Confirmed with Link: Oilers sign Connor Brown to 1-year incentive laden deal ($775K caphit, potentially $3.25M in bonuses)

[Drivesaitl]

The bolded is simply not true. For example in the three years He played in TO when he and Matthews played together the Leafs scored 3.18 GF/60 and gave up 2.22 GA/60. Over the same period with Matthews away from Brown the Leafs scored 3.23 GF/60 and gave up 2.69.

In Ottawa for example when he played with Tkachuk the Sens had 2.81 GF/60 while with Tkachuk away from Brown they had 2.66 GF. With Stutzle the numbers were 2.74 GF/60 vs 2.32 GF/60.

The main reason he was traded by the Leafs was that they needed cap relief and had to move Zaitsev's contract. Ottawa traded him because they did not think he was going to re-sign.

Turris was a post-buyout signing. No one expected he had much if anything left in the tank.


Generally bonuses are paid when they are earned.

More of your omniscient telling others "this is simply not true" Using numbers that do not define exactly what impact the player had but are subject to many other extraneous variables. Your numbers don't define relative truths in this regard and you know that. But you do it anyway.

You and others made the Hyman comparisons without any reflection that Hyman was a sought after player in his ascendancy that teams were willing to throw some big bucks at including us, and signing a big contract to be here. Contractually, worth, or otherwise Connor Brown was nowhere in that ballpark, and shouldn't be, but for some reason you throw out the Turris example as incomparable despite Turris having hit production benchmarks way in excess of anything Connot Brown could ever touch.

My actual position on Connor Brown, not after the fact, but as per signing was that nobody SHOULD expect much from this player giving all the cited circumstance. It was presumptive for the team or others to believe that Connor Brown was somehow going to go back to his peak levels of play.

Connor Brown and Kyle Turris came in here off very similar last seasons played, with the important distinction that Connor Brown had missed a complete season after his last season in which he had already showed decline. The examples are similar, and the players coming in here at a fairly similar age.

 

[Drivesaitl]

4 mil for a PKer. Offense, meh. Not needed for 4mil. He has come close to 40 points (turns 30 in a few weeks) twice in his career while being a minus player on those seasons.

He was a kind of healthy. He's small and slow.

Strange hill to die on. Putting lipstick on a...

Indeedy. What a hill to die on. Especially after the results are in. "Its just inexplicable that he could be so off offensively" is an odd precept to take after the data is already in. In other words reality is inexplicable. It must be.

 

[Drivesaitl]

I am not arguing that he has played up to his contract or even that it was the right number. If you look through my post history you will see that I thought $4M was high by about $0.5-1M. But there are 172 forwards in the NHL with cap hits of $4M+. Add in guys on their first contract or just coming off there first playing in the top 6 and that means $3-4M is about what you expect for a #7/8 forward on the team.

The 40 point threshold requires context. He has essentially played 6 seasons. In his rookie year he had 20 goals and 36 points. In 20-21 he had 21 goals and 35 points in 56 games which was the length of the season. If you look at the last 3 years he played prior to last year amongst forwards who played 100+ games he was 159th in both goals per game and 159th in points per game.

And as far as the +- is concerned, I am not sure if you are using this to suggest that he is not solid defensively. Because if so this is not a great argument without context. In the three years he was with Ottawa they were a collective -151 in goal differential. Brown was -20 over that period while being second in pts and third in goals scored. Tkachuk was -38 over the same period, Stutzle was -45 in 60 fewer games. In 2020-21 for example Brown was second on Ottawa in points with 35 one behind Tkachuk with 36. Brown was a +1 and Tkachuk was -17.

The discussion you quoted was about whether Brown could have been seen as a top six forward on a team with top players. My response was that he has been such a player most of his career but not because of his offense. He has been a player whose skill set complemented top talent. That is exactly what the Oilers were hoping to get. As of this point, that most definitely has not been the case this year.

