Like Miller and Schmidt? pretty much every post I do is defending Benning when I would give him a 3 out of 10 for 2014 to 2017. There is no defense of him pre Petterson. Boeser, Demko and lack of assets moved him up to 3 as most everything else was bad. 2017 on I would give him 7.5. Only the ufa have been a problem recently and the progress of Hughes and Petterson along with trades for Miller and Schmidt more than outdid those mistakes. This team has a core now that except for Edler and Horvat was all Benning made. The rot will fall away from the core the next two years and this team with a couple additions on d could be a contender year in year out. People are still upset about the early years and do not appreciate the potential this team has right now. The present situation should change interpretation of the past and the future
Well for one I think we deserve a few nice things to make up for multiple top 10 picks flushed down the toilet. I also think we deserve a little sump’n sump’n for watching $12,000,000 of LOL either taking endless penalties/sit in the press box. That time we watched Benning ice the worst team in the nhl over a 3+ year stretch- that one definitely earned us a little goodwill. You know the rest of what can go here.
How does the existence of a league rule instituted before the pandemic and before Eriksson and Baertschi's contracts were signed that no one could have anticipated would be relevant today indicate mismanagement?
This isn't semantics, and you constantly say that when caught out. The point I took issue with was literally the central point of the post I responded to, and it was a claim that Benning supporters weren't distinguishing the value of lottery picks and late firsts when comparing the drafting performance of Gillis and Benning. This is ludicrous and no one is doing it.
Now you're falling back on old chestnuts you know pretty much everyone agrees with anyway. Your post pretty clearly suggested that ignoring elements of the CBA that couldn't possibly have been anticipated to have an effect on the team's expenses constitutes mismanagement. Everyone knows those contracts suck. You're straining to somehow add additional culpability in ways that don't make any sense.
My bias is against shitty, disingenuous arguments advanced by people smart enough to know they're bullshit and willing to attack people who take issue with them. One side, despite being generally correct, makes far more of them and is quicker to attack anyone who points out their flaws. I think this is probably a bigger problem here than the presence of posters who overlook Benning's flaws and generally have a far more benign way of dealing with disagreement.
Without semantics, we are left only with revisionist history.
Fortunately you are here to restore balance to the forc . . . forum.
None of this suggests that the people making these claims believe that the act of drafting a good player in the lottery is equivalent to drafting a similarly good player late in the first round. You make claims like this to dunk on people. Then, you back away and call it semantics when people question whether they make any sense, and pretend they're the ones twisting details to undermine you when it's more or less the other way around.
