Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Ray Ferraro on Analytics and Brandon Sutter


CanucksAtHome

Recommended Posts

There is a high probability that Brandon Sutter is indeed a career black hole of puck possession and he's going to be paid WAY too much here based on 100% intangibles.

Those expecting 'the next Kesler' will be disappointed. Kesler was a 40-goal man at Sutter's current age. Pittsburgh would not have given him up if he was this 'buried offensive star' that some think he may be.

Right now Benning is working the phones like he's everyone's best friend.

I've always found it amusing that metrix are thrown right out the window as soon as the numbers don't fit their argument.

What do the stats say about goals scored against while he is on the ice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For all the different Sutter threads, this one I don't mind - as far as it actually talks about Sutter at least. It supports what I've read when checking out some of the Penguins blogs from his performance last season and adds what I hadn't seen about being a player who doesn't carry the puck.

But then it devolves somewhat after the bolded part (directed by the TSN1040 questions) into an analytics experiment.

I agree that GMs won't use analytics as a determining factor, but it'll still be a factor for any number of them (particularly someone like Dubas as Asst. GM in Toronto) and help drive decisions they've supported with traditional scouting as Ferraro notes. In today's NHL it's very hard to succeed on scouting alone, and certainly impossible to approach it from strictly an analytics standpoint.

But back to Sutter, it should give people a better impression of what to expect, and that we won't expect him to be driving play and making players on his line better. He'll allow them to be more free offensively as he handles the defensive end, but he won't spend a lot of time creating.

It's clear as day to anybody who actually watches hockey why Sutter is a better hockey player than Bonino.

The people that follow hockey loosely and watch stat sheets over real games are the ones who need it explained to them like this.

I don't think Ferraro said that anywhere in his interview, and I don't think it's as clear cut as some people want to keep suggesting. They're close even before you consider cap advantages (and then considering we added more to the deal than Pittsburgh did) but I agree Sutter probably helps us more so long as his cap doesn't prevent us from getting another piece that would help as well.

its what the pitsburg hockey writer said about him....he is a streaky player... disappears... just like kassian...

Yet another case of someone on CDC confusing things as strictly black and white. :picard:

Kassian and Sutter both had consistency issues, yes, but Sutter's relate to him providing physical play and offense. Kassian's relate to him providing those as well as defensive play, effort, and overall style. I'd even go so far as to say Kassian's a better offensive player but he's inconsistent in all areas and spread out across different areas at different times. Sutter will always be strong defensively, he just might not be contributing to the scoresheet all the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For all the different Sutter threads, this one I don't mind - as far as it actually talks about Sutter at least. It supports what I've read when checking out some of the Penguins blogs from his performance last season and adds what I hadn't seen about being a player who doesn't carry the puck.

But then it devolves somewhat after the bolded part (directed by the TSN1040 questions) into an analytics experiment.

I agree that GMs won't use analytics as a determining factor, but it'll still be a factor for any number of them (particularly someone like Dubas as Asst. GM in Toronto) and help drive decisions they've supported with traditional scouting as Ferraro notes. In today's NHL it's very hard to succeed on scouting alone, and certainly impossible to approach it from strictly an analytics standpoint.

But back to Sutter, it should give people a better impression of what to expect, and that we won't expect him to be driving play and making players on his line better. He'll allow them to be more free offensively as he handles the defensive end, but he won't spend a lot of time creating.

I don't think Ferraro said that anywhere in his interview, and I don't think it's as clear cut as some people want to keep suggesting. They're close even before you consider cap advantages but I agree Sutter probably helps us more (so long as his cap doesn't prevent us from getting another piece that would help as well).

Isnt giving them freedom on the offensive side of the puck making his libemares better? Same as being a dogged forechecking and creating scoring chances.

I dont think anyone is expecting Sutter to be a gamebreaker, but he provides a similar element as Kesler did.

