Sign in to follow this  
StealthNuck

Sven Baertschi | LW

Recommended Posts

actually, on second thought, he's probably worth a late first at this point.

 

but doesn't that prove a bit of the magic-fairy-dust that everyone believes draft picks possess? what I mean is, baertschi was a mid-1st and has succeeded at a level consistent with players picked around that spot while clearly still on an upwards trajectory.

 

yet, there's no way a GM would give a mid-1st in this draft to get baertschi, because they're gambling on the hope that their pick is the one that turns into a tarasenko rather than a kyle beach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, nzan said:

actually, on second thought, he's probably worth a late first at this point.

 

but doesn't that prove a bit of the magic-fairy-dust that everyone believes draft picks possess? what I mean is, baertschi was a mid-1st and has succeeded at a level consistent with players picked around that spot while clearly still on an upwards trajectory.

 

yet, there's no way a GM would give a mid-1st in this draft to get baertschi, because they're gambling on the hope that their pick is the one that turns into a tarasenko rather than a kyle beach.

That's exactly why rebuilding teams accumulate picks in the first three rounds.  They give themselves more chances at getting elite players from the later picks.  As the odds decrease those teams keep their odds almost like having first round picks.  It's the smart way.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Alflives said:

That's exactly why rebuilding teams accumulate picks in the first three rounds.  They give themselves more chances at getting elite players from the later picks.  As the odds decrease those teams keep their odds almost like having first round picks.  It's the smart way.  

...orrrrr...because everyone believes that draft picks are way more valuable than they actually are, maybe we should stop complaining when our very competent GM trades them away for actual value.

 

hey Jim, I wanna get some more draft picks cause it looks like we're heading into a rebuild...I know you're in one yourself, but you have any you would part with?

uh, not really, unless you wanted to give me a legitimate nhl player in return

yeah, we could do that

for real, a legitimate nhl hockey player for a 10% chance at a legitimate hockey player?

well, if that's the way you want to put it, I guess

mmmm...ok, lets do the deal

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, nzan said:

...orrrrr...because everyone believes that draft picks are way more valuable than they actually are, maybe we should stop complaining when our very competent GM trades them away for actual value.

 

hey Jim, I wanna get some more draft picks cause it looks like we're heading into a rebuild...I know you're in one yourself, but you have any you would part with?

uh, not really, unless you wanted to give me a legitimate nhl player in return

yeah, we could do that

for real, a legitimate nhl hockey player for a 10% chance at a legitimate hockey player?

well, if that's the way you want to put it, I guess

mmmm...ok, lets do the deal

Vey, Baer, Pedan?  Ligitimate players on a Cup team?  Seriously?  These guys are, at best, place holders.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hopefully he keeps driving to the net, it's easy to revert back to being a perimeter player, only way he's going to be successful

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Alflives said:

Vey, Baer, Pedan?  Ligitimate players on a Cup team?  Seriously?  These guys are, at best, place holders.  

Who said anything about a cup team? The point is the value of one asset versus the value of the other asset.

 

I'm not even disagreeing with the point that these players are just place holders, I'm just skeptical about current thinking on the value of picks. To illustrate, lets use just these three players you've picked...I think Baertschi will continue upwards, I'd say Pedan is 60/40 to become a legitimate nhl'er and I'd venture that Vey ends up in Europe before long...

 

So if you were to take the 50th, 53rd and 64th pick from any draft in the last 20 years, would you ever have gotten close to that value? If you could get similar value 30% of the time I'd say Bennings fame as a scout brings you up to a 50% shot at getting equal value and you maybe make that gamble...I bet you don't get similar value more than 10% of the time though.

Edited by nzan
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok, i'm willing to admit maybe I'm wrong...my whole point is that we're employing a great strategy of getting players of value in exchange for picks that everyone values extremely highly (but have extremely low probabilities of turning into actual value).

 

using those three draft spots and looking over the last 20 years, I've identified 6 years where you would absolutely prefer those three picks than Baer, Pedan and Vey, so close to 30%...and yeah, maybe Benning would have unearthed a Keith or Weber in addition to the choices made in those spots...

