Jeremy Hronek

14 minutes ago, LillStrimma said:

It’s in the thread, one tweeted the word ”Finally”. 
That is not a word someone tweets if Benning did a good job.

Meh, fair enough.     

But again, why is this relevant in 2023?   

I was a "BenningBro" and fully admit defeat.   

I predicted that the Canucks would "arrive" in 21/22 (this core's equivalent of the 08/09 season) and I was off............by two years.

23/24 seems like it's shaping to be our 08/09 season right now (followed by bigger, better, and blacker things to come over the next few seasons?).   

Excluding Pettersson, guys like Hughes, Demko, Miller, Boeser, Garland, and Hoglander are all a part of the current Canucks squad.   

Is that because of Benning?  Judd Bracket's ball sack?  Thomas Drance?  Who gives a fuck.  The bottom line is that this Canucks team looks poised and ready to take the next step.

I'm thankful for some of what Benning did for us, but am absolutely ecstatic that we have Alvin + what I think is the greatest coaching staff (Tocchet, Foote, Yeo, Gonchar) that this organization has ever had.  

Lets focus on the now.

Let the past be the past.

Just now, LillStrimma said:

So you believe scouts in NHL don’t know wich pick they will choose if their first, second, third, fourth, fifth etc choice is taken? 
Here it shows you only are here to defend Benning at all cost.

 

I’ve only heard of one guy being so stupid and that is Benning. Wich he showed when he let Tanev, Marky and Toffoli all go for free.

No that's not what I'm saying.  What I'm saying is that Benning probably wanted his scouting team (and himself for that matter) to do a more comprehensive analysis before fully committing to Petey (even though Benning himself probably loved Pettersson).   I'm guessing that Linden may have misinterpreted Benning's intentions here (I will admit that Linden had good reason to 2nd guess Benning due to the 2016 drafting fiasco.........something that I fully blame Benning for by the way..........so you can get it out of your head that I'm emotionally and spiritually invested in Benning's genitalia and what have you).  

Just now, Provost said:

 

 

 

 

 

[quote]There have been so many people attached to the organization and left that have effectively called Benning a snake that I think any right minded person can figure it out. [/quote]

Like who?  Linden has indirectly implied this but who else has done this?

 [quote]Heck, with the Brackett firing he said that Judd wanted 100% autonomy and control over every pick. [/quote]

Was Benning lying here?

[quote]Benning was a terrible GM and an average at best scout. [/quote]

Letting Tanev walk in the Summer of 2020 was absolutely unforgivable in my eyes and may have singlehandedly cost us from taking that 'next step' post bubble.  Benning seemingly got it ingrained in his head that guys like Schmidt, Myers, and OEL would be suitable replacements from Edler and Tanev in terms of being those 'two-way minute eating defensemen' that could take on tough match-ups, etc.  

But again - Why is this relevant in 2023?

I was a BenningBro and I got knocked on my ass.   I predicted that this team would 'arrive' in 21/22 (this core's version of 2008/2009)..........and now it's happening two years later.  

Let's enjoy the ride my friend.  

p.s.________________And yes, I'll be counting on you to make a 'probabilities' post in a few games if we keep our current solid play.  

5 minutes ago, Nucker67 said:

Nothing to see here. Sure, Benning probably wanted another player, like Makar or Heiskanen. 

 

With all of the excitement and positivity surrounding the Canucks this season, I'm surprised Linden would spew this negativity. Maybe Trev needs another Euro bike ride to clear his head.

I don't think Linden deliberately threw Benning under the bus as much as he did in simply expressing his thoughts to a question.  

Hilariously enough, I think Linden was subtly far tougher on Boudreau in the interview than he was with Benning or ownership, lol.   

But fuck it - who cares now.   

It's 2023.

Linden and Benning are about as relevant to the Canucks as my uncle's breasts.   

Yes, I was a BenningBro back in the day, and I predicted that 2019/2020 would be our 06/07 (surprise 2nd round appearance), 20/21 would be our 07/08 (small step back), and 21/22 would be our 08/09 'we've arrived' party.  

I was two years off.  

This year looks like it's our 08/09 year with bigger, better, and blacker things to possibly come.  

