2018 Management Discussion, Pt. III - Now with Less Trevor and More Mutiny

[Motte and Bailey]

And with the current team this mentor ship has produced what???
Adding hallucinogens to the Kool-aid can result in some strange ideas.

It's hilarious how often people bring up the recent lack of winning in the middle of a rebuild like it's some soft of gotcha question or as if it has any relevance at all.

 

[mossey3535]

I can't even fathom how you could have been angry during GIllis' run? Allergic to winning or something? I look back on those days with fondness.

These last few seasons I am angry. We are the laughingstock of the league. The only reason Ottawa overtook us lately is because they had a near-unprecedented fallout between the families of two players.

 

[Cogburn]

You're either a hater or an apologist in this thread, there is no room for folks on the fence or looking at both sides it seems.

 

[tantalum]

Probably should have waited for the dust to settled,i guess.He's paying for protection for Pettersson,Hughes,Dahlin ect.The wheels fell off the Canucks completely when Dorsett was re-injured last year.Beagle also wins face-offs and is one of the best bottom 6 forwards in the NHL.He just won a cup and showed his importance on that team.

Beagle is now a protector? Whaaaaa....?

This team is not a playoff team looking for a last piece or anything like that, it’s a bad contract on a player that you are massively over rating. Stanley Cup winners have not so good players on them every year. They have players who do indeed play well and at a level they will never manage to be at again. And really he was still a 12 minute a night forward. The caps without Jay Beagle win the cup. Jay Beagle without caps gets no Stanley Cup and significantly less of a contract.

 

[Bojack Horvatman]

It's hilarious how often people bring up the recent lack of winning in the middle of a rebuild like it's some soft of gotcha question or as if it has any relevance at all.

More like 2 years of trying to make the playoffs and another year of "call it a rebuild if you like". It's not the losing that is worrysome but this management's decision making and flaws in almost every aspect. Jim Benning was absolutely at building a team around around the old core. Based on recent transactions that has not changed.

 

[CanaFan]

Apart from 2 top pairing defenders, the defense is exactly the same. LOL. Pretty big difference I would say.

No mentors? Did Edmonton ever have anyone close to Henrik Sedin to mentor their emerging leaders? Daniel Sedin? Ryan Miller? Alex Burrows? Brandon Sutter? Chris Higgins? Jannik Hansen? Derek Dorsett? Hamhuis and Bieksa when they were here? Not even. Count the all star appearances, $$$, whatever you want to and compare them to the mentors the Oilers had. There is no comparison.

Well the lack of winning is definitely comparable.

 

[CanaFan]

Edmonton had no defense, no goalie, no mentors. So you cannot compare us with the Oilers.

We have no defense, no goalie. And mentorship is a comforting excuse that people tell themselves to explain why their GM keeps acquiring bottom 6 talent again and again and again.

 

[Hodgy]

I would consider myself a lifelong hockey and Canucks fan who certainly has enough hockey knowledge and intelligence to not sit around going through extravagant lengths to bash people employed in top hockey jobs making millions of dollars per year thinking I'm smarter than them, all the while typing away on my laptop before jumping in my Dodge K-car, to go work in a completely non related hockey job.

The fact you guys think you're smarter than Benning and hockey GM is such an easy job is mind blowing, and just ....

Like, talk about delusional. Really it's like me pretending I could be CEO of Superstore, or Wal-Greens, cause it's so easy. I read books like c'mon man. It's so pathetic it's not even laughable anymore. At least Canafan knows hockey, you're just a anti-Benning follower throwing out the causal insult.

The thing is, while you may think the above about yourself, it may also just be that you are a deluded optimist. In fact, that is more likely than not based on the objective statistics we have.

Jim Benning spends to the cap for essentially four straight seasons and his team is one of the worst teams in the NHL over that span. In that context, which above the below seem to be accurate:

1. a poster criticizes Jim Benning because he or she is a Jim Benning "basher";
2. a poster praises Jim Benning because her or she is a deluded optimist;
3. a poster criticizes Jim Benning because he or she is rationally objective; and
4. a poster praises Jim Benning because he or she is rationally objective.

I think it is pretty obvious which two of the above appear to be the most accurate, given the objective statistics that we have.

 

[Chairman Maouth]

New thread up.