Pre-Game Talk: 2020 NHL Draft (October 6th - 7th)

[Raistlin]

It’s also because so many people can’t see past point totals. They see good production from a young player and think that means its unlikely they improve. What they don’t see is the play away from the puck and ability to take on tougher matchups and excel in them, as their two-way profile grows. All 4 of the Canucks best young players have room to grow in this area.

What we are seeing with the young core is just the tip of the iceberg. Don’t be fooled by the gaudy point totals. Pettersson for example looks like he’s trending in the direction of a Pavel Datsyuk - a matchup nightmare for the opposition. A centre equally adept at shutting down the other teams best player as he is burying you with his offensive tools.

And don’t sleep on Vancouver becoming a very desirable destination for free agents, and the impact this can have on team building long term.

This is just the beginning.

i dont know.... signing free agents got us into this cap crunch in the first place... none of them has been exceptional so far. Unless you have a slam dunk like Panarin, I wouldnt count on our desirable coastline and mountains for help. its drafting drafting drafting in the cap era.

 

[Peter10]

It’s also because so many people can’t see past point totals. They see good production from a young player and think that means its unlikely they improve. What they don’t see is the play away from the puck and ability to take on tougher matchups and excel in them, as their two-way profile grows. All 4 of the Canucks best young players have room to grow in this area.

What we are seeing with the young core is just the tip of the iceberg. Don’t be fooled by the gaudy point totals. Pettersson for example looks like he’s trending in the direction of a Pavel Datsyuk - a matchup nightmare for the opposition. A centre equally adept at shutting down the other teams best player as he is burying you with his offensive tools.

And don’t sleep on Vancouver becoming a very desirable destination for free agents, and the impact this can have on team building long term.

This is just the beginning.

Expecting a lot of improvement on what has been career years for many players this season seems a tad too optimistic to me.

Also, the Canucks can be the most desirable UFA destination of the league but it wont help them if they dont have any cap space.

 

[1440]

Dave Bolland was coming off an injury prone year but ya I would consider him to have been a quality UFA if you're paying him as an elite 3rd line C.

I do think Ladd, Okposo, and Backes were quality UFAs. They, along with Stamkos, Eriksson and Lucic, represented the best group of UFA forwards in recent memory (Stamkos signed before July 1st but it was after other teams were allowed to make their pitch). . Backes was 32 and played a physical game so decline was expected but the others were legitimately considered first line wingers at the time. That free agent class were busts. Even Okposo, who was the youngest of that group, is not a top 6 forward today.

I don't understand why some of you are having so much trouble understanding this. Eriksson was legitimately a top line player for the majority of his pre-Canucks career including his pending UFA year. Go look at past UFA forwards in recent memory does his resume as a UFA forward not put him among the top 5 forwards in any given UFA year?

Strange as it is to think about now, Eriksson's contract was actually a really good one from an analytics perspective at the time of his signing.

By the numbers: The 15 worst NHL free agents of the last decade

Paywall, but the gist is that he had been worth 2.2 wins in 7 of the prior 8 seasons and 3.4 in the season immediately prior to his signing according to Dom Luszczyszyn's (the author of the article) modeling. His contract made him a player paid to generate an expected average of 1.8 wins a season throughout its course. In Boston he did this while playing with Krejci and Beleskey, not Bergeron and Marchand. In short, he was legitimately one of the more underrated players in the league prior to signing for the Canucks and his contract, though large, actually underpaid him relative to his expected value.

Now, you can make a bunch of legitimate arguments as to why this still doesn't forgive Benning for signing the contract:
1. He has signed other big contracts, like those for Myers and Beagle that do not look as favourable under an analytical lens.
2. Most mainstream analytics tend to overvalue the supporting cast on really good teams. (Mostly anecdotal, but there is some info that backs me up on this).
3. Big money free agent signings rarely work out. They are high risk. You can only sign so many of them regardless of how good the players are.

Two things are clear:
One is that whatever analytics that Benning is using (and after reading H. Dayal's article on Green's use of analytics, I am 100% certain he does so too) only align with certain aspects of the analytical framework that is readily available to the public. (I had posted an article here a while back about Myers and cross-ice pass generation as a potential example of alternative analysis that paints him in more favourable light.)

