2019 Around the League V

[Fire Benning]

Man do the Avs ever suck ass, 5 wins in 26 games

Wasting Mackinnon's best years

 

[NucksRuleYep]

LOST (good)
Minnesota, Chicago, Vegas and Colorado

WON (bad)
St Louis, Dallas and Arizona

Pretty decent night for us. The most important teams lost by far (Minnesota, Colorado and Chicago). We maintain sole position of 9th and we are only 2 points behind Minnesota with same games in hand.

The reason I included Vegas above is because I have my eye on them. They are 9 points ahead of us, but we play them twice. Assuming we win both those games, that's only a 5 point spread and I could easily see Vegas tanking a bit in this home stretch. They are 3-6-0 in their last 9 games

 

[NucksRuleYep]

Man do the Avs ever suck ass, 5 wins in 26 games

Wasting Mackinnon's best years

It's really incredible how bad some of these teams are doing. Colorado and Anaheim are stinking the entire league up. And I love it!

 

[me2]

Man do the Avs ever suck ass, 5 wins in 26 games

Wasting Mackinnon's best years

Them and Edmonton show just how hard it can be to get over the hump and stay there. A hot year and they look amazing, then bam back to earth. The Canucks should be watching these teams closely to make sure they don't end up in the same mess.

 

[Addison Rae]

LOST (good)
Minnesota, Chicago, Vegas and Colorado

WON (bad)
St Louis, Dallas and Arizona

Pretty decent night for us. The most important teams lost by far (Minnesota, Colorado and Chicago). We maintain sole position of 9th and we are only 2 points behind Minnesota with same games in hand.

The reason I included Vegas above is because I have my eye on them. They are 9 points ahead of us, but we play them twice. Assuming we win both those games, that's only a 5 point spread and I could easily see Vegas tanking a bit in this home stretch. They are 3-6-0 in their last 9 games

Lol Vegas, good joke.

 

[Fire Benning]

Zona two points back of the Canucks with a game in hand lmao

 

[PG Canuck]

Zona two points back of the Canucks with a game in hand lmao

And they’ve had by far more injuries issues than us

 

[timw33]

And they’ve had by far more injuries issues than us

And doing so with a payroll of the low 60's (once you factor out Hossa/Bolland LTIRetirements).

All these teams we've been laughing at for being bad all have like...the same record as the Canucks, the team people talk about as a playoff team. No let's not look at the broader context of why they are a "playoff" team.

 

[Eddy Punch Clock]

It's really incredible how bad some of these teams are doing. Colorado and Anaheim are stinking the entire league up. And I love it!

Feels like the Avalanche have been on a Yoyo for the past little while. Good season, bad season, good season, bad season.....

 

[Hit the post]

And doing so with a payroll of the low 60's (once you factor out Hossa/Bolland LTIRetirements).

Irrelevant. You can build a solid core of a team with just around a third of 60 million bud.

Eriksson, Gagner, Guds, Beagle, Schaller, and Sutter. All need is a few complementary pieces and you see a cup contender.

 

[bandwagonesque]

No apologies for calling out my credibility ?

Oh, I know what you're talking about now. The short answer is no, because you and @ronningonempty are both wrong. He made the following quote from an article discussing the Ducks' deadline activities in 2014: "

Every one of those picks was put in play and I failed to get anything done," Murray said.

However, if you read the article it's clear from the context the quote refers to the Ducks' trade efforts in general and not to the Kesler trade:

Murray said there were times Wednesday he had all of the Ducks' two first-round and two second-round draft picks this summer and his top two picks in 2015 on the table.
The Ducks also offered prospects. Their top ones at minor league Norfolk are defenseman Sami Vatanen and forwards Emerson Etem and Devante Smith-Pelly.
Murray said he even made the unusual move, for him, of pursuing a "rental player," meaning an unrestricted free agent.
That player is believed to be Nashville center David Legwand, who was instead dealt to his hometown Detroit Red Wings for right wing Patrick Eaves, a third-round pick and a prospect.
"Every one of those picks was put in play and I failed to get anything done," Murray said.
"But I wasn't going to, and did not, offer any player off this roster, because I strongly believe this team is good enough.
"But you always try to make a hockey trade."

It was reported immediately after the trade that Murray's main and most important condition in the trade discussions regarding Kesler was that the 10th pick could not be included:

Canucks ship Ryan Kesler to Ducks ahead of NHL draft | CBC Sports


So yeah. If you're worried about your credibility, a good place to start would be not posting conspiracy theories that can be disproven with one page of google results rather than taking it to individual posters.

 

[me2]

Everything about chayka's tenure in Arizona is a black box. His analytics are proprietary and he's never released any details. The owner is an NHL stooge who's just there to keep the seat warm until the league finds a place for the team to play. Who knows what sort of interference the league runs in the club's operations. I don't think the "owner" has any real say in anything. Chayka is selling his data to other teams through his company while he's also working for Phoenix. Just an utterly bizarre situation all around.

