CanucksCorner.com Forums

RoyalDude wrote:

Ronning's Ghost wrote:You keep losing the plot, RD. The thread is not 'The Great Mike Gillis Debate'. Whether or not Mike Gillis was any good is no longer relevant, and of very limited interest.

You're not even helping your argument for Jim Benning's competence. If you insist that Mike Gillis was an absolutely terrible GM, and then argue that Jim Benning is better, then there's still room for Benning to be pretty bad, if the best thing you can say about him is that he's better than a GM you consider to be terrible.

How about comparing Benning to Sam Pollock ?

Listen RG Bunker did ya dig Gilleye's first 3 years at the draft table or were you not cool with it? Shit I don't know how anyone in their right mind could be cool with it, maybe the mad Sicilian - Roberto Macenzzi but that is just about it. The Canucks have zilch from Gilleyes first 3 years at the draft table! Zilch! Hell, Benning did better in the 2nd and 3rd round of his first draft than Gilleye did in ALL the rounds of his first 3 drafts. Gawd fucking awful I tell ya.

Ronning's Ghost wrote:
If, as a long-time Benning skeptic, I concede that Benning started in a disadvantageous position?

Ronning's Ghost wrote:

RoyalDude wrote:

Ronning's Ghost wrote:You keep losing the plot, RD. The thread is not 'The Great Mike Gillis Debate'. Whether or not Mike Gillis was any good is no longer relevant, and of very limited interest.

You're not even helping your argument for Jim Benning's competence. If you insist that Mike Gillis was an absolutely terrible GM, and then argue that Jim Benning is better, then there's still room for Benning to be pretty bad, if the best thing you can say about him is that he's better than a GM you consider to be terrible.

How about comparing Benning to Sam Pollock ?

Listen RG Bunker did ya dig Gilleye's first 3 years at the draft table or were you not cool with it? Shit I don't know how anyone in their right mind could be cool with it, maybe the mad Sicilian - Roberto Macenzzi but that is just about it. The Canucks have zilch from Gilleyes first 3 years at the draft table! Zilch! Hell, Benning did better in the 2nd and 3rd round of his first draft than Gilleye did in ALL the rounds of his first 3 drafts. Gawd fucking awful I tell ya.

If, as a long-time Benning skeptic, I concede that Benning started in a disadvantageous position, can we just move on from there and keep this thread about how good a job he has done of managing his way forward out of that position ?

RoyalDude wrote:

Ronning's Ghost wrote:
If, as a long-time Benning skeptic, I concede that Benning started in a disadvantageous position?

I am stunned, RG Bunker!

They are finally admitting it, my mission may be over. Doc you see this?

What an admission, thank you, RG

Blob Mckenzie wrote:

RoyalDude wrote:

Ronning's Ghost wrote:
If, as a long-time Benning skeptic, I concede that Benning started in a disadvantageous position?

I am stunned, RG Bunker!

They are finally admitting it, my mission may be over. Doc you see this?

What an admission, thank you, RG

I think we all know that Elmer walked into a situation that wasn't ideal and the team was barren of young talent. It doesn't excuse some of the blunders he has made in his three years here.

Blob Mckenzie wrote:Every team has Gaudette , Lockwood and Brisebois type prospects. None of these guys has proven a thing. Tryamkin was a good pick but he wants nothing to do with this organization.Elmer will be judged on Boeser, Juolevi, Virtanen, McCann and this years pick.

rats19 wrote:Gillis was in a do or die situation with aging vets his window was "now" so to speak. A lot like Dallas right now, in that scenario you don't protect your pics as hard as maybe they should. To me that's why gillis drafting sucked he put it all out there for the ... now.

We pay for it in the present but if we had a cup it wouldn't be as painful

Blob Mckenzie wrote:What does Craig Button think of Jake Virtanen ?

RoyalDude wrote:

rats19 wrote:Gillis was in a do or die situation with aging vets his window was "now" so to speak. A lot like Dallas right now, in that scenario you don't protect your pics as hard as maybe they should. To me that's why gillis drafting sucked he put it all out there for the ... now.

We pay for it in the present but if we had a cup it wouldn't be as painful

Um so because of that weird logic he should not care about drafting well with the picks they had at the draft? Just phone it in, "pick whoever, I don't give a Rats ass"?

Cornuck wrote:He needed to follow the Detroit model and get lucky in the later rounds.