[Signing] Canucks sign Carson Soucy

[Gawdzukes]

1 hour ago, shiznak said:

 

It isn’t, but it gives you in an unbiased view of a player. 
 

People suggesting Soucy is a better fit in our top 4, when neither players has ever played in the top 4 throughout their careers. Every micro/advance stats in the book suggests Burroughs is an equal player. 
 

I actually do watch both players. I’m curious to see why people think Soucy is a better fit on our top 4? While providing hard evidence.

 

Not “you just need to watch them play”.

I see Soucy stepping up physically, being in control, and very hard to play against. He provides positive value more often than not when he's on the ice and helps create offence. I see Burroughs try hard but he's always a step behind and has a lot of trouble making good hockey IQ plays. As a result we end up scored on or running around in our own end half of the game. Burroughs adds nothing offensively or towards tilting the ice in our favor.

 

Soucy has a far better understanding of time and space and what he himself is able to accomplish without doing too much. He understands his limitations, is confident, and he has over 250 games of experience to Burroughs 95. Burroughs looks like a kid in the candy store just happy to be out there playing. In addition, he probably got into 30 games this year simply due to us not having any other options.

 

It seemed to me Soucy took on a tonne more responsibility in Seattle, and Minny, and played in top 4 situations all the time, where as Burroughs was a guy forced into the line-up that played when there were no other options.

 

It seems blatantly obvious to me if you watch them play who I would choose. Not to take anything away from Burroughs. I love his attitude and compete. Soucy is just a far better, more well rounded player, with size. Again, stats are extremely limited and that's why they are no substitute for watching the games. This is a good example of that if indeed their stats are equal.

 

Edit: The biggest problem with stat watching is that for the most part they don't actually measure what people claim they do. For example sometimes letting the other team take control of the puck and reversing pressure is more advantageous than trying to waltz your way through the opposition and getting stripped as the last man back. Yet it gets recorded as a negative. Other times they call a shot on goal a high danger chance when in fact the player was tied up and had zero chance of scoring. Until they actually break down every play and analyze it on it's own merits the cumulative results we see now are overly simplistic and often not representative, and therefore pretty useless. NHL teams actually keep track of more detailed stuff like this and don't use the simple advanced stats we as fans have access to. As a fan who watches the games this is basically what we're doing by keeping our own more detailed, more meaningful statistical analysis.

 

https://thehockeynews.com/news/secret-formula-analytics-in-the-nhl

Edited July 4, 2023 by Gawdzukes

[IBatch]

2 hours ago, shiznak said:

I don’t see how Soucy is a borderline top 4B/5A, when analytically he and Burroughs has the same statistics, defensively. Soucy also has never played in the top 4 in either Minnesota or Seattle averaging 30 seconds per game against elite competition in his career. While Burroughs averages about the same as Soucy (he actually averages .02 seconds higher), in his short NHL career. 
 

If you compare both players on natural stat trick, this season. They pretty much have an identical advance stats, with Soucy being the better offensive defensemen.

Did you use your eyeballs, assuming you watched us play a top 4 defensive team in the league at the time,  during bubble?  I sure did.   He was noticeably bothering our mojo.   Burroughs.   To me he's just another Stetcher, lots of heart.   But not really a guy we should be getting attached to.    Can't we just be happy that our D got better? 

[Pears]

24 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

I see Soucy stepping up physically, being in control, and very hard to play against. He provides positive value more often than not when he's on the ice and helps create offence. I see Burroughs try hard but he's always a step behind and has a lot of trouble making good hockey IQ plays. As a result we end up scored on or running around in our own end half of the game. Burroughs adds nothing offensively or towards tilting the ice in our favor.

 

Soucy has a far better understanding of time and space and what he himself is able to accomplish without doing too much. He understands his limitations, is confident, and he has over 250 games of experience to Burroughs 95. Burroughs looks like a kid in the candy store just happy to be out there playing. In addition, he probably got into 30 games this year simply due to us not having any other options.

