[Signing] Capitals sign Ethan Bear 2 Years 2.0625 AAV

[cripplereh]

Glad he signed.

 

Here would have been a 7th to 9th D man at best.

 

Good for us having better D that has mostly been healthy.

[Biff Tannen]

On 12/28/2023 at 6:07 PM, Mike Vanderhoek said:

No way Myers see's under $ 4m per on his next contract if he goes to market. Would be shocked.

I recommend ensuring you're sat down on July 1st

[The Lock]

After getting Zadorov, I can't say that I'm surprised by this. The depth would have been nice for us, but probably not nice for him.

[Biff Tannen]

I see Bear has finally turned up on capfriendly. $1.375m this year and $2.75m next, which I guess explains the weird AAV. Like the guy but glad Van didn't sign this contract, probably would've been fine if he was healthy at the start of the season but he's not really needed anymore and the injury creates uncertainty.

Edited January 1 by Biff Tannen

[Crabcakes]

2 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

I see Bear has finally turned up on capfriendly. $1.375m this year and $2.75m next, which I guess explains the weird AAV. Like the guy but glad Van did sign this contract, probably would've been fine if he was healthy at the start of the season but he's not really needed anymore and the injury creates uncertainty.

 

That's a weird contract.  I don't think that I've seen one where the player makes less than half in one year on a 2 year contract.  Has this to do with him not playing before Christmas?  Can somebody please explain?

 

Edit:  apparently the 1st season is a prorated amount per The Hockey Guy based on something like 50 games remaining for the Caps.  1.375 works out to effectively 2.25 for a full season

Edited December 30, 2023 by Crabcakes

[CanuckMan]

I like Juulsen more than Bear for half the cost. Juulsen has picked up his physical play. Has been a pleasant surprise and glad we got him for 1 more year under 800K

[MikeBossy]

Looks like Bear played 20 minutes tonight for the Caps?

[Miss Korea]

8 minutes ago, MikeBossy said:

Looks like Bear played 20 minutes tonight for the Caps?

Word on the street is that he looked stiff out there.  Understandable.  It'll obviously take some time for him to get back into the groove of things.

[Gawdzukes]

13 hours ago, Miss Korea said:

Word on the street is that he looked stiff out there.  Understandable.  It'll obviously take some time for him to get back into the groove of things.

 

Or he just looked like the tiny little offence suspect defender he is when he's not paired with a phenom in Q. Hughes.

[Miss Korea]

31 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

 

Or he just looked like the tiny little offence suspect defender he is when he's not paired with a phenom in Q. Hughes.

 

Bear put up respectable numbers playing with Hughes and OEL.  His ability to move the puck up the ice was underrated by fans here, especially now that he's gone.  His time in Vancouver was not as bad as people think.

[Devron]

Too much by double 

[Gawdzukes]

2 hours ago, Miss Korea said:

 

Bear put up respectable numbers playing with Hughes and OEL.  His ability to move the puck up the ice was underrated by fans here, especially now that he's gone.  His time in Vancouver was not as bad as people think.

 

I thought his defence was brutal. Noticeably bad attempting to move forwards from the crease and hitting in behind the net and board play. Also a lot of very poor decision making in his own end leading to bad turnovers. Our defence was horrible, he was a part of that. I agree his puck moving was quite good but he still didn't generate a lot of offence.

[canuck73_3]

5 hours ago, Devron said:

Too much by double 

Money is fine by me or at the least in the ball park, more than a year is the no go for me 

Edited January 1 by canuck73_3

[Devron]

8 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:

Money is fine buy me or at the least in the ball park, more than a year is the no go for me 

Yeah I figured like 1 or 1.2 show me deal. I really like Bear though too bad it didn’t work out 

[Miss Korea]

6 hours ago, Gawdzukes said:

 

I thought his defence was brutal. Noticeably bad attempting to move forwards from the crease and hitting in behind the net and board play. Also a lot of very poor decision making in his own end leading to bad turnovers. Our defence was horrible, he was a part of that. I agree his puck moving was quite good but he still didn't generate a lot of offence.

 

 

The numbers don't really line up with what you're suggesting.  Defenders like OEL and Myers were particularly poor in their own end last year.  Couldn't suppress shots, couldn't prevent zone entry, couldn't clear the zone - the three main jobs of a defender in his own end.  Bear was actually pretty good at all of them.

 

[Gawdzukes]

23 hours ago, Miss Korea said:

 

 

The numbers don't really line up with what you're suggesting.  Defenders like OEL and Myers were particularly poor in their own end last year.  Couldn't suppress shots, couldn't prevent zone entry, couldn't clear the zone - the three main jobs of a defender in his own end.  Bear was actually pretty good at all of them.

 

 

Says this silly little chart? Bear wasn't good at playing defence. Period. That's why advanced stats suck when they are used like this. It just doesn't describe his weak play in his own end.

