Canucks Managerial Thread II

[VanillaCoke]

The Ducks got Perry at 28 while actually winning cups. More excuses

What the ****?!?!
Perry was drafted way before the Ducks won their ONE cup in 07....

The same draft fyi that we got Kesler, who helped us to the SCF remember (and a seller trophy). Where we came up ONE game short, under gillis too.

Yeesh

 

[AwesomeInTheory]

Glad someone said it. Addiction is very much a disease, not a choice. High character, and professional, individuals fall prey to it just the same.

The choice hinges on whether or not you want to do something about it. Having a substance abuse problem does not make one immune from making the adult choices the rest of us have to make.

 

[Drop the Sopel]

Yeah guys why didn't Gillis pick all stars while winning president trophys!!

Allstars? Gillis drafted 1 player that has more than 30 career points in the NHL and that 1 player had half as many points as Linden Vey last season.

I don't think it's too much to ask for the guy with possibly the biggest scouting budget in the NHL to be one of the top 29 drafting teams in hockey.

 

[Cupless44]

The age gap is a stupid ass myth for the lazy.
We need young players period.

Let's do a thought experiment. If Horvat, Virtanen, McCann, Shink and Cassels can all contribute next year, does it matter that we don't have any guys between 23-25?

Just a final thought before i leave this thread.

To many here Gillis did no wrong. I try to be objective about him and Benning. I have called out Benning for some bad moves just like I have called out Gillis today for his overall drafting. But I also give credit to either for good moves.

I only take the Benning side on here at times because i believe the hatred goes way to far. The guy has made a few mistakes but he needs to be given more than one year

The real reason I am going to be patient with Benning because where the team is now it is all about drafting to me. I believe Benning is and will be the better drafter.

On that note I will leave you some food for thought. We all are pumped about Horvat and McCann. Finally after 7 drafts Mike Gillis nailed a good young centre in Horvat that made the team at 19. It took 7 draft. He did it with the 9th pick. Benning nailed McCann in his very first draft. A good young centre (who I think has more offensive upside than Horvat) who made the team at 19. He did it with the 24 pick. IN HIS FIRST DRAFT.

 

[arttk]

yes it does matter because none of those players are close to being top 6 impact players that can go toe to toe with Gezlaf or Kopitar or standing up in a playoff series. Maybe Horvat by next year but it is too much to ask of most 20 year olds. We dont even know if Shink will ever get out of the AHL.

Both of our top centres were drafted. One is 35. One is 20. If that gap of a successful draft result isnt a little long for you than I am not sure what to say.

Not sure why the obsession over Getzlaf and Perry, did they win the cup?

Top end players along with depth wins you the cup.
Sedins are pretty much evergreen at this point and really the difference between a playoff team and a dominant playoff team is depth. If the youth can play, then they can be the depth that makes the difference.

Look at every team, there are maybe like 2 good offensive centers per team, maybe 3 for a really good team. Doesn't matter what the age gap is, what matter is whether we have them or not. Right now, it seems like we do. A real damn good #1 in Henrik and an emerging #2 in Horvat.

 

[Cupless44]

What the ****?!?!
Perry was drafted way before the Ducks won their ONE cup in 07....

The same draft fyi that we got Kesler, who helped us to the SCF remember (and a seller trophy). Where we came up ONE game short, under gillis too.

Yeesh

Sorry might have got the timing wrong but my main point was other teams do draft good players where the Canucks were drafting.

 

[Ryp37]

Allstars? Gillis drafted 1 player that has more than 30 career points in the NHL and that 1 player had half as many points as Linden Vey last season.

I don't think it's too much to ask for the guy with possibly the biggest scouting budget in the NHL to be one of the top 29 drafting teams in hockey.

Which he attempted to fix it after he begun to focus on it and realize he better start focusing on the future over just winning a cup. even your boy Benning hasn't been able to shed Delorme for whatever reason.

It shouldn't be Gillis vs Benning. Benning was brought in to be better then Gillis, if the only thing he's better at then Gillis is drafting then he should be a head scout

 

[arttk]

Just a final thought before i leave this thread.

To many here Gillis did no wrong. I try to be objective about him and Benning. I have called out Benning for some bad moves just like I have called out Gillis today for his overall drafting. But I also give credit to either for good moves.

