RunningWild
-
Posts
6,166 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by RunningWild
-
-
I provide the official faceoff summary from the NHL that have the faceoff stats for Bo which differ from your advanced stats website count. However, you prefer to get numbers from the advanced stats website, and therefore you claim that they are accurate. Hmm. I see what kind of a person I'm dealing with here as well, so I won't bother responding regarding this subject after this.
The above you indicate are indeed facts.
The rest are assumptions surrounding the facts.
Behind the Net (and most advanced stats sites) use NHL.com base #'s. The difference of a few face-offs either means: BTN hasn't updated to include Ottawa game yet, or NHL.com made an error and will adjust over time. Both happen from time to time. Either way, I adjusted the #'s I use to include Ott game, and it further supports my argument. He was a +3 corsi player, and his over dzone face-off % is still the best among any Canucks centre. By a long shot. He still takes lowest o zone face-offs of any Canucks centre. Both of which were emu points.
In your original post, your reply was trying to augment the facts I posted. I.e, you assumed his SA/60 would go up with more TOI, that his corsi #'s have to do with his little TOI in score close situations and talking bout sample sizes. I was stating those replies were assumptions based on actual facts (which they were). I recognized the small sample size, but the very nature of an 9 game tryout in an 82 game season is a very small sample size. So at the end of the day you can either make an evaluation based on the data you have (which I did), or data you think you might have over time (though you've provided no data to support long term claims).
-
Vs COL - Off (1/1) Def (4/5) http://www.nhl.com/scores/htmlreports/20142015/FS020182.HTM
Vs SJS - Off (0/1) Def (0/1) http://www.nhl.com/scores/htmlreports/20142015/FS020196.HTM
Vs LAK - Off (0/0) Def (4/6) http://www.nhl.com/scores/htmlreports/20142015/FS020213.HTM
Vs ANA - Off (2/2) Def (1/2) http://www.nhl.com/scores/htmlreports/20142015/FS020217.HTM
Vs OTT - Off (0/4) Def (1/2) http://www.nhl.com/scores/htmlreports/20142015/FS020230.HTM
According to NHL faceoff summary. Add'em up big boy. 8 o-zone faceoffs and 16 d-zone faceoffs.
He hasn't earned jack with his play - the sample size is way too small to make an argument one way or the other.
I made an argument saying you made a whole bunch of assumptions - you seem to make an argument that I am making a whole bunch of assumptions as well. Yup. We are both looking at the same facts and coming up with two very different conclusions - that's because the sample size is insufficient to make any one of our claims come true. That's my point.
You are making assumptions:
The data is factual (well - the faceoff data is wrong so who knows how credible the other numbers are, but we'll look past that for now). What you say the data indicates is your opinion about what you think these stats mean. When you make a claim about what a fact means, you are assuming something additional to the fact (data) to be the case - ex. that you're opinion is also a fact. So don't tell me you are giving the facts - you're just giving your opinion about the facts.
Other points:
Draisaitl in EDM is a good example? You want to cite EDM as a good example of developing young players? EDM doesn't have NHL calibre centers after RNH so they put a high-profile kid on the 2nd line by default. Does 2G3A5P in 17GP look like a 2nd line center who deserves his minutes to you? Look at where EDM is in the standings and look where VAN is.
Yes, for sure what I've said about practice is 100% assumption. But tell me. Honestly. Do you not think that, if Bo was outplaying any one of Henrik, Bonino or Richardson (our top 9 centers) on a consistent basis during practice for the past two weeks, that Willie Desjardins would at least try him one game in the top 9? Does that seem like a real stretch to you?
Well, that was an assumption based on one fact:
That you and I watch only the games to measure Bo's performance,
While WD watches the games and practices to measure Bo's performance.
Just like your opinions made assumptions based on facts from Behindthenet.
"Add em up big boy", mmm kay. I can see what type of person I'm dealing with here.
I prefer to get #'s the advanced stats websites. I linked them in my previous post. Therefore, the #'s are accurate. NHL use these site as well.
I 'm also not sure how you can make assumptions based on a players advanced stats. The #'s are concrete. Either he was on the ice for 'x' shots against or he hasn't Either he was on the ice for 'x' goals against, or he wasn't. These are called facts, which as I've already stated have been collected by Behind the Net (a website which man NHLteams use):
- He's played more than 9 min TOI in exactly 1 game this yr. Been given exactly 2 seconds of PP time, 1:40 of PK time.
