The Rebuild Started...

[Jimbo57]

Like who?

There 34% think the rebuild has started. Not a high number but it does prove that it's not as black and white as you think. If it was that black and white percentage would be a lot lower.

If you go to other hockey forums that are not dominated by the same 20 or so anti-management characters you will see more objective sentiments as to why there is a rebuild going on. In the meantime arguing here is like paddling up a fast flowing river...tiring and pointless...

 

[Canucks1096]

Explain how you got to 34%

66.2 % people voted rebuild not started

So other votes must equal to 33.8%.

Simple math

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Hutton was in perfectly fine shape to start the season. All of a sudden after playing a couple months he fell out of shape? Uhhh...more likely that MDZ was just getting more opportunity than Hutton. Edler missed about a month at the beginning of the season, and when he came back Hutton got pushed down.

Also didn't help that they saddled Hutton with that useless defenseman Gudbranson. Hutton played well when away from Gudbranson, but when paired together his game all of a sudden sunk. Coincidence?

He was out of shape..
Vancouver Canucks✔@Canucks
Hutton said he isn’t proud of his season. “Coach was right to question my game and conditioning. I’m glad he did, it shows he cares and knows I can be better. And I will be better. I’ve already talked to guys back home, I’m starting a running group.”
11:40 AM - Apr 9, 2018

 

[rypper]

Even after he eventually steps down from President of the team (he won't be fired) it's going to take a long time for me to hear the name Trevor Linden and think of him favorably.

 

[Bleach Clean]

I had no doubt he would get an extension.

Because you had controlled for an idiot owner and a terrible president?

@Pastor Of Muppetz: Correct, I called for Benning to be fired. I was wrong. So were a few media people. It seems that a great deal of evidence in one direction doesn’t matter. It was all on the perception of one idiot owner and one terrible president. Good on you for getting that right. Let’s see how long it holds.

One thing: I imagine that when Benning does get the boot, your past assertions will be the target of many here. I don’t envy you your position.

 

[y2kcanucks]

66.2 % people voted rebuild not started

So other votes must equal to 33.8%.

Simple math

I completely misread that. I thought you had said that we are 34% into the rebuild.

34% of the people are wrong.

 

[y2kcanucks]

He was out of shape..
Vancouver Canucks✔@Canucks
Hutton said he isn’t proud of his season. “Coach was right to question my game and conditioning. I’m glad he did, it shows he cares and knows I can be better. And I will be better. I’ve already talked to guys back home, I’m starting a running group.”
11:40 AM - Apr 9, 2018

Do you really think he's going to be combative against his coach?

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Do you really think he's going to be combative against his coach?

This is a classic example why its a waste of time responding to you.

 

[y2kcanucks]

This is a classic example why its a waste of time responding to you.

Why? I gave you the same response you give me and others whenever people point out to Benning talking about the playoffs. What's good for the goose clearly isn't what's good for the gander I take it.

 

[pgj98m3]

This is a classic example why its a waste of time responding to you.

And a classic example of you not responding to logical points that don't fit your narrative.

 

[Bleach Clean]

If you go to other hockey forums that are not dominated by the same 20 or so anti-management characters you will see more objective sentiments as to why there is a rebuild going on. In the meantime arguing here is like paddling up a fast flowing river...tiring and pointless...

Don’t confuse objectivity with neutrality. A neutral opinion is wrong when the objective evidence points in one direction over another. In such a case, the neutral opinion actually ignores or fights the objective conclusion.

This board is predominantly anti-Benning. This goes well past the few posters you’re referencing. That said, the traits of a rebuild are the same regardless of who’s in charge. That’s why when Holland accrues picks, people know he’s rebuilding, even though a lot of DET fans hate him. Or, we know that Gorton is rebuilding in NYR despite calls for his resignation. The perception of a rebuild is separate from the feeling towards the GM.

If you want proof: List your best argument, your absolute best, as to why you think this is a Rebuild. I will weigh every point and break down where I agree and where I don’t. I will list why I don’t agree with any point. My rationale. None of it will have to do with Benning. We can designate GM X as the GM in this scenario. Are you game?

