Canucks Management & Ownership Discussion | Part 25

[Bleach Clean]

Continue.

Click to read more...

 

[racerjoe]

Continue.

Do we have to?

I think it is interesting that now we have more and more publications coming out pointing out just how terrible our GM, owner and Coach are, and yet we still have people standing up them. Especially with lines like well they have the job so they must be good.

It wasn't enough for Sportnet and TSN to make fun of us, we needed these last two reports as well...

 

[Mad Brills*]

Anyone have a timeline on a possibility that the team is sold?

 

[iloveloov*]

Last thread got full.

Innate meaning qualities belonging to the player, which includes his "behaviour" and his contract.

This is the opposite of your view that the player has only extrinsic or acquired value, such as the price paid by a GM to acquire him.

Let me ask, if a player only has such value as the acquiring team paid, what value do the Sedins have? Since they have never been traded do they have any value? Do they have value but it is unknown? Are we incapable of estimating their value without Benning trading them first? In absence of any trades, is their default value the price we paid to acquire them in the first place, namely a 2nd and 3rd overall pick? Or has their value changed since then?

Please tell.

What?? Who told you that's how the NHL works? I blame EA Sports. You can't think of the NHL which is an N=30 market in the same way you think of the financial markets which are N=1,000,000,000+.

In the NHL there's a very limited number of jobs to go around. Today Carey Price has incredible value. If the next draft yields 40 goalies better than him that step into the league right away his value has crashed overnight. That's the very definition of extrinsic.

If you're trying to unload a player like Dan Hamhuis that has good "intrinsic" value at the trade deadline but let's say only 10 teams are looking to buy and of those 10 teams only 5 are looking for a defenseman and of those 5 only 2 are looking for a LHD and of those 2 none of them are looking to pay very much because he's going UFA then what good is his "intrinsic" value? It's meaningless. In reality everything is relative.

 

[Hit the post]

David Clarkson was signed for appropriate value by the Laffs.

Hey that lifetime deal the fishsticks gave DiPietro was market value!

 

[CanaFan]

Last thread got full.



What?? Who told you that's how the NHL works? I blame EA Sports. You can't think of the NHL which is an N=30 market in the same way you think of the financial markets which are N=1,000,000,000+.

In the NHL there's a very limited number of jobs to go around. Today Carey Price has incredible value. If the next draft yields 40 goalies better than him that step into the league right away his value has crashed overnight. That's the very definition of extrinsic.

If you're trying to unload a player like Dan Hamhuis that has good "intrinsic" value at the trade deadline but let's say only 10 teams are looking to buy and of those 10 teams only 5 are looking for a defenseman and of those 5 only 2 are looking for a LHD and of those 2 none of them are looking to pay very much because he's going UFA then what good is his "intrinsic" value? It's meaningless. In reality everything is relative.

Again you are confusing PRICE with VALUE. If there is a limited market for Dan Hamhuis - for whatever reason (cap, roster limits, etc) then that certainly changes his PRICE but it doesn't change his VALUE i.e. the on and off ice value he brings to the team. If the PRICE you get for him is too LOW (relative to his VALUE) then you simply don't make the trade.

Value is innate. Price is impacted by external factors.

Hunter Shinkaruk had innate value. The fact that Benning sold him for Granlund simply means that is the price Benning accepted, not that it equates to the quality Shinkaruk is as a player or a prospect.

I've been arguing that they are two different things for the last 5 posts now but you keep returning to PRICE as your standard for value. This isn't what fans on this board are talking about when we say it was a bad trade. Is it all Benning could get for Shinkaruk? Maybe, or maybe Benning preferred Granlund most out of his offers or maybe he didn't even shop him around that hard, we don't really know. But even if it was, it is still a BAD trade because all the information that we know about Shinkaruk as a player/prospect is that he is tracking better TODAY than Granlund is TODAY, therefore it is a BAD VALUE exchange. And if you are faced with a bad value exchange, you have one very simple solution always at hand.

Don't make the trade.

 

[iloveloov*]

Again you are confusing PRICE with VALUE. If there is a limited market for Dan Hamhuis - for whatever reason (cap, roster limits, etc) then that certainly changes his PRICE but it doesn't change his VALUE i.e. the on and off ice value he brings to the team. If the PRICE you get for him is too LOW (relative to his VALUE) then you simply don't make the trade.

Value is innate. Price is impacted by external factors.

Hunter Shinkaruk had innate value. The fact that Benning sold him for Granlund simply means that is the price Benning accepted, not that it equates to the quality Shinkaruk is as a player or a prospect.