- He's taken 52 face-offs - exactly 6 of them while starting in the offensive zone. And won 65% of the defensive zone draws he's taken....... which by the way is the best % of any Canucks centre by a country mile.
- He's been on the ice for exactly 1 goal against.
- He has the 6th best corsi relative to his teammates (forwards only), despite starting the 'team lowest' 33% of his shifts in the offensive zone.
- He's been given, by far, the worst wingers on the team every single game.
- Only Vrbata, Hank and Dank have fewer shots against/per ice time. *Keep in mind those 3 players start 55+% of shifts startin in the ozone. Horvat is 33%*
Please explain how any of the above is my assumption.
Also, did I say EDM was a good example of developing prospects? Answer: No. You are trying to twist this my post into something that works for some new argument you're trying to make. Refer to my original post for my statement, which is also a fact. His most common line mates were better than Horvats line mates (via advanced stats). And players line mates do influence their play and #'s, refer to any WOWY (which are also facts cause they are hard #"s);
I have zero idea what's in Willis mind, I never met the guy. So I'm not going to speak to what he would or would not do re: Bo in practice.
-
1
-
-
The only word I could see is exactly
It's a good word, I'm glad you can see it.
Which have been the others?
There have been many IMO, Linden hiring, food/concession changes, Gillis firing etc.
-
He's not supposed to be given every opportunity to make this team. He has to earn it.
Firstly, a little mistake - Bo took 8 offensive zone faceoffs, not 6. Still, it's a very small number of o-zone starts.
Secondly, 65% on 16 total defensive draws is not significant, and as the sample size increases, his numbers will drop. Also, I doubt he would sustain those numbers while taking the number of draws Henrik, Bonino or Richardson has had to take against the competition they face. Basically, Bo is being sheltered (I don't know why though, since he did fairly well vs LAK in that one game - this is puzzling to me as well). And something is off in your numbers again because you can't get 65% out of 16 draws (10/16 yields 62.5% and 11/16 yields 68.75%).
Thirdly, Corsi might have to do with Bo not playing much in the 3rd or when games matter and the score is tight.
And If you think Bo will maintain his low "shots against per ice-time" if he's given top 9 minutes you are only fooling yourself. Also, what do you expect the 4th line center to get - Daniel and Vrbata? The classic argument for a prospect that his linemates aren't good enough is getting old. He needs to do better to deserve better linemates.
Lastly, you are making all these assumptions based on limited game action and interpreting statistics positively to construct your view even though the sample size is clearly too small to make an argument for one way or another.
Willie Desjardins sees this kid go up against Henrik, Bonino and Richardson every day in practice.
They probably face off against each other, defend, attack, etc. If Bo excelled in practice, I'm sure Desjardins would have given him a shot. The lines are based on performance during games and during practice.
You don't try things out in a game when you don't see it in practice. Bo is probably not exactly killing it out there against our top 9 centers in practice. If he was beating Richardson day in and day out in practice, I am 100% sure we would see Bo on the 3rd line by now. So, when you see him on the 4th line, that's where he should be based on everything WD has seen so far.
That being said, Bo is not by any means looking out of place. He's holding his own well in the limited ice time he gets. I, too, wonder what he would look like if he wasn't getting sheltered like he was in the past two games. Perhaps he would have been burned and we would have lost those games - or perhaps he would have gotten a goal or assisted on one to get us a W.
Bo has 4 games remaining before management will make a decision on him. Let's see if he can break out a little and get more minutes. I think this little break after the Arizona game might help him get some more practices in and gain a little more of the coach's confidence in those practices.
And my point was that he earned it.
And It was 6 ozone draws: Link Also my #'s aren't off, it's called rounding. He took 14 D zone draws, won 9.
Of course Horvat isn't taking the # of draws the other centres are - cause he wasn't given the opportunity. Which was my point. So what you evaluate is what you have, small sample sizes.
How does his corsi have do with him not getting TOI in the certain periods, or when game his close? His corsi rel is good, that would indicate they would want/need him in those situations. But they don't, which was my point.
