18/19 MGMT thread VII. WARNING POST #25

[Black Noise]

Ok. Can you answer the rest?

Sure. If the Canucks didn't trade away picks, and just let Benning "the God" scout. They could have:

Debrincat (Top 6 forward), Dunn (Top 4 dman), Mascherin (PPG in AHL as 20 yeard old), Elevnes (0.5 PPG in SHL as 18 year old), Montour (Top 4 dman), and Dube (20 year old that make Flames this year).

Unless you want to admit that Benning isn't as a good a scout as you claim we could have all these guys.

But ya, Etem Larsen Sutter Baertschi Pouliot Vey Gudbranson is much better

 

[ProstheticConscience]

4th round for Pouliot
5th round for Larsen
6th for Etem
5th for Prust
3rd for Pedan
2nd for Baer

Which 1st line player and top pairing D JB could of drafted if he didn't trade those picks?

The funny thing when these trades are made. It is usually 50/50 on people liking the trade. Now those players don't work out and now people are acting like experts saying don't trade your picks.

You also forgot a 2nd for Vey and throwing in the 2nd he got for Bieksa in with the Sutter deal.

You're also not listing the complete deals. It wasn't a 4th for Pouliot, it was a 4th and Pedan who he'd already thrown away a 3rd on. It was a 5th and Kassian for Prust. It was a 6th and Jensen for Etem. So basically you got two right there.

 

[Canucks1096]

You also forgot a 2nd for Vey and throwing in the 2nd he got for Bieksa in with the Sutter deal.

You're also not listing the complete deals. It wasn't a 4th for Pouliot, it was a 4th and Pedan who he'd already thrown away a 3rd on. It was a 5th and Kassian for Prust. It was a 6th and Jensen for Etem. So basically you got two right there.

Can you answer the question? Thanks

 

[Bojack Horvatman]

For the people that think Benning trading away picks for waiver-wire players is no big deal:

https://www.tsn.ca/statistically-speaking-nhl-draft-pick-value-1.786131

Calculate the odds that these picks don't get any top 6/top 4 d by multiplying together (1-probability of pick producing top 6/top 4 d) for each pick.

If you minus that answer from 1 you get the probability of getting at least 1 top 6f/top 4d.

 

[Black Noise]

Can you answer the question? Thanks

I answered the question but you seem to be ignoring it. How come?

 

[ProstheticConscience]

Can you answer the question? Thanks

Obviously not because there's no way of knowing what first line player could have possibly be had in a trade package with all the various draft picks and players Benning threw away.

 

[valkynax]

I answered the question but you seem to be ignoring it. How come?

same here, and he just flat out ignores them.

ok fine, here's the answer he's looking for: oh no those picks will 100% be junk and the players Dim Jim acquired are 100% better than having those useless picks! long live Dim Jim!!!!

 

[Canucks1096]

Sure. If the Canucks didn't trade away picks, and just let Benning "the God" scout. They could have:

Debrincat (Top 6 forward), Dunn (Top 4 dman), Mascherin (PPG in AHL as 20 yeard old), Elevnes (0.5 PPG in SHL as 18 year old), Montour (Top 4 dman), and Dube (20 year old that make Flames this year).

Unless you want to admit that Benning isn't as a good a scout as you claim we could have all these guys.

But ya, Etem Larsen Sutter Baertschi Pouliot Vey Gudbranson is much better

So one top 6 F and two top 4 D. All 3 of them play on different teams. Realistically do you think one GM could of drafted all 3 of them?

The answer is going to be No. That means the argument that people are using if he kept those draft picks he could of had that player and this player. Realistically that is almost impossible to do. Let's say he get one of them right.

So it's pretty much Montour vs Baer. I probably want Montour. But does that make the Canucks cup contender with Montour instead Baer? No it doesn't. People acting like because we traded all the picks, Canucks are not cup contenders.

Reality of that didn't make much of a difference.

