[PGT] Canucks Media Availability

[AlwaysACanuckFan]

1 minute ago, Dr. Crossbar said:

People have been gunning for Hronek since day one of the trade because they couldn't control his narrative. 

I thought it was more like, why did Yzerman give up on this guy? 

[BC_Hawk]

Just now, Dr. Crossbar said:

People have been gunning for Hronek since day one of the trade because they couldn't control his narrative. 

People need to revert to what we looked like before his arrival. It is VERY HARD to find a young Top4 let alone a top pair RHD. Guys like Ekholm and Tanev look great, but father time is knocking on there door. These guys are either drafted and developed (hopefully Willander) OR traded for in blockbuster trades (Hronek).

 

There is a reason that PA has focused his efforts (outside of that trade) in bringing in LHD; they are simply cheaper and more readily available. 

[Bob Long]

2 minutes ago, AlwaysACanuckFan said:

I thought it was more like, why did Yzerman give up on this guy? 

 

and then, oh no, Stevie must have screwed us 

 

[BC_Hawk]

4 minutes ago, AlwaysACanuckFan said:

I thought it was more like, why did Yzerman give up on this guy? 

And it is quite simple; Hronek wants play as a top pair (and get Top pairing money) and Seider is already their top pair RHD. There is only so much money and opportunity to go around. Steve made the decision that Hronek's value was maxed out last year with two years of team control left, so pulled the trigger. 

[HOFsedins]

2 minutes ago, BC_Hawk said:

People need to revert to what we looked like before his arrival. It is VERY HARD to find a young Top4 let alone a top pair RHD. Guys like Ekholm and Tanev look great, but father time is knocking on there door. These guys are either drafted and developed (hopefully Willander) OR traded for in blockbuster trades (Hronek).

 

There is a reason that PA has focused his efforts (outside of that trade) in bringing in LHD; they are simply cheaper and more readily available. 

I agree with you but you need to understand Hronek is NOT a TOP pairing RHD. That is why majority of fans aren't willing to pay 8M for him. 

[syntheticity]

13 minutes ago, -dlc- said:

Not in understanding the question, but in responding to it.  Maybe the words don't come as easily  (just as has been the case with Petey in the past).

 

Drama. Our team has too much of it...let's not buy into it.

 

The media also went hard at JT back in the day, just move along to the next target? Controversy sells but we don't have to buy it.

I've previously agreed with others (in the original GDT for the topic) that Jpat's followup question was poorly framed. I was just pushing back against the idea that there was anything inappropriate with his initial injury question that warranted H's evasive, disengaged response.

 

I'm not convinced that a language barrier really exolains that.  Other non-native speakers were asked the same injury q and managed just fine, without needing to divulge details they didn't wish to divulge. 

 

But to be clear, I'm not accusing H of committing a grave moral crime. I just don't think he did himself any favours.

[BC_Hawk]

2 minutes ago, HOFsedins said:

I agree with you but you need to understand Hronek is NOT a TOP pairing RHD. That is why majority of fans aren't willing to pay 8M for him. 

Is he not though? I thought he looked great for 3/4 of the year, then his play declined; seemed to correspond to when his slapshots disappeared too. I'm not buying he wasnt playing injuried.

 

Should clarify; he is NOT worth 8m+ at this time......he is a 7mish dman on a 7/8 year deal. If he wants 8m+, he needs to take a bridge to show

hes worth it.

Edited May 24 by BC_Hawk

[Gurn]

19 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

there's a difference, tho, which you know. Choosing to make things out of nothing "because media" usually isn't a good thing. Ignoring things that should be ignored doesn't usually lead to issues.

 

Ignoring things, by saying it's not an issue, can lead  to issues; that would also not be a good thing.

Edited May 24 by Gurn

[syntheticity]

18 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

Pat's delivery of it was kind of dickish. I get thats his shtick, but he got the response he deserved imo.

 

I've previously agreed with others (in the original GDT for the topic) that Jpat's followup question was poorly framed. I was just pushing back against the idea that there was anything inappropriate with his initial injury question that warranted H's evasive, disengaged response. I think both H and Jpat had a part to play in how things unfolded.