We would all do well to remember that this is a guy JB has long targetted and hes seen a whole lot more of Sutter than any of us. If he didnt think he was going to be one of the guys to build around, he wouldnt have pursued him for so long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He never said it wasn't a factor, he said it's not a determining factor.

Like if two players are close in terms of perceived value, a GM isn't going to be swayed to one or the other because of analytics. There's too many underlying factors to those numbers that make them an imperfect science.

That's kind of what I was trying to allude to. I agree. I would also add, a GM may give it no consideration at all, but may take advice from someone who spends more time on analytics. My point is that analytics are a relevant tool that NHL GMs are using, but it is still just one tool in the tool chest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uh, no.

Sutter is 2C, Horvat is 3C. The kid has played great, but part of this move is to help Bo move at a steady pace and not bump him up the depth chart so quickly.

So you think that's how it stays over the next several years (or at least while the Sedins are here)? There's no plan that Horvat is being pegged for that role?

Dura has a point that while it sounds pretty certain Sutter will be signed, if he didn't want to sign in Pitts because he didn't want to play 3C (not that I've heard that specifically) then will a year or two of 2C here make him happy?

Maybe he's ok with that, or thinks he can still have an increased role as the Sedins move on, but it's a point to consider.

Kinda like considering that the people who like advanced stats also use more traditional ways of evaluating a player and considering who might have got the best value in a deal. It's not hard to argue that the Pens won considering they gained cap space to allow them to sign Fehr along with two players and the better (even if only marginally) of the two picks.

Advance stats are just a way for everyone to prove they're right. I have never been a believer in using them to try and draft/develop/form a team and i will continue to believe this until someone shows me a GM who bases all his decisions purely on advanced stats.

They are absolutely supporting evidence, but I don't discount them as something you can use on a player you aren't familiar with as a starting point to look for potential strengths and weaknesses. You have to then support that with more information than just stats, but they absolutely can be used in a number of ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isnt giving them freedom on the offensive side of the puck making his libemares better? Same as being a dogged forechecking and creating scoring chances.

I dont think anyone is expecting Sutter to be a gamebreaker, but he provides a similar element as Kesler did.

We would all do well to remember that this is a guy JB has long targetted and hes seen a whole lot more of Sutter than any of us. If he didnt think he was going to be one of the guys to build around, he wouldnt have pursued him for so long.

While it's arguable, I look at it as he's not adding to their offensive games and helping create chances. Making them less responsible defensively could be a detriment if they start to rely too much on Sutter to pick up after them as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For all the different Sutter threads, this one I don't mind - as far as it actually talks about Sutter at least. It supports what I've read when checking out some of the Penguins blogs from his performance last season and adds what I hadn't seen about being a player who doesn't carry the puck.

But then it devolves somewhat after the bolded part (directed by the TSN1040 questions) into an analytics experiment.

I agree that GMs won't use analytics as a determining factor, but it'll still be a factor for any number of them (particularly someone like Dubas as Asst. GM in Toronto) and help drive decisions they've supported with traditional scouting as Ferraro notes. In today's NHL it's very hard to succeed on scouting alone, and certainly impossible to approach it from strictly an analytics standpoint.

But back to Sutter, it should give people a better impression of what to expect, and that we won't expect him to be driving play and making players on his line better. He'll allow them to be more free offensively as he handles the defensive end, but he won't spend a lot of time creating.

I don't think Ferraro said that anywhere in his interview, and I don't think it's as clear cut as some people want to keep suggesting. They're close even before you consider cap advantages (and then considering we added more to the deal than Pittsburgh did) but I agree Sutter probably helps us more so long as his cap doesn't prevent us from getting another piece that would help as well.

Yet another case of someone on CDC confusing things as strictly black and white. :picard:

Kassian and Sutter both had consistency issues, yes, but Sutter's relate to him providing physical play and offense. Kassian's relate to him providing those as well as defensive play, effort, and overall style. I'd even go so far as to say Kassian's a better offensive player but he's inconsistent in all areas and spread out across different areas at different times. Sutter will always be strong defensively, he just might not be contributing to the scoresheet all the time.