Leafs and Jets right now. When there rebuild was done there top 7 or 8 guys. All were 1st round picks or players the GM Inherited.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Ok. Can you answer my question. Thanks

Brayden Point - 2014
Brandon Montour - 2014 (not top pairing, but would be better than anyone Benning has brought in).
Vince Dunn - 2015 (looks good, though I'm mostly OK with the Baertschi trade except I think we should have been able to get him cheaper).
Alex DeBrincat - 2016 (there were even reports the Canucks liked him)
Samuel Girard - 2016 (again, not top pairing but also better than anyone Benning has brought in)
Taylor Raddysh - 2016 (looks like a very good prospect. Could have been taken with the pick we gave to Pittsburgh for some reason)

That's just looking at the 2nd round picks. I'm sure you're capable of going over the draft pick history and seeing who the Canucks could have drafted with the other picks.

 

[y2kcanucks]

So one top 6 F and two top 4 D. All 3 of them play on different teams. Realistically do you think one GM could of drafted all 3 of them?

The answer is going to be No. That means the argument that people are using if he kept those draft picks he could of had that player and this player. Realistically that is almost impossible to do. Let's say he get one of them right.

So it's pretty much Montour vs Baer. I probably want Montour. But does that make the Canucks cup contender with Montour instead Baer? No it doesn't. People acting like because we traded all the picks, Canucks are not cup contenders.

Reality of that didn't make much of a difference.

Leafs and Jets right now. When there rebuild was done there top 7 or 8 guys. All were 1st round picks or players the GM Inherited.

You literally move the goal posts in this post.

No one is saying the Canucks would be a contender if they had one, or even two or three of the guys listed. Just that this would be an actual rebuild.

Instead Benning has traded away picks for garbage, has neglected to acquire additional picks and keep them, and has saddled the team with a lot of bad contracts.

 

[sandwichbird2023]

So one top 6 F and two top 4 D. All 3 of them play on different teams. Realistically do you think one GM could of drafted all 3 of them?

The answer is going to be No. That means the argument that people are using if he kept those draft picks he could of had that player and this player. Realistically that is almost impossible to do. Let's say he get one of them right.

So it's pretty much Montour vs Baer. I probably want Montour. But does that make the Canucks cup contender with Montour instead Baer? No it doesn't. People acting like because we traded all the picks, Canucks are not cup contenders.

Reality of that didn't make much of a difference.

Leafs and Jets right now. When there rebuild was done there top 7 or 8 guys. All were 1st round picks or players the GM Inherited.

If thats your argument then JB might as well go ahead and trade all non-1st round picks for players like Burakowsky/Ceci etc, just give them like a 2nd for Bura and 5x 3rd for Ceci. No point keeping those picks since keeping those picks won't make much of a difference, and since the Leafs and Jets also didn't get core guys after the 1st (conveniently ignoring Tampa Bay for some reason).
Heck, why even have a "draft god GM" if only the 1st round matter

 

[valkynax]

If thats your argument then JB might as well go ahead and trade all non-1st round picks for players like Burakowsky/Ceci etc, just give them like a 2nd for Bura and 5x 3rd for Ceci. No point keeping those picks since keeping those picks won't make much of a difference, and since the Leafs and Jets also didn't get core guys after the 1st (conveniently ignoring Tampa Bay for some reason).
Heck, why even have a "draft god GM" if only the 1st round matter

yet this draft god of a GM thinks getting any draft pick will cause him to have a tapeworm infection.

no? is that not how the story goes? I don't know then.

 

[Canucks1096]

You literally move the goal posts in this post.

No one is saying the Canucks would be a contender if they had one, or even two or three of the guys listed. Just that this would be an actual rebuild.

Instead Benning has traded away picks for garbage, has neglected to acquire additional picks and keep them, and has saddled the team with a lot of bad contracts.

But the reality is it wouldn't make much of a difference in terms on where the Canucks are at right now? If it doesn't make a difference trading some picks for reclamation player? Then why are against it?

