Canucks Extend Jim Benning's Contract II

[Melvin]

I can't stress this enough. If you have a legitimate criticism of the potato and or the picks it has made, please post in the dedicated thread and I'd be happy to discuss. Otherwise I assume you're just talking shit.

 

[Melvin]

I think you've put some thought into your previous points, though I just want to clear up a couple things I think you're misinterpreting with the potato (feel free to correct me, Melvin).

We don't revere the potato for its drafting ability and that was never its intention anyway. It's just an attempt to provide an objective baseline for drafting players, and the objectivity comes from the fact it only looks at a player's PPG while considering leagues, position, and height. It doesn't care about more subjective things like whether players are Russian, grew up in Vancouver, or were arrogant in their combine interviews.

The potato is supposed to be a predictive tool, not an evaluative one. The evaluation using TOI only comes in after the potato has made its picks, and has no bearing (that I know of) on player selection. The point of the TOI comparisons was probably just to make an easy calculation of the potato's performance relative to NHL teams. It's not perfect - there are situations where Player A makes the NHL before Player B, and would have more TOI in the first few years even if Player B looks to be the better player moving forward. You can really evaluate the selections however you see fit, which is I think what most of us do.

Behind the scenes it probably looks something like:
A*B*C*(Draft PPG) = Potato Points
Where A, B, and C are the league, position, and height adjustments, and Potato Points are optimized to some NHL variable. I'm not sure if Melvin has shared what the variable is exactly (NHL PPG? NHL TOI?).

This is all 100% correct.

Toi of course has no bearing on the selection, as it doesn't use any information that came after the pick was made. It is used to evaluate the performance.

The goal was to be able to evaluate how well nhl teams (and more complicated models like the canucks army one) did at drafting by seeing how much better they did than this stupid, baseline methodology. It was loosely based on tangotiger marcel the monkey projections for baseball if you want to google that.

You can't compare team a directly to team b because the two teams had different picks. So, you compare team a to the potato selections of team a, and compare team b to the potato selections for team b, and that allows you to compare the two teams based on their performance relative to the picks they held. It's a way to standardize team drafting performance.

Basically, to evaluate your own performance, you compare how much better you did than this stupid baseline. I didn't think it would outperform Benning, but rather give us some context about how well Benning has done by measuring how much better he is than what I consider the bare minimum.

Really the point was to just demonstrate that even if you're picking players in a stupid, lazy way, you're still going to wind up with pretty good prospects. Even from just the last 3 drafts, I'm pretty sure every benningite would still consider Benning a genius if he had taken Pettersson, Bouchard, Almeida, etc. When you don't have a baseline you end up with the opinion that Benning is great because he adds X new prospects every year, which is the equivalent of saying that I rocked my math test because I got ten questions right. You need a denominator.

It is illuminating though that this purposefully stupid methodology has yielded results such that people think I somehow cheated, even though they can't elucidate how that would even be possible. It's basically no different than the monkey that can pick stocks about as well as "expert investors." it highlights the fact that it's all bullshit.

That's all I'm really gonna say about it here. I don't have time to wade through this thread. But please, if a legitimate point or question comes up, put it in the other thread. I have email notifications set up on that one. Thanks.

 

[tradervik]

Someone might have already mention this, but the "potato" is very similar to mechanical investment strategies (look up "dogs of the Dow" if you're curious). It's a great idea and kudos to Melvin for creating it. The "potato vs draft-guru" argument is just like the mechanical investing vs stock picking debates I used to follow.

It would be fascinating to see the potato back-tested against more drafts. Looking at 2010-2013 it would have produced at least 10 NHL players vs 2 to 3 picked by the Canucks. I agree it's too soon to compare recent drafts to the potato.

 

[rypper]

Bob McK obviously (he's retiring btw)........He's been around twice as long (on TV) as most guys on the HNIC panel....But who gets the higher viewership?...Rogers holds the NHL rights.

Where did you hear that? He just tweeted something about hopefully by the time he's back from vacation the Marner deal is done.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Where did you hear that? He just tweeted something about hopefully by the time he's back from vacation the Marner deal is done.

"On the bright side, four more seasons without any labor concerns. Also on bright side, my anticipated retirement date: September, 2020"...Bob McK

 

[rypper]

"On the bright side, four more seasons without any labor concerns. Also on bright side, my anticipated retirement date: September, 2020"...Bob McK

That tweet is from 2016. Has he said anything else about it since?

That's a big hole left in the hockey world when he does pull the pin.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Hockey without Bob McKenzie (MacKenzie to retire after this season)

 

[sting101]

Why wouldn't prople just compare Bennings drafting to NHL expected results based on top50 selections and their order in reality?

As far as i can tell the Potato is less critical than the reality of the selections by NHL teams. Am i wrong in saying this?

