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

[krutovsdonut]

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.

didn't he played his first 5 games paired with stecher?

 

[vancityluongo]

didn't he played his first 5 games paired with stecher?

Something like that, but as you noted he's improved since then - in minutes with Tanev and Edler. So how much of that is due to actual absolute improvement and how much is because he has a better defense partner? His numbers and minutes from last night with Stecher or Hutton over an extended stretch would sway me towards genuine "maybe Pouliot can be a top-4 defenseman" remarks. Whether that happens is up for debate (ie. wait and see) but until then, yeah, he's been decent as a bottom-pairing defenseman.

 

[Catamarca Livin]

Biega has good points but I would never call him a calming influence. If anything Pouliot is the calming influence. The play against Pearson originally i thought he turned the wrong way, but watching it on th provies I think he did it on purpose to gain speed. Looks weird but was incredibly skilled and on that one play effective.

 

[JumpierPegasus]

Want to watch Pouliot in our top 6 for this season. If he's solid as he has been (and improving like he has been) it makes Hutton expendable going into next season (and obviously move Gudbranson asap)

Juolevi likely plays at least a couple games if not more next year, and hopefully we pick up a defender in round 1 of this draft. McEneny looking like a guy who could be a #7 next year right now in the AHL

It's not ideal (or good) D right now, but it's going to be a slow burn with next to no prospects back there

 

[Catamarca Livin]

Someone mentioned Jeff Brown in OJ thread. I was thinking last night of Jeff Brown as a Pouliot comparison. The Jeff Brown pass to Bure in 94 is a pass I could see Pouliot making. Not physical but solid. Jeff had more offensive ability in the nhl than Pouliot though he played in the era where players scored 70 plus goals a year. Think their styles are similar.

 

[NoShowWilly]

Looking promising so far. I hate the reclamation project for picks approach but this trade is looking good to this point. Even if he doesn't work out I think he holds enough value to recoup close to the asset given.

I just want a full complement of picks plus at the draft for what I believe this management team is best at.

 

[MS]

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.

Pouliot played 15 minutes and change against LA and he and Edler were getting 70% offensive zone starts. Hell yeah, they were sheltered.

The SJ game is the only game this season I haven't watched closely and I can't comment on that one but 78.9% o-zone starts indicates he was getting sheltered there, too.

 

[krutovsdonut]

Pouliot played 15 minutes and change against LA and he and Edler were getting 70% offensive zone starts. Hell yeah, they were sheltered.

The SJ game is the only game this season I haven't watched closely and I can't comment on that one but 78.9% o-zone starts indicates he was getting sheltered there, too.

as i said , he played the same 5 on 5 minutes as edler. interesting you would think edler would be sheltered.

is there a site that tracks face off location by team in a game? canucks were in an extended catch up position dominating play against la so perhaps the number of face offs per zone in the game is skewed.

 

[bossram]

Biega has good points but I would never call him a calming influence. If anything Pouliot is the calming influence. The play against Pearson originally i thought he turned the wrong way, but watching it on th provies I think he did it on purpose to gain speed. Looks weird but was incredibly skilled and on that one play effective.

Agree lol. No idea how Biega is "calming". He's barely NHL calibre and watching him play, he looks quite spastic most of the time.

 

[shottasasa]

Pouliot played 15 minutes and change against LA and he and Edler were getting 70% offensive zone starts. Hell yeah, they were sheltered.

The SJ game is the only game this season I haven't watched closely and I can't comment on that one but 78.9% o-zone starts indicates he was getting sheltered there, too.

Slightly off point but I'd be very interested to know whether Green starts them in the o-zone so much to shelter them, or because he views them as the best pair for generating offense. Either way, it does put their ridiculously high Corsi numbers in context.

 

[The Drop]

This years Granlund

 

[krutovsdonut]

This years Granlund

you say that like it would be a bad thing.

 

[VanJack]

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.

This has got to be tongue in cheek, right?....Weber and Bartkowski?......Pouliot has shown more in 15 games with the Canucks than those journeyman d-man have shown in their entire careers....He's already been asked by Travis Green to shift from his normal left side to the right, and excelled.....And Biega as a 'calming influence' on the pairing with Pouliot?.....I love the Bulldog as much as anyone, but he's all over the map and has been a bit of a trainwreck in the last couple of outings....no, unless the last few games have been an optical illusion, Canuck fans have reason to start getting excited about Pouliot. Was interesting to see Pouliot matched up against Doughty last night....I actually thought he was better of the two.