I only take the Benning side on here at times because i believe the hatred goes way to far. The guy has made a few mistakes but he needs to be given more than one year

The real reason I am going to be patient with Benning because where the team is now it is all about drafting to me. I believe Benning is and will be the better drafter.

On that note I will leave you some food for thought. We all are pumped about Horvat and McCann. Finally after 7 drafts Mike Gillis nailed a good young centre in Horvat that made the team at 19. It took 7 draft. He did it with the 9th pick. Benning nailed McCann in his very first draft. A good young centre (who I think has more offensive upside than Horvat) who made the team at 19. He did it with the 24 pick. IN HIS FIRST DRAFT.

To say Benning has made a few mistake would be a severe understatement.

Cap structure destroyed.
Lose value on every single trade.
Nepotism.
Favoritism.
****ing hiring Weisbrod.
Firing competent staff because they are not yes men.

I mean that is a pretty damn long list already.

Maybe you should also credit the scouting staff that made the McCann recommendation as well. You know the scouting staff MG built.

 

[Drop the Sopel]

Which he attempted to fix it after he begun to focus on it and realize he better start focusing on the future over just winning a cup. even your boy Benning hasn't been able to shed Delorme for whatever reason.

It shouldn't be Gillis vs Benning. Benning was brought in to be better then Gillis, if the only thing he's better at then Gillis is drafting then he should be a head scout

I would have no problem with Benning as head scout. His negotiating thus far has left a lot to be desired.

Gillis was a tremendous negotiator and made a lot of good decisions around the periphery. But with where this team is currently at, it's all about finding the next core group IMO. On that front, the early returns at the draft have been terrific. Gives hope that the scouting has finally been turned around.

 

[Intangibos]

You make some points and I agree some of the picks are finally coming along.

But it doesnt change the bottom line I mentioned. A void in 23-27 year old talent on the roster because not one pick in 5 years became good player for the Canucks. Its fact. Rodin now at 27 or whatever playing well in Sweden means absolutely nothing to the talent or lack there of on the Canuck roster from those 5 drafts. You had a guy like Higgins playing on the 2nd line for so long because no top 6 forward came from those drafts

As for Hodgson, it isnt the plan to use a 10th overall pick on a player you have to trade for a 13th overall bust in his own right.

I dont know why you guys cant be honest and objective about this. Gillis did some good things. No one can say otherwise. But the failure of much his drafting is irrefutable.

Trading a 10th overall for a 13th overall doesn't make a player a bust, what does that even mean? Not all draft classes are created equal. For example, in 2014, Ekblad went first but it was pretty clear that the first overall pick would have been different depending on which team got the pick. So lets say Buffalo had the 1st overall and they took Reinhart, would trading Reinhart for Eichel make Reinhart a bust because you're trading down picks? It was a blue chip for blue chip trade. If Hodgson was clearly a bust at that point they wouldn't have given him a 4m+ contract.

As for Gillis drafting record, nobody is disputing that it's poor, but you have to look into the circumstances of the situation. He didn't walk in and get rid of a good scouting department and have drafting go downhill on his watch. He made strides to improve the scouting department and quite clearly made a lot of progress by the end of his tenure. The Canucks have had **** scouting for over a decade and Benning comes in and fires one of our most competent scouts in Crawford because he disagrees with him. I'm really sorry it took Gillis 5 years to turn around an entire scouting department, and it's probably something that he should have done in 3 years, but regardless acquiring good amateur scouts is not something that is done easily. He has to compete with 29 other teams in the league all trying to load up on as many talented scouts as possible.

I dont need to "argue" with you on this. The facts are the facts. In his first 5 years of drafting Gillis did not add one single player that made an impact or is on the team today.

If you think that is good enough well that is your perogative but i don't need to argue the truth.

Hutton is on the team now, so your facts aren't even facts. Not only that, but it's incredible disingenuous to not include Tanev and Lack there, at least until Lack was traded. Whether we sign them for free, or draft them in the 7th round, we found amateur talent that nobody else did and they were huge pieces for the team, especially Tanev. Also, Hodgson made the team while Beech who our inept scouting staff wanted didn't. We then traded Hodgson for Kassian who not only has the potential to be a good top 6 forward, even if he doesn't improve at all he is still a good roster player and very good 3rd liner. That 10th overall pick from Gillis turned into our #2 ES P/60 scorer the last 2 seasons.

its ok its all they have on this issue. Other than arrtk who takes the other side and posts reasonable points there is alot of grasping going on here right now.