You are assuming his SA/60 will go up if his TOI does. There's no indicator of that, that's just a guess. is SA/60 is relative to teams TOI. We won't know unless we see him play more. So perhaps you are fooling yourself into believing your assumptions are fact.
Plenty of prospects get decent line mates, even on 9 game tryouts. Draisaitl in EDM is a good example for this season (Perron,Purcell are his most common linemates. It's not even an argument that's players line mates influence their play/advanced stats. All you have to do is take a look at WOWYs.
I am not making any assumptions. There are advanced stats websites, which I've used to provide the data. I've voiced my opinion about how he's being treated despite a good showing in 5 games.
We all realize he's only played 5 hockey games thus far, which I outlined above.
You can talk about what you 'think' is going on in Wilies mind. That's fine, but that's more assumption than anything I've written. I was simply posting some facts about Horvats play this far, relaying that they are good #'s and wondering why they aren't using him. Given the dog and pony show this summer about doing everything to make the fans happy, I assumed they were giving Horvat 9 games as apart of that. Cause it they were serious, his early #'s would indicate he's ready for more opportunity.
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
I'm not sure how anyone could say "he was given every opportunity with the Canucks in this 5 game try out. It's hogwash anyway you look at it. He was not given a chance, period.
- He's played more than 9 min TOI in exactly 1 game this yr. Been given exactly 2 seconds of PP time, 1:40 of PK time.
- He's taken 52 face-offs - exactly 6 of them while starting in the offensive zone. And won 65% of the defensive zone draws he's taken....... which by the way is the best % of any Canucks centre by a country mile.
- He's been on the ice for exactly 1 goal against.
- He has the 6th best corsi relative to his teammates (forwards only), despite starting the 'team lowest' 33% of his shifts in the offensive zone.
- He's been given, by far, the worst wingers on the team every single game.
- Only Vrbata, Hank and Dank have fewer shots against/per ice time. *Keep in mind those 3 players start 55+% of shifts startin in the ozone. Horvat is 33%*
This is exactly the type of player that has earned more ice time. You couldn't write the script better. Yet after his best game of the season against the defending Cup champions, he's been given less than 8 min each of the last 2 games. And been demoted to the 4th line with scrubs.
They've in now way given him any type of opportunity to succeed, other than placing his nameplate in the locker room. I honestly believe this is another horse and pony show from the Canucks brass to make the fan base happy, "give the top prospect a few games to make the fans happy". There's no other way to explain the way they're using (or not using him). I won't explain in detail how he's currently a better option than Richardson or Matthias (cause he is an the #'s prove it). But I will say, send him back to Jr. where he can play big minutes instead of being wasted in Van and being trotted out as a prize to the fan base.
-
9
-
Meaning what? He played better for a worse team?
That's good for the Canucks, cause they're not as good as the Blues right now.
You posted "played for worst team in league"
Inferring his poor stats last season were tied to playing behind a poor Buffalo team. I posted "his stats were better in Buff than Stl".
Meaning, that's not really an argument I'd use if I were trying to sell Miller to Canucks.
I'm saying it doesn't matter if he played behind a bad Buff team, or STL team that gave up some of the fewest scoring chances in the league - he's not a gamble i would take. As I mentioned in the other thread, he's not an upgrade on rookie Lack IMO.
-
1
-
-
Played on the worst team in the league...
That's a funny argument. Cause his stats were better in Buffalo than they were in St Louis.
Yeah, let's ignore the facts where Miller played on BUFFALO. The god damn SABRES.
Also, to people wanting Hiller... He did WORSE than Miller while on the best team in the West and got chased by a 20 year old goalie
Haven't really looked at Hillers stats.
I dont want Miller, but this is laughable.... he played for the worst team in the league 3/4 of the year... put Patrick Roy in his prime on that buffalo team and let's see how good the stats are..
Again, better stats in Buff than St Louis.
-
He took the words right out of my mouth:
Dimitri Filipovic @DimFilipovic 9mRyan Miller had the exact same even strength save % as Steve Mason, James Reimer, and Ilya Bryzgalov last season. #Logoff, Vancouver. -
Miller had a .923 SV% and a 2.72 GAA with a team that finished with the worst record in the league. That's all you need to know.
