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

oldnews

Members
  • Posts

    53,830
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    186

Everything posted by oldnews

  1. just a moment. Apparently, plus/minus and/or on ice goals against - over a slightly larger sample than 17 games - his season here before going to Pittsburgh - are enough to make a player "the worst defenseman in the NHL." Let's be fair to Gudbranson though - let's also look at his previous season here to see if it confirms this. Gudbranson in 2017/18: 42.8% ozone starts / 43.9% corsi 2.0 on ice goals against. -7 Interesting thing - Gudbranson allegedly 'drags down every partner he plays with, right. His three principal partners in 17/18: Edler = 29.8% of shared ice time 5 on 5. Edler 46.0% ozone starts / 46.8% corsi -18 3.0 on ice goals against per 60 Del Zotto = 28.8% shared ice time 48.2% ozone starts / 46.0 corsi -8 2.9 on ice goals against Hutton = 26.7% shared ice time 51.9% ozone starts / 49.1 corsi -9 2.4 on ice goals against per 60. All three of them: 1) higher ozone starts 2) worse plus/minus 3) higher on ice goals against.. Hmmj. If he was awful here - a failed trade - and a disappointment - apparently the entire blueline (perhaps Tanev an exception) were even more 'failed' than Gudbranson - at least by the metrics standards by which it's ok to sandbag him. But, but Gudbranson was dragging them all down - and - on the verge of the NHL's worst defenseman! Sorry if I added a metric or two (zone starts) when I should have just cherry-picked one - but the points I'm trying to make - these measures by which he was allegedly the NHL's worst - were entirely contradicted by last year's sample - not only not the worst in the NHL, but nowhere near the worst among the Canucks top 6 - actually, arguably in their top 2 by these reductive/limited standards. When I watched him did I see a guy meeting his perceived potential - not necessarily (nor the team as a whole) - but I also wasn't ready to join in the absurd chorus of "he's the worst" drivel. Here's the difference between those of us that 'defend' him - we're not claiming he's the NHL's best defenseman. On the other hand, there's a laughable chorus claiming he's the worst...... I was I ready to see what he'd be in due course, when this team as a whole improves. In any event, we're getting to see what he looks like on a contender....I guess some people are expecting that to radically change and confirm their absurd claims....I wouldn't hold my breath on that.
  2. fill your boots. quote something. So what "you were saying" doesn't qualify.
  3. Ok thanks for letting me off the hook.......after you've exposed me. Confession: I suspected they were going to trade Gudbranson - so I bought a plane ticket - to disappear/hide on a beach, hoping no one on CDC would notice my absence. I guess it didn't work. It was kinda cowardly.
  4. You're making a fool of yourself with this - and like I said, don't know what you're talking about. If you''re going to purport to monitor my activity here - try to get the basic facts straight.
  5. Whiff. What I do understand is that you don't know what you're talking about - and are probably just guntrixing in any event . I don't 'disappear" / shy away from answering for my opinions./ posts - if/when I'm wrong - and you are nore than welcome to go to the Gudbranson trade thread - read what I posted- at the time of the trade. I'll understand if you 'disappear' without acknowledging this was a flake news allegation of yours.
  6. Well, now it's official! I had my doubts, but when MSN.com / espresso makes a slide-show.... Only rainbows and unicorns can deny the word. I had a look, just for fun. Within the first handful of slides... Ristolainen - his 40 pts, 225 hits, 121 blocks, 24:42 / game of the hardest minutes on that blueline - of a young, not very good team - is on the slideshow.....because....plus/minus! Evander Kane - with his 29 goals - 169 hits, 46 takeaways (+10 turnover differntial) is in the slideshow.....because....penalty minutes. "The thing about penalty minutes is that they're bad, and no one has more of them than Evander Kane." Two of the worst players in the NHL. Jesse Puljujaarvi. Yes folks, even 20 year olds can qualify. Meh - at least he didn't cause the Oilers to miss the playoffs. That would be Reider's fault. Thankfully for Gudbranson, there are other 'worst players in the NHL' - likeTanner Pearson!....that they can be traded for. 7 goals in 17 games here aint gonna change that = one of, if not the worst forward in the NHL.
  7. I'm just relieved that Bennng managed to get rid of that contract. I thought Gudbranson was virtually unmoveable - might cost more assets to get someone to eat his horrible terms. Unfortunately, Bennig couldn't just waive him - because no one would have claimed the worst defenseman in the NHL. Instead, he had to take back the worst forward in the NHL. You gotta get to give.
  8. The thing about "advanced stats" - they need to be kept in context as well. Doughty this year: 47.6% corsi 48,9% ozone starts 1.9 on ice goals for per 60 (that's actually lower than Gudbranson's was here this year). Nothing special about those whatsoever - could be mistaken for any replacement level defenseman in the NHL. It's a funny thing what playing on a bottomfeeder can do to a player's 'advanced stats'.
  9. Yours was every bit as weak a cherry pick. In fact, it's misleading enough that if you look at last year's numbers in Vancouver... Gubranson's on ice goals against was 2.0. Lower than Hutton 2.4, Tanev 2.5, Stecher 2.8, and Edler 3.0..... These are the simplistic types of goldfishing that would lead a person to believe Horvat was one of the worst players in the NHL in 2015/16.