You can love Gillis all you want and the success the team had on his watch. He deserves credit and I give him that. But his poor drafting record up until 2013 is irrefutable. There are no homegrown drafted by Gillis players in their prime on the Canucks roster. The facts don't lie.

This isn't news btw. It has been talked about in the media extensively and was among the major reasons Gillis was fired.

Again, you have to look at the circumstances. If Gillis was hired in Edmonton tomorrow and they missed the playoffs this year, would you fault him for it? Gillis was left with one of, if not the worst scouting departments in the league. I don't understand why you think scouts grow on trees and you can replace an entire scouting department quickly. You can google Gillis' staff moves during his tenure and look at the number of scouts he had to fire and demote. I wish he did it quicker as well, but at the end of the day, he got the job done and fixed our scouting department and I don't think 5 years is that bad a time frame considering how much work he had to do in that area.

 

[Intangibos]

The choice hinges on whether or not you want to do something about it. Having a substance abuse problem does not make one immune from making the adult choices the rest of us have to make.

I'd say joining stage 1 voluntarily is a pretty good way of showing you want to do something about it. Lots of addicts who want to do something about it fall off the wagon and have to get back on. It's really common.

 

[AwesomeInTheory]

Which he attempted to fix it after he begun to focus on it and realize he better start focusing on the future over just winning a cup. even your boy Benning hasn't been able to shed Delorme for whatever reason.

It shouldn't be Gillis vs Benning. Benning was brought in to be better then Gillis, if the only thing he's better at then Gillis is drafting then he should be a head scout

Well, the bigger thing is that Gillis was taking on new and unique approaches to trying to find and draft talent. There was a focus on birthdates and drafting 'older' players, and I'm sure other methodology that we're not going to be privy to.

Some of it didn't work, but he was still evaluating and tinkering with things and it was starting to pay off. Some of it did work, though, particularly his efforts in finding undrafted talent. Tanev and Lack wouldn't be Canucks were it not for Gillis' efforts in that regard.

If you're revamping your scouting department and introducing new methodology, there are going to be some hiccups. Especially if you're GM of a team that is in "win now" mode and is contending for the Stanley Cup.

The 2010 draft is looking to be a kneecapper for the Canucks prospect pool. I think McNally is going to be the only one that is going to become an NHL talent at this point.

But you also have to factor in the 2007 draft under Nonis, where a grand total of 0 players were drafted, 2006 where Michael Grabner was the only semi-viable talent and where the Canucks had one 1st, one 3rd, two 6ths and a 7th, and 2005 where Luc Bourdon passed.

Those are all significant body blows and have to factor into any discussion of the Canucks drafting/prospect pool, especially if we're talking specifically about the 'age gap' that the Canucks are currently facing. Players from 05-07 would fit into the age gap, and Gillis can't be faulted for that.

That doesn't mean his drafting record shouldn't be criticized -- if you're taking risks and a new approaches like he was, it should be pointed out when you mess up. Same as with Benning and the sign and trade of Sutter. It's a risky move that might pay off, but he should have his feet held to the fire when Sutter crashes and burns.

I'd say joining stage 1 voluntarily is a pretty good way of showing you want to do something about it. Lots of addicts who want to do something about it fall off the wagon and have to get back on. It's really common.

I maintain that Kassian is just someone who is irresponsible and his partying was causing problems with the team. I judge Kassian by his actions subsequently. He doesn't strike me as someone who was particularly concerned with trying to maintain a sober lifestyle. EDIT: I will also say that this is based on my own personal experiences with addicts (which is going to distort things slightly), along with other stuff that I can't really comment on because I believe it breaks the board rules.

 

[a Fool]

Gillis drafting:

2008
- Natural picks at 10th overall. 4 picks total. Rounds 1, 2, 5, 6.
- Result: NHL player (Hodgson).

2009
- Natural picks at 22nd overall. 6 picks total. Rounds 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7.
- Result: NHL player (Connauton).

2010
- Natural picks at 25th overall. 4 picks total. Rounds 4, 5, 6, 7.
- Result: 1 player TBD (McNally).

