Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Enter Search Term. Use arrows to navigate between autocomplete results. If no results appear, use Enter to do a full site search.
Forum Closure ×
Canucks Community
Forum Closure

Goat James

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    770

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Goat James

    JB In Historical Context

    in Canucks Talk

    Posted · Edited by The Game

    1 hour ago, IBatch said:

    Tryamkin. Forsling. Demko say hello. 
     

    Edit:  As far as JV goes he’s past the point of being a bust too.   Spend some time and look at the top ten picks or if you’d prefer the top 3-8 the past 30 years and you will find dozens of names that haven’t played many games or scored many point at the NHL level.   OJ will get a chance but yeah I’m pretty sure he’s going to be a bust.   That said Yakupov and Puljajarvi say hello...EDM’s  demise was they couldn’t get anyone outside the first round to stick for years - and their picks even though high didn’t always work out either .. and Yakupov should have given his scoring prowess as a junior (record setting)....


    yeah, sure, the 2014 draft (apart from Virtanen) looks good. Although no one has really proven themselves yet. I do find it ironic though that Benning is considered such a draft guru when he’s missed on 2/4 of his top 10 picks. And sure, not ever pick is a hit, but they way he’s made out to be this expert it’s funny to think that he only has a 50 percent “hit rate” in the early first round. 

    • Cheers 1

    JB In Historical Context

    in Canucks Talk

    Posted

    I really don’t understand this Benning hysteria. He’s routinely drafted in the top 10 and has whiffed on two picks (Virtanen and Juolevi). Apart from Gaudette no player he’s drafted outside of the first round these last five years has scored a point in the NHL. 
     

    Sure, the Boeser, Pettersson and Hughes picks look great, but saying that he’s historically good is downright crazy? Compare his work to the job that Burke did while he was here: Burke drafted the Sedins, RJ Umberger (almost 400 points), Kevin Bieksa, Ryan Kesler, Cory Schneider and Alex Edler. 

     

    Post your All-time Vancouver Canucks line up + 2020 Team Canada line-up

    in Canucks Talk

    Posted

    9 hours ago, DarkIndianRises said:

    Pretty good roster, but my only criticism here is that there are too many players playing Out of position (I.e. Bure, Horvat, Jovo, Ohlund).   I love your addition of Tanti however. 

     

    Truth be told I don't remember which side Jovo or Öhlund played on, but I really wanted to include both of them. Any all time/best of lineup is bound to have too many centers (just look at Team Canada, half their forwards are natural centers) but they usually make the transition fine. I know that Mogilny and Bure played on a line with Fedorov on the Soviet national team (that must have been one of the most fun lines ever!), and both of them are RWs. Tanti had crazy stats!

    NHL's "Super 16" goaltender list has Markstrom at 13

    in Canucks Talk

    Posted · Edited by The Game

    On 6/14/2020 at 7:51 AM, Canuckster86 said:

    Would take both CUP winning goalies ahead of most other guys above them WITHOUT a cup


    MAF wasn’t even the starter for two of his three cups? Hellebuyck had a Hart-worthy season? Saying that Fleury is a better goaltender is just flat out wrong. 
     

    Edit: and the Cups argument is really strange, would you rather have 60 year old Patrick Roy than Markström since Roy won more Cups? 

    [Game] Your All-Time Canucks Roster (as of this season)

    in Canucks Talk

    Posted · Edited by The Game

    That I've seen, started following the 'Nucks after they drafted my two favorit players in 1999.

     

    Näslund - Morrison - Bertuzzi

    Sedin - Sedin (C) - Pettersson 

    Horvat - Kesler - Burrows

    Miller - Linden (A) -  Boeser

    Higgins

     

    Edler - Öhlund (A)

    Hughes - Jovanovski 

    Bieksa - Hamhius 

    Salo

     

    Luongo

    Markström 

     

    Should Prince Harry be chosen as our King?

    in Off-Topic General

    Posted

    Why would you turn your country into a Monarchy? It stads against everything a Western Democracy stands for: it places people above the law, and it does so not determined by skill, but by birth. It's a horrible thing and I cannot for the life of me understand why you would want to start a Monarchy from scratch? Totally insane. /Swedish person.

    • Thanks 1

    2019 THN Top 100 Players Under 21

    in Canucks Talk

    Posted

    On 11/24/2019 at 10:13 PM, the grinder said:

    a

    and so was alexander daigle and nail yakupov  ,    you  know what I mean  look at petey on the list  , he  was projected like 10th overall  and now he is second on the list .I hate when they put  pros vs junior . you never know if they can actually make it in the nhl or will another petey come out of no where 


    Both Daigle and Yakupov had good rookie seasons, so just ‘cause a player’s turned pro doesn’t mean that we know what kind of career he’s going to have. And for every first overall bust there’s like seven guys who lived up to their potential. I don’t see the issue here. 

