aGENT Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 You're correct, my mistake. I strongly believe Benning thinks highly of himself as a scout and judge of talent and thus he is going to be much more likely to give his prospects breaks that others may not get. And of course he will likely be more willing to trade Gillis' prospects. I think that's a load of horse manure. His ability to assess players will trump wherever they came from. He's a Canuck now, they're all his players until they aren't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucks Curse Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 If Lucic signs here, shinker falls even further down the depth chart unless they play him on his off wing Sedin Sedin Lucic Beartschi Horvat Burrows Shinker Sutter Hansen Gaunce Cassels Dorsett Kenins, Vey, virtanen? That's a log jam for sure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
messier's_elbow Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 If Lucic signs here, shinker falls even further down the depth chart unless they play him on his off wing Sedin Sedin Lucic Beartschi Horvat Burrows Shinker Sutter Hansen Gaunce Cassels Dorsett Kenins, Vey, virtanen? That's a log jam for sureThe good kind of logjam. We want internal competition it means our team doesn't suck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumerman77 Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 I think people are misunderstanding my point. I'm not saying Benning will/has given up on Gillis' prospects or will cast them aside just to spite Gillis. Rather I'm saying he'll favour his own prospects. I'm shocked that people don't agree with that. I wish he or GM could be so rational as to objectively judge talent evenly. Alas, psychology paints a different picture with confirmation bias (favoring his own prospects) and out group bias (not favoring gillis prospects). There is definitely a qualitative difference between players that an old GM brought in and players a new GM has aquired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derp... Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 Can Kenins play RW? What about Grenier, we are going to have so many guys ready in the next 2 years it's going to be interesting to see what happens. I hope Shink can bring his game to the next level and force his way onto the roster. He needs to be around PPG this year in the AHL if he wants to project as a top 6 player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winthecup Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 http://blogs.theprovince.com/2015/09/07/canucks-young-stars-who-are-these-guys-hunter-shinkaruk/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter With the Young Stars Classic getting rolling this week, let’s keep looking at some of the young men involved. We opened with Brendan Gaunce on Wednesday, then there was a look at Ben Hutton; today it’s Hunter Shinkaruk. Scouting: Shinkaruk was seen by some as having top-10 draft potential in 2013, but slid all the way to the Canucks’ at 23rd overall. He was one of the oldest players in his draft cohort. He had a sparkling 2011-12, scoring 49 goals. His draft season, 2012-13, wasn’t as high-powered: “just” 37 goals for Medicine Hat. No matter what, the kid has hands. His 2013-14 season was slowed by a major hip operation. He was injured early in the season, tried to play through the hip problem in hopes of making the World Junior team, didn’t and then went under the knife. He was off skates for half of 2014, slowing his transition to the AHL. There’s plenty of evidence showing he was a victim of bad shooting luck in the first half in Utica. He played mostly third-line minutes under Travis Green, but showed flashes of his skill when finally lined up with slick-passing veteran centre Cal O’Reilly: he bagged 9 goals in his final 16 games. In the playoffs he was back to a grinding role and his output suffered. ESPN scouting guru Corey Pronman rates Shinkaruk 74th on his top 100 prospects going into the season, noting his high end skill but also worries about how he’ll handle the even-more physical rigour of the NHL. What should get Canucks fans excited: The Canucks system has a good number of guys who can play solid hockey, but few with high-end potential. Shinkaruk’s one of the few. He’s likely to get plenty of ice time in Utica, where he can showcase his talents. Why Canucks fans should worry: While he’s built like a bull, he did have trouble adjusting to playing against men last season in the AHL. Can his body hold up to the pounding at the AHL level, let alone the NHL level? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumerman77 Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 I'm fairly optimistic about Shinkaruk this year. He's going to have a top 6 role in Utica and will likely be on the 1st unit powerplay. Last season as a young rookie, he scored 20 goals on 200 shots in 97 games. That shooting a 10% which is likely going to increase this season (I would expect). He average 2 shots per game which is very good for a +2 season in the AHL. I'm hoping he can improve his shoots per game to over 2.5 and increase his goal per game from .2 to .4 which I don't think is unrealistic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyCuddles Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 Can Kenins play RW? What about Grenier, we are going to have so many guys ready in the next 2 years it's going to be interesting to see what happens. I hope Shink can bring his game to the next level and force his way onto the roster. He needs to be around PPG this year in the AHL if he wants to project as a top 6 player. I thought we all agreed 2-3 points per game is the standard for Prospects in the AHL? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davinci Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 http://blogs.theprovince.com/2015/09/07/canucks-young-stars-who-are-these-guys-hunter-shinkaruk/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter built like a bull.... BAHAHA. more like a squirrel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkyard Dog Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 I think people are misunderstanding my point. I'm not saying Benning will/has given up on Gillis' prospects or will cast them aside just to spite Gillis. Rather I'm saying he'll favour his own prospects. I'm shocked that people don't agree with that. I wish he or GM could be so rational as to objectively judge talent evenly. Alas, psychology paints a different picture with confirmation bias (favoring his own prospects) and out group bias (not favoring gillis prospects). There is definitely a qualitative difference between players that an old GM brought in and players a new GM has aquired. I disagree with that. I see no favoritism whatsoever. Nothing he has done has pointed to favoritism but in fact almost the opposite. The only way he will not favor prospects and young players of the previous regime is if said players do not fit his criteria of how he wants the new core to be. You can be damn sure if certain prospects and young players do not fit his criteria that he will sit down with them and try to discuss how to adjust their game to fit their criteria of how he wants the new core to be. He has done that with Kassian and Jensen so far that we know He got rid of his own player(Clendening) which gave a Gillis player (Corrado) more of a guarantee to make the team. Signed a few of Gillis's prospects. If anything Gillis left a bunch of players that already fit Benning's criteria and Benning is just building on the group of young players that Gillis left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derp... Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 I thought we all agreed 2-3 points per game is the standard for Prospects in the AHL? It is it is, but considering he had a below average start to his AHL career in terms of the cohort that generally shows top 6 upside > 0.7 ppg in 154 games or less He's going to need to up his total points by the end of the year to 108 to get above .7 that means going from 31 points to 77 in his next 80 AHL games. Also he played a total of 97 AHL games this year! That's ridiculous finished with 20 Goals and 17 Assists if you include playoffs. To put it in perspective Grenier has 82 points in 135 regular season AHL games for 0.61 PPG. When you include his playoff performance this year, it totals 97 points in 158 games, still 0.6. They have had very different development paths, but there is a good challenge in front of Shinky this year. He can be the top prospect for the Canucks at this time next summer with a great year, I think he can do it. I like to see him get 250 shots this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crabcakes Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 I think people are misunderstanding my point. I'm not saying Benning will/has given up on Gillis' prospects or will cast them aside just to spite Gillis. Rather I'm saying he'll favour his own prospects. I'm shocked that people don't agree with that. I wish he or GM could be so rational as to objectively judge talent evenly. Alas, psychology paints a different picture with confirmation bias (favoring his own prospects) and out group bias (not favoring gillis prospects). There is definitely a qualitative difference between players that an old GM brought in and players a new GM has aquired. I agree that one almost expects this to happen but until you see examples, why even bring it up? You're calling into question Bennings character based on nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nave Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 I think people are misunderstanding my point. I'm not saying Benning will/has given up on Gillis' prospects or will cast them aside just to spite Gillis. Rather I'm saying he'll favour his own prospects. I'm shocked that people don't agree with that. I wish he or GM could be so rational as to objectively judge talent evenly. Alas, psychology paints a different picture with confirmation bias (favoring his own prospects) and out group bias (not favoring gillis prospects). There is definitely a qualitative difference between players that an old GM brought in and players a new GM has aquired.I get what you mean but that's more true for other sports, like the NFL (because players must fit the scheme). He has been complimentary of players that Gillis drafted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumerman77 Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 I disagree with that. I see no favoritism whatsoever. Nothing he has done has pointed to favoritism but in fact almost the opposite. The only way he will not favor prospects and young players of the previous regime is if said players do not fit his criteria of how he wants the new core to be. You can be damn sure if certain prospects and young players do not fit his criteria that he will sit down with them and try to discuss how to adjust their game to fit their criteria of how he wants the new core to be. He has done that with Kassian and Jensen so far that we know He got rid of his own player(Clendening) which