 

Those years are:

1998 - Brad RIchards

2003 - Jimmy Howard

2004 - Brandon Dubinsky

2006 - Milan Lucic

2008 - Travis Hamonic

2009 - Tyson Barrie

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At first, I was very skeptical about the Baertschi trade, wondering why Calgary would give up a player they were very high on. it didn't seem to make sense for them. As the season started I still had that doubt in my mind and was fully expecting a flop. However, as the season went on, I could see the real potential in this guy and found myself really routing for him. He still needs to work on his defense (as does BoHo) but I think he had a solid first season. If he and Bo can bring it together, defensively, I think there's a real chance we can have a top 2 line with these guys. As I've said in a couple other threads, I still think they need a veteran right winger to bring it all together.

Edited by Kraken70

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Alflives said:

Vey, Baer, Pedan?  Ligitimate players on a Cup team?  Seriously?  These guys are, at best, place holders.  

 

3 hours ago, nzan said:

Who said anything about a cup team? The point is the value of one asset versus the value of the other asset.

 

I'm not even disagreeing with the point that these players are just place holders, I'm just skeptical about current thinking on the value of picks. To illustrate, lets use just these three players you've picked...I think Baertschi will continue upwards, I'd say Pedan is 60/40 to become a legitimate nhl'er and I'd venture that Vey ends up in Europe before long...

 

So if you were to take the 50th, 53rd and 64th pick from any draft in the last 20 years, would you ever have gotten close to that value? If you could get similar value 30% of the time I'd say Bennings fame as a scout brings you up to a 50% shot at getting equal value and you maybe make that gamble...I bet you don't get similar value more than 10% of the time though.

Are these 3 good use of the draft picks used to get them?  2nd rounders have a 1/3 probability of playing 100 games.  3rd rounders 1/4

2nd for Vey 134 games......so ya

2nd for Baertschi 138 games.......ya again

3rd for Pedan 13 games......wait and see

 

Are they place holders?  In other words, what is their quality?  But the point is, they are making the line up so they are making the team better than the alternative.  The GM is always trying to upgrade and will be looking for replacements for everybody.  That's his job.  Obviously, it is much easier to find upgrades on bottom 6 players which is why we see more action there.

 

Last season we saw Benning make upgrades on:

  • Jensen (24 games) to Etem (170 games)
  • Shinkaruk (8 games.....1 at the time of the trade) to Granlund (102 games) 

In answer to the question are they place holders? 

  • Baertschi has a legitimate shot at being a 2nd line left wing.  I would call him a keeper until of course somebody better comes along. 
  • Vey is looking more and more like a utility depth guy which is valuable but not difficult to find.  What is his upside?  Probably not top 6 but he has a shot at pushing Granlund for 4C.  Also, consider that Benning likes having natural centres on the wings so that option is not out of the question. 
  • Pedan is on the bubble and the addition of more skilled players like Gudbranson, Tryamkin, Larsen, and Stecher push him down the depth chart.

So if you can get 100 games out of a 2nd rounder, it's worth it.  And one of these 3 look like a real score.

 

 

 

Edited by Crabcakes
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, nzan said:

interesting question...i don't think JB could get more than a 2nd for him right now...but I wouldn't trade him away to get a 2nd and I'd happily give up a 2nd to get him.

i think i've thought myself in a full circle at this point, but I think he's worth WAY more now than we gave up for him.

I would be pissed if we traded Baertschi I think he has the potential to become a 30 goal scorer if we play him right.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, nzan said:

Who said anything about a cup team? The point is the value of one asset versus the value of the other asset.

 

I'm not even disagreeing with the point that these players are just place holders, I'm just skeptical about current thinking on the value of picks. To illustrate, lets use just these three players you've picked...I think Baertschi will continue upwards, I'd say Pedan is 60/40 to become a legitimate nhl'er and I'd venture that Vey ends up in Europe before long...

 

So if you were to take the 50th, 53rd and 64th pick from any draft in the last 20 years, would you ever have gotten close to that value? If you could get similar value 30% of the time I'd say Bennings fame as a scout brings you up to a 50% shot at getting equal value and you maybe make that gamble...I bet you don't get similar value more than 10% of the time though.

