Myers or Hutton, This Year

[biturbo19]

Beaulieu is a #6-7 d-man that most sabres fans don't care for, while Hutton is a servicable middle second pairing D-man who can log heavy minutes on the top pairing when they are injuries. Bealieu a fringe defenceman is unable to do replicate what Hutton has done in the later half of the season. You're evaluation of Hutton is extremely poor at this moment.

"Ton more upside", maybe you shouldn't put words in people's mouth, because suggesting Hutton has more upside than Myers is not akin to saying he has ton more upside than the latter. Hutton is in his prime, he's definitely closer to a top 4-D than he is of a bottom pairing D.

Beulieau is what happens when the shine fully comes off a guy like Hutton. There was a time when Habs fans thought he was going to be a key part of their defence moving forward. He even played some impressive seasons as essentially a Top-4D when the Habs blueline was in shambles. But he's become a guy that most Sabres fans don't care for, and most Jets fans are pretty indifferent about because he's fallen into that niche where people just don't care very much. He's a depth defenceman. That's where Hutton is headed.


Dodging your logical incongruity in the bolded, because i think you misunderstood my point...

For Hutton to have "more upside" than Myers right now, is inherently to suggest that he has "a ton more upside". That's what it'd take Hutton to get to where Myers is right now. That's the gulf between the two. I don't really like Myers. I don't like the contract. But he's a far better defenceman than Hutton right now, and there'd need to be a ton of development for Hutton to catch up there. That just isn't likely at age 26+. Anymore than Sbisa suddenly being "less stupid" was likely at 25. Hutton isn't a kid anymore, and he hasn't shown any real progress or upward trend as a defenceman in the NHL. He's kinda climbed back to where he was as a rookie.

 

[Ace of Hades]

Beulieau is what happens when the shine fully comes off a guy like Hutton. There was a time when Habs fans thought he was going to be a key part of their defence moving forward. He even played some impressive seasons as essentially a Top-4D when the Habs blueline was in shambles. But he's become a guy that most Sabres fans don't care for, and most Jets fans are pretty indifferent about because he's fallen into that niche where people just don't care very much. He's a depth defenceman. That's where Hutton is headed.


Dodging your logical incongruity in the bolded, because i think you misunderstood my point...

For Hutton to have "more upside" than Myers right now, is inherently to suggest that he has "a ton more upside". That's what it'd take Hutton to get to where Myers is right now. That's the gulf between the two. I don't really like Myers. I don't like the contract. But he's a far better defenceman than Hutton right now, and there'd need to be a ton of development for Hutton to catch up there. That just isn't likely at age 26+. Anymore than Sbisa suddenly being "less stupid" was likely at 25. Hutton isn't a kid anymore, and he hasn't shown any real progress or upward trend as a defenceman in the NHL. He's kinda climbed back to where he was as a rookie.

Shine comes off? It actually stayed on since Hutton performed well overall this season. Basically nothing you stated countered anything I typed. Hutton is not comparable to Bealieu. Hutton is vastly superior. Hutton has shown he can log key minutes without looking out of place. Show these feats for Bealieau a fodder d-man.

I didn't misunderstood your point, you basically took my words out of context even though what I typed was pretty simple.

Considering there's not a gap between Hutton and Myers, and they are basically in similar tiers, my statement falls in line that Hutton has more, not ton more upside.
Hutton progressed without having Gudbranson saddled to his line. He played like a top 4 dman when Tanev and Edler were out. He played much better with guys like Biega and Stecher on his pair.
Gudbranson is a detrimental to any success.

Stop implying that Myers is so much greater when he sucks defensively and merely points up more PP points than Hutton did. There's a reason why Jets fans were happy that they didn't sign Myers. You're overrating him by large.

 

[biturbo19]

Shine comes off? It actually stayed on since Hutton performed well overall this season. Basically nothing you stated countered anything I typed. Hutton is not comparable to Bealieu. Hutton is vastly superior. Hutton has shown he can log key minutes without looking out of place. Show these feats for Bealieau a fodder d-man.

I didn't misunderstood your point, you basically took my words out of context even though what I typed was pretty simple.