 

[Marcel]

Pouliot played 15 minutes and change against LA and he and Edler were getting 70% offensive zone starts. Hell yeah, they were sheltered.

The SJ game is the only game this season I haven't watched closely and I can't comment on that one but 78.9% o-zone starts indicates he was getting sheltered there, too.

What other d pairing would you want to put out in an offensive situation? lol at the notion that the coach is trying to shelter one of his top 2 dmen and his playing partner.

Pouliot does not kill penalties which is why his time on ice was down in that game.

 

[sting101]

you start your best offensive players in the offensive zone if possible and your best defensive players in the defensive zone. when a player plays 20 minutes a night he's not getting sheltered. DP played 21 minutes against Anaheim and 23 minutes against San Jose. He's taking on a bigger role and doing just fine. I would give it a larger sample before claiming anything definitive.....looks good so far

 

[The Drop]

you say that like it would be a bad thing.

Yes it is because that’ll mean he sucks the following year

 

[krutovsdonut]

Yes it is because that’ll mean he sucks the following year

hah, you just admitted granlund didn't suck last year. busted.

 

[shottasasa]

you start your best offensive players in the offensive zone if possible and your best defensive players in the defensive zone. when a player plays 20 minutes a night he's not getting sheltered. DP played 21 minutes against Anaheim and 23 minutes against San Jose. He's taking on a bigger role and doing just fine. I would give it a larger sample before claiming anything definitive.....looks good so far

I actually think starting Pouliot and Edler accomplishes both, some shelter and putting out the best offensive pair in the o-zone. For this reason I like it.

It’ll be interesting when Stecher gets back, because if he is paired with Hutton, I’d like to see them get a bigger bulk of o-zone starts.

Now that I think about it, the results we’re seeing with Pouliot and Edler reminds me a bit of what we saw with Stecher and Edler last year.

 

[F A N]

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.

Unwarranted assumption.

Of course it's not grounded in fact, they never hit waivers because Benning traded from them before-hand...

Another fallacy.

What a weird thing to prop up as a counter-argument.

You sure find a lot of things weird. Weird...

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.

The argument is that they still had trade value and wouldn't be available on waivers for the Canucks to pick up. If you want to refute this, make your case.

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.

Please crunch the numbers since it's so easy. Is there the equivalent of WAR in hockey?

 

[F A N]

Pouliot played 15 minutes and change against LA and he and Edler were getting 70% offensive zone starts. Hell yeah, they were sheltered.

The SJ game is the only game this season I haven't watched closely and I can't comment on that one but 78.9% o-zone starts indicates he was getting sheltered there, too.

Way to spin it. He was 4 seconds away from playing 16 minutes. Regardless, if you take away last season, Pouliot's underlying numbers in the NHL suggests he is capable of driving the play in the NHL. In 2015-2016 he posted strong underlying numbers despite over 54% defensive zone starts.

 

[Bleach Clean]

F
Unwarranted assumption.

Another fallacy.

The argument is that they still had trade value and wouldn't be available on waivers for the Canucks to pick up. If you want to refute this, make your case.

You cannot make the claim that each player still had trade value aside from relying on the trades that were executed to confirm that value. It's a circular argument. Do you know of any other teams that made offers for Granlund/Baertschi/Pouliot at the time?

I have made a case that Waivers was a concern for Granlund (Treliving audio, linked in reply to one of your posts already. Do a search.).

Pouliot was referred to as the Pens' "8th Dman". That's fringe. (Source: Penguins trade Derrick Pouliot to Vancouver for D Andrey Pedan, 4th round pick)

Pouliot has been mired as the 8th defenseman on the depth chart after another uneven preseason

As for Baertschi, here's an excerpt from Flame for Thought (one of their blog sites (referenced by theCanuckWay: Vancouver Canucks: Reflecting on Granlund, Baertschi trades)):

Ramina: I think Baertschi was somewhat lacking in work ethic. The Flames did give him lots of opportunities, but ultimately, he didn’t cut it at the NHL level yet and they wanted to send him back down to develop his skills more. But what lots of people don’t know is that Baertschi didn’t want to be sent down and said that if he doesn’t spend time at the NHL level, he wants a trade. So ultimately, the Flames didn’t quite have that much of a choice with that…So I think the Flames made a good move with that.

Now, I have made my case again and again with you hiding behind reversing the question. Let's see your homework to the contrary (for once). Do you have anything that refutes that these players were not fringe NHL assets at the time of trade? Or, are you arguing to argue (as per usual)?