Secondly, anyone stating that they knew the Eriksson contract was bad at the time of signing is either only addressing the heuristic that large free agent contracts are usually bad, or (and I think this unlikely) just knew something about how he would fit in Vancouver that the rest of us didn't. It would be unreasonable to suggest that he was a bad player at the time because he simply was not.

 

[Hoghandler]

Expecting a lot of improvement on what has been career years for many players this season seems a tad too optimistic to me.

Also, the Canucks can be the most desirable UFA destination of the league but it wont help them if they dont have any cap space.

‘Career year’ only refers to point totals. Two-way impact should improve as guys move from their early 20’s into their mid 20’s. There is still a lot of growth left in the Canucks young core IMO.

In regards to free agency, I agree this offseason there won’t be a ton of flexibility to improve. That’s why I said it could really help in the long term team building. Cap space will open up over the coming years, and being a desirable location for free agents will help attract the type of talent you want. Something that is obviously much tougher to do for an organization in the downward trajectory of a competitive cycle.

 

[MS]

Wow, grab me some Kool-Aid.

Sure, some young players may improve. Or they may not, as we saw with Pettersson/Horvat/Boeser last year where that group basically flatlined.

Around those players, there was the healthiest Canuck team in years (unlikely to duplicate) surrounded by a pile of career years (unlikely to duplicate).

In goal, Markstrom had a career year ... and may not be back in any case. Hard to imagine an improvement there.

4 of the team's top-5 defenders are either a) over 30 b) not likely to be brought back or c) both. And there is nothing behind them and no money to spend on improvements. It would be *stunning* if our blueline - which already was a defensive mess - didn't get substantially worse.

Up front, does anyone think Miller and Pearson will duplicate their massive outlier seasons? Virtanen and Leivo are probably gone, and again no money for replacements. MacEwen is the only young player ready to step into a very depth role. And the Eriksson/Sutter/Beagle/Roussel crowd will be yet another year older and worse.

Everything is setting up for a repeat of the 07-08 and 15-16 letdowns.

 

[VanillaCoke]

As well as the obvious inverse of all the Young stars getting better next year, the older players would be getting worse.

 

[Hoghandler]

Wow, grab me some Kool-Aid.

Yeah, it’s the exact same thing you said last offseason when I made my predictions. And a year later, my predictions, virtually across the board were right in line with how the season unfolded.

Maybe I was just lucky? Maybe the team was just lucky? But one thing is for sure, you will be back here calling me and the team lucky once again next offseason if they continue to move forward as a hockey club. It won’t be because a quality core is emerging in front of our eyes, it will be because of some extraneous reason you use to justify why the club was night and day different than you had predicted.

This isn’t the time for ‘But wait’, next year will be a disaster! Instead, comment on what a terrific season we are mired in, especially measured against expectation. It’s time for you to give credit where credit is due. Exhaustively.

 

[Just A Bit Outside]

Thing is, the Canucks got lucky with the break as far as making the playoffs.

They were trending towards missing the payoffs again.

I'm sure the tune of some would be different if that happened.

 

[MS]

Yeah, it’s the exact same thing you said last offseason when I made my predictions. And a year later, my predictions, virtually across the board were right in line with how the season unfolded.

Maybe I was just lucky? Maybe the team was just lucky? But one thing is for sure, you will be back here calling me and the team lucky once again next offseason if they continue to move forward as a hockey club. It won’t be because a quality core is emerging in front of our eyes, it will be because of some extraneous reason you use to justify why the club was night and day different than you had predicted.

This isn’t the time for ‘But wait’, next year will be a disaster! Instead, comment on what a terrific season we are mired in, especially measured against expectation. It’s time for you to give credit where credit is due. Exhaustively.

Uh, FYI I predicted the team would substantially improve in 2019-20 and had them as a bubble playoff team, exactly where they ended up. Strawman, as usual. The team was clearly much improved as they chased the Fake Stanley Cup of Playoffs 2020.

They will not improve in 20-21.

 

[Hoghandler]

Uh, FYI I predicted the team would substantially improve in 2019-20 and had them as a bubble playoff team, exactly where they ended up. Strawman, as usual. The team was clearly much improved as they chased the Fake Stanley Cup of Playoffs 2020.

They will not improve in 20-21.

Your predictions, both team and individual player related, were certainly not as accurate as mine. Surely you can admit as much.

You constantly questioned my ‘kool-aid’ assessments last offseason. And if I’m being honest, my projections, if anything, were not positive enough.

For you to be making predictions for next season, before we even have a good idea what the roster will look like, seems rather foolish. Seems more like wishful thinking on your part, that Benning’s group will underperform this time.

As I said last offseason, don’t hold your breathe on that one.

 

[MS]

Your predictions, both team and individual player related, were certainly not as accurate as mine. Surely you can admit as much.

You constantly questioned my ‘kool-aid’ assessments last offseason. And if I’m being honest, my projections, if anything, were not positive enough.

For you to be making predictions for next season, before we even have a good idea what the roster will look like, seems rather foolish. Seems more like wishful thinking on your part, that Benning’s group will underperform this time.

As I said last offseason, don’t hold your breathe on that one.

Other than conservatively estimating Hughes' production at 35-40 points and predicting that Miller would get 60 points instead of 80 (something literally nobody predicted - I was on the top end of projections there) what exactly did I get wrong?

You were claiming that Jordie Benn was better than Ben Chiarot, as I recall.

I said that this was a bubble playoff team that could sneak into the playoffs if Markstrom was massive and key players stayed healthy ... which is exactly what happened. I also warned against projections of exponential improvement for the Boeser/Pettersson/Horvat crowd, which proved exactly correct.

 

[BB06]

I think Canucks improve next year. Horvat had an awful year and expect a bounce back and Boeser (finally healthy) won't have a down year like he did this one. I I was a betting man Hughes/Pettersson/Boeser Improve and Horvat goes back to 18-19 Horvat. Pearson didn't really have a career year either. His stats were just heavily inflated by empty net stats he was on his usually 40-42 points pace.

 

[Raistlin]

Uh, FYI I predicted the team would substantially improve in 2019-20 and had them as a bubble playoff team, exactly where they ended up. Strawman, as usual. The team was clearly much improved as they chased the Fake Stanley Cup of Playoffs 2020.

They will not improve in 20-21.

Wow, grab me some Cyanide pills!

Day one after a four year hiatus from the playoffs, 3 Calder nominees (23, 21, 20) leading the charge and this guy is still skeptical. Someone needs to rescue MS from the event horizon! Even the harshest pundits can see this team is on the upswing. Pop a skittle and taste some rainbows man!

 

[Szechwan]

I 'member when this thread was about the draft

 

[Fedz]

I 'member when this thread was about the draft

Was just reading through this and thought I somehow clicked into the Management Thread. Amazing how we can continually argue the same things over and over and over and and over and over and over and...I think you get the point.

No question this year's draft will hold a little less interest in the hearts and minds of Canucks fans but I am willing to bet Benning makes a play into the first 45 picks. It may not be a move we like, just have a funny feeling we will pick somewhere in the top two rounds.

 

[Seattle Totems]

I 'member when this thread was about the draft

Probably was before Benning traded away most of his picks and promoted himself and the jackass to head scout.

 

[Bojack Horvatman]

To get this thread back on track, I really like the top end of the draft this year. Lafrenierre, Byfield, and Rossi are all producing like first overall picks in the CHL. Stutzle has great numbers playing against men in the DEL. I'm not as high on Drysdale as I was on Byram last year. I see him more as a #2-3 defencemen, but he is still a great pick around 5. There's some really good consolation prizes this year for the teams that lost the lottery.

 

[MS]

Wow, grab me some Cyanide pills!

Day one after a four year hiatus from the playoffs, 3 Calder nominees (23, 21, 20) leading the charge and this guy is still skeptical. Someone needs to rescue MS from the event horizon! Even the harshest pundits can see this team is on the upswing. Pop a skittle and taste some rainbows man!