Your math is impressive.  All I'm saying is IMHAO it's better to have a chance (even if it's only a small one) at getting a top player drafting than trading for someone who has had their chance in hopes that guy improves.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Crabcakes said:

 

Are these 3 good use of the draft picks used to get them?  2nd rounders have a 1/3 probability of playing 100 games.  3rd rounders 1/4

2nd for Vey 134 games......so ya

2nd for Baertschi 138 games.......ya again

3rd for Pedan 13 games......wait and see

 

Are they place holders?  In other words, what is their quality?  But the point is, they are making the line up so they are making the team better than the alternative.  The GM is always trying to upgrade and will be looking for replacements for everybody.  That's his job.  Obviously, it is much easier to find upgrades on bottom 6 players which is why we see more action there.

 

Last season we saw Benning make upgrades on:

  • Jensen (24 games) to Etem (170 games)
  • Shinkaruk (8 games.....1 at the time of the trade) to Granlund (102 games) 

In answer to the question are they place holders? 

  • Baertschi has a legitimate shot at being a 2nd line left wing.  I would call him a keeper until of course somebody better comes along. 
  • Vey is looking more and more like a utility depth guy which is valuable but not difficult to find.  What is his upside?  Probably not top 6 but he has a shot at pushing Granlund for 4C.  Also, consider that Benning likes having natural centres on the wings so that option is not out of the question. 
  • Pedan is on the bubble and the addition of more skilled players like Gudbranson, Tryamkin, Larsen, and Stecher push him down the depth chart.

So if you can get 100 games out of a 2nd rounder, it's worth it.  And one of these 3 look like a real score.

 

 

 

Math wise, what you propose makes really good statistical sense.  I cannot refute those numbers, but IMHAO, it's more than numbers.  It's opportunity at drafting elite D in rounds two and three wasted for average, fringe NHL, place holders that could have been signed through UFAs.  Examples: Santorelli, Matthias, Richardson, and a big tough D man.  In the new Cap era these come for rea lively cheap.  I think we basically gave away chances for elite D, albeit low odds, on players on players we didn't need.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Math wise, what you propose makes really good statistical sense.  I cannot refute those numbers, but IMHAO, it's more than numbers.  It's opportunity at drafting elite D in rounds two and three wasted for average, fringe NHL, place holders that could have been signed through UFAs.  Examples: Santorelli, Matthias, Richardson, and a big tough D man.  In the new Cap era these come for rea lively cheap.  I think we basically gave away chances for elite D, albeit low odds, on players on players we didn't need.  

These arguments always get complicated because Benning is trying to add players in their early 20's who can play (and hopefully still develop) and also draft well.  Both of these things help to build for the future.  What takes priority?  It looks as though Benning is prioritizing players over draft picks at this time.  Is this accelerating the re-thing?  Is it better or worse?

 

I'm not quite so hung up on draft picks as some people are.  As long as the assets arrive and the team is getting better, I'm not going to cry about it.  He hasn't given up any first round picks.  Other than McCann but he was picked already.  This is where the top line players are going to come from in general.  In the mean time, Benning is finding improvements in bottom 9 forwards and bottom 4 D through unconventional means. 

 

Who needs to be conventional?  Apparently Alf does.  B)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Crabcakes
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Crabcakes said:

These arguments always get complicated because Benning is trying to add players in their early 20's who can play (and hopefully still develop) and also draft well.  Both of these things help to build for the future.  What takes priority?  It looks as though Benning is prioritizing players over draft picks at this time.  Is this accelerating the re-thing?  Is it better or worse?

 

I'm not quite so hung up on draft picks as some people are.  As long as the assets arrive and the team is getting better, I'm not going to cry about it.  He hasn't given up any first round picks.  Other than McCann but he was picked already.  This is where the top line players are going to come from in general.  In the mean time, Benning is finding improvements in bottom 9 forwards and bottom 4 D through unconventional means. 

 

Who needs to be conventional?  Apparently Alf does.  B)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Excellent post CC. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When it comes to Baertschi he's achieved nothing of consequence so far .... he might but then again he might not. If he gets 20 goals this season I'll concede his significance to the club. I'm hoping for some entertainment this coming season

Edited by Fred65

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Fred65 said:

If he gets 20 goals this season I'll concede his significance to the club. 

It's 100% plausible,  without anything else having to change,  that Beart gets 20 this season imo. 

 

But I hear you,  he's got to get them before we count'em^_^.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Fanuck said:

It's 100% plausible,  without anything else having to change,  that Beart gets 20 this season imo. 

