Bob McKenzie
@TSNBobMcKenzie
·
1m
It’s my understanding NHLPA conference call tonight was spirited if not raucous. While exec committee voting won’t be finalized until Friday, some believe Don Fehr may already have or will get the mandate to accept NHL RTP plan but not overwhelmingly so.
Just read that iMac said Virtanen, McCann Boeser, Joulevi are Benning picks and Pettersson, Hughes, Podz are Brackett picks.
Interesting coming from iMac as he tends to be the organization mouthpiece. Wonder if the relationship is changing or something else as this certainly doesn't make Benning look great in the Brackett drama.
I personally subscribe to the notion that all good and bad decisions land at a GM's feet so I don't really care if Brackett goes but an iMac revolt would be news. - belcherbd
My thinking is those earlier picks were when the transition period was just beginning. Looks more like picks for needs. Later picks more so JB deferred more to his scouts. In the end scouts do all the work & combine opinions & the GM has final say on the direction to go. I doubt Judd doesn’t have more input on who to pick the deeper the draft gets. JB on down work together.
Just read that iMac said Virtanen, McCann Boeser, Joulevi are Benning picks and Pettersson, Hughes, Podz are Brackett picks.
Interesting coming from iMac as he tends to be the organization mouthpiece. Wonder if the relationship is changing or something else as this certainly doesn't make Benning look great in the Brackett drama.
I personally subscribe to the notion that all good and bad decisions land at a GM's feet so I don't really care if Brackett goes but an iMac revolt would be news. - belcherbd
I remember seeing at the draft table and it was Hughes or someone else . Benning looked at Brackett and said Hughes and Brackett nodded. It is not like it was a great debate.
Same thing at this years draft with Podz . It is not like Brackett and Benning were arguing who to take.
It really is a lot of Horse S this debate (not you).
My thinking is those earlier picks were when the transition period was just beginning. Looks more like picks for needs. Later picks more so JB deferred more to his scouts. In the end scouts do all the work & combine opinions & the GM has final say on the direction to go. I doubt Judd doesn’t have more input on who to pick the deeper the draft gets. JB on down work together. - Nighthawk
I'm not sure what you mean by transition, it's not like Benning was new to drafting. I agree that those picks seemed my about trying to draft for a specific need though. That said I think all teams draft pick based on need somewhat.
I remember seeing at the draft table and it was Hughes or someone else . Benning looked at Brackett and said Hughes and Brackett nodded. It is not like it was a great debate.
Same thing at this years draft with Podz . It is not like Brackett and Benning were arguing who to take.
It really is a lot of Horse S this debate (not you). - VANTEL
Yeah, I agree that the debate is horse poop and Benning looked just as pumped as the rest of the table when Hughes fell to them. I'm not sure I've ever seen an argument break out a table either though, realistically I think these guys have their lists set way in advance. I think there is a 60 or 90 second clock past the 2nd round?
Just read that iMac said Virtanen, McCann Boeser, Joulevi are Benning picks and Pettersson, Hughes, Podz are Brackett picks.
Interesting coming from iMac as he tends to be the organization mouthpiece. Wonder if the relationship is changing or something else as this certainly doesn't make Benning look great in the Brackett drama.
I personally subscribe to the notion that all good and bad decisions land at a GM's feet so I don't really care if Brackett goes but an iMac revolt would be news. - belcherbd
Benning was huge on Hughes so that doesnt sound right at all.
Who they pick is collective with Benning having the final say.
Yeah, I agree that the debate is horse poop and Benning looked just as pumped as the rest of the table when Hughes fell to them. I'm not sure I've ever seen an argument break out a table either though, realistically I think these guys have their lists set way in advance. I think there is a 60 or 90 second clock past the 2nd round? - belcherbd
But Juolevi was Benning’s choice back in 2016 because the GM wanted a defenceman and loved what he saw from the Finn at the world juniors. He could have chosen Mikhail Sergachev or Charlie McAvoy. Benning is believed to have gone with Brackett’s first-round recommendation ever since.
Like I said, I agree the GM owns every pick, good or bad. I'm just surprised iMac weighed in considering how much press this topic is getting. Whether he is right or wrong he certainly is suggesting that Benning passed the final judgment to Brackett after the Joulevi pick.
I'm not sure what you mean by transition, it's not like Benning was new to drafting. I agree that those picks seemed my about trying to draft for a specific need though. That said I think all teams draft pick based on need somewhat. - belcherbd
Like I said, I agree the GM owns every pick, good or bad. I'm just surprised iMac weighed in considering how much press this topic is getting. Whether he is right or wrong he certainly is suggesting that Benning passed the final judgment to Brackett after the Joulevi pick. - belcherbd
I understand what you are saying.