I don't think it's fair to put the sole blame on him for the Blues loss to Chicago either. The blues were not good enough.
Even strength save percentage is a better indicator than overall save sv% that you quoted.... as per stats guys.
Hes 33 yrs old with a lot of mileage, coming off his worst ev sv% in a long time - a possible sign of decline. I wouldn't take that risk.
-
He had a .913 even strength save percentage last season. Welllllllll below league average. Eddie Lack had a .921 even strength save percentage in his first season as a NHL player (league average), and got slammed with 19 straight starts. Not sure why Canucks would have an interested in Miller, Lack/Markstrom would likely produce similar or better numbers.
Lack would outplay him my christmas and this team would be in the midst of another goalie controversy. A big no thanx to Miller.
-
2
-
-
So apparently Jets are pushing hard for 1st overall..speculated package around 9th + byfuglien+ or even evander kane might be in play.
Might be a bidding war, hopefully canucks stay put at 6th + tanev + something small and not try to outbid the jets. It could end up being a big overpayment when its all said and done.
@GeorgeRichards: #FlaPanthers Tallon says he doesn't want to drop any farther than eighth in the first round. Let the rumors begin.
-
A few things that jumped out:
A week ago, Tallon said he got 1 fair offer for the 1st pick. A few days after that Friedman o team 1040 said he didn't think canucks had made an offer yet for that pick. Today Friedman said they have made an offer, and Tallonsaid he's still only received 1 fair offer. So that basically means he didn't like Canucks offer.
I don't like idea of trading Shinny, 6th pick and a roster player for Reinhart. I don't think Canucks have the depth to do that deal. I would rather have Shinny, Ehlers, roster player than Reinhart ( who isn't even a concencus 1st overall pick). I think those are the type of moves that leave the Canucks in the depth issues they face today.
Kesler. Wowee. If he really wants out, he needs to pull his head out of his $&@ and expand his list. I am getting the sense his list decreased instead of increased. Again, Nash had a 10 team list whe he asked for trade. He expanded it to 12 after he wasn't trade at deadline. Sounds like Kes is doing the opposite which says to me he doesn't really want out - wich I guess is fine cause they're better with him o n roster.
-
From Garrioch's column today, http://www.ottawasun.com/2014/06/14/calgary-flames-make-pitch-for-sens-captain-jason-spezza
The other top option is the St. Louis Blues, but they've been holding talks with the Vancouver Canucks to see if there's any deal there for Ryan Kesler and may want to see where that leads.
-
1
-
-
Botchford had mentioned a few days ago that Benning is really high on the local boys (Virtanen/Reinhart). And that Fla is high on Garrison and looking for a quality d-man in trade for 1st overall.
While both Reinhart/Virtanen are great players, this smells like a "please the fans" move (like the Gillis firing/ Linden hiring) more than anything. I hope they take the best player available despite birth location.
And if they are trading up, the only d-man that's expendable is Garrison (IMO). Tanev is too much to give-up IMO.
-
But that's not what I'm debating, even if there is some worth to that. People like you are saying he doesn't want to be here at all and his value is dropping like a stone because of it so we should move him now, maybe for whatever we can get, before we get stuck with no return, etc., etc., etc. and all that.
When Friedman reports something he's gotten from speaking with a source himself, he usually says the source or at least calls it an unnamed source. I haven't seen him do so. That's not to say he and all the other insiders haven't found more sources, but it certainly doesn't rule out that they're all going off the same original source as Lavoie (or even just his tweet).
That's not true at all. He talks/writes about so many rumors - I've rarely heard him say what you've said. A guy like Friedman isn't going to speak on team 1040 (which he has done many times) and write articles about Kesler requesting a trade - when his source is some guy on twitter. He's been saying Kesler requested trade for months now - along with many other insiders. If it was inaccurate, the Canucks brass would be publicly talking about "how Kesler hasn't requested a trade". Insiders like Friedman don't go around talking about high end players requesting trades when they have 3rd string sources - they'd get skewered.