Yamamoto here had a 20 goal season. While looking basically a cooler the entire time here in topsix outside of two short windows of play. What this basically indicates is that if you throw a third with greats that they will be occasionally dragged along to some production numbers. It doesn't indicate, to me, that such players should be there.

Theres no reason to be looking at last 3 seasons played and the only reason you did that is to group data with specific timelines to support your preconclusion.
For a player coming off a year long potential career ending type injury and that had struggled to score his entire last season in Ottawa means that more recent circumstance should be looked at. That in 23-24 we were getting a player coming off egregious injury, missed season, and that had struggled to score his entire last season, and that also had not scored his last 18 games PRIOR even, to the injury. That you still think this player should have come in here and had up to a 20 goal season is based on sheer hope.

You seem to entirely ignore what the player was presently, and its clear you defer to what the player was in his prime.

btw, and so that people know, in the 3yr sample you specifically cited as some sort of great artifact Connor Brown is 164 in goals scored in 3 seasons at 55, tied with such luminaries as Alex Chiasson. People here know Chiasson's respective skill level.

Trying to put Connor Brown into our topsix was just going to be repeating mistakes of the past. Where we had relative no talents playing in our topsix with generational superstars. Its OK to want better.

 

[Fourier]

Just because he played with Stutzle in Ottawa and did bugger all with him getting only 10 goals doesn't mean that the player SHOULD be getting topsix minutes. You know, I'd expect Edmonton fans to recognize this sort of thing after the several years of trying to hammer square peg guys that can't score to save their lives into our generational topsix.

I find it interesting that you still say a reasonable expectation is in the range of 12-20 goals specifically. That would be in his career best range and there was no way he was getting anywhere close to that being older, post injury, and having had multiple years since he'd hit those kinds of numbers.

lol that in your avarice you're telling me "definitely not true" when I've been right about every aspect of what Connor Brown was probably going to look like here.

Its like all the results are in and somehow you're still convinced you must be right and reality must be wrong.

Are you so inobjective in regards to this player that you are completely ignoring what has actually occurred? Is there an alternate universe where Connor Brown is hitting it out of the ballpark and being a player of value?

Over the three years in Ottawa Brown played 481 minutes 5 vs 5 with Stutzle and score 7 goals. That is a G/60 rate of .87. Over the last three years Draisaitl's 5 vs 5 G/60 was .98. So you may want to rethink the "did bugger all" part of your post.

You may be ignoring the "if healthy" of the post you are quoting. In the three years in Ottawa he scored 16 in 71, 21 in 56 and 10 in 64. The latter being a pace of 13 goals in 82. I am not sure what you mean by "his career best range" but in his 6 years in the league in which he played more than 10 games he has missed scoring in that range once while healthy and barely missed it in his injury impacted 64 games in his last year in Ottawa.

(From the Sens Board on Wednesday by the way:

Hard to say.. I'd like to see them move Kubalik and Tarasenko and replace them with more two way gritty players .. in the mold of Connor Brown.
to start off with.

)


Regardless of how he has played this year, your assertion that he has no record of success with top players is simply not true as I explicitly showed.

As far as ignoring what has actually happened, I think you would be hard pressed to find any place where I have stated he has been anything but disappointing this year. Hence the "inexplicable" comment which you responded to. So if you want to criticize the player for his play this year, be my guest. But it does not make your assessment of his history accurate.

 

[Drivesaitl]

Over the three years in Ottawa Brown played 481 minutes 5 vs 5 with Stutzle and score 7 goals. That is a G/60 rate of .87. Over the last three years Draisaitl's 5 vs 5 G/60 was .98. So you may want to rethink the "did bugger a''" part of your post.

You may be ignoring the "if healthy" of the post you are quoting. In the three years in Ottawa he scored 16 in 71, 21 in 56 and 10 in 64. The latter being a pace of 13 goals in 82. I am not sure what you mean by "his career best range" but in his 6 years in the league in which he played more than 10 games he has missed scoring in that range once while healthy and barely missed it in his injury impacted 64 games in his last year in Ottawa.