Considering there's not a gap between Hutton and Myers, and they are basically in similar tiers, my statement falls in line that Hutton has more, not ton more upside.
Hutton progressed without having Gudbranson saddled to his line. He played like a top 4 dman when Tanev and Edler were out. He played much better with guys like Biega and Stecher on his pair.
Gudbranson is a detrimental to any success.

Stop implying that Myers is so much greater when he sucks defensively and merely points up more PP points than Hutton did. There's a reason why Jets fans were happy that they didn't sign Myers. You're overrating him by large.

You're saying nothing i said countered anything you said, yet I literally explained to you that, despite your claims...all of the defencemen in Pittsburgh actually improved with Gudbranson beside them. That punches an awfully big hole in your argument that Guddy makes "everyone worse".

Explained that Beaulieu has had seasons well prior to this one, where he like Hutton...seemed like a real promising smooth skating defenceman with "upside". Never got there.

Hutton getting back to where he was as a rookie isn't "progress", it's basically just eating up some regression. Do you honestly think Hutton is a much better defenceman than he was when he busted in as an amazing surprised rookie? He just hasn't improved enough as a defender, and the offense has mostly dried up. He's not even on a real upward trend at 26.

You're pre-supposing that there is not a gap between Hutton and Myers currently. I vehemently disagree on that. I think most people 'round these forums would disagree on that. I honestly just don't know many people who would agree with that premise that Hutton is currently as good a defenceman as Myers.

 

[Ace of Hades]

You're saying nothing i said countered anything you said, yet I literally explained to you that, despite your claims...all of the defencemen in Pittsburgh actually improved with Gudbranson beside them. That punches an awfully big hole in your argument that Guddy makes "everyone worse".

Explained that Beaulieu has had seasons well prior to this one, where he like Hutton...seemed like a real promising smooth skating defenceman with "upside". Never got there.

Hutton getting back to where he was as a rookie isn't "progress", it's basically just eating up some regression. Do you honestly think Hutton is a much better defenceman than he was when he busted in as an amazing surprised rookie? He just hasn't improved enough as a defender, and the offense has mostly dried up. He's not even on a real upward trend at 26.

You're pre-supposing that there is not a gap between Hutton and Myers currently. I vehemently disagree on that. I think most people 'round these forums would disagree on that. I honestly just don't know many people who would agree with that premise that Hutton is currently as good a defenceman as Myers.

How he has fared with the Pittsburgh has no bearing on how he fared with the Canucks. The fact is he was a black hole of suck who made every linemate he was paired up with to be dragged down due to his incompetence when he played for us. He was put in a position where he was not good enough to fill and because of it, his linemates suffered due to him. Nothing of what you said punched a hole in my argument. Your desperation is just amusing at this point acting as of his non inspiring play with the pens correlate to how he performed here.

Hutton isn't getting back to how he was a rookie, he simply improved on it as indicated during major half of the season when he was paired with adequate defenders. Hutton was able to log key minutes for the teams and played solid during Tanev and Edler's absence on the top pairing, something you continue to dismiss for whatever reason. Bealieau didn't have as good of a season than Hutton did this season, so your comparision is complete rubbish.

I would take Jets fans perception on what Myers is as a defenceman than many people here. Since they watched this defenceman play for their team for many years, and know his strengths and weaknesses. Most of have them admitted he is a #4-5 D, similar to what Hutton is. There's no gap. Those who believe Myers is a tier or two above Hutton need to think through once again. I have no qualms if people believe Myers is currently superior than Hutton, but to suggest he's tiers above is simply ridiculous.

 

[biturbo19]

How he has fared with the Pittsburgh has no bearing on how he fared with the Canucks. The fact is he was a black hole of suck who made every linemate he was paired up with to be dragged down due to his incompetence when he played for us. He was put in a position where he was not good enough to fill and because of it, his linemates suffered due to him. Nothing of what you said punched a hole in my argument. Your desperation is just amusing at this point acting as of his non inspiring play with the pens correlate to how he performed here.

Hutton isn't getting back to how he was a rookie, he simply improved on it as indicated during major half of the season when he was paired with adequate defenders. Hutton was able to log key minutes for the teams and played solid during Tanev and Edler's absence on the top pairing, something you continue to dismiss for whatever reason. Bealieau didn't have as good of a season than Hutton did this season, so your comparision is complete rubbish.

