Management V

[F A N]

No, you’re wrong.

No, you are.

 

[Bleach Clean]

Tyson Barrie averaged 56 points for 5 years, slumps this year, not actually that good...?

I want more not-that-good players please.

 

[y2kcanucks]

No, you’re wrong.

Not wrong at all. Only 2 players on the roster who were drafted outside the first round. That’s not that good of a track record.

 

[y2kcanucks]

I literally just said stated that if this team was ever to contend, it would be in another GM's hands. What part of that did you miss?

I swear you start spats with people just for fun.

Re-read your own post for a better understanding of what I was responding to then.

 

[MS]

Tyson Barrie averaged 56 points for 5 years, slumps this year, not actually that good...?

I want more not-that-good players please.

These #4-5 small skill defenders who score 50 POINTZ because they ranked up 25-30 points on a stacked PP are the most overrated players in hockey.

People think Tyson Barrie is a star because he scored 50 points when in fact he’s really a depth player with PP utility.

 

[Bleach Clean]

These #4-5 small skill defenders who score 50 POINTZ because they ranked up 25-30 points on a stacked PP are the most overrated players in hockey.

People think Tyson Barrie is a star because he scored 50 points when in fact he’s really a depth player with PP utility.

You are out to lunch on this MS. The ability to produce that number in any context is not pedestrian. It’s a farce that you think it is.

Simple put, you can choose to devalue talent that produces because you are looking for key markers at ES. That’s fine for you. But please leave it there. Don’t pretend to be able to argue this with numbers that prove these players are mid depth defenders. You will find no purchase there.

 

[MS]

You are out to lunch on this MS. The ability to produce that number in any context is not pedestrian. It’s a farce that you think it is.

Simple put, you can choose to devalue talent that produces because you are looking for key markers at ES. That’s fine for you. But please leave it there. Don’t pretend to be able to argue this with numbers that prove these players are mid depth defenders. You will find no purchase there.

PP results have value. Nobody is claiming otherwise.

But Tyson Barrie is a guy who has bled goals at ES 5 years in a row while playing the easiest minutes on his team. He’s a 3rd pairing defender who is a PP specialist. And then when he gets traded to a team where another guy gets the creamy PP minutes and he doesn’t have 50 points to cover his bad defensive play as a result, he’s completely unmasked for what he is. Same with Gostisbehere.

 

[Bleach Clean]

PP results have value. Nobody is claiming otherwise.

But Tyson Barrie is a guy who has bled goals at ES 5 years in a row while playing the easiest minutes on his team. He’s a 3rd pairing defender who is a PP specialist. And then when he gets traded to a team where another guy gets the creamy PP minutes and he doesn’t have 50 points to cover his bad defensive play as a result, he’s completely unmasked for what he is. Same with Gostisbehere.

Unmasked? Pointing out a limitation is not akin to calling him a fraud. So he doesn’t get 56 points because of a lack of PP time? Quelle surpris. I would not have guessed? Were you expecting him to produce 50+ without top unit PP time?

It doesn’t matter how you categorize him. A “3rd pairing PP specialist” that produces a 56 point average over 5 years is a highly skilled, unique asset. Period. Perhaps a handful of defenders produce that number each year. As a result, his acquisition cost or AAV will reflect that uniqueness.

As an aside: If I recall correctly, you projected Hughes to be the same. A PP specialist that is a 2nd/3rd pairing defender. Still feel this way?

 

[Motte and Bailey]

Unmasked? Pointing out a limitation is not akin to calling him a fraud. So he doesn’t get 56 points because of a lack of PP time? Quelle surpris. I would not have guessed? Were you expecting him to produce 50+ without top unit PP time?

It doesn’t matter how you categorize him. A “3rd pairing PP specialist” that produces a 56 point average over 5 years is a highly skilled, unique asset. Period. Perhaps a handful of defenders produce that number each year. As a result, his acquisition cost or AAV will reflect that uniqueness.

As an aside: If I recall correctly, you projected Hughes to be the same. A PP specialist that is a 2nd/3rd pairing defender. Still feel this way?

It is a fraud if you think you’re getting a 1st pairing dman for $8 million (what Barrie wants) when you’re actually getting a faster version of Marc Andre Bergeron

 

[MadaCanuckle]

In the real world there’s no such thing as accounting for all the variables in a statistical model.

This shows that you don't know a thing about statistical modeling techniques: Regression Bayesian models, neural networks, you name it. You can account any number of variables and there are techniques to consider a large number of variables. So, yes, you are completely wrong!

