wallstreetamigo Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 I would love to see at least one Bieksa homer actually admit he was terrible last night...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Millerdraft Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 I'm not gonna get back into this debate but I'd like to add that Bieksa's improved play is in fact backed up by his 5on5 stats posted on behindthenet.ca: http://behindthenet.ca/2010/new_5_on_5.php?sort=7§ion=goals&mingp=20&mintoi=15&team=&pos=D Last Update: 3:7, 12/12/2010 About Advanced NHL Statistics 5-on-5 Statistics by team: Show Stats Report: Minimum Games Played: 20 Position: D Minimum TOI/60: 15 Team: Behind the Net Statistics SCORING and +/- NAME POS TEAM NUM GP TOI/60 TOF/60 RATING QUALCOMPQUALTEAMCORSIRelQoCCORSIQoCCORSIRelQoTCORSIQoTGOALS/60ASST1/60ASST2/60 PTS/60GFON/GAON GFON/60GAON/60 +-ON/60 GFOFF/60GAOFF/60+-OFF/60 1. R. KLESLA D CBJ 97 28 15.16 30.04 2.83 0.140 0.184 1.541 0.404 -4.371 -5.763 0.14 0.42 0.14 0.71 27 12 3.82 1.70 2.12 1.71 2.43 -0.71 2. S. MONTADOR D BUF 4 30 17.04 29.38 2.60 0.012 0.095 0.638 1.652 0.222 3.167 0.35 0.35 0.47 1.17 28 14 3.29 1.64 1.64 1.70 2.66 -0.95 3. TONILYDMAN D ANA 32 28 17.71 29.87 2.60 0.090 0.414 1.160 0.851 5.789 -7.456 0.24 0.36 0.24 0.85 26 14 3.15 1.69 1.45 1.72 2.87 -1.15 4. MARCMETHOT D CBJ 3 23 15.25 30.29 1.97 0.148 0.468 1.352 -0.067 -5.460 -6.502 0.00 0.51 1.03 1.54 22 10 3.76 1.71 2.05 2.07 1.98 0.09 5. TOMASKABERLE D TOR 15 29 17.33 30.07 1.84 -0.087 0.212 0.298 0.810 1.222 0.594 0.12 0.60 0.12 0.84 20 15 2.39 1.79 0.60 1.58 2.82 -1.24 6. RYANWHITNEY D EDM 6 27 17.62 29.39 1.76 -0.002 -0.037 0.352 1.685 1.311 -12.767 0.00 0.76 0.76 1.51 27 22 3.41 2.77 0.63 1.81 2.95 -1.13 7. DREWDOUGHTY D L.A 8 21 17.01 29.01 1.74 0.038 0.491 1.054 0.852 2.308 1.093 0.00 0.17 0.50 0.67 16 8 2.69 1.34 1.34 2.17 2.56 -0.39 8. KRIS LETANG D PIT 58 31 15.68 28.91 1.72 0.023 0.148 0.430 0.221 0.575 4.711 0.37 0.37 1.11 1.85 32 17 3.95 2.10 1.85 2.28 2.14 0.13 9. JOHN M.LILES D COL 4 27 16.93 29.67 1.65 0.018 0.051 0.788 0.875 -0.045 -5.559 0.39 0.92 0.52 1.84 26 14 3.41 1.84 1.57 2.92 3.00 -0.07 10. ERICBREWER D STL 4 28 17.55 28.55 1.60 0.059 -0.030 0.765 -0.450 -1.459 8.414 0.49 0.12 0.00 0.61 22 15 2.69 1.83 0.85 1.80 2.55 -0.75 11. ALEXEDLER D VAN 23 25 17.77 29.06 1.58 -0.008 0.324 -0.132 0.245 4.527 6.371 0.00 0.41 0.54 0.95 20 12 2.70 1.62 1.08 2.48 2.97 -0.50 12. C. EHRHOFF D VAN 5 24 17.31 29.41 1.58 -0.002 0.309 -0.497 -0.337 3.588 5.707 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.14 20 12 2.89 1.73 1.16 2.38 2.81 -0.43 13. V. HEDMAN D T.B 77 28 16.25 29.24 1.51 0.025 0.147 -0.031 -1.680 -0.107 8.031 0.26 0.40 0.66 1.32 21 19 2.77 2.51 0.26 2.64 3.88 -1.25 14. R. MARTINEK D NYI 24 26 16.91 28.52 1.51 -0.015 0.060 0.493 0.912 -0.291 -7.905 0.14 0.41 0.00 0.55 15 17 2.05 2.32 -0.27 1.54 3.32 -1.78 15. ROBSCUDERI D L.A 7 27 16.44 29.50 1.46 0.016 0.121 1.049 0.524 1.630 0.666 0.00 0.54 0.27 0.81 22 14 2.97 1.89 1.08 2.03 2.41 -0.38 16. COLINWHITE D N.J 5 27 16.38 31.45 1.43 0.051 -0.140 1.231 1.807 1.246 4.645 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.14 13 16 1.76 2.17 -0.41 1.48 3.32 -1.84 17. M. GIORDANO D CGY 5 30 15.48 29.42 1.26 -0.065 0.111 -0.466 -0.796 0.959 4.490 0.00 0.26 0.65 0.90 24 19 3.10 2.45 0.65 1.84 2.45 -0.61 18. BRYANMCCABE D FLA 24 27 16.26 32.23 1.23 -0.005 0.077 -0.045 -2.583 0.516 4.013 0.14 0.68 0.41 1.23 20 13 2.73 1.78 0.96 2.48 2.76 -0.28 19. LUKESCHENN D TOR 2 29 18.56 28.84 1.12 -0.052 0.321 0.297 0.960 1.872 0.822 0.11 0.33 0.22 0.67 20 19 2.23 2.12 0.11 1.65 2.65 -1.00 20. A. FERENCE D BOS 21 28 15.70 31.82 1.03 0.012 0.086 0.283 2.267 2.554 -3.825 0.00 0.00 0.41 0.41 24 12 3.28 1.64 1.64 2.36 1.75 0.61 21. L.VISNOVSKY D ANA 17 31 18.83 28.30 1.03 0.077 0.589 0.822 1.149 3.989 -8.299 0.31 0.41 0.72 1.44 27 27 2.78 2.78 0.00 1.37 2.39 -1.03 22. KEVINKLEIN D NSH 8 27 17.03 29.28 1.02 0.012 -0.089 0.744 2.246 -1.082 -2.320 0.26 0.39 0.39 1.04 24 