Confirmed with Link: Derrick Pouliot's here because reasons. Part 1. (#859)

[shottasasa]

Because people keep refusing to acknowledge this point, by saying dumb things like "there was no guarantee he'd make it to waivers."

As long as people keep saying that, they will get the same counter-point, even if neither point addresses the core issue alluded to by your post.

What are you trying to argue here except that we have a different opinion on a fundamental point?

We don't have enough information to declare he was a fungible asset. Trying to ram home this point doesn't make it true.

 

[Melvin]

What are you trying to argue here except that we have a different opinion on a fundamental point?

We don't have enough information to declare he was a fungible asset. Trying to ram home this point doesn't make it true.

There isn't a player in the league for whom you will find unanimous consensus on his value.

So what? Those that were arguing against the logic were not arguing against the presumed value which predicates the logic. If they were, then they should have been more clear.

 

[shottasasa]

This same 'There was no guarantee he'd be available/they'd make the deal unless we threw these extra assets at it!' excuse has been used for about a dozen different Jim Benning transactions.

If it was a one-off, sure ... whatever. But the larger pattern is the problem. You actually 'win' trades and get value for assets by being patient and knowing when you have leverage, and exploiting that leverage. Jim Benning is chronically unable to do this, and this is why this organization is continually bleeding draft picks and assets.

Well the truth is, unless a reliable source spills what happened, we don't know. We have incomplete information on most of the trades and we can judge whether we think the price was too high when it was made, but trying to to argue that position based on assumptions with no good evidence is no good. For me this actually isn't about being pro-Benning or anti-Benning, just flawed arguments. I am certainly not excusing Jim Benning from trades that looked bad at the time and have turned out arguably worse, ie. Sutter, Gudbranson and Clendening.

 

[CroatianCanuck]

Pouliot is fire.... keeps getting better every game.

 

[Catamarca Livin]

If we could trade baertschi and granlund for a 2nd and a waiver exempt prospect I would do it in a heartbeat.

Both were likely to be on waivers at some point and neither present a strong argument in favour of wasting assets on such players. Same with etem, pedan, and all the other Jim benning fetishees.

I agree you need to count the misses with the hits.
We could trade the whole team minus Horvat Boeser based off your standards. If you would trade Sven who would you keep to play the games out of the rest of the forwards.
Pouliot fills a spot on the lineup if he progresses maybe he will be part of the solution going forward just like Sven seems to be right now. You need depth for when the Boeser and hopefully Pettersons arrive. Matthews arrival has been helped by many nhl level players already there. Edmonton has struggled to find these other pieces because they were not looking for these incremental young pieces they thought they would draft them. If Pouliot progresses he will not get paid for a while just like Sven and Grandlund. These are good cheap assets when they work. When they dont you get Pedan Larssen Vey Clendening etc.. So I can see arguing against this practice saying they would have been better off with the picks. I think they will do it less in the future as the depth of the organization is better. So less need to take risk on other team's leftovers. In Pouliot's case it is quickly becoming a win and maybe bigger than Sven as quality puck moving dman are rare.

 

[DFAC]

Lol when this trade went down people were complaining about losing a 4th

Probs the same people who are still complaining about the Shinkaruk trade.

Makes no sense, both trades have been great for the Canucks

 

[F A N]

This same 'There was no guarantee he'd be available/they'd make the deal unless we threw these extra assets at it!' excuse has been used for about a dozen different Jim Benning transactions.

If it was a one-off, sure ... whatever. But the larger pattern is the problem. You actually 'win' trades and get value for assets by being patient and knowing when you have leverage, and exploiting that leverage. Jim Benning is chronically unable to do this, and this is why this organization is continually bleeding draft picks and assets.

That's just your perspective. I could turn it around and say that any good waiver wire pickup should have been had for a 7th round pick.

There are different management styles. Some GMs prefer to acquire players they have targeted for a while that suddenly became available and affordable. Some GMs prefer to scour the garbage bin. The fact that it is part of a "larger pattern" means nothing. Benning prefers to pay more to get the player he wants rather than pick up what is available in the bargain/garbage bin.