 

[Jimbo57]

Don’t confuse objectivity with neutrality. A neutral opinion is wrong when the objective evidence points in one direction over another. In such a case, the neutral opinion actually ignores or fights the objective conclusion.

Thanks for the lecture, you certainly cleared up my confusion.

With this in mind...

If you want proof: List your best argument, your absolute best, as to why you think this is a Rebuild. I will weigh every point and break down where I agree and where I don’t. I will list why I don’t agree with any point. My rationale. None of it will have to do with Benning. We can designate GM X as the GM in this scenario. Are you game?

Wow what an offer - lets engage in a back and forth, where you lecture me in a condescending manner, over a topic that is subjective. Unless you can show me a widely accepted standard of what a rebuild is everything you say is subjective. It would be the same as debating the proper way to raise a child. There are multiple avenues that work, just like there are multiple ways teams resurrect themselves from basement dwellers to perennial threats to win it all.

As an aside, even though I hardly post here, I know your MO. You talk down to people who do not agree with you because you think you are always right. Its a common trait of this place I suppose. Out of all the hockey forums on the internet this is the only one rife with accusations of sophistry launched by posters who enjoy getting into pissing contests in an attempt to show off their supposed intellectual superiority (i mean look at your first paragraph above). Its laughable how many times one can read blasts of "ad hominem" and "straw man" in here accompanied by "show your homework" and " that is your false narrative". If there is a forum with little man syndrome, this is it. The hockey hardly matters anymore, its all about being right and belittling people who offer dissenting views.

So in the end, I'll pass. Your offer to weigh my points and give me a break down of where you don't agree would mean something if you were an actual authority.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

The best post in this thread is Krutovs post #54...Sums it up to tee...

 

[y2kcanucks]

Thanks for the lecture, you certainly cleared up my confusion.

With this in mind...



Wow what an offer - lets engage in a back and forth, where you lecture me in a condescending manner, over a topic that is subjective. Unless you can show me a widely accepted standard of what a rebuild is everything you say is subjective. It would be the same as debating the proper way to raise a child. There are multiple avenues that work, just like there are multiple ways teams resurrect themselves from basement dwellers to perennial threats to win it all.

As an aside, even though I hardly post here, I know your MO. You talk down to people who do not agree with you because you think you are always right. Its a common trait of this place I suppose. Out of all the hockey forums on the internet this is the only one rife with accusations of sophistry launched by posters who enjoy getting into pissing contests in an attempt to show off their supposed intellectual superiority (i mean look at your first paragraph above). Its laughable how many times one can read blasts of "ad hominem" and "straw man" in here accompanied by "show your homework" and " that is your false narrative". If there is a forum with little man syndrome, this is it. The hockey hardly matters anymore, its all about being right and belittling people who offer dissenting views.

So in the end, I'll pass. Your offer to weigh my points and give me a break down of where you don't agree would mean something if you were an actual authority.

Of course you'll pass, because as much as you want to defend Benning even you know you can't come up with a logical argument that supports him, or that suggests that the Canucks are actually in a rebuild. Rebuilds do not involve stockpiling veterans while trading away picks and prospects and avoiding acquiring additional draft picks.

 

[y2kcanucks]

The best post in this thread is Krutovs post #54...Sums it up to tee...

Actually not at all. Most of what he said was debunked, but of course you choose to ignore the facts so it doesn't surprise me you think this way.

 

[Bleach Clean]

Thanks for the lecture, you certainly cleared up my confusion.

With this in mind...

Wow what an offer - lets engage in a back and forth, where you lecture me in a condescending manner, over a topic that is subjective. Unless you can show me a widely accepted standard of what a rebuild is everything you say is subjective. It would be the same as debating the proper way to raise a child. There are multiple avenues that work, just like there are multiple ways teams resurrect themselves from basement dwellers to perennial threats to win it all.

As an aside, even though I hardly post here, I know your MO. You talk down to people who do not agree with you because you think you are always right. Its a common trait of this place I suppose. Out of all the hockey forums on the internet this is the only one rife with accusations of sophistry launched by posters who enjoy getting into pissing contests in an attempt to show off their supposed intellectual superiority (i mean look at your first paragraph above). Its laughable how many times one can read blasts of "ad hominem" and "straw man" in here accompanied by "show your homework" and " that is your false narrative". If there is a forum with little man syndrome, this is it. The hockey hardly matters anymore, its all about being right and belittling people who offer dissenting views.