As has been stated countless times, for most of us the ultimate goal was not to go all-in to finish in 16th place in 2020 and squeak into the playoffs. The goal is to intelligently build this roster to win a Cup.

If you want to plan the parade for 16th place and think the last decade for the Florida Panthers is just awesome, fill your boots. Yay 8th seed! For others, the fact that we've spent 41% of our cap space going forward on junk and are going to see our roster take a significant step backward next season - while our top players are still on ELCs - is deeply concerning.

This should be the point where we have tons of cap space and are adding to our current roster to spring this team forward to try and become a legitimate contender. Instead we're doing the exact opposite.

 

[Hoghandler]

Other than conservatively estimating Hughes' production at 35-40 points and predicting that Miller would get 60 points instead of 80 (something literally nobody predicted - I was on the top end of projections there) what exactly did I get wrong?

You were claiming that Jordie Benn was better than Ben Chiarot, as I recall.

I said that this was a bubble playoff team that could sneak into the playoffs if Markstrom was massive and key players stayed healthy ... which is exactly what happened. I also warned against projections of exponential improvement for the Boeser/Pettersson/Horvat crowd, which proved exactly correct.

So when the team exceeds even the most optimistic expectations, while a ton of players have excellent, career years, you still see your analysis from last offseason as spot on?

I have gone back and looked at the discussions from that time. This isn’t the thread for it, but I recommend you do the same. Let’s just say, you were the least optimistic of pretty much every poster on this board from that period. No offense, but your track record was as bad as I’ve ever seen...

 

[F A N]

Strange as it is to think about now, Eriksson's contract was actually a really good one from an analytics perspective at the time of his signing.

By the numbers: The 15 worst NHL free agents of the last decade

Paywall, but the gist is that he had been worth 2.2 wins in 7 of the prior 8 seasons and 3.4 in the season immediately prior to his signing according to Dom Luszczyszyn's (the author of the article) modeling. His contract made him a player paid to generate an expected average of 1.8 wins a season throughout its course. In Boston he did this while playing with Krejci and Beleskey, not Bergeron and Marchand. In short, he was legitimately one of the more underrated players in the league prior to signing for the Canucks and his contract, though large, actually underpaid him relative to his expected value.

Now, you can make a bunch of legitimate arguments as to why this still doesn't forgive Benning for signing the contract:
1. He has signed other big contracts, like those for Myers and Beagle that do not look as favourable under an analytical lens.
2. Most mainstream analytics tend to overvalue the supporting cast on really good teams. (Mostly anecdotal, but there is some info that backs me up on this).
3. Big money free agent signings rarely work out. They are high risk. You can only sign so many of them regardless of how good the players are.

Two things are clear:
One is that whatever analytics that Benning is using (and after reading H. Dayal's article on Green's use of analytics, I am 100% certain he does so too) only align with certain aspects of the analytical framework that is readily available to the public. (I had posted an article here a while back about Myers and cross-ice pass generation as a potential example of alternative analysis that paints him in more favourable light.)

Secondly, anyone stating that they knew the Eriksson contract was bad at the time of signing is either only addressing the heuristic that large free agent contracts are usually bad, or (and I think this unlikely) just knew something about how he would fit in Vancouver that the rest of us didn't. It would be unreasonable to suggest that he was a bad player at the time because he simply was not.

Thanks for that. I do think that Benning uses analytics and we have been making acquisitions that address team weakness.

With Eriksson, there were signs of 5 v 5 decline and Eriksson was 31 at the beginning of his 6 year contract. That doesn't change the fact that he was a considered one of the best UFA forwards available who was expected to produce in a top 6 role for at least the first couple of seasons. It's not like he was expected to carry a line. He was expected to play alongside the Sedins and given 1st unit PP time. Alternatively, he was to play with Horvat.

 

[Peen]

So when the team exceeds even the most optimistic expectations, while a ton of players have excellent, career years, you still see your analysis from last offseason as spot on?