Great post elvis. +1

I just felt like including main points of the rest of the interview for completeness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dura has a point that while it sounds pretty certain Sutter will be signed, if he didn't want to sign in Pitts because he didn't want to play 3C (not that I've heard that specifically) then will a year or two of 2C here make him happy?

Maybe he's ok with that, or thinks he can still have an increased role as the Sedins move on, but it's a point to consider.

Even if he reverts to an elite 3C in a few years as Horvat surpasses him while reaching for his ceiling, he'll still have far more opportunity here on a 3rd line behind Hank/Horvat with WD rolling 4 lines than he would behind Crosby/Malkin.

There's also the factor that the Pen's could in no way afford to re-sign him regardless of whether he did or didn't want more opportunity. They needed more depth (Bonino/Fehr) for the same cap hit. Period.

There's no way they could afford to pay him $4m+ next season in cap or in depth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great post elvis. +1

I just felt like including main points of the rest of the interview for completeness.

Oh sure, and no problem with it. I wasn't sure at first if it was you adding more about analytics but then I realized as I was listening to the interview while typing.

Even if he reverts to an elite 3C in a few years as Horvat surpasses him while reaching for his ceiling, he'll still have far more opportunity here on a 3rd line behind Hank/Horvat with WD rolling 4 lines than he would behind Crosby/Malkin.

There's also the factor that the Pen's could in no way afford to re-sign him regardless of whether he did or didn't want more opportunity. They needed more depth (Bonino/Fehr) for the same cap hit. Period.

There's no way they could afford to pay him $4m+ next season in cap or in depth.

I agree they couldn't afford him, but there may have been a factor of would they want to for that price as well. It remains to be seen if he'll be worth quite that much as a player, but that's another question.

We'll see if he's worth it here but we're back to the "could we have spent better elsewhere?" argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even if he reverts to an elite 3C in a few years as Horvat surpasses him while reaching for his ceiling, he'll still have far more opportunity here on a 3rd line behind Hank/Horvat with WD rolling 4 lines than he would behind Crosby/Malkin.

There's also the factor that the Pen's could in no way afford to re-sign him regardless of whether he did or didn't want more opportunity. They needed more depth (Bonino/Fehr) for the same cap hit. Period.

There's no way they could afford to pay him $4m+ next season in cap or in depth.

Rutherford knew that Sutter was going to walk. Truly is was an excellent hockey deal for both teams.

I also think, for a good chunk of Sutters term, it will be a 2a/2b situation with Bo......depending on opposition, linemates, situation etc etc. When Mccaan and Cassels move up, there will be 4 cmen, all of whom will be able to contribute at both ends of the ice and olay in every situation. Ill take that over one superstar cman and fillers behind him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rutherford knew that Sutter was going to walk. Truly is was an excellent hockey deal for both teams.

I also think, for a good chunk of Sutters term, it will be a 2a/2b situation with Bo......depending on opposition, linemates, situation etc etc. When Mccaan and Cassels move up, there will be 4 cmen, all of whom will be able to contribute at both ends of the ice and olay in every situation. Ill take that over one superstar cman and fillers behind him.

I think we're going to have a 2A, 2B and 2C situations for a few years if the twins happen to re-sign a 1-2 year extension.

Seriously, when the prospect wingers start being able to contribute at a high level in a few years we could be a pretty scary team up front.

Now as for our D... :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think everyone whose going with the whole analytics thing to value this trade, in terms of win or not win is forgetting that every trade Benning has made till now ;has not been made with analytics kept in mind.Most of his trades have been made keeping in mind abstract factors, like the desire to compete, leadership, character, toughness.

From what I have seen and heard from him, he's doesn't seem like a big numbers guy. But that's how I view him. So yes in some sense I agree with Ferraro when he says analytics are not really a factor, specially with our GM. Other GM's I am not sure. The only example that comes up is Toronto and Dubas. Toronto needs guys who can put up numbers on the board for them, hence they brought in a guy like Dubas who has good analytical sense.