Let's celebrate what's in front of us instead of dwelling on issues from 5+ years ago.

5 minutes ago, iinatcc said:

 

 But is it a coincidence when this Linden interview hit one of the scouts posted a photo of Linden and Pettersson ? 

Maybe.....maybe not. 

But do you think it's possible that you're reading too far into this?

9 hours ago, Miss Korea said:

You hear that, brother Luke?  Filip is the best partner he's ever played with!

 

Now your failure is complete

 

Still *way* too early.  

After Game 1, Brock Boeser was slated to be the next Wayne Gretzky.    

1 minute ago, Alflives said:

Scouts like their jobs. They don’t work again if they voice criticism publicly about the process of selection under Benning, or any GM. That’s breaking the code. 

So then what actual evidence do we have that our scouts (other than Judd Brackett) were at odds with Benning?    

1 hour ago, iinatcc said:

 

 

 other former Canucks scouts that indirectly verified what Linden said. 

Do you still the problem with the above statement?  

"Indirectly"

13 hours ago, Rekker said:

It's not so much a dislike for Garland. It's that we need some size and truculence on the wings, and for lesser monies.

In Garland's defense, he'd probably be able to beat the shit out of my sister-in-law if the two ever came to blows.  

1 hour ago, LillStrimma said:

So you say the other scouts confirming Lindens word is also full of shit?

 

 

 

Which other scouts claimed that Benning *clearly* wanted someone else (Glass?) over Pettersson?

47 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Listen to the interview.    And the questions asked.    Linden was reserved.   Like usual.   He probably has several reasons to throw JB under the bus but isn't.   As for JB, probably best just to keep quiet.    For sure JB needed convincing, nothing wrong with that either. 

I'll have a listen right now (just going to be my usual self and go to 7/11 and get some soda, candy, and chips first.  :-p............it's a little later in my part of the world than it is in good ol' VanCity [good morning btw]).   

29 minutes ago, timberz21 said:

 

 When the "whole" group likes a player and they were always going to draft Pettersson, why is there a need to do due diligence? 

 

 

Because, you always need to be sure.  Even if you really love one prospect and are 99% sure that you're going to draft him, you still need to do a comprehensive analysis on other picks and prospects just to be sure. For example, what if Pettersson had been drafted earlier?  Then what?     Doing a comprehensive analysis and proper due diligence is the smart thing to do.

3 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

We all know Benning wanted Juolevi and Glass.  He got his way the first time but was outnumbered the second time and had to go with the crowd.  Thanks God...

False. Benning also loved Pettersson but wanted to do a more comprehensive due diligence on all of the prospects.

3 hours ago, Drakrami said:

It just goes to show there's a lot more behind the scenes. 95% of CDC was showering Benning with praises for at least the first 7 years of Benning's tenure. It's ironic now if people start bashing him lol. 

 

Benning also wanted Pettersson.......he just wanted to do a more comprehensive due diligence on all of the other prospects as well.  

4 hours ago, -AJ- said:

"Slams" is probably not the correct term, but Linden was pretty clear that Benning had a different opinion. To his credit though, I think the consensus was that Petey was a 7-9 player, not a #5, so it was a little of the board. Credit to Brackett and his team though for doing a good job.

Benning was also wanted Pettersson but wanted to do a comprehensive due diligence before definitively moving forward with him.  

Sounds to me like Linden is full of shit.

2 hours ago, Pears said:

Makes sense. Points aside Garland has been phenomenal in the dirty areas and has been the anchor of the third line. 

I've always liked Garland to be honest.  

Sure he has his warts but I've always liked his work ethic.

No idea why so many Canuck pundits don't like the guy.  

8 hours ago, IBatch said:

Few of us care about that anymore.   Well suppose a few might think Horfat is worth the effort. 

I dunno man......One year old version of me was pretty pissed off over that loss.  

4 hours ago, Pears said:

I'll do you one better: 1994 revenge 30 years later

What about a 42 year rematch between Canucks and Islanders..........with the return of Bo Horvat.  

10 hours ago, Mando27 said:

 

In all seriousness, this would have been an excellent question back in 2012 but the Canucks aren't quite at that level in 2023.   

