Who Can Be The Canucks New GM?

[Todd Bersnoozi]

Even though Benning doesn't look very comfortable in front of media conferences and in the spotlight, it's good to see that he looks very comfortable where it counts, interacting with players (starts around 1:40). He seemed to walk in there with a lot of confidence and knows he's the new boss.

[Betamax]

Hey Betamax, one of your links (Friedman's story about potentially changing the draft lottery/odds) supports your "there are two top prospects" claim but seriously undermines your original "there's no way the Canucks could get one of them" claim.

I mean, if you care about people being able to support their claims that might be an issue.

Oh please, dave, spare me your rhetoric. There's a big difference between speculation and proposals and what the reality of the situation currently is. I'm operating on the premise that things will stay the same. Until things actually change it would be premature to get your hopes up, cyber bro.

UPDATE:

Jun 24 3:24 PM ET
By Pierre LeBrun | ESPN.com

via: http://espn.go.com/blog/nhl/post/_/id/3 ... for-kesler

Draft lottery update
When NHL general managers met in New York during the Stanley Cup finals, there wasn't consensus from the group to go ahead with a plan to change the draft-lottery format.

Some were for it; others -- most notably Buffalo Sabres GM Tim Murray -- were against changing it for 2015 for obvious reasons. It's the draft involving highly touted prospects Connor McDavid and Jack Eichel.

Several GMs we spoke with left the meeting believing the matter was to be further debated, but that no changes were on the horizon for next year.

Deputy commissioner Bill Daly plans to table a draft-lottery proposal Thursday at the board of governors’ meeting in New York for owners to look at.

If owners give it the go-ahead, the plan could be implemented next year. Interesting, to say the least.

[ClamRussel]

This just proves Buffalo has no intention on improving & in fact are already in Penguins-tank mode! Screw them, time to re-jig the draft so all teams focus on winning.

[Betamax]

Hey Betamax, one of your links (Friedman's story about potentially changing the draft lottery/odds) supports your "there are two top prospects" claim but seriously undermines your original "there's no way the Canucks could get one of them" claim.

I mean, if you care about people being able to support their claims that might be an issue.

Hey dave, if you care about yourself being able to support your claims .... how has the NHL changed the "draft lottery rules" for the 2015 draft?

[dbr]

My claim was that the process of determining the top draft choices in 2015 may be changed, supported by a link you posted to an article by a respected journalist. So claiming that the Canucks could not get one of the top two prospects was IMO premature and you did less credulous posters a favour by inadvertently undermining your claim with that link (assuming they had not already read it, of course).

If the current view that the changes in lottery odds (but not the draw for positions after 1st overall) will go into effect immediately prevails, the Canucks could have a season similar to this past one and have a nearly equal chance at Connor McDavid as the team finishing 30th overall.

My claim was supported at the time I posted it and no subsequent development (aside from say, a major scandal in which it came to light that Elliotte Friedman was fabricating the stories he reported) would change that.

[Betamax]

My claim was that the process of determining the top draft choices in 2015 may be changed, supported by a link you posted to an article by a respected journalist. So claiming that the Canucks could not get one of the top two prospects was IMO premature and you did less credulous posters a favour by inadvertently undermining your claim with that link (assuming they had not already read it, of course).

If the current view that the changes in lottery odds (but not the draw for positions after 1st overall) will go into effect immediately prevails, the Canucks could have a season similar to this past one and have a nearly equal chance at Connor McDavid as the team finishing 30th overall.

My claim was supported at the time I posted it and no subsequent development (aside from say, a major scandal in which it came to light that Elliotte Friedman was fabricating the stories he reported) would change that.

Uh, dave, where exactly are you getting this information that a team finishes 6th overall will have nearly an equal chance at 1st overall?

Citation please ...............

[dbr]

Not worth my time, Braytamax.

Feel free to wilfully ignore the fact that I said similar (and not identical) and discount the entire paragraph, the rest still stands. My original statement was fact based, unlike the claims you were propping up (poorly) with the Friedman link.