I have gone back and looked at the discussions from that time. This isn’t the thread for it, but I recommend you do the same. Let’s just say, you were the least optimistic of pretty much every poster on this board from that period. No offense, but your track record was as bad as I’ve ever seen...

you should probably provide direct links or quotes because what ms is saying seems to be accurate in regards to what was discussed.

if everyone stays healthy and players overachieve, we can sneak into the playoffs... which is what we did. we were a bubble team out of the playoffs on the day that the league shut down having won like 2 of 10 games iirc. we were trending down and key players were getting injured at that time.

 

[VanillaCoke]

To get this thread back on track, I really like the top end of the draft this year. Lafrenierre, Byfield, and Rossi are all producing like first overall picks in the CHL. Stutzle has great numbers playing against men in the DEL. I'm not as high on Drysdale as I was on Byram last year. I see him more as a #2-3 defencemen, but he is still a great pick around 5. There's some really good consolation prizes this year for the teams that lost the lottery.

I like stutzle and rossi more than byfield, and Drysdale more than byram lol

 

[VanJack]

I know the Canucks were desperate at the trade deadline to acquire a scoring forward when Boeser went down.

But damn.....Tyler Madden AND a second round draft choice in a year where you likely wouldn't have had a first rounder either, is tough to swallow.

Now if the Canucks could unearth another Madden in the third round it might ease the pain a bit. But the guru of those later round gems--Judd Brackett--is no longer in the stable. Maybe it's time to take another flyer on a Russian player, and hope he morphs into another Artemi Panarin.

 

[MS]

So when the team exceeds even the most optimistic expectations, while a ton of players have excellent, career years, you still see your analysis from last offseason as spot on?

I have gone back and looked at the discussions from that time. This isn’t the thread for it, but I recommend you do the same. Let’s just say, you were the least optimistic of pretty much every poster on this board from that period. No offense, but your track record was as bad as I’ve ever seen...

I know exactly what I said. And you can go look at the prediction threads and see I'm *far* from the most negative poster here about what our results in the 19-20 season would be. I believe I picked 90 points as our projected total and given the way we were freefalling in March, that might have been optimistic had we played a full 82 games.

My position has been very consistent for the last year. We obviously improved the team significantly in the short-term in the 2019 offseason in an effort to win the 2020 Playoffs Fake Stanley Cup (which I've talked about endlessly), at the expense of the long-term health of the franchise. I expected we'd be a playoff bubble team who would need to stay healthy and have a big season from Markstrom to make the playoffs. Then we'd have to pay the piper after the season was over. This is exactly what's happened.

I didn't expect Hughes to be this good this soon. Nobody expected JT Miller to score 80 points, but I projected one of the highest outputs from him. I thought Myers was a 4-5, but he was probably more a #4 and held up a bit better defensively than I anticipated. Other than that? Basically exactly what I thought would happen happened. Meanwhile you were hyping up Ferland and Benn as impact acquisitions.

 

[Raistlin]

As has been stated countless times, for most of us the ultimate goal was not to go all-in to finish in 16th place in 2020 and squeak into the playoffs. The goal is to intelligently build this roster to win a Cup.

If you want to plan the parade for 16th place and think the last decade for the Florida Panthers is just awesome, fill your boots. Yay 8th seed! For others, the fact that we've spent 41% of our cap space going forward on junk and are going to see our roster take a significant step backward next season - while our top players are still on ELCs - is deeply concerning.

This should be the point where we have tons of cap space and are adding to our current roster to spring this team forward to try and become a legitimate contender. Instead we're doing the exact opposite.

Hey man, I'm on the same boat, I dont want to just make the playoffs too, I was in the tank thread for a good 5 years, but a case has to be made to not simply wallow because we are not employed by Aqualini, we are not close to winning the cup until we can offload the bottom 6 contract anyways, that wont change no matter how much we cry, and I dont agree that the roster will take a significant step backwards say... Hughes didnt just outperform expectations, he turned out to be on par with Dahlin and Makar, or small things like OJ, Rathbone is found money right now. When its day one of this momentuous day, read the room and enjoy the enthusiasm for a few days.

Plenty of time to sulk back in the dark room once(if?) we get bounced.