[Article] Offseason grades from the Athletic

[The_Rocket]

Full article here

 

drance and Dayal grading the whole off season. Full article posted in the next comment, but I encourage you to read it from the source. 
 

my biggest disagreements:

 

D grade for the Poolman signing; I think he is better than either writer is giving credit

 

C grade for Schmidt trade: the player had a bad season then asked out and was flexing is M-NTC. Getting any kind of return is a huge win considering the contract 

 

and D+ for the OEL deal: it’s weird how they have the trade itself a b+ (about right) but then gave OEL a D+. Doesn’t make sense. 
 

Edit:

 

forgot to mention, grading the Hughes and Pettersson contracts a D-minus when the haven’t even signed yet makes no sense. They should have just waited until after they signed to write the article

Edited September 15, 2021 by The_Rocket

[Alflives]

Two guys pretending to be hockey experts, who never played.  

And remember Drance is the idiot who is 110% a Dubass fan. 

Edited September 15, 2021 by Alflives

[73 Percent]

Hating on the Canucks. Cool since 2012.

[canucklehead44]

25 minutes ago, The_Rocket said:

Full article here

 

drance and Dayal grading the whole off season. Full article posted in the next comment, but I encourage you to read it from the source. 
 

my biggest disagreements:

 

D grade for the Poolman signing; I think he is better than either writer is giving credit

 

C grade for Schmidt trade: the player had a bad season then asked out and was flexing is M-NTC. Getting any kind of return is a huge win considering the contract 

 

and D+ for the OEL deal: it’s weird how they have the trade itself a b+ (about right) but then gave OEL a D+. Doesn’t make sense. 
 

Edit:

 

forgot to mention, grading the Hughes and Pettersson contracts a D-minus when the haven’t even signed yet makes no sense. They should have just waited until after they signed to write the article

The trade itself was pretty good but keep in mind Player Name, Beagle, Roussel all had massive negative value. Garland was a huge add and we got rid of bad contracts in the process. But long term OEL's contract is a major anchor. I get what he is saying. 

Poolman seems like a fine 6/7 guy but 4 years at 2.5 million is a lot to commit to a player like that so I don't disagree. Half the value/half the term he would have been a solid signing. I am a little less high on him than I was on Jordie Benn who got 2x2. 

[Alflives]

Just now, canucklehead44 said:

The trade itself was pretty good but keep in mind Player Name, Beagle, Roussel all had massive negative value. Garland was a huge add and we got rid of bad contracts in the process. But long term OEL's contract is a major anchor. I get what he is saying. 

Poolman seems like a fine 6/7 guy but 4 years at 2.5 million is a lot to commit to a player like that so I don't disagree. Half the value/half the term he would have been a solid signing. I am a little less high on him than I was on Jordie Benn who got 2x2. 

Nah.  Poolman is Tanev, but younger and better.  OEL is an awesome player!  We are winning the Cup this year.  These reporters all love the Dumbass Leafs, because of fancy stats.  Now there's the joke.    

[FaninMex]

40 minutes ago, The_Rocket said:

Full article here

 

drance and Dayal grading the whole off season. Full article posted in the next comment, but I encourage you to read it from the source. 
 

my biggest disagreements:

 

D grade for the Poolman signing; I think he is better than either writer is giving credit

 

C grade for Schmidt trade: the player had a bad season then asked out and was flexing is M-NTC. Getting any kind of return is a huge win considering the contract 

 

and D+ for the OEL deal: it’s weird how they have the trade itself a b+ (about right) but then gave OEL a D+. Doesn’t make sense. 
 

Edit:

 

forgot to mention, grading the Hughes and Pettersson contracts a D-minus when the haven’t even signed yet makes no sense. They should have just waited until after they signed to write the article

It is Drance. There is nothing to read. He is about equal to Eklund. 

[Guest]

Drance was a social media guy with Florida Panthers and then went on and started boasting that he worked in the NHL as if he was a scout or something. 

 

He does good research and has good attention to detail, but his hockey knowledge and takes scream of incompetence. 

[The_Rocket]

15 minutes ago, canucklehead44 said:

The trade itself was pretty good but keep in mind Player Name, Beagle, Roussel all had massive negative value. Garland was a huge add and we got rid of bad contracts in the process. But long term OEL's contract is a major anchor. I get what he is saying. 

Poolman seems like a fine 6/7 guy but 4 years at 2.5 million is a lot to commit to a player like that so I don't disagree. Half the value/half the term he would have been a solid signing. I am a little less high on him than I was on Jordie Benn who got 2x2. 

