The Pro Tank Thread I Post #621

[M2Beezy]

Tkachuk-Pettersson-Boeser
DeBrincat-Horvat-Nylander

what could have been

I think Larkin would have been the best option in hinesight

And yeah Mccann AND DeBincat over Gudbranson... sigh

 

[THE Green Man]

Tkachuk-Pettersson-Boeser
DeBrincat-Horvat-Nylander

what could have been

I think Larkin would have been the best option in hinesight

And yeah Mccann AND DeBincat over Gudbranson... sigh

Screw McCann, what about Pastarnak! Granted how painful would that have been in hindsight to trade him for Gudbrandson....

Personally too I like Ehlers over Nylander but that could be just a anti-Leaf bias. As well if we drafted Tkachuk and Nylander/Ehlers we wouldn't have been in a position to draft EP40 most likely.

 

[beachcomber]

Tkachuk-Pettersson-Boeser
DeBrincat-Horvat-Nylander

what could have been

Tkachuk-Vlardi-Konecney
DeBrincat-Horvat-Nylander

Hindsight is always 20-20 given your preference for Vlardi and Konecney on the draft days. You really seemed upset with the Pettersson pick but you probably hadn't watched him play at all.

 

[bandwagonesque]

Tkachuk-Vlardi-Konecney
DeBrincat-Horvat-Nylander

Hindsight is always 20-20 given your preference for Vlardi and Konecney on the draft days. You really seemed upset with the Pettersson pick but you probably hadn't watched him play at all.

He then claimed he "liked the pick from day 1."

 

[MadaCanuckle]

Screw McCann, what about Pastarnak! Granted how painful would that have been in hindsight to trade him for Gudbrandson....

Personally too I like Ehlers over Nylander but that could be just a anti-Leaf bias. As well if we drafted Tkachuk and Nylander/Ehlers we wouldn't have been in a position to draft EP40 most likely.

Every ranking had McCann ahead of Pastrnak so you cannot argue that he could take him ahead of McCann. You can argue, however, how is it possible that the draft savant couldn't recognize how good Pastrnak was/is...

 

[xtra]

Tkachuk-Vlardi-Konecney
DeBrincat-Horvat-Nylander

Hindsight is always 20-20 given your preference for Vlardi and Konecney on the draft days. You really seemed upset with the Pettersson pick but you probably hadn't watched him play at all.

Do you think y2k maybe getting the petersson/valardi pick wrong is as egregious as the guy who’s actual job it is to scout players getting the obvious Virtanen/Euler/nylander and Juolevi/Tkachuk picks wrong?

Oh and btw valardi put up 58 points in 32 games so it’s not like he’s been tracking poorly like the picks the scouting savant made.

 

[Melvin]

Do you think y2k maybe getting the petersson/valardi pick wrong is as egregious as the guy who’s actual job it is to scout players getting the obvious Virtanen/Euler/nylander and Juolevi/Tkachuk picks wrong?

Oh and btw valardi put up 58 points in 32 games so it’s not like he’s been tracking poorly like the picks the scouting savant made.

This times a million.

That people want to apply the same standards to their purported savant guru drafting wizard as they do to random ass fans with real jobs is infuriating.

 

[bandwagonesque]

This times a million.

That people want to apply the same standards to their purported savant guru drafting wizard as they do to random ass fans with real jobs is infuriating.

When someone constantly posts about how much farther along the team would be if they'd made the picks they wanted, then yes, there is a supposition that that person knows better who ought to have been drafted. And it turns out they only make that claim when discussing certain picks and never bring up the picks they wanted that wouldn't have worked as well as the ones that were actually made. There's no humility whatsoever on internet message boards. That's ultimately what leads to arguments.

 

[THE Green Man]

Every ranking had McCann ahead of Pastrnak so you cannot argue that he could take him ahead of McCann. You can argue, however, how is it possible that the draft savant couldn't recognize how good Pastrnak was/is...

Completely talking hind-sight here. I was high on Pasta based on his WJC showing but not so that I was disappointing with the McCann pick or wanting us to take Pasta there. Looking back though it's almost a good thing we didn't take him as trading him for Gudbrandson would be a real tough pill to swallow. Not that McCann and Debrincat isn't but it would just be a million times worse had Pasta been included.

 

[Intangibos]

McCann and Pastrnak were the only two NHL regulars so far until like the 3rd round. We got the 2nd best pick out of like 60. Benning needs to be held responsible for all kinds of things from contracts, acquiring bad players, wasting prospects and picks to acquire those bad players, and completely blowing 2/3 of his top 10 picks. McCann over Pastrnak is not one of them.

 

[y2kcanucks]

He then claimed he "liked the pick from day 1."

When you make things up that's when people get pissed off. Then again I've thrown facts in your face many times and you've ignored every one of them, so I'll do it again.

