Vancouver Sports Media Thread
- Thread starter Mr. Canucklehead
- Start date
- Status
Megaterio Llamas
el rey del mambo
When Neil Macrae went on the air with Sportsline in 1978 they said Vancouver couldn't support one hour of daily sports talk radio haha.
And it looked like they were right for a while.
without sounding like a jerk. A lot of what is is on that station sounds like uneducated ramblings to kill time
nucks88
Registered User
Meh, Babcock is from Saskatchewan ....it didn't stop him from declaring the Leafs "Canada's Team" when he got the head coach job.
Megaterio Llamas
el rey del mambo
Sekeres and Cybulski are authentic Ontarians if you're looking for local media examples.
Not that there's anything wrong with being from Ontario of course
cabinessence
Registered User
- Feb 18, 2017
- 1,136
- 468
Did anyone catch Blo Jake with Ben Kuzma this morning? Ben mentioned that Petterson's brother is up to 185 pounds so there could be a possibility of Elias putting on weight. I think Pratt brought something else up and tehn about 2 minutes later, Blo asks Kuzma if he thinks Petterson will be able to put on weight.It was like he had left the room or something. More likely he was just reading questions from a script.
Lindgren
Registered User
- Jun 30, 2005
- 6,030
- 3,956
Did Kuzma acknowledge that he got his info from Pass it to Bulis, who wrote an entire column on this subject?
cabinessence
Registered User
- Feb 18, 2017
- 1,136
- 468
rypper
21-12-05 it's finally over.
- Dec 22, 2006
- 16,443
- 20,399
Anyone else catch Laurence Gilman let something slip today regarding Virtanen?
During his usual spot with Sekeres and Price, they were discussing whether or not they'd take Tkachuk if he was on the board at 7. He explained it depends on how the team's internal draft board was laid out, in that if on their internal board if they had Tkachuk ranked higher then some of the defenders they would definitely take him or look to trade down, despite team need.
He then reminisced about previous drafts and how they broke down according to their list, consensus lists etc. He talked about the 2014 draft how it went pretty much exactly pick by pick how they had guys ranked prior to their pick.
Then Price or Sekeres said something to the effect of "... and then you guys had Virtanen ranked next?" Gilman kind of paused and scoffed and said "uh, no..." then quickly moved back to the subject of Tkachuk.
Just more evidence I guess that Virtanen wasn't who the scouts wanted, or perhaps the remnants of the previous management team wanted, but they were overridden by Benning, Ownership, or both.
Once again, why the segments with Gilman on, are always always a great listen.
During his usual spot with Sekeres and Price, they were discussing whether or not they'd take Tkachuk if he was on the board at 7. He explained it depends on how the team's internal draft board was laid out, in that if on their internal board if they had Tkachuk ranked higher then some of the defenders they would definitely take him or look to trade down, despite team need.
He then reminisced about previous drafts and how they broke down according to their list, consensus lists etc. He talked about the 2014 draft how it went pretty much exactly pick by pick how they had guys ranked prior to their pick.
Then Price or Sekeres said something to the effect of "... and then you guys had Virtanen ranked next?" Gilman kind of paused and scoffed and said "uh, no..." then quickly moved back to the subject of Tkachuk.
Just more evidence I guess that Virtanen wasn't who the scouts wanted, or perhaps the remnants of the previous management team wanted, but they were overridden by Benning, Ownership, or both.
Once again, why the segments with Gilman on, are always always a great listen.
Notice a question after that too where a listener asked how much Benning has to do with the actual drafts - Gilman went on to say that outside of the high end prospects, Benning simply would not have time to scout players in later rounds. Just more evidence that we can attribute the 1st round to Benning and the later rounds to his scouts.
This narrative about Benning being a skilled talent evaluator is not supported by any real evidence. He's blown two picks out of four in the 1st round and his evaluation of pro players he has traded for has been dismal at best.
Ryan Miller*
Registered User
- Jan 13, 2017
- 1,079
- 322
Not sure Gilman has a right to scoff at anyone's draft record.
Beyond a sadly long-unemployed exec trying to protect his own skin, the facts are that Benning is on record saying he sat back and evaluated the 2014 draft—a point hammered home by users like MS, who when the 2014 draft was looking good, typically yammered on about a GM bearing little responsibility for his first draft; he's changed his tune now though. Tony Gallagher also tweeted about ownership's involvement in the Virtanen pick.
Beyond a sadly long-unemployed exec trying to protect his own skin, the facts are that Benning is on record saying he sat back and evaluated the 2014 draft—a point hammered home by users like MS, who when the 2014 draft was looking good, typically yammered on about a GM bearing little responsibility for his first draft; he's changed his tune now though. Tony Gallagher also tweeted about ownership's involvement in the Virtanen pick.
