Rss

I don’t get the impression Brackett is in a hurry to leave the Canucks organization. He’s well-respected here and unless he has a desire to move into a management role I think he’s in a good spot for now

As far as the second question goes, I know what you’re referring to- Judd and Jim were at odds over which players to select at times during this year’s draft, and ultimately Brackett was overridden on a number of occasions – but I haven’t really heard it described as “bickering”. Teams generally draft by consensus, or give individual scouts the opportunity to make certain picks, so I don’t think the situation is cause for concern. Not yet, anyway. Jim Benning is a scout at heart and perhaps that will wear on Judd Brackett eventually and he’ll look to move somewhere where he’ll have more control, but I think it’s a little early to speculate.

Honestly, the biggest reason is just that I don’t have time. Writing here makes enough income to be considered a job, and I also have a day job that keeps me busy four days out of the week. Between that, doing Roxy Fever, and playing in two bands there just isn’t a lot of time for other stuff.

I also find gaming to have a pacifying effect on me. The system of simulated challenges and rewards satisfies that part of me just enough that I’m less likely to feel motivated to experience real challenges and rewards. I’d imagine that’s probably true for a lot of people, though perhaps not everyone. Either way, I’ve found that I’ve been a happier person when video games aren’t part of my life – less frustrated and more engaged in what’s going on around me.

First of all, I don’t know why so many people seem so eager to move Jordie Benn to the right side. General Managers across the league go through the trouble of painstakingly constructing a roster with balanced left and right sides, so I don’t think it’s particularly likely that the Canucks would move out a right-handed D unless they have one ready to step in.

I also don’t think the Canucks have any reason to sign Ben Hutton. He struggled here, and unless he’s got another gear, there are probably better options available at $2 million – perhaps even ones who play the right side.

I honestly don’t know, but I’ve been told more than once by people I respect that it’s a big enough difference to make an impact. I’m not convinced that the trade off is worth it, though. It could very well just be the drafting, but it’s not as though the Comets organization has churned out a ton of NHL regulars. There would be advantages to having the team in California that extend beyond injury call-ups. Chief among them is that the front office have an easier time keeping up with what’s going on in the minors.

To be honest, I’m agnostic on the issue. There are clear advantages and disadvantages and I think anyone who feels very strongly either way is probably selling snake oil.

21-1 sounds like a championship team to me. I’d like their chances better if they hired Ryan as a consultant.

It’s tough to know where to start with this one. One thing I’ll say is that NHLe isn’t something I put a ton of stock in without other inputs. It’s not particularly advanced and the quality of each of the leagues it takes into account is in a constant state of flux.

When I say Hughes is more dynamic, I’m talking about play style, not point production. Hughes is one of the most brilliant, effortless skaters I’ve ever seen at any level, and his edges are far better than Ellis’ were at the same age. Ellis was a more well-rounded defenseman with a better shot, but when it comes to style, speed, and creativity, I think Hughes has the edge.

A lot of this has to do with era – Ellis’ draft campaign was ten years ago now and the defense position has changed tremendously since then. Defense has moved away from in-zone play and big booming shots from the point towards being more about what you can do in transition. So maybe comparing them at all is unfair. I’ll also admit I saw a lot more of Hughes in his draft year than I did of Ellis when I was in high school. But I think they have less in common stylistically than people think. Outside of their height, they don’t necessarily have a ton in common.

Look, I know I said you could ask me anything, but I lied.

Mike Keenan and Mark Messier are both proven winners. I don’t see any issue here.

I think Kyle covered this one pretty well:

The scariest thing about Francesco Aqulini when it comes to hockey operations is that I don’t think he’s purely motivated by money. The Canucks are a cultural touchstone in Vancouver. Having season tickets is a status symbol and games are a networking opportunity. I don’t think the Aquilini Group would sell the team unless someone made them an offer they couldn’t refuse.


Important
This site makes use of cookies which may contain tracking information about visitors. By continuing to browse this site you agree to our use of cookies.