Confirmed with Link: [VAN/FLA] Canucks acquire Erik Gudbranson, 2016 5th for McCann, 2016 2nd, 2016 4th

[CanadianPirate]

He took an aside to point out their popularity. The implied suggestion was that their popularity made them superior sources.

It would be like holding up a rebuttal for climate change and chasing it with "And from Fox news, no less!". Yeah, you found a click-baity article on Sportsnet. Quelle surprise.

I'd point out how this is a nice working example of confirmation bias, with a pro-trade person seeing only a point-counterpoint video and interpreting it as "pro Canuck" while ignoring the inflammatory article following it, and an anti-trade person seeing only the article, believing the video that preceded it was from "something else entirely", and not noticing that the auto-starting video begins by suggesting the Canucks won the trade. Alas, no one really cares to have their confirmation bias pointed out, the majority of people think they're immune, and confirmation bias being what it is having it shoved under their nose likely won't even register at all.

See it's funny this isn't how I read the situation at all. It seemed to me that iceburg was attempting to prove that hf boards is overly negative by saying that we are the only ones being negative towards the trade. The implication being because many people are biased against benning, hence "there's something rotten in the state of Denmark" quote. While Harold was saying that this isn't true and provided sources.

To me a more apt analogy would be saying that every single news source agrees that climate change is real and having someone else say no that isn't true and provide Fox News as an example. Even if you think the example is crap it still disproves the original argument.

And as an aside the author of the sportsnet article is dmitri fiplovic (sp) who is a former canucksarmy writer and knows the Canucks well. He isn't a media hack talking out his ass.

And now I'm tired of this weird semantic argument. Nice talking to you. Good night.

 

[The Stig]

Honestly, the thought of him with Hutton is starting to make me happy. We do still have that Anaheim 2nd rounder.....and we needed the D more than we needed McCann. I love McCann but did we really need another center? If we draft Dubois, we'll have a center combo of Dubois, Horvat, Sutter after Hank retires. Having a young top 4 D man is a good thing to have.

 

[iceburg]

No it doesn't at all

Yup. The response to this trade on these Boards is not representative of the response outside. But that's not news to anyone. If anything, at least there's consistency.

 

[Scygen]

We have a Top 4 but it's nowhere near good enough to contend with.

No of course not that's why we are called a rebuilding team. We have young players, Hutton, Tryamkin, Tanev, and now Gudbranson who are all young and full of potential to be better. In 2-4 years if they live up to their potential they will be a top 4 that's good enough to contend with.

You're so glued to the idea that we needed a puck moving dman, but really we needed someone who can watch Hutton's back and not throw this young and extremely raw player to the wolves.

 

[VanillaCoke]

Yup. The response to this trade on these Boards is not representative of the response outside. But that's not news to anyone. If anything, at least there's consistency.

Pls post all these outside opinions that labelled this a big win for Vancouver.

12 I believe you said.
(PS. Nick kypreos isn't a source)

 

[Scygen]

Honestly, the thought of him with Hutton is starting to make me happy. We do still have that Anaheim 2nd rounder.....and we needed the D more than we needed McCann. I love McCann but did we really need another center? If we draft Dubois, we'll have a center combo of Dubois, Horvat, Sutter after Hank retires. Having a young top 4 D man is a good thing to have.

Yeap we moved an assert from a position we are strong at to a position we are weak at. Our defense last year was horrid. Our top three was set with Edler, Tanev, and Hutton. This just round us out.

 

[canwincup]

Pls post all these outside opinions that labelled this a big win for Vancouver.

12 I believe you said.
(PS. Nick kypreos isn't a source)

Who other than the analytics crowd thinks this is a huge loss for the Canucks?

 

[The Drop]

Honestly, the thought of him with Hutton is starting to make me happy. We do still have that Anaheim 2nd rounder.....and we needed the D more than we needed McCann. I love McCann but did we really need another center? If we draft Dubois, we'll have a center combo of Dubois, Horvat, Sutter after Hank retires. Having a young top 4 D man is a good thing to have.

We don't have that Anaheim second. We gave it to Pitt and got a 3rd back lol

 

[The Drop]

Who other than the analytics crowd thinks this is a huge loss for the Canucks?

If this was a even 1 for 1 swap then I think most could see the reasoning. The problem here is we have bare cupboards and traded away a very very high 2nd round pick which would have given us another good (maybe not great) prospect

 

[Butcher]

Who other than the analytics crowd thinks this is a huge loss for the Canucks?

Don't answer questions with questions. Prove your point by answering their question or move on.

 

[canwincup]

If this was a even 1 for 1 swap then I think most could see the reasoning. The problem here is we have bare cupboards and traded away a very very high 2nd round pick which would have given us another good (maybe not great) prospect

I agree with this, hate that we parted with the 33rd pick.

 

[CanaFan]

Honestly, the thought of him with Hutton is starting to make me happy. We do still have that Anaheim 2nd rounder.....and we needed the D more than we needed McCann. I love McCann but did we really need another center? If we draft Dubois, we'll have a center combo of Dubois, Horvat, Sutter after Hank retires. Having a young top 4 D man is a good thing to have.