Regardless of how he has played this year, your assertion that he has no record of success with top players is simply not true as I explicitly showed.

As far as ignoring what has actually happened, I think you would be hard pressed to find any place where I have stated he has been anything but disappointing this year. Hence the "inexplicable" comment which you responded to. So if you want to criticize the player for his play this year, be my guest. But it does not make your assessment of his history accurate.

Interesting that this is what you get from my replies when my main assertion has been that the history is overstated, and that it is less salient consideration than the more recent circumstance and seasons that led him to be here at negligible value.

Its odd you're using limited data score sets and making anything of it. You should know better. But you do it anyway.

When I stated bugger all its a throwaway statement that suggests that even a Connor Brown coming in here in prime wasn't going to be notably different then such players as Yamamoto, or Chiasson, who were actually here, producing similar dragged along results. But we weren't even getting THAT Connor Brown. We were getting him in decline and after egregious injury that caused an entire missed season. We were also getting aged and post injured Connor Brown.

 

[Fourier]

More of your omniscient telling others "this is simply not true" Using numbers that do not define exactly what impact the player had but are subject to many other extraneous variables. Your numbers don't define relative truths in this regard and you know that. But you do it anyway.

You and others made the Hyman comparisons without any reflection that Hyman was a sought after player in his ascendancy that teams were willing to throw some big bucks at including us, and signing a big contract to be here. Contractually, worth, or otherwise Connor Brown was nowhere in that ballpark, and shouldn't be, but for some reason you throw out the Turris example as incomparable despite Turris having hit production benchmarks way in excess of anything Connot Brown could ever touch.

My actual position on Connor Brown, not after the fact, but as per signing was that nobody SHOULD expect much from this player giving all the cited circumstance. It was presumptive for the team or others to believe that Connor Brown was somehow going to go back to his peak levels of play.

Connor Brown and Kyle Turris came in here off very similar last seasons played, with the important distinction that Connor Brown had missed a complete season after his last season in which he had already showed decline. The examples are similar, and the players coming in here at a fairly similar age.

I was literally responding to a comment that said because he was a 40 point player he was dragging down a line when he played with top players. How else do you show this is false beyond showing that the team actually scored at a higher rate with the player and Brown on the line than they did when the player was on the ice without Brown.
We are not talking about 10 minutes here. The sample size is large enough to disprove the assertion.

As for the comparison with Hyman I never suggested he was at the same level. If you check my posts I said that Hyman was better offensively but Brown has been a better passer. I believe in the only post you and I exchanged about the two you stated you like Hyman because of his work around the net and his net positioning and I said this is exactly why teams also liked Brown. I have also stated that I wanted his deal to be in the $2.5-3M range. I think that should tell you that I did not expect him to be at Hyma's level.

Yamamoto here had a 20 goal season. While looking basically a cooler the entire time here in topsix outside of two short windows of play. What this basically indicates is that if you throw a third with greats that they will be occasionally dragged along to some production numbers. It doesn't indicate, to me, that such players should be there.

Theres no reason to be looking at last 3 seasons played and the only reason you did that is to group data with specific timelines to support your preconclusion.
For a player coming off a year long potential career ending type injury and that had struggled to score his entire last season in Ottawa means that more recent circumstance should be looked at. That in 23-24 we were getting a player coming off egregious injury, missed season, and that had struggled to score his entire last season, and that also had not scored his last 18 games PRIOR even, to the injury. That you still think this player should have come in here and had up to a 20 goal season is based on sheer hope.

You seem to entirely ignore what the player was presently, and its clear you defer to what the player was in his prime.

btw, and so that people know, in the 3yr sample you specifically cited as some sort of great artifact Connor Brown is 164 in goals scored in 3 seasons at 55, tied with such luminaries as Alex Chiasson. People here know Chiasson's respective skill level.

Trying to put Connor Brown into our topsix was just going to be repeating mistakes of the past. Where we had relative no talents playing in our topsix with generational superstars. Its OK to want better.

