Speculation: What's going on with Judd Brackett?

[Hoghandler]

Because Benning is Weisbrod's boss.

If Benning and Brackett were on the same page, what Weisbrod thought would be irrelevant and Linden wouldn't have had to intervene.

That sounds about right.

Based on Linden's interview, it sounds like he wants the credit for the Pettersson pick.

I wish they asked Linden if he was the one responsible for re-vamping the scouting staff, or if that was Benning's doing.

 

[Diamonddog01]

There's no evidence of Benning being opposed to the pick....(how you got from TL giving each Canuck hockey department 'autonomy' to TL over riding Benning is beyond me)..In fact, didnt Benning point EP out at the draft before the selection,...I remember him getting mocked about that...

Sorry, not buying it

Yup. It's a narrative based on some sort of 'insider knowledge' that he's unable to share or prove and now is attempting to shove down everyone's throats and demand that we believe it based on completely innocuous quotes that aren't even about Benning. It's very disingenuous and frustrating, I expect more out of this site and the posters on it tbh.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

1) His quotes yesterday are referring specifically to the Pettersson pick and giving Brackett autonomy to make that particular selection. Not some generic, 'oh, I like giving people autonomy' sort of thing.

2) There is no evidence of Benning being in favour of the pick. There is plenty that he was opposed to it.

3) These discussions would happened in the days leading up to the draft. On draft day, of course Benning was going to be a good soldier and go along with the pick.

Please demonstrate how Benning, specifically, was opposed to the pick.?.not guess work, or some other twisted narratives...or confusing 'healthy debating' with 'heated arguments'..Some good solid evidence.

 

[MS]

That sounds about right.

Based on Linden's interview, it sounds like he wants the credit for the Pettersson pick.

It sounds like Benning wants to back his guy in Brackett and make sure the truth is know about that pick. Obviously he's taking a shot at Benning as well, but that doesn't mean for a second it isn't true.

I wish they asked Linden if he was the one responsible for re-vamping the scouting staff, or if that was Benning's doing.

No doubt.

Based on recent events, my take on the Brackett promotion is now pretty similar to your take on the Willie hiring.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

Yup. It's a narrative based on some sort of 'insider knowledge' that he's unable to share or prove and now is attempting to shove down everyone's throats and demand that we believe it based on completely innocuous quotes that aren't even about Benning. It's very disingenuous and frustrating, I expect more out of this site and the posters on it tbh.

 

[MS]

Please demonstrate how Benning, specifically, was opposed to the pick.?.not guess work, or some other twisted narratives...or confusing 'healthy debating' with 'heated arguments'..Some good solid evidence.

1. Linden specifically said that he stepped in on the Pettersson pick to let Brackett take his guy. If Benning wanted Brackett, it is not plausible that this would happen. If the GM and the head scout agreed on a pick, their boss would never be stepping in in favour of the head scout. It would have been the same process as the Hughes selection a year later, when Benning and Brackett were clearly on the same page.

2. A Canucks accredited media member has confirmed that this is what happened.

 

[Hoghandler]

This isn't the first time we are hearing rumblings the scouting staff and Benning aren't on the same page either. There was a report Benning wasn't thrilled with his scouts in regards to the Jared McCann pick. Considering Benning dumped him so soon after drafting him, it lends credence to that theory.

Satiar Shah also claimed Benning was a 'Nylander guy' as well.

That is one reason I could see Benning being behind the firing of Eric Crawford, and replacing him.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

1. Linden specifically said that he stepped in on the Pettersson pick to let Brackett take his guy. If Benning wanted Brackett, it is not plausible that this would happen. If the GM and the head scout agreed on a pick, their boss would never be stepping in in favour of the head scout. It would have been the same process as the Hughes selection a year later, when Benning and Brackett were clearly on the same page.

2. A Canucks accredited media member has confirmed that this is what happened.

It still does not tell us that Benning (specifically) was opposed to the pick?....I will gladly concede if there was specific evidence otherwise....Judging from all of Bennings quotes, he was more than happy at the Pettersson selection.

and no..JD Burke is not a respected source.

Until there's anything new (except spitballing..and your predictable rabid obsession with crapping on Benning)..I'm not commenting on it any further...At the end of the day...It was an excellent selection.

 

[Jay Cee]

This pinpoint focus on "who is specifically responsible for the pick?" Is so f***ing stupid and completely elusive.

 

[bandwagonesque]

It still does not tell us that Benning (specifically) was opposed to the pick?....I will gladly concede if there was specific evidence otherwise....Judging from all of Bennings quotes, he was more than happy at the Pettersson selection.

and no..JD Burke is not a respected source.

Benning said the following after the draft:

“If he was there at No. 5, we were going to draft him,” said Benning. “We knew he has a special skill set and felt with the wingers we had in our system, a playmaker was a need. He had the vision and with his release from the half wall — he could really rip it — it was the (draft) separation.”

Still, Benning pondered a swap of first-round picks with Buffalo (eighth overall) and Vegas to add an additional later pick. The Golden Knights liked Glass, but weren’t sure what the Canucks were going to do. And with the New York Rangers getting the seventh selection, picking eighth didn’t ensure Benning would land Pettersson. Either did the sixth pick, because Vegas could have had a change of heart.