 

Can you explain in simple English what this chart is even saying? I don't really know what this is supposed to tell me. Isn't 59% bad, 17% on the pk is also crap isn't it? It says 72% offence and 71% goals. He had 3 goals and 13 assists last year. 38 points in 3 years of hockey. Quite poor, especially when lining up with Hughes half of the time last season. That certainly wouldn't get a 71% rating from me.

 

He's a tiny defenceman, doesn't score much, and can't defend in his own end worth a crap. If you like this type of defender then that's fine. I'm just super glad we didn't waste any money on him for next season.

 

He's an option for a team that is rebuilding, or totally cash strapped and hopes he can fill a number 6 role, or 7-8 as a depth defender. We're trying to build something here. We need to target better players and we can't afford to throw $2 mil in the garbage on a player like this.

 

[Alflives]

23 hours ago, Miss Korea said:

 

 

The numbers don't really line up with what you're suggesting.  Defenders like OEL and Myers were particularly poor in their own end last year.  Couldn't suppress shots, couldn't prevent zone entry, couldn't clear the zone - the three main jobs of a defender in his own end.  Bear was actually pretty good at all of them.

 

Bear got to play his 5 on 5 minutes with Hughes. Of course his fancy stats will look good. Hughes is a phenom who makes AHL D look good. 
Besr is a tiny puck sucker. Thank goodness he’s gone. 

[Gawdzukes]

1 hour ago, Alflives said:

Bear got to play his 5 on 5 minutes with Hughes. Of course his fancy stats will look good. Hughes is a phenom who makes AHL D look good. 
Besr is a tiny puck sucker. Thank goodness he’s gone. 

 

Yeah, puck sucker extreme. His offence numbers are still very poor for a guy playing on Hughes line and not a care in the world to keep the puck out of his own net or win hockey games. 13 points points last year. Tanev had 20 points alongside Hughes in 2020, in 8 more games. Chris Tanev lol. Luke Schenn had 21 points in 6 less games then Bear last season. Luke Schenn haha. People really tricked themselves around here into believing he was anything more than depth 7 or 8 dman, who may or may not be a regular nhler moving forward.

 

Also super happy he's gone. His biggest fault is he makes Myers level mistakes. That to me severely limits overall what little effectiveness he has on the offensive side.

[Miss Korea]

1 hour ago, Gawdzukes said:

 

Says this silly little chart? Bear wasn't good at playing defence. Period. That's why advanced stats suck when they are used like this. It just doesn't describe his weak play in his own end.

 

Can you explain in simple English what this chart is even saying? I don't really know what this is supposed to tell me. Isn't 59% bad, 17% on the pk is also crap isn't it? It says 72% offence and 71% goals. He had 3 goals and 13 assists last year. 38 points in 3 years of hockey. Quite poor, especially when lining up with Hughes half of the time last season. That certainly wouldn't get a 71% rating from me.

 

He's a tiny defenceman, doesn't score much, and can't defend in his own end worth a crap. If you like this type of defender then that's fine. I'm just super glad we didn't waste any money on him for next season.

 

He's an option for a team that is rebuilding, or totally cash strapped and hopes he can fill a number 6 role, or 7-8 as a depth defender. We're trying to build something here. We need to target better players and we can't afford to throw $2 mil in the garbage on a player like this.

 

Before I try to break anything down with numbers, I have to ask you this - why are you so dismissive of something you don't seem to understand?  Why should I explain the numbers and charts to you if you already think it's silly and it sucks?

 

You are the one with the controversial take here.  All I'm saying is that at $2 million he was a solid two-way defender who lived up to his reputation during his one year here.  You're the one suggesting he was extremely poor defensively, and the numbers simply don't back that statement up.  Washington signing him also doesn't back that statement up.

[Tusk]

7 minutes ago, Miss Korea said:

Before I try to break anything down with numbers, I have to ask you this - why are you so dismissive of something you don't seem to understand?  Why should I explain the numbers and charts to you if you already think it's silly and it sucks?

 

You are the one with the controversial take here.  All I'm saying is that at $2 million he was a solid two-way defender who lived up to his reputation during his one year here.  You're the one suggesting he was extremely poor defensively, and the numbers simply don't back that statement up.  Washington signing him also doesn't back that statement up.

i really wish Demko could come on here and judge the defensemen. His answers would likely surprise alot of fans. But alas, there is the whole no team shaming thing. 

[EdgarM]

13 minutes ago, Miss Korea said:

Before I try to break anything down with numbers, I have to ask you this - why are you so dismissive of something you don't seem to understand?  Why should I explain the numbers and charts to you if you already think it's silly and it sucks?

 

You are the one with the controversial take here.  All I'm saying is that at $2 million he was a solid two-way defender who lived up to his reputation during his one year here.  You're the one suggesting he was extremely poor defensively, and the numbers simply don't back that statement up.  Washington signing him also doesn't back that statement up.