 

It seemed to me Soucy took on a tonne more responsibility in Seattle, and Minny, and played in top 4 situations all the time, where as Burroughs was a guy forced into the line-up that played when there were no other options.

 

It seems blatantly obvious to me if you watch them play who I would choose. Not to take anything away from Burroughs. I love his attitude and compete. Soucy is just a far better, more well rounded player, with size. Again, stats are extremely limited and that's why they are no substitute for watching the games. This is a good example of that if indeed their stats are equal.

People get far too attached to replacement level players simply because they’re from the lower mainland around here. Again Burroughs is a good depth piece to have, but should not get anywhere close to top four minutes on any team with playoff aspirations. 

Edited July 4, 2023 by Pears

[IBatch]

3 minutes ago, Pears said:

People get far too attached to replacement level players around here. Again Burroughs is a good depth piece to have, but should not get anywhere close to top four minutes on any team with playoff aspirations. 

Yes.   We might as well be getting upset Stillman isn't still around.   Or Hutton.  Or Robert Dirk, but at least I think he played in Kelowna. 

Edited July 4, 2023 by IBatch

[eeeeergh]

2 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Yes.   We might as well be getting upset Stillman isn't still around.   Or Hutton.  Or Robert Dirk, but at least I think he played in Kelowna. 

Personally im livid that Stillman isnt still around

 

With him in the lineup, we were trending towards a top-5 pick in the draft

 

When he left, our draft position nuked

 

And Buffalos started soaring

 

theres a lesson in that

[Bobby James]

On 7/1/2023 at 10:39 AM, aGENT said:

With the Orlov signing, CAR back end looking awfully crowded... Pesce would sure look good in that hole....

That would be great if we could grab him and resign. I wonder if they have any interest in Garland +

[Gawdzukes]

4 minutes ago, Pears said:

People get far too attached to replacement level players simply because they’re from the lower mainland around here. Again Burroughs is a good depth piece to have, but should not get anywhere close to top four minutes on any team with playoff aspirations. 

 

Exactly, I love a feel good story too and a great kid like Burroughs. However the choice between these two guys is blatantly obvious. One guy is struggling just to have NHL relevancy and we saw it for 48 games last year. He shouldn't even be getting top 6 minutes with a team who has playoff aspirations. He is lucky SJ is going full tank and he got some long-term security.

[shiznak]

1 hour ago, Gawdzukes said:

I see Soucy stepping up physically, being in control, and very hard to play against. He provides positive value more often than not when he's on the ice and helps create offence. I see Burroughs try hard but he's always a step behind and has a lot of trouble making good hockey IQ plays. As a result we end up scored on or running around in our own end half of the game. Burroughs adds nothing offensively or towards tilting the ice in our favor.

 

Soucy has a far better understanding of time and space and what he himself is able to accomplish without doing too much. He understands his limitations, is confident, and he has over 250 games of experience to Burroughs 95. Burroughs looks like a kid in the candy store just happy to be out there playing. In addition, he probably got into 30 games this year simply due to us not having any other options.

 

It seemed to me Soucy took on a tonne more responsibility in Seattle, and Minny, and played in top 4 situations all the time, where as Burroughs was a guy forced into the line-up that played when there were no other options.

 

It seems blatantly obvious to me if you watch them play who I would choose. Not to take anything away from Burroughs. I love his attitude and compete. Soucy is just a far better, more well rounded player, with size. Again, stats are extremely limited and that's why they are no substitute for watching the games. This is a good example of that if indeed their stats are equal.

Burroughs had over 25 more hits than Soucy, while playing a half of a season. Soucy also doesn’t play against elite competition, ranking last amongst Kraken’s defensemen. Borgen, a guy who played less than 20 NHL games prior, jumped pass him on the depth chart. As I mentioned, Soucy has never played in the top 4 in either cities he’s played in, aside from stepping in when an injury occurred. He’s barely even on the ice when the team is defending a one goal lead, at the end of the game. 