So in the end, I'll pass. Your offer to weigh my points and give me a break down of where you don't agree would mean something if you were an actual authority.

Actually, the fact that you think a critique has to come from an authority to be valid explains your experience here. Why can't you accept or reject ideas based upon logic/reason? Why does it have to come from an authority?

I've seen enough of your posts to know your MO as well. To be clear, I can spend the next few paragraphs disparaging your 'contribution' (or lack thereof), but instead I will simply say: By attacking the forum, or me, and not the argument, your own argument isn't being served in the slightest. It is actually weakened before it can even be entertained.

There's something being lost in translation here. There are multiple team states that can result in powerful new core groups. EDM was in disarray for over a decade and now they have one of the best young core groups in the league. Same for TOR. PIT dwelled in the basement for years, etc... Did these states all work to get them each a new core group? Yes. This goes back to your "many ways to raise a child" comment. The child has been raised in all instances. However, was the child raised in the best way possible in all instances? No. The best possible parenthood is the pure rebuild.

Consider the following:

- EDM clearly fumbled on its way to McDavid.
- TOR was mired in a Burke/Nonis retool at the bottom until Shanahan righted the ship. They tanked hard for three years and then pulled their way up.
- PIT bottomed out, got their franchise player, and then never looked back.

VAN will never be confused for representing what PIT or Shanahan-TOR did. Why? Because these were the pure and focused builds. The actual rebuilds, not retool, not 'call what you want' builds. Rebuilds. The best way to raise the child. VAN is taking the passive approach to raising their child. It's unfocused. It's meandering. We are 5 drafts in and we don't know when the child is going to be ready for kindergarten.

After this year, VAN will have 6 drafts worth of futures from this regime. 5 of those 6 being bottom10 finishes. That's a lot of high picks. That's twice the amount of time Shanahan-TOR was at the bottom. The funny thing is, this will set them up with better volume than TOR can achieve as a result. But TOR doesn't care because they're already climbing from their focused rebuild. They just signed a top20 forward because of that expediency. That's the difference.

The first paragraph wasn't meant to be condescending. I just wanted to point out that what you're seeking isn't objectivity, it's a neutral opinion, and a neutral opinion does not necessarily represent objectivity.

 

[Bleach Clean]

The best post in this thread is Krutovs post #54...Sums it up to tee...

Disagree, this is the best post:

Circumstantial.

Outlines what krutov's argument actually is, and summarizes what separates a rebuild from what we are seeing here. All in one word.

 

[pgj98m3]

If you go to other hockey forums that are not dominated by the same 20 or so anti-management characters you will see more objective sentiments as to why there is a rebuild going on. In the meantime arguing here is like paddling up a fast flowing river...tiring and pointless...

Please list these forums........

 

[ProstheticConscience]

Thanks for the lecture, you certainly cleared up my confusion.

With this in mind...



Wow what an offer - lets engage in a back and forth, where you lecture me in a condescending manner, over a topic that is subjective. Unless you can show me a widely accepted standard of what a rebuild is everything you say is subjective. It would be the same as debating the proper way to raise a child. There are multiple avenues that work, just like there are multiple ways teams resurrect themselves from basement dwellers to perennial threats to win it all.

As an aside, even though I hardly post here, I know your MO. You talk down to people who do not agree with you because you think you are always right. Its a common trait of this place I suppose. Out of all the hockey forums on the internet this is the only one rife with accusations of sophistry launched by posters who enjoy getting into pissing contests in an attempt to show off their supposed intellectual superiority (i mean look at your first paragraph above). Its laughable how many times one can read blasts of "ad hominem" and "straw man" in here accompanied by "show your homework" and " that is your false narrative". If there is a forum with little man syndrome, this is it. The hockey hardly matters anymore, its all about being right and belittling people who offer dissenting views.

So in the end, I'll pass. Your offer to weigh my points and give me a break down of where you don't agree would mean something if you were an actual authority.

