Confirmed with Link: Blues sign Beau Bennett (1 year @ $650k)

[BlueDream]

Or you guys could just not read the articles instead of complaining about every single one. Actually entertaining how worked up some of you are getting over it.

All you have to do is avoid clicking on that little hyperlink. It's pretty easy!

 

[Klank Loves You]

Or you guys could just not read the articles instead of complaining about every single one. Actually entertaining how worked up some of you are getting over it.

All you have to do is avoid clicking on that little hyperlink. It's pretty easy!

People are going to talk about stories relating to Blues hockey on the Blues hockey forum. HFB affiliates have consistently shown lack of basic team knowledge and writing quality since i've been here. I think there has been one quality article regarding Blues Hockey.

 

[Stealth JD]

I encourage young writers to create and proudly share their material. It's good that this fan would have the courage to put his name on a blog, and perhaps start himself down the path of a long and satisfying career writing and/or following sports. Doing so, however, opens oneself up to criticism (deservedly or otherwise) and put-downs of which the internet has no shortages.

Keep writing, but double-check your claims being presented as fact and research before guessing. Everyone's a critic, and though nobody would admit it, deep-down there's probably a little bit of truth in the wisdom of Randal Graves:

Schadenfreude was meant for the internet. Don't let the critiques dissuade you from following your passion.

 

[MortiestOfMortys]

Yes, despite my wholesale disagreement with the article, it was very well written, especially given the age of the author. Good for him for doing it, that's a huge deal for a kid his age honestly, even if it is a click-baity site (what isn't these days?).

But... welcome to the world of sports writing. You could publish an article with only the three words "Gretzky was good" and there would be 15 pages of arguments from people who have a cross to carry and a hill to die on. In sports writing, nobody is ever right. With guys like Rutherford and Korac, they tend to stick to just writing the facts: here's what happened in this game, here's what this guy said about it, here's what's next. Boom. Done. Hard to dispute. But you get guys like Miklasz or Dan Oneil who editorialize (or Timmerman who would clearly rather be writing about literally anything else) and then all hell breaks loose.

My beef is that there was so much context missed in this evaluation of Bennett. Like, it seems at least a little likely that the kid saw the point totals, and saw everything he needed to see to send Bennett down to replace Agostino in Chicago (and it wasn't really particularly clear that he knows that Vegas is taking up a substantial part of that roster). I disagree with that assessment, and I certainly am not ready to cap my expectations for Bennett at "Agostino-lite."

A more interesting take would be how Bennett could be a good, cheap asset because there is evidence that the best depth players tend to be guys with high ceilings and high draft pedigrees whose offensive elements don't translate as well to the NHL game like Auston Watson or Scottie Upshall. Having been injured doesn't seem like a good indicator of success to me, idk, maybe it is.

So, yeah man, keep writing for sure. But.... also buckle up

 

[AjaxManifesto]

I liked the article. I know more about Beau.

Keep working your craft kid, someday you will write for a big outlet.

To those of you who are nasty and heartless, pull your head out of your ass. This is a hockey site for fans, not some secret site for NHL insiders. Get a clue.

 

[Majorityof1]

I liked the article. I know more about Beau.

Keep working your craft kid, someday you will write for a big outlet.

To those of you who are nasty and heartless, pull your head out of your ass. This is a hockey site for fans, not some secret site for NHL insiders. Get a clue.

Give me a ****ing break. If he really wants to be a professional writer some day, he would be better served by harsh criticism than by generic "Keep plugging at it, you can do anything you set your mind to" BS". My issue was not with a kid writing an article, or even submitting it. It was actually decently written for a kid and showed promise. Young people can do amazingly creative things now-a-days. No, my issue was with the site that purports to be the last word (and hence most important word) on the subject posting an article with such glaring errors. My problem is with click-bait media in general where it is more important to have a catchy title and advertise in the right places than to have actual good content. We live in a world where actual news has to be condensed into a 144-character tweet. Where real, knowledgeable writers are afraid to delve into analysis, lest they offend someone, so they stick with quick tweets and inane commentary. That leaves people looking for decent analysis (like me) left to wade through a sea of trash like this article (and most of this board) to find some actually interesting and educated discussion.