 

Bear-cheese is going to be a gem.  First full season in the league and he nets 15 while playing on a terrible team.  Wait until the supporting pieces in the organization come into their own,  including him!

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On June 11, 2016 at 8:51 PM, Crabcakes said:

 

Are these 3 good use of the draft picks used to get them?  2nd rounders have a 1/3 probability of playing 100 games.  3rd rounders 1/4

2nd for Vey 134 games......so ya

2nd for Baertschi 138 games.......ya again

3rd for Pedan 13 games......wait and see

 

Are they place holders?  In other words, what is their quality?  But the point is, they are making the line up so they are making the team better than the alternative.  The GM is always trying to upgrade and will be looking for replacements for everybody.  That's his job.  Obviously, it is much easier to find upgrades on bottom 6 players which is why we see more action there.

 

Last season we saw Benning make upgrades on:

  • Jensen (24 games) to Etem (170 games)
  • Shinkaruk (8 games.....1 at the time of the trade) to Granlund (102 games) 

In answer to the question are they place holders? 

  • Baertschi has a legitimate shot at being a 2nd line left wing.  I would call him a keeper until of course somebody better comes along. 
  • Vey is looking more and more like a utility depth guy which is valuable but not difficult to find.  What is his upside?  Probably not top 6 but he has a shot at pushing Granlund for 4C.  Also, consider that Benning likes having natural centres on the wings so that option is not out of the question. 
  • Pedan is on the bubble and the addition of more skilled players like Gudbranson, Tryamkin, Larsen, and Stecher push him down the depth chart.

So if you can get 100 games out of a 2nd rounder, it's worth it.  And one of these 3 look like a real score.

 

 

 

So, this isn't to discount what you've said, because I agree with what you've said.

 

But I think the math we're using is slightly confusing when talking about probabilities and percentages.

 

The first question we should be asking, when we trade any picks, be they second or fifth rounders, is whether the player Benning would have selected there would have been better than the player we acquired. We shouldn't be talking about historical averages of "that pick" except as a general model. It's not necessarily what Benning would

have done. In general, I think Benning picks well, and those picks have larger than historically average weight. Of course, the problem is that we'll never know who Benning really would have picked. It'd be cool for the fans to get a retroactive draft board from the Canucks or whichever specific team, but then that provides too much info for the competitors.

 

The second question we should be asking is whether the player we acquired is going to be able to help us more than the drafted player at X spot. This becomes a nuanced conversation about team dynamics, timing, and character. This is where we could envision a set of say, five players Benning might've picked, and compare their trajectories to the player acquired via trade. This, of course, is an exercise only executable with hindsight, and a significant amount at that. It's also one where a tremendous amount of data needs to be considered for us to have anywhere close to a realistic model. Again, even then, the exercise remains speculative. The set would have to have, on average, a higher value than the player acquired within the team model. I can envision further complications to this as well, but I'm not gonna bring them up right now. Rabbit hole type thinking.

 

What I mean to establish by framing the discussion this way is that we should be talking about specifics, not generalities. The latter is lazy thinking, and doesn't really benefit our understanding of hockey. To see our GM's plan and vision, we have to think like him, and all evidence suggests he is extremely specific and detail-oriented. If we're going to criticize him,  we should at least be doing it on his level.

 

Anyway, I think you're on the right track, and I support this kind of thinking on CDC. Keep at it, yo.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, PlanB said:

Bear-cheese is going to be a gem.  First full season in the league and he nets 15 while playing on a terrible team.  Wait until the supporting pieces in the organization come into their own,  including him!

I hope so.  He was expected to perform at a 2nd line level last season, but if you look at his stats for the whole year, he didn't exactly improve them from his time in Calgary.  Career year - yes.  But in 12-13, he scored every other game.  (.50) In 13-14, he scored at pace of .42.  His 14-15 year was forgettable at .27, and his last year with us: .40.  Granted, I have little to no insight into his linemates or how he was used, and even though the stats are out there, I don't know about his ice time either.  Point being that purely from a statistical standpoint he isn't exactly improved... even though he looked better at times than others this past season.

 

Point being that I think there is little to back up that he will be a "gem", despite his 15 goals.  This coming season will be very telling for what kind of progress he's actually making.  I do hope he turns out to be our 2nd line winger; it is a position we badly need talent in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.