So because our PK% has been ridiculously high, you want to trade 2 of our best penalty killers for Matthieu Perreault... Not really seeing the logic there

Pysyk is a healthy scratch in Florida and a UFA after this season. I wouldn't trade Matt Benning for him 1-for-1 let alone throw in another player.

Bouchard and Yamamoto likely won't get recalled until at least Christmas.

Nygard and Persson are both on IR.

MP is a strong player and a decent PK guy, the point of going after him is to add a more offensive C to the 3rd line than the current set up.

The PK percentage is going to come down its inevitable however if EDM can improve its bottom 6 scoring % it will help neutralize the pain of falling to a more earthly pk%. If you look at this trade scenario as if you are trying to maintain a 90% pk rate you missed the point. furthermore the PK% has more to do with the set up and goalies then KR & MG, swap KR with Lagesson whos a better player and as long as the goalies remain hot nothing will change.

Thanks TSN for the IR update, this is an arm chair gm where we put together hypothetical lineups based on what we would like to see. I'm aware they are hurt but i still want them in my hypothetical lineup

As for Pysyk i would argue he is a better player than Benning and unless Benning is in the long term plans, which he shouldnt be, then no harm in adding a pending UFA. The pick may not be required as it is rumored FLA is shopping Pysyk hard and would like to move his salary. https://public.tableau.com/shared/W3GB5SNDF?:display_count=yes&:origin=viz_share_link

As for the AHL kids, i think you are right unless EDMs bottom six continues to not produce Holland and Tip may pull the trigger early and call them up.

Benning has consitantly produced better results, and has even played up the lineup with great results too. Pysyk is a downgrade IMO, he had a poor year last season and this one has started off even worse. And considering contract situation (Benning is an RFA next summer) Pysyk is a serious downgrade.

Benning: http://naturalstattrick.com/playerreport.php?fromseason=20192020&thruseason=20192020&stype=2&sit=5v5&stdoi=oi&rate=y&v=p&playerid=8476988

Pysyk: http://naturalstattrick.com/playerreport.php?fromseason=20182019&thruseason=20182019&stype=2&sit=5v5&stdoi=oi&rate=y&v=p&playerid=8475796

Great results ?? In what world, when Benning moves above 3rd pairing minutes he is often exposed and turns the puck over constantly. The contract situation matters nothing if Benning does not factor into next years plans, which in my opinion he should not. If EDM traded 1 for 1 Benning for Pysyk it is a gamble based on this years stats/metrics however historical data leads me to believe there is a marginally better player there. Next season EDMs blueline will likely be composed of Larsson/Bear/Bouchard/Persson making Benning expendable which makes the gamble on Pysyk palatable because at years end EDM can walk away if the fit is not there.

You are right about Pysyk last season and this season however over his career he has shown himself to be a better defender which is shown in the link i sent comparing 3yrs worth of defensive metrics. If you expand the natural stat trick reports you linked you can see metrics like giveaways and takeaways per 60 which speak more to the players defensive play versus corsi/HDSC% which is more a team based metric.

Maybe you should look at the facts?

******************************

Is 1250 minutes over 3 years a large enough sample size to prove anything? I’m genuinely asking, because on another forum I’m the only guy that sees any value in Matt Benning at all, and looking at the numbers I think he can play 2RD. Certainly between him, Sekera and Russell we should be able to cover 2RD next season, but the numbers for Benning are intriguing.

To start with I used a proxy for “top-4” each year going back to 2016-17, based on TOI v Elites taken from puckiq.com, as follows:

2016-17: Sekera (35.5%), Klefbom (34.6)
2017-18: Nurse (34.9), Klefbom (32.3)
2018-19: Klefbom (35.1), Nurse (33.8)

Next I went to naturalstattrick.com and, using their “Teammates” tool, filtered all the stats for each year for the TOI Benning spent with each player listed above. I realize there were times when Russell-Benning were the 2nd pairing, but there may have been games that they were 3rd pairing too and I didn’t want to confuse the numbers with 3rd pairing data. Then too, who you play with is as important as who you play against, so showing those games where Russell-Benning played 2nd pairing probably doesn’t give us much information about potential combos this coming season, unless the injury bug strikes down 2-3 of the top-5 guys. For reference though, Russell-Benning were together just 21:04 in 2018-19 and outscored the competition 2-1. Negligible.