Yeah, I've seen this before quite a bit here. Usually from people who don't understand what ad hominen attacks or straw men are and from those who can't provide data to back up their views. The cries of "boo-hoo-hoo, people are belittling me for being different" are pretty much universally peddled by those who can't understand that being different all by itself is meaningless. If you're unprepared to back up why you believe what you believe, that's your problem. You're no different than the Trump fanatics who wander into the political board and whine when their illogical crap is dissected and shown to be illogical, ill thought-out or just plain wrong. If all you want is people to hold your hand and tell you how right you are than Benning is a great gm, then why even come here? There are as you said other hockey forums to talk on. Hang out at CDC if you want. There they ban you if you don't show instant willingness to laud the current management. That's probably more your style.

Here, you have every right to believe what you want. Believe Benning's rebuilt the team if you want. You absolutely have the right to post that Benning's just the cat's pajamas.

But don't think for a second you have the right to hide from the responses.

 

[terrible dee]

Based on the evidence, the rebuild has not started. This is just a bad team that is quite directionless. Management that thinks they can compete for the playoffs every year, but the results just aren't there.

Throughout the last several years the Canucks have loaded up the team with veterans. Even last year it was stockpiled with veterans. During the season they traded away a draft pick, and they traded away a prospect (for now pieces). They have not traded away a player straight up for a draft pick since June 2015 when they traded away Kevin Bieksa for a 2nd round pick, but then a month later they flipped that draft pick to bring in Brandon Sutter. This team has not acquired a pick in the top 3 rounds, for a player, and kept and used that pick at the draft since they got a 1st round pick back as part of the Ryan Kesler trade. The lack of draft picks acquired does not suggest that this team is in a rebuild.

Every year the Canucks load up on veterans. Some people will point to the team adding a couple of rookies or youth to the lineup, but I easily counter that by pointing to the fact that every team in the NHL adds rookies and youth to the lineup. That was something that our teams have typically had problems doing, but if you actually look around the league, including the contenders, young players are incorporated into their lineups with regularity. The Boston Bruins are an example of this. They've been adding youth into their lineup steadily in recent years; however, they clearly are not in a rebuild. They did an aggressive retool in 2015, or a one year mini-rebuild perhaps (much more than anything Benning ever did here); however, they have kept the majority of their core and have not been afraid to put their youth in key roles. While Benning is too busy focusing on overloading the team with veterans and 4th liners, Boston focused on adding skill players and giving opportunities to their top young players to play with those skill players. They avoided overloading their team with aging veterans.

Some will point to our prospect pool as an indication that the Canucks are rebuilding, but that over simplifies the Canucks situation and also ignores facts. First of all, any team that has been as bad as the Canucks have been will have an improved prospect pool. Any team. That's just the nature of how the NHL draft works. Bad teams are rewarded with higher draft picks. Our drafting in other rounds has not been entirely incompetent either, so we are starting to accumulate some decent prospects. That's not the result of a rebuild, that's the result of the team just plain being bad. Furthermore, we're adding some decent prospects that are on the same level that other teams have plenty of as well. Just look at Tampa for example. They've been one of the top teams in the league for most of Benning's tenure here, yet they also have a stockpile of prospects that I would say is much deeper than what Benning has assembled. That's without Tampa having a single top 10 pick during this time period (Benning has had 4), and with Tampa only having 3 first round picks in the last 5 drafts.

Each year Benning has been here the Canucks have spent to the cap. Last year the Canucks went over the cap due to Brock Boeser hitting his bonuses. It's very rare for rebuilding teams to be this expensive. In some cases you'll see rebuilding teams take on other team's bad contracts in order to add an extra prospect or draft pick, but the Canucks haven't bothered to do that. Instead, every year they are big players in the UFA market, often times adding their own bad contracts. Again, not something you usually see from rebuilding teams especially when you factor in these contracts are multi-year deals.


So, looking at the evidence and how the team has been run, it's safe to conclude that the Canucks have not yet even started a rebuild. They may call it a rebuild, the standings may suggest they're probably in a rebuild, but it's not a rebuild. Instead, this is merely a bad team that has poor management. It's a team that's trending down and is stuck in the bottom of the NHL standings, yet has management that continues to try to make the playoffs every year. The emphasis has not been on rebuilding through the draft, or around youth. The emphasis has quite clearly been to spend to the cap on bringing in as many veterans as they can, leaving a minimal amount of roster spots for youth. They can talk about "doing things the right way" and rebuilding through the draft, but the fact of the matter is they have not bothered to employ this strategy. This delayed rebuild is going to keep the Canucks at the bottom of the standings for a long time, in what will be quite easily the darkest time in Canucks history.

