Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

oldnews

Members
  • Posts

    53,830
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    186

Everything posted by oldnews

  1. There were some signs I really liked - when the team was recognizable that is. The amount of comebacks they managed was very impressive imo - something this team was not known for in recent years and I think Desjardins has to be credited with some of it - the ability to turn a game around - particularly when the team isn't the type that is laden with snipers and game-breakers. If anything I'd probably be more concerned about how frequently they got behind as opposed to whether he was able to make a difference during the game. But what I find more promising is the way they play - regardless of what his lineup looks like - they may give up shots when they're grossly over-manned - but the team has consistently played good systems hockey imo - they are harder to play against than they have been in years, they have fewer breakdowns than they've had since probably the AV era, and they maintain pretty good puck pressure and support over 200 ft for the most part. The story seems to be that Miller is responsible for all decent results, but in fairness to the team as a whole, Miller has a .915 sv% - it was actually a hair better last year - and as far as I'm concerned, those aren't deflated numbers - he's been good, and on some nights great - as you'd expect from a 6 million goaltender. Other teams get the same kind of boost from their keeper - I think Miller actually gets more credit than he deserves in general (of course on the odd night he's the best player on the ice).
  2. I think there's a general assumption that the reasoning behind WD not playing young players as much as some people would like is simply a matter of self-preservation on his part - as if he believes he has a better chance of winning by playing AHLers in certain situations as opposed to more raw prospects. I don't think it's that simple - at all. Part of his job is to be careful with young players - to keep them on an upward trajectory in their development, so that their confidence builds as opposed to slingshots back and forth all over the place. A very good example was how he managed Baertschi's early months here. So many people were up in arms - knew so much better - thought Baertschi should be playing bigger minutes sooner. But Baertschi came here with fractured confidence - and in the end, it took WD a half season or so, but Sven most certainly recovered - and praised the coach for how he was patient with him, how well he communicated with Baertschi - the end result was recovering a pretty good middle six forward. I think Sbisa's experience is likely quite similar - he was rushed into the NHL - thrown in over his head and was looking like a potential bust by the time he was thrown into the Kesler deal. Again - kudos to this management group and coaching staff for identifying a player they could work with - and executing. I doubt that Granlund had quite the same issues, but at the same time it would be very difficult to argue that his confidence has not blossomed the more time he's been in Desjardins' lineup. Stecher has a certain level of development coming out of college - having played against (some) young men for a few years, and being blessed with a pretty high level of hockey intelligence that at 22 yrs old he's been on the cusp of ready for the significant minutes he's gotten and in either event is a very clear counterpoint to the idea that WD has some kind of cookie-cutter preference for veterans. As Benning pointed out, the coach has to walk a fine line of balancing a number of goals simultaneously - winning games / staying competitve, developing players properly and having them earn their uptick in minutes, A player like Horvat - I think it's been pretty clear that he's somewhat of an exception - perhaps unbreakable to a certain extent - and that the coaching staff has been leaning on him more than you would most young players - to the point where he's already reaching out for the team's torch. He's only 21 years old. Now, the same tired complaints about players like Goldobin - as if Desjardins doesn''t want these guys to succeed. The coaching staff (and mngt) have a pretty good eye on these guys though - they know where they're at in a development sense - know their strengths and weaknesses - and don't want to overexpose them too early for a number of reasons. There lots of time for us to see Goldobin can do.
  3. Kudos for following up and pointing out the objective reality. I think what it actually evidences is that Horvat is playing more than normal in the final 5 minutes - 3.2 shifts every 5 minutes would put him at about 38.4 shifts per 60 minutes or roughly 26 minutes per game. I'm not surprised, because I do recall the one game a certain hack had twitter up in arms over Horvat's alleged benching at the end of the game - I looked at the shift chart and it was utter bullcrap.
  4. Yes. Apparently he had comparable contract options to go either way (at least over two year terms - not sure about the 3rd yr option) but chose Toronto as opposed to joining EE (on arguably a better opportunity to win?) at the point the Jays offered more than simply the one year deal.
  5. I don't know but they've admitted to offering Bautista one year matching Toronto and were prepared to go multiple years but Bautista ended the negotiation at the point Toronto stepped up.
  6. Looks like those sleazebags in Cleveland tried to poach Bautista as well.... But JB preferred to return to T.O.
  7. not really, but I got the wrong thread here lulz
  8. Interesting. Thanks for that piece of information. In that case I'm giving the new regime a fail thus far - they're coasting even more on AA's momentum than I realized.
  9. I'm not a fan of Shapiro. However, setting that aside, if they're judged on their moves: 1) Allowing Price to walk was the right move. Thinking that Stroman was ready to be an ace - serious failure in judgement - however, the Happ signing has been the best move in their tenure and that, combined with Sanchez's emergence, made the rotation better than expected. 2) The Liriano deal imo was a good one - and if Sanchez, Happ, Estrada and Stroman can sustain their performances, Liriano represents a pretty good 5th arm that may be an upgrade on Dickey. A pass thus far on the rotation. 3) Mel Upton Jr - good enough depth addition at a reasonable price - and adds versatility. 4) Not impressed with the approach to the EE situation - I think it sought the result it got - a pick - and now there's some pressure on Morales to fill some pretty big shoes. Circling back to Bautista became necessary/reasonable given the inability to get other deals done. Not really fair to prejudge the results of these moves/non-moves, but at the same time it's difficult to consider it a successful offseason when the goals haven't really been met. 5) The bullpen moves are wait and see - the team hasn't really enhanced it's utility - hasn't really added speed - hasn't really added a control bat for the top end of the lineup. But there remains a lot to like, and a few needs that can still be added at any point in the future. While I think they've relatively sustained their ability to compete, it's hard to say they've improved on what AA left behind - hard to say they're not simply still relying on the pieces that were already in place. Considering how critical Shapiro was of AA's moves, I think it's fair to hold him accountable to fairly high expectations of his moves in the trade market and free agency. Aside from the Happ signing, not particularly impressive thus far. If their calling card is rebuilding, building through the draft and development, perhaps he was a misfit with poor timing, to step into a franchise that had already committed to going all-in - and re-engaged a broader fan base as a result. Shapiro's tenure is marked by general indifference, but has the momentum of the success of the franchise at the end of the AA era. I don't mind the splitting of focus - to try to remain competitive but not continue to spend futures / try to recover a few - which obviously was the goal in letting EE walk and replacing him with a left-handed power option. I'm relieved they didn't fundamentally change/reverse course and start selling assets for futures - rebuilding in the wake of a few much needed playoff appearances - and I don't think the team is going to decline much, if at all, as is being projected, but at the same time it's hard to credit Shapiro with much at this point - aside from the ability to schmooze himself into position.
  10. Thanks. http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/blue-jays-identity-crisis-could-lead-to-end-of-short-lived-toronto-renaissance/ I think he's overstating his case - as critics tend to - in expecting the Jays to regress to .500 mark, and expecting the pitching staff to regress as well. I can't quite make sense of his analytics around Morales which expects worse production from him in Toronto than in Kansas City. Not sure how that adds up, but the authority with which people make predictions like this is fairly dishonest imo. I get his criticism - that the team doesn't appear to be going all-in, nor are they selling off aging assets and rebuilding - which he calls a rigid mentality - but I think the rigid mentality might be his own. It's so in vogue these days to expect all teams to go hard one way or the other. How horrible would the professional leagues be if they all divided into groups of all-in contenders on the one hand, and liquidating rebuilders looking to dump all their aging assets on the other? The opposite of competitive parity, the leagues would be full of disparity and terrible matchups. I have literally no interest in watching a MLB or NHL with half the teams fielding bottom feeder lineups - and the more and more popular mentality that expects an absolute either/or approach to team-building has gotten really carried away imo. The Jays may (or may not) have a slightly lesser lineup this coming season than they had last year - assuming Morales is a relative downgrade on EE, however, that aside, it's pretty odd to argue that they're a .500 team overnight, whose small resurgence is now a closing window. That's just way too dramatic imo - and I'm not really a fan of Shapiro, so I agree with some points made about the odd approach taken to negotiations with EE - but I think this critic might be outsmarting himself trying to hinge so much regression on the Morales vs EE impact. For me, the potential of the pitching staff to be improved is as possible as regression - I don't mind the departure of Dickey and am just as comfortable with their rotation having Liriano in a depth spot and three of their key young arms a year more developed. I don't see any reason for their to be much age related decline in JD or TT, and JB and UptonJr aren't really core pieces, they're complementary players. The team hasn't really downgraded as significantly as suggested - they may not keep pace with Boston or Cleveland, but at the same time, playoff series are a mere best of seven, and there's no real reason the Jays can't be in a playoff race again this year.
  11. Where is that quote from? "his aggregate line of .263/.327/.468 was a more modest 10 percent better than league average on a park-adjusted basis, placing him in the same company as Brad Miller, Cesar Hernandez, Martin Prado and J.T. Realmuto ... except, again, with no complementary skills. Projection systems only see things getting worse from here." those two bolded parts are what raise my doubts about the 'authority' to reduce players in the present - and the future - particularly when 'analysts' purport to "adjust" their production - in this case based on a single factor ("park-adjusted"). Honestly, that stuff always smells. I find it curious - how exactly Morales production would be adjusted negatively - as a result of playing in Kansas / Kauffman. Hernandez, Prado and Realmuto....really? Smells like trolling to me tbh. wRC+ = weighted runs created + smells like some delta-corse, hero-chart kinda material that may outsmart itself and us in the process. I simply can't buy this stuff. Takes an awful lot of "adjusting" to wind a player like Morales up and put him beside guys with over 600 ab, less than 10 hr, and 39 or 48 RBIs. Am I missing something? sounds kinda like 'Jaysarmy' to me.
  12. I'll trust him over you any and every time.
  13. oh look at that - Vanuckles doesn't watch the games, doesn't listen to Dan Murphy.
  14. http://www.fangraphs.com/community/complete-outfield-dimensions/
  15. It's size. Larger field means that yes, teams will hit for better average - fielders have more space to cover (tend to have to play deeper), hitters have more space to put the ball in play. Kaufman has the largest outfield in MLB. The counterpoint is fewer home runs. Part of the equation is that the Royals build a team to suit their home field (speed and average) but the reason they don't build a power hitting team is that it would be a misfit for their stadium.
  16. 28-3 and snow ruins the reception on the satellite dish. Missed the rest of the game. Divine intervention. Got to watch the best part. That dive - and then the look on Brady's face after that pick 6 = priceless. Thing about early leads in football - when it's 28-3 you have to treat it like you need two more touchdowns. Kept checking in online and.... Reminds me of the 1984 Grey Cup. Hamilton got out to an early 17-0 lead and the guy I'd made a bet with phoned me, gloating and asking me if I wanted to pay the $20 now or later. That one wound up 47-17 Winnipeg. Seen so many comebacks over the years, enough to know that you never know.
  17. Yeah, he made his choice to accurately assess the icicles that Shapkins were dangling.
  18. oldnews