I didn't know what the LWoS was when I read the article. I had seen some things from there but never paid much attention. The design looks professional and it was affiliated with a giant discussion board. I figured it had to be somewhat legit. I now know its not. I definitely didn't know the author was 16. But neither of those things changes my opinion. The article had glaring errors that cast doubt on the authors knowledge base to make any sort of conclusion on the subject.

 

[medkit]

On July 1, the St. Louis Blues signed Beau Bennett to a one year deal. The injury prone Bennett wasn’t the most sought after free agent; but St. Louis fans seem to be excited about the signing. The argument is that the right winger will add a lot of strength to the Blues bottom six. While he does add depth, it’s not at the level of what most people are hoping. Instead, he’s likely to be one of the AHL’s best players this season.

http://lastwordonhockey.com/2017/07/24/beau-bennett-changed-teams-not-expectations/

I'm surprised to hear the writer is only 16. Great job.

Part of the job is dealing with the haters, good luck

 

[Memento]

I liked the article. I know more about Beau.

Keep working your craft kid, someday you will write for a big outlet.

To those of you who are nasty and heartless, pull your head out of your ass. This is a hockey site for fans, not some secret site for NHL insiders. Get a clue.

Speaking as an aspiring authoress with more than ten years of experience in writing, I didn't improve until I received harsh critique. That was the moment when I decided that I wanted to get better, so that I could be the absolute best I could be. Critique is an essential tool for writers - like this kid - to get better at their craft. If everything was sunshine and rainbows, how would we ever improve?

 

[Oberyn]

I liked the article. I know more about Beau.

Keep working your craft kid, someday you will write for a big outlet.

To those of you who are nasty and heartless, pull your head out of your ass. This is a hockey site for fans, not some secret site for NHL insiders. Get a clue.

Nasty and heartless because we criticized a hockey article? Give me a break.

 

[AjaxManifesto]

Give me a ****ing break. If he really wants to be a professional writer some day, he would be better served by harsh criticism than by generic "Keep plugging at it, you can do anything you set your mind to" BS". My issue was not with a kid writing an article, or even submitting it. It was actually decently written for a kid and showed promise. Young people can do amazingly creative things now-a-days. No, my issue was with the site that purports to be the last word (and hence most important word) on the subject posting an article with such glaring errors. My problem is with click-bait media in general where it is more important to have a catchy title and advertise in the right places than to have actual good content. We live in a world where actual news has to be condensed into a 144-character tweet. Where real, knowledgeable writers are afraid to delve into analysis, lest they offend someone, so they stick with quick tweets and inane commentary. That leaves people looking for decent analysis (like me) left to wade through a sea of trash like this article (and most of this board) to find some actually interesting and educated discussion.

I didn't know what the LWoS was when I read the article. I had seen some things from there but never paid much attention. The design looks professional and it was affiliated with a giant discussion board. I figured it had to be somewhat legit. I now know its not. I definitely didn't know the author was 16. But neither of those things changes my opinion. The article had glaring errors that cast doubt on the authors knowledge base to make any sort of conclusion on the subject.

He's a 16 year old kid. Grasp reality. He isn't paid, he's learning his craft, he's still young.

You need to grow up and look at the bigger picture.

 

[AjaxManifesto]

Speaking as an aspiring authoress with more than ten years of experience in writing, I didn't improve until I received harsh critique. That was the moment when I decided that I wanted to get better, so that I could be the absolute best I could be. Critique is an essential tool for writers - like this kid - to get better at their craft. If everything was sunshine and rainbows, how would we ever improve?

Ditto for you. He's 16. Doing it for free. Harsh critique is what he needs?

Grow up.

 

[AjaxManifesto]

Nasty and heartless because we criticized a hockey article? Give me a break.

Another ditto. Grasp reality and grow up.

Encouragement for a 16 aspiring writer rather than being hyper critical.

 

[KirkOut]

I liked the article. I know more about Beau.

Keep working your craft kid, someday you will write for a big outlet.

To those of you who are nasty and heartless, pull your head out of your ass. This is a hockey site for fans, not some secret site for NHL insiders. Get a clue.

this is a great post. keep it up. someday you're gonna be a big time hockey forum poster.