You get it, I get it, all the posters here who aren't Astroturfers get it...Aqua doesn't get it, due to his ego, it's too bad, but I see how that happens...

...Benning doesn't get it, he just isn't very smart, in fact within seconds of hearing him speak for the first time, it was obvious that he was an individual who would score well below average on an I.Q test
There are ways of speaking, mannerisms, even facial structure and physical attributes that are symptomatic of "Creteanism" or mild Pejorative Sluration and Benning is like a walking checklist. I'm not saying this to insult him, I don't think he's a bad guy, and sometimes feel sorry for him, having been put into a position that he should never have been put in...then I remember what he's being paid. I expect nothing from Benning because he's not capable of giving any more, the capacity to learn and understand the nuances of managing a pro sports team are far beyond his capacity to understand, let alone implement.

The one guy I don't understand is Linden, My childhood hero, who is neither stupid or meglomaniacle
I don't understand why he has allowed this to happen, he doesn't need the money, he understands hockey and business well enough to be able to grasp all that has happened...

...I don't understand his motives throughout this suicidal running of the team into the ground, I just don't get it.

 

[Canucks1096]

Actually, the fact that you think a critique has to come from an authority to be valid explains your experience here. Why can't you accept or reject ideas based upon logic/reason? Why does it have to come from an authority?

I've seen enough of your posts to know your MO as well. To be clear, I can spend the next few paragraphs disparaging your 'contribution' (or lack thereof), but instead I will simply say: By attacking the forum, or me, and not the argument, your own argument isn't being served in the slightest. It is actually weakened before it can even be entertained.

There's something being lost in translation here. There are multiple team states that can result in powerful new core groups. EDM was in disarray for over a decade and now they have one of the best young core groups in the league. Same for TOR. PIT dwelled in the basement for years, etc... Did these states all work to get them each a new core group? Yes. This goes back to your "many ways to raise a child" comment. The child has been raised in all instances. However, was the child raised in the best way possible in all instances? No. The best possible parenthood is the pure rebuild.

Consider the following:

- EDM clearly fumbled on its way to McDavid.
- TOR was mired in a Burke/Nonis retool at the bottom until Shanahan righted the ship. They tanked hard for three years and then pulled their way up.
- PIT bottomed out, got their franchise player, and then never looked back.

VAN will never be confused for representing what PIT or Shanahan-TOR did. Why? Because these were the pure and focused builds. The actual rebuilds, not retool, not 'call what you want' builds. Rebuilds. The best way to raise the child. VAN is taking the passive approach to raising their child. It's unfocused. It's meandering. We are 5 drafts in and we don't know when the child is going to be ready for kindergarten.

After this year, VAN will have 6 drafts worth of futures from this regime. 5 of those 6 being bottom10 finishes. That's a lot of high picks. That's twice the amount of time Shanahan-TOR was at the bottom. The funny thing is, this will set them up with better volume than TOR can achieve as a result. But TOR doesn't care because they're already climbing from their focused rebuild. They just signed a top20 forward because of that expediency. That's the difference.

The first paragraph wasn't meant to be condescending. I just wanted to point out that what you're seeking isn't objectivity, it's a neutral opinion, and a neutral opinion does not necessarily represent objectivity.

Is there a reason why you didn't use Jets as one of your examples? Is it because the Jets don't fit your description of a rebuild?

Some facts about the Jets rebuild.

2014 to 2017 before they became a powerhouse 29 draft picks during that time frame. Canucks had 28. Btw jets traded picks for players like the Canucks. Those 4 year stretch they traded 6 picks for these 6 players Tangradi, Gustavasson,Harrison, Tlusty, Frolik, Setoguchi.

How come Jets were so successful? They didn't follow the scripted road map that you had. This Jets example proves that your wrong that a rebuild doesn't have to be your scripted road map.

