I am not sure what most of this is trying to say. I was specifically reffering to management, but it can easily be translated to us fans as well. Classic example fans being angry at Gillis for 1 bad season and part of the luongo deal... mistake.
Rumor: Canucks going after Barrie. (+ Hudler)
- Thread starter Canucks LB
- Start date
- Status
I am not sure what most of this is trying to say. I was specifically reffering to management, but it can easily be translated to us fans as well. Classic example fans being angry at Gillis for 1 bad season and part of the luongo deal... mistake.
Cupless44
Registered User
- Jun 25, 2014
- 7,154
- 3,298
Good post. Whether one likes the trade or not, which I was not thrilled with, how about we wait and see what this player actually does in Vancouver?
He was thrown into a mess of an organization at 19, where no one wanted to play at that time. He is still 24 with room to improve.
Personally I am not going to write off the rest of his career because an analytics guy said so.
rune74
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2008
- 9,228
- 552
y2kcanucks
Le Sex God
And if he doesn't? Will it be "oh so what?" like the last time you were proven wrong?
Cupless44
Registered User
- Jun 25, 2014
- 7,154
- 3,298
Nice easy and convenient for those who have condemned the guy and written him off as a barely #6 defenceman.
I you were referring to management why did you quote me? I was clearly talking about fan perspective. did you even read my post or the post I quoted?
rune74
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2008
- 9,228
- 552
Hah, you actually are still clinging to catching me on a quote from 4 years ago?
Sad.
rune74
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2008
- 9,228
- 552
I love the Gudbranson trade and that's not to defend this management (because I'm not) I just simply like having a guy like him on the team. The basis of corsi/fenwick in a nutshell is shots for/shots against, so it comes as no shock when a defensive player, like Gud doesn't have great fancy stats. But it seems since fancy stats are so hawt right now that it's the ONLY metric to evaluate players.
... And it's not.
If he is a good defensive player, he should be suppressing shot attempts at his goal such that there are fewer of them relative to offensive chances -- that's basically what makes one a good defensive player, assuming the purpose of defense is to prevent your team from being scored against. If an "offensive player" does this by skating the puck to the other end in search of scoring chances, that guy is doing a lot more for the defensive bottom line than the classic "stay-at-home" type.
Basically offense and defense are not two different things, they are both just measures of which way you are pushing the puck and making it more likely to go into the nearest goal.
It's very difficult to separate players from their QOT, though.
http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rat...teamid=0&type=shots&sort=A60RelTM&sortdir=ASC
Tanev and Edler are awesome at it. Willie Mitchell… not so much anymore.
y2kcanucks
Le Sex God
y2kcanucks
Le Sex God
Huge difference is they kinda did a semi tear-down when they traded Richards/Carter and got lottery picks/prospects in return for those 2 trades (could argue both were great trades due to both declining right after their respective trades).
The biggest difference is key players in Philly were in their prime/entering their prime while our best players (Sedins) are more or less past their prime (tho still performing well). We'll need to replace them sooner or later so the model Philly used (altho great) won't really work for us unless we trade the Sedins like Richards/Carter were traded to speed up the "rebuild". That more or less work like a tear down.
Benning had a chance to speed up the rebuild by dealing Hamhuis at the deadline and likely getting a decent pick/player in return (likely 1st tho with Benning dealing, other GMs might be offering him less thinking he'll be dumb enough to accept). Basically he failed to even make the logical move of gaining assets when it should've been pretty easy making it much harder for him to retool and rebuild at the same time (since he doesn't have the assets and hasn't shown any ability to gather assets).
Difference is owners care more about money now than money in the future. Most people do as well because a dollar today has more value than a dollar a year from now (and so on).
As far as sustained playoff revenue... there is no guarantee of that either. Look at the Oilers and Islanders... rebuilds that take that long isn't ideal at all and in the case of Islanders, they pretty much fielded a lowest possible cap hit team during their rebuild (resulting in pretty much no fans showing up). The Jets are another example of failed rebuild. They made the playoffs once during their rebuild but are bailed out because they just moved back to 'peg so fans will keep coming (for now). While with ATL, they were doing so bad financially that they had to relocate (tho to be fail, that really wasn't a hocket market to start with). But if they don't get back into the playoffs constantly soon, fans might start bailing too (tho given the team relocated the last time they bailed, this might not happen for a while and the team actually looks promising but consider how long that rebuild took with a good part of it taking place in ATL).