The fact is that we have more than enough evidence that Benning is a great drafter. All you need to do is look at the draft record before Benning and immediately after Benning to see how much of a night and day difference it is. No amount of sophistry will explain away the fact that the team’s scouting is in a really good place right now and the fact that it wasn’t for basically the entire franchise’s history pre-Benning should overwhelmingly point any reasonable person to the obvious conclusion that Benning is a great drafter.

This is a complete fallacy. You don't compare Benning draft record against the previous regime to say it is great, you compare it against the best drafters in the NHL. And if you do it, with the amount of top 10 picks Benning had, it doesn't look good. But, again, as usual, you just spit what Weisdumb tells you to spit, right?

 

[Bleach Clean]

It is a fraud if you think you’re getting a 1st pairing dman for $8 million (what Barrie wants) when you’re actually getting a faster version of Marc Andre Bergeron

That’s #1 Dman production. How the contract comes out is a matter of debate, but that production will command dollars on its own.

Edit: In the last 5 years, Barrie ranks 6th overall among Dmen for P/GP. That’s not just #1 Dman production. That’s the upper end of elite production.

He’s not a fraud. He is not now something different than he was. Barrie needs #1 PP time to produce his gaudy totals. The context and his utility has changed, and so his game has understandably suffered. It’s not a mystery as to why it has suffered.

 

[Motte and Bailey]

This shows that you don't know a thing about statistical modeling techniques: Regression Bayesian models, neural networks, you name it. You can account any number of variables and there are techniques to consider a large number of variables. So, yes, you are completely wrong!

You said I’m wrong but you didn’t offer a single thing that contradicts what I said. Of course we can account for many variables but anyone who tells you they’ve accounted for every single variable is a charlatan. The more variables you add the more messy it gets and there are always more variables to add because drafting is about evaluating human performance - and humans are very complicated.

So my point was not to dismiss the idea of a statistically informed analysis but to attack Melvin’s completely sophistic appeal to a lack of data and his bogus claim that we can’t draw conclusions about drafting from the data we have available. Even though I’ve been polite to him I know he won’t answer to any of my criticisms. He doesn’t seem to be as willing to withstand the level of rigorous criticism that he’s otherwise willing to levy at our management.

This is a complete fallacy. You don't compare Benning draft record against the previous regime to say it is great, you compare it against the best drafters in the NHL. And if you do it, with the amount of top 10 picks Benning had, it doesn't look good. But, again, as usual, you just spit what Weisdumb tells you to spit, right?

Benning compares favourably to other GMs too but I’m talking about comparing him to Gillis because it’s more relevant. If we eliminate top 10 picks, In 6 drafts the previous drafting regime produced less than 200 NHL points. In his first 3 drafts Benning’s drafting has produced over 300 NHL points. Per draft, Benning is outperforming Gillis in converting drafts to NHL points by over 300% when you disregard top 10 picks. He must be really lucky, you know, losing all of those draft lotteries in a row and sustaining a league leading level of injuries long term.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Benning compares favourably to other GMs too but I’m talking about comparing him to Gillis because it’s more relevant. If we eliminate top 10 picks, In 6 drafts the previous drafting regime produced less than 200 NHL points. In his first 3 drafts Benning’s drafting has produced over 300 NHL points. Per draft, Benning is outperforming Gillis in converting drafts to NHL points by over 300% when you disregard top 10 picks. He must be really lucky, you know, losing all of those draft lotteries in a row and sustaining a league leading level of injuries long term.

Uh what? Benning has 2 players that drafted outside the first round on the Canucks roster, out of 6 drafts. That's not very good. He completely blew 2 top 6 picks in the first round, and completely blew the entire 2016 draft despite the Canucks being the 2nd worst team in the league that season. His drafting has been shit.

 

[canucksfan]

Not wrong at all. Only 2 players on the roster who were drafted outside the first round. That’s not that good of a track record.

Part of the problem is Benning has traded draft picks away and didn't accumulate any.

Just to somewhat counter your point some of the picks recently seem to be tracking well, Rathbone, Madden and Woo, although I don't follow Nucks prospects closely so I could be wrong. Also, I like to see how the players do in the AHL to make a good judgement. So some of those players could falter once they hit the AHL.

 

[sting101]

Uh what? Benning has 2 players that drafted outside the first round on the Canucks roster, out of 6 drafts. That's not very good. He completely blew 2 top 6 picks in the first round, and completely blew the entire 2016 draft despite the Canucks being the 2nd worst team in the league that season. His drafting has been ****.

wrong

 

[y2kcanucks]

Part of the problem is Benning has traded draft picks away and didn't accumulate any.