We are probably closer to 2008/09 than 2010-2012 Canucks.  We are on the right track but not quite there yet.  Slow your horses.

You have to learn how to fart before being able to take a crap without mommy and daddy wiping your bum for you.   

10 hours ago, Mando27 said:

 

10 hours ago, HKSR said:

...where are all of you that were saying we are a good 4 years away from being relevant?  Some even going as far as saying we need to blow up this core? 

 

Come on guys.  You know who you are.  Stand up and eat some yummy crow lol

I will admit that I wanted to completely blow it up this past January.

-Pettersson for a 2023 1st + elite prospect

-Hughes for a 2023 1st + elite prospect

-Demko for a 2023 1st + elite prospect

-Kuzmenko for a 1st and a B prospect

-Miller for two 1sts (Pens deal that was offered at that time)

And then weaponize cap space for more pics and prospects.

I would have tanked harder than Michael Jackson at Neverland Ranch in order to land one of Bedard, Carlsson, or Fantilli.   

I would have kept OEL, Boeser, Schenn, Myers, etc. as part of the veteran leadership while grooming the elite prospects with other vets that we would have signed (which likely would have been to unfavorable term and money since they would have had all the bargaining power).  

Thankfully, we did NOT go this route.    

I honestly didn't anticipate this coming season turning out like this at ALL.  And I'm pleasantly surprised.  

20 hours ago, Coconuts said:

 

Considering he's not only an 11OA pick, but also a D, probably longer than some people would like. Folks expecting him to jump in and be a top four D sooner than later probably have unrealistic expectations imo. D prospects typically take longer than forwards to get going. 

 

Willander should be a very good player someday, but there's a good chance he'll need to stew and that he won't be an impact D right off the hop once he makes the bigs. 

 

The Canucks need him to be a hit, I hope they don't rush him because of NHL level team expectations. 

I tend to agree with this.

Hence, my preference to bring in a guy like Rasmus Andersson if it's remotely possible.  Let Andersson come here and give us some more insurance on the back-end just in case one of Hughes or Hronek go down with injury (knock on wood).  I still don't like the fact that there's too big of a drop off in talent between Hronek and whoever is our 3rd best defenseman (Cole/Soucy/Myers).  

Bring in Andersson, have him here for 3 years, and then that in itself could serve as a transition from Andersson to "Top 4 NHL calibre" Willander once Andersson's contract ends.   

22 hours ago, Bob Long said:

 

Yep I'm very interested to see what we have in Bluger too. 

 

As far as giving up chances goes, that comes with pushing offence. I'm not worried about that aspect as all offensive lines give up chances.

 

True but remember..........playoff hockey is a different beast.  

2 hours ago, Bob Long said:

 

I'm not sure why people want to break up H-H. Let them dominate possession.

 

A Boqvist type player might fit well with Cole, e.g. 

 

If we leave our dominant top pair as is, then we are just looking at replacing Friedman.

I'm not sure how sustainable a Hughes-Hronek pairing will continue to be but I do agree that we should keep pairing them up if it continues to work. I think a while back, @wai_lai416 also posted some fancy stats that indicates that the Hughes-Hronek was also giving up a lot of chances?  (i.e. Goaltending was bailing them out).   

If it eventually stops working however, it would be nice to have other options (i.e. someone like a Rasmus Andersson playing alongside Hughes while Hronek moves down to play with Cole).   

In terms of joining elite teams like Vegas, I still think our two biggest needs are a good two-way 3rd line Center (Suter moves to his natural wing on that line) and a #3 or #2A calibre defenseman that would be a better stylistic fit with Hughes.  

For the two-way 3rd line center, we *might* already have that with Bluegar (time will tell), but I still think we need another #3/#2A calibre d-man.  Wet farts such as Ethan Bear, Adam Boquist, Andrew Peeke, etc. are "decent," but aren't going to move the needle for this team.  

44 minutes ago, Canuck Surfer said:

 

Thats Willander.

 

Already in our system.  

 

If its not Hronek, who paired with Hughes have only offered, what, 2 goals against all year? With both being in the top 5 in scoring bt D.

 

Also already in our system... 

How many years away is he from being an NHL top 4 calibre guy?