The problem with your argument is you like to cherry pick. You didn't bother talking about the Jets because it doesn't fit your agenda.

About yesterday the question I Asked about what players did the rebuild team get by stacking picks. You only gave the Hawks example because you knew the Pens, Oilers and a few teams didn't have that many. That's cherry picking.

You think you are right Because you just cherry pick the stuff that fits your agenda.

Don't reply back and say Jets didn't rebuild. Every person in hockey knows Jets went through a rebuild

 

[terrible dee]

Yeah, I've seen this before quite a bit here. Usually from people who don't understand what ad hominen attacks or straw men are and from those who can't provide data to back up their views. The cries of "boo-hoo-hoo, people are belittling me for being different" are pretty much universally peddled by those who can't understand that being different all by itself is meaningless. If you're unprepared to back up why you believe what you believe, that's your problem. You're no different than the Trump fanatics who wander into the political board and whine when their illogical crap is dissected and shown to be illogical, ill thought-out or just plain wrong. If all you want is people to hold your hand and tell you how right you are than Benning is a great gm, then why even come here? There are as you said other hockey forums to talk on. Hang out at CDC if you want. There they ban you if you don't show instant willingness to laud the current management. That's probably more your style.

Here, you have every right to believe what you want. Believe Benning's rebuilt the team if you want. You absolutely have the right to post that Benning's just the cat's pajamas.

But don't think for a second you have the right to hide from the responses.

Google the term "Astroturfing" and you'll understand what this, many other posters here and pretty much ALL of CDC are.

They don't actually think what they are saying is true, they are doing their job, and their job is really slimy.

P.S Your post was pretty dead-on but was really brought down by the Trump stuff, consider leaving political belittlement out next time, it doesn't make you look very good and obscures your point.

 

[Trelane]

If Holland thought the same, why would have collected 21 picks for the last 2 drafts?

You are making a Post Hoc fallacy with the above. That a team like DET could upset pick yield averages over a span of time does not dictate that every team could upset pick yield averages using the same method. If it were the case, then DET would be employing that method right now, not chasing an abundance of picks like Holland is actually doing. That same architect is proving your theory false.

The draft has always been the source of the best core players. As far back as I can recall. What is changing now is the valuation and probability placed upon picks. We are learning more about their conversion rates. More about their value. And so, if you understand that picks are draws, and that draw frequency increases your probability to hit, then no logical argument can be made to assail the pursuit of picks. More equals a greater ability to hit. Less equals a lesser ability to hit. Ergo, if you want more hits at the draft, get more picks. It's not complicated.

Even if you rank EP above each Sedin (very lofty), you are still talking about 2 prospects of that calibre vs. one. There's nothing in this pool that matches that state. Nothing.

Early picks are almost always the best picks. This is not being refuted. This is also why the pool is tracking well. The team has been abysmally run and as a result are drafting really high. Those high picks yield high end talent. That said, this discussion is about the value forgone. You say that extra picks are optional. I disagree. So we'll test this theory. Please answer the following questions:

1. Is the draft the _best_ place to acquire future core players?

2. Does having more picks increase the likelihood that an NHL player will result from the draft?

If you answered yes to both, then adding picks are not optional for a rebuilding team. If you said no to either, please explain your rationale.

Holland said he should have retired when Lidstrom did. Hitting on Datsyuk and Zetterberg so late is a feat that won’t be replicated for an eon. His glory is past. If Detroit stands for anything it is that good/lucky drafting ≠ higher number of picks.

And it wasn’t just Detroit that didn’t acquire picks. Since only Chicago gained a support player or two via the tactic (LA may as well not have bothered) I’m thinking that an overwhelming number of cup winners and finalists didn’t get there via the picks hoarding method, otherwise known as the one and only “proper rebuilt” method. This could be providence given that 2/3 of voters figure the “rebuilt hasn’t yet started.”

“Yes” to both questions, incomplete as they are, assuming that nothing is coming back for trading picks. E.g., Baertschi will likely play his 300 NHL game this year. Less than 1/4 2nd rounders do this. Only about 14% get to 400. I like his chances. How many 2nd round picks can Benning literally give away before he falls below average of 2nd round expectations per his term as GM? “But upside” of those unconverted picks or “Bae is junk” is not an answer. Even support players are only as good as the core and when those get better…

Also, that last statement doesn't follow. Good/lucky drafting trumps excess picks every time. Back to Detroit and maybe every other cup winner other than Chicago. There are countless options.

