Vancouver Sports Media III

[Fatass]

Also, he could run with flimsy rumors that the fan base would like to hear, and take less heat. The only reason half of the fan base are so upset is because it's a leak that they don't want to hear. If it was a leak about trading a player they don't like they wouldn't have an issue with a member of the media reporting on a leak.

If there were any truth to the Sekeras (made up) story about Canucks discussing trading BB, where did he hear it from? And who told the same to Dhaliwal? Two different people, right?
If the Canucks were talking about trading Boeser (which they weren’t) how many people were in on this discussion? Benning, Wisebrod, and ?
Maybe three or four people max, right?
And we actually think that two of those 3 or 4 are informants for Sekeras and Dhaliwal?
Totally made up by Sekeras.

 

[rypper]

If there were any truth to the Sekeras (made up) story about Canucks discussing trading BB, where did he hear it from? And who told the same to Dhaliwal? Two different people, right?
If the Canucks were talking about trading Boeser (which they weren’t) how many people were in on this discussion? Benning, Wisebrod, and ?
Maybe three or four people max, right?
And we actually think that two of those 3 or 4 are informants for Sekeras and Dhaliwal?
Totally made up by Sekeras.

Here's Patrick Johnson getting in on it too:

Boeser hasn’t been on the block

But that doesn’t mean his name hasn’t come up.
It did at the draft last year. At that point he was unsigned. The team and the player were far apart.
Remember the report about the Canucks eyeing up Jason Zucker? The Wild asked for Boeser.
At the time we thought the Canucks laughed Paul Fenton off the phone.
From what I’ve heard since, there wasn’t laughter, and it wasn’t an immediate “no.”

Sekeres was very careful in his words, he explicitly said "Boeser wasn't on the block, wasn't being shopped by the team, and there were no advanced discussions with any teams."

He said the team put priority on re-signing Markstrom and Toffoli and explored moving Boeser as a means to do so.

 

[Fatass]

Here's Patrick Johnson getting in on it too:



Sekeres was very careful in his words, he explicitly said "Boeser wasn't on the block, wasn't being shopped by the team, and there were no advanced discussions with any teams."

He said the team put priority on re-signing Markstrom and Toffoli and explored moving Boeser as a means to do so.

Boeser is in a three year deal, so any discussions of trading him were before that was signed.
I think Benning/Wisebrod are ruining our team’s future, but this Sekares story is made up. That’s not to say the two clowns won’t trade Boeser.

 

[racerjoe]

Boeser is in a three year deal, so any discussions of trading him were before that was signed.
I think Benning/Wisebrod are ruining our team’s future, but this Sekares story is made up. That’s not to say the two clowns won’t trade Boeser.

Dude that is 4 reporters all with good connections saying the same thing. There was definitely discussions.

 

[Fatass]

Dude that is 4 reporters all with good connections saying the same thing. There was definitely discussions.

Not anything current. Old discussions, from before Boeser signed his new contract, isn’t what Sekeras was referring to, and there would have been lots of people available with that information, especially from the Minnesota side.
This was suggested to be new, and recent, which means only a very small (closed knit) group of Canuck’s upper management would be aware.
You are saying Sekeras and Dhaliwal have sources in Canuck’s upper management, which is only 3 or 4 people.
Dude, if you can’t see how frail that belief is than I don’t know what to tell you other than you’re contempt for Benning (which I carry for him too) is blinding you from the truth.
Sekeras made this up. He took old facts, and brought them forward to today, and used them to support his supposition.

 

[racerjoe]

Not anything current. Old discussions, from before Boeser signed his new contract, isn’t what Sekeras was referring to, and there would have been lots of people available with that information, especially from the Minnesota side.
This was suggested to be new, and recent, which means only a very small (closed knit) group of Canuck’s upper management would be aware.
You are saying Sekeras and Dhaliwal have sources in Canuck’s upper management, which is only 3 or 4 people.
Dude, if you can’t see how frail that belief is than I don’t know what to tell you other than you’re contempt for Benning (which I carry for him too) is blinding you from the truth.
Sekeras made this up. He took old facts, and brought them forward to today, and used them to support his supposition.

i am saying sakeres, Dhaliwal, Friedman, and Johnston are all well know good reporters saying the canucks were discussing the possibility of trading Boeser for cap reasons to keep Tofoli.

 

[Fatass]

i am saying sakeres, Dhaliwal, Friedman, and Johnston are all well know good reporters saying the canucks were discussing the possibility of trading Boeser for cap reasons to keep Tofoli.