Just to reiterate that point, here's the quote again:
Again, Overhardt has only talked about the underlined part based on Friedman's 30 thoughts. Friedman hasn't directly attributed the bolded part to Overhardt at all; that's Friedman's statement. Friedman also makes no claims to his source or if he has one other than Lavoie's original tweet. The same goes for the other insiders who've been talking about the situation (rather than breaking or even independently confirming the news that Kesler has asked for a trade).
People equating multiple tweets from multiple people they follow on Twitter to meaning there are multiple sources for those multiple tweets is my issue. One doesn't equal the other. I've asked this in the past Kesler threads, but if you have other sources than the Lavoie tweet that would confirm Kesler has asked for a trade only then is the debate over it's validity closed.
I believe he's approached the team about the possibility of a trade based on what I know, but then that's why I brought up semantics earlier. That doesn't mean he's forcing a trade, or even that he's the one that wants a trade to begin with. Nor does it mean we should sell him off OBO, especially if it's well below asking price.
I don't have any NHL sources, that's why I rely on a few key 'insiders' to lead the way. When all of said insiders have said Kesler asked for a trade - I'm going to believe them.
I don't necessarily think he's 'forcing' a trade, after all - he could Marty St. Louis this team if he wanted. But I think the Canucks are trying to convince him to stay - and I think that's a bad idea for many different reasons. I think they are best off trading him this summer - if he'll agree to expand his list. If not, things get dicey.
-
That's a bit leading as well, and you're reading into it. I can see that as why would Overhardt want to address something that isn't true?
I don't think we need to debate the possibility of a trade, but how much it's being forced if at all is absolutely in question. Don't read too much into things is all I'm saying.
There is nothing misleading about:
Newly hired Canucks GM Jim Benning said he would like to meet with Ryan Kesler, who requested a tradeNor it is it the first time he, or any other hockey insider, has said this.
Every hockey "insider" has piggybacked off of the first tweet.
Kesler, agent, teammates have all said he didnt ask for a trade, as douchey as some hockey players can be, I doubt kesler would let teammates speak definitively on his behalf and deny he asked for a trade if he actually had asked, only makes himself and teammates look like fools if . I would not doubt that that Gillis approached him to see if he was open to a trade. hence the list, after all gillis was fighting for his job. explains why other gms were calling, even gillis is not dumb enough to waste other gms time by talking offers if he hadnt of asked kesler first if he was open to trades and to what teams. But even then there is a big difference between asking for a trade and being open to one.
Some of the hockey insiders piggy back off eachother - not all. The McKenzies, Friedmans, LeBrun will get their own confirmation. All have said Kesler asked for a trade. Linden/Benning have never denied Kesler asked for a trade when they're asked about it every other day. Keslers agent is now talking about it on record.
I don't know people are still debating about it's validity. When it happened, why it happened is up for debate IMO.
-
But that's just it, he wouldn't go on record for anything about what it'd take to change Kesler's mind. From the qupte you posted earlier:
And they didn't specifically talk about talking to the Sedins, Bieksa, etc. because no one asked specifically about whether or not they'd be staying and there hasn't been a rumour about them wanting a trade this past year.
Don't read so much into such a small thing.
It's a bit of semantics about whether he did or didn't request a trade, but suffice it to say it may not be him that wants out, nor the team that wants to trade him. As he's said, it's not that he doesn't want to be here.
Friedman was saying "what it would take to change his mind ...... to stay in Vancouver". Meaning, he doesn't want to be here.
Even regardless of what Friedman posted, every other hockey insider has said Kesler asked for a trade. Every single one. Not sure why people are even debating it at this point.
Why did Kesler deny it? Who knows. Prob cause he's not guaranteed to be moved, and he doesn't want to be booed in his own arena (like Luongo did). Or get horassed by fans on the street who are angry he requested a trade. Or cause he came up through the pro ranks with most guys on his current team and doesn't want to offend them.
-
I think we're reading that differently. What I get from your part of the post is your impression is that Kesler has again requested a trade since the management change and that it's all but a given he will be moved. Warhippy's reply further suggests that impression means his trade value will be reduced and we'll be lucky to get much of anything for him.
Here's how I took it: he'd talked about a trade earlier in the season and is very much involved with speaking to the new management. Even Overhardt didn't confirm anything more than that, that Kesler had asked for a trade and has already met with Linden with another meeting coming up with Benning.