Bottom line, if the prospect pool is the best in Nuck history, as at least one major paper columnist puts it and many others rate it highly, than it stands to reason that a rebuilt of *some* kind has at least started. Far too many make every thread a regime verdict.

Enjoy the summer boyz. I’ll see you in September.

 

[terrible dee]

Please list these forums........

B.S

There is one forum that is pro-Benning,

It's the one on the Canucks official website.

Only, as of about two years ago, it ceased being a legitimate fan forum and instead became ground zero for the Canucks attempt to grab hold of the narrative via aggressive Astroturfing, as another poster stated any criticism of Benning on the CDC forum is deleted and the poster who wandered onto it by mistake, believing it to be a real fan forum, is banned.

You idiots really think we can't spot you 10 miles away? This regime didn't even hire skilled Astroturfers, they hired unskilled scumbags....you are liars and you aren't even any good at it.

The reason I canceled my season's tickets two years ago wasn't that the team was bad, I lived through the 90's, I can handle bad,

But I will not support an organization that tries to mind-f*ck its customers, it shows disregard and callousness that is sickening.

On a level above and beyond hockey, it is VERY important that entities like the Canucks have the best interests of the public at heart...sadly the Canucks organization has revealed itself to be an operation of extremely low character, no morals and zero respect for its fans.

It all comes out in the wash buddy, for the Canucks and for you personally, being a professional liar is nothing your parents or children would ever respect.

You make the world a worse place, and you do it for chump change.

Pitiful,

 

[terrible dee]

Holland said he should have retired when Lidstrom did. Hitting on Datsyuk and Zetterberg so late is a feat that won’t be replicated for an eon. His glory is past. If Detroit stands for anything it is that good/lucky drafting ≠ higher number of picks.

And it wasn’t just Detroit that didn’t acquire picks. Since only Chicago gained a support player or two via the tactic (LA may as well not have bothered) I’m thinking that an overwhelming number of cup winners and finalists didn’t get there via the picks hoarding method, otherwise known as the one and only “proper rebuilt” method. This could be providence given that 2/3 of voters figure the “rebuilt hasn’t yet started.”

“Yes” to both questions, incomplete as they are, assuming that nothing is coming back for trading picks. E.g., Baertschi will likely play his 300 NHL game this year. Less than 1/4 2nd rounders do this. Only about 14% get to 400. I like his chances. How many 2nd round picks can Benning literally give away before he falls below average of 2nd round expectations per his term as GM? “But upside” of those unconverted picks or “Bae is junk” is not an answer. Even support players are only as good as the core and when those get better…

Also, that last statement doesn't follow. Good/lucky drafting trumps excess picks every time. Back to Detroit and maybe every other cup winner other than Chicago. There are countless options.

Bottom line, if the prospect pool is the best in Nuck history, as at least one major paper columnist puts it and many others rate it highly, than it stands to reason that a rebuilt of *some* kind has at least started. Far too many make every thread a regime verdict.

Enjoy the summer boyz. I’ll see you in September.

Ask yourselves this question everyone: What possible motive would a FAN of a team have for trying to defend the actions, decisions and people who made the team bad in the first place.

Would someone being beaten and robbed tell the police to go away if they showed up while the crime was being committed?

Its time to stop pretending these posters are fans with a different opinion, they aren't.

If you want to know why you have been subjected to the blathering of seemingly delusional Canuck fans over the past couple of years, then I strongly suggest you take a look-see at this:



And to the Astroturfer I'm replying to, no, you won't see me in September, I canceled my season's tickets two years ago for one reason...YOU and the disregard that current management has for fans that you represent.

And we are not your "Boyz" Less and less of us are "fans" and even more of us are no longer "customers"

What you will see in September is empty seats, just like you have for the past several years, more and more each year.

Take that message to your boss "Boy" Your sleazy organization is starting to wear out its welcome. Why don't you move to Houston and well get ourselves an expansion team, one with a moral backbone?