[Betamax]

Not worth my time, Braytamax.

Feel free to wilfully ignore the fact that I said similar (and not identical) and discount the entire paragraph, the rest still stands. My original statement was fact based, unlike the claims you were propping up (poorly) with the Friedman link.

Nice try, dave.

NOT.

dave, why don't you show some intellectual honesty for once and say that you were making inferences from information that was not specific?

For example:

via: http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=455770

The league has proposed smoothing or compressing the odds among the 14 non-playoff teams for the 2015 draft and then increasing the number of selections determined by the lottery in 2016.

Where are you getting the specific numbers where you've come to the conclusion that .....a team finishes 6th overall will have nearly an equal chance at 1st overall?"

This ...........................




BTW, the information I have acquired knowledge on the proposed changes .... it CONTRADICTS what you have been inferring.


Curious that.

via: https://twitter.com/BNHarrington/status ... 2104060928

Buffalo News baseball columnist and Sabres beat writer. 2013 Buffalo Baseball HOF inductee. 'Mike, YOU coach!' -- Lindy Ruff, 1/18/12

Mike Harrington ‏@BNHarrington

#Sabres GM Tim Murray says No. 1 odds next year drop to 19-20 % and confirms they would only drop to No. 2 in '15 if last/lottery loser

8:48 AM - 27 Jun 2014

So, dave, you tell me, how can a number 6 pick overall have close to a 1/5 chance at "winning" the Draft if what Mr. Harrington (who is quoting an NHL GM with a vested interest in said information) suggests otherwise.

The math don't fit, therefore I must object.

What say you?

[Aaronp18]

Wow!

[Meds]

My claim was that the process of determining the top draft choices in 2015 may be changed, supported by a link you posted to an article by a respected journalist. So claiming that the Canucks could not get one of the top two prospects was IMO premature and you did less credulous posters a favour by inadvertently undermining your claim with that link (assuming they had not already read it, of course).

If the current view that the changes in lottery odds (but not the draw for positions after 1st overall) will go into effect immediately prevails, the Canucks could have a season similar to this past one and have a nearly equal chance at Connor McDavid as the team finishing 30th overall.

My claim was supported at the time I posted it and no subsequent development (aside from say, a major scandal in which it came to light that Elliotte Friedman was fabricating the stories he reported) would change that.

Uh, dave, where exactly are you getting this information that a team finishes 6th overall will have nearly an equal chance at 1st overall?

Citation please ...............

Are you really that fucking retarded BaterMax? Where did he say anything in that paragraph you've so nicely bolded for us about a team finishing 6th overall and having and equal chance at 1st overall? He said that if the Canucks had a similar season to this past one, where they finished 25th overall, they could have the same odds of landing the first overall pick as the team that finished 30th overall. A difference of 5 spots in the standings.

And I haven't seen dbr post any numbers either. Just comment on the speculation that was out there.

Fuck are you an annoying nitpicker.

[Betamax]

My claim was that the process of determining the top draft choices in 2015 may be changed, supported by a link you posted to an article by a respected journalist. So claiming that the Canucks could not get one of the top two prospects was IMO premature and you did less credulous posters a favour by inadvertently undermining your claim with that link (assuming they had not already read it, of course).

If the current view that the changes in lottery odds (but not the draw for positions after 1st overall) will go into effect immediately prevails, the Canucks could have a season similar to this past one and have a nearly equal chance at Connor McDavid as the team finishing 30th overall.

My claim was supported at the time I posted it and no subsequent development (aside from say, a major scandal in which it came to light that Elliotte Friedman was fabricating the stories he reported) would change that.

Uh, dave, where exactly are you getting this information that a team finishes 6th overall will have nearly an equal chance at 1st overall?

Citation please ...............

Are you really that fucking retarded BaterMax? Where did he say anything in that paragraph you've so nicely bolded for us about a team finishing 6th overall and having and equal chance at 1st overall? He said that if the Canucks had a similar season to this past one, where they finished 25th overall, they could have the same odds of landing the first overall pick as the team that finished 30th overall. A difference of 5 spots in the standings.