I've been arguing that they are two different things for the last 5 posts now but you keep returning to PRICE as your standard for value. This isn't what fans on this board are talking about when we say it was a bad trade. Is it all Benning could get for Shinkaruk? Maybe, or maybe Benning preferred Granlund most out of his offers or maybe he didn't even shop him around that hard, we don't really know. But even if it was, it is still a BAD trade because all the information that we know about Shinkaruk as a player/prospect is that he is tracking better TODAY than Granlund is TODAY, therefore it is a BAD VALUE exchange. And if you are faced with a bad value exchange, you have one very simple solution always at hand.

Don't make the trade.

What is Price's value if 30 goalies surpass him next year?

 

[CanaFan]

Last thread got full.



What?? Who told you that's how the NHL works? I blame EA Sports. You can't think of the NHL which is an N=30 market in the same way you think of the financial markets which are N=1,000,000,000+.

In the NHL there's a very limited number of jobs to go around. Today Carey Price has incredible value. If the next draft yields 40 goalies better than him that step into the league right away his value has crashed overnight. That's the very definition of extrinsic.

If you're trying to unload a player like Dan Hamhuis that has good "intrinsic" value at the trade deadline but let's say only 10 teams are looking to buy and of those 10 teams only 5 are looking for a defenseman and of those 5 only 2 are looking for a LHD and of those 2 none of them are looking to pay very much because he's going UFA then what good is his "intrinsic" value? It's meaningless. In reality everything is relative.

Also you avoided my Sedin question. Without having ever been traded, do they have "value"? And if so, how would you go about arriving at your estimate of their value in absence of the market "telling you" what they are worth?

Looking forward to your answer.

 

[CanaFan]

What is Price's value if 30 goalies surpass him next year?

If 30 goalies pass him then his relative performance - his innate value as a player - will be considerably lower.

That's fairly obvious.

*That said, assuming Montreal doesn't have any of these 30 better goalies they would be stupid to trade Price for Granlund "just cause". They'd still get more value from keeping him than dumping him for an even lower value player. Because he would still stop the puck for them, even if it wasn't as good as 30 other goalies.

 

[Jyrki21]

Now I want a player called Value to get traded for Price.

 

[Pip]

I don't even know how someone could argue that trade value is always equal to player value. Each player has a certain value (which is obviously subjective to a degree) depending on their skill level, age, contract, character, size etc. Other factors can lower or raise this player's trade value such as the negotiating skills of the GMs involved, how desperate a GM is to offload/acquire this player, no trade clauses which can limit destinations.

There are plenty of instances of players getting traded for less than or more than their actual value.

 

[Jyrki21]

Benning on Empty #23: "The Peace of Mind"

 

[iloveloov*]

Also you avoided my Sedin question. Without having ever been traded, do they have "value"? And if so, how would you go about arriving at your estimate of their value in absence of the market "telling you" what they are worth?

Looking forward to your answer.

I can't know how much value the Sedins have because I don't talk to NHL managers. You can try to estimate it by guessing about how those conversations would play out but that's about it.

If 30 goalies pass him then his relative performance - his innate value as a player - will be considerably lower.

That's fairly obvious.

*That said, assuming Montreal doesn't have any of these 30 better goalies they would be stupid to trade Price for Granlund "just cause". They'd still get more value from keeping him than dumping him for an even lower value player. Because he would still stop the puck for them, even if it wasn't as good as 30 other goalies.

You aren't making sense. If something is innate/intrinsic then it can't be changed by an external factor. A player's performance level is intrinsic but the value of that performance isn't, it's extrinsic. Every manager values players differently depending on his own team's needs. The value of a player is set by what the market of other GM's think he's worth; the price is set by what relinquishing GM is willing to trade that player for. Neither have anything to do with that player's "innate" or intrinsic value.

If your argument is that Benning for whatever reason sets the price of his players lower than their league-wide value then bring some actual evidence like some credible leaks instead of your uninformed subjective interpretation of player values that by virtue of your bias as a Canucks fan overvalues Canucks players and undervalues players from other teams.

 

[Peter10]

Benning on Empty #23: "The Peace of Mind"

This is "real good". I think "Benning on Empty" is the only thing I will miss once Jim is finally shown the door.

 

[racerjoe]

Also you avoided my Sedin question. Without having ever been traded, do they have "value"? And if so, how would you go about arriving at your estimate of their value in absence of the market "telling you" what they are worth?

Looking forward to your answer.

Obviously the twins are "Priceless"...

To put it in simplistic terms, we know there are bad trades that have been made in the NHL, however this couldn't be true if Price = Value.

We also have no idea what other GM's may have offered for Shink. We just know he was shopped for similar aged dmen. Well what if those dmen were Jones, Nurse, Ristolainen, or guys who should obviously have more value? Then he settles for Granlund, when another team was willing to offer a late first, or something better than Granlund?

