aGENT Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 3 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said: Tampa would be a great fit. He's get to play with fellow swede's stralman and hedman, play on a contending cup favourite and live in sunny florida. Cal Foote please! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 9 minutes ago, Isam said: True, but guddy offers nothing on the offensive side. Try to think of it as offense by proxy. Gud does the things and plays the minutes and situations that allow time and space for more offensive players to create offense. And the extra energy and less injuries that affords them vs having to play that physical role as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isam Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 5 minutes ago, aGENT said: Try to think of it as offense by proxy. Gud does the things and plays the minutes and situations that allow time and space for more offensive players to create offense. And the extra energy and less injuries that affords them vs having to play that physical role as well. But he can also bleed shots like a mofo. I get the pdo argument for guddy and the eyetest but if you cant move the puck then you're in trouble in the nhl. Plus you need everyone on the line to contribute some offense because the league is tough to score. However, i will give guddy the benifit of the doubt for now. Personally, if he can effective then we're gonna have to get a pmd to help him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 14 minutes ago, Isam said: But he can also bleed shots like a mofo. I get the pdo argument for guddy and the eyetest but if you cant move the puck then you're in trouble in the nhl. Plus you need everyone on the line to contribute some offense because the league is tough to score. However, i will give guddy the benifit of the doubt for now. Personally, if he can effective then we're gonna have to get a pmd to help him. * 'Bleeds' low percentage shots against tough competition with a large amounts of Dzone starts and pk time while bringing physicality and 'nuclear deterrent'/a safe working environment factor. Context. Again if he's not doing those things, smaller, less physical D who might struggle against tougher competition/matchups/zone starts etc would need to play those situations and minutes. Inherently that makes them less able to create the offense and puck transitioning everyone seems to love to look at graphs and charts of. Again, offense by proxy. It also would likely lead to more injuries to those guys and perhaps crushed confidence as those (primarily younger guys on our roster) struggle to cope in those situations. We just got Pouliot's confidence levels back to something resembling why/when he was drafted high. Do we really want to screw that up by moving Gudbranson unnecessarily? Do we want guys running Juolevi when he arrives? I sure don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isam Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 4 minutes ago, aGENT said: * 'Bleeds' low percentage shots against tough competition with a large amounts of Dzone starts and pk time while bringing physicality and 'nuclear deterrent'/a safe working environment factor. Context. Again if he's not doing those things, smaller, less physical D who might struggle against tougher competition/matchups/zone starts etc would need to play those situations and minutes. Inherently that makes them less able to create the offense and puck transitioning everyone seems to love to look at graphs and charts of. Again, offense by proxy. It also would likely lead to more injuries to those guys and perhaps crushed confidence as those (primarily younger guys on our roster) struggle to cope in those situations. We just got Pouliot's confidence levels back to something resembling why/when he was drafted high. Do we really want to screw that up by moving Gudbranson unnecessarily? Do we want guys running Juolevi when he arrives? I sure don't. I get that. But he has bled a large quantity of high percentage shots and really hasnt played great until this last strech of games. That is why I'm taking the wait and see approach. Like I said, it seems that in order to use guddy to his full efectiveness then we need a good pmd to partner with him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 1 minute ago, Isam said: I get that. But he has bled a large quantity of high percentage shots and really hasnt played great until this last strech of games. That is why I'm taking the wait and see approach. Like I said, it seems that in order to use guddy to his full efectiveness then we need a good pmd to partner with him. He played well earlier when partnered with MDZ. All the injuries haven't helped any of the pairings. All D perform better with a good, complimentary partner. I'm not sure why he'd be any different? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isam Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 2 minutes ago, aGENT said: He played well earlier when partnered with MDZ. All the injuries haven't helped any of the pairings. All D perform better with a good, complimentary partner. I'm not sure why he'd be any different? He did ok. As with injuries, I'm willing to give him a shot as mentioned in other posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 5 minutes ago, Isam said: He did ok. As with injuries, I'm willing to give him a shot as mentioned in other posts. He was being praised at the start of the year and for good reason. But yeah, 'ok'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isam Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 5 minutes ago, Isam said: He did ok. As with injuries, I'm willing to give him a shot as mentioned in other posts. I would actually like to see gudbranson paired with pouliot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isam Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 3 minutes ago, aGENT said: He was being praised at the start of the year and for good reason. But yeah, 'ok'. He was also lit up for his bad play via various media outlets. I get it that you like guddy. I also agree with some of the argument you presented so I'm willing to give him a shot and see if he shows the qualities you say he shows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 2 hours ago, Isam said: True, but guddy offers nothing on the offensive side. sure but most D cores have 1 or 2 guys that don't Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 26 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said: sure but most D cores have 1 or 2 guys that don't I'm really not sure why the difficulty in understanding that a one dimensional D core of ANY kind is a bad idea. You can't just have 6, small, skilled D any more than you could have 6 'Gudbranson's'. Or a forward group/team without anyone to check other teams best lines or PK. You need a mix of players regardless of their offensive or advanced, stats (that aren't terribly good at measuring contributions of that type of player anyway - See: Sutter and his rep with the advanced stats crowd). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 12 hours ago, aGENT said: I'm really not sure why the difficulty in understanding that a one dimensional D core of ANY kind is a bad idea. You can't just have 6, small, skilled D any more than you could have 6 'Gudbranson's'. Or a forward group/team without anyone to check other teams best lines or PK. You need a mix of players regardless of their offensive or advanced, stats (that aren't terribly good at measuring contributions of that type of player anyway - See: Sutter and his rep with the advanced stats crowd). I dunno, they seem to understand a mixed top 6 F group. Sutter has done an amazing job some nights, particularly the ones where he's had 100% d-zone starts and nearly 50% possession numbers. You'd think they'd be all over that as a great example of defensive play but.... oh wait... it doesn't fit their narratives. I think some of the stuff coming out now (the red and blue maps we've seen lately in particular) is actually a ridiculous parody of itself. Its creating a lot of non-information at least in terms of actual games and what players jobs are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 12 hours ago, aGENT said: I'm really not sure why the difficulty in understanding that a one dimensional D core of ANY kind is a bad idea. You can't just have 6, small, skilled D any more than you could have 6 'Gudbranson's'. Or a forward group/team without anyone to check other teams best lines or PK. You need a mix of players regardless of their offensive or advanced, stats (that aren't terribly good at measuring contributions of that type of player anyway - See: Sutter and his rep with the advanced stats crowd). But.....but......they all have to have airtight Fenwick percentages in order to be considered useful defensemen, and score at least 20 goals a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 16 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said: sure but most D cores have 1 or 2 guys that don't I believe they are called defensive defensemen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 31 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said: I believe they are called defensive defensemen. well coined Phil, I bet that will catch on.... I think one of the casualties of analytics (at least how its done in the media, not internally with teams) is a real lack of emphasis and understanding of D and other types of DF role players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Me_ Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 2 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said: well coined Phil, I bet that will catch on.... I think one of the casualties of analytics (at least how its done in the media, not internally with teams) is a real lack of emphasis and understanding of D and other types of DF role players. It is interesting to note that DDs are and have always been a major point of discussion as they have always been measured against their peers who produce more points. Defensive defensemen to me, are the most difficult players to price. They are invaluable to a team because they stop pucks. But stopping pucks doesn't translate in scoring goals and that's where it all falls apart for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 1 minute ago, Me_ said: The interesting to note that DDs are and have always been a major point of discussion as they have always been measured against their peers who produce more points. Defensive defensemen to me, are more most difficult players to price. They are invaluable to a team because they stop pucks. But stopping pucks doesn't translate in scoring goals and that's where it all falls apart for them. I did see one analysis a couple of seasons ago that showed Tanev is probably suppressing 0.5 goals per game more than the average d-man. But I haven't seen anything like that on him since, but he's probably an easy one to use as an example since he stands out so much. For more average D I think it gets very hard to separate players, and using a metric on the number of shots they take seems a bit silly to me, since thats not really what they are there to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Zepp Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 On 10/3/2017 at 12:09 PM, darkpoet said: I don't see any convo at all on this at the Penguins message board but all the guys at HF are loving the fact Pouliot is gone. This proves, but once again, that whatever the consensus is on HF then the opposite must be the reality. Seems to work in almost every single situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucks1000 Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 This trade is looking better and better every game! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.