Toggle sidebar

Dhaliwal: Bruins one of the teams interested in Hutton

MadaCanuckle

MadaCanuckle

Registered User
Jun 25, 2012
2,092
922
Lisboa
Shareefruck said:
My agenda? Seriously? I'm firmly in the "Benning is a petty, egotistical, and incompetent GM" side of the argument, still hold out hope that Hutton can potentially turn into a top 4 defenseman, agree with your point, and I've been arguing/ranting about the exact thing that you are over the last few days.

My leanings give me every reason not to pick on your post, but fair's fair-- the method you used to frame that point was very disingenuous and read like a fallacy of equivocation. You're trying to suggest that Hutton has promise and value and it would be ridiculous and stupid to consider trading him due to some weird and petty insecurity that Benning seems to have over Gillis players, which is totally true, IMO. But to emphasize just how valuable he is and how foolish that would be, you chose to call him an under-25 top 4 defenseman (which communicates super untouchable and nuts to trade), despite the fact that he's only a top 4 defenseman on a technicality in name only, rather than in actual quality. It's hard to believe that this ambiguity was unintended.
Click to expand...
That's your conclusion about my words, so I ask again, why did you pick me out every poster on this forum who does compare it? Why do you try to imply something that is completely false (No, I don't have any kind of unruly or dark intention with my words)? Why didn't I see you doing this kind of (personal) attack on everyone who compared Sutter to whatever elite player of the day, or Granlund to Bergeron-lite? Did I fail you in one of my classes and you hold a grudge?

For me, yes, he is a top 4 D on this team. Yes, he showed in past season he can be a top 4 on a good team. There's my opinion. If you single me out, I need to ask why. I have an idea, but I'll keep it to myself.
 
Shareefruck

Shareefruck

Registered User
Apr 2, 2005
28,995
3,747
Vancouver, BC
MadaCanuckle said:
That's your conclusion about my words, so I ask again, why did you pick me out every poster on this forum who does compare it? Why do you try to imply something that is completely false (No, I don't have any kind of unruly or dark intention with my words)? Why didn't I see you doing this kind of (personal) attack on everyone who compared Sutter to whatever elite player of the day, or Granlund to Bergeron-lite? Did I fail you in one of my classes and you hold a grudge?

For me, yes, he is a top 4 D on this team. Yes, he showed in past season he can be a top 4 on a good team. There's my opinion. If you single me out, I need to ask why. I have an idea, but I'll keep it to myself.
Click to expand...
What on earth are you talking about?

I don't shy away from criticizing Granlund and Sutter and arguing with those who defend them. If anything, I get criticized for doing it too often and being a broken record about it.

Every poster on this forum who does compare it (compare what?)? Fail me in one of your classes? What does any of this even mean? :huh:

Andy Dufresne pointed out an inaccurate argument that you made, you defended it by adding a caveat that conveniently wasn't originally communicated and was misleading, and I came in and suggested "I hate Benning as much as the next guy, but to be fair, that is pretty disingenuous phrasing," and then proceeded to explain why I thought that, despite otherwise agreeing with your point.

How is that remotely close to a personal attack, singling you out, or holding a grudge in any way?
 
Last edited:
Andy Dufresne

Andy Dufresne

Registered User
Jun 17, 2009
2,643
740
fwiw- I don't necessarily think Mada is being intentionally disengenous, I just think he's way off on his evaluation of Hutton. Hutton has potential I guess, but then I thought this board agreed that 24 year olds don't have potential ?? He was better as a rookie, or was that just us overlooking his weaknesses because he gave us hope ??? He was the same last year as this year imo. Flashes of high end play, followed by tire fire own zone plays.

To me our #3/4 d-men on any given night right now are: Whoever plays LD with Tanev as a partner, and whoever plays RD with Edler. None of them really qualify as legit top 4's, although Stech has been giving me some renewed hope lately. If Hutton plays with Tanev then I guess he's our #2!

The most telling thing about our D, is that our legit top pairing can't play together because they both are needed to cover for guys who are playing too far up our lineup.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Blue and Green
Shareefruck

Shareefruck

Registered User
Apr 2, 2005
28,995
3,747
Vancouver, BC
Andy Dufresne said:
fwiw- I don't necessarily think Mada is being intentionally disengenous, I just think he's way off on his evaluation of Hutton. Hutton has potential I guess, but then I thought this board agreed that 24 year olds don't have potential ?? He was better as a rookie, or was that just us overlooking his weaknesses because he gave us hope ??? He was the same last year as this year imo. Flashes of high end play, followed by tire fire own zone plays.

To me our #3/4 d-men on any given night right now are: Whoever plays LD with Tanev as a partner, and whoever plays RD with Edler. None of them really qualify as legit top 4's, although Stech has been giving me some renewed hope lately. If Hutton plays with Tanev then I guess he's our #2!

The most telling thing about our D, is that our legit top pairing can't play together because they both are needed to cover for guys who are playing too far up our lineup.
Click to expand...
Regardless, I commented on his post because it was already brought into question, I didn't single him out.

If he thinks Hutton is a top 4 D in the NHL and should be held onto to like any other young top 4 D should, then I agree, I don't think it's disingenuous and is just an assessment that's way off.

If he thinks Hutton is actually a bottom pairing or worse D in the NHL and is only top 4 relative to this bad team, but decided to label him a top 4 D anyways to emphasize how much he should be held onto, I think that's disingenuous phrasing. If it's unintentional, then I'm happy to call it misleading phrasing instead.
 