I would take Jets fans perception on what Myers is as a defenceman than many people here. Since they watched this defenceman play for their team for many years, and know his strengths and weaknesses. Most of have them admitted he is a #4-5 D, similar to what Hutton is. There's no gap. Those who believe Myers is a tier or two above Hutton need to think through once again. I have no qualms if people believe Myers is currently superior than Hutton, but to suggest he's tiers above is simply ridiculous.

I really don't understand how you're not grasping the irony of what you're saying.

You're talking about how "great" Hutton looked once Gudbranson left, but you're unwilling to considering how much better Gudbranson looked once he left.

Hutton wasn't making anybody else better either. He dragged Stecher's numbers down when they played together. And he somehow made Tanev look worse too...which we know is very hard to do.


You really can't dismiss how a guy like Gudbranson fared outside of Vancouver, if you're insistent on including how Myers fared in Winnipeg, behind two big minute RHD in Trouba and Byfuglien. Context is for kings.

Do you honestly believe there's a point in Hutton's career, at which he's going to surpass Myers at his own peak? Or even come close?

 

[Horse McHindu]

.all of the defencemen in Pittsburgh actually improved with Gudbranson beside them. That punches an awfully big hole in your argument that Guddy makes "everyone worse".
.

Thankfully, it punches an even bigger hole in the arguments of those that use Advanced Analytics as a way *conclusively* determining that Player A is better than Player B.......or if Player A is a good hockey player or not.

Advanced Analytics is an extremely useful tool, but it’s not a 100% “tell all” of what goes on, or why a player is performing a certain way, no matter what the 25 year kids on the internet are saying.

A combination of Advanced Analytics, deployment, and systems fit (ie how a player fits into a certain teams’ system), plus a myriad of other factors determines how good a player is. Erik Gudbranson is proof of this. Antoine Roussel is proof of this. That’s why teams and professional hockey clubs are run by managers, analysts, and scouts that can use ALL of the above in their comprehensive evaluations. The “eye tests” of people with extensive hockey experience, farts in the face of Advanced Analytics.

 

[Jay Cee]

Delving into these corsi comparison charts is interesting. I wanted to see what we would see if we weren't just looking to beat Benning over the head.

cy	Strength	Line

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

38.54%	EV	KULIKOV,DMITRY - MYERS,TYLER
18.45%	EV	MORROW,JOE - MYERS,TYLER
13.19%	EV	CHIAROT,BEN - MYERS,TYLER

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

 

[Dough72]

not to derail the thread and if a mod wants to erase this I won't complain but I see "statistical models" and "analytics" brought up more and more on these forums as a voice of authority and I don't think the people being cowed by them realize it's just stuff fans come up with on their blogs. It's almost always based on some kind of heat map that inevitably rewards/penalizes all 5 players for something one guy did. The better ones will add formulas trying to normalize for differences in linemates and goaltending and pace and things but it always ends up so convoluted that to call it questionable is an understatement. The statistical models fans used to hold up as super-important proofs have virtually all been discredited which is something all these formulas seem to have in common given enough time. So stop being cowed by these things and trust your own eyeballs. If you want to know how good/bad a player is go to his team's forum and listen to fans who actually watch all his games instead of listening to equations with about a zillion obvious problems.

 

[Horse McHindu]

not to derail the thread and if a mod wants to erase this I won't complain but I see "statistical models" and "analytics" brought up more and more on these forums as a voice of authority and I don't think the people being cowed by them realize it's just stuff fans come up with on their blogs. It's almost always based on some kind of heat map that inevitably rewards/penalizes all 5 players for something one guy did. The better ones will add formulas trying to normalize for differences in linemates and goaltending and pace and things but it always ends up so convoluted that to call it questionable is an understatement. The statistical models fans used to hold up as super-important proofs have virtually all been discredited which is something all these formulas seem to have in common given enough time. So stop being cowed by these things and trust your own eyeballs. If you want to know how good/bad a player is go to his team's forum and listen to fans who actually watch all his games instead of listening to equations with about a zillion obvious problems.

