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

[racerjoe]

You do not know enough of his process to evaluate it definitively. You are missing a lot of data, and making a possibly improper evaluation based on incomplete data.

All we can do as fans is infer the process based on the data that we have. Perhaps counter intuitively, the results are part of the data that we must use. If their process includes a black box method of projections for players, it would be impossible to evaluate this without the results.

It's bad process, because otherwise you would also have to say the Forsling trade was good process, the Vey trade and so on. One win (which until he sustains this play it is not) does not change this.

 

[Bleach Clean]

You do not know enough of his process to evaluate it definitively. You are missing a lot of data, and making a possibly improper evaluation based on incomplete data.

All we can do as fans is infer the process based on the data that we have. Perhaps counter intuitively, the results are part of the data that we must use. If their process includes a black box method of projections for players, it would be impossible to evaluate this without the results.

Right, and I have not yet said that the result does not influence the overall perception of the deal. It's process (as much as it can be inferred) and the result. It's not all results based, is my argument. If it were, bizarre move after bizarre move would be tolerated as common place... When clearly that's not the case in this market.

 

[Gaunce4gm]

He's leading the team's D in scoring while being passable defensively.

He's young.

He's cheap.

He's not the problem on this team.

Gudbranson and Sutter are the problems.

 

[Cupless44]

Absolutely nobody acts this way, or comes close to acting this way. Certainly no one has come close to suggesting that other teams never trade them.

You do your otherwise valid argument a disservice when you infect it with this sort of disingenuous strawman junk.

You know damn well that nobody would complain about this trade were it the only kind of its ilk, and people struggle with the pattern of behaviour rather than this transaction in isolation.

Having said all that, this trade is looking good, and you absolutely must incorporate results into an evaluation of the process. The only time this would not be true would be if you actually had a complete picture of the process, which we would never have.

I hear you and I get that people complain because of past trades. But that is also kind of the point. You can't cloud your judgement on the the current trade, on every single trade, because of past trades. This wasnt a 2nd round pick it was a 4th. Pedan is a very low value asset. Some thought went in bringing in a player that the coach knew well that has more offensive talent than the current blue line of offensive plumbers.

Personally I felt this trade was a decent iniative from the get go, whereas I hated the Vey trade and the Forsling trade, Gubrandson trades from the get go. I don't let the past cloud my open mind on the new transaction. GMs sometimes do improve with time on the job. Not yet a Benning fan, but recently he has been more stable. Personally I like the Burrows and Hansen trades. I like this trade.

 

[Bleach Clean]

I hear you and I get that people complain because of past trades. But that is also kind of the point. You can't cloud your judgement on the the current trade, on every single trade, because of past trades. This wasnt a 2nd round pick it was a 4th. Pedan is a very low value asset. Some thought went in bringing in a player that the coach knew well that has more offensive talent than the current blue line of offensive plumbers.

Personally I felt this trade was a decent iniative from the get go, whereas I hated the Vey trade and the Forsling trade, Gubrandson trades from the get go. I don't let the past cloud my open mind on the new transaction. GMs sometimes do improve with time on the job. Not yet a Benning fan, but recently he has been more stable. Personally I like the Burrows and Hansen trades. I like this trade.

Why did you hate the Vey and Forsling deals?

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

It's bad process, because otherwise you would also have to say the Forsling trade was good process, the Vey trade and so on. One win (which until he sustains this play it is not) does not change this.

I mean....players like Pouliot,you should just be able to obtain for free right (like running water?)...Maybe Benning should have gone for the equal asset in Pokka?

"Its a bad process"..???....Right..Keep on digging yourself a bigger ditch.

 

[krutovsdonut]

I feel like this is going to be another Granlund like trade where Pouliot has a decent year offensively, one side rubs it in the others face, the other side says enjoy it while you can because it won’t last forever and next season comes and reality sinks in.

I hope Pouliot turns out good but have my doubts. His defensive game will always be his biggest issue so he needs to be insulated in every situation. His offensive abilities need to make up for that greatly.

define "face rubbing"? do you mean posting something complimentary about a canuck player who just had a 3 point game? do you mean responding when detractors respond to this by saying "it was still a bad trade"?

who is being salty here? this is a canucks forum, and you are defining complimenting a canuck player doing well as face rubbing.

also, granlund is doing fine this year and that is not a fair balanced account of what happened in the granlund thread last year. your entire paradigm is wonky.

 

[Melvin]

It's bad process, because otherwise you would also have to say the Forsling trade was good process, the Vey trade and so on. One win (which until he sustains this play it is not) does not change this.

It's not as simple as this, unfortunately.

Indulge me for a moment in a thought exercise.

Suppose this last off season they acquired a magical device that could predict Norris winners. Suppose there is no reason to doubt its veracity. Again, it's a thought exercise.

Now, suppose their device told them that Pouliot would win the Norris in 2021. I think that we all agree that armed with this information, they made an excellent trade, and one we would all make.

In this case, criticizing their process behind the trade is beyond silly. Obviously, their magic box is a key piece of the process that you know nothing about, and the only way to infer that they may have had such a device would be based on the results of the trade. When Pouliot wins the Norris you would have to think, maybe they knew something we didn't.

Now, obviously they do not possess such a device, and also their track record on this is abysmal, so I don't trust them either, but just as all the failures of sbisa, clendening, Bartkowski, etc indicated to us, based on results, remember, that the process might be flawed, continued good play from Pouliot may suggest that something has been corrected, and if the trend continues, with subsequent acquisitions having similar success, we would have to re think our evaluation of their process.

All based on results.

 

[EXTRAS]

Could he be a top 4 dman eventually? Upside ?

 

[rune74]

4th round pick for the player we have right now is good. There is a lot of spinning here.

 

[krutovsdonut]

Why did you hate the Vey and Forsling deals?

it is completely fair to consider those deals along with etem, pouliot, pedan, granlund and baertschi as a whole, and whoever else i am forgetting. they represent a similar strategy, although the goals and risk/return in each case varied.

sort of like looking at your poke during blackjack at the end of the night rather than focussing on a single hand.