brob89

Members
  • Content count

    27
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

24 Neutral

About brob89

  • Rank
    Aces Regular
  1. I struggle to find value in these HERO comparisons, although I certainly can't claim to be the best informed statistician. Clearly there is something to be said for how they seem to be attempting at being helpful in thinking through the value of particular players, but it just seems like they are not taking into account enough variables to be useful. I think it probably is the case that Bonino is good value at 1.9 million, but the limited variables taken into account inflate his value to be sure. Similar challenges could be raised in regard to a number of players that are analyzed this way. That doesn't necessarily change whether Dorsett's contract is bad, or whether the Prust trade was bad, etc., but I'd say that the Hero analysis isn't enough evidence to prove the case. I think the fact that many of us agree with with the conclusions is diminishing our ability to see the weaknesses of the HERO analytics... otherwise called confirmation bias. Nonetheless, I found this post to be an interesting read; so thanks, OP.
  2. The challenge of drafting well is a multifaceted one that, I think, boils down to a number of variables that cannot be solved merely by a better placement in the draft (although that certainly doesn't hurt). We need to be realistic about this if we want our expectations to match the realistic possibilities that are available to our team. The challenges of drafting well (that I can think of presently): - Talent analysis (both for the players which you have interest in, and the ones you might be passing on in order to pick a particular one) - Predicting talent, physique, and mental progression (None of us at 25 resembled ourselves at 17, or at least if we did, we were big disappointments to our parents. Hockey players are people.) - Draft placement (It matters, sure.) - The moves of other teams (Oh snap! Calgary took Johnny Gaudreau. I guess we'd better go with our next option; Ludwig Blomstrand. No big deal.) - Trades (Managing asset value moving in and out to a degree where we are annually giving ourselves the best opportunity possible to find the best value in each draft year) Frankly, I think draft placement is not at all the most important aspect of building a winning franchise. It is if you're hinging the construction of your franchise on the generational talent that appears at the top of the draft every couple years, but one generational talent can only lift a Franchise out of last place; it can't turn them into a winner. If we want to be frustrated with the performance of the present Canucks management, the draft should not be our focus. It should be in the area of trades, Free Agency, and peculiar decisions generally regarding asset management. Case and point: Sbisa contract - seriously? Have they been watching what I've been watching? For that amount of money and term? Dorsett Contract - great 4th liner; horrible contract - the cap hit and term make him completely untradeable Miller signing and contract - Why get him at all? Why sign him to 6 million a year? Why sign him for 3 years? All questions that I have despite Miller being a great goalie. Corrado waiver debacle - Is he the king of the world? No. Is it frustrating to lose an asset like him for nothing? Yes. Our two deadline deals of 2016 so far - How will these players fair? I don't know. Are these the sort of moves that a rebuilding team needs? None that I've ever seen. Anyway... my two cents. Hopefully it wasn't a worthless read.