Chayka has been making some strange moves, they used to have a logic to them, lately they seem to be the kind of moves that a frustrated GM makes.

 

[4Twenty]

Anyone can make a stipulation, it's called a negotiation.

Thing is, Benning just wanted to rid himself of a potential headache (I don't really blame him after the market just went through the goalie thing) but he damn well targeted Bonino and Sbisa. All you need to know at the end of the day.

Thing with negotiations are, you need leverage and pressure points. Benning pulled the trigger on the Kesler deal before the draft even started. Some more shrewd negotiators may have taken the negotiation into the draft, and maybe could've used the pressure point of the pick at 10th overall to make the deal.

That's what I would've done and I said as much at the time.

Benning caved to Overhardt (Kesler's agent) and Bob Murray because he wanted the problem solved....he did not make the deal with the best future interest of the Canucks in mind IMO.

 

[bandwagonesque]

Anyone can make a stipulation, it's called a negotiation.

Thing is, Benning just wanted to rid himself of a potential headache (I don't really blame him after the market just went through the goalie thing) but he damn well targeted Bonino and Sbisa. All you need to know at the end of the day.

Thing with negotiations are, you need leverage and pressure points. Benning pulled the trigger on the Kesler deal before the draft even started. Some more shrewd negotiators may have taken the negotiation into the draft, and maybe could've used the pressure point of the pick at 10th overall to make the deal.

That's what I would've done and I said as much at the time.

Benning caved to Overhardt (Kesler's agent) and Bob Murray because he wanted the problem solved....he did not make the deal with the best future interest of the Canucks in mind IMO.

Murray literally said that his most important priority in the Kesler negotiations and something he mentioned imediately as a starting point was that the pick was off the table. Given that this is the case, it's ludicrous to suggest not getting the pick was a failure. I'm not defending the trade on any level. Benning could have acquired better pieces, and was probably offered pieces that turned out better than the ones he recieved. I'm not defending Benning in general and never have. I was addressing two posters spreading falsehoods about what was available in order to advance their own narratives about Benning, which could be advanced without being deceptive if they were wiling to do a bit more work, and stop at a level of criticism that is realistic rather than one that is necessary in order for them to feel as righteous as possible. The posters in question were claiming the pick wasn't declared to be off the table, and one took a quote out of context to make it appear Murray had said that. Addressing this has nothing to do with any discussion about negotiating skills.

 

[StreetHawk]

Anyone can make a stipulation, it's called a negotiation.

Thing is, Benning just wanted to rid himself of a potential headache (I don't really blame him after the market just went through the goalie thing) but he damn well targeted Bonino and Sbisa. All you need to know at the end of the day.

Thing with negotiations are, you need leverage and pressure points. Benning pulled the trigger on the Kesler deal before the draft even started. Some more shrewd negotiators may have taken the negotiation into the draft, and maybe could've used the pressure point of the pick at 10th overall to make the deal.

That's what I would've done and I said as much at the time.

Benning caved to Overhardt (Kesler's agent) and Bob Murray because he wanted the problem solved....he did not make the deal with the best future interest of the Canucks in mind IMO.

The deal overall was fine given the circumstances so long as the Canucks picked a better Dman that scisba. They had the option to ask for Theodore but rather that man take a 19 year old they opted for the 24 year old mainly cause they wanted to still contend in the twins final few years.

So, instead of having Theodore to grow and develop with brock, bo, Petey the Canucks robbed from them a Dman and gave that to the Sedins. And for what? To make the playoffs 1 time and be bottom 3 the other 3 years he was here?

That’s what happens when you don’t think big picture and allow sentiment to rule your decisions. Twins were great but when Lu and Kesler get moved for. On impact returns and Schneider is moved for a 1st round pick, kind of indicates that you’re no longer contending doesn’t it aqua man?

 

[4Twenty]

Murray literally said that his most important priority in the Kesler negotiations and something he mentioned imediately as a starting point was that the pick was off the table. Given that this is the case, it's ludicrous to suggest not getting the pick was a failure. I'm not defending the trade on any level. Benning could have acquired better pieces, and was probably offered pieces that turned out better than the ones he recieved. I'm not defending Benning in general and never have. I was addressing two posters spreading falsehoods about what was available in order to advance their own narratives about Benning, which could be advanced without lying if they were wiling to do a bit more work, and stop at a level of criticism that is realistic rather than one that is necessary in order for them to feel as righteous as possible. The posters in question were claiming the pick wasn't declared to be off the table, and one took a quote out of context to make it appear Murray had said that. Addressing this has nothing to do with any discussion about negotiating skills.

He could say that all he wants, all the picks were available 4 months previous to the deal.

Insisting it's off the table doesn't mean you can't keep asking for it.

The link you posted doesn't even attribute a quote to Murray, it's a paraphrase from whoever the member of the Canadian Press was who made the article...no author is noted on this article.