gave a Gillis player (Corrado) more of a guarantee to make the team. Signed a few of Gillis's prospects. If anything Gillis left a bunch of players that already fit Benning's criteria and Benning is just building on the group of young players that Gillis left. Like I said earlier, to look at results now would be biased (There are more "Gillis' prospects" than "Benning prospects" so of course it will be biased). I could say that Corrado didn't play as many games this year as under Gillis last year (largely due to Clendenning being used instead). Or I could mention that Markstrom played the same amount of games (actually one more with Gillis and he was left as the defacto backup by Gillis). But like I said, it is far too early point examples because they will bias Gillis' prospect due to the shear number of them. But I completely agree with your point about Benning's criteria (and perhaps you were able to communicate that point better than I was). Benning knows his players fit his criteria (he drafted/acquired them), but he isn't sure if Gillis' prospects meet his criteria. This is a big part of what I am saying. He's already invested in his players (confirmation bias) whereas Gillis' players he feels less allegiance towards and thus they have to prove themselves to him. I'm reminded of a study in psychology where they divided participants into two groups: one group's participants get $20 for nothing and the other group's participants have to perform a small task in exchange for $20. After, they tempt both groups' participants into buying some small items. They find that those who worked for the money were less likely to part with it even though on the face the value ($20) was the exact same amount. The researchers concluded (and these types of studies have been replicated) that people value things they work for more. I believe certain aspect of this applies to my point. Benning put effort into accumulating his prospects and in contrast he just received Gillis' prospects. Even though their utility should be assessed by their skill (or the face value of the $20 bill) underlying mechanisms, mainly confirmation bias, should lead Benning to value his own prospects in a different way. I agree that one almost expects this to happen but until you see examples, why even bring it up? You're calling into question Bennings character based on nothing. I don't think it is just Benning. I think most new GMs like their own guys. And like I said it is at least a year perhaps two years too early for examples (some questions can be asked and debated even before data are available, I don't think that is a reason to sit in silence). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucky Day Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 too many brackets there, makes it a choppy read hey, but good points Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robongo Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 Was posted recently by Shink Some good company there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rollieo Del Fuego Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 Shinkaruk's top 10 goals highlight package has him scoring 5 or 6 of them on a "fake shot to back hand top shelf" move. Kid likes his backhand....me too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Bang Boogie Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 Was posted recently by Shink Some good company there It would be interesting to see how Shink kept up with the other guys there. Can someone name all of them? I only recognize Crosby, Mackinnon, Skinner, Brad Richards?, Tyson Barrie (?), James Van Riemsdyk and Kyle Okposo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SamJamIam Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 I think people are misunderstanding my point. I'm not saying Benning will/has given up on Gillis' prospects or will cast them aside just to spite Gillis. Rather I'm saying he'll favour his own prospects. I'm shocked that people don't agree with that. I wish he or GM could be so rational as to objectively judge talent evenly. Alas, psychology paints a different picture with confirmation bias (favoring his own prospects) and out group bias (not favoring gillis prospects). There is definitely a qualitative difference between players that an old GM brought in and players a new GM has aquired. Confirmation bias requires a decision be made between 2 options at a specific point in time. Benning was not in MG's situation since Boston picked at different times in the draft. It's perfectly likely that Benning liked our players but simply was at a different draft position. If JB was picking for us in 2013, he may very well have picked the same guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumerman77 Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 Confirmation bias requires a decision be made between 2 options at a specific point in time. Benning was not in MG's situation since Boston picked at different times in the draft. It's perfectly likely that Benning liked our players but simply was at a different draft position. If JB was picking for us in 2013, he may very well have picked the same guys. Confirmation bias does not require a decision to be made a specific point in time. Rather it is just simply one biasing their previously held beliefs, it doesn't necessarily require action. I did not say that confirmation bias has anything to do with Benning disliking Gillis' prospects, rather that Benning's would think highly of his own prospects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.