I think you’re being a little low on Poolman here. Strong skater, good along the boards, good in-front of his own net. He makes simple plays which limit his offense but frankly the Canucks have enough offensive d-men. Poolman fits the bill for what they need. 
 

plus, his underlying numbers are pretty good as well

[VegasCanuck]

46 minutes ago, The_Rocket said:

Full article here

 

drance and Dayal grading the whole off season. Full article posted in the next comment, but I encourage you to read it from the source. 
 

my biggest disagreements:

 

D grade for the Poolman signing; I think he is better than either writer is giving credit

 

C grade for Schmidt trade: the player had a bad season then asked out and was flexing is M-NTC. Getting any kind of return is a huge win considering the contract 

 

and D+ for the OEL deal: it’s weird how they have the trade itself a b+ (about right) but then gave OEL a D+. Doesn’t make sense. 
 

Edit:

 

forgot to mention, grading the Hughes and Pettersson contracts a D-minus when the haven’t even signed yet makes no sense. They should have just waited until after they signed to write the article

I don't take their site seriously, everything they do is clickbait to try and sell subscriptions.

 

Neither one of these guys would get jobs with NHL teams, above the position of janitor.

[The_Rocket]

1 minute ago, VancouverHabitant said:

Drance was a social media guy with Florida Panthers and then went on and started boasting that he worked in the NHL as if he was a scout or something. 

 

He does good research and has good attention to detail, but his hockey knowledge and takes scream of incompetence. 

Sometimes it feels like he is borrowing his opinions from others instead of developing his own thoughts. I like the Vancast and I like some of his work, but he will often find someone’s opinion and stick to it. His Poolman take is, in my mind, a good example of this

[Angry Goose]

Looking forward to how things actually play out on the ice.  Hopefully these are just terrible takes/grades given out.  Don't mind Drance but would also love to see him eat Doo Doo on these.

[JM_]

34 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Nah.  Poolman is Tanev, but younger and better.  OEL is an awesome player!  We are winning the Cup this year.  These reporters all love the Dumbass Leafs, because of fancy stats.  Now there's the joke.    

funny thing is, one of the biggest fancy stats groups Evolving Hockey, put Poolmans appropriate next deal value at 2.4 mil. 

[JM_]

1 hour ago, The_Rocket said:

forgot to mention, grading the Hughes and Pettersson contracts a D-minus when the haven’t even signed yet makes no sense. They should have just waited until after they signed to write the article

how do you grade something that hasn't happened yet? 

[J-Dizzle]

1 hour ago, The_Rocket said:

Full article here

 

drance and Dayal grading the whole off season. Full article posted in the next comment, but I encourage you to read it from the source. 
 

my biggest disagreements:

 

D grade for the Poolman signing; I think he is better than either writer is giving credit

 

C grade for Schmidt trade: the player had a bad season then asked out and was flexing is M-NTC. Getting any kind of return is a huge win considering the contract 

 

and D+ for the OEL deal: it’s weird how they have the trade itself a b+ (about right) but then gave OEL a D+. Doesn’t make sense. 
 

Edit:

 

forgot to mention, grading the Hughes and Pettersson contracts a D-minus when the haven’t even signed yet makes no sense. They should have just waited until after they signed to write the article

I give their ability to assess an off-season an F

 

 

[King Heffy]

Drance is an analytics dweeb who wouldn't know a puck if it hit him in the face.  His opinion has precisely zero value.

[King Heffy]

6 minutes ago, JM_ said:

how do you grade something that hasn't happened yet? 

I grade whoever Drance loses his virginity to a D-.

[JM_]

5 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

I grade whoever Drance loses his virginity to a D-.

[Goal:thecup]

So Big Jim signs an under 30, 6 foot 4, 216 pound ("that's measured", "he's what you want" - Dan Darazio, BC Lions), .228 points per game, free agent, right side defenseman to a 4 x 2.5m deal and gets a failing grade?

[Gawdzukes]

I haven't even read the article but much like Drance with hockey I'm going to go ahead and give it a D-

 

Oh yeah, my assessment is based on analytics!

 

 

Edited September 15, 2021 by Gawdzukes

[The_Rocket]

58 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

Drance is an analytics dweeb who wouldn't know a puck if it hit him in the face.  His opinion has precisely zero value.

Funny thing is, he hates Poolman because of his analytics, but Poolman’s D-zone analytics are actually quite good. He’s one of those players that is good defensively, poor offensively. The eye test, the stat sheet, and the analytics show this. 
 

I honestly do not understand the hate for Poolman that many media members give him