Last edited:
MadaCanuckle

MadaCanuckle

Registered User
Jun 25, 2012
2,092
922
Lisboa
Shareefruck said:
What on earth are you talking about?

I don't shy away from criticizing Granlund and Sutter and arguing with those who defend them. If anything, I get criticized for doing it too often and being a broken record about it.

Every poster on this forum who does compare it (compare what?)? Fail me in one of your classes? What does any of this even mean? :huh:

Andy Dufresne pointed out an inaccurate argument that you made, you defended it by adding a caveat that conveniently wasn't originally communicated and was misleading, and I came in and suggested "I hate Benning as much as the next guy, but to be fair, that is pretty disingenuous phrasing," and then proceeded to explain why I thought that, despite otherwise agreeing with your point.

How is that remotely close to a personal attack, singling you out, or holding a grudge in any way?
Click to expand...
You don't answer one of my single questions, you ignore what I wrote, you say you agree with me but you insist in bashing me personally, you assume I was thinking something that I wasn't (Are you a telepath? If true, you could use it better) and now ask me how that isn't a personal attack? Amazing!
 
ATypicalCanadian

ATypicalCanadian

Registered User
Apr 30, 2015
4,882
2,670
Canada
Ched Brosky said:
Didn’t watch the game but why did he only get 5 min tonight?
Click to expand...

Greens reasoning was that Hutton had only played 5 minutes up to a point in the game (idk when exactly) and decided since they had dressed 7 Dmen it wouldn't be fair to play him when he was cold on the bench.

He also then shifted that reasoning as Baumgartner's thought process and said he had to check with him.

Either way it's stupid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hit the post and Weylspin
Shareefruck

Shareefruck

Registered User
Apr 2, 2005
28,995
3,747
Vancouver, BC
MadaCanuckle said:
You don't answer one of my single questions, you ignore what I wrote, you say you agree with me but you insist in bashing me personally, you assume I was thinking something that I wasn't (Are you a telepath? If true, you could use it better) and now ask me how that isn't a personal attack? Amazing!
Click to expand...
I honestly could not make sense out of a lot of what you wrote (I did point that out for you to clarify, though), and addressed what I did understand the best I could. But forget it. This is clearly not following any rational line of discussion, criticism is being taken as personal attack, and this just feels like reactionary/defensive bickering now. So have it your way.
 
Last edited:
Grub

Grub

First Line Troll
Jun 30, 2008
9,824
7,766
B.C
Hutton is trash. I'm glad Green notices this. Even more glad that a team is actually interested on him.
 
elitepete

elitepete

Registered User
Jan 30, 2017
8,141
5,466
Vancouver
Andy Dufresne said:
To me our #3/4 d-men on any given night right now are: Whoever plays LD with Tanev as a partner, and whoever plays RD with Edler. None of them really qualify as legit top 4's, although Stech has been giving me some renewed hope lately. If Hutton plays with Tanev then I guess he's our #2!

The most telling thing about our D, is that our legit top pairing can't play together because they both are needed to cover for guys who are playing too far up our lineup.
Click to expand...
I don’t think it would be a problem if we still had Hamhuis.

Edler-Tanev
Hamhuis-Stecher
Hutton-Biega
 
BerSTUzzi

BerSTUzzi

Registered User
Jan 24, 2006
3,224
568
Kamloops
Does Hutton have the ability to get us a Trent Frederic or Forsbacka-Karlsson type prospect from Boston? I am just curious what people think?
 
Nucker101

Nucker101

Foundational Poster
Apr 2, 2013
21,236
16,805
I think Hutton is a quality bottom pairing dman right now. A good buy low for another team.

Boston should be all over Spooner for Hutton

Spooner is a classic tweener, he’s only solid when spoon fed o-zone starts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Megaterio Llamas and Canadian Canuck
MadaCanuckle

MadaCanuckle

Registered User
Jun 25, 2012
2,092
922
Lisboa
Shareefruck said:
I honestly could not make sense out of a lot of what you wrote (I did point that out for you to clarify, though), and addressed what I did understand the best I could. But forget it. This is clearly not following any rational line of discussion, criticism is being taken as personal attack, and this just feels like reactionary/defensive bickering now. So have it your way.
Click to expand...
Yep, I agree, I cannot follow your reasoning, the reason you're doing this and the personal attack. It is not criticism, it is a personal attack and I cannot understand why, with so many examples on this board and your silence on them (yes, I went to check it!).
 
Canadian Canuck

Canadian Canuck

Hughes4Calder
Jul 30, 2013
14,223
3,972
Kamloops BC
I’d target Anders Bjork + 2nd round pick

Or I’d look to package Hutton+Vanek for Bjork+1st round pick

Anders Bjork is a young prime Alex Burrows/Jannik Hansen. He retrieves pucks, wins puck battles, huge energy guy and team guy. He’s only 20 years old and so far this year he has 4 Goals and 8 Assists in 30 games, only averaging 12 mins of ice time per game.

Here’s forecasters view on him.
Is an excellent offensive talent, with both playmaking and goal-scoring acumen. Is also an adept two-way forward with sound work ethic and excellent skating ability. Can play a complete game.
 

M2Beezy

Objective and Neutral Hockey Commentator
Sponsor
May 25, 2014
45,959
31,398
I really dont want to us to be trading Hutton unless is a steal which u know Benning cant judge properly. Should be trading Gud Vanek Sedins and the impossible messes that are Eriksson Gag and Sutter
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom