Confirmed with Link: Ethan Bear signs 2-year $2M AAV

[GOilers88]

You new here? Yes, I have said it from the start. He struggled since game 40 last year, Nurse got the blame for him being bad for some reason.

So the first half doesn't count, but the second half does for a rookie playing top pairing minutes?

Why does the emphasis get put on the struggles and not on the good all the time? My point was he showed that he clearly could hang. Him struggling then and now after missing time with a concussion doesn't suddenly mean he no longer has it.

 

[Dazed and Confused]

Not sure why Bear isn't being eased back into the lineup on the 3rd pair.

This is what I don't get. Bear has been no where near as good this year as last, but he really hasn't seen much time on the 3rd pairing. I know 4K is done for the season, but can we please get a Bear-Bouchard pairing?


Though of the young defence to pile on at the moment, Jones deserves far more heat than Bear. Of the 4 bubble LD that have played this year, all of the other 3 of easily outclassed him. When 4K and Lagesson both looks like world eaters compatibility, (and only because they're playing simple competent hockey) you know things have gone wrong.

 

[DaGap]

This year isn't going to be easy on the young guys.

With limited practice time, and Mandated days off there's not much time to learn except for in game.

Would have been nice to have a few vets available so the young guys aren't getting fed to the wolves nightly

 

[Czechboy]

slow played

He averaged around 15 to 16 minutes prior to his last game. Last season his average was 21:58.


I'm a huge Bear fan but he started poorly, got healthy scratched, then concussed and is now struggling. I really can't point to many good games he's had at all this season. Add in the play in was bad. It's been awhile sicne I've seen 'good Bear' who I love on the Oil.

I do get a kick out of last season and I read a LOT about how Bear was carrying Nurse. Hopefully people stopped thinking that but I doubt it.

 

[Czechboy]

This year isn't going to be easy on the young guys.

With limited practice time, and Mandated days off there's not much time to learn except for in game.

Would have been nice to have a few vets available so the young guys aren't getting fed to the wolves nightly

Russel (862 GP), Nurse (375GP), Larsson (572GP) and Barrie (579 GP)?

Everytime an older guy gets played in Top 4 over a Bouchard/Bear/Jones Twitter explodes.

 

[DaGap]

Russel (862 GP), Nurse (375GP), Larsson (572GP) and Barrie (579 GP)?

Everytime an older guy gets played in Top 4 over a Bouchard/Bear/Jones Twitter explodes.

Well that list only has two Dmen on it that can play in the top 4

 

[Llamamoto]

View attachment 403595

He averaged around 15 to 16 minutes prior to his last game. Last season his average was 21:58.


I'm a huge Bear fan but he started poorly, got healthy scratched, then concussed and is now struggling. I really can't point to many good games he's had at all this season. Add in the play in was bad. It's been awhile sicne I've seen 'good Bear' who I love on the Oil.

I do get a kick out of last season and I read a LOT about how Bear was carrying Nurse. Hopefully people stopped thinking that but I doubt it.

I don't know where you're getting that from. He was averaging 20:74 before his injury, and he was a +5 in that time.

 

[Czechboy]

Well that list only has two Dmen on it that can play in the top 4

You said 'few vets available'. Just pointing out we have that.

All of them have been playing top 4 minutes for either all (Barrie, Nurse, Larsson) or most (Russel) of the season.

If you meant we need some in prime Dmen like Weber, Petry and Hedman than I agree that'd be lovely.

 

[Czechboy]

I don't know where you're getting that from. He was averaging 20:74 before his injury, and he was a +5 in that time.

I said 'last season'.... so not the one we're in right now. The one he played a year ago.

The other graph I showed was his last 5 games... 4 of them (before last Leafs game) were either 14 or 17 minutes. That's well below (about 25% less) what he was playing last season (2019-20). I'd say that's easing him in.

The last game was the first one where he was on the Top Pair after 3 games (I originally said 4, my bad) in a row being eased in.

 

[DaGap]

You said 'few vets available'. Just pointing out we have that.

All of them have been playing top 4 minutes for either all (Barrie, Nurse, Larsson) or most (Russel) of the season.

If you meant we need some in prime Dmen like Weber, Petry and Hedman than I agree that'd be lovely.

Sorry shoulda specified competent dmen

 

[Czechboy]

Sorry shoulda specified competent dmen

For what it's worth. When I suggest trading Barrie, people on here lose it on me because he is elite and Top 5 in scoring. Larsson has been a Top 4 for a very long time and has been playing well for about 10 games in a row now. Nurse has actually been mentioned in Norris talks and Team Canada 2022 talks. I have no defence for Russel in my Top 4.lol

 

[Llamamoto]

I said 'last season'.... so not the one we're in right now. The one he played a year ago.

View attachment 403637

The other graph I showed was his last 5 games... 4 of them (before last Leafs game) were either 14 or 17 minutes. That's well below (about 25% less) what he was playing last season (2019-20). I'd say that's easing him in.

The last game was the first one where he was on the Top Pair after 3 games (I originally said 4, my bad) in a row being eased in.

View attachment 403638

My point was that he was playing well before he got his concussion.

He was averaging nearly 21 mins a night and was a +5 on a pairing with Nurse. (Which wasn't the issue at the time).

 

[Czechboy]

My point was that he was playing well before he got his concussion.

He was averaging nearly 21 mins a night and was a +5 on a pairing with Nurse. (Which wasn't the issue at the time).

He was also a healthy scratch before his concussion. Last season he was .3 ppg. He had 2 points in that stretch of 9 games before the concussion (.22 ppg). Team had a losing record in those 9 games as well. Not that I blame him for losses but I'd say a win/loss record is about as fair to use as +/-. Eg. if you use plus minus, in the last 5 years our best defender is Matthew Benning! This is from 2016/17 to today.

Here are the bottom 3 for plus/minus in that same span:

Good luck convincing me Klefbom was our worst D because he has an awful plus/minus.

 

[Llamamoto]

He was also a healthy scratch before his concussion. Last season he was .3 ppg. He had 2 points in that stretch of 9 games before the concussion (.22 ppg). Team had a losing record in those 9 games as well. Not that I blame him for losses but I'd say a win/loss record is about as fair to use as +/-. Eg. if you use plus minus, in the last 5 years our best defender is Matthew Benning! This is from 2016/17 to today.

View attachment 403673

Here are the bottom 3 for plus/minus in that same span:

View attachment 403675

Good luck convincing me Klefbom was our worst D because he has an awful plus/minus.

Quality of competition. Benning was actually a solid bottom pairing defenseman, especially against the quality of competition that the faced.

And comparing ppgs over such a small sample size is kinda useless, especially for defensemen. And Bear and Jones were a combined -20 in their rookie seasons, their +/-'s are skewed because of that.

 

[Czechboy]

Quality of competition. Benning was actually a solid bottom pairing defenseman, especially against the quality of competition that the faced.

And comparing ppgs over such a small sample size is kinda useless, especially for defensemen. And Bear and Jones were a combined -20 in their rookie seasons, their +/-'s are skewed because of that.

So +/- over 9 games is fair and an accurate way to show a player has been good and a good sample size but .ppg over 9 games is too small a sample size? Got it.

I used the Benning example to show that over 5 years he was about +40 better than our best dman Klefbom in that stretch to illustrate how flawed +/- is. Like you say, quality of comp, rookie years etc. It's a decent stat when combined with others at best.

No matter how you look at it.. Bear's scoring was down, the team was losing and he was a healthy scratch pre concussion. Both our losing streaks (start of the season and the Leafs slaughter) were with Bear in the lineup. Our strong spell of hockey was mostly with him out of the lineup.

Again, I'm a big fan but he wasn't playing well during the play-in, not at the start of the season and not now. You can blame concussion for one of those 3 and concussions suck but peak Bear was around Game 40 of last season. FTR.. he's a healthy scratch again tomorrow. I know, it's the concussion this time. The first healthy scratch he wasn't concussed but he was playing well according to you and his +/- so it must be Tipp's fault:

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on his play this year. I definitely hope it gets better for him as I thought him and Jones would be Top 4 fixtures this season.

 

[belair]

He was also a healthy scratch before his concussion. Last season he was .3 ppg. He had 2 points in that stretch of 9 games before the concussion (.22 ppg). Team had a losing record in those 9 games as well. Not that I blame him for losses but I'd say a win/loss record is about as fair to use as +/-. Eg. if you use plus minus, in the last 5 years our best defender is Matthew Benning! This is from 2016/17 to today.

View attachment 403673

Here are the bottom 3 for plus/minus in that same span:

View attachment 403675

Good luck convincing me Klefbom was our worst D because he has an awful plus/minus.