I hated passing on Vilardi.

I also liked Pettersson and had him ranked around the Canucks draft spot.

My gripe was with drafting Pettersson over Vilardi.

But again, don't let facts stand in the way of your own agenda.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Do you think y2k maybe getting the petersson/valardi pick wrong is as egregious as the guy who’s actual job it is to scout players getting the obvious Virtanen/Euler/nylander and Juolevi/Tkachuk picks wrong?

Oh and btw valardi put up 58 points in 32 games so it’s not like he’s been tracking poorly like the picks the scouting savant made.

What's hilarious is how that's some egregious error and supposedly means I have no credibility and that's all set in stone, but when the guy actually in charge drafts Juolevi over Tkachuk it's "too early to judge" and "Benning has a great eye for talent."

 

[bandwagonesque]

When you make things up that's when people get pissed off. Then again I've thrown facts in your face many times and you've ignored every one of them, so I'll do it again.

I hated passing on Vilardi.

I also liked Pettersson and had him ranked around the Canucks draft spot.

My gripe was with drafting Pettersson over Vilardi.

But again, don't let facts stand in the way of your own agenda.

You said on draft day that any pick other than Vilardi would be a blown pick. Therefore, you categorically called Pettersson a blown pick. Later you claimed you liked the pick from day one. You're a liar. everyone on this board knowns you're a liar. It's okay -- that's why there are so many message boards on the internet. You don't need to maintain credibility on any one of them, and for people like you it's more fun not to most of the time. You're not the first of your type any of us have seen.

 

[Breakers]

Speaking of statistics
Anaheim had a good start and the numbers showed it was completely on John Gibson winning those games because they were the worst possession team in the league. Time has caught up with them and they lost 5 straight.

these injuries and Vancouver's equally terrible possession, and their inability except for Pettersson to gain the zone with control. A losing record over the next 10 is pretty much a given. 3-6-1 is my guess.

wins over detroit, and both New York Teams.

 

[y2kcanucks]

You said on draft day that any pick other than Vilardi would be a blown pick. Therefore, you categorically called Pettersson a blown pick. Later you claimed you liked the pick from day one. You're a liar. everyone on this board knowns you're a liar. It's okay -- that's why there are so many message boards on the internet. You don't need to maintain credibility on any one of them, and for people like you it's more fun not to most of the time. You're not the first of your type any of us have seen.

There's a difference between a blown pick and not liking the player we pick.

Example: I like Brock Boeser. Brock Boeser at 1st overall in 2015 would have been a block pick.

I don't know how much simpler I can explain this, but it seems like rather than dealing with reality you're more interested in twisting things to come attack me. Maybe you should actually join us in reality and critically analyze the job performance of Jim Benning...you know...the guy who's actions actually have real world impact.

 

[bandwagonesque]

There's a difference between a blown pick and not liking the player we pick.

Example: I like Brock Boeser. Brock Boeser at 1st overall in 2015 would have been a block pick.

I don't know how much simpler I can explain this, but it seems like rather than dealing with reality you're more interested in twisting things to come attack me. Maybe you should actually join us in reality and critically analyze the job performance of Jim Benning...you know...the guy who's actions actually have real world impact.

Just before Pettersson was drafted, you posted:

Just after Pettersson was drafted, you posted:

"****ing idiots!"

And:

"Blown pick. Stupid ****ing idiots"

And:

"Second year in a row I cash in on their stupidity, oh well."

And:

"But passing on Vilardi nonetheless was typical of this stupid regime."

Later you claimed you "liked the pick from day 1." That's a direct quotation. This isn't twisting. This isn't a departure from the task of holding management accountable. This is something you started by lying. You. Are. A. Liar. And now you're trying to change the subject. You're pathetic. You're embarrassing yourself.

 

[Just A Bit Outside]

Just before Pettersson was drafted, you posted:

Just after Pettersson was drafted, you posted:

"****ing idiots!"

And:

"Blown pick. Stupid ****ing idiots"

And:

"Second year in a row I cash in on their stupidity, oh well."

And:

"But passing on Vilardi nonetheless was typical of this stupid regime."

Later you claimed you "liked the pick from day 1." That's a direct quotation. This isn't twisting. This isn't a departure from the task of holding management accountable. This is something you started by lying. You. Are. A. Liar. And now you're trying to change the subject. You're pathetic. You're embarrassing yourself.

Maybe Y2K is secretly Dave Pratt.

 

[bandwagonesque]

Maybe Y2K is secretly Dave Pratt.

Holy shit. It would not surprise me at all.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Just before Pettersson was drafted, you posted:

Just after Pettersson was drafted, you posted:

"****ing idiots!"

And:

"Blown pick. Stupid ****ing idiots"

And:

"Second year in a row I cash in on their stupidity, oh well."