And I haven't seen dbr post any numbers either. Just comment on the speculation that was out there.

Fuck are you an annoying nitpicker.

Uh, what part of the following passage did you not get when cyber bro dave wrote the following?

If the current view that the changes in lottery odds (but not the draw for positions after 1st overall) will go into effect immediately prevails, the Canucks could have a season similar to this past one and have a nearly equal chance at Connor McDavid as the team finishing 30th overall.

The tweet by Mike Harrington ‏@BNHarrington

via: https://twitter.com/BNHarrington/status ... 2104060928

#Sabres GM Tim Murray says No. 1 odds next year drop to 19-20 % and confirms they would only drop to No. 2 in '15 if last/lottery loser

8:48 AM - 27 Jun 2014

essentially refutes cyber bro's dave's speculation.

If you can't put one and one together then it's on you and you should keep quiet and stop further embarrassing yourself here as you have here unfortunately with regular occurrence ..... oh, and your other deactivated accounts can't save you too, bro.

For the others here .... let me try to explain things more clearly:

For the 2014 Entry Draft, the #30th overall team (worst record) (Sabres) had a 25% chance at the No. 1 pick. The Canucks at 24th overall (sixth worst record) had a 6.2%.

via: http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=714727

Anyone with any intelligence can use logical deduction that for 2015, it's going to drop to 19-20% as per the tweet for the #30th overall team (worst record), you have 79%-80% remaining to be split up among the 13 other teams that misses the playoffs. So how the Hell can the Canucks at 24th overall (sixth worst record) go up from 6.2 to nearly 19-20%?

The math don't fit, therefore you should exercise your right to refrain from further embarrassing yourself.

[Strangelove]

Anyone with any intelligence can use logical deduction that for 2015, it's going to drop to 19-20% as per the tweet for the #30th overall team (worst record), you have 79%-80% remaining to be split up among the 13 other teams that misses the playoffs. So how the Hell can the Canucks at 24th overall (sixth worst record) go up from 6.2 to nearly 19-20%?

The math don't fit, therefore you should exercise your right to refrain from further embarrassing yourself.

Actually that would be 80%-81%.... Mr Math Whiz.

[Betamax]

Anyone with any intelligence can use logical deduction that for 2015, it's going to drop to 19-20% as per the tweet for the #30th overall team (worst record), you have 79%-80% remaining to be split up among the 13 other teams that misses the playoffs. So how the Hell can the Canucks at 24th overall (sixth worst record) go up from 6.2 to nearly 19-20%?

The math don't fit, therefore you should exercise your right to refrain from further embarrassing yourself.

Actually that would be 80%-81%.... Mr Math Whiz.

Whatever .... right now, I'm posting with a 3 minute time limit per post while multi-tasking. Still, my math is better than the math cyber bro dave or Mëds trying to foist on this board. Do you disagree?

If so, out of the 13 non-playoffs teams left, splitting 80-81% of the remaining pie .... how would a team that finish with the a record similar to the Canucks' 6th worst record have nearly an 19-20% chance at the top pick?

Explain that one to me please.

[Strangelove]

Actually that would be 80%-81%.... Mr Math Whiz.

Whatever

You are demanding mathematical precision from others and not providing that yourself.

Irony much?

BTW Masta Beta, you're not trolling the best posters at this site are ya buds?

(dbr, IN, Blob, etc)

Saaaay... isn't that why you were BANNED from HF?

*polishes badge*

[Betamax]

Actually that would be 80%-81%.... Mr Math Whiz.

Whatever

You are demanding mathematical precision from others and not providing that yourself.

Irony much?

BTW Masta Beta, you're not trolling the best posters at this site are ya buds?

(dbr, IN, Blob, etc)

Saaaay... isn't that why you were BANNED from HF?

*polishes badge*

Uh, I'm pretty confident that cyber bro dave and Mëds by extension "math" as per their previous comments is significantly more "off" than I was.

Do you disagree?