2011
- Natural picks at 29th overall. 7 picks total. Rounds 1, 3, 4, 4, 5, 6, 7.
- Result: 1 player TBD (Grenier), NHL project (Corrado).

2012
- Natural picks at 26th overall. 5 picks total. Rounds 1, 2, 5, 6, 7.
- Result 1 NHL player (Hutton), 1 player TBD (Gaunce).

2013
- Natural picks at 24th overall. 7 picks total. Rounds 1, 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7.
- Result 1 NHL player (Horvat), 3 players TBD (Shinkaruk, Cassels, Subban)

Gillis never had more than the normal amount of picks (7) and was often drafting near the bottom of the round due to team success. First two drafts are failures. 2010 there were no picks to work with - another failure I guess. 2011 is bad with not much hope. Last two drafts look fine, if not good.

I think MG's ABYSMAL drafting is getting overblown. It's not like he was getting gifted top 10 natural picks every year (Godson bust aside) and finding nothing. Expecting to finish at the top of the NHL every season and hit home runs with the few late round picks you have is a bit much.

 

[Intangibos]

I maintain that Kassian is just someone who is irresponsible and his partying was causing problems with the team. I judge Kassian by his actions subsequently. He doesn't strike me as someone who was particularly concerned with trying to maintain a sober lifestyle. EDIT: I will also say that this is based on my own personal experiences with addicts (which is going to distort things slightly), along with other stuff that I can't really comment on because I believe it breaks the board rules.

Good to know that we can't judge what goes on behind closed doors, as we just don't know the full story, but you're able to determine exactly what type of person Kassian is because he was in a car accident.

There are a lot of really good, really smart people who are addicts and sometimes they just **** up. Do you think because you're an addict you have to be tucked in by 8 or something?

 

[Intangibos]

Gillis drafting:

2008
- Natural picks at 10th overall. 4 picks total. Rounds 1, 2, 5, 6.
- Result: NHL player (Hodgson).

2009
- Natural picks at 22nd overall. 6 picks total. Rounds 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7.
- Result: NHL player (Connauton).

2010
- Natural picks at 25th overall. 4 picks total. Rounds 4, 5, 6, 7.
- Result: 1 player TBD (McNally).

2011
- Natural picks at 29th overall. 7 picks total. Rounds 1, 3, 4, 4, 5, 6, 7.
- Result: 1 player TBD (Grenier), NHL project (Corrado).

2012
- Natural picks at 26th overall. 5 picks total. Rounds 1, 2, 5, 6, 7.
- Result 1 NHL player (Hutton), 1 player TBD (Gaunce).

2013
- Natural picks at 24th overall. 7 picks total. Rounds 1, 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7.
- Result 1 NHL player (Horvat), 3 players TBD (Shinkaruk, Cassels, Subban)

Gillis never had more than the normal amount of picks (7) and was often drafting near the bottom of the round due to team success. First two drafts are failures. 2010 there were no picks to work with - another failure I guess. 2011 is bad with not much hope. Last two drafts look fine, if not good.

I think MG's ABYSMAL drafting is getting overblown. It's not like he was getting gifted top 10 natural picks every year (Godson bust aside) and finding nothing. Expecting to finish at the top of the NHL every season and hit home runs with the few late round picks you have is a bit much.

Not only that, but even the anti-Gillis crew admit that he turned the scouting around before he left. If the major knock on Gillis is that he took too long to turn the scouting department around, then that sucks, but once it's already done that isn't a problem anymore is it? It's not like he completely failed to turn it around, he just failed to turn it around in a timely manner. Overhauling the scouting department from scratch isn't something he has to do every year, so even if he was too slow, he shouldn't really have to do it again so firing him makes no sense.

 

[RandV]

The choice hinges on whether or not you want to do something about it. Having a substance abuse problem does not make one immune from making the adult choices the rest of us have to make.

Kassian is 24. These things aren't the same for everyone but that's just getting to the age where 'college kids' start smartening up and growing up, slowing down from all the partying to move onto adult life.

Not to excuse anyone from these choices and don't quote me on this but statistically isn't 16-24 the prime age for this sort of behavior? It certainly fits for a lot of members of my own family.

 

[Cupless44]

To say Benning has made a few mistake would be a severe understatement.