Take Gillis. He picked up Wellwood in his first season and it took a while for Wellwood to be a true contributor. His second season, he traded for Ehrhoff. That was an amazing trade. He left cap room available to make that kind of trade. Every year since he tried to leave room to make that kind of trade. Did he manage to make trade even close to that calibre? No. What about waivers? He picked up Wiese and Stanton who was serviceable. Meanwhile, he was also signing guys like Sultzer and Barker. In his final year he traded a 4th for Dalpe.

The idea that players like Baertschi, Granlund, and Pouliot would simply be available on waivers is simply purely speculative and not grounded in fact.

 

[Ainec]

Lol when this trade went down people were complaining about losing a 4th

Probs the same people who are still complaining about the Shinkaruk trade.

Makes no sense, both trades have been great for the Canucks

don't forget the best trade

acquiring and extending Gudbranson

#tank commander

 

[Bleach Clean]

Benning prefers to pay more to get the player he wants rather than pick up what is available in the bargain/garbage bin.

False dichotomy. Benning can pay less for the player he wants. This is a matter of being a better negotiator for the same asset. It's not an either/or scenario between desired asset and bargain bin pick ups.

The idea that players like Baertschi, Granlund, and Pouliot would simply be available on waivers is simply purely speculative and not grounded in fact.

Of course it's not grounded in fact, they never hit waivers because Benning traded from them before-hand... What a weird thing to prop up as a counter-argument.

The argument is that they were headed for the fringes of the NHL given various factors at the time. If you want to refute this, make your case.

 

[Tobi Wan Kenobi]

Botchford on the Pouliot train

The Provies: Green’s guts, the Pouliot years, a back-pat bonanza and boom goes the mic drop

To add to that. The third goal was because of Pouliot driving the net. Baertschi wouldn't have been open had Pouliot not done that

Edler Pouliot
Hutton Tanev
MDZ Stecher

When healthy. Trade Gud in two weeks when Tanev is back

 

[Catamarca Livin]

Botchford on the Pouliot train

The Provies: Green’s guts, the Pouliot years, a back-pat bonanza and boom goes the mic drop

To add to that. The third goal was because of Pouliot driving the net. Baertschi wouldn't have been open had Pouliot not done that

Edler Pouliot
Hutton Tanev
MDZ Stecher

When healthy. Trade Gud in two weeks when Tanev is back

I find myself either agreeing and or persuaded by Bothford's opinions. One issue I had with provies is that he thought it was possible Pouliot play was a reflection of Edler however Biega played his best with Pouliot as well. Like Tanev every d man looks better the less they play in their zone. I accept that Pouliot is not on the pk so avoids looking bad in this heavy pressure role. That said him and Edler are by far our best pair right now.

 

[vancityluongo]

Pouliot played well last night. Definitely seems to be much more confident than when he first started. Good to see.

 

[The Stig]

Pouliot (whose nickname should be Deadpool because its awesome) has looked like a very good pick up thus far. If we can salvage some of his potential, we will have ourselves a solid piece for our future D core.

 

[CroatianCanuck]

When you break it down. The Canucks got a 8th Overall 1st round pick from 2012. Everyone knows D take a lot longer to develop. He's only 23 turning 24. Same age (1994) as Hutton/Stecher (who we consider young future core D-men) The Penguins didn't develop him right and being a contender every year didn't help with playing time. This could be Benning's best trade ever and he could potentially become a foundational player for the team going forward. I am super excited to see how much better he could get! He just gets better every game!

 

[Melvin]

Sigh

 

[MS]

When you break it down. The Canucks got a 8th Overall 1st round pick from 2012. Everyone knows D take a lot longer to develop. He's only 23 turning 24. Same age (1994) as Hutton/Stecher (who we consider young future core D-men) The Penguins didn't develop him right and being a contender every year didn't help with playing time. This could be Benning's best trade ever and he could potentially become a foundational player for the team going forward. I am super excited to see how much better he could get! He just gets better every game!

If this is satire, it's brilliant.