For us we have been putting up good numbers, since 15 years, maybe with few exceptions. We lack in the department of qualities a player needs to posses to win games like being physical, pushing back and competing. So we bring in Guys like Dorsett, Prust and Sutter.

They might not out up huge numbers, but they have what our team has lacked for a long time. So analytics is sometimes really a very subjective thing in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we're going to have a 2A, 2B and 2C situations for a few years if the twins happen to re-sign a 1-2 year extension.

Seriously, when the prospect wingers start being able to contribute at a high level in a few years we could be a pretty scary team up front.

Now as for our D... :unsure:

All the young, cheap fwds should leave room to sign or poach prime aged dmen, imo. Ive always maintained drafting and developing top end fwds and signing/dealing for already developed dmen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

my only concern is, if sutter is not a play maker, can he be successful on the second line with vrbata...? seems to me, he'ld fit better with burrows and maybe baerschi...if sutter was a third line centre he would fit perfect...maybe he will surprise us all.

Really, how would anybody know??? The kid played behind CROSBY & MALKIN. Now at the still young age of 26 he'll be given a great chance to prove or show what he has matured & learned from those 2 stars.

Some of us have watched him play a few games for Pitt and as a 3rd liner he was great. Now lets see what he can do in a #2 role.

Nobody thought Santorelli was going to light it up for us the way he did coming over as a 3rd/4th liner.

I think Sutter has more to offer yet than most have seen. Given an opportunity is the only way for anybody to really know & he is gonna get that here for sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the roster entering into the season is:

Sedin Sedin Vrbata

Baertchi Sutter Burrows/Higgins

Hansen Horvat Kenin/Higgins/Burrows

Prust Vey Dorsett

That just illustrates how badly we need on of Grenier, Jensen, Virtanen to take that 2nd line RW spot. Higgins is a solid 3rd liner but should never be counted on for more than 35 points. Burrows is a 3rd liner that can step his game up a couple notches when he plays with the Sedins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Ray that it is a balancing game - of integrating both the eye test and the possession numbers.

No one makes decisions based upon analytics alone, particularly when some of the 'analytics' are so poorly formulated, so lacking in integrated analysis - but at the same time, looking at them in as full a context as you can derive from this is useful and ignoring them would be irresponsible and underestimate their value

I wonder if he realizes that a zone entry is not a 'possession number' - corsi and fenwick are essentially the plus/minus of shot attempts, not necessarily of 'puck possession' in a more integral sense. The Sedins possession numbers - if possession was actually measured - as opposed to shot attempts - would be off the chart.

Ray is right to belittle those ridiculous, oversimplified wowy and hero charts though.

Always like Ray whether I agree with him or not - and he makes lots of good points regarding Sutter.

I think he's right to like the deal for Vancouver and dismiss the cherry-picked analytics that attempt to underplay Sutter. Those 'analytics' are garbage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That just illustrates how badly we need on of Grenier, Jensen, Virtanen to take that 2nd line RW spot. Higgins is a solid 3rd liner but should never be counted on for more than 35 points. Burrows is a 3rd liner that can step his game up a couple notches when he plays with the Sedins.

Dank, Hank, Burr

Baer, Sutter, Vrbata

Higgins, Horvat, Hansen

The fourth is a bit of a mystery but something with 3 of :

Dorsett/Kenins/Prust/Vey/Grenier/Virtanen/Gaunce

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm thankful for the NHL's ..... ELC ... clause that limits what you can pay rookies. It might save Benning from a disaster with his financial blunders. Vcr is racking up a lot of money for average players at an alarming rate. Thankfully we have a bunch of good prospect coming along on salaries negoiated by the league rather then JB. Man he spends money like your wife spends at a closing out sale. I don't see any opportunities for Vcr to take advantage with UFA in the future

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...