Sekeras and Dhaliwal said it was recent. The other two said it was before Boeser signed his current contract. Big difference.
I wouldn’t be at all shocked that the two idiots running the show fir us aren’t talking about ways to get out of their self made cap hell that involves trading Boeser. It’s Sekeras saying he has a “source” telling him Canucks (got to be upper management only at this moment in time) top brass are discussing it now.
That’s made up.

 

[racerjoe]

Sekeras and Dhaliwal said it was recent. The other two said it was before Boeser signed his current contract. Big difference.
I wouldn’t be at all shocked that the two idiots running the show fir us aren’t talking about ways to get out of their self made cap hell that involves trading Boeser. It’s Sekeras saying he has a “source” telling him Canucks (got to be upper management only at this moment in time) top brass are discussing it now.
That’s made up.

no you are reading it how you want to hear it.
He is saying his name as come up then gives an example of it coming up in the past. Saying it’s like this, not this was what happened.

 

[Fatass]

no you are reading it how you want to hear it.
He is saying his name as come up then gives an example of it coming up in the past. Saying it’s like this, not this was what happened.

Then it’s not discussion of trading Boeser (now) with a source; it’s simply supposition. Sekeras is just connecting the dots these two idiots have lined up to a logical conclusion. That’s exactly the stuff we float here.

 

[racerjoe]

Then it’s not discussion of trading Boeser (now) with a source; it’s simply supposition. Sekeras is just connecting the dots these two idiots have lined up to a logical conclusion. That’s exactly the stuff we float here.

Thats not what an example is...

Do you not understand the difference between example and an actual event?

 

[Fatass]

Thats not what an example is...

Do you not understand the difference between example and an actual event?

I’m clearly missing something.
Sekeras floated a rumour the Canucks were having internal discussions about trading Boeser, which he said was sourced.
Or didn’t he?

 

[racerjoe]

I’m clearly missing something.
Sekeras floated a rumour the Canucks were having internal discussions about trading Boeser, which he said was sourced.
Or didn’t he?

yes he did.

this completely separate from the example Johnston gave.

he gave this to show what the conversation was probably like. As most people have probably heard that rumour. He also then clarified what happened that time.

it’s like I told you I am looking at a new car, then remind you of how I was looking at M5, last year, when this year I am looking at the Audi S4 Quattro. You have never heard of the S4 but you are a big BMW fan so you get the general idea.

 

[WestCoastLife]

Just heard one of the morning guys on 650 commenting about Robin Lehner about he's come a long way which of course we all agree to to, as it's a feel good story

Then they got into how he was kneeling yesterday before the game, saying it's a great cause for social justice. Then went on to say how much he's matured as he once had the words 'TRUMP' on his mask. Basically implying it was a negative thing.

Anyone else see an issue with this sort of commentary coming from a supposed neutral sportscaster?

 

[Jay Cee]

No but I usually cringe when sports guys talk about politics.

 

[Hit the post]

No but I usually cringe when sports guys talk about politics.

or visa-versa..(eg., Rush Limbaugh)

 

[Burke's Evil Spirit]

Just heard one of the morning guys on 650 commenting about Robin Lehner about he's come a long way which of course we all agree to to, as it's a feel good story

Then they got into how he was kneeling yesterday before the game, saying it's a great cause for social justice. Then went on to say how much he's matured as he once had the words 'TRUMP' on his mask. Basically implying it was a negative thing.

Anyone else see an issue with this sort of commentary coming from a supposed neutral sportscaster?

Lehner said as much in his press conference. It's not a big deal.

 

[I am toxic]

Who is the host on 650 this morning spewing racist $#!+ about swedes? What an underhanded POS thing to say.

 

[rypper]

Who is the host on 650 this morning spewing racist $#!+ about swedes? What an underhanded POS thing to say.

The hosts are James Cybulski and Perry Solkowski.

I didn't/ don't listen to 650 so I couldn't tell you. They had Anthony Stewart, Jovo, and Mark Spector as guests though.

 

[m9]

What was said?

 

[I am toxic]

What was said?

It was one of the two hosts, paraphrasing, that Petey was not swedish but more north american in the way he shrugs off punishment and gets business done. Like wtf I thought that crap died with Grapes getting canned.

And to think it was said against the backdrop of having Marky and Edler, the Sedins, and great swedes dating back to the early '80's.

Unbelievable, and even more so in this market. Total POS thing to say.

Eta: to the guest's credit, he immediately brought up the Sedins and how no one is tougher or put up with more punishment than them.