NoShowWilly
Registered User
I will defend Benning in saying that he helped lay out the approach to the draft in the later rounds.
I may be wrong and am trying to find it but i remember reading that he has scouts looking for players that really excelled at a skill in later rounds. (eg- Rathbone's skating)
I may be wrong and am trying to find it but i remember reading that he has scouts looking for players that really excelled at a skill in later rounds. (eg- Rathbone's skating)
Maybe you should listen to the interview. He did not scoff at anyone's drafting record. He simply stated that the GM does not have the time to scout players in later rounds, and that in general he would only have a large degree of input in the early rounds. Further, he clearly stated he had no comment on how things work now, as he is not employed by the Canucks. Given the way he was turfed by the team you'd expect some bitterness, but he has been completely diplomatic about things.
If you want to continue to believe in the genius of Benning - the master player evaluator that determined that Gustav Forsling was a poorer prospect than Adam Clendenning or that believed Brandon Sutter was a foundational player, or that predicted that Luca Sbisa would be a top 4 d-man or that thought Juolevi was a better option than Tkachuk or others drafted in after him....I could go on....but we have, and you continue to believe in Jim....so it's pointless.
Ryan Miller*
Registered User
- Jan 13, 2017
- 1,079
- 322
Yawn, honestly it's getting sad to see the state of the "Benning is the worst GM in pro sports" bandwagon lately. Never boasting much critical thought, it at least used to have so much more energy before the contract extension.
Forsling has yet to establish himself as an NHL player. Leave him off the pamphlet for now.
Other franchises bemoan players like Forsberg or Barzal or Baertschi who slipped through their fingers, while we bemoan the Shinkaruks, the Foxes, the Kassians, the Lacks, etc., until these players fall off the map due to Benning's accurate pro-scouting prognostications. Then we move onto the next flavour of the month. McCann got a second assist?! What a horrible trade!
The rest of your critique is based off vague over-interpretations of statements Benning made to the over-interpreting Vancouver media. Again, leave it off the pamphlet.
Um, yeah, there is so much asinine about this, I don't know where to start and frankly am not interested in trying. I am happy for you that Benning gives you so much joy. It's better than seeing things as they really are, I guess.
Ryan Miller*
Registered User
- Jan 13, 2017
- 1,079
- 322
See, what I said... you guys used to have so much more energy. Now a single counterpoint or two to your rambling negativity and you give up! Guess it takes a lot more work now to paint Kassian, Lack, Shinkaruk, Fox, Bonino, Forsling, etc., as the lost mega-talents they once were. Or people don't care so much when you find one quote where Benning said some innocuous thing like "we want to compete next year" and then follow it up with a 5-paragraph analysis of how Benning is a total idiot for saying this.
I admit, I did take a lot of joy in Benning's extension.
krutovsdonut
eeyore
- Sep 25, 2016
- 16,894
- 9,570
I'm not sure that Judd Brackett has scouted all the guys in person that the Canucks have drafted since he became the director of amateur scouting. You have to rely on your scouting staff. I think a GM can influence the draft quite a bit. For example, both Weisbrod and Brackett are big on the USHL and NCAA scene. You think it's a coincidence that the Canucks started drafting USHL players once Benning came on board and gave Weisbrod and Brackett authority?
And not every late round pick is some obscure player playing in Europe or on a middle of nowhere US high school team. Benning was there at the U18s in 2015. He likely saw Jasek played. And when you go and watch Sergachev, you watch Chatfield and Dipietro etc. and the guys on the other team. Similarly, scouts saw Kyle Petit play when they were scouting Dane Fox. They saw Jordan Subban play when they saw Brendan Gaunce (and Cramarossa). It's not an impossibility that a GM didn't personally watch a late round draft pick play. If you go and watch Owen Sound play last season you get to watch Suzuki, and you watched Gadjovich and Palmu play as well. That's not to mention the fact that GMs who are out of the playoffs have time to scout CHL playoff games.
The belief that a GM couldn't have seen a late round pick play in person (nevermind on video) because they couldn't have the time for it is stupid.
Of course, at the end of the day, Benning's job isn't to go out and scout. He promoted Brackett, a part-time scout, to be the Canucks' Director of Amateur Scouting to help him. That's not insignificant.
PuckMunchkin
Very Nice, Very Evil!
If you listen to Bennings comments on Gadjovitch when they draft him (in the video where he is mic'd up) you get the feeling that he doesn't know much anything about the player.
(around 2:36 if the link doesn't take you to that spot directly)
Considering how much you downplay these guys its quite fascinating that of 4 years Benning and all the guys he brought in, the team is much worse now than it was before. So would you say he replaced bad players with even worse guys? If not, how do you explain that the team is so terrible despite most of the previous regime guys are gone now?