15 3.13 1.96 1.17 2.13 1.97 0.15 23. J. LEOPOLD D BUF 3 30 17.54 28.88 0.92 -0.002 0.403 0.379 1.326 -0.172 2.994 0.57 0.34 0.57 1.48 26 21 2.96 2.39 0.57 1.87 2.22 -0.35 24. BOUWMEESTER D CGY 4 30 17.64 27.26 0.85 0.097 0.134 1.246 0.261 -0.662 3.374 0.23 0.23 0.34 0.79 21 18 2.38 2.04 0.34 2.20 2.71 -0.51 25. JOHNCARLSON D WSH 74 30 17.12 29.35 0.84 0.007 0.087 0.450 -1.355 0.886 7.469 0.35 0.12 0.58 1.05 24 18 2.80 2.10 0.70 2.52 2.66 -0.14 26. ZDENOCHARA D BOS 33 28 19.42 28.10 0.82 0.074 0.277 0.798 2.611 1.604 -3.753 0.22 0.00 0.44 0.66 28 15 3.09 1.65 1.43 2.36 1.75 0.61 27. MARKEATON D NYI 4 27 15.79 29.42 0.81 0.006 0.184 0.737 0.904 -0.658 -8.123 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.14 13 18 1.83 2.53 -0.70 1.81 3.32 -1.51 28. P.K.SUBBAN D MTL 76 27 15.28 31.04 0.73 -0.044 0.089 -0.710 -0.646 2.826 4.512 0.00 0.29 0.44 0.73 16 11 2.33 1.60 0.73 2.08 2.08 0.00 29. BRADSTUART D DET 23 28 16.48 29.46 0.72 0.011 0.254 1.147 -1.272 1.577 7.934 0.13 0.52 0.52 1.17 27 17 3.51 2.21 1.30 2.91 2.33 0.58 30. A. AUCOIN D PHX 33 25 17.33 30.12 0.71 0.087 0.144 0.349 -0.548 0.307 0.999 0.00 0.69 0.55 1.25 23 19 3.19 2.63 0.55 2.07 2.23 -0.16 31. JOVANOVSKI D PHX 55 24 16.39 31.33 0.69 0.149 0.141 0.923 0.598 0.939 1.171 0.46 0.31 0.31 1.07 18 14 2.75 2.14 0.61 2.31 2.39 -0.08 32. J. PITKANEN D CAR 25 24 18.08 28.54 0.63 0.058 -0.108 0.031 -0.674 2.311 0.475 0.28 0.28 0.55 1.11 22 20 3.04 2.77 0.28 1.93 2.28 -0.35 33. D. KULIKOV D FLA 7 27 15.68 32.81 0.63 -0.020 0.106 0.120 -2.554 0.266 3.894 0.00 0.28 0.43 0.71 19 15 2.69 2.13 0.57 2.51 2.57 -0.07 34. PIETRANGELO D STL 27 28 15.31 30.80 0.63 -0.006 -0.014 0.510 -0.363 0.967 9.920 0.14 0.70 0.56 1.40 20 18 2.80 2.52 0.28 1.81 2.16 -0.35 35. BRENTBURNS D MIN 8 26 17.85 27.91 0.61 0.025 -0.043 0.488 0.244 1.190 -8.047 0.39 0.26 0.52 1.16 17 18 2.20 2.33 -0.13 1.82 2.56 -0.74 36. N. LIDSTROM D DET 5 28 15.49 30.45 0.61 0.080 0.392 1.747 -0.970 1.119 7.768 0.14 0.28 0.55 0.97 25 16 3.46 2.21 1.24 2.96 2.32 0.63 37. TREVORDALEY D DAL 6 28 17.06 28.70 0.60 -0.045 0.189 0.093 0.762 -0.585 -7.406 0.25 0.38 0.50 1.13 25 19 3.14 2.39 0.75 2.16 2.02 0.15 38. JOECORVO D CAR 77 26 17.23 29.42 0.60 0.115 0.099 0.630 0.263 -1.628 -2.518 0.40 0.00 0.27 0.67 19 18 2.54 2.41 0.13 2.43 2.90 -0.47 39. MIKELUNDIN D T.B 39 29 15.91 29.55 0.52 0.006 -0.031 0.300 -1.611 0.795 8.545 0.00 0.39 0.52 0.91 21 24 2.73 3.12 -0.39 2.52 3.43 -0.91 40. C. CAMPOLI D OTT 14 31 15.10 32.09 0.47 -0.047 0.138 -0.826 -0.245 1.228 1.613 0.13 0.13 0.38 0.64 14 15 1.79 1.92 -0.13 1.99 2.59 -0.60 41. R. HAMRLIK D MTL 44 28 16.33 30.70 0.44 0.036 0.086 1.205 1.394 -0.057 2.382 0.13 0.26 0.52 0.92 19 13 2.49 1.71 0.79 2.09 1.75 0.35 42. F. BOUILLON D NSH 51 27 17.01 29.60 0.43 0.046 0.044 0.543 1.274 -0.824 -2.141 0.13 0.52 0.26 0.91 25 20 3.27 2.61 0.65 1.88 1.65 0.23 43. THEOPECKHAM D EDM 49 25 15.71 31.66 0.38 0.036 0.012 0.199 1.131 1.199 -12.885 0.15 0.46 0.15 0.76 15 15 2.29 2.29 0.00 2.73 3.11 -0.38 44. MIKEGREEN D WSH 52 24 17.80 28.98 0.34 -0.058 0.111 0.871 -0.599 1.405 7.523 0.28 0.42 0.28 0.98 16 13 2.25 1.83 0.42 3.11 3.02 0.09 45. D. MURRAY D S.J 3 25 16.26 30.02 0.32 0.112 -0.093 1.048 0.051 -0.243 8.270 0.15 0.30 0.15 0.59 19 19 2.80 2.80 0.00 1.92 2.24 -0.32 46. BROOKSORPIK D PIT 44 25 16.45 28.78 0.29 0.045 0.237 0.477 0.194 0.459 4.493 0.15 0.15 0.44 0.73 19 13 2.77 1.90 0.88 2.92 2.34 0.58 47. A. SEKERA D BUF 44 29 15.31 31.04 0.27 0.042 -0.206 0.263 1.217 0.159 3.540 0.14 0.27 0.27 0.68 14 12 1.89 1.62 0.27 2.53 2.53 0.00 48. T. ENSTROM D ATL 39 30 17.38 30.20 0.26 0.089 0.129 0.567 1.985 5.012 -5.033 0.12 0.35 0.23 0.69 25 25 2.88 2.88 0.00 2.12 2.38 -0.26 50.F.BEAUCHEMIN D TOR 22 29 18.66 28.74 0.20 0.073 -0.197 0.723 1.096 -0.252 -0.315 0.11 0.22 0.22 0.55 19 23 2.11 2.55 -0.44 1.73 2.38 -0.65 51. E. KARLSSON D OTT 65 29 17.10 30.01 0.19 -0.035 0.015 0.066 0.299 -1.520 -0.352 0.36 0.48 0.24 1.09 16 19 1.94 2.30 -0.36 1.93 2.48 -0.55 52. T. GLEASON D CAR 6 26 17.07 29.58 0.18 0.102 