 

[Majorityof1]

He's a 16 year old kid. Grasp reality. He isn't paid, he's learning his craft, he's still young.

You need to grow up and look at the bigger picture.

16 is what, like a junior in High School. Yes, he should have factual errors pointed out in his writing at that point. If he turned in a research paper for Compositions class, and the teacher just ignored the totally made up facts and just gave the him an A, that would be doing the kid a disservice. One of the "benefits" of writing on LWoS, according to their own website, is to "hone your craft". How can you hone your craft if everyone tells you your doing great when you really aren't. As for not getting paid, he is writing for a for-profit website. That is his choice. Thus he opens himself up for criticism. Also, they do have a remuneration policy of some sort. Not sure if this particular writer qualifies, but its a possibility.

Plus, you are just ignoring the problem that LWoS is making money off ad links, probably not paying their writers much, and posting articles with glaring errors most likely without any oversight. Again, the main problem is not with the writer but the site who will put any garbage up to get a few clicks and ad revenue.

As far as looking at the bigger picture and grasping reality, here it is. The number of people who can make successful careers as a writer is a very tiny percentage of the number of people who try to do so and are encouraged that "they can do anything they set their mind to". If he is going to succeed, he needs to a) improve his craft to a great extent, not because he is bad but because you have to be truly special to make it, (b) grow a thick skin as its a tough business and (c) still get lucky. He can't do (a) if all he gets is false encouragement. As for b, when you put yourself and your work out in the public, its going to get torn apart. This was mild compared to what he's going to face. Given that you personally have had your feelings hurt on a few different occasions when people critique something on here, I'd be willing to bet the kid has thicker skin than you do. Maybe an internet message board is not the place for you, and you should go back to your wonderful utopia where everyone wins and everyone is the best at whatever they chose to do regardless of their talent or the level of effort they put into it.

 

[Evocable Manager]

Another ditto. Grasp reality and grow up.

Encouragement for a 16 aspiring writer rather than being hyper critical.

Does this mean if he was 46 that being hyper critical is encouraged?

I mean if I was 16 I'd hate being treating differently because my age. A 16 year old can take harsh criticism or at least I hope so.

 

[2 Minute Minor]

You guys missed it. In the amount of time this thread has been kvetching about his article he turned 17.

 

[AjaxManifesto]

Internet tough guys abound. The number that would say the same things face to face with a person is very low. Done in this thread. Not worth elevating the bottom dwellers.

 

[Edgar Carrow]

Internet tough guys abound. The number that would say the same things face to face with a person is very low. Done in this thread. Not worth elevating the bottom dwellers.

Calm down, Gabe.

 

[Ranksu]

This thread is great example how negative some people are in Blues forum. Bash down mentatilty.

 

[Kasparov]

Are we cyber bullying people again?

Wish the mods would have stepped in on this one. Can we get back to hockey? How about that beau Bennett guy. I hear he's pretty good...when he's healthy.

...Get it?
You get it?

 

[simon IC]

Anyway maybe we'll get luckywith Bennett and he will stay healthy. He is a RHS, which is something we lack.

 

[Majorityof1]

Bennett is a slightly older, less physical version of Jaskin with slightly better offensive skills and vastly better puck luck. So for a sub-million dollar contract, he's good depth but not much more. With Berglund hurt, I'd be fine with him getting consistent looks on the 3rd line, and think it should probably be between him and Paajarvi. I wouldn't want either of them there long-term unless he improves from what he has shown previously.

 

[MortiestOfMortys]

Over the last 3 seasons, Bennett has scored 1.26, 1.27, and 1.28 P/60, so he's pretty consistent and reliable at that production level. For a 3 year average of all players currently on our roster, that would put him at our 10th or 13th most productive forward, depending on whether or not you want to count the limited sample size from Barbashev, Sanford and Megan last year.

Regardless, that's better production over a 3-year average (to smooth out outlier seasons) than Jaskin, Brodziak, Thorburn, and all of our defensemen. He's only .03 P/60 behind Berglund's production, so negligible difference really.