Unfortunately, your post makes too much sense. I’m not sure if I can handle this torrid change of pace.

 

[4Twenty]

I really don't understand how you're not grasping the irony of what you're saying.

You're talking about how "great" Hutton looked once Gudbranson left, but you're unwilling to considering how much better Gudbranson looked once he left.

Hutton wasn't making anybody else better either. He dragged Stecher's numbers down when they played together. And he somehow made Tanev look worse too...which we know is very hard to do.


You really can't dismiss how a guy like Gudbranson fared outside of Vancouver, if you're insistent on including how Myers fared in Winnipeg, behind two big minute RHD in Trouba and Byfuglien. Context is for kings.

Do you honestly believe there's a point in Hutton's career, at which he's going to surpass Myers at his own peak? Or even come close?

Stecher's numbers dropped because he went from an 18 minute sheltered 3rd pair defender prior to February when he and Hutton were playing 25+ minutes a night as a top pair. Of course Troy's numbers would drop in that massive change in usage.

Hutton and Stecher treaded water as a top pairing last year, in minutes way beyond them. I think they're both 4/5 defensman.

 

[4Twenty]

Delving into these corsi comparison charts is interesting. I wanted to see what we would see if we weren't just looking to beat Benning over the head.

cy	Strength	Line

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

38.54%	EV	KULIKOV,DMITRY - MYERS,TYLER
18.45%	EV	MORROW,JOE - MYERS,TYLER
13.19%	EV	CHIAROT,BEN - MYERS,TYLER

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Wow, confirms the ice test. Erik Gudbranson sucks at exiting his own zone. You have to imagine this has greatly impacted his teams ability to keep the puck out of their own net.

 

[Bertuzzzi44]

Myers AINEC

 

[Jay Cee]

Analytics are great- it is changing how we look at hockey. It provides all sorts of information about a player that we previously did not have at our disposal to give a clearer picture of what they have to offer.

It is early days however- we do not have a god stat like baseball.

The problem with analytics is how people treat it. We hone in on desirable traits like Corsi and start simplifing things based on the stat which does not appropriately weigh for context. Another example is 5vs5 scoring. It's definitely where we want to look to find consistency over time but the view of some now is that PP scoring are fake points or flukey or something when sometimes you should want to use your statistics to isolate a guy who can actually improve your power play instead of dismissing his proficiency on the power play.

 

[4Twenty]

Analytics are great- it is changing how we look at hockey. It provides all sorts of information about a player that we previously did not have at our disposal to give a clearer picture of what they have to offer.

It is early days however- we do not have a god stat like baseball.

The problem with analytics is how people treat it. We hone in on desirable traits like Corsi and start simplifing things based on the stat which does not appropriately weigh for context. Another example is 5vs5 scoring. It's definitely where we want to look to find consistency over time but the view of some now is that PP scoring are fake points or flukey or something when sometimes you should want to use your statistics to isolate a guy who can actually improve your power play instead of dismissing his proficiency on the power play.

I've had this discussion a lot, but the taboo around corsi from some fans is really interesting to me. Like before it was called corsi, if you were watching a hockey game on TV or listening on the radio and the commentator kept describing that one team was heavily outshooting the other, did you not think that team was carrying the play? That's all it's attempting to show. Which players tilt the ice over time? What role etc?

All corsi is is a recording of on ice events, it's not a statistical equation like WAR or GAR, all it is is a recording of shot attempts. I still don't get why that's voodoo for many.

 

[Jay Cee]

I've had this discussion a lot, but the taboo around corsi from some fans is really interesting to me. Like before it was called corsi, if you were watching a hockey game on TV or listening on the radio and the commentator kept describing that one team was heavily outshooting the other, did you not think that team was carrying the play? That's all it's attempting to show. Which players tilt the ice over time? What role etc?

All corsi is is a recording of on ice events, it's not a statistical equation like WAR or GAR, all it is is a recording of shot attempts. I still don't get why that's voodoo for many.

Maybe I didn't do a good job explaining how I feel. I can't speak for others who think it is voodoo but I can comment on what people like me think. It's not the trait it is the application of people interpreting the data.

Sometimes contextually a player doesn't have a good corsi from playing with garbage hockey players all the time. Certain players like the defensive specialist is not really given a fair shake with his value to the team based on his Corsi. You can be searching as a team generally to have a positive shot differential and still value certain types of players that can help you win games. Also, certain players shouldn't be dismissed out or hand because of one stat in a given place and time.

I am not talking about hockey teams now mind you. I think the people that hockey teams employ have a lot more wholesome view of the tools they have at their disposal.

 

[4Twenty]

I don't see a lot of folks just using corsi to explain whether a player is good or not anymore. People are always looking to contextualize those numbers and find the best way to analyse it. I'm by no means a math wiz or stat nerd, but I do pay attention to these metrics because I think it's an important chapter in the book. It's not a be all/end all, but it's better than my eyes.

 

[Fatass]

I don't see a lot of folks just using corsi to explain whether a player is good or not anymore. People are always looking to contextualize those numbers and find the best way to analyse it. I'm by no means a math wiz or stat nerd, but I do pay attention to these metrics because I think it's an important chapter in the book. It's not a be all/end all, but it's better than my eyes.

As a fan, I know my eyes have a definite bias view. Fancy metric stars are not bias.

 

[MS]

Hutton = Gillis guy = 26 = still has tons of time to improve and still has upside.

Juolevi = Benning guy = 20/21 = done! Bust! Stick a fork in him! Poo in his cornflakes.

One of those guys just consistently played 20+ minutes solidly in the NHL while the other was nearly unplayable at ES in the AHL.

Also, one of them was a late-round pick and the other was a top-5 pick. Nobody would be crapping on Juolevi if he was taken in the 5th round - much of the criticism is a product of how frustratingly terrible that draft pick is looking.

 

[MS]

How he has fared with the Pittsburgh has no bearing on how he fared with the Canucks. The fact is he was a black hole of suck who made every linemate he was paired up with to be dragged down due to his incompetence when he played for us. He was put in a position where he was not good enough to fill and because of it, his linemates suffered due to him. Nothing of what you said punched a hole in my argument. Your desperation is just amusing at this point acting as of his non inspiring play with the pens correlate to how he performed here.

Hutton isn't getting back to how he was a rookie, he simply improved on it as indicated during major half of the season when he was paired with adequate defenders. Hutton was able to log key minutes for the teams and played solid during Tanev and Edler's absence on the top pairing, something you continue to dismiss for whatever reason. Bealieau didn't have as good of a season than Hutton did this season, so your comparision is complete rubbish.

I would take Jets fans perception on what Myers is as a defenceman than many people here. Since they watched this defenceman play for their team for many years, and know his strengths and weaknesses. Most of have them admitted he is a #4-5 D, similar to what Hutton is. There's no gap. Those who believe Myers is a tier or two above Hutton need to think through once again. I have no qualms if people believe Myers is currently superior than Hutton, but to suggest he's tiers above is simply ridiculous.

It's fascinating.

Hutton - when not with Gudbranson - played top-4 minutes in the NHL very solidly last year.

Winnipeg fans pretty much all agree that Myers is a 4/5 guy whose mobility and defensive issues get exposed when he gets moved higher up in the lineup.

This seems pretty similar. Maybe Myers is a bit better (and yes, you do have to factor in his PP utility), but there is pretty clearly not a huge gap between these players. But a huge percentage of this board are trying to argue that it isn't even close, which is ridiculous.

Remember how we all laughed when Pittsburgh fans tried to tell us that we were wrong about Gudbranson and that he was actually really solid? Everyone here is doing that exact same thing to Winnipeg fans right now.

___________

One thing I'm really starting to take out of these discussions is that I really question how many people here actually watch the games - either ours or those of other teams - with any real regularity.

 

[MS]

Would you rather be hit by Biega or Myers?

Physicality is more than just number of hits. It's also more than just how many hit and vicious your hits are, but also how well you can receive those hits and stand up to the abuse daily and can keep pushing back.

I'm 6'2 and 210, Biega isn't going to intimidate a guy my size and I wouldn't give second thought to pushing him.... I'd think twice about it against Myers.