Brown in Ottawa was the teams 2nd highest scorer. Was that true of Yamamoto? Yamamoto was bought out and signed for $1.5M . Brown was being recruited by at least 10 teams. These two players were not interchangeable.

Serious question. How much did you actually watch Brown in either TO or Ottawa?

 

[Fourier]

Interesting that this is what you get from my replies when my main assertion has been that the history is overstated, and that it is less salient consideration than the more recent circumstance and seasons that led him to be here at negligible value.

Its odd you're using limited data score sets and making anything of it. You should know better. But you do it anyway.

When I stated bugger all its a throwaway statement that suggests that even a Connor Brown coming in here in prime wasn't going to be notably different then such players as Yamamoto, or Chiasson, who were actually here, producing similar dragged along results. But we weren't even getting THAT Connor Brown. We were getting him in decline and after egregious injury that caused an entire missed season. We were also getting aged and post injured Connor Brown.

You literally said that he did "bugger all" with Stutzle. Again that is provably false. That data set is 481 minutes. But what other data set can I use? There was no evidence of declining play. He was very good in his last year in Ottawa despite a goal scoring drought at the end of his last year.

Honestly, by lumping him in with Yamamoto and Chiasson you show that you did not really know what the players record was. These comparisons could not be more off.

Again. This is not to say he has been anything but a disappointment here. But his record coming in is exactly what I claimed it was.

 

[Drivesaitl]

I was literally responding to a comment that said he was dragging down a line when he played with top players. How else do you show this is false beyond showing that the team scored at a higher rate with the player and Brown on the line than they did when the player was on the ice without Brown.
We are not talking about 10 minutes here. The sample size is large enough to disprove the assertion.

As for the comparison with Hyman I never suggested he was at the same level. If you check my posts I said that Hyman was better offensively but Brown has been a better passer. I believe in the only post you and I exchanged about the two you stated you like Hyman because of his work around the net and his net positioning and I said this is exactly why teams also liked Brown. I have also stated that I wanted his deal to be in the $2.5-3M range. I think that should tell you that I did not expect him to be at Hyma's level.

It doesn't disprove or show falsehood. Even top production players exist, within seasons in periods of increased and decreased production. This is often due to players relative health, being 100% or not, being hot or cold, being on a streak, being sharp on top of it vs struggling. All players have these ups and downs. With or without stats are overstated because they don't account that fluctuations of production, even of star players are immense from one point in season or other. Thus such vernacular as "heaters" being a very real phenomenon. WOWY stats are always limited due to so many other variables existing.

We had crystal clear indication of that in the one Yams sample where he went around PPG riding a Drai/Nuge heater. These two players having the causal effect. The streak is not at all indicative of what yama brings. its indicative of a segment that he got to ride coat tails and look better by association. Wowy stats don't parse that kind of wild distortion.

Its erroneous, and was at the time for some to suggest that a player such as Yamamoto improved the production of Drai or Nuge or both. It was just moments in time where the former star players heated up. The bolded doesn't mean what you think it means. Hockey cannot be quantified in that way. Despite a quarter century of you thinking it is.

 

[Drivesaitl]

I was literally responding to a comment that said he was dragging down a line when he played with top players. How else do you show this is false beyond showing that the team scored at a higher rate with the player and Brown on the line than they did when the player was on the ice without Brown.
We are not talking about 10 minutes here. The sample size is large enough to disprove the assertion.

Brown in Ottawa was the teams 2nd highest scorer. Was that true of Yamamoto? Yamamoto was bought out and signed for $1.5M . Brown was being recruited by at least 10 teams. These two players were not interchangeable.

Serious question. How much did you actually watch Brown in either TO or Ottawa?

You might have missed that the Sens were an awful team devoid of talent outside of Stutzle. I don't know how you feel this is valid comparison to the Oilers that had several star, and even generational players.

Sorry, but the bolded is just weak. What on Earth.

The Stutzle comment was throwaway. Ill cede that comment. More reflecting that Brown only scored 10 goals that last season in Ottawa despite getting better looks up and down the lineup than say a Derek Ryan here that notches 10 or more playing ALL bottom minutes.

Brown is amazingly similar to a lot of the limited talent players we've tried to throw into our vaunted topsix. Invariably they look out of place. Again its OK to want more than the latest incarnation of Alex Chiasson being slotted into our generation topsix in 2023.

please citation for the "at least 10 teams" that were willing to sign Connor Brown. Washington Capitals didn't even make an offer. I guess they'd seen enough. good on them. They made the right call there. I dare say while having the most current information on the player.

 

[ZJuice]

I’d rather a Derek Grant that can play center, PK, and provide physicality at a minimum contract over a Brown. He’s doing okay in the Swiss league this year. Too late for that!

Although I did have high hopes for Brown until I actually saw him play.

 

[Drivesaitl]

ps articles like this are hilarious. One wonders if Brown or his agent pay for bs like this to be written.

https://thehockeynews.com/nhl/washington-capitals/news/washington-capitals-qualifying-offers-free-agency

Washington is staying in touch with Brown's representatives, but he and his camp want to explore what's out there in free agency. It's the first time the 29-year-old will be a free agent, and he's eager to show what he can do after missing all but three games last season due to a torn ACL. He used that time away to reflect on himself, make improvements to his diet and change the type of player he is and wants to be.

Wow, what changes Connor Brown made. What was wrong with his diet before? heh

Connor Brown is so eager to show improvement that he's 561st in NHL production this season with only one player in the league being worse (minimum 20GP)

"Reflect on himself" "change the type of player he is and wants to be" lol

Say those kinds of things and I guess some will even think its meaningful in some way.

I'm sure Brown was eager to get a contract. That much seems apt. Too bad it was Holland falling for it.

 

[ThePhoenixx]

I am not arguing that he has played up to his contract or even that it was the right number. If you look through my post history you will see that I thought $4M was high by about $0.5-1M. But there are 172 forwards in the NHL with cap hits of $4M+. Add in guys on their first contract or just coming off there first playing in the top 6 and that means $3-4M is about what you expect for a #7/8 forward on the team.

The 40 point threshold requires context. He has essentially played 6 seasons. In his rookie year he had 20 goals and 36 points. In 20-21 he had 21 goals and 35 points in 56 games which was the length of the season. If you look at the last 3 years he played prior to last year amongst forwards who played 100+ games he was 159th in both goals per game and 159th in points per game.

And as far as the +- is concerned, I am not sure if you are using this to suggest that he is not solid defensively. Because if so this is not a great argument without context. In the three years he was with Ottawa they were a collective -151 in goal differential. Brown was -20 over that period while being second in pts and third in goals scored. Tkachuk was -38 over the same period, Stutzle was -45 in 60 fewer games. In 2020-21 for example Brown was second on Ottawa in points with 35 one behind Tkachuk with 36. Brown was a +1 and Tkachuk was -17.

The discussion you quoted was about whether Brown could have been seen as a top six forward on a team with top players. My response was that he has been such a player most of his career but not because of his offense. He has been a player whose skill set complemented top talent. That is exactly what the Oilers were hoping to get. As of this point, that most definitely has not been the case this year.

You are arguing that it was a good signing gone wrong. That one couldn't see it coming.

Others, myself included, are just saying that there were signs that this was a bad player to take an especially 4 million dollar gamble on. So far it appears those signs needed to be heeded.

Oilers are playing better though.

Merry Christmas!

 

[Tobias Kahun]

Interesting that this is what you get from my replies when my main assertion has been that the history is overstated, and that it is less salient consideration than the more recent circumstance and seasons that led him to be here at negligible value.

Its odd you're using limited data score sets and making anything of it. You should know better. But you do it anyway.

When I stated bugger all its a throwaway statement that suggests that even a Connor Brown coming in here in prime wasn't going to be notably different then such players as Yamamoto, or Chiasson, who were actually here, producing similar dragged along results. But we weren't even getting THAT Connor Brown. We were getting him in decline and after egregious injury that caused an entire missed season. We were also getting aged and post injured Connor Brown.

