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

baumerman77

Members
  • Posts

    2,221
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by baumerman77

  1. I agree that he performed very well in the USHL, but it is difficult to judge players out of the USHL. And I don't think he was a bad pick, I just think there were 2 defenseman and 2-3 forwards who would have been better picks. That being said, I will be very interested in how he performs at the NCAA level next year. I think that will really clarify the type of player we got.
  2. I have a feeling a few fans on this site really want to win and have good "character". Yet, they can barely skate should Benning sign them? The point is skill is what matters the most plain and simple. You can't teach it at the point of the draft, you can fine tune it. Character can be developed through culture. To tell you the truth Virtanen doesn't scream character to me, neither does Lucic who Benning went hard after, not to mention Benning seems to want to move out a couple of our players with a lot of character -- Bieksa and Lack. When a prospect pool is lacking high end talent you swing for the fences, especially with a guy like Kylington or even Roy on the board (also a few quality CHL forwards).
  3. Long enough for him to not sign with us and go to another team.
  4. This tool echoes Canucks Army cohort success model: http://www.theprojectionproject.com/Home/Search Big risk on upside by Benning. Can't help but think there were less risky players with higher upside still available.
  5. http://canucksarmy.com/2015/6/26/first-look-canucks-draft-brock-boeser-23rd-overall About 27% of Boeser's draft season comparables went on to play in the NHL. Of those 27%on average they scored 35 points per 82 game season.
  6. Did he just say "I just try to be the great guy I am"?
  7. Decent pick. Next two years of development will be critical.
  8. Nobody is bashing Virtanen. People are discussing the selection. Even the most die-hard Ehlers/Nylander fans aren't mad at Virtanen, if anything they are upset with Benning for making the pick. And this type of discussion is kind of the point of these forums...
  9. I think you are misunderstanding the nature of predictions. This talk of "escape routes" and "leaving outs" doesn't make sense. Only a fool would claim that the could absolutely predict a players potential. Prediction is based in probability. That is why they use language such as "most likely" or "unlikely". Like I said prior, Horvat's production as an NHL player will not prove CA correct or incorrect. I think you may be missing this point. Because of this, there really isn't a reason for them to create "outs" as you claim. I am not saying statistical analysis is the "end all be all". I think any good scouting model should contain both statistical and observational/qualitative data. The problem with the latter type of information is that it is not codified to the point where it can be measured reliably. For example, how can we tell if prospect A hits a little bit harder than prospect B? Maybe some scouts say he does maybe some say he doesn't. However if we can fairly certainly figure out which one hits more (even if hitting harder is more important) because the data is more reliable. Other significant aspects of the game also suffer from this unreliability; heart, leadership, compete level, etc. It is not that they are unimportant but rather the data is hard to compare (does Toews or Crosby have more "heart"). Yes, these things matter but the reason why it is difficult to place faith in these measures when they aren't systematically and rigorously outlined. And yes you can plug anything you want into a model.
  10. His NHL performance doesn't influence whether or not CA's probability prediction was accurate or inaccurate. For example, he could become the best player in the NHL and that would not mean that CA's probability prediction was wrong.
  11. So are you saying that you thought Horvat was more likely to be a 1C or 2C over a 3C or 4C? It wasn't just Canucks Army who projected that. Most scouts at the 2013 draft also projected him as most likely a 3C. What reasons/evidence do you have for thinking he would likely be better than 3C?
  12. I agree with this analysis. Next year will be very important in terms of Horvat's development. The thing I am most interest to see is where his even strength shooting percentage ends up. He had a very high even strength shooting percentage at 14.63%. That is very high and is very likely to regress if he shot at a normal 10% he would have scored 8 even strength goals this year vs the 12 goals that he did score. For those who don't know, shooting percentage is highly influenced by luck and randomness, that is to say that a large component of it is not a repeatable skill. In this regard if I had to guess I would say Horvat was "lucky" and next year we will see a regression in his shooting percentage (which will likely result in a similar goal total because he will likely see an increase in playing time). However, Horvat could be an outlier who actually does normally produce a shooting percentage of 14% at even strength which I am really hoping for. Virtanen I think had the opposite shooting percentage than Horvat this year. I believe he suffered an unsustainably low shooting percentage that will regress up next year (to be fair in his draft year his shooting percentage was likely unsustainably high). However, I don't have any data to back-up this position with Virtanen. It is more speculation on my part.