  10. LOL. Saw this by chance - notice you didn't have the integrity to @oldnews - and venture a response. I just wish I hadn't made such a fool of myself now that he's getting re-exposed as the NHL's worst defenseman in Pittsburgh. What was I thinking? Only people as stupid as me are the Penguins. 40.6% ozone starts and +6 in that context. 52.6% coris 1.4 on ice goals against per 60. Another stupid coach there - dumb enough to mistake him for a principal penalty killer (the idea that he was 'protected' / sheltered here is about as dumb and uninformed as they come). Meh, what's context worth lol?
  11. I guess you have a hard time seeing the irony in that cherry-pick - and how laughably it backfires on you. Rob Blake is a Hall of Fame defenseman lol. Mark Giordano is probably the best defenseman in the NHL - easily this year's front runner for the Norris, and perenially under-rated. Dustin Byfuglien is a six-time Norris nominee, 1 time Hart nominee, 6 time all-star. Thomas Chabot - in 2nd place - is probably the best young defenseman in the game today. What embarrassing company lol. Like this thread as a whole - you're outsmarting yourself - and moreover, the irony of the OP bumping this yesterday - as Gudranson literally makes bigger fools with every passing game in Pittsburgh - of the people who believe/believed this nonsense.
  12. He might not continue at that pace of shooting percentage - but on the other hand it's also possible that - when this team is healthy - he and Horvat might see more opportunity / might find themselves playing up less tilted ice. Pearson's 'possession' numbers - like Horvat's naturally and in large part because of Horvat - are quite good - with 42.9% ozone starts and a 50.6% corsi (Horvat 41.0 and 50.0). So while they may be converting on chances at a relatively high rate - that may be in part because they have a very good counterpunch element to their game - and are producing high quality chances - but they're also facing relatively strong quality of competition in a fair amount of matchup minutes. With Sutter in the lineup, taking a lot of dzone starts/draws, and handling (along with Beagle) a lot of what Horvat has been drawn into - Horvat/Pearson might actually be even more effective/harder to handle. It will be interesting to see - because a large part of what makes Horvat so good is his two-way game, and when he's actually winning those head to head battles against the opposition's best players, I wonder how much of that is translating into being more threatening when in possession, because the opposition's best scorers aren't necessarily their best defenders....so counterpunching in those circumstances could in part explain why he's so able to maintain his production despite 'harder' minutes (I put that in quotes because while the defending aspect of those minutes are certainly harder when facing highly skilled, top lines of opponents, perhaps there is a counterpoint when it comes to gaining possession against those players, and them in turn having to defend him...In those circumstances, those opponents may not actually be as effective in defending against him as their 'bottom 6' or matchup lines are.... However, I do think it bodes well when the team has those two veteran shutdown centers - because Horvat's line will be less taxed, will get more ozone starts, opponents will still have to key on Pettersson's line - and it creates circumstances where the Canucks have a pair of threats to contend with - while also having a pair of dedicated shutdown centers in addition to Horvat....
  13. Uh - you were 14 pages into a thread that had a whole lot of people liking the deal for Calgary - and the other poster quoted himself a page or two ago..... I don't think you read the thread and maybe still haven't - no "weird I'm the only one" doesn't represent - at all.
  14. Also another poster boy for a 1st overall pick - or marquis free agent signing - not necessarily making your team "all that". The irony - the Leafs proclaimed themselves Stanley Cup favorites with this signing - and their lottery win. Are they really much, if any better than last year? And second - the Islanders - lost their franchise player/1st overall......and they are sitting with 99 pts - also ironically - tied with the Leafs lol (after finishing 7th in the Metro division last year).
  15. thankfully we can bet that Thomas Gradin, Ron Delorme (who was assertive on Pettersson) et al have a pretty good handle on how good he is (or isn't).
  16. I hate change. Not really, but sometimes, yes. And waste. And throwaway, consumer culture - with "new" merchandise at endless intervals to milk revenue out of. What does any of it have to do with hockey, or 'identity'? How often do the NHL's signature franchises - the original six - change their jerseys? Messing with things is not always a great idea.