So I built an excel spreadsheet combining all the figures for Benning’s ice-time with the top two LHD for each season and the results were interesting to say the least. For the 3 years combined, 5v5 minutes in the top-4 only:

TOI: 1250:19
CF%: 52.79
FF%: 53.00
SF%: 53.17
GF%: 55.65

xGF%: 53.71
SCF%: 52.75
SCGF%: 56.99
HDCF%: 52.69
HDGF%: 56.72

Sh%: 9.51
Sv%: 91.75
PDO: 1.013

Again, this is just the time he spent in the top-4, these numbers don’t include any bottom-pairing play at all. This looks like a decent top-4 blueliner from here. Is it the McDavid push? Let’s look at the numbers with and without McDavid, filtered by the aforementioned top two LHD:

With McDavid

TOI: 420:30
CF%: 55.19
FF%: 56.65
SF%: 56.14
GF%: 62.96

xGF%: 56.10
SCF%: 55.27
HDCF%: 55.10
HDGF%: 59.38

Sh%: 14.05
Sv%: 90.73
PDO: 1.048

Without McDavid:

TOI: 829:47
CF%: 51.39
FF%: 50.88
SF%: 51.49
GF%: 49.18

xGF%: 52.06
SCF%: 50.97
HDCF%: 50.80
HDGF%: 54.29

Sh%: 8.20
Sv%: 94.67
PDO: 1.029

The truth is that Benning, even when playing top-4 minutes, isn’t getting a ton of “McDavid time”, just 33.6% of his TOI was spent with the world’s best center. Of course his numbers in those minutes are better, but he performed quite well even without the CMD push.

And then there’s this: Benning personally posted amazing boxcars during these minutes. His .912 points/60 puts him tied for 58th best defenseman in the NHL over the past 3 years, while his .29 goals/60 puts him in a 5 way tie for 24th, with Jones, Ekblad, Markov and our own Darnell Nurse. (I can’t believe so many Oilers fans are calling for these two to be traded). These are phenomenal numbers.

The list of marquee players that couldn’t match Benning’s .912 p/60 over the past 3 years is long, including Slavin, Petry, Morrissey, Ekholm, Heiskanen, Gostisbehere, Miller, Pesce, Ekman-Larsson, Parayko, Ekblad, Brodin, Doughty, Lindholm, Fowler, Ristolainen, Klefbom, Hamonic and Vatanen.

Now, I’m not suggesting that Matt Benning is a top-pairing guy or even a sure-fire top 4. I do know for sure that he’s played a reasonable amount of top-4 minutes over the past 3 years and has won those minutes even playing behind a piss-poor forward group. NONE of the other top blueliners can touch Benning’s GF% without McDavid, and it isn’t close:

Benning: 49.18 (while in the top-4 only)
Nurse: 44.51
Russell: 43.87
Larsson: 43.68
Klefbom: 40.27
Sekera: 40.00 (includes bottom-pairing time)

For reference, Benning’s overall GF% without McDavid (just so we’re comparing apples-to-apples) is 51.45%.

Hahahah you are ignoring the "facts" which are shown in links you sent as well as those i sent which did a comparative analysis of the two specific players being debated.

Great read though and thanks for sharing someone else's work, Matt Benning definitely gets a bad wrap because he fails the eye test most nights and yet somehow will have a decent stat line. Perhaps his glaring mistakes outshine his positive plays and therefore fans like myself who watch roughly 60+ games a year become annoyed with the player. However you have missed the whole point of the thread where i suggest EDM acquire Pysyk for Benning due to historical numbers which suggest Pysyk is a better defender. My not wanting Benning as part of the future is factors of both opinion and organizational depth (Bear Larsson Persson > Benning)

That was my work, but nice try!