• Announcements

    • StealthNuck

      Forum-specific Rules   07/11/2017

      These are board specific rules for the Trades and Rumors forum designed to provide organization and a better experience for everyone. Please review these rules before posting new threads. 
        THREAD ETIQUETTE   1. Please search for an existing thread before posting. This forum can be very fast moving, so it's understandable if redundant threads are inadvertently posted. In such a case, please use the report feature to request removal of redundant threads.    2. Provide a clearly identifiable topic title so that users can readily understand the content. The title should include any and all teams involved, as well as player names or other personnel involved as appropriate.   3. All trades, signings, rumors and other news MUST include a linkable source. Simply posting the name of the source is not enough. Effort should also be made to copy and paste the full article, or at the very least the relevant portion of text from the source to the first post of the thread. Moderators may remove low-quality threads in favour of high-quality threads. 

      Affixed to the front of your title should be a label that identifies the type of transaction that is taking place. For all trades use [TRADE]. For all signings use [SIGNING]. For all waiver-wire transactions use [WAIVERS]. For all rumours use [RUMOUR].
      For articles or news items that don't fit into the above categories, affix an appropriate label of your choice such as [NEWS], [ARTICLE] or [MISC].   4. When the status of a thread changes a new thread can be created. The new thread should reflect the change and help focus the discussion on current events. e.g. Someone may create a new thread when a rumor becomes a trades. The old thread will be locked by the moderating team.    5. Do not misrepresent the contents of your thread or post false trades or rumors. Trolling will result in a permanent suspension. 

      SOURCES   The following source types are considered INVALID. Any links to posts or threads on other message boards Any links to personal blogs Any news heard on the radio that does not have a link to an audio vault or podcast Any news seen on television that does not have a link to online video Any news spread by word of mouth
      Additionally, certain sources may be be blacklisted due to poor credentials, clear traffic-mongering etc. Blacklisted sources will be posted here. 
      Thank you for your co-operation and please PM the Administrator or Moderators if you have any questions, concerns or suggestions regarding this forum.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Templeton Peck

[Discussion] Roberto Luongo Trade Thread 3.0

Recommended Posts

Two problems with them.

-"Advanced" Stats. Things that are more complicated aren't necessarily more informative. Hockey is not nearly as easily quantified as 1-on-1 (pitcher v. hitter, fielder v. ball, etc.) baseball is.

-Based on 1 year only; which is again my problem with the signing. Dion Phaneuf's been a star ever since he entered the league in 2005; and he's younger than Garrison. Jason Garrison had a breakout year. Congratulations. But a 6-year, $4.6M per deal coming from it? Buying on the breakout rarely works out. In recent years, I bet Buffalo would like to take the Ville Leino signing back. And you can say that "we don't need him to score 16 goals", but we're paying him on that expectancy. 6 years is a pretty serious commitment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I realize you don't like "advanced" stats, but if you actually look at what they cumulatively reveal, they tend to indicate what perceptive coaches and analysts already know by observation. For example in the case of Garrison - the stats revealed what analysts claimed - he has very strong even strength corsi numbers - and strong numbers two years consecutively against high quality of competition. His numbers were the best on the Panthers (one reason he was promoted to the top pairing), and he had spent a year on their shutdown pairing - which translated into making an excellent partner for Campbell. The fact that he was good enough to be promoted to the top pairing - on his off side - says alot. Not only did he show the offensive upside they expected, but he made Campbell a much better player as well by complementing Campbell's style of game - allowing him to carry the puck and join the rush, take some risks you can't without such a solid partner. That kind of complement, imo, is precisely the kind of player that Edler could benefit from as a partner - similar to Salo - when Salo was healthy through the first half of last season, Edler was exceptionally successful - he struggled down the stretch with revolving partners. I like what Garrison brings in a dual sense as a partner for Edler. I can't say the same about Phaneuf - imo his game isn't strong enough in his own end of the ice - which is why it was questioned widely whether in fact he is actually a better defender than the young, struggling Schenn was. Phaneuf partners primarily with Gunnarson - who is the more responsible defender of the two - Phaneuf essentially needs that - and therefore, not really a good fit in the Canucks existing scheme of things. The Canucks needed a guy with shutdown abilities/responsibility much more - and signed Garrison as a result.

Phaneuf hasn't been a "star" since 2008 - he hasn't been a top 20 blueliner since then (and despite upside, has always had holes in his game). At least in the case of Garrison we are looking at the present - the player he has been over that past two years.

As with any deal, only time will really tell - but Garrison is a very good risk to take (there is risk in every single transaction), given the shutdown aspect of a players game can be counted on for more consistency than the highlight reel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That alone would be quite important to us. We would get a pretty good return if we traded Cory.

Think of it this way:

Lu + Cory's return, will most likely be better than, Cory plus Lu's return

Of course it could go either way, but I think it's more likely this scenario happens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By "things" do you mean one guy's opinion? Because that's all it is. There is no statistical/numerical support for Jason Garrison being a better hockey player than Dion Phaneuf. If oldnews thinks he is, good for him. I don't, and I've articulated why. Neither participant is right or wrong.

