Pokecheque wrote:
Okay, what is going on here...first Friedman with his comments about how Benning and Linden look out of sorts and downtrodden, now this.
http://theprovince.com/sports/hockey/nh ... negativityQuote:
But how do you measure that? How do you know if it has any impact? If Benning was really spooked about the court of public opinion, why didn’t he flip Vanek for a fifth-rounder?
Because NO picks were on the table for Vanek. It was a non-starter.
Anyhow, my take on all the vitriol coming from the market, is a result of the mixed messages and communication coming from the Canucks management team. They don't seem to respect the hockey intelligence of the market they are in.
On the one hand, they say all the right things. Committed to a full on Rebuild. They claim to be committed to getting younger, faster and more skilled -- then they re-sign Gudbranson. They don't play to Benning's strengths at the draft table by stock piling draft picks. They trade away picks and don't get any in return. Signing Miller, Vrbata, Vanek, Del Zotto, Ericksson. Making hockey trades for 20 something unproven fringe players on other clubs with a limited ceiling, instead of building through the draft. Or at least utilizing the draft more than they have. Spending to the cap. They are rebuilding by cutting corners. Therefore the rebuild is taking far longer than it needs to and it's very frustrating to witness. Meandering.
Not sure about Friedman's comments, they seem out of character. Canuck management know full well what market they are in -- and remain steadfast to the mixed plan.