Hmm if you read through the whole thread some users are saying we would of had this and that player. The core players would be so much better. Maybe not cup contender but much better team.

 

[valkynax]

But the reality is it wouldn't make much of a difference in terms on where the Canucks are at right now? If it doesn't make a difference trading some picks for reclamation player? Then why are against it?

Hmm if you read through the whole thread some users are saying we would of had this and that player. The core players would be so much better. Maybe not cup contender but much better team.

Since you've been dodging my post like Dim Jim dodges draft picks, I will ask you straight up: can you say with 100% certainty that none of the draft picks pissed away by Dim Jim will turn up with a player better than the list of f***ing garbage he traded in for?

 

[ProstheticConscience]

But the reality is it wouldn't make much of a difference in terms on where the Canucks are at right now? If it doesn't make a difference trading some picks for reclamation player? Then why are against it?

Hmm if you read through the whole thread some users are saying we would of had this and that player. The core players would be so much better. Maybe not cup contender but much better team.

Okay. So what exactly is your theory on what Benning should have done when he took over? What is your theory on team-building, seeing as how you've apparently eliminated trading and drafting?

 

[Intangibos]

4th round for Pouliot
5th round for Larsen
6th for Etem
5th for Prust
3rd for Pedan
2nd for Baer

Which 1st line player and top pairing D JB could of drafted if he didn't trade those picks?

He could have got a 1st for Bonino instead of a pending UFA in Sutter. Also plenty of players are drafted in later rounds. In the past we have players like:
Alfredsson 6th round, Lidstrom 3rd round, Jamie Benn 5th round, Sami Salo 9th round (3rd last pick in the draft), Jannik Hansen 9th round (5th last pick in the draft), Datsyuk 6th round, Hull 6th round, Gilmour 7th round, Zetterberg 6th round, Theo Fluery 8th round, Robitaille 9th round.

In recent history we have:

• Vince Dunn, 2nd round taken 3 spots after the pick we gave Calgary for Baertschi. He's a D in St Louis on pace for 40 points - 2014
• Jake Montour, 2nd round taken 5 spots after the pick we gave up for Vey (who you conveniently left out of the list of picks we've given up). D who scored 32 points last year and is on pace for 45 this year. - 2014
  
• Ondrej Kase, 7th round pick on pace for 71 points this year, though he has missed about half the season so it's a small sample size. 14 points in 16 games. 7th round in 2014
• Kevin Leblanc, on pace for 50 points this year. 6th round in 2014
• Victor Arvidsson, on pace for 82 points though like Kase has missed a lot of the year. On pace for 82 points this year. This isn't a one off though as he scored 60 points in the past 2 seasons. 4th round in 2013
• Brayden Point, on pace for 101 points this year and scored 66 last year. 3rd round pick in 2014. Also drafted 16 spots behind the pick we gave up for Vey. You'll see posters here who had Point higher up on their draft list if you go back to those threads, but Benning disagreed I guess.
• Jesper Bratt, on pace for 62 points in 17 games last year though likely inflated with a shortened season, but still scored 38 last year as a 19 year old. 6th round in 2016, 8 picks after draft guru Benning took ECHL 2nd liner Stukel

The funny thing when these trades are made. It is usually 50/50 on people liking the trade. Now those players don't work out and now people are acting like experts saying don't trade your picks.

You've made this type of claim before when they're not even remotely true. You claimed earlier that in the Virtanen thread "half of the posters think it was the right pick". Why are you blatantly telling lies? Nobody had high hopes for Etem and thought it was meh at best. The majority of the people here hated the Prust trade, especially that we threw in a pick. When we traded for Larsen people were asking why we keep giving up picks. Baertschi was split 50/50 and I liked the trade, but the other places Benning has blown his picks are absolutely brutal

 

[Peter10]

For the people that think Benning trading away picks for waiver-wire players is no big deal:

https://www.tsn.ca/statistically-speaking-nhl-draft-pick-value-1.786131

Calculate the odds that these picks don't get any top 6/top 4 d by multiplying together (1-probability of pick producing top 6/top 4 d) for each pick.