[HOFsedins]

7 minutes ago, BC_Hawk said:

Is he not though? I thought he looked great for 3/4 of the year, then his play declined; seemed to correspond to when his slapshots disappeared too. I'm not buying he wasnt playing injuried.

 

Should clarify; he is NOT worth 8m+ at this time......he is a 7mish dman on a 7/8 year deal. If he wants 8m+, he needs to take a bridge to show

hes worth it.

I've mentioned this before. 

 

You have to realize that playing with Hughes doesnt make you a top pairing RHD. When he was tasked to anchor his own pairing, he did not fare well. I agree that he did look good for the first half of the year, but how much is that because of Hughes though? 

 

I remember when he was traded, majority of people didnt know who he was. Now all of a sudden, he is a top pairing defenseman?

[Bob Long]

8 minutes ago, Gurn said:

Ignoring things, by saying it's not an issue, can lead  to issues; that would also not be a good thing.

 

True, but this is j pat we are talking about. 

[Maniwaki Canuck]

Whatever you think about Hronek, it's great to see a throwback to a time before compulsory media training for players.  Shakes things up a bit, no?

[Dr. Crossbar]

20 minutes ago, BC_Hawk said:

People need to revert to what we looked like before his arrival. It is VERY HARD to find a young Top4 let alone a top pair RHD. Guys like Ekholm and Tanev look great, but father time is knocking on there door. These guys are either drafted and developed (hopefully Willander) OR traded for in blockbuster trades (Hronek).

 

There is a reason that PA has focused his efforts (outside of that trade) in bringing in LHD; they are simply cheaper and more readily available. 

 

Exactly. Thanks for the added perspective. Hronek is perfect for this window until Willlander arrives. We're fortunate to have him AND he doesn't need to be nice.

[PhillipBlunt]

4 minutes ago, Maniwaki Canuck said:

Whatever you think about Hronek, it's great to see a throwback to a time before compulsory media training for players.  Shakes things up a bit, no?

Having had time to ruminate on it, I find the whole portion of the interview with Splaterson and Hronek very amusing. 

[-dlc-]

19 minutes ago, Gurn said:

Ignoring things, by saying it's not an issue, can lead  to issues; that would also not be a good thing.

He may not be "ignoring things" and I'm sure the people who need to know, know.

 

Media's looking for stuff to expand upon and maybe they don't get all the info they'd like. Doesn't mean there's nothing there, just that not everything's always disclosed to the public.

 

It's quite common to keep the cards close to your chest and not reveal things that give others an upper hand or something to target. I mean, personal health is personal business in regards to how much the public gets access to.

 

He said no. Good enough for me.

[Maniwaki Canuck]

4 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Having had time to ruminate on it, I find the whole portion of the interview with Splaterson and Hronek very amusing. 

Absolutely.  Just sit back and watch the sparks fly.  

[NewbieCanuckFan]

 

15 minutes ago, HOFsedins said:

I've mentioned this before. 

 

You have to realize that playing with Hughes doesnt make you a top pairing RHD. When he was tasked to anchor his own pairing, he did not fare well. I agree that he did look good for the first half of the year, but how much is that because of Hughes though? 

 

I remember when he was traded, majority of people didnt know who he was. Now all of a sudden, he is a top pairing defenseman?

Probably a #2.  Can play on a top pairing without an issue (but likely can't carry one).  Nothing to be ashamed in that is that there probably isn't 32 #1 defensemen in the entire league.  

 

Question is, is he a #3 or a #4?  Can he carry a 2nd pairing (a #3)?  Might depend on who his partner is (eg., Hughes can pretty much play with anyone on the team at this point (imho) and still not have that pairing look awful).

[quattrob]

1 hour ago, syntheticity said:

 

No one is claiming that he committed a moral crime. Or at least I'm not. I just don't think H did himself any favours and that there was nothing inappropriate about JPat's injury question.

 

I think it was more the part when JPat said "We've given your space all year/season.." to me it sounded like we need answers because we did this.. guilt tripping even if true, JPat should've not said that.  It just sounds like Hronek owes you something which he has the right now to give.  If JPat left that part out, I would agree with you more.

