed toward Benning around here, I don't think any NHL GM would hold up as "smart management."
Just look at the rapidly shifting evaluations of GM's around the league: Sakic was horrible, then he was a God; Rutherford was horrible, then he was a God, then he was horrible again; Doug Wilson was a God, now he is horrible; Dubas was a goldenboy, now he's an incompetent pushover; Chayka was a goldenboy, now he's tarnished.
The truth is that most GM's are human, and make decisions with outside factors involved that no fan or even media member has total access to. All they can really do is surmise what transpired through a sort of telephone game where facts can become twisted, unless they have tapped the Canucks front office. Lots of the Vancouver media rumours originate from those spurned by Benning and Weisbrod--I'm looking at Gilman and Brackett--and thus are heavily biased.
That's why it's best to just evaluate what actually transpired rather than generating narratives out of speculation and ambiguity. Though, to be fair, it does look very favourable upon Benning that now he's mostly litigated for things he could have done, rather than what he actually did. That it's now necessary to scrounge around for little nuggets of Benning "incompetence" rather than just evaluate the team as it stands today suggests that the tides are turning.
Just look at the rapidly shifting evaluations of GM's around the league: Sakic was horrible, then he was a God; Rutherford was horrible, then he was a God, then he was horrible again; Doug Wilson was a God, now he is horrible; Dubas was a goldenboy, now he's an incompetent pushover; Chayka was a goldenboy, now he's tarnished.
The truth is that most GM's are human, and make decisions with outside factors involved that no fan or even media member has total access to. All they can really do is surmise what transpired through a sort of telephone game where facts can become twisted, unless they have tapped the Canucks front office. Lots of the Vancouver media rumours originate from those spurned by Benning and Weisbrod--I'm looking at Gilman and Brackett--and thus are heavily biased.
That's why it's best to just evaluate what actually transpired rather than generating narratives out of speculation and ambiguity. Though, to be fair, it does look very favourable upon Benning that now he's mostly litigated for things he could have done, rather than what he actually did. That it's now necessary to scrounge around for little nuggets of Benning "incompetence" rather than just evaluate the team as it stands today suggests that the tides are turning.