Waived: Brandon Manning: Clears :’(

TheRebuild

Bold as Boognish
Jun 12, 2014
2,165
405
Winter
Please...please...please. Take him Nucks, he’s actually “Really Good” and totally “Not Terrible”... just not a good fit here. Great “Character” guy with tons of “intangibles”, good “locker room presence” and all that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Debbie Mathers

Spawn

Something in the water
Feb 20, 2006
43,642
15,109
Edmonton
See now that quote is from a coach who isn't going to say the opposite and the key word in his quote is "trying to help". That's kind of an underhanded compliment to me.

Chiarelli, ultimately was the one who signed off on the trades, not the AGM and as has been beaten to death, by his own admittance was chasing Manning for over a year.

Gretzky trading Spooner and trying to trade Manning (now putting him on waivers) is a sign to me he wasn't on board with these moves and in no business operation would an AGM's words or wishes supercede the GM. As I said to the other poster earlier today, we won't ever know what other returns were on the table. Maybe Petrovic was the guy Gretzky suggested they pursue. Pretty suspicious how two of Chiarelli's guys are gone and Petrovic is still around (R/S, UFA-I know).

We can discuss until we're blue in the face over who we think was on board with trading who for whatever return and in the end no one knows except the people employed with the Oilers executive.

You've got the words directly from the coach highlighting the role that the assistant GM made in the acquisitions. The only way to argue against it is to believe that for some reason Hitchcock was lying. Which makes no sense. Why would a coach even bring up the assistant GM if he didn't play an integral part in the acquisitions?

And you're right, Chiarelli was ultimately the person who signed off on the deals. All the deals. Thank god that idiot is fired.

But I don't buy for a second the BS narrative that Bob Stauffer has been selling, and some have apparently been buying, that Chiarelli was some rogue ignoring the sound advice from everyone else in the organization.

Gretzky is as much a problem as any of them.

But hey, he traded Spooner for a former fan favourite (who also happens to have lost his job in the NHL and costs us more money to bury next year or buy out). So he must know what he's doing.
 

Senor Catface

Registered User
Jul 25, 2006
15,978
19,974
You've got the words directly from the coach highlighting the role that the assistant GM made in the acquisitions. The only way to argue against it is to believe that for some reason Hitchcock was lying. Which makes no sense. Why would a coach even bring up the assistant GM if he didn't play an integral part in the acquisitions?

And you're right, Chiarelli was ultimately the person who signed off on the deals. All the deals. Thank god that idiot is fired.

But I don't buy for a second the BS narrative that Bob Stauffer has been selling, and some have apparently been buying, that Chiarelli was some rogue ignoring the sound advice from everyone else in the organization.

Gretzky is as much a problem as any of them.

But hey, he traded Spooner for a former fan favourite (who also happens to have lost his job in the NHL and costs us more money to bury next year or buy out). So he must know what he's doing.

What's the Hitchcock quote? I've barely been following anything but the Condors lately.
 

Debbie Mathers

Registered User
Jul 5, 2018
176
199
Take him Nucks, he’s actually “Really Good” and totally “Not Terrible”... just not a good fit here. Great “Character” guy with tons of “intangibles”, good “locker room presence” and all that.
Wow. You should consider a career in sales, mate!
 

boxcar65

Registered User
Sep 24, 2007
1,545
1,643
Richmond, VA
If anyone watched the games, Manning had actually played fairly well the past 6 or 7 contests he was on the ice. Absolutely not as bad as everyone makes him out to be. He’s perfectly fine as a 5/6 D-man.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fuswald

Ritchie Valens

Registered User
Sep 24, 2007
28,623
39,785
You've got the words directly from the coach highlighting the role that the assistant GM made in the acquisitions. The only way to argue against it is to believe that for some reason Hitchcock was lying. Which makes no sense. Why would a coach even bring up the assistant GM if he didn't play an integral part in the acquisitions?

And you're right, Chiarelli was ultimately the person who signed off on the deals. All the deals. Thank god that idiot is fired.

But I don't buy for a second the BS narrative that Bob Stauffer has been selling, and some have apparently been buying, that Chiarelli was some rogue ignoring the sound advice from everyone else in the organization.

Gretzky is as much a problem as any of them.

But hey, he traded Spooner for a former fan favourite (who also happens to have lost his job in the NHL and costs us more money to bury next year or buy out). So he must know what he's doing.

Good question about Hitchcock...but one thing I've noticed throughout his career is he is a compulsive/habitual ass-kisser. Let's not forget he's on a short five month contract and was likely saying the right things to applaud the moves made above him, in hopes to land an extension...which is all but gone out the window now, I'm guessing. Word is he did not like Caggiula so he was probably a little too overjoyed to see him gone.

As the old saying goes, there's two sides to every story and somewhere in the middle is the truth. Stauffer can't go making shit up and splashing it all over the air otherwise Chiarelli could go after him and CHED/Global (I think Global owns CHED) for libel. Those statements were/are pretty damaging to Chiarelli's reputation and could cost him future employment. So yes, Bob's statements in this case hold elements of truth to it, in my opinion.

