Ah, but it's not neutrality. I have some pretty strong opinions. There is a distinction.
Bravo Benning. The D is pretty much rebuilt.
- Thread starter No Face No Case
- Start date
-
Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
- Status
I don't think you've made that distinction clear.
Please elaborate on your opinion of Benning as a GM.
ErrantShepherd
Nostalgic despite the Bad
That's cool, me neither. Interesting you seem to think that was some kind of bait? I prefer more lightness, less humorlessness or tribalism in my hobbies.
hahahaha...you don't stop! I think I have but it seems you want me to call myself anti-Benning and I'm not. Nor am I pro-Benning. I am pro-good moves (which others may disagree are good moves) and anti-bad moves.
Benning has made some good trades (e.g. Leivo) and some bad trades (e.g. Vey for a 2nd). Overall I would say the weight of the trade transactions is negative. Though he hasn't had much to work with and more recently resisted giving up draft picks, which is a good thing.
He has made some good draft choices (e.g. Pettersson, Boeser, Gaudette) and some bad choices (Juolevi, Virtanen). Overall I would say his drafting is positive.
His signings, particularly when he re-ups players like Gudbranson, are generally poor. He is getting better but still giving out too much term and cash.
I hope he continues to get better at trading, his drafting is just fine overall, and he should stay away from contract negotiations (and fill out management with someone who is strong in this area).
If I were in the position of ownership, I would be looking to strengthen management continually. That could mean replacing the GM if a better candidate was available. It could mean bringing in others to complement the strengths of the GM.
So, that's my high level report card on Benning. It doesn't make me pro- or anti-Benning.
Weird you would introduce the notion of "bait" to describe your own posts.
I'll give you one last chance to convince me your posts are worthy of a response.
So... based on your high level report...he's not a good GM?
Which implies you should be part of the anti-Benning camp....
Again, what is your hesitation to commit?
Is it really so hard to make a decision?
You are choosing not to acknowledge my main point. Dualistic rhetoric and tribalism are unproductive at best, more often just plain unhealthy.
I thought this was a sarcastic thread lol .
Wow
Wow
ErrantShepherd
Nostalgic despite the Bad
...you are a very bizarre and demanding poster, sir.
Seeing as you seem to think you have the right to determine who is "worthy" or not of your responses, I'm going to just ahead and say kindly that your lack of humor and superiority complex are strange and offputting and have nothing to really do with a sports game forum conversation.
So, do whatever the hell you want, I'm not interested in continuing pointless dialogues.
Fine. Restate your main point. I'm not deliberately choosing to ignore it. Let me respond to it directly to it.
"Anti- vs Pro- Benning" is, by it's very nature, dualistic rhetoric and tribalism: "us vs them".
Focusing on transactions allows for a better dialogue that is more likely to lead to "reasoning together" rather than devolving in to vitriol.
I've said this in a few different ways over the last pages. If you still have questions, I think you're just playing with me.
"Anti- vs Pro- Benning" is, by it's very nature, dualistic rhetoric and tribalism: "us vs them".
Focusing on transactions allows for a better dialogue that is more likely to lead to "reasoning together" rather than devolving in to vitriol.
I've said this in a few different ways over the last pages. If you still have questions, I think you're just playing with me.
Okay. Got it. Not impressed by your reasoning. C'est la vie.
Not playing.
It's like you are deliberately confabulating the worst possible interpretation of my words to make you feel good yourself. Knock yourself out with that.
"Anti- vs Pro- Benning" is, by it's very nature, dualistic rhetoric and tribalism: "us vs them".
Focusing on transactions allows for a better dialogue that is more likely to lead to "reasoning together" rather than devolving in to vitriol.
I've said this in a few different ways over the last pages. If you still have questions, I think you're just playing with me.
Javaman seems to one of those types that doesn't know how to have a discussion featuring nuance, and is binary in his thinking. Only my side or the other side. That would make life very simple if it could actually accomplish anything.
You obviously don't know me well enough to claim I'm binary and incapable of nuance.
- Feb 24, 2017
- 5,094
- 2,866
I thought this was a tongue in cheek thread referencing benning icing a defence with three former top 10 picks now that Schenn is recalled.
Fans did bitch about the Horvat pick, most wanted the big Russian winger that’s now a bust.
Horse McHindu
They call me Horse.....
- Jun 21, 2014
- 9,668
- 2,650
Some fun posts to look at:
Oh so wrong. You're still very pro-Benning despite being wrong in defending him time and time again. Tkachuk was not the next Dal Colle or Hodgson, meanwhile Juolevi has not developed well since being drafted. And no, he was not a much better prospect than Hamhuis. In fact, I was wrong in giving Juolevi too much credit calling him another Hamhuis.
Maybe all the people who keep ****ting all over every single thing Benning and Linden do are right? I mean...the results are there. But hey, I'm glad you loved the Canucks picking a worse prospect.
I think there very much was doubt, and those doubters were proven correct.
Well it's 3 years later...if that's our top 4, ouch.
Okay, I quoted you. You were wrong.
Nicely played? That list is terrible.
Well...Gudbranson certainly isn't on the 2nd pairing, but Juolevi isn't even on the team (Gudbranson shouldn't be either).
Yeah, no. But at least you admitted you were wrong so that's nice
^^^This guy gets it.
No, it wasn't. And it didn't happen.
No, he didn't assmble a solid, young, mobile back end. He assembled junk. I was right 3 years ago, and have been proven right since.
Hutton-Gudbranson together was trash, because Gudbranson is trash.
This post will be remembered as someone actually wanting the Canucks to sign Loui Eriksson.
Yeah no. That's a recipe for an awful defense.
Don't need to exclude Gudbranson and Sutter. They weren't good pieces for the team. But I'm glad you admit Jim's retool looks really bad.
Adam Larsson isn't very good, but he certainly is much better than Erik Gudbranson. Telling someone else to take a hike when you're wrong with your assessment.....
This is just an example that people shouldn't openly ridicule others for their opinions unless they know for certain they're correct. If you're not using anything factual to support your own opinion, then don't ridicule others. Use facts. Educate yourself on analytics, and then you can tell someone to take a hike.
I’ll have to admit defeat as far as Gudbranson goes.
Having said that, I’m so impressed with Hutton. The guy was called out by Green, ate a huge serving of humble pie last year, and then worked his butt off in the off season and came back better than ever.
As far as Juolevi goes, the guy looked like he had improved before he got injured again. Juolevi hasn’t lit it up as of yet, but he’s still so young......and I believe that it’s still too early to write him off. Take off your Benning hatred googles for a sec and give the kid some rope.
Ps - what’s Brandon Gormley up to these days?
Pretty sure I seem to recall you wanting the Canucks to pick Jack Wise over Tyler Madden as well.
Ainec
Panetta was not racist
- Jun 20, 2009
- 21,782
- 6,432
y2kcanucks
Better than you
I’ll have to admit defeat as far as Gudbranson goes.
Having said that, I’m so impressed with Hutton. The guy was called out by Green, ate a huge serving of humble pie last year, and then worked his butt off in the off season and came back better than ever.
As far as Juolevi goes, the guy looked like he had improved before he got injured again. Juolevi hasn’t lit it up as of yet, but he’s still so young......and I believe that it’s still too early to write him off. Take off your Benning hatred googles for a sec and give the kid some rope.
Ps - what’s Brandon Gormley up to these days?
I don't know who Jack Wise is.
Juolevi will be in his Draft +4 season next year. It's pretty much make or break it for him.
clunk
Registered User
I think we all know at this point Juolevi is a bust pick for where he was picked.
Horse McHindu
They call me Horse.....
- Jun 21, 2014
- 9,668
- 2,650
All that D + 3 or D +4 crap is hot garbage. Players can improve or take a leap at any time. The individual decides what he wants to get out of hockey and how much he’s willing to improve. Sedins, Naslund, and what now appears to be Markstrom, all took a leap in their mid 20’s (Markstrom late 20’s). Bertuzzi was also a late developer. Look at what Hutton and Stecher have done this past year.
Now - will Juolevi be a superstar in this league? While anything is possible, it’s unlikely. However - he can still be a very key component for us in the future. Ditto for Virtanen.
Back in 2011, the Canucks had a guy that was drafted 5th overall back in his day, and never quite lived up to his billing. His name? Raffi Torres. I think we can all agree that Torres played a solid role for the Canucks that year.
Who’s to say that Juolevi and Virtanen don’t do the same for us one day?......even if they don’t become superstars.
By the way - the emergence of Hutton has given legs to the argument that perhaps we can move on from Edler......and so in one form or another, I wasn’t completely off base in suggesting (back in 2016) that maybe we’ll have our Edler replacement (even if that guy wasn’t Juolevi).
Horse McHindu
They call me Horse.....
- Jun 21, 2014
- 9,668
- 2,650
Last year, I wouldn’t be surprised if you said something to the effect of, “I think we all know at this point that Hutton’s days as a Canuck are numbered.”
Or,
“I think we all know at this point that Markstrom is on borrowed time and that he’ll be succeeded by Demko in a few years.”
Never say never. Just because a guy is in his mid 20’s, or is in his “D+4” or D+22” or whatever “new age” hot garbage classification people want to create, players can improve at any time.
- Status