0.194 0.552 0.136 -0.141 -1.603 0.27 0.14 0.14 0.54 14 15 1.89 2.03 -0.14 2.81 3.12 -0.31 53. PAULMARTIN D PIT 7 31 16.05 28.54 0.17 0.022 -0.102 0.041 -0.213 0.331 4.474 0.12 0.24 0.36 0.72 23 16 2.77 1.93 0.84 2.92 2.24 0.68 54. M. CARLE D PHI 25 31 16.23 28.48 0.16 -0.008 -0.024 0.480 0.624 1.314 4.441 0.12 0.83 0.72 1.67 33 22 3.93 2.62 1.31 2.72 1.56 1.16 55. PAVELKUBINA D T.B 13 29 16.01 29.45 0.13 -0.059 0.049 -0.241 -1.970 -0.077 8.167 0.13 0.39 0.26 0.78 21 26 2.71 3.36 -0.65 2.53 3.30 -0.77 56. NICKSCHULTZ D MIN 55 28 16.10 30.24 0.09 0.054 -0.021 0.618 0.238 0.996 -8.281 0.27 0.40 0.27 0.93 16 18 2.13 2.40 -0.27 1.84 2.20 -0.35 57. ROBYNREGEHR D CGY 28 29 15.73 28.94 0.08 0.121 -0.022 1.611 0.751 -0.522 3.235 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.26 15 16 1.97 2.10 -0.13 2.50 2.72 -0.21 58. S. ROBIDAS D DAL 3 27 16.49 29.36 0.08 0.096 -0.055 1.257 1.921 0.678 -6.423 0.13 0.27 0.13 0.54 20 16 2.70 2.16 0.54 2.50 2.04 0.45 59. M. ROZSIVAL D NYR 33 22 16.97 29.63 0.02 -0.012 -0.249 0.594 0.027 -0.017 -4.646 0.32 0.48 0.16 0.96 13 14 2.09 2.25 -0.16 2.39 2.58 -0.18 60. CAMFOWLER D ANA 4 26 17.16 29.90 -0.02 -0.006 -0.043 0.400 0.380 -3.495 -13.466 0.13 0.27 0.67 1.08 14 17 1.88 2.29 -0.40 2.16 2.55 -0.39 61. DANBOYLE D S.J 22 29 18.67 27.73 -0.04 0.124 -0.067 0.818 -0.460 0.047 8.298 0.11 0.44 0.44 1.00 26 27 2.88 2.99 -0.11 2.09 2.16 -0.07 62. M. DELZOTTO D NYR 4 30 15.78 30.95 -0.06 -0.075 -0.089 0.361 -0.509 -0.481 -5.058 0.00 0.13 0.25 0.38 23 25 2.91 3.17 -0.25 2.00 2.20 -0.19 63. PAULMARA D ANA 23 31 16.20 30.85 -0.16 -0.063 -0.067 0.279 1.210 -1.781 -12.073 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.12 14 18 1.67 2.15 -0.48 2.38 2.70 -0.31 64. ERIKJOHNSON D STL 6 28 16.36 29.75 -0.19 0.012 0.146 0.234 -0.669 0.267 9.591 0.00 0.13 0.39 0.52 16 18 2.10 2.36 -0.26 2.16 2.23 -0.07 65. KARLALZNER D WSH 27 30 15.80 30.67 -0.26 0.045 0.198 0.427 -1.161 2.028 8.185 0.13 0.00 0.38 0.51 17 17 2.15 2.15 0.00 2.87 2.61 0.26 66. GREGZANON D MIN 5 28 17.34 29.00 -0.27 0.064 -0.041 0.733 0.363 1.646 -8.012 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.12 14 18 1.73 2.22 -0.49 2.07 2.29 -0.22 67. B. SEABROOK D CHI 7 30 18.59 29.28 -0.28 0.108 -0.303 0.906 0.190 1.196 7.273 0.00 0.32 0.22 0.54 22 24 2.37 2.58 -0.22 2.53 2.46 0.07 68. JEFFSCHULTZ D WSH 55 28 17.12 29.65 -0.31 0.005 0.177 1.200 -0.427 2.659 8.246 0.00 0.00 0.38 0.38 19 18 2.38 2.25 0.13 2.96 2.53 0.43 69. HJALMARSSON D CHI 4 28 16.36 31.42 -0.32 0.036 0.113 0.612 0.147 0.260 6.961 0.13 0.00 0.13 0.26 15 18 1.97 2.36 -0.39 2.66 2.73 -0.07 70. M. ZIDLICKY D MIN 3 22 15.64 30.47 -0.36 0.069 -0.034 0.909 0.553 1.210 -7.930 0.35 0.52 0.70 1.57 15 15 2.62 2.62 0.00 2.15 1.79 0.36 71. MARCSTAAL D NYR 18 31 18.72 27.99 -0.38 0.025 -0.305 1.195 0.086 0.152 -4.534 0.10 0.21 0.21 0.52 20 23 2.07 2.38 -0.31 2.63 2.56 0.07 72. N. KRONWALL D DET 55 28 16.31 29.64 -0.49 -0.101 -0.231 -0.342 -2.170 -0.855 6.272 0.53 0.00 0.26 0.79 20 16 2.63 2.10 0.53 3.40 2.39 1.01 73. N. GROSSMAN D DAL 2 28 15.14 30.63 -0.56 0.085 0.008 1.430 1.742 0.615 -6.568 0.00 0.14 0.28 0.42 13 13 1.84 1.84 0.00 2.87 2.31 0.56 74. DANGIRARDI D NYR 5 31 17.39 29.32 -0.58 0.016 -0.203 1.348 0.197 0.488 -4.201 0.11 0.56 0.22 0.89 24 28 2.67 3.12 -0.45 2.24 2.11 0.13 75. KEVINBIEKSA D VAN 3 24 16.59 29.85 -0.69 0.110 -0.090 0.548 0.441 3.454 5.860 0.30 0.15 0.15 0.60 18 22 2.71 3.31 -0.60 2.18 2.09 0.08 76. H.TALLINDER D N.J 7 28 18.04 29.71 -0.70 -0.023 0.032 1.038 1.485 0.074 3.805 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.24 12 27 1.43 3.21 -1.78 1.59 2.67 -1.08 77. M.E.VLASIC D S.J 44 29 17.18 29.21 -0.81 0.074 -0.053 0.339 -1.160 1.425 9.313 0.12 0.00 0.12 0.24 15 20 1.81 2.41 -0.60 2.76 2.55 0.21 78. JANHEJDA D CBJ 35 26 16.52 28.92 -0.86 0.004 -0.202 0.191 0.004 2.663 -0.289 0.28 0.14 0.14 0.56 16 17 2.24 2.38 -0.14 2.63 1.92 0.72 79. TOMGILBERT D EDM 77 27 17.33 29.68 -0.88 0.045 0.090 0.311 1.735 0.603 -13.289 0.38 0.38 0.26 1.03 22 30 2.82 3.85 -1.03 2.17 2.32 -0.15 80. MIKEMOTTAU D NYI 10 20 15.60 29.27 -0.98 -0.066 -0.222 0.057 1.393 2.299 -6.348 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.19 4 16 0.77 3.08 -2.31 1.74 3.07 -1.33 81. SEIDENBERG D BOS 44 28 18.80 28.73 -1.00 0.024 -0.128 0.301 2.320 -0.011 -5.358 0.11 0.34 0.23 0.68 19 16 2.17 1.82 0.34 2.98 1.64 1.34 82. B.COBURN D PHI 5 31 16.68 28.04 -1.01 -0.046 -0.120 0.212 0.554 0.500 3.764 0.00 0.35 0.46 0.81 24 19 2.78 2.20 0.58 3.38 1.79 1.59 83. D.WIDEMAN D FLA 6 27 17.60 30.90 -1.01 -0.021 0.114 0.587 -1.999 -0.073 3.917 0.00 0.13 0.76 0.88 22 26 2.78 3.28 -0.51 2.45 1.94 0.50 84. SHEAWEBER D NSH 6 28 17.14 29.27 -1.03 0.089 0.049 0.543 1.675 1.033 -0.784 0.38 0.38 0.13 0.88 18 21 2.25 2.63 -0.38 2.49 1.83 0.66 85. MIKEWEAVER D FLA 43 27 16.35 32.15 -1.03 0.114 -0.130 0.928 -1.854 -0.354 3.473 0.14 0.41 0.00 0.54 13 17 1.77 2.31 -0.54 2.97 2.49 0.48 86. RUSLANSALEI D DET 24 28 15.82 30.13 -1.07 -0.131 -0.287 -0.247 -2.274 -0.271 6.628 0.00 0.00 0.54 0.54 17 16 2.30 2.17 0.14 3.56 2.35 1.21 87. A. STRALMAN D CBJ 6 22 15.48 29.40 -1.07 -0.028 -0.080 0.158 0.622 2.603 -0.830 0.00 0.00 0.18 0.18 8 13 1.41 2.29 -0.88 2.50 2.32 0.19 88. C. PHILLIPS D OTT 4 31 17.02 30.16 -1.07 0.073 -0.225 1.084 0.966 -1.594 -0.294 0.00 0.23 0.11 0.34 18 28 2.05 3.18 -1.14 1.86 1.93 -0.06 89. TYLERMYERS D BUF 57 30 16.01 30.41 -1.14 0.052 -0.099 0.284 1.202 1.774 4.028 0.25 0.25 0.12 0.62 16 22 2.00 2.75 -0.75 2.43 2.04 0.39 90. JOSHGORGES D MTL 26 30 16.50 30.32 -1.17 0.104 -0.234 1.297 1.457 -2.280 1.075 0.00 0.12 0.48 0.61 18 20 2.18 2.42 -0.24 2.37 1.45 0.92 91. ANDYGREENE D N.J 6 28 16.88 30.86 -1.25 -0.052 -0.063 0.353 0.810 0.350 3.879 0.13 0.00 0.63 0.76 12 29 1.52 3.68 -2.16 1.53 2.43 -0.90 92. Z. BOGOSIAN D ATL 4 24 17.38 30.89 -1.27 0.061 -0.333 0.986 2.334 -2.115 -9.686 0.14 0.00 0.29 0.43 12 18 1.73 2.59 -0.86 2.75 2.35 0.40 93. DEREKMORRIS D PHX 53 24 17.38 30.15 -1.28 0.149 -0.150 1.875 0.029 -0.811 0.063 0.14 0.29 0.00 0.43 15 17 2.16 2.45 -0.29 3.07 2.07 0.99 94. KEITHYANDLE D PHX 3 27 18.88 29.02 -1.31 0.079 -0.165 1.066 -0.552 -2.318 -0.523 0.24 0.12 0.24 0.59 17 21 2.00 2.47 -0.47 2.99 2.14 0.84 95. DUNCANKEITH D CHI 2 30 19.64 28.24 -1.31 0.083 -0.086 0.595 -0.072 2.569 8.106 0.10 0.20 0.51 0.81 23 31 2.34 3.16 -0.81 2.55 2.05 0.50 96. HALGILL D MTL 75 30 15.50 31.32 -1.34 0.062 -0.252 0.703 0.986 -2.071 1.100 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.13 13 16 1.68 2.06 -0.39 2.62 1.66 0.96 97. JOHNODUYA D ATL 29 30 16.86 30.72 -1.39 0.064 -0.292 0.853 2.132 -1.718 -9.406 0.24 0.36 0.36 0.95 16 25 1.90 2.97 -1.07 2.67 2.34 0.33 98. J. JOHNSON D L.A 3 27 17.48 28.47 -1.47 -0.027 0.221 0.444 0.227 0.970 0.175 0.00 0.38 0.38 0.76 21 27 2.67 3.43 -0.76 2.19 1.48 0.70 99.J.WISNIEWSKI D NYI 20 25 16.48 29.07 -1.59 -0.052 -0.152 0.352 -0.084 0.559 -7.234 0.00 0.44 0.29 0.73 11 27 1.60 3.93 -2.33 1.98 2.72 -0.74 100. S.GONCHAR D OTT 55 31 17.64 29.54 -1.73 0.069 -0.129 0.964 0.900 -1.566 -0.311 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.33 13 27 1.43 2.96 -1.54 2.23 2.03 0.20 101. Z.MICHALEK D PIT 4 22 15.68 29.92 -1.98 0.017 0.066 0.069 -1.043 2.360 5.707 0.00 0.35 0.17 0.52 11 14 1.91 2.43 -0.52 3.56 2.10 1.46 102. IANWHITE D CAR 7 26 16.71 29.18 -2.09 0.014 0.171 0.145 -0.627 1.570 2.719 0.14 0.00 0.41 0.55 9 23 1.24 3.18 -1.93 2.61 2.45 0.16 As for any discrepancies, here's what Gabriel Desjarden told me: > On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 9:33 PM, wrote: >> >> Hi Gabriel (or whomever it may concern), >> >> I really enjoy your statistics and frequently visit your site. However, >> there seems to be a discrepancy in your stats and it's been that way for >> awhile. Nhl.com as Bieksa listed as +4 with 22GF (6 of which were on the >> PP) & 16GA (4 of which were on the PP) when on the ice in 17gp whereas >> your >> site has him down for 12GF & 12GA when on the ice in 15gp. He's a -1 in >> his >> last two games played and the Canucks only have 1 shorthanded goal