We do????

How the hell did we manage that?

 

[Scygen]

If this was a even 1 for 1 swap then I think most could see the reasoning. The problem here is we have bare cupboards and traded away a very very high 2nd round pick which would have given us another good (maybe not great) prospect

You have to give to get.. and we desperately needed.
And it was fairly comparable with the current price tag of similar trades.

 

[canwincup]

Don't answer questions with questions. Prove your point by answering their question or move on.

I don't have the time to post links, but Button liked it for the Cancks, Pronman said it was even, Duthie said it was even.....there's more but I've answered his question.

With the that being said don't tell me what I can or can't do...take your advice and move on Butch.

 

[The Drop]

You have to give to get.. and we desperately needed.
And it was fairly comparable with the current price tag of similar trades.

The problem here is we are always the ones giving and never getting. If this was the first trade where he bled picks then whatever. But it isn't.

 

[iceburg]

Pls post all these outside opinions that labelled this a big win for Vancouver.

12 I believe you said.
(PS. Nick kypreos isn't a source)

So Kypreos is disqualified? Who else should be disqualified? But the posters on these Boards should be qualified?? Seems odd to me.
There were a number on 1040, and a few articles but you know that. Yes, probably about a dozen. I just found it strange that none of these were trashing the trade and the majority on here were. As I've said I didn't go looking for the negative opinions but, since I also didn't go looking for the positive opinions, it certainly showed the difference.

 

[The Drop]

So Kypreos is disqualified? Who else should be disqualified? But the posters on these Boards should be qualified?? Seems odd to me.
There were a number on 1040, and a few articles but you know that. Yes, probably about a dozen. I just found it strange that none of these were trashing the trade and the majority on here were. As I've said I didn't go looking for the negative opinions but, since I also didn't go looking for the positive opinions, it certainly showed the difference.

Ferraro also didn't speak favorably about the trade.

 

[canwincup]

Ferraro also didn't speak favorably about the trade.

No Ferraro said that Gudbranson is a number 4 and also said that he would like the deal for Vancouver if they find a way to recoup picks in another trade.

 

[CanaFan]

You know, I could probably live with this trade if Benning had had a consistent plan for this team back in February and got off his ass and managed to deal Hamhuis - the proverbial "Top 4 D" that I've heard so much about in this thread being worth giving up so much to acquire - for a couple of 2nd round picks like any half decent GM should do when their team is outside the playoffs and they have a 34 year old UFA.

If he then dealt one of THOSE picks along with McCann for Gud - rather than our only hard earned 2nd - I wouldn't be nearly as critical of this deal.

But because he didn't want to move Hamhuis until the last minute (can't send a bad message to the team lol) he got nothing for him. Now he's decided to give up prime assets that we can't afford to give up to replace Hamhuis with a less talented albeit younger "top 4 D" all while now deciding to let Hamhuis walk for nothing.

If asset management 101 were an actual course in high school, Benning would be pulling in solid D minuses for his work so far.

 

[The Drop]

No Ferraro said that Gudbranson is a number 4 and also said that he would like the deal for Vancouver if they find a way to recoup picks in another trade.

Yup. And I took that as him not liking the deal as it is.

 

[CanaFan]

Ferraro also didn't speak favorably about the trade.

Neither did Pronman. He was very "meh" on Gudbranson and basically squashed the 1040 guys' attempts to get him to agree that Gud still had untapped offensive potential.

 

[Fat Tony]

We do????

How the hell did we manage that?

We have that second rounder, if we means the Pens.

 

[Scygen]

The problem here is we are always the ones giving and never getting. If this was the first trade where he bled picks then whatever. But it isn't.

That I agree with, this is the first trade Henning has made that I actually agree with. I agree he has been bleeding picks and value out his butt. But his past moves doesn't make this a bad move. This move actually fills a massive hole in the organization. Yea.. it would have been better if Gudbranson was a puck mover and more offensive, but then we would have had to pay an even steeper price.. or were Canuck fans here really happy about the idea of having Weber or Larsen instead.

It sounds a lot more like some people here wanted to have their cake and to eat it too..

 

[VanillaCoke]

So Kypreos is disqualified? Who else should be disqualified? But the posters on these Boards should be qualified?? Seems odd to me.
There were a number on 1040, and a few articles but you know that. Yes, probably about a dozen. I just found it strange that none of these were trashing the trade and the majority on here were. As I've said I didn't go looking for the negative opinions but, since I also didn't go looking for the positive opinions, it certainly showed the difference.

nick kypreos. Nick. Kypreos.

Let's just wait until darren Dreger and glen Healy give their opinions so we know what we should believe.

 

[CanaFan]

No Ferraro said that Gudbranson is a number 4 and also said that he would like the deal for Vancouver if they find a way to recoup picks in another trade.

Was it Ferraro who qualified him as saying a "fringe #4"? Or was that Pronman?

One of them did, cause I recall wanting to high five the radio. Can't say which it was through.