And:

"But passing on Vilardi nonetheless was typical of this stupid regime."

Later you claimed you "liked the pick from day 1." That's a direct quotation. This isn't twisting. This isn't a departure from the task of holding management accountable. This is something you started by lying. You. Are. A. Liar. And now you're trying to change the subject. You're pathetic. You're embarrassing yourself.

Let me ask you...is there a reason you put quotations instead of directly linking to my quotes? Might that be because what you're claiming I said, and what I actually said, are two completely different things?

Since you seem to have this vendetta against me, for whatever reason, let me link you to what I actually said:

But it's a Juolevi thread so why were you asking about UFA's? Why bring that up only to shut Pavel down when he gave you an answer? That's exactly the point I was making. He was responding to a question YOU asked.

And since you brought it up I've liked EP since day 1. I had him ranked around where we picked him. I just felt Vilardi was the better pick. But like others have mentioned, how is it too early to judge Juolevi when you're ready to dub EP a huge success? Also what EP hate? I've loved everything I've seen from him since he was drafted.

Full transparency.

The only one embarrassing himself is the guy who claims to be making a direct quotation, but really isn't. You accuse me of lying? Not at all. I"m the one being transparent, not you. You claimed I said that I liked the pick from day 1, please, show us that post.

Now that I’ve exposed you as a fraud, what else are you going to twist to distract people away from the reality that the GM you praise so much is actually incompetent?


And you call ME pathetic?

Come back to me when you’ve learned the difference between liking a player, and liking where a player was drafted. Like I tried explaining above, I like Brock Boeser as a player, but I’d have hated it if we drafted him over McDavid. I thought that was simple enough, but I can tell some people struggle with the English language.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Maybe Y2K is secretly Dave Pratt.

Nah. Though it may seem that way if you actually believe people who make false claims like this guy.

It’s also funny how all the Benning bro’s jump on liking his post. Again, factually inaccurate. Funny how facts never seem to matter to these people. Whether it be regarding things that are on topic like Benning and how incompetent he has been as GM, or when some newbie takes a run at trying to discredit someone on an online message board as if that made a difference with anything.

 

[JT Milker]

Homie it was a mistake regarding how strictly you should apply tiers, but you’ve learned from it, no need to try to cover it up or argue in circles about it.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Homie it was a mistake regarding how strictly you should apply tiers, but you’ve learned from it, no need to try to cover it up or argue in circles about it.

What?

I saw Vilardi as a faller. Someone I thought for sure was a top 4 lock. He fell to us at 5. I saw passing on him as a huge mistake. I did have Pettersson ranked at 5/6 in some of my final rankings. Clearly I was high on him. But when there’s a prospect who falls, who the team passes on, clearly you’re going to think it’s a mistake. That doesn’t mean you don’t like the player they picked. That’s just means you feel the team passed on a better player.

I can’t believe I’m having to explain such a simple concept.

 

[bossram]

If they had just misjudged Tkachuk as a projected player, I could forgive that... but they passed on Tkachuk because Virtanen was already in the system and they were going to draft a dman or center. If Tkachuk was a center, he'd probably be a canuck.

Don't. Draft. For. Position.

If they thought Tkachuk was legitimately the best player available but passed on him because they "had" to draft a defenseman, that should be an inexcusable offense.

 

[bossram]

McCann and Pastrnak were the only two NHL regulars so far until like the 3rd round. We got the 2nd best pick out of like 60. Benning needs to be held responsible for all kinds of things from contracts, acquiring bad players, wasting prospects and picks to acquire those bad players, and completely blowing 2/3 of his top 10 picks. McCann over Pastrnak is not one of them.

Agreed. McCann was a solid pick. Can't harp on him for that.

Unfortunately, it is 100% on Benning for subsequently trading McCann++ for a bad defenseman.

 

[xtra]

Also all this is brushing off valardi as some sort of joke of a player. He’s tracking damn well and EP could still be the wrong pick if his size gets him injured all the time. Based on how he’s tracking valardi could easily be a 70 point center and Peterson could be an injury prone small center or an 75 point center.

I wouldn’t be upset with an 70point center at pick 5 even if pick 6(or rangers at 8) got an 75 point center.

I was hesitant on petersson because of his size when he was drafted and I believe I wanted glass/valardi also but most of us knew they were in the same tier unlike our other picks previously at 5/6.


Also you can say a lot of things about y2k but him hiding and changing his opinion is not one of them. He says dumb things at times ( individual points and trading away the twins for gaborik/demitra(not 100% on this comment) but he will stand by what he says and defends his point until proven wrong and then will admit it.

But someone joining in March 2018 calling him out when they haven’t been here for all these arguements ( and the glorious ski resort under the sea thread) is kinda a joke