I'm not crowning KG as the saviour and planting him as the new GM but he wouldn't have to trade a useless Spooner-who let's face it, had zero value, for Gagner if Chiarelli didn't trade Strome for Spooner (who Chiarelli drafted and by Stauffer's admission the coaches didn't want Strome traded) in the first place, now would he?
 
Last edited:

McJadeddog

Registered User
Sep 25, 2003
20,237
5,173
Regina, Saskatchewan
If anyone watched the games, Manning had actually played fairly well the past 6 or 7 contests he was on the ice. Absolutely not as bad as everyone makes him out to be. He’s perfectly fine as a 5/6 D-man.

Yeah, perfectly fine... not a bad player at all... I get what you are putting down man *wink*..... totally good and serviceable as a player, and not overpaid for next year by about 1.2 million. Nope, all is well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TB12

Ritchie Valens

Registered User
Sep 24, 2007
28,623
39,785



If anyone is unable to view the embedded tweets, they are both from Rick Dhaliwal-Vancouver SN reporter and this is what they say:

"If Tanev is out for a while which I hear could be a possibility, wonder if Canucks would have interest in Brandon Manning who is on waivers."

Bottom tweet:

"Not saying they going to claim him but they have shown interest in him in the past. If Tanev out long term - they have to add I think."


Fingers crossed, three hours to kill until we find out.
 

Nostradumbass

Divinity
Jan 1, 2007
5,000
4,599
If anyone watched the games, Manning had actually played fairly well the past 6 or 7 contests he was on the ice. Absolutely not as bad as everyone makes him out to be. He’s perfectly fine as a 5/6 D-man.
Then hopefully someone takes him for free on waivers.
 

joestevens29

Registered User
Apr 30, 2009
52,765
15,428



If anyone is unable to view the embedded tweets, they are both from Rick Dhaliwal-Vancouver SN reporter and this is what they say:

"If Tanev is out for a while which I hear could be a possibility, wonder if Canucks would have interest in Brandon Manning who is on waivers."

Bottom tweet:

"Not saying they going to claim him but they have shown interest in him in the past. If Tanev out long term - they have to add I think."


Fingers crossed, three hours to kill until we find out.

Well I'm sure it's been talked about to some degree as we did just make another deal with them. I'd assume they'd want us to retain. Even take a bad contract on. Tim Schaller?

Edler, Tanev, Sutter, Baertschi, Demko, Virtanen all on the IR. Vancouver 6 points up on us:help:
 

Ritchie Valens

Registered User
Sep 24, 2007
28,623
39,785
Well I'm sure it's been talked about to some degree as we did just make another deal with them. I'd assume they'd want us to retain. Even take a bad contract on. Tim Schaller?

Edler, Tanev, Sutter, Baertschi, Demko, Virtanen all on the IR. Vancouver 6 points up on us:help:

I'd laugh if J. Benning took him and his cap hit on as a waiver claim. I'd call that a huge win freeing up more cap space, especially for next season. However, maybe there's a deal in place if no other team claims him, we see him dealt to Van with a bit of retention, which would suck but is not the complete end of the world. I guess we will all find out in about 97 minutes.
 

rboomercat90

Registered User
Mar 24, 2013
14,757
8,981
Edmonton
Looks more and more like Stauffer isn't just dumping bags of lye on Chiarelli's career corpse just because...these moves KG has made really signify Chiarelli put himself on an island and made these moves against everyone else's thoughts.
I’m not convinced of this. Hithcock’s Comments thanking Gretzky for his work landing Manning and Petrovic suggest otherwise. What it looks like to me is the organization is in serious damage control right now.

Still too much that doesn’t make sense. If Chiarelli was operating on his own he should have been fired immediately after the Manning and Petrovic trades, they happened on the same day and were head scratching moves. Instead they waited another 24 days to can him. He was fired the day after Koskinen was extended. It’s reasonable to think he was fired for that but Nicholson immediately said that was an organizational decision. Had he said at that point Chiarelli was doing everything on his own and the Koskinen extension was the last straw it would have believable. Instead, he said the team had been discussing it with Chiarelli since December. We’ve since found out they’d been discussing Gagner with Chiarelli too. Doesn’t sound to me like the GM was operating on an island.

This looks a lot like people scrambling to save their own jobs to me. What better way to do it than trying to undue an unpopular and senseless deal made before the former boss was let go. Pull that off and maybe Keith looks like a better choice for GM. It doesn’t help either that nothing coming out of Nicholson’s mouth sounds believable.
 

nturn06

Registered User
Nov 9, 2017
3,639
2,915



If anyone is unable to view the embedded tweets, they are both from Rick Dhaliwal-Vancouver SN reporter and this is what they say:

"If Tanev is out for a while which I hear could be a possibility, wonder if Canucks would have interest in Brandon Manning who is on waivers."

Bottom tweet:

"Not saying they going to claim him but they have shown interest in him in the past. If Tanev out long term - they have to add I think."


Fingers crossed, three hours to kill until we find out.



If they claim Manning and play Spooner we may be able to catch them....
 

CycloneSweep

Registered User
Sep 27, 2017
48,209
40,021
If Manning is claimed it'll turn out that we traded Caggiula so another team would waive Garrison.

If he is claimed that's cap space cleared for next year that cost KG nothing. That's better than anything Chia has done lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: McFuhryous

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad