Management Thread: Weisileaks

[I am toxic]

Whoa there boy, where did I say Eriksson had "value". All I said is that he is actually an OK hockey player. His contract is insane and probably immoveable. Let it run out and move on. Play him when you need a warm body that won't hit or score but can play decent 2 way hockey.

Ah, so you agree that Eriksson has negative value.

 

[Dab]

Ah, so you agree that Eriksson has negative value.

 

[I am toxic]

 

[Zippgunn]

Ah, so you agree that Eriksson has negative value.

Of course. Whether or not it's worth trading away assets to get rid of it is what I question.

 

[Peen]

I would add Richardson to this list as well. Made no sense to let him leave

Richardson was my favorite player on the team at the time but it made no sense IMO for us to give an elite fourth liner a multi year extension for what was at the time, a pretty decent amount to pay a fourth liner.

 

[Bgav]

Richardson was my favorite player on the team at the time but it made no sense IMO for us to give an elite fourth liner a multi year extension for what was at the time, a pretty decent amount to pay a fourth liner.

He was more than just a 4th liner imo. I would have rather paid him that premium rather than bringing in Sutter and Beagle. He was one of my favourites as well, sucked seeing him go.

 

[Lonny Bohonos]

There are people who take the opposite opinion just for the sake of arguing or pissing off others. Some of them are still around.

No there isnt.

 

[pgj98m3]

No there isnt.

Yes there is

 

[mathonwy]

I remember Santorelli, he was a good bottom six guy

The Second Line’s Play, And Chris Higgins’ Bounce-Back Season

Under Torts, Santo was on a 60pt pace with CHiggs and Burr until his shoulder injury which f***ed the entire season.

https://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nh...has-shoulder-surgery-out-5-6-months-1.2517817

And then Burr had his ankle injury and broken jaw.

And then the end of Hank's iron streak.

yeah.. 13/14 was all sorts of f***ed up

 

[bandwagonesque]

If anyone who even semi-regularly posts here really thinks online astroturfing hasn't happened in here during the Benning regime...I really don't know what to tell you.

I don’t think anyone has actually said that. The kind of claim that we’re objecting to is, for example, that the fact John Weisbrod probably edited his own Wikipedia page proves that he posts here, and in fact proves that a specific poster here is actually him.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

I don’t think anyone has actually said that. The kind of claim that we’re objecting to is, for example, that the fact John Weisbrod probably edited his own Wikipedia page proves that he posts here, and in fact proves that a specific poster here is actually him.

It's all circumstantial evidence for sure, and no one will ever be able to prove it either way so it's kind of pointless to debate. Weisbrod is definitely petty enough to care about what a message board thinks, see him sulking at the draft because we took Pettersson over his boy Glass.

 

[rypper]

I don’t think anyone has actually said that. The kind of claim that we’re objecting to is, for example, that the fact John Weisbrod probably edited his own Wikipedia page proves that he posts here, and in fact proves that a specific poster here is actually him.

Has anyone made that specific connection?

They've always been separate things.

 

[bandwagonesque]

Has anyone made that specific connection?

They've always been separate things.

Yes, frequently. Probably not in this iteration of the management thread.

 

[ProstheticConscience]

A lot of the people I believe you're referring to were just blatantly trolling. To the point I got a kick out of it because I cannot believe how effectively they riled everyone up despite blatantly constantly choosing whatever talking points were the most inflammatory. Like RMB going hard defending Voynov and then heading over to the politics board to take my side? That ain't no astroturfin', that's jimmy rustlin'

The fact of the matter is this board isn't really an effective place to be astroturfing. The way this forum works and how many posters have a consensus here, it just isn't feasible. Reddit, however, is one large corporate astroturfing platform and I have no doubt PR companies the Canucks hire pay for upvotes, or retweets on twitter or whatever. This board has very little exposure compared to the other mediums as well. From an effort/cost to return standpoint, it makes no sense.

While you may say things that make no sense from a logical standpoint are right in the wheelhouse of this management group, the astroturfing isn't going to be done by those guys themselves (unless it's a Costanza situation as described above, which I don't think qualifies as astroturfing just a biased fan), it's going to be done by a firm and it wouldn't be worth it for them to do it here IMO. I really like the hockey talk here, but it's a pretty small pond with a relatively tight-knit community (which is why I like it), I just never got the vibe that we were being shilled to as much as I got the vibe we were being trolled by some posters, and being bombarded with stupidity from others (sorry)

Do I think Weisbrod or Benning or members of the team are purposely posting here under aliases? No.

But I think it's far too easy and cheap for anyone at CSE or in Franco's social circle of various minions or executive assistants to say: "Hey, young media intern/new hire/underling, how'd you like to help the team out? We're really excited about the direction of the Canucks, we think great things are in our future with Pettersson, Hughes, and Boeser, and we'd like you to help spread the word. Your job here kinda has to be kept on the dl, but it would really help your next performance review if you'd help us spread the good word about the direction and management of the Canucks...know what I mean...wink wink nudge nudge?" There's only so many times I can see accounts that have been dormant for years suddenly spring to life armed with the same talking points over and over and over again before before my bullshit detector goes off. It's just how things are done these days, man. How many times have we seen this kind of thing in the last five years all over the internet? Literally the highest levels of government in the world are eagerly employing (directly or not) armies of online trolls and shitposters to get their message out and slime their real or perceived enemies. And a certain orange guy has proven that you don't even need a logical, coherent argument to convince people your position is valid. You just need to repeat it over and over and over and over and shout louder than anyone else.

This is a great place for astroturfing. It's got access to every fanbase in the NHL, links to all the media in the NHL, and it's quite a large online forum with lots of activity. The effort is minimal. The CSE staff all have friends, families, kids...if each of them puts in just a half hour or hour a day, that's a lot of posts. The return is clear: notice how docile the fanbase and media have been towards Benning as compared to the pitchforks and torches mobs for Gillis? How many times have you seen people in here remarking on the easy ride Benning's been given these last few years? I know I've seen it quite a bit. Just a few pages back we had a guy frothing mad, trying to take the argument back to Gillis. Again.

I've seen the same bullshit arguments with the same presentation by the same mysterious new posters repeated too many times to be coincidence.

Can anyone else think of a recurring situation like this?

"Oooh! Me! Me! I know! I know!"​

 

[LordBacon]

Maybe if aquaman got rid of that yeeyee ass GM he’ll get a contender on his hands

 

[Fatass]

Do I think Weisbrod or Benning or members of the team are purposely posting here under aliases? No.

But I think it's far too easy and cheap for anyone at CSE or in Franco's social circle of various minions or executive assistants to say: "Hey, young media intern/new hire/underling, how'd you like to help the team out? We're really excited about the direction of the Canucks, we think great things are in our future with Pettersson, Hughes, and Boeser, and we'd like you to help spread the word. Your job here kinda has to be kept on the dl, but it would really help your next performance review if you'd help us spread the good word about the direction and management of the Canucks...know what I mean...wink wink nudge nudge?" There's only so many times I can see accounts that have been dormant for years suddenly spring to life armed with the same talking points over and over and over again before before my bullshit detector goes off. It's just how things are done these days, man. How many times have we seen this kind of thing in the last five years all over the internet? Literally the highest levels of government in the world are eagerly employing (directly or not) armies of online trolls and shitposters to get their message out and slime their real or perceived enemies. And a certain orange guy has proven that you don't even need a logical, coherent argument to convince people your position is valid. You just need to repeat it over and over and over and over and shout louder than anyone else.

This is a great place for astroturfing. It's got access to every fanbase in the NHL, links to all the media in the NHL, and it's quite a large online forum with lots of activity. The effort is minimal. The CSE staff all have friends, families, kids...if each of them puts in just a half hour or hour a day, that's a lot of posts. The return is clear: notice how docile the fanbase and media have been towards Benning as compared to the pitchforks and torches mobs for Gillis? How many times have you seen people in here remarking on the easy ride Benning's been given these last few years? I know I've seen it quite a bit. Just a few pages back we had a guy frothing mad, trying to take the argument back to Gillis. Again.

I've seen the same bullshit arguments with the same presentation by the same mysterious new posters repeated too many times to be coincidence.

Can anyone else think of a recurring situation like this?

"Oooh! Me! Me! I know! I know!"​

Even if the Canucks have active propagandists on this board what’s the big deal? We know the Benning/ Brod duo (Jethro/Jethrine) and their puppet master (Aquilini) are craperolla.
Certain poster are just casting lines for fun.
Maybe HF needs to implement a fishing license?

 

[I am toxic]

Even if the Canucks have active propagandists on this board what’s the big deal? We know the Benning/ Brod duo (Jethro/Jethrine) and their puppet master (Aquilini) are craperolla.
Certain poster are just casting lines for fun.
Maybe HF needs to implement a fishing license?

It subverts and stifles honest debate, and in our society, changes for the better can't be done as properly or quickly without the best information from honest debate.

It's why action on climate change has been delayed for 2 decades, and action on firing incompetent management has been delayed 5 years.

By itself, this forum is just one of the drops in the bucket. The bulk of the drops is the local and national media that spout BS to maintain the status quo and their revenues, other drips are reddit and cdc. It all adds up to the cluster**** of the past half decade here with the Canucks.

 

[Fatass]

It subverts and stifles honest debate, and in our society, changes for the better can't be done as properly or quickly without the best information from honest debate.

It's why action on climate change has been delayed for 2 decades, and action on firing incompetent management has been delayed 5 years.

By itself, this forum is just one of the drops in the bucket. The bulk of the drops is the local and national media that spout BS to maintain the status quo and their revenues, other drips are reddit and cdc. It all adds up to the cluster**** of the past half decade here with the Canucks.

Of course, when equated to the “Big Brother” propaganda of the world in which we live anything that occurs in that vane here is bad news. But I just don’t see a few posters, who are on a fishing trip, as propagandists. Our board has many excellent posters, who (without opposing views) wouldn’t have the same influence. Really, we need the “fishers” as foils to highlight the quality of points made to the contrary.
As for the real world propagandists. Yes, we are a lazy population, who are too easily manipulated.
CDC is so one sided in favour of Canuck’s positivity it’s blatantly obvious it’s just a forum for the team.

 

[Dab]

I would honestly be SHOCKED if a billion dollar company didn’t contract communications teams to upvote, share and like positive stuff and downvote and bury negative stuff. Also comment, post and produce fluff pieces.


Also, how many sports execs have been outed for having burner social media accounts before? Like is it really unthinkable that a sports executive could have a burner account ? Really?

 

[DS7]

 

[Izzy Goodenough]

I wonder if Nucks 'Crack' management team were aware of this fellow when Malhotra left:



Probably to much of a succession hire I suspect for this group.

 

[I am toxic]

 

[I am toxic]

I wonder if Nucks 'Crack' management team were aware of this fellow when Malhotra left:



Probably to much of a succession hire I suspect for this group.

Well, as much as Burrows obviously cherished his time and experience in Vancouver, I think his true home and family are in Quebec.

And I am glad for him - and Manny in Ontario - that they are far away from this shitshow right now. Maybe in 5 years would be a great time try to lure one or the other back.

 

[MS]

@EpochLink @Paulinbc just reading the nonsense in the gdt

“Haha why do fans make logical arguments about why we should keep 3 points in 40 games nic dowd instead of paying cup winning Beagle way more?

There’s no way that Dowd is a better hockey player and then you factor in the veteranness

Gonna look back and laugh at this one... same type of idiots who think there’s cap space issues”

- certain posters, 2018

After proven wrong, the argument was changed to “you guys thought dowd was some unbelievable player” when that missed the point entirely.

Same with Stecher, Biega, Gaunce, Lack, Stanton, Santorelli, Bonino etc. that we’ve had discussions about for seven years. Not once has the extra money paid for veteranness instead of league min or close to it proven to be beneficial towards winning a cup relative to the alternative. The argument has never been “we need to keep all these great players because they are sooo good omg ”

It’s always been that they’re a better option than the alternative.

This is year 16 of the salary cap and people simply still have not adjusted to the financial realities of the modern NHL. Do not understand the economics of the salary cap. Don't understand the opportunity cost of overpaying fringe players. Don't understand that an ok player on a great contract is better to have on your roster than a good player on a bad contract.

And of course, are unable to detach themselves from the biases in player evaluation that they grew up with in a different time.

And then default to 'LOL YOU THOUGHT GAUNCE WAS A SUPERSTAR' and simply don't even understand or grasp that they're the ones who were wrong.

 

[I am toxic]

Of course, when equated to the “Big Brother” propaganda of the world in which we live anything that occurs in that vane here is bad news. But I just don’t see a few posters, who are on a fishing trip, as propagandists. Our board has many excellent posters, who (without opposing views) wouldn’t have the same influence. Really, we need the “fishers” as foils to highlight the quality of points made to the contrary.
As for the real world propagandists. Yes, we are a lazy population, who are too easily manipulated.
CDC is so one sided in favour of Canuck’s positivity it’s blatantly obvious it’s just a forum for the team.

Gonna disagree totally on this one. We can see the honest debate between @420Canuck and @y2kcanucks on when to exit a rebuild and see the quality of their points.

Addressing the propaganda and shilling and agendas of HFBenning certainly hones the arguments, but overall it is a distraction and a delaying technique that plays into the hands of propaganda/shilling/selfish agendas.