I think your view of this is the part where many of us differ. Solid as in, he is adequate for what he did last year? Well it wasn't the playoffs and the group was pretty bad for the most part so he did OK , considering the circumstances.

If you look at our group now, we are big, and physical, aside from Hughes and Hronek who are our offensive threats. 

We are built for the playoffs and we have no room for a smaller , non-physical , defenseman who doesn't have very much offensive threat. 

He is one of those mediocre players who are adequate but we are past that now and we are looking for key pieces to the puzzle.

He was never going to be a part of that once we acquired Hronek, end of story.

[Randy Marsh]

Good for Bear to go there. Washington needs him far more than the Canucks do... especially at that price point. Jeepers creepers

[Gawdzukes]

38 minutes ago, Miss Korea said:

Before I try to break anything down with numbers, I have to ask you this - why are you so dismissive of something you don't seem to understand?  Why should I explain the numbers and charts to you if you already think it's silly and it sucks?

 

You are the one with the controversial take here.  All I'm saying is that at $2 million he was a solid two-way defender who lived up to his reputation during his one year here.  You're the one suggesting he was extremely poor defensively, and the numbers simply don't back that statement up.  Washington signing him also doesn't back that statement up.

 

That's why I want you to explain exactly what they're saying so I'll be more knowledgeable and accurate. I don't want to be dismissive. It's just at the end of the day they won't change what I saw while watching him with my own eyes either, but maybe it will help me understand why people keep saying he's a decent defender when i just don't see any of it. The chart seems to indicate he's poor defensively with a 58% defence and 17% pk. Isn't that bad?

 

Like maybe if it says he clears the puck a lot or something I can agree but still say yeah it doesn't eliminate all the horrible giveaways he made and lack of coverage in his own end, or does this chart somehow explain that and I just can't read it properly?

 

I'm also real curious about the offence stuff. His offence seems pretty crappy to me so I'm confused by those ratings too. They seem way too high. I'd have them at about 50%, but maybe it's calculated in some weird fashion. I'm interested to learn.

Edited January 2 by Gawdzukes

[Tusk]

5 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

 

That's why I want you to explain exactly what they're saying so I'll be more knowledgeable and accurate. I don't want to be dismissive. It's just at the end of the day they won't change what I saw while watching him with my own eyes either, but maybe it will help me understand why people keep saying he's a decent defender when i just don't see any of it. The chart seems to indicate he's poor defensively with a 58% defence and 17% pk. Isn't that bad?

 

Like maybe if it says he clears the puck a lot or something I can agree but still say yeah it doesn't eliminate all the horrible giveaways he made and lack of coverage in his own end, or does this chart somehow explain that and I just can't read it properly?

 

I'm also real curious about the offence stuff. His offence seems petty crappy to me so I'm confused by those ratings too. They seem way to high. I'd have them at about 50% but maybe it's calculated in some weird fashion. I'm interested to learn.

The stats are accurate. His PK is so low because he was first PK unit and he was in front of spencer martin and Dealia.  So that is that. Bear at 2 mil is better than cole at 3. and... you can all hate me, better than soucy at 3

[Miss Korea]

3 minutes ago, EdgarM said:

I think your view of this is the part where many of us differ. Solid as in, he is adequate for what he did last year? Well it wasn't the playoffs and the group was pretty bad for the most part so he did OK , considering the circumstances.

If you look at our group now, we are big, and physical, aside from Hughes and Hronek who are our offensive threats. 

We are built for the playoffs and we have no room for a smaller , non-physical , defenseman who doesn't have very much offensive threat. 

He is one of those mediocre players who are adequate but we are past that now and we are looking for key pieces to the puzzle.

He was never going to be a part of that once we acquired Hronek, end of story.

I disagree.  I think he would've at least received a qualifying offer as a bottom four RD.  Which is what he is.  I think it's pretty well accepted (even here) that we let him walk because of his shoulder injury.  Bear moved the puck decently and played okay defence in his own end, even in a losing season.  Despite playing with Hughes half the time, he still put up solid metrics the other half when paired with OEL.  When he did play with Hughes, he put up far better metrics than Luke Schenn.  At the end of the day, Bear is on another team and we have sufficiently replaced him, so it is what it is.  But I do honestly believe he can help Washington make the playoffs.

 

Regarding the assertion that this team is built for the playoffs... I think that's missing the point of our success this year.  For the first time in forever, the Canucks are actually a good regular season team.  We have been told year in, year out that the Canucks are a playoff team, only to fall at the first (most important) hurdle of actually winning regular season games.  Being big and physical means absolutely nothing if the team only bags 80 points.  Maybe we are a playoff team, or maybe we aren't.  What's most important is that we're winning games every week.