Burroughs and Soucy pretty much played in the same role, and both did a passable job. So, now people are assuming Soucy can take on a bigger role on our team, when he’s never done it before, better than Burroughs?

Edit: Also, “watching the game” varies from person to person. Example, if a defensemen is puck watching along the corner boards, and the opposing player freed himself, making a pass to an open man in front of the net. The defensemen makes just enough disturbance to stop them from a goal. Is that equal to a good defensive play? No, because the defensemen should always be aware of what’s going on in front of the net. 
 

ie: this play (it’s not a coincidence that this play involves Soucy, because everyone has a hard-on for his play in the bubble.)

 

Timestamp: 4:20ish.

 

 

Edited July 4, 2023 by shiznak

[shiznak]

20 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Did you use your eyeballs, assuming you watched us play a top 4 defensive team in the league at the time,  during bubble?  I sure did.   He was noticeably bothering our mojo.   Burroughs.   To me he's just another Stetcher, lots of heart.   But not really a guy we should be getting attached to.    Can't we just be happy that our D got better? 

It’s not hard to bother our mojo, when playing against the Virtanen’s, Leivo’s, Gaudette’s, Roussel’s of the world.

[Jester13]

1 hour ago, Makaramel MacKhiato said:

Soucy is such a good fit, plus he's a heavy hitter & fighter. Hronek is probably the perfect pair for him. Although, him and Myers together is a massive blue line pairing. 

There's something about having Soucy that kinda makes me want to keep Myers. Having such big bodies on the back end can make a huge difference (pun always intended). If we ride out Myers' contract this year, we can even look to sign him for another year or two but at a bottom pair level to where he should be and is worth - I'd be okay with that. 

[Gawdzukes]

2 hours ago, shiznak said:

Burroughs had over 25 more hits than Soucy, while playing a half of a season. Soucy also doesn’t play against elite competition, ranking last amongst Kraken’s defensemen. Borgen, a guy who played less than 20 NHL games prior, jumped pass him on the depth chart. As I mentioned, Soucy has never played in the top 4 in either cities he’s played in, aside from stepping in when an injury occurred. He’s barely even on the ice when the team is defending a one goal lead, at the end of the game. 

Burroughs and Soucy pretty much played in the same role, and both did a passable job. So, now people are assuming Soucy can take on a bigger role on our team, when he’s never done it before, better than Burroughs?

 

Agree to disagree. I have to wonder if you actually do watch, and if you do if you evaluate for yourself what is happening on the ice.

 

Again, there is so much more to a hockey play than whether or not you are accumulating simple shots for vs shots against stats. Every hockey play is vastly different and needs to be evaluated on it's own merits independently.

 

I don't know why you say Soucy didn't play top 4 ever as a comparison but it makes sense why you're confused then. You're are unaware of the situational realities and somewhat blindfolded by a spreadsheet. Not all bottom 2/top 4 situations are the same. Players also graduate to larger roles as they progress which is what you're seeing here. I watched quite a few Kraken games this past year and he seemed to jump on the ice and play a pivotal role throughout the game, often against top caliber players, while providing that sought after pushback and toughness. He may have been in the third slot but certainly was relied in all types of situations. Burroughs was not and shouldn't be. Soucy contributed to an incredible Seattle season and played a sizable role. Burroughs contributed to one of the worst defence performances in modern history. He played in a pinch when we were short players. Do you not see the difference?

 

Also the size difference where we all saw Burroughs struggle against bigger players.

 

That's why people believe Soucy has a far better chance at playing top 4 then Burroughs. I understand being hesitant in declaring Soucy a surefire top 4 but the difference between the two is currently night and day.

Edited July 4, 2023 by Gawdzukes

[aGENT]

2 hours ago, shiznak said:

 

It isn’t, but it gives you in an unbiased view of a player. 
 