If Benning wanted 10th and just "didn't want it to linger" he could've kept bargaining.

 

[4Twenty]

The deal overall was fine given the circumstances so long as the Canucks picked a better Dman that scisba. They had the option to ask for Theodore but rather that man take a 19 year old they opted for the 24 year old mainly cause they wanted to still contend in the twins final few years.

So, instead of having Theodore to grow and develop with brock, bo, Petey the Canucks robbed from them a Dman and gave that to the Sedins. And for what? To make the playoffs 1 time and be bottom 3 the other 3 years he was here?

I don't think the deal was fine.

They sold the premium asset and took a cap dump back. Sbisa was 9th on the Ducks depth chart. Apparently Vantanen was also offered, but they wanted Sbisa: Getting Luca, he gives us some physical play from the back end. He's strong. He plays like a heavy game and I think in our division his heaviness is going to come in handy for our group."

Dont you guys remember the video, Benning was so happy with the deal he didn't want it to fall through by asking for an additional 3rd round pick, so they swapped 3rd's. Remember?

I hated the deal from day one, Bonino's performance here made it better, but IMO, they targeted the wrong 3 pieces.

 

[bandwagonesque]

He could say that all he wants, all the picks were available 4 months previous to the deal.

Insisting it's off the table doesn't mean you can't keep asking for it.

The link you posted doesn't even attribute a quote to Murray, it's a paraphrase from whoever the member of the Canadian Press was who made the article...no author is noted on this article.

If Benning wanted 10th and just "didn't want it to linger" he could've kept bargaining.

I know it's not a direct quote. It's a writer from a reputable outlet reporting on what someone has said. The article says Murray was insistent from the very beginning that the Ducks wouldn't move the 10th pick in the trade. The two posters said this wasn't true and @Ronning On Empty took a quote out of context and claimed it proved Murray discussed moving both picks in the Kesler trade when is clearly wasn't actually referring to the Kesler trade but to trades in general. I'm not saying it was impossible to get the pick -- I'm saying that those two posters are being deceptive in trying to say it was definitely available and provided conclusive proof Murray was not referring to the Kesler trade specifically. Do you dispute this in particular? Because if not, you're not disputing anything I was actually saying.

 

[4Twenty]

Is there anything from before the trade? All we see is the post trade stuff.

The picks were on the table 4 months previously as per the article you pulled from your post, so if the staff Benning inherited knew that, why back off that.

I dispute that a post trade quote saying he insisted he wasn't moving 10th was set in stone. Negotiate. Create pressure points. You know, stuff that we used to expect out of a GM.

It's a two way street, insist you want 10th....they were desperate for Kesler. He was exactly what they wanted and got to two Conference Finals with him, they wanted exactly THIS PLAYER.

I will hold firm until the day I die that the 10th would've been available if the re-tool pieces weren't desired.

 

[VC]

From my understand all the picks were on the board at the deadline after that then it was know the Ottawa pick would be the #10 it was off. This has been discussed many times over the years.

 

[Bleach Clean]

I know it's not a direct quote. It's a writer from a reputable outlet reporting on what someone has said. The article says Murray was insistent from the very beginning that the Ducks wouldn't move the 10th pick in the trade. The two posters said this wasn't true and @Ronning On Empty took a quote out of context and claimed it proved Murray discussed moving both picks in the Kesler trade when is clearly wasn't actually referring to the Kesler trade but to trades in general. I'm not saying it was impossible to get the pick -- I'm saying that those two posters are being deceptive in trying to say it was definitely available and provided conclusive proof Murray was not referring to the Kesler trade specifically. Do you dispute this in particular? Because if not, you're not disputing anything I was actually saying.

Oh yes, we’re being deceptive when I link a quote proving your supposition incorrect. You are not being disingenuous when you parse that information to your liking. Yup, your approach here is undeniable.

I’m sure most reading this came away with the same take. No need to worry.

 

[Addison Rae]

Oh yes, we’re being deceptive when I link a quote proving your supposition incorrect. You are not being disingenuous when you parse that information to your liking. Yup, your approach here is undeniable.

I’m sure most reading this came away with the same take. No need to worry.

Literally every poster here understands this as the Ottawa pick was available at the deadline but wasn’t made available to Benning (this has nothing to do with Benning so not sure why he actually decided to engage)

But yeah, apparently citing two “rumours” with factual sources is “fan fiction”.

Complete utter joke, but really par for the course for this poster, can’t expect much else.

 

[M2Beezy]

Feels like the Avalanche have been on a Yoyo for the past little while. Good season, bad season, good season, bad season.....

Yeah Eddy and this season even they were super high and now as low as you can go. Yo yo in deed

 

[Hit the post]

McCann with another goal tonight (granted, it was only against the Oilers).

 

[Eddy Punch Clock]

McCann with another goal tonight (granted, it was only against the Oilers).

I just had a quick vision of the NHL starting to track stats with asterisks for points again Edmonton.