Chalky Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 I wouldn't debunk the Edler one just yet. His giveaways seem to come more in the sense of offensive puck possesion, essentially he kills the cycle. He is not having a great season, I agree, but his last full season was good, so is it really fair to judge a player based on this small a sample size? He needs to pick up his game for sure, but if a myth is created from this short a time-frame then I think we need to reconsider. He's not reaching his potential, he may never reach it again, I'll be ready to call it a myth in a years time if this goes on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chalky Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 Edler is far better than Hamhuis and bieksa. People just don't like to see it because they're racist and prefer to pump hammers and juices tires. I love all 3 but it's pathetic how people make their assumptions here. Edler is a number 1 dman. Racist? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 Here is a myth we can debunk The canucks are an elite team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coastal1 Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 Edler is far better than Hamhuis and bieksa. People just don't like to see it because they're racist and prefer to pump hammers and juices tires. I love all 3 but it's pathetic how people make their assumptions here. Edler is a number 1 dman. Edler is a of a different race? Now there is myth that needs debunking! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 I agree about debunking the myth that Edler is a giveaway machine. However, I do think that he gets walked around like a pylon the most out of all d-men. Is there a stat that logs scoring chances given up per 60 minutes? Also, as for the Sedins, points don't matter if you let the opposition score more than you when you are on the ice. Their playoff +- numbers is an absolute embarrassment considering they are elite players in the league. Moreover, have you guys seen any other stars in the league that end up on their butts as much as the Sedins? If there was a stat that shows how man times they ended up on the ice compared to how many times they put their check on the ice, the ratio would be something like 1 in 15 Leave it to CanucksJay to cite something like playoff +/- as an indicator of production, and make up a ridiculous knock down ratio. Myths remade. Here's Joe Thornton's lifetime playoff +/-. http://www.nhl.com/ice/player.htm?id=8466138 Tell us one of your creative absolute embarrassment CanucksJay stories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 Leave it to CanucksJay to cite something like playoff +/- as an indicator of production, and make up a ridiculous knock down ratio. Myths remade. Here's Joe Thornton's lifetime playoff +/-. http://www.nhl.com/i....htm?id=8466138 Tell us one of your creative absolute embarrassment CanucksJay stories. Yup, +/- only makes sense if you can compare it to others around the league. Otherwise it's just cherry picking. Context is important though, and the Sedins playing a cycle game means they're bound to get hit more often around the boards. They hold the puck for so long sometimes that they can get knocked down making a pass yet the Canucks are keeping possession, giving the defence more chance to knock them down. It's a far cry from someone like Raymond or Booth carrying the puck on their own only to get checked and allow the defence to get the puck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kmotamed Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 Luuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JelloIce Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 Now, the troubling part of all this is, Daniel hasn't scored a goal in the play-offs since Game 2 against Boston in 2011. One thing I will say, Assists don't win games, goals do. That being said, the Sedins still put up points in the play offs. Here's a mythical cliche that needs debunking too. When you get an assist, it means someone scored a goal. More assists naturally means more goals and vice versa. You can't split up the pairing for a cool one-liner and still expect to make sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lychees Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 1. Edler is far too inconsistent without the "older brother" mantra beside him it seems (Ohlund/Salo), which is why people state he is a giveaway machine. He makes quite a few gaffs per game that often lead to goals, whereas the other defenseman don't as much with the exception seeming to be Hamhuis 2.a Sedins are soft come from the fact they hardly drive to the net which is considered the dirty area. Not true due to their often physically punishing style of board cycling and having other players literally draped over them. Also pretty much used as uninformed "fans" as an insult to the Sedins 2.b Sedins are declining IS a sad truth, every player declines just others at a different pace. They are still a threat out there game after game, however you cannot deny their decline in point production as opposed to past years, yes they are asked to take on a more overall vital role in the team (defensive face-offs/PK/shot blocking) but as I've stated, every player declines 2.c Sedins don't show up in the playoffs, there's more to a game then scoring. Obviously it's what we need them to do but there's other ways to contribute, it's just that people who score get the glory-hog (see : Olympics 2010 & Crosby) 3. Luongo not being elite is based off his beachball games and what was often ghastly goals from stupid angles like behind the net. The fact that he's going to the olympics and by all means is debatable for starter is enough of an argument itself on his quality of goaltending. 