    Tennis

    I was happy to see Federer win - but the idea that he's 5yrs older is irrelevent. The playing field needs to be level regardless of any natural advantage a player might have due to age or other factor.
  19. oldnews

    Tennis

    Right to the bittersweet end. Surprised that one didn't go longer tbh. Didn't think Federer had a hope in hell after being broke to start the 5th, and then blowing a handful of break points to go down 2-0.... Epic pushback against a guy that defines compete-level. I suppose it didn't hurt that Federer had the extra day of rest/recovery. At a tournament as outstanding as the AO, that's something that shouldn't happen imo. Both semis should be on the same day.
  20. water under the bridge, but I think you've oversimplified the story. if you find that soothing, great, but personally, I'm not looking forward to the showdowns with EE, and I think it played out just as Jays management scripted it. When they had the chance to circle back, they chose the pick did they not? That's how I see it and I don't blame EE a bit for testing the market - it just happened to turn out that the draft pick compensation got in his way where lesser players have cashed in more deeply. as for people not understanding the criticisms of Jays management - I didn't like the way Shapiro schmoozed himself in the door - not a fan - don't mind Atkins really - but before we start crediting them for much it'll take something to convince me they are the architects of any of this team's success. I found the fact they considered Stroman ready to be an ace alarming to be honest - and I'm not surprised in the least by the results of that. Thankfully Happ bailed them out. Again, this offseason is lined with promises of a culture change - but I haven't seen much aside from the addition of a left-handed power bat at first base. I don't have any real problems with what they've done, but at the same time am not particularly impressed either. Bottom line imo - the team is still coasting on the foundation that pre-dated Shapiro - once we see some actual, significant changes and different results, there's not much praise due imo.
×
×
  • Create New...