Also, do you think the team is about to lose its culture?
According to Bennings timeline, if they have another losing season the team will also lose its culture, or already has. Its been 3 years of losing already after all.
Ryan Miller*
Registered User
- Jan 13, 2017
- 1,079
- 322
It's really interesting how the dynamics of this forum function. It's kind of a spillover of Twitter, where users grab these random tweets and start to argue them as if they're their own ideas. They barely recognize that these tweets from these accounts (even Botchford and his rabid followers hoping for their precious tweet to be included in the provies) are mere clickbait and not acual arguments. But luckily they can parrot these viewpoints safe from actual public discourse, as this forum has steadily bullied and hounded out any outsiders to its own special cult of negativity (which is routinely excoriated in other corners of the internet), [mod]
Like the weakness of the ideas presented is becoming embarrassing. Yes, the team is worse than before because a) this is a rebuild, and b) no GM can draft and assemble a whole team around one u-25 NHL player left by the previous regime. That's needing to bring in 11 forwards, and 6 defencemen, and if you're executing a rebuild, then that will mostly be through the draft. Yes, criticize Benning for not doing this in 4 years even if many of his draft picks are still teenagers; it definitely makes you seem smart.
Again, a quote pulled from a presser as if it's a word from God. You'd be surprised what a lot of GM's around the league say to their paying fanbase; hint: unless you're in Toronto or Edmonton where the fans will come no matter what, you can't exactly directly inform your customers that the product is going to suck for multiple years, or you won't have a franchise anymore. Again, these quotes are so open to interpretation that basing an argument around them just descends into the mud. I believe Benning wanted the team to compete every night, which apart from the tail end of Desjardin's tenure, they have done, preserving a cultural identity, which as I detailed in another of my posts, is reaching a boiling point with the retirement of the Sedins.
Like the weakness of the ideas presented is becoming embarrassing. Yes, the team is worse than before because a) this is a rebuild, and b) no GM can draft and assemble a whole team around one u-25 NHL player left by the previous regime. That's needing to bring in 11 forwards, and 6 defencemen, and if you're executing a rebuild, then that will mostly be through the draft. Yes, criticize Benning for not doing this in 4 years even if many of his draft picks are still teenagers; it definitely makes you seem smart.
Again, a quote pulled from a presser as if it's a word from God. You'd be surprised what a lot of GM's around the league say to their paying fanbase; hint: unless you're in Toronto or Edmonton where the fans will come no matter what, you can't exactly directly inform your customers that the product is going to suck for multiple years, or you won't have a franchise anymore. Again, these quotes are so open to interpretation that basing an argument around them just descends into the mud. I believe Benning wanted the team to compete every night, which apart from the tail end of Desjardin's tenure, they have done, preserving a cultural identity, which as I detailed in another of my posts, is reaching a boiling point with the retirement of the Sedins.
Last edited by a moderator:
You are cute. This is not a rebuild - they have done 1 rebuild move which was the Burrows trade. Over the last 4 years they had 28 picks which is exactly the number which you get automatically over that period, one of the 28 is coming via a fired coach. They have 6 picks in this years draft. Just because the team is bad doesnt make it a rebuild. Also I am not quite sure on your math skills, since when are 7 of 28 many? Because thats the number of Benning players drafted that are still teenager. 4 of those 7 will be 20 by October, and 5 in November when Pettersson turns 20.
How is that open for interpretation?
Last edited by a moderator:
Ryan Miller*
Registered User
- Jan 13, 2017
- 1,079
- 322
More semantic mud as usual. Moving from the worst prospect pool in the league to a top-5 prospect pool is proof of a rebuild, as well as turning one of the oldest cores (stale, as Tortorella put it) in the league into one of the league's youngest squads.
Thats a good one. 8 of the top 11 scorers are 27y and older. Just because you throw some random young guys on the team doesnt mean you are actually rebuilding.
Abaddon, you’re saying people can’t handle pro-Benning counterpoints while not making any in all of your posts in this page.
Your ‘arguments’ boil down to “I don’t want to acknowledge that so we can’t talk about it,” when you say “leave it off the pamphlet.”
And nothing Benning says that reflects poorly on him or your opinion of him counts.
It’s utter nonsense. Provide facts and data for why the moves being criticized aren’t disastrously poor.
You seem to be the one lacking energy in this debate.
Your ‘arguments’ boil down to “I don’t want to acknowledge that so we can’t talk about it,” when you say “leave it off the pamphlet.”
And nothing Benning says that reflects poorly on him or your opinion of him counts.
It’s utter nonsense. Provide facts and data for why the moves being criticized aren’t disastrously poor.
You seem to be the one lacking energy in this debate.
- Status