The 6th point (2nd paragraph from the quote) from Friedman's 30 thoughts is all opinion or restating past rumours. Kesler has stated he wants to stay, which Bieksa confirmed, so him being open to a trade can certainly depend on the direction of the team and the forces that led to the trade request in the first place.
There's a big gap between putting up his list of teams he'd accept a trade to and demanding a trade. Only the latter would force the Canucks hand and have any significant affect on Kesler's value.
I won't get into the specifics of how it can be (and can't with the board rules) that he's approached the team about a trade but doesn't want one but I very much feel he isn't forcing a trade at this point. There's a good possibility he stays if A. we don't get good value in trade offers or B. Linden and Benning want him to stay and Kesler agrees.
I'm a bit confused by your post, but that's ok. Been a long day
Friedman, LeBrun, Botchford, Lavoie, Mckenzie have all stated Kesler requested a trade (Freidman reiterated it in his collumn). I don't think he re-requested a trade with the new regime, I think the request was always on the table (just as Luongos was). Kesler denied the trade request, as did Bieksa. So whys Kesler agent talking on the record about "what it would take to change Keslers mind"? And why would all of these hockey insiders say that he has requested a trade - as fact.
Linden and Benning have been very open about talking to Kesler about his future plans with this team. If there was nothing there, why didn't they specifically talk about talking to the Sedins, or Bieksa, or any other Canuck?
I don't know how anyone could think he didn't request a trade. Prob the same people who think Luongo didn't request a trade. And because I believe that, I can't see how they want to keep him. He doesn't want to be here, why would they want him here. Time to make the trade IMO.
-
If this is true.
Yup
His value will now diminish to the point of worthlessness if it drags out.
I also cannot see him signing here in two years.Trade him
Ya, at this point I'm taking it as true. Enough sources (Mckenzie, LeBrun, Friedman, Botch etc) have reported it. Now his agent is talking with the media about it - which is not ideal. At all.
Just pray to the hockey gods that he expands his list or it's gonna be a tough trade.
-
Friedmans 30 thoughts today:
5. Newly hired Canucks GM Jim Benning said he would like to meet with Ryan Kesler, who requested a trade. There's a lot of info flying around about the centre. Here's what agent Kurt Overhardt would confirm: that he and Kesler have met once with Canucks president Trevor Linden, who met solely with Kesler on a second occasion. Both sides agreed to have another discussion once the new GM and head coach were hired.
6. Here's what Overhardt would not address: What it would take to change Kesler's mind. Both Linden and Benning talk about the Canucks retooling on the fly, and, from what a couple sources say about Kesler, that's a critical part of the discussion. He's suffered some pretty painful losses in his career (2010 Olympics, 2011 Stanley Cup, 2014 Olympics) and badly wants to win. The agent also wouldn't talk about Kesler's list of teams (Anaheim Ducks, Chicago Blackhawks, Colorado Avalanche, Detroit Red Wings, Pittsburgh Penguins, Tampa Bay). It is believed, however, that group may change.
It's time to trade Kesler. I've been on the fence for some time, not sure what rumors to believe. But Friedman is writing in 'facts' with this piece. As in fact: Kesler asked for a trade. Kesler wants to win sooooooo badly that of the 23 other teams in the league, the Avalanche and Red Wings have a better shot at the cup over LA, SJS, STL, Bost etc? Caman. He wants out of Van and he wants a select destination (which is technically his right with a NTC). You don't think the Sedins, or 85% of the Canucks current roster, haven't suffered through some painful losses? Caman. Don't hear them requesting a trade.
It's time to send Kesler on his merry way and get the best package available.
-
1
-
-
First off, thanks for the link, RW. Added that to my folder of hockey bookmarks.
Unfortunately, we can't see the possession stats for the Preds' best offensive years, which was 2005-7; those were the numbers I was the most curious to see.
This is only speculation, but based on Linden's comments when he was hired and the assumption that Benning is indeed the next GM, I'd guess that they're going to shoot for a "rebuild-on-the-fly". Benning's strength is his scouting background, so even if we do rebuild, it'd be years before we'd see the fruits of his labour specifically.