SH, EN goals and a f*** ton of mismatches at EV. Klefbom was hardly the perfect defenseman, but his +/- is going to be heavily impacted by playing at every situation and with pretty much every line combination.

Benning was zoomed in the same manner Bear has been. The significant difference is the quality of competition. Bear played a ton against heavy competition, which should be congratulated. But him 'surviving' those minutes had a lot more to do with who his forwards were than what he brought to the table individually.

+/- might be a little more valid in Bear's case because he's pretty much a strict 5 on 5 player, but it's a very broken stat. Defenseman don't have a big impact on the + aspect to it.

 

[Czechboy]

SH, EN goals and a f*** ton of mismatches at EV. Klefbom was hardly the perfect defenseman, but his +/- is going to be heavily impacted by playing at every situation and with pretty much every line combination.

Benning was zoomed in the same manner Bear has been. The significant difference is the quality of competition. Bear played a ton against heavy competition, which should be congratulated. But him 'surviving' those minutes had a lot more to do with who his forwards were than what he brought to the table individually.

+/- might be a little more valid in Bear's case because he's pretty much a strict 5 on 5 player, but it's a very broken stat. Defenseman don't have a big impact on the + aspect to of it.

I agree, +/- is a very flawed stat. I wasn't the one that brought it in. I was pointing out how flawed it is.

 

[Llamamoto]

So +/- over 9 games is fair and an accurate way to show a player has been good and a good sample size but .ppg over 9 games is too small a sample size? Got it.

I used the Benning example to show that over 5 years he was about +40 better than our best dman Klefbom in that stretch to illustrate how flawed +/- is. Like you say, quality of comp, rookie years etc. It's a decent stat when combined with others at best.

No matter how you look at it.. Bear's scoring was down, the team was losing and he was a healthy scratch pre concussion. Both our losing streaks (start of the season and the Leafs slaughter) were with Bear in the lineup. Our strong spell of hockey was mostly with him out of the lineup.

Again, I'm a big fan but he wasn't playing well during the play-in, not at the start of the season and not now. You can blame concussion for one of those 3 and concussions suck but peak Bear was around Game 40 of last season. FTR.. he's a healthy scratch again tomorrow. I know, it's the concussion this time. The first healthy scratch he wasn't concussed but he was playing well according to you and his +/- so it must be Tipp's fault:

View attachment 403679

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on his play this year. I definitely hope it gets better for him as I thought him and Jones would be Top 4 fixtures this season.

If Bear got 1 more assist in that time span, (8 games), his ppg would have been better than last year. That woudn't change anything about his performance, especially considering that assist could have been a simple dump-in/breakout pass.

My point was arguing your post that said he was averaging 14-17 minutes pre-concussion, where he was struggling. I countered by showing you that he played nearly 21 minutes a night, where he was on for more goals for than goals against. While they aren't incredibly accurate measures of performances, they do point to the fact that he was having a positive impact while on the ice. Having a positive +/-, especially when the team as a whole is playing badly, can be quite telling. (And +5 isn't insignificant either).

I also don't like the argument that says our record is better with him out of the lineup. He came back from injury right in time to play the top team in the division that was on a hot streak. He missed all of our games against Ottawa, which had a pretty significant impact on our win streak.

Regardless, he hasn't looked the same since his concussion. That said, I'm not willing to give up on him because of such a small sample size. This fanbase turns on our defensemen wayy to fast, we saw that with Petry and even Schultz to an extent. I don't want that to be the same case with Bear. (And I don't put much stock into Tippet's line combinations, I disagree with a lot of them).

 

[Czechboy]

If Bear got 1 more assist in that time span,

But he didn't.. and his season is current at .18ppg.

My point was arguing your post that said he was averaging 14-17 minutes pre-concussion

I absolutely did not say that. You said he needed to be eased in... I said his first 3 games AFTER the concussions were 14 and 17 mintues which is easing in. He didn't get to the top line till his 4th game back. It would help if you read what I wrote and looked at the stats.

I've literally drawn a red line for you so you can see where the concussion happened and I've highlighted his minutes for the first 3 games AFTER he returned... 14, 17 and 14 is being eased in. He didn't come back and go to 1st pair with Nurse right away.

 

[Captain Controversy]

Well, worst case...
Bear is taken by Seattle and we sign another right way.