    • Cheers 1

    A Tale of Two Bennings

    in Canucks Talk

    Posted

    On 11/5/2019 at 8:22 PM, JamesB said:

     

    I thought I would weigh in on this. Is Benning's draft record good?

     

    I find it weird to be defending Benning. I was critical of the JV and OJ picks when they were made and I am still critical. On the other hand, I wanted Glass ahead of EP and I had no idea about Boeser or Demko. And I was very critical of Benning's record in other areas during his first three years. That said, his draft record is very good to excellent.

     

    The expected value of draft picks has been studied a lot. Here is a chart taken from one of the best articles, although it is getting a bit old. See https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/analyzing-value-nhl-draft-picks/

     

     chart22.jpg

     

    This diagram is based on how players drafted between 1995 and 2007 did up through 2015. It is based only on forwards and looks only at pts per game.

     

    But it is very revealing. The expected value for a first overall pick is 0.8 PPG, The expected value for second overall is about 0.71, For third overall it drops down to about 0.57 and 4, 5, and 6 drop down to about 0.4. The rest of the top 10 clusters in the 0.3 to 0.4 range.

     

    That includes early years when players might not score much so the scoring rates in their prime years will be a bit higher.

     

    But here is a translation, with some extra data from other sources thrown in. You should get a good first liner if you pick 1st or 2nd overall. You expect to get a guy who, in his prime and near-prime years (say 23 to 30), is a good second liner if you pick in the 3 to 6 range. If pick in the rest of the top 10 you expect to get sa olid NHL regular but if he becomes a top 6 players you have beaten the average or expected value.  

     

    In the first round outside the top 10 you expect to get an NHL player but probably a guy who peaks as a bottom 6 forward. And a lot of first rounders outside the top 10 (about a third) never become NHL regulars. Most second rounders never become NHL regulars, although your odds are pretty good of getting an NHL player in the high second round -- maybe about 40%. In the third round your chances are maybe 20%. Beyond that, the chance of getting an NHL regular drops to about 10% and does not change much from round to round.

     

    So, EP and Boeser are performing at the expected value of guys chosen first overall. If we do a translation for D-men, Hughes is also performing like a guy chosen in the top 3. Virtanen has a record more like a guy chosen in the 15-20 range in the first round. Demko is great pick for a second rounder. Juolevi has been disappointing so far and I am not convinced he will ever by an NHL regular. But it is too early to make the final call and guys like Woo and Lind are looking pretty good for 2nd rounders at this stage. And lots of other guys look like they have a decent shot at becoming NHL regulars.

     

    If you look at other GMs, very few have a record as consistently good as Benning. In aggregate, Benning is way ahead of the overall expected value for the portfolio of draft picks he has had. Every GM, even the GMs who built LA, Chicago, and other multi-Cup teams, they have about as many misses as hits with their first round picks.

     

    So, on a hindsight basis, Benning has made some drafting mistakes. But, compared to other GMs, his record in this area is very good -- much, much better than his record in other areas such as UFA signings.  

     

     

     

     

    I feel like we're saying basically the same thing, but I feel like I want to elaborate. I'm gonna start off by saying that I'm an engineering student, so I'm pretty well versed when it comes to math models. Your way of assessing draft picks works (pretty well) when trying to calculate a general value of a draft pick given its position, but it lacks A LOT when looking at specific examples.

     

    For example: if the model concludes that a first overall pick is worth X, say a first line forward for 10 years, something like a Mitch Marner or a Leon Draisaitl. This would be great when looking at the overall value of a first overall pick (I do feel like you're undervaluing a first overall pick a bit when you say that Brock Boeser is performing like one, but nevertheless), and predicting future first overall pick and their values. But if you'd apply this model to a draft in the past, say the 2015 draft you'd run into huge problems.

     

    We know that the first overall pick in 2015 was Connor McDavid, a generational talent who at this stage of his career looks like he's well on his way to becoming at least a top 10 player of all time. If you applied your model to this draft it would say that Peter Chiarelli would've had a great draft had he chosen Jack Eichel with the first overall pick (as Eichel is outperforming what a first overall pick has historically done), and that he'd gotten a passing grade had he chosen Marner, as Mitch looks to be about what you can expect from a first overall pick (given this model). 

     

    I think that you'd have a hard time finding a single fan who would agree that the Oilers would've had a good draft, had they passed on McDavid and chosen either Eichel or Marner in 2015. 

     

    If you look at the 2012 draft on the other hand, I would argue that the first real impact player picked was Filip Forsberg at #11, and I wouldn't call him a "first overall level talent". The 2012 draft was historically weak and leading in to the draft the consensus was that either Yakupov or Ryan Murray would go first. Saying that the Oilers had a bad draft when they picked Yakupov (who turned out being one of the worst first overall picks of the 21st century) is true, but saying that they should've picked Filip Forsberg is unrealistic, since no GM in the league would have done that given the Oiler's position, and even so, even given that Forsberg is the best player in the entire draft, he's still worse than most first overall picks are, thus the model would tell us that even he was chosen first overall (again, really unlikely since he wasn't considered a first overall talet at the time) whoever picked him would have had a bad draft.

     

    My point in this is that when assessing such a small number of drafts as we are when talking about Benning, you have to look at them one by one to get a good idea of how good a job he's done, this being because the sample size is too small and that the expected value of a draft pick oscillates so much from year to year. The thing with mathematical models based on probabilities and stats work great when used with a really large sample size. you can, given enough data tell the difference between 50.01 % and 49.99 %, but given a small sample size, it can be impossible to tell 1/3 from 2/3. Again, what I'm saying is that the model (although sophisticated and based in facts) is not a good tool when trying to do what you're doing: assess single drafts.

     

    I genuinely think that you have to look at Benning's drafts one by one and look at the picks that were made around his picks to tell how good a job he's done. And when doing this, I think it's clear to say that he's missed by quiet a wide margin on some of the picks (mainly in the 2014 and 2016 drafts), hit home runs in some (2015 and 2017), and that the 2018 draft is looking really good at the moment. And it is true that all GMs miss in the draft, but people on here go on and on about what a "draft wizard" he is, and I can't help but feel that if you've missed on two first rounders (both picked in the very beginning of their drafts) in a five year span; maybe you can't be considered a draft wizard. 

    • Thanks 1

    A Tale of Two Bennings

    in Canucks Talk

    Posted · Edited by The Game

    5 hours ago, coastal.view said:

    so your criteria for success is

    every first round pick must be a star or superstar

    jb has not missed on any 1st round pick

     

    go look at other teams

    see how many gms can say that

    and the look at the home run drafts he achieved

    ep40, brock, well hughes did fall in his lap

    but gaudette, demko, and i'm sure i'm missing others

    an no, ep40 did not fall to him, the consensus on these boards was glass

     


    Did you even read my post? What I said was that while Benning certainly has hit on some draft picks (mostly Elias and Brock) he’s missed on some (Jake and Olli).
     

    What do you mean when you say that he hasn’t missed on any first round draft pick? Juolevi was picked at number 5 overall three years ago and has yet to play an NHL game, Matthew Tkachuk (34 goals last year) was picked right after him. That’s a miss I my book.

     

    And calling Gaudette a “home run pick” seems a bit pre mature, the guy’s scored six career NHL goals. 
     

    I’m not saying that Benning has done a horrible job, I’m saying that he hasn’t been as good as some people on here try say that he has. 

    A Tale of Two Bennings

    in Canucks Talk

    Posted

    Everyone always brings up what a great scout Benning is but he’s whiffed on two really high draft picks (Jake at 6, Juolevi at 5). Sure Pettersson and Hughes look amazing, but top end draft picks are supposed to turn out into great players. The only players drafted by Benning in the later rounds currently playing for our team are Demko and Gaudette. I don’t feel like he’s this big draft guru that everyone is making him out to be.  

    • Haha 1
    • Wat 1
    • Upvote 1

    [discusion[ Would u trade Petey for Wayne Gretzky in his prime

    in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing

    Posted

    32 minutes ago, khay said:

    Yes x 1 million. Can't believe this is even a question. Petey for Gretzky in his prime??? As much as I love Petey, I'd even trade Petey for McDavid let alone Gretzky.

     

    Take your homer glasses off, and you will see that Petey is still very raw and we don't know if he's peak is going to be anywhere near say McDavid, not to mention Gretzky. The scary thing is that McDavid is already playing at or near his peak, which could last at least 10 more years. And what is even more scary is that Edmonton sucks even with McDavid. You put replace Petey with McDavid on Canucks and we are going to SCF this season.

     

     

     

    Your just a band wagon fan! Petey is the best ever! Only the corrupt Toronto media would tell you otherwise!!!

    • Haha 1
    • Upvote 1

    Greatest Canucks coach of all time?

    in Canucks Talk

    Posted

    I remember a thread like this like 10 games into the 2013/14 season. We were off to a great start and everyone was saying that Tortorella was the best ever. I remember someone saying "AV is the winningest coach in franchise history, and Tortorella is better than him so therefore Torts is the best ever."

×
×
  • Create New...