Just to somewhat counter your point some of the picks recently seem to be tracking well, Rathbone, Madden and Woo, although I don't follow Nucks prospects closely so I could be wrong. Also, I like to see how the players do in the AHL to make a good judgement. So some of those players could falter once they hit the AHL.

People said this about guys like Jasek, Palmu and Lockwood but they’ve all turned out to be crap.

Also Woo has taken a big step back this year.

 

[y2kcanucks]

wrong

Actually not wrong. It’s a fact. But facts aren't something you seem to care about too much either.

 

[WonderTwinsUnite]

Unless I missed someone, it's only Demko (2nd), Gaudette (5th), MacEwan (UDFA), and Stetcher (UDFA) among non 1st rounders that Benning has drafted or signed as a prospect.

 

[sting101]

The one thing I will give credit for, and I think this also could be part of Benning, stemming from player interviews, is the Canucks seem to be drafting players of good character. When you put too much emphasis on that though, it leads to you many of Delorme’s picks and Penny’s picks from past years. But looking at guys like Boeser, Pettersson, and Hughes, they are good people (along with Horvat). I don’t think we have to worry about a Matthews-like embarrassment from any of those guys.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Unless I missed someone, it's only Demko (2nd), Gaudette (5th), MacEwan (UDFA), and Stetcher (UDFA) among non 1st rounders that Benning has drafted or signed as a prospect.

That is correct.

 

[sting101]

Actually not wrong. It’s a fact. But facts aren't something you seem to care about too much either.

No the facts are he's been good. 5 positive development picks vs draft position in the key selections as opposed to 2 poor selections and 2 late round gems in Gaudette and Tryamkin.

7 and soon to be 8 NHL players in 5 drafts and from 2016 to current is not really fair to assess 2nd round and later selections yet due to the ages of these picks.

Hughes at 7 is already the 3rd or 4th best player in that draft. 5th in scoring and closing on Kotkaniemi fast
Pettersson is top2 from 5 2nd in scoring and a franchise player.............that is massive
Juolevi looks to be a bust but only 20 players have made any sort of impact to date so there is some time but it looks like that one could turn his record if he completely busts. its not done yet
Boeser is 10th. 13 spots above his draft at 23
Gaudette is at 38 from the 5th round. Looks like a gem
Virtanen is 26th from 6 so thats minus 20
McCann is 14 from 24 thats plus 10
Demko looks like a future starter from 36 and its hard to categorize gaolies but being a solid roster player at this point puts him roughly 30th which is enough with McCann to negate the Virtanen selection
Tryamkin will be in the equation soon if he comes back

These are the facts and you are wrong

 

[RandV]

Part of the problem is Benning has traded draft picks away and didn't accumulate any.

Just to somewhat counter your point some of the picks recently seem to be tracking well, Rathbone, Madden and Woo, although I don't follow Nucks prospects closely so I could be wrong. Also, I like to see how the players do in the AHL to make a good judgement. So some of those players could falter once they hit the AHL.

Lots of guys 'track well' while they're still in junior or college,and if they were drafted in the 2nd-3rd round this should be the expectations. Just taking a rough guesstimate I'd say once they hit the AHL there's probably a 50% chance they hit a wall. If they make it past that hurdle, then it's probably only a 25% chance they can become NHL regulars.

I do like to say it's a sign of good drafting if you're picks are doing well on their way up but never actually make the NHL, but it doesn't really help the Canucks pro team here when we've made so few top 100 picks.

 

[Melvin]

That’s #1 Dman production. How the contract comes out is a matter of debate, but that production will command dollars on its own.

Edit: In the last 5 years, Barrie ranks 6th overall among Dmen for P/GP. That’s not just #1 Dman production. That’s the upper end of elite production.

He’s not a fraud. He is not now something different than he was. Barrie needs #1 PP time to produce his gaudy totals. The context and his utility has changed, and so his game has understandably suffered. It’s not a mystery as to why it has suffered.

Uh yeah. The fact that he's not that different from what he was is the point. He was overvalued before and is now being exposed as the not very good player that he's been all along.

 

[vanuck]

Also Benning's only late-rounder was 2015, which was either going to be Boeser or Konecny, which who cares? Would anyone consider Konecny a bad pick there? He's a point per game player playing the superpest role in Philly. Might even be arguably better than Boeser, yet Benning is credited with a "homerun" because he didn't, I don't know, pick a tennis player or something. Shows how silly and arbitrarily these standards are applied.

I remember HF Canucks wanting Konecny at the time, who may actually have been the better pick.

 

[mathonwy]

How injuries to Brandon Sutter and Jay Beagle have...

Drance writes an article about the effects of not having foundational players Sutter and Beagle in the line up.

How coincidental.

HI DRANCE.