Hamilton? (7.5 x 6)
Barrie (4.5 x 4)
Bouchard (ELC)
Larsson (2.5 x4)

 

[gordonhught]

So I don’t have time to read all these long posts. Are we for or against Ethan Bear?

 

[belair]

If Bear got 1 more assist in that time span, (8 games), his ppg would have been better than last year. That woudn't change anything about his performance, especially considering that assist could have been a simple dump-in/breakout pass.

My point was arguing your post that said he was averaging 14-17 minutes pre-concussion, where he was struggling. I countered by showing you that he played nearly 21 minutes a night, where he was on for more goals for than goals against. While they aren't incredibly accurate measures of performances, they do point to the fact that he was having a positive impact while on the ice. Having a positive +/-, especially when the team as a whole is playing badly, can be quite telling. (And +5 isn't insignificant either).

I also don't like the argument that says our record is better with him out of the lineup. He came back from injury right in time to play the top team in the division that was on a hot streak. He missed all of our games against Ottawa, which had a pretty significant impact on our win streak.

Regardless, he hasn't looked the same since his concussion. That said, I'm not willing to give up on him because of such a small sample size. This fanbase turns on our defensemen wayy to fast, we saw that with Petry and even Schultz to an extent. I don't want that to be the same case with Bear. (And I don't put much stock into Tippet's line combinations, I disagree with a lot of them).

The idea of moving on from him has been going on since the play-ins. And it has nothing to do with his performance. It's about identifying what the player is right now, what it would take for him to continue his trajectory and what the risks are if he runs into hurdles moving forward.

How difficult would it have been for an average FA defenseman to duplicate Bear's rookie campaign? Honest answer: Not very.

 

[Burnt Biscuits]

Well, worst case...
Bear is taken by Seattle and we sign another right way.

Hamilton? (7.5 x 6)
Barrie (4.5 x 4)
Bouchard (ELC)
Larsson (2.5 x4)

I think the worst case there is we have an incompetent GM who exposed Bear in the first place and probably a sign that we should expect more terrible decisions.

A worst case also isn't likely to have us getting multiple d-men at bargain prices.

Bidding for Hamilton is likely to be hotly contested if he wants Pietro money he can likely get that money or very close to it. Barrie came off a bad season and got offered more money than that in the past offseason, the contract offers are likely to be better after bouncing back to form, I'm guessing his next contract starts with a 5, but I'd guess breaking the $6M barrier is more likely than signing a sub-$5M contract.

 

[GOilers88]

The idea of moving on from him has been going on since the play-ins. And it has nothing to do with his performance. It's about identifying what the player is right now, what it would take for him to continue his trajectory and what the risks are if he runs into hurdles moving forward.

How difficult would it have been for an average FA defenseman to duplicate Bear's rookie campaign? Honest answer: Not very.

While I'm not saying I entirely disagree with you, I also think this has been a franchise that has been unable to properly learn how to draft and develop their own players. We always seem to be looking to flip players because they aren't coming along fast enough for easy free agent answers that never seem to work. The whole circle confuses me. I think giving up on Bear in favor of another high priced free agent is the wrong move given we're not very far removed from Bear being a godsend.

In my opinion, the biggest reason folks seem to be ready to move on are because he got exposed in the play ins and has had a typical sophomore slump. So I disagree that it isn't because of his recent play. We, like always, don't want to have any sort of patience with our own prospects and their development, despite him showing well last year as a rookie.

Barrie is doing exactly what Bear did for us last year. Came in with relatively low expectations, is currently doing well, and now people want to lock him up and move on from Bear, like they did with Bear over Larsson last year. I'm not saying it's the wrong move, but I just have a gut feeling that we'll regret moving him and then we'll be looking for another relatively young RHD a year or two down the road and be unhappy with Barrie and his new contract and thus repeat the same old cycle.

 

[MessierII]

The idea of moving on from him has been going on since the play-ins. And it has nothing to do with his performance. It's about identifying what the player is right now, what it would take for him to continue his trajectory and what the risks are if he runs into hurdles moving forward.

How difficult would it have been for an average FA defenseman to duplicate Bear's rookie campaign? Honest answer: Not very.

Really? We spent how long looking for a right shot top 4 D? Better part of a decade . Traded Hall for one but apparently they are plentiful and easily acquired via FA every summer folks.