4. Kassian is 23, how you can call someone a bust (unless it's obvious, see : Patrick White) at this point in time is ridiculous, stop comparing him to Hodgson and be accepting of what he contributes to the team relative to his contract at this point and time. So nothing new for fans who can think for themselves and don't follow the bandwagoners/other fans trains of thought. Okay. Next? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckleheadder Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 The statistics you provide for the Sedins' points vs number of hits does not prove they play better when they get hit more or are tough. That is simply an incorrect way of using statistics. There is a correlation between hits and points and a positive one. However it does not mean hits = more points. It also does not mean that Sedins' play just as good when they get hit more. A more in depth analysis could be done if you also cross reference their puck possession numbers vs hits vs points. They might simply have higher puck possession numbers and subsequently they get hit more IMHO. What I would have been curious to see is a pattern in shooting locations when they are successful and when they are not and look for a pattern in the types of teams they play. I do however think the Sedins' are very tough and have always thought so. All in all a very thoughtful post. Probably the best one on CDC in a long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted January 24, 2014 Share Posted January 24, 2014 Yup, +/- only makes sense if you can compare it to others around the league. Otherwise it's just cherry picking. Context is important though, and the Sedins playing a cycle game means they're bound to get hit more often around the boards. They hold the puck for so long sometimes that they can get knocked down making a pass yet the Canucks are keeping possession, giving the defence more chance to knock them down. It's a far cry from someone like Raymond or Booth carrying the puck on their own only to get checked and allow the defence to get the puck. Yes, good point Elvis. Being among the better puck possession players in the NHL certainly increases the amount of opportunities opponents have to throw hits (or cross checks, slashes, and cheap shots in general) - generally possession is required in order to throw/receive a hit. If the ratio were in fact as high as 15-1, that would indicate a pair of players that tend to have the puck all the time, ironically. Perhaps CanucksJay would prefer the opposition have possession. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CupisAll Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 what he sad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CupisAll Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 none of the above Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tortorella's Rant Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 Pretty much every goalie that plays(or played ) for the kings (scrivens included) is more "elite" then lu by your logic A teams overall defensive play is a big factor in goalie stats.... Lu's biggest criticisms have never been regular season stats.. but untimely chokejobs in the playoffs.. I'm saying they aren't because of the small sample size of games played even though some people have argued that they're better than Lu. Choking in the playoffs has been his problem, yes, but I can also find significant faults with the rest of the team as well. Even if he stood on his head at any of those times, it might not have been enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gross-Misconduct Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 Kassian's 14 points has not debunked anything. I'm one of Zack's critics and I never once called him a bust cause it's still way to early to call him anything, including a success. Torts said Zack hasn't even learned how to be a pro yet, so lets stop with the blind homer adulation. I voted Luongo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drewismyname Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 Edler has been the chess piece that has fallen which led to the loss of the majority of our games not won in the past three playoff exits. If enough people quote this and argue I will be more than happy to put together a post in Canucks Talk with video evidence of this opinion. I have already gone through the highlights of the past few years exits but acidentally hit the back button and lost the entire thing before I could post it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babych Posted January 25, 2014 Share Posted January 25, 2014 I don't know hockey. About time you admitted that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-sCi CoRe- Posted January 26, 2014 Share Posted January 26, 2014 Luongo is no longer elite gets my vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Singh Posted January 27, 2014 Share Posted January 27, 2014 People need to realize that teams play more defensively when back ups are in net. That, and sometimes they just get lucky. Look at Bobrovski, Vezina last year....and this year? my favourite quote ever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanucksJay Posted January 27, 2014 Share Posted January 27, 2014 Leave it to CanucksJay to cite something like playoff +/- as an indicator of production, and make up a ridiculous knock down ratio. Myths remade. Here's Joe Thornton's lifetime playoff +/-. http://www.nhl.com/i....htm?id=8466138 Tell us one of your creative absolute embarrassment CanucksJay stories. Lol, sorry, did I make up their career +- stats? Pretty sure that was their own doing. And what does Thornton have to do with anything? He's also known for being no show Joe come playoffs... Are you trying to help support my case? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.