If he's healthy, then he's arguably the best 4th line option we've got, and a borderline 3rd liner in a pinch. He's also a right-handed shot, his underlying numbers are fantastic, and his on-ice vision and hockey IQ are reportedly top-notch. If he's only getting 10-13 minutes a night (and he should be), there's no reason to expect his real production to peak above 15-20 points, especially if he's not good for more than 70 games. That's essentially Scottie Upshall levels of production, so he essentially replaces his production and speed in the lineup.

I personally like the pickup a lot. He fits our core age group, and he's apparently a good locker room guy. I don't expect a ton from him, but I think he'll be a good addition to our group. It's a marginal upgrade over Upshall, and often times that's where you win in hockey games: in the margins. I'm excited to see how he does.

 

[Majorityof1]

Over the last 3 seasons, Bennett has scored 1.26, 1.27, and 1.28 P/60, so he's pretty consistent and reliable at that production level. For a 3 year average of all players currently on our roster, that would put him at our 10th or 13th most productive forward, depending on whether or not you want to count the limited sample size from Barbashev, Sanford and Megan last year.

Regardless, that's better production over a 3-year average (to smooth out outlier seasons) than Jaskin, Brodziak, Thorburn, and all of our defensemen. He's only .03 P/60 behind Berglund's production, so negligible difference really.

If he's healthy, then he's arguably the best 4th line option we've got, and a borderline 3rd liner in a pinch. He's also a right-handed shot, his underlying numbers are fantastic, and his on-ice vision and hockey IQ are reportedly top-notch. If he's only getting 10-13 minutes a night (and he should be), there's no reason to expect his real production to peak above 15-20 points, especially if he's not good for more than 70 games. That's essentially Scottie Upshall levels of production, so he essentially replaces his production and speed in the lineup.

I personally like the pickup a lot. He fits our core age group, and he's apparently a good locker room guy. I don't expect a ton from him, but I think he'll be a good addition to our group. It's a marginal upgrade over Upshall, and often times that's where you win in hockey games: in the margins. I'm excited to see how he does.

While I pretty much agree with most of this, I'd like to provide some context for the Brodziak vs. Bennett argument. First, I'll assume those #s are 5v5, because if we are using Brodziak's PK time to discuss p/60, that's totally unfair. Even assuming 5v5, Brodziak starts 40%+ zone starts in the defensive zone. He was 50%+ this past year. Bennett starts just over 30%. Brodziak played with Reaves and Upshall. Bennett's most consistent linemates were Kunitz and Sutter with the Penguins and Henrique and Zacha with the Devils. Kunitz and Henrique offer far more offensive upside than anything Brodz has had to work with.

I also don't think he is much of an upgrade over Upshall because of Upshall's PK ability. Losing Upshall on the PK will hurt Brodziak on the PK because of how well they worked together. That in turn will hurt the team since they were a great unit.

 

[MortiestOfMortys]

While I pretty much agree with most of this, I'd like to provide some context for the Brodziak vs. Bennett argument. First, I'll assume those #s are 5v5, because if we are using Brodziak's PK time to discuss p/60, that's totally unfair. Even assuming 5v5, Brodziak starts 40%+ zone starts in the defensive zone. He was 50%+ this past year. Bennett starts just over 30%. Brodziak played with Reaves and Upshall. Bennett's most consistent linemates were Kunitz and Sutter with the Penguins and Henrique and Zacha with the Devils. Kunitz and Henrique offer far more offensive upside than anything Brodz has had to work with.

I also don't think he is much of an upgrade over Upshall because of Upshall's PK ability. Losing Upshall on the PK will hurt Brodziak on the PK because of how well they worked together. That in turn will hurt the team since they were a great unit.

Well, he did the same thing playing with Suter and Spaling 3 years ago, but point taken regardless. I think if he's playing on a 4th line with Sundqvist and Jaskin/Paajarvi, that has the potential to be a little more offensively oriented than other 4th lines we've had in the past. A Thorburn-Brodziak-Bennett line though doesn't really make sense to me, I'd rather have Jaskin in there at 4RW.

And you're completely right, I neglected the PK aspect. Bennett has, to date, played essentially 0 PK time. Not sure if that's a skill he could add to his repertoire, but it would certainly help him hold down a bottom-6 role.