Would you rather be hit by Jordin Tootoo or Brendan Gaunce?

Biega is a vicious hitter. He knocked multiple opposing players out of games last year with clean hits. Anyone who actually watched the games should know this.

Myers is a p***ycat with basically no mean streak or pushback at all.

 

[MS]

When it comes to opinions there is no such thing as definitive information or else it would cease to be an opinion and become a fact. The JT Miller trade, as an example, is not a definitive good or bad. It really depends on where the draft pick ends up and how JT Miller performs in a Canuck's jersey. Therefore attacking Benning for a terrible trade is not definitive. Saying wait and see is the only neutral opinion. If someone wishes to have the opinion that it is a bad deal that is fine. But don't tell others they are wrong as is what often happens here. The facts concerning the cost of the trade are yet to come.

If I'm running late for work and pass a bunch of cars at 150kph on a double-yellow around blind corners and I manage to get away with it and get to work on time, that isn't 'good driving'. It's awful driving where I got damned lucky.

The risk involved in being a long-term non-playoff team sending away unprotected #1 picks is absolutely idiotic and should never, ever have happened. The fact that we'll probably get away with it doesn't make it OK to take that stupid chance.

 

[MS]

How can you make an accurate comparison when Biega is deployed as a fill in for injured players while Myers had a more prominent role on his teams? Has Biega played long enough in diverse situations to have his faults exposed to the extent Myers has? Every year to me it looks like Biega starts off strong then when he hits about 10 games we see a lot of problems.

Im not going to pretend to have watched Myers played extensively. I have watched Biega though. I admire his heart and determination but it was awfully frustrating watching the play die on his stick, time after time in the O zone while being on the ice with the top 2 lines. Im willing to wager that Myers is a better passer and will operate better in an offensive role.

First off, Biega barely played in the first half and then played regularly up until Hughes arrived. So it wasn't like he was playing 1-on, 1-off to get the results he did. And I'm not sure there's any evidence that it's easier to generate good results when you're in/out of the lineup.

Biega played 16:54 at ES from a 3rd pairing RS spot. Myers played 17:01 at ES from a 3rd pairing RS spot.

Myers is absolutely a better passer than Biega. He's also a far worse skater with worse defensive fundamentals. They're similar players.

But in any case, if we're down to 'well they were similarly effective but Biega wasn't in the lineup consistently so Myers had a bit harder job' as your best argument, then maybe what I'm claiming isn't so ridiculous, is it?

 

[Canadian Canuck]

Better at defending. Better at moving the puck. You’re welcome.

Disagree with both man

 

[Goon42]

This entire thread is hilarious. Hutton is awful. Myers has his flaws but I take him over Hutton 10 times out of 10.

 

[settinguptheplay]

If I'm running late for work and pass a bunch of cars at 150kph on a double-yellow around blind corners and I manage to get away with it and get to work on time, that isn't 'good driving'. It's awful driving where I got damned lucky.

The risk involved in being a long-term non-playoff team sending away unprotected #1 picks is absolutely idiotic and should never, ever have happened. The fact that we'll probably get away with it doesn't make it OK to take that stupid chance.

What you describe is neither good nor bad driving. It is possible that it took some real skill to pull it off. One might have gotten lucky not to get caught and it could very well be reckless but makes no indication whether or not the driver was a good driver or a bad one. One might argue that the skills needed to do that better indicates that the driver is good. I understand what you are getting at though. It is somewhat a case of semantics. How does one chose to use good or bad. If by virtue of breaking driving laws it could be seen as bad. As an indication to the skill of the driver it says very little.

Better put would be to say that you are playing blackjack and have a 18. Instead of holding you take another card. That would be a bad blackjack player who took a chance that had great odds to fail. Even if his extra card is a 3 and he wins big. It was still a bad call.

As for the trade itself. I am not, nor was I ever, happy with giving away the first. But it is done and all the bellyaching will achieve nothing in regards to the trade itself. In my analogy Benning had a 15 and chose to call. His odds to bust are still high but sometimes it is a call you have to make. Benning's stake in the game is his job. Now we just have to wait for our call card to see if the trade is ultimately the right or wrong choice.