Reading through it, there is nothing to suggest that there was a difference of opinions on who to take in the 1st round since the OJ selection. It just says "it is believed Benning has gone with Brackets 1st round recommendations" since then. As we can see, there was definitely no divide on the Hughes pick. This could be the same for all the 1st round selections... or not. It clearly suggests that Benning hasnt gone against Brackett's recommendations since then. Bracketts recommendations dont suggest those are his players alone. No where does Imac list two groups of players for Benning and Brackett as who's picks they are. He just talks about OJ being Bennings because he was wanting a Dman and was impressed with his WJC performance..
Location: Auckland -Burn it all down Joined: 10.22.2008
May 22 @ 1:22 AM ET
I understand what you are saying.
Reading through it, there is nothing to suggest that there was a difference of opinions on who to take in the 1st round since the OJ selection. It just says "it is believed Benning has gone with Brackets 1st round recommendations" since then. As we can see, there was definitely no divide on the Hughes pick. This could be the same for all the 1st round selections... or not. It clearly suggests that Benning hasnt gone against Brackett's recommendations since then. Bracketts recommendations dont suggest those are his players alone. - boonerbuck
Reading through it, there is nothing to suggest that there was a difference of opinions on who to take in the 1st round since the OJ selection. It just says "it is believed Benning has gone with Brackets 1st round recommendations" since then. As we can see, there was definitely no divide on the Hughes pick. This could be the same for all the 1st round selections... or not. It clearly suggests that Benning hasnt gone against Brackett's recommendations since then. Bracketts recommendations dont suggest those are his players alone. - boonerbuck
Reading through it, there is nothing to suggest that there was a difference of opinions on who to take in the 1st round since the OJ selection. It just says "it is believed Benning has gone with Brackets 1st round recommendations" since then. As we can see, there was definitely no divide on the Hughes pick. This could be the same for all the 1st round selections... or not. It clearly suggests that Benning hasnt gone against Brackett's recommendations since then. Bracketts recommendations dont suggest those are his players alone. No where does Imac list two groups of players for Benning and Brackett as who's picks they are. He just talks about OJ being Bennings because he was wanting a Dman and was impressed with his WJC performance.. - boonerbuck
*whose,
since you like to point out my odd spelling mistake.😁
Is it? Because I’m looking at the US CDC website and it doesn’t actually say what you are saying it says... - 1970vintage
The CDC made a subtle change to their claim about contacting through touching surfaces. Now they are now saying "it doesnt spread easily" by touching surfaces.
All media outlets are quoting this. I havent seen any say anything about zero risk though.
The CDC made a subtle change to their claim about contacting through touching surfaces. Now they are now saying "it doesnt spread easily" by touching surfaces.
All media outlets are quoting this. I havent seen any say anything about zero risk though. - boonerbuck
Yeah, the sensational headline on Fox News was “CDC now says Coronavirus does not spread easily”. What the CDC says is that person to person transmission is still the most likely way to spread the virus. That while getting it from a surface like a counter or package is uncommon, people should still be washing their hands and sanitizing commonly used surfaces.
Perhaps it’s a subtle difference to their previous narrative, but I have never heard any health official suggest we should distance ourselves from door handles.
Yeah, the sensational headline on Fox News was “CDC now says Coronavirus does not spread easily”. What the CDC says is that person to person transmission is still the most likely way to spread the virus. That while getting it from a surface like a counter or package is uncommon, people should still be washing their hands and sanitizing commonly used surfaces.
Perhaps it’s a subtle difference to their previous narrative, but I have never heard any health official suggest we should distance ourselves from door handles. - 1970vintage
Thats no different than the games the Washington Post plays. No surprise. Both outlets are corporate media with low integrity. One panders to the right, the other the left.
US health official says "“There’s a possibility that the assault of the virus on our nation next winter will actually be even more difficult than the one we just went through,”
WP misquotes in the title and makes up their own sensational claim: "CDC director warns second wave of coronavirus is likely to be even more devastating"
Location: Turning a new Leaf, CA Joined: 09.29.2010
May 22 @ 7:17 AM ET
The CDC made a subtle change to their claim about contacting through touching surfaces. Now they are now saying "it doesnt spread easily" by touching surfaces.
All media outlets are quoting this. I havent seen any say anything about zero risk though. - boonerbuck
I saw that reported on the "news" as well. The CDC is garbage anyway. Just a shill site for vaccine manufacturers.
Location: Turning a new Leaf, CA Joined: 09.29.2010
May 22 @ 7:27 AM ET
Bob McKenzie
@TSNBobMcKenzie
·
1m
It’s my understanding NHLPA conference call tonight was spirited if not raucous. While exec committee voting won’t be finalized until Friday, some believe Don Fehr may already have or will get the mandate to accept NHL RTP plan but not overwhelmingly so. - VANTEL
Great, so they're playing. If they don't play I could see a bunch of teams folding. The TV money only gets paid if they play. Gate receipts are gone so they need to fulfill their commercial commitments to keep the money flowing.