for and >> none against so something is amiss in your numbers... >> >> >> http://www.nhl.com/ice/playerstats.htm?fetchKey=20112VANDADAll&sort=plusMinus&viewName=plusMinus > >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gabriel Desjardins" > <gabriel.desjardins@gmail.com> > To: > Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 9:43 PM > Subject: Re: Kevin Bieksa's 2010/2011 5on5 GF/GA stats > > > hi > > My site lists 5v5 and does not include 4v4, which is usually the > source of the discrepancy. On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 9:00 AM, wrote: > I guess so but that still doesn't add up because the Canucks have only > scored twice 4on4 so even if he were on the ice for both he'd still be on > for 13GF (Bieksa was on the ice for Vancouver's only SHG scored) and 12GA at > 5on5. Maybe the missing GF was scored with Luongo/Schneider out of the net > for a 6on5? > > Nonetheless, thanks for taking the time to reply and thanks for taking the > effort to compile all these stats. It's a great site! > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gabriel Desjardins" > <gabriel.desjardins@gmail.com> > To: > Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2010 9:02 AM > Subject: Re: Kevin Bieksa's 2010/2011 5on5 GF/GA stats >hey, There are time when the NHL's gamesheets don't match the NHL's master stats. They're done by two different groups. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duodenum Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 I'm not gonna get back into this debate but I'd like to add that Bieksa's improved play is in fact backed up by his 5on5 stats posted on behindthenet.ca: http://behindthenet.ca/2010/new_5_on_5.php?sort=7§ion=goals&mingp=20&mintoi=15&team=&pos=D Bieksa was a lot higher than -0.69 earlier in the year. His career average is -1 or something so he might be on his way back to that mark again this year unfortunately. I don't think many here care for these statistics though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Millerdraft Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 Bieksa was a lot higher than -0.69 earlier in the year. His career average is -1 or something so he might be on his way back to that mark again this year unfortunately. I don't think many here care for these statistics though. No, I know that. We had a discussion about it much earlier in the thread where everyone agreed Bieksa's defensive game was improved from last year. My point was he was bottom 5 3 years running, and at that point in time Bieksa was once again bottom 10, but this year he's only bottom 25. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duodenum Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 No, I know that. We had a discussion about it much earlier in the thread where everyone agreed Bieksa's defensive game was improved from last year. My point was he was bottom 5 3 years running, and at that point in time Bieksa was once again bottom 10, but this year he's only bottom 25. Yea, I'll probably be looking up this stat again once the year is done to see if any improvement there was made or not. Bieksa was good to start the year but his play has tailed off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wallstreetamigo Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 Yea, I'll probably be looking up this stat again once the year is done to see if any improvement there was made or not. Bieksa was good to start the year but his play has tailed off. Agreed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Luongo Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 Bieksa is having a very solid season and doing a great job making tons of little to big plays that help the team every night. Thats why the coaches, players and GM stick with him is because they know he brings a good game to the table overall and aren't brain dead. I would love to see and would pay big money to see Bieksa with canucklion and wallstreetamigo in a dark back ally talking like they do it would be priceless! This constant ranting about Bieksa's so called errors is flat out sickening and as far as i am concerned these guys aren't true canucks fans and are a disgrace. On a side note wtf kind of names are these canucklelion and wallstreetamigo anyway ?? even the names sound stupid haha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANUCKLELION Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 Bieksa is having a very solid season and doing a great job making tons of little to big plays that help the team every night. Thats why the coaches, players and GM stick with him is because they know he brings a good game to the table overall and aren't brain dead. I would love to see and would pay big money to see Bieksa with canucklion and wallstreetamigo in a dark back ally talking like they do it would be priceless! This constant ranting about Bieksa's so called errors is flat out sickening and as far as i am concerned these guys aren't true canucks fans and are a disgrace. On a side note wtf kind of names are these canucklelion and wallstreetamigo anyway ?? even the names sound stupid haha You don't seem to know the difference between being a Canuck fan and being a card carrying Bieksa fanboy. Bieksa's 3.75 mil of cap space is more valuable to the team than Bieksa's error filled play. Hamhuis has been baby sitting him the last couple of games, just think of how much better Hamhuis and the rest of the D would be if they could just play instead of having to constantly be concerned with holding Bieksa's hand, so he won't make too much of a mess pulling his bonehead plays on the ice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmployeeoftheMonth Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 You don't seem to know the difference between being a Canuck fan and being a card carrying Bieksa fanboy. Bieksa's 3.75 mil of cap space is more valuable to the team than Bieksa's error filled play. Hamhuis has been baby sitting him the last couple of games, just think of how much better Hamhuis and the rest of the D would be if they could just play instead of having to constantly be concerned with holding Bieksa's hand, so he won't make too much of a mess pulling his bonehead plays on the ice. You forgot the "lol". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 Like every other dman on the team other than Alberts, Hamhuis has only looked like he was playing his game and living up to what he needs to be for this team when he was not paired with Bieksa. Anyone who is objective will see that the constant Bieksa mistakes are taking a toll on Hamhuis who is struggling to constantly cover for them rather than playing his game. As I have said many times before, Bieksa makes his defense partners worse, not better. This is in stark contrast to Salo, who makes anyone he plays with better. Here's hoping Salo will be back soon and Bieksa will be traded. The huge improvement in Ballard the last half dozen games or so is encouraging. It, combined with Alberts solid play and Rome as an adequate fill in on the 3rd pairing, is fast making Bieksa and his high risk/limited reward play this season expendable. More of your "anyone who's objective" crap. Just because we don't jump on your hating bandwagon, doesn't mean we're not objective. I pointed out exactly what happened on both the goals that you and your idiot cronies are calling 100% Bieksa's fault. If you have an actual case other than your overestimation of the value of your opinion, please share it. But spare us the "anyone who's objective" crap. Say what you want about CANUCKLELION, but this is not a blind hate statement towards Bieksa. This is 100% correct. Absolute garbage. One of CDC's most noted trolls is calling as goal "all Bieksa's fault" and you, as supposed "moderate" are agreeing with him. I thought you said you know hockey. If you agree with Canuckelion's assessment, then you don't know sh!t. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duodenum Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 More of your "anyone who's objective" crap. Just because we don't jump on your hating bandwagon, doesn't mean we're not objective. I pointed out exactly what happened on both the goals that you and your idiot cronies are calling 100% Bieksa's fault. If you have an actual case other than your overestimation of the value of your opinion, please share it. But spare us the "anyone who's objective" crap. Absolute garbage. One of CDC's most noted trolls is calling as goal "all Bieksa's fault" and you, as supposed "moderate" are agreeing with him. I thought you said you know hockey. If you agree with Canuckelion's assessment, then you don't know sh!t. The post wall was replying to does not say it was all Bieksa's fault, check again. Might want to edit your other "eat crow" post as well, wall has made it quite clear that he does not believe that play was solely on Bieksa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 Actually, you don't know what you are talking about. I never said Bieksa was 100% at fault for the goal. I said his mistake (and it was a huge one) is what led to any possibility of other mistakes on the play. That is actually a fact. Without the terrible D by Bieksa, there would be no goal. Anyone who denies that actually doesn't know what they are talking about. Bieksa was flat out terrible all around last night even outside of this huge blunder. So you're not saying Bieksa is 100% at fault, you're just saying it's his fault. Just as a side note: I've seen Ballard, Hamhuis, Edler and Ehrhoff all go for hits this season only have it side stepped by lesser players than Stamkos. Does that mean they play terrible D as well? Or is it only terrible when it happens to Bieksa? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duodenum Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 So you're not saying Bieksa is 100% at fault, you're just saying it's his fault. Pretty simple concept, If player A doesn't do something then event A happens. If player B doesn't do something then event A happens. Neither player A or B are 100% at fault for the occurence of event A, but if either player gets it right event A doesn't occur. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ITSNOTBIEKSASFAULT Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 Pretty simple concept, If player A doesn't do something then event A happens. If player B doesn't do something then event A happens. Neither player A or B are 100% at fault for the occurence of event A, but if either player gets it right event A doesn't occur. BUT WHAT ABOUT EVENT B?!?!?!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugemanskost Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 I would love to see at least one Bieksa homer actually admit he was terrible last night...... I am a Bieksa "homer", wallstreet. And I agree that he was poor against the Lightning. Biggest blunder... missed hit on Stamkos. Was OK tonight against a weak Coilers crew, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 Pretty simple concept, If player A doesn't do something then event A happens. If player B doesn't do something then event A happens. Neither player A or B are 100% at fault for the occurence of event A, but if either player gets it right event A doesn't occur. So wouldn't the Canuck that coughed up the puck or lost the faceoff be more responsible than Bieksa? Because if that did't happen it never gets to our zone in the first place. So who shoulders the prime responsibility? Should it be whoever gave Tampa puck possession because if that didn't happen then Bieksa never would have tried to hit Stampkos and missed. How far back in the play can we go with stupidity to lay blame? Or does that path just automatically end at Bieksa by default regardless of any other errors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmployeeoftheMonth Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 