Confirmed with Link: Melnyk talks about new coach, new arena, etc

[SilverSeven]

Well, it clearly isn't. I have no idea how you could even infer that.

The crux of my argument IN RESPONSE TO YOUR POST ABOUT ME "BELIEVING LEEDER OVER MELNYK" is that Leeder and Melnyk had better be on the same page about things, seeing as how Leeder is responsible for carrying out multi-million dollar projects for the team, such as, for example, building renovations. That is one example of things they should probably see eye to eye about. There are probably many, many other things that they should agree on in order for that professional relationship to work.

I only brought it up in response to the post you made about me "believing Leeder over Melnyk", as though Leeder was somehow telling tales out of turn. Like Leeder was going around saying "25+ years" without running it through Melnyk first.


As an aside, I am actually amazed that I am still explaining this, 24 hours later.

Again...how does Melnyk saying what he said mean Leeder was making plans without him? Those multi million dollar renovations were made...and can be brought to a new arena. You seem to think the two are mutually exclusive.

Also: in retrospect, I regret even having brought it up in the first place. Next time, I'll keep any insight I have out of it, you can be sure of that. This will be the last time I ever do something like this. I honestly don't have the patience for it.

You could try coming in without guns blazing.

Oh I get it now, thanks. You were focussing on the "30" while many others are looking at the "40".

Got it.

NO MELNYK IS A LYING PIECE OF **** AHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[StefanW]

Look at the bright side bonk, now we have yet another great example of why we can't have nice things.

There's always someone out there to give a hard time to someone just trying to give some additional insight.

Yup. As always, it depends on what insight you are trying to add.

 

[BonkTastic]

Again...how does Melnyk saying what he said mean Leeder was making plans without him? Those multi million dollar renovations were made...and can be brought to a new arena. You seem to think the two are mutually exclusive.

You still don't understand what I'm trying to say? Holy jeez. Holy. Wow.

I'm done. We're done here.

 

[Slack]

Please rename this thread to the "Crucify Bonk" show

Simply put, if I heard that a former CTC/SBP employee was told by Leeder that the building was built to last a minimum of 39 years, then the owner tells the media in a public statement, which concerns a huge public land deal, that their building "was not built to last [a minimum of] 30-40 years," I'd be inclined to believe Leeder.

Maybe he's lying to his employees, but I hardly see what is gained from that. Melnyk trying a public sell job, that seems more likely, or at least to have a clear motive.

I'm not even necessarily defending the content of Bonk's statement, but it's really not hard to see his viewpoint. Certainly not worth wasting the better part of 6 pages on.

 

[DylanSensFan]

This ole thing is still going. I would have thought you'd be debating about the coach, rather than the building.

 

[Upgrayedd]

Please rename this thread to the "Crucify Bonk" show

Simply put, if I heard that a former CTC/SBP employee was told by Leeder that the building was built to last a minimum of 39 years, then the owner tells the media in a public statement, which concerns a huge public land deal, that their building "was not built to last [a minimum of] 30-40 years," I'd be inclined to believe Leeder.

Maybe he's lying to his employees, but I hardly see what is gained from that. Melnyk trying a public sell job, that seems more likely, or at least to have a clear motive.

I'm not even necessarily defending the content of Bonk's statement, but it's really not hard to see his viewpoint. Certainly not worth wasting the better part of 6 pages on.

I do not know anyone on here personally and take all with a grain of salt especially those bringing insider info, i choose to believe the official statement over second/third hand information from years ago but i will certainly keep the claim in mind going forward. That's me though and to each there own i guess.

Now it certainly can be interesting and appreciated at times but in no way should really anything on here said by a poster be taken as fact unless sufficient evidence is provided. Even if said poster seems to be well respected and appreciated by folks on this board.

 

[Nac Mac Feegle]

Please rename this thread to the "Crucify Bonk" show

Simply put, if I heard that a former CTC/SBP employee was told by Leeder that the building was built to last a minimum of 39 years, then the owner tells the media in a public statement, which concerns a huge public land deal, that their building "was not built to last [a minimum of] 30-40 years," I'd be inclined to believe Leeder.