Basically it comes down to rather or not you believe in Chicago/Pitts model and hope you get lucky during your rebuild year (good drafts/franchise talent) or rather you want to try Detroit route (basically what MG was trying to do and it worked for him until he tried to become Vancouver Bruins). Also like i said earlier, during the rebuilds for Chicago and Pitts... the Pens were basically bankrupt before they got Sid... basically no one showed up to games while they were losing. It wasn't as bad for Chicago but they were still bottom 10 @ ~i think 13k-14k fans per game during their rebuild (with much lower ticket prices vs 22k now).
Personally i would rather we go full rebuild... i just understand the business side of things and know its pretty unlikely to happen unless we miss the playoffs say 3 years (random number, really its how long before attendance dive to a point where it doesn't matter... probably when the Sedins retire or get traded) and the owners finally give up on the retooling efforts because the opportunity cost of rebuilding will virtually be 0 by then. Thats the reason the Leafs started a rebuild... they finally figured out there is virtually no opportunity cost because their games will be sold-out regardless so the only cost was playoff revenue and they were getting 0 anyways. That is unlikely to happen in Vancouver given #s dropped quite a bit when the team started losing (ticket prices dropped a ton and was basically being unsold at below season ticket holder prices). Of course when attendance drops to say 13-14k per game... then the opportunity cost for a rebuild might be close to 0.
As far as jersey sale goes... remember during our cup run, you couldn't even find a jersey during the run so you're right if we can make a run, jersey sales would go up but the problem is during the down years, they go down. Without any clear top prospect except for Horvat... if we say trade the Sedins, jersey sale will drop a lot short term and odds are we won't make up for that lost for a long time (if ever). Of course as a whole, that isn't as important as the TV rating drops (and lost revenue there) as well as marketing hit from having a non-competitive team (meaning new advertising contracts from say Telus or whoever will be a lot lower).
Part 1 of that statement i disagree. A change of environment can have positive impact on a player. That has happened countless times and Sbisa does have physical attributes that you want on a Dmen so if his IQ improves, he could be a much better player... problem is after he came here, he didn't show any improvement despite a change of environment (which should be redflags) but Benning overpaid him with an extension anyways (bad management and i totally agree with you there).
Of course to compound his mistakes, he basically let a fan favorite (Hamhuis) go for nothing @ pretty much the same cap hit because he had Sbisa. Again signs of a GM you can't really have much faith in so if he's going after Barrie... its scary because he might overpay him to a huge extension and screw up the team a lot more. The Gudbranson trade was already one that could have a huge impact in the future... a 2nd trade like that could be a nightmare (plus like i said earlier somewhere... if we get Barrie without dealing a D... that gives us 4 D we suddenly need to protect... which means management isn't even thinking of expansion draft while other teams are prepping for it).
In terms of D for Barrie... i prefer Tanev over Barrie due to both contract status and the fact Tanev is basically our best D/reliable in his own end (much more than Barrie) while Barrie does bring some offensive skills over, Tanev might be one of the better lockdown defenders who doesn't get any PIMs.
If we trade Edler in a deal for Barrie then we suddenly have a massive shortage of LHD. Hutton will move up to #1 then it goes to Sbisa/Tryamkin (or Pedan)?!?! Not a comfortable feeling considering one is basically a rookie and the other hasn't exactly been great. Also our top 3Ds will all be RHD... not a great combo either since its unlikely they can play together.
Also trading either Edler or Tanev likely will hurt our contract situation going forward because Barrie will likely carry a bigger cap hit than either one and of course we already have enough players needing raises in the future and the Sedins don't come off the books for 2 years. The result could be a contract nightmare next year.
If its any other D, we run back into the problem of 4 Ds to protect because beside Pedan, none of the above need to be protected.
I you were referring to management why did you quote me? I was clearly talking about fan perspective. did you even read my post or the post I quoted?