Cap structure destroyed.
Lose value on every single trade.
Nepotism.
Favoritism.
****ing hiring Weisbrod.
Firing competent staff because they are not yes men.

I mean that is a pretty damn long list already.

Maybe you should also credit the scouting staff that made the McCann recommendation as well. You know the scouting staff MG built.

If you know anything about Benning than you should know he is a scout at heart. He scouts more games himself than most GMs. He is more hands on with draft picks than most GMs. Sure he listens and collaborates with his scouts but he has given them clearer directives than Gillis ever did. Not much doubt in my mind that Benning has the final say on all draft picks.

Can you guys find in your selves to give even the slightest credit to Benning for something? if you do it actually gives more weight to the moves you slam him for because it provides at least a hint of objectivity.

 

[tantalum]

The choice hinges on whether or not you want to do something about it. Having a substance abuse problem does not make one immune from making the adult choices the rest of us have to make.

There are very very very very few addicts who want to be an addict and don't want to stop. Yes an addict has to take that first step and agree to treatment but they need all sorts of support to make it to and through recovery. And I'll be absolutely honest, it was IMO a completely crappy thing if this was a reason Benning had no use for Kassian just as it was completely awful what Bergevin said about character etc. It really isn't a choice, it is a disease. While not perfect, Russel Brand has a couple of good documentaries on Netflix. I suggest people watch them as a starting point.

 

[Cupless44]

Gillis drafting:

2008
- Natural picks at 10th overall. 4 picks total. Rounds 1, 2, 5, 6.
- Result: NHL player (Hodgson).

2009
- Natural picks at 22nd overall. 6 picks total. Rounds 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7.
- Result: NHL player (Connauton).

2010
- Natural picks at 25th overall. 4 picks total. Rounds 4, 5, 6, 7.
- Result: 1 player TBD (McNally).

2011
- Natural picks at 29th overall. 7 picks total. Rounds 1, 3, 4, 4, 5, 6, 7.
- Result: 1 player TBD (Grenier), NHL project (Corrado).

2012
- Natural picks at 26th overall. 5 picks total. Rounds 1, 2, 5, 6, 7.
- Result 1 NHL player (Hutton), 1 player TBD (Gaunce).

2013
- Natural picks at 24th overall. 7 picks total. Rounds 1, 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7.
- Result 1 NHL player (Horvat), 3 players TBD (Shinkaruk, Cassels, Subban)

Gillis never had more than the normal amount of picks (7) and was often drafting near the bottom of the round due to team success. First two drafts are failures. 2010 there were no picks to work with - another failure I guess. 2011 is bad with not much hope. Last two drafts look fine, if not good.

I think MG's ABYSMAL drafting is getting overblown. It's not like he was getting gifted top 10 natural picks every year (Godson bust aside) and finding nothing. Expecting to finish at the top of the NHL every season and hit home runs with the few late round picks you have is a bit much.

You really trotting out Hodgson, Connaghton, Grenier, McNally as NHL successes or players who have impacted the Canucks NHL roster? Wow the bar is set low

 

[Cupless44]

Not only that, but even the anti-Gillis crew admit that he turned the scouting around before he left. If the major knock on Gillis is that he took too long to turn the scouting department around, then that sucks, but once it's already done that isn't a problem anymore is it? It's not like he completely failed to turn it around, he just failed to turn it around in a timely manner. Overhauling the scouting department from scratch isn't something he has to do every year, so even if he was too slow, he shouldn't really have to do it again so firing him makes no sense.

That is right. Gillis took so long, 6 years to start hitting draft picks that could help the organization. So long that the team is no longer a western conference power and needs a pretty serious rebuild.

 

[VanillaCoke]

If you know anything about Benning than you should know he is a scout at heart. He scouts more games himself than most GMs. He is more hands on with draft picks than most GMs. Sure he listens and collaborates with his scouts but he has given them clearer directives than Gillis ever did. Not much doubt in my mind that Benning has the final say on all draft picks.

Can you guys find in your selves to give even the slightest credit to Benning for something? if you do it actually gives more weight to the moves you slam him for because it provides at least a hint of objectivity.

There's lots of objectivity, you're choosing not to see it.
Ppl give credit for vrbata all the time, Hutton and Virt making the team and most ppl Sven too.
The list of negatives is just much longer.