We don't know any of that, but we do know Granlund should be worthless. It's just where he falls today being close to useless, and waiver eligible. Most things should have more value, Vey should of had more value.

 

[Hit the post]

If your argument is that Benning for whatever reason sets the price of his players lower than their league-wide value then bring some actual evidence like some credible leaks instead of your uninformed subjective interpretation of player values that by virtue of your bias as a Canucks fan overvalues Canucks players and undervalues players from other teams.

Bieksa at the time he was dealt was no more than 3rd pairing D - WAY overpaid. Benning hit a home run in unloading that salary cap dump to the Ducks & getting a real asset in return (without taking a cap dump in return).

Course I'm a Benning fanboy & overvalue Canuck assets & undervalue assets from other clubs.

 

[PM]

This is "real good". I think "Benning on Empty" is the only thing I will miss once Jim is finally shown the door.

So true. The day he is finally fired I'm cracking a celebratory bottle of whiskey and reading every Benning on Empty while smiling like a kid in a candy shop.

 

[Kickassguy]

Benning on Empty #23: "The Peace of Mind"

Lost it twice - at making/breaking an egg and when a man loves a woman. So good.

 

[CanaFan]

I can't know how much value the Sedins have because I don't talk to NHL managers. You can try to estimate it by guessing about how those conversations would play out but that's about it.



You aren't making sense. If something is innate/intrinsic then it can't be changed by an external factor. A player's performance level is intrinsic but the value of that performance isn't, it's extrinsic. Every manager values players differently depending on his own team's needs. The value of a player is set by what the market of other GM's think he's worth; the price is set by what relinquishing GM is willing to trade that player for. Neither have anything to do with that player's "innate" or intrinsic value.

If your argument is that Benning for whatever reason sets the price of his players lower than their league-wide value then bring some actual evidence like some credible leaks instead of your uninformed subjective interpretation of player values that by virtue of your bias as a Canucks fan overvalues Canucks players and undervalues players from other teams.

bolded is the weakness in your argument. What other GM's "think" of your player does not impact their intrinsic value it merely impacts the price they would pay to acquire that player from you.

Again if you don't like the price - perhaps because it is less than you value your player - then you don't need to make a trade. Shinakruk's value as a prospect is not defined by what he was traded for, it is defined by his accomplishments and expectations for the future. Benning likely undervalued (misread) these and possibly overvalued the immediate benefits of acquiring Granlund (perhaps to push for the playoffs and save his job?). GM's also don't offer their top price right away so if Benning simply jumps at the first offer he gets, he may not be obtaining the full price for Shinakruk's value.

There are just so many factors that could easily distort the price-value relationship since the NHL is far from an efficient market and is far less rational than any investors market.

 

[Samzilla]

Benning on Empty is a better GM than the actual Benning

 

[CanaFan]

this is "real good". i think "benning on empty" is the only thing i will miss once jim is finally shown the door.

100%

 

[Jyrki21]

Thank you for the kind comments.

I was starting to wonder about an exit strategy (like if he's canned, do I keep on doing them? Do I shift my sights to whoever remains?) but figured in all likelihood I'll run out of material way before then, just because there are only so many discrete events to bring up.

So either I will have to fabricate stories out of whole cloth ("Benning goes to the zoo" and such) or take it Community-style and just play around with different genres and things like with the Very Special Episodes.

 

[Peter10]

Thank you for the kind comments.

I was starting to wonder about an exit strategy (like if he's canned, do I keep on doing them? Do I shift my sights to whoever remains?) but figured in all likelihood I'll run out of material way before then, just because there are only so many discrete events to bring up.

So either I will have to fabricate stories out of whole cloth ("Benning goes to the zoo" and such) or take it Community-style and just play around with different genres and things like with the Very Special Episodes.

Well I dont think he gets canned before next year anyways so still plenty of time to think about a potential spin off series. You could still make an interim "Benning on retirement" series until you figure out whats next. Until then, I fear you will have more than enough happenings to jump on.

 

[Bleach Clean]

Do we have to?

I think it is interesting that now we have more and more publications coming out pointing out just how terrible our GM, owner and Coach are, and yet we still have people standing up them. Especially with lines like well they have the job so they must be good.

It wasn't enough for Sportnet and TSN to make fun of us, we needed these last two reports as well...

The majority knows what he is, and that's what matters most. In the court of public opinion, Benning is now fighting uphill to gain respectability. In such a short time no less... It's truly remarkable. It makes little difference, to me at least, that a few still believe in what he is doing. Seldom do people agree across the board. But it's clear they are in the minority grouping.

It's only a matter of time now... Benning is not long for his position.

 

[Archangel]

Continue.

continue?

we have one thread suggesting we have the best depth on D and another where we are ****ed? sorry---any fan who has not grasp the fact that they day the sedins realize they are old? we are ****ed