Edited May 24 by quattrob

[-dlc-]

Let's think about this from Hronek's perspective.

 

You just got knocked out of the playoffs. Your production had slipped but you're likely not in the best space right now. Trying to process it all.

 

Some guy's question basically could be translated as: 'you've sucked lately, do you have an excuse for that?"

 

Hronek's right...if he knew why he was struggling he'd likely have adjusted. Sometimes you don't have the answers so pushing for one, despite having left you alone all year, is all about bad timing. Maybe you should have asked then not now? Because he's clearly not in the mood and not everyone deals with failure (which is what he's likely feeling) the same way. Dejection is obviously part of this and he's working through it. He smiled/tried. But don't get cocky and fire at him when he's not giving you what you want.

 

It's refreshing when players don't pretend everything's roses and sunshine or give canned answers to appease the masses. He's pissed off right now.

 

"Look we gave you your space" was the part of that conversation that was more of a challenge than anything constructive in my view. And, at this particular time, you'll likely get pushback from a guy who's unhappy (yes, clearly miserable) with the recent outcome of things. Surprise!?

[syntheticity]

40 minutes ago, Dr. Crossbar said:

 

There isn't anything inappropriate about those two questions. Hronek just didn't act way he and others wanted or expected.  That's why we're here. And I say, good for him. 

 

There are some in here who clearly share your reaction to H's answer, others who don't. Ultimately, in my view, such reactions are a matter of aesthetic preference; and both are perfectly rational. However, it's a further q how his responses will shape his overall public perception moving fwd. My sense is that he didn't do himself any favours on that front (assuming he remains in Vancouver), but only time will tell I suppose...

 

[-dlc-]

Drance didn't like the "combative response". Sigh.

 

Drama.

 

/out

[syntheticity]

3 minutes ago, quattrob said:

 

I think it was more the part when JPat said "We've given your space all year/season.." to me it sounded like we need answers because we did this.. guilt tripping even if true, JPat should've not said that.  It just sounds like Hronek owes you something which he has the right now to give.  If JPat left that part out, I would agree with you more.

 

Totally with you on that. I've previously agreed with others (in the original GDT for the topic) that Jpat's followup question was poorly framed. I was just pushing back against the idea that there was anything inappropriate with his initial injury question that warranted H's evasive, disengaged response. I think both H and Jpat had a part to play in how things unfolded.

[-dlc-]

5 minutes ago, syntheticity said:

 

There are some in here who clearly share your reaction to H's answer, others who don't. Ultimately, in my view, such reactions are a matter of aesthetic preference; and both are perfectly rational. However, it's a further q how his responses will shape his overall public perception moving fwd. My sense is that he didn't do himself any favours on that front (assuming he remains in Vancouver), but only time will tell I suppose...

 

"Image is everything"?

 

Look, we've had players who've given the canned nicey nice responses. May as well stick cardboard cutouts up there.

 

He wore his heart on his sleeve...disappointment's obviously set in. 

 

I love players who don't care what the masses think....they're there to play hockey, first and foremost. You want a spokesman? Talk to the captain and leave me the f alone because the wound is raw and wide open. 

 

Yes, end of year media is part of it. But don't try to tell players how they should respond...they're individuals. Human beings. Some hide their disappointment and can move through it quickly, others may carry it for awhile. Asking them why they sucked (in prettier words) probably isn't going to incite the nicest reaction.

[-dlc-]

4 minutes ago, quattrob said:

 

I think it was more the part when JPat said "We've given your space all year/season.." to me it sounded like we need answers because we did this.. guilt tripping even if true, JPat should've not said that.  It just sounds like Hronek owes you something which he has the right now to give.  If JPat left that part out, I would agree with you more.

Bingo.

 

THAT was combative in my opinion. He threw out the first dagger because he wasn't getting the answers he wanted. But that was hardly the way to dig for them.

[Maniwaki Canuck]

I feel like we're forgetting Zadorov's stellar response to the question about pricing himself out of the market.  Still laughing about that one.  Just think how entertaining it would be if more players knew how to put the media on the back foot like that.  We had the alien death stare,  now there's Hronek, but suppose we had all that and more?  Might teach the local media some much needed respect.