---------------------------------------------------------------------

What is the fallacy in stating that Benning traded for Granlund, Baertschi and Pouliot before they could hit waivers? Do you know what fallacy means?

You have categorized my belief that Benning can do better on trades as an "unwarranted assumption". Meaning, either you think he cannot improve his trading acumen. Or, that he is a master trader and no other GM could have done better in his place, given the same circumstances. That is such an amusing statement made by you that I'm going to take a minute and reflect on its absurdity and humour. Well done! You've made me laugh. Thanks.

 

[shottasasa]

You cannot make the claim that each player still had trade value aside from relying on the trades that were executed to confirm that value. It's a circular argument. Do you know of any other teams that made offers for Granlund/Baertschi/Pouliot at the time?

I have made a case that Waivers was a concern for Granlund (Treliving audio, linked in reply to one of your posts already. Do a search.).

Pouliot was referred to as the Pens' "8th Dman". That's fringe. (Source: Penguins trade Derrick Pouliot to Vancouver for D Andrey Pedan, 4th round pick)



As for Baertschi, here's an excerpt from Flame for Thought (one of their blog sites (referenced by theCanuckWay: Vancouver Canucks: Reflecting on Granlund, Baertschi trades)):



Now, I have made my case again and again with you hiding behind reversing the question. Let's see your homework to the contrary (for once). Do you have anything that refutes that these players were not fringe NHL assets at the time of trade? Or, are you arguing to argue (as per usual)?


---------------------------------------------------------------------

What is the fallacy in stating that Benning traded for Granlund, Baertschi and Pouliot before they could hit waivers? Do you know what fallacy means?

You have categorized my belief that Benning can do better on trades as an "unwarranted assumption". Meaning, either you think he cannot improve his trading acumen. Or, that he is a master trader and no other GM could have done better in his place, given the same circumstances. That is such an amusing statement made by you that I'm going to take a minute and reflect on its absurdity and humour. Well done! You've made me laugh. Thanks.

None of this is evidence that others weren’t prepared to trade for these players, or that they didn’t have value. Sure if trade partners weren’t found it’s possible that they could have hit waivers and we’re clearly thought of as surplus to requirements by their organisations, but then most tased players are. Seeing as trade partners were found and there could have been others bidding, means no one who is arguing the “Canucks wasted assets when we could have had the player for free on waivers” has anything but their own assumptions to go on.

I understand if people don’t like the trades because they don’t like the players they got in return, or don’t like strategy of giving up draft picks for older prospects who have fallen out of favour. If you want to have a go at Benning ability, he’s made enough outright bad moves without this nonsense. Even bad or mediocre GMs can make good trades with sound logic sometimes.

 

[Catamarca Livin]

Research and proof based of a false assumption is still false. It is impossible to prove a negative. Granlund and Sven were not waiver eligible when the Canucks traded for them both spent time in the Ahl when they were traded for. It is like the situation if Jake Virtanen goes back down to the Ahl this year. Is that proof the Canucks would waive him next year? Pouliot was in the same situation as Brendan Gaunce is he about to go on waivers even after scoring 1 nhl goal in his career. Pouliot has shown a lot more at the nhl, ahl and junior level than Gaunce. Most teams do not give up good young assets on waivers remember Corrado here and the uproar. Your faulty thought process is that teams are willing to lose viable young prospects so easily. In order to justify your opinion show examples like Corrado where good prospects were let go on waivers. I do not think there are a lot of examples of high first round picks being let go after being Ahl all stars but i might be wrong.

 

[Catamarca Livin]

Pratt noticed Pouliot for the first time in the SJ game. Good to have media like him to keep us informed. I think he has been our best dman the last 7 games or so. Though no pk time makes it easier to look good, he is the only dman in the lineup that rarely turns the puck over even when attempting to make plays. When the other team plays prevent defense and sits back in the neutral zone he picks them apart. Only question marks is can he keep up this play and does he protect the net in front well enough. He was sat in favour of Hutton the last couple minutes so he does not have the confidence of the coaches defensively yet. I have not seen any issues defending the rush. At this point he has a lot more chance of being a top 4 dman than Guddy. Eastern media speculating on Gudbranson to Toronto.

 

[Wo Yorfat]

Pratt noticed Pouliot for the first time in the SJ game. Good to have media like him to keep us informed. I think he has been our best dman the last 7 games or so. .....