 

[TruGr1t]

The idea that players like Baertschi, Granlund, and Pouliot would simply be available on waivers is simply purely speculative and not grounded in fact.

It's pretty easy to crunch the numbers and determine a players replacement value. I haven't done it for these guys, but I'd wager you'd be surprised where they rank.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

If this is satire, it's brilliant.

When we traded for him,you chimed in with "Pouliot Sucks"...In retrospect,thats just as brilliant..

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Botchford on the Pouliot train

The Provies: Green’s guts, the Pouliot years, a back-pat bonanza and boom goes the mic drop

To add to that. The third goal was because of Pouliot driving the net. Baertschi wouldn't have been open had Pouliot not done that

Edler Pouliot
Hutton Tanev
MDZ Stecher

When healthy. Trade Gud in two weeks when Tanev is back

Edler and Pouliot do look good together (even though Edler was moving at a glacial pace last night)..you would almost hate to break that up if it really clicks...

All of a sudden there could be a bit of a logjam on D if everyone is healthy (which is normally never..lol)..Also nice to have 4 decent PMD's (MDZ,Stecher,Pouliot and Hutton).

 

[Balls Mahoney]

Watched him for the first time last night, he's not bad. I could see how he would get lost in an organization with a better defensive group than us. But he plays a pretty efficient quiet defensive game and I didn't see any reason to complain about him. Also noticed he was making decent passes and seemed to play very well in the offensive zone. Only one game with my barely watching but there's definitely something to work with here.

 

[krutovsdonut]

i can't recall the last time i saw a player show such steady incremental progress like this for so many games in a row.

i think the rescue dog analogy holds for this guy. he's not "developing" that much from game to game in the sense of learning new skills between games. he looks to be a much better player steadily emerging from a shell he had been forced into.

he's also either been incredibly lucky or else he is better defensively than he looks to the eye. the botchford gif where he catches up, mistakenly turns and then realized his mistake and then turns again while staying with pearson is an example of the guy apparently being faster than he looks. is he quick enough that he can really do that, or was he lucky and pearson was too tired to walk him?

bottom line: still not enough games to even call him a bottom 6 guy, but if this is smoke and mirrors it will be a great cautionary teaching example along the lines of "before you get too excited, do you remember that time pouliot looked progressively better for <15> consecutive games after we traded for him before it all finally caught up with him?"

otoh, if this is not smoke and mirrors, he is now showing as a potential top 4 guy.

 

[Cupless44]

If this is satire, it's brilliant.

I think it is fair to say the trade is looking solid at this point even if you have been very vocal against Pouliot.

 

[MS]

I think it is fair to say the trade is looking solid at this point even if you have been very vocal against Pouliot.

If the post I was quoting had complimented his play for actual reasons instead of spewing a whole bunch of nonsense, I wouldn't have responded.

He's on a nice run of games for the last two weeks, as a very sheltered #6 defender who basically never takes a defensive zone faceoff. That said, he's looked better than I expected him to and is moving the puck well. And I've been very complimentary of his recent efforts. Hopefully it continues. But again, Yannick Weber has had plenty of stretches like this in his career.

For the record, even though I had little faith in Pouliot based on his development in the Pittsburgh system, my criticisms were far more about the process behind the deal - this is a player who was more than likely going to be on waivers, and the GM should have been exploiting this rather than coughing up a pick unnecessarily. If we'd claimed him on waivers, my opinion of the transaction would have been substantially different.

 

[krutovsdonut]

He's on a nice run of games for the last two weeks, as a very sheltered #6 defender who basically never takes a defensive zone faceoff.

the last two games he's been paired with edler and actually has higher 5 on 5 minutes than edler.

so are we sheltering edler now? because i don't recall green giving edler a different partner for defensive zone faceoffs.

 

[vancityluongo]

Much of his strong game last night was also because Edler did a lot of the heavy lifting defensively. Before that, he had Biega as a calming influence. Zone starts and QoC aside, a real test would be if he could keep his head above water with someone like Stecher (let alone Gudbranson...) That to me is a crude, informal metric of what separates a Yannick Weber type serviceable 3rd pairing defenseman from the Bartkowski types.