People suggesting Soucy is a better fit in our top 4, when neither players has ever played in the top 4 throughout their careers. Every micro/advance stats in the book suggests Burroughs is an equal player. 
 

I actually do watch both players. I’m curious to see why people think Soucy is a better fit on our top 4? While providing hard evidence.

 

Not “you just need to watch them play”.

5", 15lbs, 155GP (+26 playoff), and numerous games playing 18+ minutes in a top 4 role where he didn't hurt his team. Probably due to having higher hockey IQ, puck moving ability and ability to transition the puck to offense despite being a "defensive" D.

Edited July 4, 2023 by aGENT

[canuck73_3]

1 hour ago, shiznak said:

It’s not hard to bother our mojo, when playing against the Virtanen’s, Leivo’s, Gaudette’s, Roussel’s of the world.

Defence got much better, period. Really shouldn't need to be explained to you more than @Gawdzukes has done numerous times already, and no one play in isolation from the bubble playoffs isn't the gotcha you think it is. 

[shiznak]

36 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

Agree to disagree. I have to wonder if you actually do watch, and if you do if you evaluate for yourself what is happening on the ice.

 

Again, there is so much more to a hockey play than whether or not you are accumulating simple shots for vs shots against stats. Every hockey play is vastly different and needs to be evaluated on it's own merits independently.

 

I don't know why you say Soucy didn't play top 4 ever as a comparison but it makes sense why you're confused then. You're are unaware of the situational realities and somewhat blindfolded by a spreadsheet. Not all bottom 2/top 4 situations are the same. Players also graduate to larger roles as they progress which is what you're seeing here. I watched quite a few Kraken games this past year and he seemed to jump on the ice and play a pivotal role throughout the game, often against top caliber players, while providing that sought after pushback and toughness. He may have been in the third slot but certainly was relied in all types of situations. Burroughs was not and shouldn't be. Soucy contributed to an incredible Seattle season and played a sizable role. Burroughs contributed to one of the worst defence performances in modern history. He played in a pinch when we were short players. Do you not see the difference?

 

That's why people believe Soucy has a far better chance at playing top 4 than Burroughs. I understand being hesitant in declaring Soucy a surefire top 4 but the difference between the two is currently night and day.

Puckiq is a good way of measuring players who play in pivotal roles/situations. Out of his 1034 minutes. He only played 234 of them against elite competition, ranked last amongst the Kraken’s defensemen. To put it into perspective, all of our defensemen last year, who played more than 50 games. Played more against elite competition than Soucy. He also averaged just under 15 minutes per game, at even-strength.

13 of the 79 games, he played more than 18+ minutes and only one of them was over 20 minutes. Not really an endorsing stat for a potential top 4 defensemen. 

 

Does he play against top 6 opponents, sure. But that wasn’t his role. Dunn, Larsson, Oleksiak, and Borgen did the majority of the heavy lifting for Seattle’s defensive core. No one in Krakenland is losing sleep that he’s gone.
 

Like I said, he’s a did a passable job playing in a bottom 6 role for Seattle, much like what Burroughs did for us. Not sure how well he’ll do playing in a bigger role here. I don’t expect much, though. If he was brought here to play in the bottom 6, that’s fine, but I wouldn’t have paid him 3m+ for it.

Edited July 4, 2023 by shiznak

[BC_Hawk]

30 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

Agree to disagree. I have to wonder if you actually do watch, and if you do if you evaluate for yourself what is happening on the ice.

 

Again, there is so much more to a hockey play than whether or not you are accumulating simple shots for vs shots against stats. Every hockey play is vastly different and needs to be evaluated on it's own merits independently.