Does that make sense to you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe he gives more of a leash to Bieksa and Edler because he's seen more evidence of them being able to help the team, evidence which has been built up over the period of many years.

Besides, none of your naive excuses take away from the fundamental reality that AV's main objective is to win games. Knowing this, why would he deliberately hold back a player that could allegedly help out the team win games so greatly? You're not thinking rationally, you're thinking as a Canuck/Ballard fan and are denying reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now it is just becoming Trolling.

What proof do you have other than the Points which really is expected from a player playing on the 3rd pair, who is in and out of the line-up and get's no PP time, when he is still a plus player.

You deny the true reality that this past season he has very great moments when given more time. And when he was given the most time and responsability (The playoffs) he was easily our best defensemen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Trolling", huh? And I love the bolded part especially - "other than the points" - :lol:. Well, that's pretty important. 14 points in 112 games, while consuming $4.25M of cap space, is awful.

And I know that your YouTube clip of Keith's hipcheck leads you to believe that a Norris nomination is in his future, but, trust me, "very great moments" happen to everybody. Do you remember Marek Malik's shootout goal a few years ago? Heck, go and watch compilations of Kyle Wellwood from when he was a Leaf. You'd think that you were watching a guy who was one day going to be inducted into the HHOF.

Calling him our best defenceman in the playoffs seems to be something that you thoroughly enjoy bringing up. What are you basing that on? What did he do that differentiated himself so greatly from our other guys? Could it be that your bizarre love for Keith Ballard is clouding your judgment on what took place in reality?

And BTW - who was Pittsburgh's best forward this past playoffs? The answer is nobody cares, because they got swept. No different than us, except that we lasted 1 game longer.

+/- is another stat that can be highly misleading. Daniel & Henrik can control the puck for the entire shift, generate a goal themselves, and the rest of the gravy-trainers on the ice get a +1 beside their name. That is not a more important stat than goals and assists, not even close. Far less reliable.

Anyway, this is again a time where it's good to compare this stat to the rest of the team's.

In 2010-11, Ballard's +10 ranked 5th amongst Vancouver's D.

In 2011-12, Ballard's 0 rating tied him with Edler as the second worst rating on their D. Only Aaron Rome, at -4, had a worse rating. That means that there were 6 defenceman on the Canucks with a better +/- than Ballard, 5 if you don't want to count Gragnani. Either way, not a good result, right?

Anything else you've got for support of how Ballard is really an excellent defenceman, who's merely being held back by the coach, even though it would be directly in conflict of the coach's own interest for holding anyone back that could help him win?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are 100% correct if you disregard advanced stats because of an unexplained ignorant dismissal.

Otherwise, you're wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, this is again a time where it's good to compare this stat to the rest of the team's.

In 2010-11, Ballard's +10 ranked 5th amongst Vancouver's D.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Trolling", huh? And I love the bolded part especially - "other than the points" - :lol:. Well, that's pretty important. 14 points in 112 games, while consuming $4.25M of cap space, is awful.

And I know that your YouTube clip of Keith's hipcheck leads you to believe that a Norris nomination is in his future, but, trust me, "very great moments" happen to everybody. Do you remember Marek Malik's shootout goal a few years ago? Heck, go and watch compilations of Kyle Wellwood from when he was a Leaf. You'd think that you were watching a guy who was one day going to be inducted into the HHOF.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's funny you should bring that up.

Phaneuf's +/- was worse than Gardiner, Schenn, Franson, and Gunnarson's.

That would rank him 5th on the "pathetic" Leafs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My Point is that he is alot better than you give him credit for, your just a troll, your ignorant beyond belief and even if you don't agree with someone, you refuse to even look at things from there point of view.

Not to mention that very very very few people on CDC ever agree with anything you say. If any.

I bring it up almost as much as you bring up his point total's, but not quite as much because I do have more to my opinion than just that, unlike you it seems.

the reason I can say this is because unlike you I actually know enough about hockey to be able to watch and anaylze his play, not to mention I actually went to a game and watched him very closely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, what it proves is that anyone who loses in the first round is not relevant, and discussions of who the best loser was should not exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personal insults, "you know nothing about hockey", weak.

And I'll take hard numbers over "I analyzed him myself" any time.

For a guy who says that +/- is of such great importance, you might want to figure out how it's computed. It is an even-strength metric, unless you get scored on while you're on the PP, and/or someone on the PK gets a goal. If Daniel Sedin gets a PP goal, for example, his +/- is unaffected. Make sense?

You're really going here? He "rebounded" a lot better? You're again denying reality.

Funny how Lecavalier's so terrible for getting "just" 49 points in 64 games, but Keith Ballard can get 14 in 112 and "you just need to watch him play!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keith Ballard points

Phoenix: 39, 27, 21

Florida: 34,28

Vancouver: 7, 7

Keith Ballard can get points if he's allowed to play his game. In Vancouver as a third pairing with extremely limited shifts, he cannot. He just... doesn't fit the Canucks. He is playing in a position that could be filled by a $500,000 player. With Garrison coming in, Ballard has even less chance of making the top four.

VAN

Schneider

Edler

Ballard

This package will get any available 1D in the league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.