Bleach Clean
Registered User
- Aug 9, 2006
- 27,198
- 6,902
Continue.
CanaFan said: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.
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.
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.
What is Price's value if 30 goalies surpass him next year?
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.
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.
Benning on Empty #23: "The Peace of Mind"
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.
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.
This is "real good". I think "Benning on Empty" is the only thing I will miss once Jim is finally shown the door.
Benning on Empty #23: "The Peace of Mind"
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.
this is "real good". i think "benning on empty" is the only thing i will miss once jim is finally shown the door.
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.
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...
Continue.