If you minus that answer from 1 you get the probability of getting at least 1 top 6f/top 4d.

Benning himself said, he can get an NHL player with every pick. So results for those picks should be awesome

 

[Bleach Clean]

If thats your argument then JB might as well go ahead and trade all non-1st round picks for players like Burakowsky/Ceci etc, just give them like a 2nd for Bura and 5x 3rd for Ceci. No point keeping those picks since keeping those picks won't make much of a difference, and since the Leafs and Jets also didn't get core guys after the 1st (conveniently ignoring Tampa Bay for some reason).
Heck, why even have a "draft god GM" if only the 1st round matter

Canucks1096 is somehow balancing two thoughts in his mind:

1. That picks beyond the late 1st round and beyond do not matter in terms of impact.

2. Pick frequency increases the odds of getting a player from the draft.

How he's able to do this, I don't know. If you believe in probability and how pick frequency can affect the odds of getting a player from the draft, then you cannot say that trading picks in the late 1st round and beyond is arbitrary. These thoughts do not hold together.

 

[sandwichbird2023]

Since you've been dodging my post like Dim Jim dodges draft picks, I will ask you straight up: can you say with 100% certainty that none of the draft picks pissed away by Dim Jim will turn up with a player better than the list of ****ing garbage he traded in for?

And if none of JB's pick will be better than those garbage, why is he regarded as a good drafting GM, and more importantly WHAT IS HE ACTUALLY GOOD AT!?

 

[sandwichbird2023]

Canucks1096 is somehow balancing two thoughts in his mind:

1. That picks beyond the late 1st round and beyond do not matter in terms of impact.

2. Pick frequency increases the odds of getting a player from the draft.

How he's able to do this, I don't know. If you believe in probability and how pick frequency can affect the odds of getting a player from the draft, then you cannot say that trading picks in the late 1st round and beyond is arbitrary. These thoughts do not hold together.

Its just so illogical to go down that path. The original question was "how do you acquire a 1D?" Then another statement came up that "trading non 1st round picks doesn't matter because JB might not have drafted players better than Vey/Gudbranson/Etem/etc.
You know how some teams acquire 1D? Drafting them outside of the first round, like Keith, Subban, Josi, Yandle, etc.
Also for the millionth time I ask, if JB can't draft good players beyond the 1st round after so many years, what is he actually good at!? Nailing half his top 10 picks is an accomplishment now?

 

[Bleach Clean]

There are the picks Benning traded, the picks forgone by not trading good assets and the unwillingness to weaponize cap space to get more futures. That has been ultimately what has held back the progression of this re-tool at the bottom.

- Late 1st round picks can convert to core pieces: Pastrnak, Boeser etc...
- More depth picks offer a better chance to get core or complementary players: DeBrincat, Aho, Montour, Dvorak etc...
- Weaponizing cap space could have yielded deals like Datsyuk/1st.

To say that we would not have been further along regardless of the strategy and execution of that strategy is just... mind boggling. It's incorrect, and it comes as no surprise that there is a tidal wave against this faulty notion.

 

[Bleach Clean]

Its just so illogical to go down that path. The original question was "how do you acquire a 1D?" Then another statement came up that "trading non 1st round picks doesn't matter because JB might not have drafted players better than Vey/Gudbranson/Etem/etc.
You know how some teams acquire 1D? Drafting them outside of the first round, like Keith, Subban, Josi, Yandle, etc.
Also for the millionth time I ask, if JB can't draft good players beyond the 1st round after so many years, what is he actually good at!? Nailing half his top 10 picks is an accomplishment now?

Well yes, it would be great if we could assume all the things we want to assume when making an argument, completely limit the other side of the argument, and downplay the few points allowable as "spin". I wonder why this isn't working?

