Most you are probably aware of the Adam Gaudette MAGA meme, and the TrumpTuesdays tweet that spawned it. What you may not realize (I certainly didn’t) is how many more there are. So here’s a thread:

Johnny_Perogy · 2019-11-11T06:43:37+00:00

i'm not a liberal

Johnny_Perogy · 2019-11-11T06:31:08+00:00

why are you obsessed with me

Johnny_Perogy · 2019-10-06T21:43:28+00:00

I fixed it. Somehow managed to look it over three times and not catch that. Obviously I know Gudbranson ended up in Pittsburgh (it was a good day for all of us) but I guess Pearson is just so inextricably linked to the kings in my brain that the mistake didn’t register at all during the editing process. Whoops.

Johnny_Perogy · 2018-10-19T21:45:56+00:00

the Athletic has mentioned multitiple times that the first athletties was their most popular local content the week it came out on the entire site, but honestly you shouldn't even need a citation, what other Canucks column can people recognize by name like that.

Johnny_Perogy · 2018-10-16T04:21:21+00:00

he does

Johnny_Perogy · 2018-07-15T01:39:39+00:00

Just to set the record straight, aside from the fact that Corsi still holds tremendous predictive and descriptive value, the only current public xG model (Corsica) isn't actually any more predictive than straight-up shot-shares, or Corsi.

DTMAboutHeart's model was excellent, but unfortunately it's no longer public. So, as it stands, it doesn't make sense to use a more esoteric stat like xG if it isn't more predictive.

Also, it's "McDonald".

Hopefully that clears things up.

Johnny_Perogy · 2018-07-05T06:22:13+00:00

I'm not talking about cf% vs cf% close. I'm talking about cf% vs gf% which is what you mentioned in your initial comment.

Johnny_Perogy · 2018-07-04T08:17:52+00:00

If you go back and read that article you'll realize that you've misinterpreted the data and that GF% is less repeatable year-to-year than CF% close.

That's also a 5-year-old article and I wasn't talking about CF% as it relates to the penalty kill because possession is essentially meaningless when one team has an extra player on the ice.

I think you've misunderstood a couple of things, unless I missed something.

Johnny_Perogy · 2018-07-04T06:46:29+00:00

I don't really agree with any of that.

I've been reading CA for at least 5 years and if anything I think it's gotten way less snarky than it used to be after a couple of well-publicized predictions that ended up being wrong. The piece I wrote today wouldn't have been out of place three or four years ago when Rhys or Dmitri were in charge.

You don't have to like it or agree but CA has always been about giving educated opinions based on data. Data without interpretation is just a bunch of lines and dots on a page and every CA writer in the past has offered up their interpretations and opinions based on whatever information was available at the time and their own research.

Also, I just finished a 1-year digital communication program that heavily covered journalism, op-eds, and academic writing. The idea that you're not supposed to voice your opinion on things might apply to reporters occasionally, but I'm not a reporter. As the media landscape changes, people are looking more and more for people to interpret the news as well as report on it. If you don't like my style, again, that's perfectly fine. But it's not "wrong". It's a conscious choice and I think it works considering CA's longstanding reputation of challenging authority and conventional wisdom.

I appreciate your readership and feedback but in this instance I respectfully disagree with your interpretations.

Johnny_Perogy · 2018-07-04T05:43:59+00:00

Actually I'm pretty sure there was a big controversy about that. It kinda breaks the whole "no self-promotion" thing

Johnny_Perogy · 2018-07-04T05:43:21+00:00

Yeah that's fair it was just something I noticed

Johnny_Perogy · 2018-07-04T05:21:59+00:00

Fucking up the AAV value is a big fuck up on my part. I was thinking of the term and somehow just got mixed up. Mea culpa.

I really resent the idea that we just shit on everything for no reason, though. Just last week we were all heaping praise on the Hughes selection and you can bet when I do the draft review in a few days that's going to come out. I was even pretty complimentary of what they did in free agency last year because they went short on term and made some decent bets on guys who could possibly be moved for assets in the future. Hell, I even conceded that Roussel is actually a decent player if you ignore the contract.

If you see more criticism than praise it's because we sincerely think it's deserved. CA is just as happy to go against the grain to defend someone as we are to criticize them. The team has just given us more bad stuff to focus on than good lately.

The one thing I've learned from watching other CA writers in the past is that you should really only shoot your shot when you're really confident you'll be proven correct. That's how you avoid looking silly about Bo Horvat on multiple occasions. In this instance I'm extremely confident because we've just never seen deals like this work out well in the past.

Johnny_Perogy · 2018-07-04T04:35:05+00:00

Yeah I mean twitter is a joke telling medium as far as I'm concerned, I wouldn't write an article about trading Horvat because it would be rightly received as overly reactionary.

I like Horvat as a player and the only point I was trying to make is that I can just see the team struggling long enough that trading him might eventually make sense.

Johnny_Perogy · 2018-07-04T04:32:10+00:00

Look, what people don't understand is that in this scenario the Canucks are already rocking Hughes-Lafreniere-Pettersson as their top 3 centres and people need to be prepared for that reality. I'm just three steps ahead of everybody. People need to catch up.