His "limited" data sets disprove most of what you're saying.

Is that why you have an issue with them?

You often have these throwaway statements that are easily disproven with 5 minutes of research and looking up, yet you still do it all the time.

 

[Fourier]

You are arguing that it was a good signing gone wrong. That one couldn't see it coming.

Others, myself included, are just saying that there were signs that this was a bad player to take an especially 4 million dollar gamble on. So far it appears those signs needed to be heeded.

Oilers are playing better though.

Merry Christmas!

What were the signs that he was a bad player?? I've watched this player his whole career. Calling him a bad player is hard to justify based on his past. Did the team over pay. Yes. Looking back I said I wanted the deal to be in the $2.5-3M range at the time, though $2.5M would not have been very realistic given salaries this off season which is why I still say it was about $1M too high. Is he playing substantially under expectations. Yes!! So in hindsight it is a problematic signing. But that is not what I was disputing in the posts I quoted.

Here is what i had previously said as to why I supported the signing if the choice was Brown or some other $775K player.

The reason I was less concerned than others by the Brown signing was that I thought the smart move was to be as strong this year as possible. Go on a run, lock Leon up and then deal with next year in the summer. There is still a chance that the cap rises enough to give them some wiggle room even if Brown's carryover is say $2.8M. But if this year does not turn around I have no idea how this plays out. If the playoffs are not going to happen the smart play would be to shed cap try to minimize the overage. If you could get it down to $1-1.5M that would be manageable.

 

[Fourier]

It doesn't disprove or show falsehood. Even top production players exist, within seasons in periods of increased and decreased production. This is often due to players relative health, being 100% or not, being hot or cold, being on a streak, being sharp on top of it vs struggling. All players have these ups and downs. With or without stats are overstated because they don't account that fluctuations of production, even of star players are immense from one point in season or other. Thus such vernacular as "heaters" being a very real phenomenon. WOWY stats are always limited due to so many other variables existing.

We had crystal clear indication of that in the one Yams sample where he went around PPG riding a Drai/Nuge heater. These two players having the causal effect. The streak is not at all indicative of what yama brings. its indicative of a segment that he got to ride coat tails and look better by association. Wowy stats don't parse that kind of wild distortion.

Its erroneous, and was at the time for some to suggest that a player such as Yamamoto improved the production of Drai or Nuge or both. It was just moments in time where the former star players heated up. The bolded doesn't mean what you think it means. Hockey cannot be quantified in that way. Despite a quarter century of you thinking it is.

I am not really sure what you are trying to say here since the post seems to have nothing to do with my points.

The claim was that because he is only a 40 point player this shows that when he plays with good players he will drag them down offensively. If that was the case then there would be evidence of this happening. Yet through his whole career in Ottawa and in TO when he has played with the team's best players there has been no drop off in production. In fact just the opposite. That is what the numbers show. You know my background. When I use numbers to make claims like I am here you can take it to the bank.

I can also say that I watched him play a lot with guys like Matthews and what I saw is consistent with my numbers. Does that convince you? There is also the point that three teams have chosen to frequently use him with their best players because they thought it would be the right thing to do. And for what it is worth here is the assessment of the player from the Sports Forecaster NHL website:

Can be used in a wide variety of roles at the NHL level and is very much a plug-and-play winger. Has proven capable of putting up very good numbers at lower levels, thanks largely to good offensive instincts. Is also plenty resilient and somewhat tenacious in his approach. Does not have ideal size. As a result, he could stand to add more bulk and become stronger. Can be used in any game situation and is an asset when playing with elite offensive talent.

So that's my evidence. Your seems to be...I was right in suggesting he would not have a good year so I must be right about everything else.

 

[Drivesaitl]

His "limited" data sets disprove most of what you're saying.

Is that why you have an issue with them?