  13. I believe they will come out with a confidence interval on their new Prospect Cohort Success Model once they finish tweaking it. It is still in its infancy so I am fine with them using vague terminology like "most likely" because I believe they are basing that on the empirical data of their model (perhaps later when it is more developed they will get more specific). As a side note, Drance is still fairly active on Canucks Army. I would love to know how people on CDC arrive upon their projections and probabilities of players' success/potential. I am sure the vast majority do not employ a model of any sort, and certainly not a model that is rigorous to the point codifying it. If anyone has such a model that projects Horvat to most likely a first or second line center I would love to see your methodology. I suspect most people claiming that Horvat projects into a top 2 line center are basing it on anecdotal evidence and wishful thinking.
  14. Here is a quote you just happened to leave out: "It's not that I don't think that guys like Bo Horvat, Brenden Gaunce, and Hunter Shinkaruk can't or won't turn into useful NHL players; it's just that we need to establish what are reasonable expectations for these players moving forward." Or your quote that you provided: "For Horvat, the most likely route his career takes sees him topping out as a decent 3rd line C, scoring in the mid-40s in points just once or twice, and finishing his career having played for 4 or 5 different teams. Even then, he probably won't be ready to step into that 3rd line role and be effective for another 3-4 years after this one." Saying most likely is a lot different than your claim that they stated "he would never be an impact player". Once again when it comes to prospects it is about probability. As I suspected, they never made an absolutest judgement as you claimed, rather they speculated on what is his most probable projection based on comparables.
  15. Do you have an example of anyone from the analytics community say this. I find it very unlikely that anyone who performs analytics would pass such absolutest judgement on a player who is only 19.
  16. I agree with this. A lot of cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias going on here. The odd thing is if you look over in the McCann thread most people are excited and applauding his season based on statistical output but when it comes to Virtanen vs Ehlers/Nylander it is all about hitting, physicality, speed, etc.
  17. Yes, I think it would include Buffalo. However, I think his Boston record holds more weight for two reasons: 1) if drafting is in fact skill driven (as opposed to luck) one would expect a person, Benning, to get better at it as his experience increases - which certainly is not the case with Benning. 2) one would expect Bennings clout -that is his ability to actualize his draft preferences- to also increase over time and experience (Boston said they brought him in because of his scouting/player development experience). Thus we would expect Benning to have more say in who was drafted in Boston than he did in Buffalo.
  18. I'm not sure if they think he is a drafting/scouting savior. They might have said that others believe that to be the case. They tend to base their opinions on empirical data and Benning's weak drafting record in Boston I don't think would inspire confidence.
  19. I didn't base my opinion on that article. And I know everyone wants to think that Horvat can be a top 6 (even next year) but it is far too early to conclude that.
  20. I thought Virtanen was the better pick going into last year's draft. If we could redo the draft after this year I would probably select one of Nylander or Ehlers. Hopefully next year at this time I am back to preferring the Virtanen pick.