 

[m9]

It was one of the two hosts, paraphrasing, that Petey was not swedish but more north american in the way he shrugs off punishment and gets business done. Like wtf I thought that crap died with Grapes getting canned.

And to think it was said against the backdrop of having Marky and Edler, the Sedins, and great swedes dating back to the early '80's.

Unbelievable, and even more so in this market. Total POS thing to say.

Eta: to the guest's credit, he immediately brought up the Sedins and how no one is tougher or put up with more punishment than them.

I see.

I don't really take offense to that kind of stuff simply because it's true that the game in Sweden is much less physical than the game over here, particularly playoff hockey.

Sounds like probably some poor wording, though.

 

[I am toxic]

I see.

I don't really take offense to that kind of stuff simply because it's true that the game in Sweden is much less physical than the game over here, particularly playoff hockey.

Sounds like probably some poor wording, though.

It was bigotry, same crap Grapes would spew.

 

[F A N]

I’m clearly missing something.
Sekeras floated a rumour the Canucks were having internal discussions about trading Boeser, which he said was sourced.
Or didn’t he?

yes he did.

What he said was "I'm told the Canucks are exploring the possibility of trading Brock Boeser." What does "exploring the possibility" mean? Does it mean having an internal discussion about it? Calling other teams and gauging interest? Of course it's "possible" to trade Brock Boeser as in some team would want him.

I'm not really sure why posters here are so up in arms over the legitimacy of this report/rumor. As I said before, it's not like we haven't discussed the possibility to trading Boeser here. Most of us are open to the idea of trading Boeser for a similar aged first pairing right side Dman. Management should be discussing the possibility of moving Boeser internally. I would think that if there is a trade target Boeser would be one of the names that other teams ask for since Petey, Bo, and Hughes are a quick turn down.

With that said, I can understand why the Canucks and Boeser were mad. The trade deadline has passed and they were gearing up for hockey in a bubble.

 

[StreetHawk]

What he said was "I'm told the Canucks are exploring the possibility of trading Brock Boeser." What does "exploring the possibility" mean? Does it mean having an internal discussion about it? Calling other teams and gauging interest? Of course it's "possible" to trade Brock Boeser as in some team would want him.

I'm not really sure why posters here are so up in arms over the legitimacy of this report/rumor. As I said before, it's not like we haven't discussed the possibility to trading Boeser here. Most of us are open to the idea of trading Boeser for a similar aged first pairing right side Dman. Management should be discussing the possibility of moving Boeser internally. I would think that if there is a trade target Boeser would be one of the names that other teams ask for since Petey, Bo, and Hughes are a quick turn down.

With that said, I can understand why the Canucks and Boeser were mad. The trade deadline has passed and they were gearing up for hockey in a bubble.

Aside from Petey and Hughes everyone else should be considered for trade if it makes sense. No different than in Buffalo with Eichel and Dahlin and then there’s everyone else. Same with Edm and McDavid and Leon. Go around the NHL. You have to give to get.

words are important. Just like people knocking Linden for retool vs rebuild.

exploring or shopping actually means they are taking the initiative to contact other teams. Rather than being called about him or have his name come up when you make a call on another player.
But really, you can’t call about someone like Parayko, Dumba, etc for example without Boeser’s name coming up.

a lot of nothing but at the same time these media guys will claim credit for breaking it early if it does go down when most time these things don’t.

 

[Fatass]

What he said was "I'm told the Canucks are exploring the possibility of trading Brock Boeser." What does "exploring the possibility" mean? Does it mean having an internal discussion about it? Calling other teams and gauging interest? Of course it's "possible" to trade Brock Boeser as in some team would want him.

I'm not really sure why posters here are so up in arms over the legitimacy of this report/rumor. As I said before, it's not like we haven't discussed the possibility to trading Boeser here. Most of us are open to the idea of trading Boeser for a similar aged first pairing right side Dman. Management should be discussing the possibility of moving Boeser internally. I would think that if there is a trade target Boeser would be one of the names that other teams ask for since Petey, Bo, and Hughes are a quick turn down.

With that said, I can understand why the Canucks and Boeser were mad. The trade deadline has passed and they were gearing up for hockey in a bubble.

“Canucks are exploring”. He didn’t say “we’re exploring”. He said “are exploring” - present tense. And who with the Canucks would be “exploring” trades? Benning and Wisebrod, right? So either Sekeras’ source is Benning or Wisebrod, or he’s making this all up.