You often have these throwaway statements that are easily disproven with 5 minutes of research and looking up, yet you still do it all the time.

That you don't even remotely understand the discussion is on you. Too bad. Hockey limited "data sets" are not proof. Period. For the several reasons I explained.

That you dont' even understand the concept of "limited sample" means you shouldn't even be weighing in, "yet you still do it all the time" pffft.

 

[Drivesaitl]

I am not really sure what you are trying to say here since the post seems to have nothing to do with my points.

The claim was that because he is only a 40 point player this shows that when he plays with good players he will drag them down offensively. If that was the case then there would be evidence of this happening. Yet through his whole career in Ottawa and in TO when he has played with the team's best players there has been no drop off in production. In fact just the opposite. That is what the numbers show. You know my background. When I use numbers to make claims like I am here you can take it to the bank.

I can also say that I watched him play a lot with guys like Matthews and what I saw is consistent with my numbers. Does that convince you? There is also the point that three teams have chosen to frequently use him with their best players because they thought it would be the right thing to do. And for what it is worth here is the assessment of the player from the Sports Forecaster NHL website:


So that's my evidence. Your seems to be...I was right in suggesting he would not have a good year so I must be right about everything else.

Doubling down. Good night. You know, at very least know when to fold. Nobody is interested in your dozen long posts sermon on the mount about how Connor Brown is valuable despite all evidence to the contrary. That you would even go down this rabbit hole at this next to zero point spectacle is "Inexplicable"

I mean why even do it?

You believe in your selective numbers more than reality. That is perplexing.

You are arguing that it was a good signing gone wrong. That one couldn't see it coming.

Others, myself included, are just saying that there were signs that this was a bad player to take an especially 4 million dollar gamble on. So far it appears those signs needed to be heeded.

Oilers are playing better though.

Merry Christmas!

Bang. But of course we're wrong, even when right. lol. Merry Christmas.

 

[Fourier]

Doubling down. Good night. You know, at very least know when to fold. Nobody is interested in your dozen long posts sermon on the mount about how Connor Brown is valuable despite all evidence to the contrary. That you would even go down this rabbit hole at this point is "Inexplicable"

You believe in your numbers more than reality. That is perplexing.


Bang. But of course we're wrong, even when right. lol. Merry Christmas.

Find me one place where I said that the current version of Connor Brown is valuable??? This whole series of posts started out with me say that his current play is inexplicably bad. Not exactly a ringing endorsement.

 

[Beerfish]

The Connor Brown move is indefensible.

Guy who's best years were behind him. Coming off a huge injury, signed to a terrible contract for the team and he looks like he does not belong in the league and could not play from day one.

Disgustingly awful move on a team that literally cannot afford such a move.

 

[Fourier]

That you don't even remotely understand the discussion is on you. Too bad. Hockey limited "data sets" are not proof. Period. For the several reasons I explained.

That you dont' even understand the concept of "limited sample" means you shouldn't even be weighing in, "yet you still do it all the time" pffft.

You do this all the time. You make claims that are provably false then dismiss any argument by criticizing the evidence in ways that are simply wrong, then twist what is being said to claim the poster is saying something that they are not. When have you ever shown an understanding of what data can and cannot tell you that merits this sort of response to a poster?

 

[Drivesaitl]

Find me one place where I said that the current version of Connor Brown is valuable??? This whole series of posts started out with me say that his current play is inexplicably bad. Not exactly a ringing endorsement.

This is not at all what you stated. Trying to change your wording and goal posts is not something of interest to me.

This is quote what you stated that I originally replied to:

This version of Brown is not the same as the player I have watched for years. Part of this is surely the injury, but it is more than that. His game was never predicated on skating so his production should not be where it is just because of the injury. It's just inexplicable that he could be so off offensively.

Now maybe that statement rings differently to you but to me it sounded like you were saying that the results were inexplicable, not that the player was inexplicably bad, as you are now stating several posts later. You understand the difference I'm sure.