In the meantime, the organization is infamously handcuffed with a lot of NTC/NMC contracts, but I'd expect if there's a reasonable offer to convert some of the Canucks moveable assets into picks/prospects, they'll do it. In other words, I don't expect wholesale changes (which is fine) but there'll probably be some reduction of the old core; I think the Canucks still need to retain a strong veteran presence to bring up whatever youth can be served.
Various stats nerds have gone back and manually calculated possession metrics for many teams (for the yrs not posted on Extra Skater etc). You might be able to find them on the net somewhere.
Ya, I assume re-tooling as well -based on Lindens comments.
How about a suggestion of who's innovative enough and please include your choices previous stats and accolades. Thank you.
Should I include my fingerprints too?
Stevens would be my choice - as he was last season (and allegedly Gillis's too). LAs been a top possession team for many yrs (esp under his tenure), had success with a great back end (just as Van has a great back end IMO). LA hasn't always been a powerhouse team, but have well above avg possesion metrics since he joined the team (of course, it could be coincidence with a team developing). They use advanced stats, get updates between periods - so he's not only familiar but experienced with them. In particular, I like his usage of the dmen (which was apparently his responsibility). It suggest to me that he would deploy "Sedin like" zone starts for the forwards and d-men to suit they strengths.
-
I don't know about you, but I've been getting my numbers from Extra Skater and the stats on their site only goes back a couple of years. (BTW, if you know of a site that has advanced stats from earlier seasons, I'd love to know about it.) I'd be curious to see what Nashville's possession stats were during the mid-2000's when they had a much better offence.
Still, the main reason why I'd really like to see Trotz as the Canucks head coach is because of the uncertainty regarding the roster moving forward. At this point, we fans don't know whether there's going to be a full rebuild, a slight re-tooling, or something in between. Given that, Trotz's key attribute is his well-known capability of working with whatever roster he has. No matter what the Canucks management decides to do with the roster, if Trotz is the head coach, there's good reason to expect that he'll get the best out of what he has.
Ya, the earliest season you can find advanced stats online is 07/08. Extra skater, Behind the Net, also another great site for WOWYs etc: Link
It's kind of odd that we don't really know what this teams plan is for next season. Are they re-buidling, re-tooling? I wonder if Lindens doesn't know and he's waiting for a new GM to determine this.
-
Looking at things with a wider or macro approach is good, but I also think that when it comes to analytics, there's a lot of context to take into account. NJD's higher possession metrics make sense, now that I've seen some of the players on there roster (I don't follow the Devils at all); NSH simply never had the players to play a possession game.
Another example of possession metrics not telling the whole story: the Canucks possession metrics were actually very good last season, believe it or not. Look how far that got them.
Ya I totally agree, there's more context to take into account re: Nashville. But from what I've seen, it's enough to raise a red flag from my perspective.
Ya, I knew Van was a decent possession team last yr. It happens, rarely, that a strong possession team doesn't make the playoffs. IMO had Torts followed advanced stats this team would have been in the playoffs. But I guess that's off topic.
-
I don't think he can be pinned with NSH's weakness up front and I will offer a different set of stats:
If you look up the offensive output of their top offensive players, even those acquired in trade, their numbers are consistent. For example, Mike Fisher's offensive numbers didn't drop off after being traded from a more offensive team in Ottawa. Martin Erat's numbers actually declined after being traded away from Nashville to an offensive team in WSH. Their best current player, Hornqvist has had a steady climb (expected because of his age).
To me, that's a pretty good indication that the inability to score is not because of coaching.
Edit: just looked up both rosters and NJD and NSH are far from comparable when it comes to their forwards. NJD still has some solid offensive players in Zajac, Henrique, Ryder, Elias and even Jagr. NSH doesn't even come close.
Ya, I wasn't trying to say Nashs problems were strictly up front. A poster was saying Nash was weak up front and Trotz did the best with what he had.
My analysis is based on more of a macro approach. Of course no 2 rosters are the same in the league. Both Nash and NJD are considered defense first teams - but one has had consistently better possession metrics. And again, my major concern is advanced stats and possesion metrics with Trotz.
Bo Horvat | #53 | C
in Alumni
Posted
This is a Horvat thread, so I'll stick to that. Yes I believe there was a horse and pony show this summer (you don't have to that's fine). I was simply saying Horvats audition is a continuation of what I believed to have happened this summer.