  21. Some Virtanen fans won't like this.. http://canucksarmy.com/2015/6/19/benning-s-year-1-report-card-part-3-2014-draft-revisited
  22. Even though I think another year of junior is better for Virtanen, I kind of hope it isn't with the Hitmen (despite me losing my opportunity to watch them) or at least not with their same playing style as they had this year. Too often Virtanen would come back and carry the puck from his own blue line into the offensive zone (through means I discussed in my earlier post). The reason they let Virtanen do this is because he has a skill (and speed) advantage in the WHL. In the NHL, this role would be the his center's job. The two zone entries Virtanen does not do often are 1) a blue line pass just prior to entering the offensive zone. This makes sense to a degree because normally center's make this pass to wingers. And 2) a hard dump in along the boards to the far side. Virtanen likely doesn't do this that often because he knows he has a good shot at regaining or keeping possession himself with the zone entries as I previously outlined. Personally I want Virtanen to play with a pure play-making centerman (in junior and at the NHL level). Virtanen's game is a very simple north-south game. He shouldn't be carrying the puck through the neutral zone, he should be getting open and gaining speed to receive an entry pass. Moreover, Virtanen doesn't have the play-making that would be best utilized by a puck carrier. The idea fit for Virtanen in the future would be to play with a possession dominate, pass first (pass second, shoot third) centerman like Henrik Sedin (he would also benefit from the other winger being a decent playmaker). I don't see Horvat (or any of our other center prospects being that high-end play-maker that would be best to optimize Virtanen's skill-set. I know we aren't in the position to grab him, but a guy like Barzal would be a perfect fit. Often times I think elite play-makers are under appreciated (perhaps not in Vancouver) in their ability to squeeze production out of subpar players. Now two guys who don't necessarily have elite skill sets but the next tier down respectively (Barzal and Virtanen) when perfectly complemented like these two are could create an elite pair (that is the whole would be greater than the sum of the parts).
  23. Some observations on Virtanen's season and moving forward. Like many of you, I have watched Virtanen play in the WJC, televised junior games, and the AHL playoffs. However, I have also watched him play live in about 25 Hitmen games (about 10 last year and 15 this year). Most of the prevailing narrative is also what I experienced; he plays physical (most of the time even when he is not scoring), he is very fast and very strong, he still take bad penalties from time to time, and he has a great shot. To be honest, I thought he improved this year and did not stall as his PPG may lead some to believe. I think that last year he shot at an unsustainable high shooting percentage which inflated his goals (45) and this year he shot at an unsustainable low shooting percentage. I expect this to regress to a norm as shooting percentage does. Virtanen was invisible at times (sometimes a period or two) even when I was trying to watch for him (including both a lack of physical play and offense). This isn't a huge knock as many junior players fall prey to this. As many of you know I was a very vocal supporter of Virtanen on CDC going into last years draft. I still like him very much, but I do not think in any way he should be in the NHL next year. Typically with power forwards, which Virtanen most certainly is, they take longer to emerge in the NHL. Much of this is because the size advantage (and in Virtanen's case also his speed) is largely washed out at the NHL level. Take for example his zone entries; Virtanen either does a light chip around the Dman and tries to sneak around him to regain possession or go through him. His other zone entry is to keep the puck to the outside, shield it by lowering his inside shoulder and power around the defender. Both of these zone entries are rarely seen in the NHL by any player due to the size and skill of NHL defenders. It will be difficult for Virtanen to utilize these entries at any point in his career. I would expect his performance, if Benning kept him next year, to be like his AHL playoffs. A little bit of offence and an average amount of physical play (likely less of both because the NHL is stronger, faster, and more skilled). I think his development would greatly benefit from one more year of junior; he would be able to play over 20 minutes a game, he would take on a leadership role, he would play in all situations (perhaps most importantly the PK), he would be a leader, be a top 6 forward at the WJC, he could work on his discipline and dominate the WHL. I believe this would be much better than him playing a bottom 6 role (likely fourth line) on the Canucks next year (and don't forget burn a year of his ELC when he isn't a big contributor). I know everyone is excited about our young guys and want them in the lineup as soon as possible. But with Virtanen another year in junior (and likely start the next year in the AHL) would be what is best for the Canucks. We can be excited for guys like Baertschi and maybe Shinkaruk and Gaunce next year.
  24. There is exactly a 0% chance Barzal drops to 20th.
  25. I really hope he goes back to junior next year. He plays a simple north-south game and he relies on his speed, strength and shot to be successful (typical powerforward). However his size and speed gap over the competition will shrink in the NHL. He needs time to get even bigger and even stronger that is why it typically takes power forwards longer to develop. One more year in junior will allow him the time to get bigger and fast, but it will also allow him to improve his defensive game and take a leadership role not only with the Hitmen but also with team canada at the WJC.
×
×
  • Create New...