It was a jumping off point
I thought it also fit for fans in this discussion. Is there a point in a discussion board to going lets wait and see? What does that ad? Versus others choosing a side use the 300 plus games we see. There have been on both sides using these games for Grud (who I use only as he was one of the last guys talked about in this thread about another dman).
This is the problem I was talking about. Smart business people see the big picture. Prime example is on Dragons Den when they have kids on. You often see the Dragons invest in kids knowing this current idea is a failure, but the kid is going to be good. It's smart business.
There is no guarantee of anything. I mean we are far far from a sure shot at the playoffs this year. I would guess we are closer to last then the playoffs.
I hate when people use the oilers to try and point to anything other than bad management, and the islanders look fine, they are getting better and better. Again under bad management and ownership before. The Jets are an interesting case, I think they had bad management in Atl, so there is that. Really you look at most bottom teams that stay down at the bottom, and it is bad management. It's teams not committing or being run so bad that it takes a long time to accumulate good assets.
Actually MG said he wanted to rebuild. I do think he would have gone more a Chi route, of selling valuable players for more youth (see Saad, or Buff, Ladd, Sharp).
Chicago and Pits had terrible ownership that lead to both instances you speak of. I mean the Chicago one is super well known that they wouldn't air hockey games on TV, and stuff. Pits was so poorly run that's how Mario ended up owning the team.
There is no question you need luck to be a championship team, but to be a good hockey team is not nearly as hard as many teams turn it out to be. It is good management, something we clearly don't have anymore. Having said that, the clear best way to build is to do it correctly unlike what we are doing now.
Look at teams with young solid cores and tell me how the Jerse sales are doing.
It can, have an impact, but you can generally look at numbers, and games and have an idea if they are going to fit. This is also looking at trajectory, ie is a player still improving vs is he stagnant. Sometimes players do just need a change, but they generally have proven something first.
There is way too many moves that I have not liked for me to like going after Barrie. He is a very good player but would be a bad fit mainly with where this team is, not with what we need. I too would be scared with what we give up.
I too prefer Tanev.
True, but left side D are generally easier to come by, or so I am told.
the worst part is, I don't know how much we are looking at that. I know the quote was old before the rules came out, but that quote about not looking at anything until we know the rules is scary when we also look at the other f-ups this team has had with the CBA.
opendoor
Registered User
- Dec 12, 2006
- 11,719
- 1,403
I don't know that ZS adjusted numbers are all that valuable, mainly because I don't think zone starts have as big of an impact on numbers as people tend to think. I was just bringing that stat up to point out that Gudbranson's numbers are virtually identical whether you adjust for them or not.
But yeah, in general I don't think zone starts mean a whole lot when you're talking about the type of usage most players receive.
Nick Lang
Registered User
- May 14, 2015
- 2,036
- 524
I will suggest a lot of the aggressiveness reaction to this trade is because people fall in love with prospects. At this point in time we are clear winners until McCann, or the other pick actually prove they are even NHL players. Yet so many here go to extravagant lengths to cut down the actually more proven player on our roster.
Nick Lang
Registered User
- May 14, 2015
- 2,036
- 524
This is why this obsession with fancy stats is so stupid. Stopping more shots than the next player means literally nothing in the NHL. What does this mean, one shot a game. Without context it's a mind numbing stat to explain defensive prowess.
Now if the only tracked good shots or opportunities... but they don't. Yawn.
GreetingsFromCanada
Registered User
http://theprovince.com/sports/hocke...ne-left-winger-to-take-pressure-off-baertschi
Wonder who he's thinking of.
JVR is better than what he described this winger, as so kane?
Though sbisa has to be going back.
Wonder who he's thinking of.
JVR is better than what he described this winger, as so kane?
Though sbisa has to be going back.
Similar to what he said last year about Horvat and needing to take pressure off him to produce offensively. So they threw him to the wolves defensively because that makes sense in their world.
Can't wait for him to move Hansen for a less effective player.
Can't wait for him to move Hansen for a less effective player.
VanillaCoke
Registered User
- Oct 30, 2013
- 25,266
- 11,640
They've said twice I believe that they're not trading Hansen.
I don't know who is even left to trade though...?
I don't know who is even left to trade though...?
- Status