“I didn’t want to risk not getting Elias and didn’t want to draft too far down — that’s where you get in trouble,” recalled Benning. “My philosophy was you just take him.”

So either he was willing to completely alienate his scouting staff and basically call all of them liars for no particular reason in a series of unnecessarily detailed remarks simply because someone in the press asked him a question, or he was on board with selecting Pettersson and approved of the team doing so.

 

[WonderTwinsUnite]

It still does not tell us that Benning (specifically) was opposed to the pick?....I will gladly concede if there was specific evidence otherwise....Judging from all of Bennings quotes, he was more than happy at the Pettersson selection.

and no..JD Burke is not a respected source.

The guy is accredited by the Canucks. For how much you love appealing to authority, shouldn't that be enough to respect him?

 

[drax0s]

1. Linden specifically said that he stepped in on the Pettersson pick to let Brackett take his guy. If Benning wanted Brackett, it is not plausible that this would happen. If the GM and the head scout agreed on a pick, their boss would never be stepping in in favour of the head scout. It would have been the same process as the Hughes selection a year later, when Benning and Brackett were clearly on the same page.

Uh. It's actually pretty plausible. In a lot of executive meetings with dissenting opinions, leaders let people make their cases and sometimes things get heated. If you're in charge, sometimes you don't want to actually say anything because you'll influence the process. You ask questions and take in the information and then once you've heard all arguments, you make the decision. You let your team try to convince you, even if you lean in a specific direction.

You're really reaching here. There's nothing on record of Benning specifically wanting Glass over Pettersson. Someone in the org evidently did though. Wasn't Delorme, Brackett or Gradin though since they are on record pushing for Petey. I'd personally wager / speculate Weisbrod purely on the fact Glass demolished the Swiss in a game he was in attendance scouting.


Glass scored 2 goals and 1 Assist that game.
http://reports.iihf.hockey/Hydra/506/IHM506A13_74_6_0.pdf

Also - if you listen to Linden's answer in the 650 interview - he's asked a leading question about how important it was to give Judd the autonomy to make picks to which he replied that it was very important to give Judd autonomy to make picks.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

This pinpoint focus on "who is specifically responsible for the pick?" Is so ****ing stupid and completely elusive.

 

[MS]

Benning said the following after the draft:

“If he was there at No. 5, we were going to draft him,” said Benning. “We knew he has a special skill set and felt with the wingers we had in our system, a playmaker was a need. He had the vision and with his release from the half wall — he could really rip it — it was the (draft) separation.”

Still, Benning pondered a swap of first-round picks with Buffalo (eighth overall) and Vegas to add an additional later pick. The Golden Knights liked Glass, but weren’t sure what the Canucks were going to do. And with the New York Rangers getting the seventh selection, picking eighth didn’t ensure Benning would land Pettersson. Either did the sixth pick, because Vegas could have had a change of heart.

“I didn’t want to risk not getting Elias and didn’t want to draft too far down — that’s where you get in trouble,” recalled Benning. “My philosophy was you just take him.”

So either he was willing to completely alienate his scouting staff and basically call all of them liars for no particular reason in a series of unnecessarily detailed remarks simply because someone in the press asked him a question, or he was on board with selecting Pettersson and approved of the team doing so.

Um, of course he's going to toe the party line about a pick his team just made. What do you expect him to say? "Uh, this wasn't really the guy I wanted but Linden and Brackett liked him, so this should be OK I guess." Or you just expected him to go rogue on the draft floor?

And again, for the umpteenth time, the fact that Benning preferred another player and had to overruled doesn't mean he didn't like Pettersson or thought he was some sort of 7th round piece of junk. I'm sure he thought all of the guys ranked in the top-10 were terrific prospects and could have made rave compliments about all of them.

 

[bandwagonesque]

Um, of course he's going to toe the party line about a pick his team just made. What do you expect him to say? "Uh, this wasn't really the guy I wanted but Linden and Brackett liked him, so this should be OK I guess." Or you just expected him to go rogue on the draft floor?

And again, for the umpteenth time, the fact that Benning preferred another player and had to overruled doesn't mean he didn't like Pettersson or thought he was some sort of 7th round piece of junk. I'm sure he thought all of the guys ranked in the top-10 were terrific prospects and could have made rave compliments about all of them.

Nothing you're saying has much to do with the discussion taking place or is an accurate representation of any poster's statements or expectations. Benning specifically said, without any apparent prompting, that as the draft approached he wanted Pettersson and acted strategically to make sure he could draft him. If your assumptions about how the pick was made are correct, this would mean Benning didn't just toe the party line, but deliberately, grossly, and with unnecessary elaboration misrepresented the behaviour and contributions of several senior members of his staff for no apparent reason when he could have easily made a much simpler and shorter statement. This is untenable.