  17. Yeah - it's hard to project a spot on a depth order to a player without knowing who they'd pair him with, who else would remain in the mix. I think of Stralman as a defenseman that you can play in any spot on the depth chart - 1, 2 or 3 RHD - and that doesn't matter much imo. It's a large part of the reason I roll my eyes when I hear 'so and so is a 3rd pairing guy'...and therefore overpaid. It's not that simple, not even close. It's an interesting question about Stralman's fit - to me, because he'd probably at the top of the list of UFA D that I'd pursue if it were up to me. I'd wonder what might make him not a good fit. His age and the 'type' of defenseman he is might be ideal in the sense that he shouldn't command a long term contract, and as a shutdown defenseman, his cap might not be as inflated as the other names hitting the market. I'd be really hesitant to sign the guys that will be gettting 6 or 8 year deals - whereas Stralman might fit a shorter window. I don't know how ready a guy like Woo will be, how serviceable Chatfield or the other young RHD might be and would want to add in the absence of Gudbranson. I'm not one of those people who'd sign Schenn to be in the top 6 (I'd sign him for Utica depth though). I think with young guys like Hughes and Juolevi on the left side, relatively young D like Stecher and Hutton (possibly Pouliot but it's not looking good for him in the present), with only Edler and Tanev as veteran presences (and Edler not yet signed)....there's a need for another 'foundational' veteran, preferably a RHD. Who he'd best fit with isn't something I'd pretend to know without seeing how that would play out, but I don't think Biega or Schenn would be guys I'd project in the lineup (I think they're more likely/ideally competing for the 8 spot on the depth chart)...It will be interesting to see who the team targets though, and whether they'd want to add more of a puck-mover/play driving RHD instead (or who that would be) - or elect to leave a spot somewhat open to competition for a young guy to seize, and if not, let a placeholding Biega fill it in the interim. With a pmd like Hughes already here, other young D like Woo on the way, I think I'd want to remain somewhat flexible by not committing too long term to a UFA - and additionally, adding Stralman would give them more stability with Tanev expiring (if he prefers to move on / not re-sign or is dealt next year).
  18. Babcock on Kadri hit: "It's reviewable but we have good people at the League & they'll look after that. It won't be a problem."
  19. can someone photoshop a Canucks jersey on that boy?
  20. Their entire blueline has been within about 4 minutes ice-time of each other - which is where the concept of 1-2, 4-6 breaks down. The problem with the traditional top pairing, 2nd pairng, 3rd pairing conception of defensemen/corps - is that it doesn't really/necessarily work like that (any more). You have defensemen who are play-drivers, powerplay quarterbacks... Situationally, your 'top 4' in those contexts is not the same as it is for example if you're defending a lead late in a game. You have defensemen who are principally shutdown or penalty killers - they may be among your top 2 or top 4 guys that you utilize when defending a lead, or in games you take a lot of penalties, but not necessarily if you're playing from behind, etc. You have two-way guys that may be more versatile, but not necessarily fall in the top tier of either of those roles....but wind up eating more minutes than other guys who may 'rank' above them in those other more situational roles. If you take a player like Edler - then you have the 'traditional 'concept of a top pairing D - because he plays in all situations - powerplay, penalty kill, hard minutes/shutdown, situations you need production... But if you're looking at a player like Tanev, he probably 'ranks' as a top pairing guy in those hard-minutes. shutdown situations but isn't going to see powerplay icetime, isn't going to be a player you depend on to close a deficit. On the other hand, Hughes is unlikely to be a high minutes "top pairing" D - simply because it's unlikely he kills penalties, unlikely he eats the big, hard minutes....so is he a top 2, top 4 or what is he? Likewise with a guy like Gudbranson, who may be on your "top 4" defensively/situationally, but won't see powerplay time, won't see a lot of ozone starts or situations where you need production. I think the ice-times therefore fluctuate considerably depending on game situations - matchups/the makeup of opponents - the amount of penalties and powerplays - whether teams trail or lead in games, how healthy the rest of the blueline/lineup is. I think it actually makes more sense to rank players by roles on both sides of the game - and at that point it becomes more complicated but more representative. ie Hutton has played more minutes/game this year than Tanev or Stecher - but does that make him a 'top--pairing' D on this team? I'd say no, it doesn't. Biega is playing more than Hughes thus far - but does that make Biega a present 'top 4' or is there more to it? I thnk in the Pitts context you have Letang as a 'top pairing' guy - Schultz as a 'top 4' in offensive circumstances - and then on the other hand you have Dumoulin, Gudbranson...Johnson another guy that plays a LHD principally defensive role... it's further complicated by LHD and RHD effects - where coaches are looking for pairings that also fit situationally. Is Gubranson a "top 4" offensively = obviously not - is he a "top 4" defensively - arguably that's a clear yes, and was the case in Vancouver as well. When your "third pairing" D is playing 19:17 a game, clearly the traditional concept of a "3rd pairing" is no longer applying.
  21. Why is this so relatable?! I take back my other responses. This right here is probably what miffs me the most - not opponents, not other media or fanbases. The Colin Campbell....O'Halloran, Rooney, Lee, Sutherland et al gongshow. Probably nothing worse about the game.
  22. Dorsett as well.... Would be great to find another player (or two, or three) like these guys..
  23. this right here is something that time may never heal lol. that Keenan/Messier infiltration was the worst. the only good thing about it was that it prepared us for Tortorella, who by comparison is a relative fan-favorite.
×
×
  • Create New...