Benning's drafting is average at best if you consider 2014 to 2017. A lot will be determined on how good Hughes Juolevi and Podkolzin become and if he can obtain enough value from his 2nd rounders and the later rounds (Gaudette Tryamkin Demko Woo) to offset the expected value. If Juolevi outright busts like the Virtanen selection has in terms of expected value he's gonna need some massive wins or a huge unlikely win somewhere else to offset it. So like many have said it's too early for the most part.

Time will tell but i fully agree that at best were getting expected results if not sub par expected results at this point relative to our crap team results.

The only reason people should be propping up the draft is because the reality is things are shaping up nicely and the reality that the last regime produced the worst results relative to expected results of any team in the NHL over a 6yr period. I think it's fair to be excited over the new core and the renewed ability to compete at the draft table even if some is based on how people perceive things vs what the eventual realities are.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

That matters. It's right after the draft. That's not hindsight.

Imagine if a poster only posted a day after the draft to say that he likes the pick. Is that hindsight? Boeser would not have played a single game to skew information. Give your head a shake.

So just to clarify based upon this post:

Boeser wins the vote in pure numbers. If you were to parse the data to remove posters who supported the pick a day after it was made, or to eliminate double selections, you get what POM just posted.

HF, you decide.

(I'm still going to keep tabulating)

So..going by these parameters (double selections, and who supported the pick in hindsight),and using "So You Think You Can Draft" as your basis......
2014: So you think you can draft - 2014 edition......

Jake Virtanen.

 

[Bleach Clean]

So..going by these parameters (double selections, and who supported the pick in hindsight),and using "So You Think You Can Draft" as your basis......
2014: So you think you can draft - 2014 edition......

Jake Virtanen.

Oh hey POM, how are you?!? Long time.

Cool, now note: I didn’t include “hindsight selections” as you call them for my research. I’m saying it’s valid to do so.

That said, as someone pointed out earlier in the thread, if you do it this way you get Pettersson instead of Mittlestadt. I’m also guessing that you would get Boeser clearly defined in the vote. Are you good with that trade off?

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Oh hey POM, how are you?!? Long time.

Cool, now note: I didn’t include “hindsight selections” as you call them for my research. I’m saying it’s valid to do so.

That said, as someone pointed out earlier in the thread, if you do it this way you get Pettersson instead of Mittlestadt. I’m also guessing that you would get Boeser clearly defined in the vote. Are you good with that trade off?

2014 Virtanen
2015 Boeser
2016 Tkachuk
2017 Pettersson
2018 Hughes
2019 Boldy/Pod

Take out Tkachuk,..pretty much looks like what Benning picked.

 

[Bleach Clean]

2014 Virtanen
2015 Boeser
2016 Tkachuk
2017 Pettersson
2018 Hughes
2019 Boldy/Pod

Take out Tkachuk,..pretty much looks like what Benning picked.

Why take out Tkachuk exactly?

And why is 2019 Boldy/Pod?

 

[Britton]

2014 Virtanen
2015 Boeser
2016 Tkachuk
2017 Pettersson
2018 Hughes
2019 Boldy/Pod

Take out Tkachuk,..pretty much looks like what Benning picked.

Yeah sure take out the biggest draft mistake he has made so far and the first rounds look the same. This is like judging Benning's trade record without using the Gudbranson trade.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Why take out Tkachuk exactly?

And why is 2019 Boldy/Pod?

So You Think You Can Draft - 2019 Edition

Boldy and Pod come out around even (using your parameters)

Other than Tkachuk..Its Bennings picks.

 

[Bleach Clean]

Vankiller Whale Jerey Rooy
DCantheDDad Konency
canucksfan100 Boeser
vancityluongo Konency
kilgore111 Merkley
donut Konency
Bad news Benning Boeser
Canucks10 Merkley
Nuckles Merkley
offbeatgravy Merkley
turkulad Boeser
Canucker Konency
Trelane Sprong
leftwinglockdown Anthony Beauvilier
jigsaw99 Boeser and Merkley
thefeebster Brock Boeser/Nick Merkley
MS Nick Merkley or Boeser
ting101 Travis Konency
Red Boeser
Rosko Thorn Travis Konency
Yossarian54 Nick Merkley
y2kcanucks Konency
ugghhh Beauvillier
biturbo19 Larsson

Boeser 7 votes
Konency 7 votes
Merkley 8 votes

Your vote count does not match mine. I have 7s across the board. Racerjoe's count, which includes post-draft support, sides with Boeser:

For fun and since it was only 2 pages of posts, I counted the actual votes including people who voted for two players. These are the results.

Roy - 1
Boeser - 9
Konecny - 6
Merkley - 7
Sprong - 1
Beauvillier -2
Larsson - 1

So it actually looks like the board preferred Boeser, although I would like to see the pre-draft poll instead.

But not to worry lawrence, still currently tabulating results from other threads. Will post when done.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Yeah sure take out the biggest draft mistake he has made so far and the first rounds look the same. This is like judging Benning's trade record without using the Gudbranson trade.