Maybe he's lying to his employees, but I hardly see what is gained from that. Melnyk trying a public sell job, that seems more likely, or at least to have a clear motive.

I'm not even necessarily defending the content of Bonk's statement, but it's really not hard to see his viewpoint. Certainly not worth wasting the better part of 6 pages on.

No kidding.

Seems a few folks lost their way between the Melynk Finances/Budget thread and this one and brought old arguments in here.

Everything Bonk said in this thread was clear and precise to me. Not sure where people took a wrong turn.

 

[BonkTastic]

I do not know anyone on here personally and take all with a grain of salt especially those bringing insider info, i choose to believe the official statement over second/third hand information from years ago but i will certainly keep the claim in mind going forward. That's me though and to each there own i guess.

Now it certainly can be interesting and appreciated at times but in no way should really anything on here said by a poster be taken as fact unless sufficient evidence is provided. Even if said poster seems to be well respected and appreciated by folks on this board.

Yep, even I agree to this. If it wasn't me saying it, I probably wouldn't believe it, either. One of those "if I didn't see it, I wouldn't believe it" type things.

I was just trying to justify why I have an opinion, not trying to sway others. I have zero evidence to substantiate anything, after all. People probably should still trust vetted & trusted sources going forward.

 

[Upgrayedd]

Yep, even I agree to this. If it wasn't me saying it, I probably wouldn't believe it, either. One of those "if I didn't see it, I wouldn't believe it" type things.

I was just trying to justify why I have an opinion, not trying to sway others. I have zero evidence to substantiate anything, after all. People probably should still trust vetted & trusted sources going forward.

Should have added that i personally enjoy your posts on here as well several other folks who generally bring the facts who i also feel are generally at the same age level/ understanding of the game, i actively look for your posts as well as others on here.

sidenote:i am not the best with names it gets me a little flustered when some alter there avatars lol, have to re learn the ones to look for (don't get me started on the forum avatars where multple posters adopt them!)

 

[Ice-Tray]

Yep, even I agree to this. If it wasn't me saying it, I probably wouldn't believe it, either. One of those "if I didn't see it, I wouldn't believe it" type things.

I was just trying to justify why I have an opinion, not trying to sway others. I have zero evidence to substantiate anything, after all. People probably should still trust vetted & trusted sources going forward.

Don't sweat it Bonk. You put yourself out there with a bold statement and some underlying emotion, and had to defend it against some who didn't agree. It may have been a pain in the ass for you but:

1) this discussion did serve to get us all to a place where we understand where you were coming from...

2) discussions like these sometimes heat up, but it was well enough written, and interesting as a reader...

3) it illustrated that Melnyk is a divisive issue for us on these boards, and well worth the discussion...

4) in order to share an opinion, we sometime shave to take on all comers, I believe that it's the way things should be done, and is refreshing when compared to the "McLean is stupid" and-I'm-out, crowd. You had support in here, which is more than some get when called to task...
..
We all have bad days sometimes, and we all get annoyed at things written here, but I hope that you're able to take a moment and shrug off any sensitivities surrounding this discussion. It was well met, things got a little heated, but we always seem to find a way back around to being fans togther in some way.

You're a valuable poster, done let a tough round, get the best of you

 

[Slack]

I do not know anyone on here personally and take all with a grain of salt especially those bringing insider info, i choose to believe the official statement over second/third hand information from years ago but i will certainly keep the claim in mind going forward. That's me though and to each there own i guess.

Now it certainly can be interesting and appreciated at times but in no way should really anything on here said by a poster be taken as fact unless sufficient evidence is provided. Even if said poster seems to be well respected and appreciated by folks on this board.

Neither do I. But like I said, I wasn't even defending the content of Bonk's argument. Rather I was a bit miffed at sifting through 6 pages of people misunderstanding/misconstruing Bonk's statement.

In other words, debate what he says rather than criticizing "how he says it."

I wanted to read people's opinions on these new statements from Melnyk. But since I'm not really contributing here myself I'll just shut up now.