 

I don't know why you say Soucy didn't play top 4 ever as a comparison but it makes sense why you're confused then. You're are unaware of the situational realities and somewhat blindfolded by a spreadsheet. Not all bottom 2/top 4 situations are the same. Players also graduate to larger roles as they progress which is what you're seeing here. I watched quite a few Kraken games this past year and he seemed to jump on the ice and play a pivotal role throughout the game, often against top caliber players, while providing that sought after pushback and toughness. He may have been in the third slot but certainly was relied in all types of situations. Burroughs was not and shouldn't be. Soucy contributed to an incredible Seattle season and played a sizable role. Burroughs contributed to one of the worst defence performances in modern history. He played in a pinch when we were short players. Do you not see the difference?

 

That's why people believe Soucy has a far better chance at playing top 4 then Burroughs. I understand being hesitant in declaring Soucy a surefire top 4 but the difference between the two is currently night and day.

Soucy is an easy 5A on a stacked defense such as LV; Burroughs is a 8A on that team. And that's how we need to look at things; the defense we want to be vs who we currently are.

 

Soucy will play 2nd pair LHD for the team this year; its just another building year anyways. Best case scenario, he steps up, and fills the spot long term...worst case, we have a wicked (slightly overpaid) 5A that we can pair with our young RHDs as they come up.

 

Looking into the future, with both Cole and Myers coming off the books next year, we will be looking for a 1B (RHD) and 2B (LHD) with 9m to get there; no a bridge to far. And that is assuming that Soucy doesn't fit the bill at 2B OR Hirose doesn't steal a spot by then.

 

Futures is bright....

[wai_lai416]

i think soucy and cole improve the defence from what we had because their playstyle should compliment hronek and hughes.. but i still don't think it's that great.. it puts us maybe slightly below average in defence. cole is a stop gap so whatever.. but honestly i rather them swing for pesce seeing he's most likely available and do whatever it takes.. have him start playing with hughes to build up chemistry and in a few years time

 

hughes pesces

soucy hronek

??? wallinder 

 

at least it looks decent on paper.

[Odd.]

3 hours ago, shiznak said:

https://www.naturalstattrick.com/playercompare.php?fromseason=20222023&thruseason=20222023&stype=2&sit=ev&score=all&stdoi=oi&rate=y&p1=8477369&p2=8477335&loc=B&gpfilt=none&fd=&td=&tgp=410&lines=single

 

Near identical. 

There is absolutely no way you think Soucy and Burroughs are similar level of players…you have to be joking lol

Edited July 4, 2023 by Odd.

[canuck73_3]

Just now, Odd. said:

There is absolutely no way you think Soucy and Burroughs are similar level of players…

Contrarian to be contrarian at this point. 

[aGENT]

15 minutes ago, wai_lai416 said:

i think soucy and cole improve the defence from what we had because their playstyle should compliment hronek and hughes.. but i still don't think it's that great.. it puts us maybe slightly below average in defence. cole is a stop gap so whatever.. but honestly i rather them swing for pesce seeing he's most likely available and do whatever it takes.. have him start playing with hughes to build up chemistry and in a few years time

 

hughes pesces

soucy hronek

??? wallinder 

 

at least it looks decent on paper.

This is just it...we may have had better quality square pegs before, but we were cramming them in to round holes, with the expected results. Now we added a couple solid round pegs, and yes, we still need a long term, higher quality round peg to put in to the round hole beside Hughes....but this wasn't likely getting ALL done in one offseason. If we do manage to add Pesce, whether by trade, or UFA next summer....giddyup!

 

[SilentSam]

1 minute ago, aGENT said:

This is just it...we may have had better quality square pegs before, but we were cramming them in to round holes, with the expected results. Now we added a couple solid round pegs, and yes, we still need a long term, higher quality round peg to put in to the round hole beside Hughes....but this wasn't likely getting ALL done in one offseason. If we do manage to add Pesce, whether by trade, or UFA next summer....giddyup!

 

I’d like to add to your comment that I think this roster movement, and the new contracts signed, are allowing prospects to see their potential to push hard on opportunities in this roster..  they themselves may create some great advantages for the org., as much as those decisions may be difficult to make.