 

[MS]

Nothing you're saying has much to do with the discussion taking place or is an accurate representation of anyone's statements or expectations. Benning specifically said, without any apparent prompting, that as the draft approached he wanted Pettersson and acted strategically to make sure he could draft him. If your assumptions about who the pick was made are correct, this would mean Benning didn't just toe the party line, but deliberately and grossly misrepresented the behaviour and contributions of several senior members of his staff for no apparent reason when he could have easily made a much simpler and shorter statement. This is untenable.

His first quote in that article uses the royal 'we' and toes the party line.

His second quote details his thoughts about trading down and gives no insight into his thoughts on Pettersson. If he's been tasked by Linden with securing the player Brackett and the scouting staff want, absolutely he doesn't want to trade down too far and miss him, because he would have failed his superior and botched the situation.

 

[Billy Kvcmu]

It’s wild. Some people in here care about covering for Benning more than the club. It’s insane.

It’s the other way around
Some people here would rather be “right” and be able to say“hah I told you!” than team improving regardless of who’s in charge

 

[Jay Cee]

Sorry bud. You're not going to convince me people pondering the meaning of existence and who was singularly responsible for a draft pick are the same thing.

 

[Billy Kvcmu]

This pinpoint focus on "who is specifically responsible for the pick?" Is so ****ing stupid and completely elusive.

Welcome to HFCancuks
Even the Stanley cup is worth less than “being right”

 

[BoHorvat 53]

Uhh, I’m taking the word of the team’s former president who legitimately has no ties to the team and therefore has nothing to gain or lose at this point by just telling things the way they are (were in this case) over some randoms on HF who are trying to defend Benning because the only thing he was supposedly behind that was half decent (drafting) isn’t being credited to him. So, why exactly is this neanderthal still our GM?

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

Sorry bud. You're not going to convince me people pondering the meaning of existence and who was singularly responsible for a draft pick are the same thing.

Don't worry, that wasn't the intention. It's more the "if we aren't absolutely certain of something, it's pointless to discuss" approach you take, hence the analogy.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

It’s the other way around
Some people here would rather be “right” and be able to say“hah I told you!” than team improving regardless of who’s in charge

Criticizing management and still rooting for the team can coexist. There are a minority of fans that want the team to do poorly so that Benning gets fired, but that's just a different approach that is based on what they perceive to be what is best for the long-term success of the team. If more people understood these points, there'd be much less disagreement on here.

 

[Orca Smash]

Uh. It's actually pretty plausible. In a lot of executive meetings with dissenting opinions, leaders let people make their cases and sometimes things get heated. If you're in charge, sometimes you don't want to actually say anything because you'll influence the process. You ask questions and take in the information and then once you've heard all arguments, you make the decision. You let your team try to convince you, even if you lean in a specific direction.

You're really reaching here. There's nothing on record of Benning specifically wanting Glass over Pettersson. Someone in the org evidently did though. Wasn't Delorme, Brackett or Gradin though since they are on record pushing for Petey. I'd personally wager / speculate Weisbrod purely on the fact Glass demolished the Swiss in a game he was in attendance scouting.


Glass scored 2 goals and 1 Assist that game.
http://reports.iihf.hockey/Hydra/506/IHM506A13_74_6_0.pdf

Also - if you listen to Linden's answer in the 650 interview - he's asked a leading question about how important it was to give Judd the autonomy to make picks to which he replied that it was very important to give Judd autonomy to make picks.

We are all speculating, nobody is in the room so it should be taken as such or however people want to take it based on evidence posters present online. Is it not plausible though Weisbrod being benning's right hand man, and from what I can tell far more opinionated and assertive might have jim's ear and trust, and perhaps jim trusts him if he wanted glass? Again purely just guessing, but that may also be possible.

 

[Billy Kvcmu]

Criticizing management and still rooting for the team can coexist. There are a minority of fans that want the team to do poorly so that Benning gets fired, but that's just a different approach that is based on what they perceive to be what is best for the long-term success of the team. If more people understood these points, there'd be much less disagreement on here.

What they perceive to be what is best for the long-term is their own opinion.

There is no rule on this board that states fans are not allow to enjoy what is in front of them and feel encouraging of what’s yet to come.

That’s where the disagreement lined on, it is totally understandable that people start to feel comfortable about the management again because the team is sitting in a playoff spot at the TDL with young players leading the charge. These people don’t need to be reminded how many mistakes the management group have made in the past 24/7 and how they don’t actually deserve credits of any success

 

[Jay Cee]

Don't worry, that wasn't the intention. It's more the "if we aren't absolutely certain of something, it's pointless to discuss" approach you take, hence the analogy.

Well, I am that guy and not. To me this thing is the worst of the worst of speculation. Like how do we have the faintest idea? Is there any medium in the world who spends so much time invested in such an elusive topic? You literally had to be there and tell someone the exact story of how the whole conversation and series of events that happened to come down to the decision. And what if it was a consensus?

That's not the worst part of the debate though. What if there wasnt just one guy? And most importantly, at the end of the day who the hell cares?

But no...we all have to have this strange reading between the lines and creating narratives based on vague statements in the media that everyone makes what they want to believe.

Linden made in my opinion a very general statement that was a big nothing burger. To another person that is supposedly the smoking gun. Go figure.