Pretty simple concept, If player A doesn't do something then event A happens. If player B doesn't do something then event A happens. Neither player A or B are 100% at fault for the occurence of event A, but if either player gets it right event A doesn't occur. Well then in this world can't we just say everyone on the ice is responsible. If 10 plays prior player E doesn't pass the puck to player D instead of player C Event A doesn't happen. Everyone on the ice is to blame for this reason and I agree it is a pretty simple concept. That's why saying that if player A gets it right event A doesn't occur is pretty meaningless in this wishy washy equation of "it's not his 100% his fault but he did it." Reality though dictates that there are people who are more at fault, somtimes it obvious and sometimes you have to look at an entire play to see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbllpp Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 No, I know that. We had a discussion about it much earlier in the thread where everyone agreed Bieksa's defensive game was improved from last year. My point was he was bottom 5 3 years running, and at that point in time Bieksa was once again bottom 10, but this year he's only bottom 25. I have been looking at these stats from the start of the year. There are 2 games that the data has not been recorded from and this really skews these stats. Nhl.com stats have Edler and Ehrhoff on for 17 ESGA and they were scored against at 4 vs 4 once that I recall. That’s a 33.3% discrepancy in this stat from nhl.com to behindthenet.ca because of 2 games not recorded. Furthermore Bieksa had been on for 21 ESGF from nhl.com one of which was 4 vs 4 that I recall and behindthenet.ca has him on for 18 5vs5 goals for. This is an 11.1% discrepancy of this stat. Since discussing stats with you when you last came on here with the behindthenet.ca numbers I have been tracking these stats myself. I don’t separate 4vs4 play from 5vs5 and combine ES, SH, and PP numbers to come up with my own +/- stat. First I calculate the players GF and GA stats in terms of minutes played. Then calculate the average ES, PP, and SH time in a 60 minute Canuck game. Using all theses numbers I calculate a +/- stat that incorporates all in game situations for each D-man. ESGF ESGA PPGF PPGA SHGF SHGA GF GA Rating Bieksa 2.16 2.26 0.78 0.52 0.09 0 2.93 2.78 0.15 Ehrhoff 2.37 1.75 1.19 0.39 0.13 0.06 3.56 2.14 1.41 Edler 2.24 1.59 0.99 0.67 0.10 0.05 3.23 2.26 0.97 Hamhuis 2.45 2.45 0.46 0.30 0 0 2.91 2.75 0.16 Ballard 2.59 1.95 0.79 0.93 0 0 3.39 2.88 0.51 Alberts 1.50 1.91 0.18 0.53 0.13 0 1.68 2.44 -0.76 Rome 1.37 1.71 0.89 0.80 0 0 2.26 2.51 -0.25 Parent 0.00 2.63 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 2.63 -2.63 Since Alberts has no PP to make an accurate judgement of his effectiveness on the PP his PPGF stat is calculated by using his ESGF/ESTOI information. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANUCKLELION Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 Absolute garbage. One of CDC's most noted trolls is calling as goal "all Bieksa's fault" and you, as supposed "moderate" are agreeing with him. I thought you said you know hockey. If you agree with Canuckelion's assessment, then you don't know sh!t. I'm hardly a troll, I'm just not an extreme Bieksa lover. If you consider my 'trade Bieksa' posts trolling, then so are the blind Bieksa love posts exhibited by yourself and a few others. They are opposite positions that provoke a response. The definition of trolling. Mr Love troll. lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucks_dynasty Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 Bieksa was soooooo primed to make the big hit on Stamkos. I was like WTF?!? when he missed his check. Then when they scored right afterwards. When Alberts made the big hit behind the net...I screamed at the TV. "That's how you're supposed to hit". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.