If you stated from the outset that Connor was bad and recanted statements of worth previously made we wouldn't be having the discussion. It was your choice of wording.

I mean imagine you would be surprised at the pushback of you trying to explain all the worth of Connor Brown given whats occurred. Its off-putting man. I'm sure nobody cares here that you just really liked Connor Brown when he was playing for Toronto and Ottawa, lol

 

[Drivesaitl]

You do this all the time. You make claims that are provably false then dismiss any argument by criticizing the evidence in ways that are simply wrong, then twist what is being said to claim the poster is saying something that they are not. When have you ever shown an understanding of what data can and cannot tell you that merits this sort of response to a poster?

The poster is merely weighing in because thats what the poster does in 80% of his posting throwing shade.

With you doing the same in this post. I have ample understanding and Post Secondary coursework in Statistical methodology. Your derision notwithstanding.

ftr you haven't adequately in the exchange even considered the arguments of myself and others that there were myriad reasons to believe that Connor Brown wasn't going to be productive here and that people including myself had made those points, and giving detail when the signing occurred. For your convenience I've reminded in the discussion what those reasons were for believing that Connor Brown would have ample difficulty tracking back here and that he certainly wouldn't be a legit topsix player here. You respond with numbers or historical backtracking which you feel counters any other premise even though they are not refutation.

Specifically you haven't even considered how a down scoring year, then a serious injury warranting an entire season missed, in addition to missing all that playing time, and lingering effects of injury was going to cumulatively impact. Again you said the results are inexplicable. They are not.

The meaning of the word "Inexplicable" is "Unable to be explained or accounted for" Several posters have responded listing the reasons that explain, or account for, the result.

Nothing wrong either in my citing that which has occurred here, and that myself and others predicted would occur here.

We won't come to agreement on this.

 

[Tobias Kahun]

The poster is merely weighing in because thats what the poster does in 80% of his posting throwing shade.

With you doing the same in this post. I have ample understanding and Post Secondary coursework in Statistical methodology. Your derision notwithstanding.

ftr you haven't adequately in the exchange even considered the arguments of myself and others that there were myriad reasons to believe that Connor Brown wasn't going to be productive here and that people including myself had made those points, and giving detail when the signing occurred. For your convenience I've reminded in the discussion what those reasons were for believing that Connor Brown would have ample difficulty tracking back here and that he certainly wouldn't be a legit topsix player here. You respond with numbers or historical backtracking which you feel counters any other premise even though they are not refutation.

Specifically you haven't even considered how a down scoring year, then a serious injury warranting an entire season missed, in addition to missing all that playing time, and lingering effects of injury was going to cumulatively impact. Again you said the results are inexplicable. They are not.

The meaning of the word "Inexplicable" is "Unable to be explained or accounted for" Several posters have responded listing the reasons that explain, or account for, the result.

Nothing wrong either in my citing that which has occurred here, and that myself and others predicted would occur here.

We won't come to agreement on this.

Your only argument was throwing out statements like hes always dragged down good players.

yet when proven wrong, you pick up the goalposts and move the argument.

This happens every single time.

The citings that he's picking apart are things that are easily disproved by stats.

Yet you ignore arguments like that everytime.

 

[Drivesaitl]

Your only argument was throwing out statements like hes always dragged down good players.

yet when proven wrong, you pick up the goalposts and move the argument.

This happens every single time.

Your only argument is strawman. As per usual.

You are correct in one thing. I contest WOWY stats. I do so for good reason. They give limited information that is highly suspect to extraneous variables, time events, limited sample, health of players at time, natural variability in production etc.

 

[Tobias Kahun]

Your only argument is strawman. As per usual.

Its only strawmen cause you dont agree with it.

You post statements like they're facts, yet when the stats disprove them.

You move the goalposts, its quite clear you dont understand how stats work with hockey.

You used to do this with RNH when you thought he stole Gagner's job as the 1C, when stats disproved that, you changed the argument.

Rinse and repeat.

As soon as someone challenges a comment

"The Stutzle comment was throwaway"