 

[Canucks1096]

He could have got a 1st for Bonino instead of a pending UFA in Sutter. Also plenty of players are drafted in later rounds. In the past we have players like:
Alfredsson 6th round, Lidstrom 3rd round, Jamie Benn 5th round, Sami Salo 9th round (3rd last pick in the draft), Jannik Hansen 9th round (5th last pick in the draft), Datsyuk 6th round, Hull 6th round, Gilmour 7th round, Zetterberg 6th round, Theo Fluery 8th round, Robitaille 9th round.

In recent history we have:

• Vince Dunn, 2nd round taken 3 spots after the pick we gave Calgary for Baertschi. He's a D in St Louis on pace for 40 points - 2014
• Jake Montour, 2nd round taken 5 spots after the pick we gave up for Vey (who you conveniently left out of the list of picks we've given up). D who scored 32 points last year and is on pace for 45 this year. - 2014
  
• Ondrej Kase, 7th round pick on pace for 71 points this year, though he has missed about half the season so it's a small sample size. 14 points in 16 games. 7th round in 2014
• Kevin Leblanc, on pace for 50 points this year. 6th round in 2014
• Victor Arvidsson, on pace for 82 points though like Kase has missed a lot of the year. On pace for 82 points this year. This isn't a one off though as he scored 60 points in the past 2 seasons. 4th round in 2013
• Brayden Point, on pace for 101 points this year and scored 66 last year. 3rd round pick in 2014. Also drafted 16 spots behind the pick we gave up for Vey. You'll see posters here who had Point higher up on their draft list if you go back to those threads, but Benning disagreed I guess.
• Jesper Bratt, on pace for 62 points in 17 games last year though likely inflated with a shortened season, but still scored 38 last year as a 19 year old. 6th round in 2016, 8 picks after draft guru Benning took ECHL 2nd liner Stukel

You've made this type of claim before when they're not even remotely true. You claimed earlier that in the Virtanen thread "half of the posters think it was the right pick". Why are you blatantly telling lies? Nobody had high hopes for Etem and thought it was meh at best. The majority of the people here hated the Prust trade, especially that we threw in a pick. When we traded for Larsen people were asking why we keep giving up picks. Baertschi was split 50/50 and I liked the trade, but the other places Benning has blown his picks are absolutely brutal

Most of the time middle 6 center don't go for 1st round picks.

So on average about one player a year. So JB gives up anywhere from 2nd to 7th. So about 30 to 150 players were drafted after the the traded pick. So anywhere from 0.5 to 3 % in getting those type of players. Can you tell me how Vey/Larsen do not have 0.5% to 3% of being anything special? So reclamation has 0% chance of becoming anything? If Hawks don't give up a 3rd for Sharp. They might have 1 or 2 less cups.

So you like Baer because of results. But as of right now not even one non non 1st round has a regular spot in the lineup. Reclamation project we have Baer. So reclamation project is actually winning over the non 1st round picks. Shouldn't you like the reclamation player better if you are looking at results?

Scouting is so much better. That is no point bringing up something 20 years ago. For you go back 30 years that just proves there are lot less steals now in later rounds.

Go and look back at those threads. You are generalizing a lot

 

[Canucks1096]

A few of you had said you guys are ok with the Baer trade. But why???? Your argument is keep your picks, there a chance you can get a better player.

So if you guys are ok with the Baer trade. That means you guys don't really believe in keeping your picks as long ad you get some results

Like I said pick one lane and stick with it. Keep changing lanes. Hard to have discussion

 

[y2kcanucks]

But the reality is it wouldn't make much of a difference in terms on where the Canucks are at right now? If it doesn't make a difference trading some picks for reclamation player? Then why are against it?

Hmm if you read through the whole thread some users are saying we would of had this and that player. The core players would be so much better. Maybe not cup contender but much better team.

It would make a major difference in terms of where the Canucks are going. If you package this one area with a lot of other adjustments to some of the other stupid things Benning has done, the summation of all that would certainly have an impact on where the Canucks are at right now.