Nope..it can be included..just saying that 'other' than Tkachuk.. its pretty much Bennings picks.

 

[Bleach Clean]

So You Think You Can Draft - 2019 Edition

Boldy and Pod come out around even (using your parameters)

Other than Tkachuk..Its Bennings picks.

I think if it's even for Boldy/Pod in that thread, and the actual voting thread has Boldy as the top choice, it should be Boldy. Just to make things clear here.

"Other than Tkachuk" may as well read like "everything Benning did minus one 1st line core player"... You think that's a small disparity?



Edit: Oh, your saying it matches Benning's picks. Well, when you include post-draft support votes that will tend to happen.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

I think if it's even for Boldy/Pod in that thread, and the actual voting thread has Boldy as the top choice, it should be Boldy. Just to make things clear here.

"Other than Tkachuk" may as well read like "everything Benning did minus one 1st line core player"... You think that's a small disparity?



Edit: Oh, your saying it matches Benning's picks. Well, when you include post-draft support votes that will tend to happen.

Obviously....Thank you.

 

[Bleach Clean]

Obviously.

Ok then...?

Not sure what point you are trying to make anymore?

 

[lawrence]

Why do you left several posters out, namely me? Why I don't see all those Merkley votes in the thread?

I don't see your post in this thread

So you think you can draft - 2015 edition

this is is the one we are using from ronning.

also can you name who I left out? please respond with the names I have left out.

 

[lawrence]

Your vote count does not match mine. I have 7s across the board. Racerjoe's count, which includes post-draft support, sides with Boeser:





But not to worry lawrence, still currently tabulating results from other threads. Will post when done.

So you think you can draft - 2015 edition 1 vote canucksfan100

So you think you can draft - 2015 edition 2nd vote bad news benning

So you think you can draft - 2015 edition 3rd vote turkulad

So you think you can draft - 2015 edition 4th vote user name thefeebster
https://hfboards.mandatory.com/posts/104468839/ 5th vote ms

https://hfboards.mandatory.com/posts/104478459/ 6th vote red

So you think you can draft - 2015 edition jigsaww 7th vote, but this one he was 50/50, so Boeser and Merkley cancels each other out.


can you kindly name the the 9 votes for Boeser?

according to that one thread. I can't find any other info on 2015 pre draft.

 

[The Drop]

Bob McK obviously (he's retiring btw)........He's been around twice as long (on TV) as most guys on the HNIC panel....But who gets the higher viewership?...Rogers holds the NHL rights.

So his opinion won’t matter despite being more respected because Rogers has the rights and the Canucks regional rights and will never critique the Canucks, therefore helping you win your argument by adding ridiculous limitations.

Congrats.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

So his opinion won’t matter despite being more respected because Rogers has the rights and the Canucks regional rights and will never critique the Canucks, therefore helping you win your argument by adding ridiculous limitations.

Congrats.

Um..where did I say Bob McK opinion doesn't matter?....I wasn't even aware that there was an argument?

 

[MadaCanuckle]

So you think you can draft - 2015 edition 1 vote canucksfan100

So you think you can draft - 2015 edition 2nd vote bad news benning

So you think you can draft - 2015 edition 3rd vote turkulad

So you think you can draft - 2015 edition 4th vote user name thefeebster
https://hfboards.mandatory.com/posts/104468839/ 5th vote ms

https://hfboards.mandatory.com/posts/104478459/ 6th vote red

So you think you can draft - 2015 edition jigsaww 7th vote, but this one he was 50/50, so Boeser and Merkley cancels each other out.


can you kindly name the the 9 votes for Boeser?

according to that one thread. I can't find any other info on 2015 pre draft.

He already did that. Three people saying you are mistaken and you still insist? Must be like the other twitter guy who was corrected in some kind of made up fact, insulted the other twitter user who corrected him and then made an apology, admiting he was unprofessional. I get it, it is your job, but try to resemble some honesty.

 

[lawrence]

He already did that. Three people saying you are mistaken and you still insist? Must be like the other twitter guy who was corrected in some kind of made up fact, insulted the other twitter user who corrected him and then made an apology, admiting he was unprofessional. I get it, it is your job, but try to resemble some honesty.

He didn’t do it it. He just said he counted 9 names. I also asked nicely which 9 names with no response. I even took my time to total up the response 1st time, 2nd time provided all the ones that voted brock.

I am also asking you to name the guys I’ve left out. Kindly awaiting your response.

I don’t believe this place can get this low. You mention honesty right ? Your last sentence ? Whois the one not being honest right now ? Yes ? 10 of you guys can say boeser got 10 votes, fact is fact , he actually only had 7. Unless I am missing something and it’s not like i didn’t do my part and the try to pull up older info. Add to the fact I got accused of leaving people out! W.t.f is going on here please answer my question who did I leave out.