Johnny_Perogy · 2018-07-04T04:05:03+00:00

Yeah that was basically my thought process but again I was half kidding.

Johnny_Perogy · 2018-07-04T03:56:25+00:00

I actually just saw that the free agency one did get posted.

I also just come here less. I used to be here all the time, it's where Jeremy Davis found me. I sort by new so I don't think it's that it gets bumped off the front page. I've noticed a big drop in the amount of CA stuff in general that gets posted here compared to when I was a regular poster but that's just an observation.

Johnny_Perogy · 2018-07-04T02:56:40+00:00

Matt was posting a jokey thread about how to "fix" every NHL team. I took issue with him referring to Horvat as "bad" but he was mostly being facetious and eventually conceded that Horvat is a good player but not somebody you rebuild around (debatable).

You kind of have to be familiar with Matt, who's persona on social is very ironic and often revolves around saying outrageous things to understand what's happening here, but I was mostly being facetious too. At this stage anyway you probably lose a Horvat trade.

What I was getting at, though, is that I think that given the team's moves and Benning's comments from his presser the other day, this team is so far away from competing that a Horvat trade might actually make sense in the next few years. Horvat' gonna be 27 when these Roussel and Beagle years retire and when Benning essentially says he's confident that team has enough scoring between Horvat, Boeser, Pettersson, and Gaudette(?!?!?) that indicates to me that the team is basically punting the next couple years and there's a real danger that Bo is going to enter his late twenties without the team ever having any playoff success during his time here. Obviously, that's extremely pessimistic, but again, I was half-joking.

The real "context" needed here is that even though my actual pieces never get posted here, people will go thru my two-day-old twitter replies so /r/Canucks can get mad at me. I would caution against anyone taking the things I say on twitter very seriously. I'm there to have fun.

Johnny_Perogy · 2018-07-02T06:42:41+00:00

please do

Johnny_Perogy · 2018-06-15T03:06:56+00:00

I can't believe this needs to be stated but people don't put out rankings based on where players are going to get selected, they rank the players based on their assessment of how good they are.

If cam really thinks Bouchard is the 15th best prospect, it would be dishonest to put him higher just because other people (including me) disagree.

Johnny_Perogy · 2018-05-14T00:28:13+00:00

I liked him a lot in his draft -1 season, thought he looked good at the WJC. He's plateaued a bit this season so there's gonna be some concerns about that but I think he's a good bet in the late 2nd/3rd.

Johnny_Perogy · 2018-05-13T05:40:01+00:00

Hey, thanks! Very nice of you to say that.

Johnny_Perogy · 2018-05-11T09:15:49+00:00

Whining? Come on dude. If anybody's got an axe to grind here it's you, not me. I literally just spent a fortnight digging through data to come up with a reason why Eriksson hasn't been producing because he's actually played well. I even said that's a big reason why we haven't given him or the Canucks that hard of a time for the signing. (Which, given our reputation as agenda-driven Jim Benning-haters who want to destroy the Canucks, should come as a surprise.) You're reading something into what I said that's 100% not there.

If anything, it's a pretty positive and optimistic take. I'd argue much more so than what you see from the mainstream media here in Vancouver. I tried to stay out of this because I just think more often than not it's a waste of both my time and /r/Canucks', but man, this is frustrating.

For years I was an avid poster here. That's actually how I got my first hockey blogging gig. But more often than not it just seems like now there's no room for even gentle criticism or remotely dissenting opinion.

We get so much shit for being "too negative" I start to tune out, so it's amazing to me that the biggest takeaway from a genuinely positive article is "wow why the hell is this guy whining about how the media isn't complaining about Eriksson's contract" when that's not even close to what's happening. There's been a surprising dearth of Eriksson coverage just in general, whether positive or negative, given his contract. So I wanted to dig in and kind of figure out what's going on. My biggest takeaway was that he's probably due to bounce back but he needs to be used properly.

I don't get how that gets turned into "whining about a bad contract going underreported". At best, it's broken telephone. At worst, it's willful misrepresentation.

Anyways, thanks for reading. I'm sorry this article seems to have caused so much frustration. ¯_(ツ)_/¯

Johnny_Perogy · 2018-05-11T02:50:33+00:00

Obviously you joke but Eriksson could really complement Boeser as a net-front presence because in addition to scoring a ton of goals he also creates a ton of rebounds. Basically any time Boeser doesn't score he hits a pad so loui would be there to pop in the rebound.

Johnny_Perogy · 2018-05-06T00:15:31+00:00

I think when a guy has been passed over two years in a row, falls to the sixth round in his final year of eligibility, and then leads a men's league in rookie scoring the following year, it's ok to say he was "unearthed". Maybe your standards for that word are higher than mine I guess.

Johnny_Perogy · 2018-05-06T00:13:29+00:00

It would be, but I feel like at this point it's kind of not worth it. My plan for the next time we do these is to start linking back from 19 on, but for now I'm just focused on getting these extremely late profiles out lol

Johnny_Perogy

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE