Indulge me then. If not coincidence, nor planned. What is it? - neem55
Well, it isn’t a coincidence because the likelihood that all those players walk or are traded (without signing a contract extension) AND THEN are replaced by those players mentioned to fill similar roles and make similar contributions is 1 in 100,000,000,000.
It isn’t planned because a) the above, and b) Miller was not targeted because of his contract length, Canucks were the only team willing to give Ferland and Miller that term and Horvat was already under contract.
Well, it isn’t a coincidence because the likelihood that all those players walk or are traded (without signing a contract extension) AND THEN are replaced by those players mentioned to fill similar roles and make similar contributions is 1 in 100,000,000,000.
It isn’t planned because a) the above, and b) Miller was not targeted because of his contract length, Canucks were the only team willing to give Ferland and Miller that term and Horvat was already under contract.
Basically, they hypothesis is total bullpoop.
- 1970vintage
Hmm it seems like pro contracts running out at the same time as elcs is wuote intentional. I have to agree about roles and whatnot though, much different players and sure hope podz end up much better than miller and ferland
Location: This message is Marwood approved! Joined: 11.30.2011
Jul 22 @ 2:30 AM ET
I thought it was pretty self explanatory there Jethro. - 1970vintage
I'd say it's not planned because there is little chance we don't re-sign Horvat, yet it's not coincidence because Ferland's deal was the last signed and his contract expires at the same time as Miller's.
Hmm it seems like pro contracts running out at the same time as elcs is wuote intentional. I have to agree about roles and whatnot though, much different players and sure hope podz end up much better than miller and ferland - neem55
Benning isn’t planning player X replacing player Y in Z years. You hope that every year, someone takes a step and provides you with better performance at lower cost. But to say he purposefully signed/traded for/re-signed three different players with the intention of replacing them in the same year with kids you just drafted, or even kids you haven’t even drafted yet is beyond stupid (and fat too).
I'd say it's not planned because there is little chance we don't re-sign Horvat, yet it's not coincidence because Ferland's deal was the last signed and his contract expires at the same time as Miller's.
It's neither, or both. - golfingsince
I don’t mean to sound like Benning isn’t thinking about the future, because I believe he is, but it’s not control x, control v
Location: This message is Marwood approved! Joined: 11.30.2011
Jul 22 @ 2:41 AM ET
I don’t mean to sound like Benning isn’t thinking about the future, because I believe he is, but it’s not control x, control v - 1970vintage
Do you think his thought process in trading for Miller was I have to get him his deal expires at the same time as Horvat's ?
However, maybe when he's signing Ferland as a UFA the thought process clicks in that in a few years he's going to want to re-sign one of or maybe both of the other two. I mean he did have a week or two to think about it.
I thought it was pretty self explanatory there Jethro. - 1970vintage
lol not quite, If not by design. Then it can be just coincidental. Saying neither is just being obtuse. Though saying both which was suggested later can also be possible.
Location: This message is Marwood approved! Joined: 11.30.2011
Jul 22 @ 2:44 AM ET
lol not quite, If not by design. Then it can be just coincidental. Saying neither is just being obtuse. Though saying both which was suggested later can also be possible. - NuckUp
Why is neither less acceptable than both? Because the word itself paints someone in a lesser light?
It was an either or question, and saying both in itself portends that it is neither.
Why is neither less acceptable than both? Because the word itself paints someone in a lesser light?
It was an either or question, and saying both in itself portends that it is neither.
Too high for ya? - golfingsince
No. But you answered it. Saying both means either one is possible as opposed to neither. But that's my interpretation. Its okay if you see it applied differently.
Location: This message is Marwood approved! Joined: 11.30.2011
Jul 22 @ 2:58 AM ET
No. But you answered it. Saying both means either one is possible as opposed to neither. But that's my interpretation. Its okay if you see it applied differently. - NuckUp
I don’t mean to sound like Benning isn’t thinking about the future, because I believe he is, but it’s not control x, control v - 1970vintage
True its not a formula. Though the conjecture is simple that 3 top 6 players will have their contracts ending at the same time past their prime years ages 28-31. While 3 projected top 6 prospects will be entering their prime years on expiring ELCs.
Location: This message is Marwood approved! Joined: 11.30.2011
Jul 22 @ 3:36 AM ET
True its not a formula. Though the conjecture is simple that 3 top 6 players will have their contracts ending at the same time past their prime years ages 28-31. While 3 projected top 6 prospects will be entering their prime years on expiring ELCs. - NuckUp
Do you think his thought process in trading for Miller was I have to get him his deal expires at the same time as Horvat's ?
However, maybe when he's signing Ferland as a UFA the thought process clicks in that in a few years he's going to want to re-sign one of or maybe both of the other two. I mean he did have a week or two to think about it. - golfingsince
In the very beginning Benning said age gaps. Could it be he was searching all along to layer the players in a such a way that we are only seeing it now? Sure it wasn’t going great but that was then & this is now.
Location: This message is Marwood approved! Joined: 11.30.2011
Jul 22 @ 3:55 AM ET
In the very beginning Benning said age gaps. Could it be he was searching all along to layer the players in a such a way that we are only seeing it now? Sure it wasn’t going great but that was then & this is now. - Nighthawk
In the very beginning Benning said age gaps. Could it be he was searching all along to layer the players in a such a way that we are only seeing it now? Sure it wasn’t going great but that was then & this is now. - Nighthawk
yes, generally
but i dont think quite to the specificity outlined here
I don't think EP will be mature enough by this year sometime. Plus, people will expect too much out of his leadership too early and when he disappoints, he'll get gutted by the fans. - boonerbuck
I was joking yesterday . I don't care at all about captain nominations. It is not like Canucks have a rich honor and this new one will follow the many heroes of years past.