Benning the scout has hit on his 1st rounders, his pro scouting however has been pretty garbage. So there that.

 

[Intangibos]

If you know anything about Benning than you should know he is a scout at heart. He scouts more games himself than most GMs. He is more hands on with draft picks than most GMs. Sure he listens and collaborates with his scouts but he has given them clearer directives than Gillis ever did. Not much doubt in my mind that Benning has the final say on all draft picks.

Can you guys find in your selves to give even the slightest credit to Benning for something? if you do it actually gives more weight to the moves you slam him for because it provides at least a hint of objectivity.

Most of us like the Baertschi trade and had high hopes for Benning. It's just objectively most of his moves are bad. Combined with him being hired to be better than Gillis when not only is he much worse IMO, but Gillis was actually a pretty good GM.

You really trotting out Hodgson, Connaghton, Grenier, McNally as NHL successes or players who have impacted the Canucks NHL roster? Wow the bar is set low

Speaking of being objective... lmao

 

[Cupless44]

There's lots of objectivity, you're choosing not to see it.
Ppl give credit for vrbata all the time, Hutton and Virt making the team and most ppl Sven too.
The list of negatives is just much longer.

Benning the scout has hit on his 1st rounders, his pro scouting however has been pretty garbage. So there that.

Fair enough thank you.

Agree the pro scouting in his regime has been poor.

But I think the first 2 drafts appear quite promising.

I also don't think credit for drafting of McCann should go to Gillis's scouts. Just like Gillis supporters probably dont want credit for the President Trophies to go to Nonis and Burke because they supplied all of the top players that drove the team.

 

[arttk]

Fair enough thank you.

Agree the pro scouting in his regime has been poor.

But I think the first 2 drafts appear quite promising.

I also don't think credit for drafting of McCann should go to Gillis's scouts. Just like Gillis supporters probably dont want credit for the President Trophies to go to Nonis and Burke because they supplied all of the top players that drove the team.

Uhh everybody gave credit to Burke for Sedins/ Kesler and Nonis for Lu. They had those players too, but never built a team strong enough to get to the SCF which MG did.

Benning inherit the scouts from MG and you think Benning just ignored whatever the scouts recommended? Not to mention that Crawford is the one responsible for the O.

 

[AwesomeInTheory]

Good to know that we can't judge what goes on behind closed doors, as we just don't know the full story, but you're able to determine exactly what type of person Kassian is because he was in a car accident.

Wrong. What is with your insistence on attributing things to me I haven't said?

There are a lot of really good, really smart people who are addicts and sometimes they just **** up. Do you think because you're an addict you have to be tucked in by 8 or something?

No, I just don't have a lot of sympathy for someone like Kassian.

There are very very very very few addicts who want to be an addict and don't want to stop. Yes an addict has to take that first step and agree to treatment but they need all sorts of support to make it to and through recovery. And I'll be absolutely honest, it was IMO a completely crappy thing if this was a reason Benning had no use for Kassian just as it was completely awful what Bergevin said about character etc. It really isn't a choice, it is a disease. While not perfect, Russel Brand has a couple of good documentaries on Netflix. I suggest people watch them as a starting point.

We're making the assumption that Kassian is an addict, rather than he's someone who is just grossly irresponsible and unprofessional. I'm of the opinion that he's just an idiot who values partying more than he does being a professional hockey player.

Shane O'Brien has come up a few times in this thread and there's no opining over being an addict. Yes, I am aware that SOB never went through the substance abuse program (that we know of.) But again, we've had 3 different teams all express varying levels of frustration with Kassian.

Stan Smyl was apparently working with Kassian in an attempt to help him. Whatever you want to say about Linden as an executive, his own moral character is unimpugnable and I doubt that he would be willing to jettison a player at the first sign of trouble.

The only real reason people are using Kassian as a hill to die on is because it can be used to argue that Jim Benning is a heartless monster who doesn't care about his players.

Which is ridiculous, given that a) Kassian's problems have been known since he was in Buffalo, b) Benning kept him on the team through the first season and saw he got into treatment, c) Canucks management were working with him to try and help him.

I'm incredibly skeptical that Kassian is some mistreated addict, and I'm not a fan of people defending addicts as though they're completely removed from whatever choices they make.