FINAL Canucks "Top DAWG" Report under Tocchet - Just released.

[CanucksJay]

3 minutes ago, kilgore said:

 

I agree that this Dawg rating system is flawed.  It puts a lot of weight on physicality obviously.  I'm more interested how this rating coincides with my own eye test looking at all aspects of what a good d is.  In a lower post you said "He needs to work on his mobility" which I find odd. What kind of mobility are you talking about?  He's not nearly as mobile as Hughes in deking out players etc. (which actually can get Quinn in trouble when he tries to get too cute) But its not his job to make offensive rushes up the ice.

 

I'd argue Burroughs is exceptionally mobile compared to other defensemen on the team besides Quinn, within his own d zone. While other D hang onto the puck, panic and give it away, he is mobile in the sense he sees the ice well, and thinks the game very fast, and makes good quick decisions shielding the puck and getting it to a forward near the blue line better than the others. Many times that forward will then lose the puck, but thats not on Burroughs.  He also, from my eye test, is not out of position much. Very disciplined in that area too.  I just can't see any flaws with his game other than he can't seem to put up points.

 

 

I used to think Burroughs was decent mobility wise but I've seen some glaring mistakes on transition defence where he cant skate back fast enough while processing the play at the same time.

He seems better in set D situations where hes defending the cycle and then getting in the lane to block a shot etc.

 

I am strictly speaking defensively. 

Guys like Hughes, Myers have mobility (although Myers lacks in other areas)

I used to think OEL did too but it looks like either he lost a step or injuries slowed him own this year

 

Juulsen lacks mobility

then Schenn

then Burroughs

 

I'm talking just straight footspeed.  When a defender takes Burroughs hard outside, Burroughs does all he can to skate back as fast as he could but once the forward cuts or makes a move, I feel like Burroughs is swimming in the deep end and cant recover to take away the passing lane or close the gap etc.

 

 

 

 

 

[alt kilgore]

27 minutes ago, CanucksJay said:

I used to think Burroughs was decent mobility wise but I've seen some glaring mistakes on transition defence where he cant skate back fast enough while processing the play at the same time.

He seems better in set D situations where hes defending the cycle and then getting in the lane to block a shot etc.

 

I am strictly speaking defensively. 

Guys like Hughes, Myers have mobility (although Myers lacks in other areas)

I used to think OEL did too but it looks like either he lost a step or injuries slowed him own this year

 

Juulsen lacks mobility

then Schenn

then Burroughs

 

I'm talking just straight footspeed.  When a defender takes Burroughs hard outside, Burroughs does all he can to skate back as fast as he could but once the forward cuts or makes a move, I feel like Burroughs is swimming in the deep end and cant recover to take away the passing lane or close the gap etc.

 

 

 

 

 

I may be overlooking some things.  Because I'm rooting for him. I'll admit that.

But we will agree to disagree. You could be right about a situation where Burroughs is playing up too high and gets caught.  I would counter with the fact that that can happen to any D, and what Burroughs does is simply not be in the position for that to happen much. (playing too high, or choosing the wrong time to jump in) He is very conservative with his positioning. He may get in that kind of trouble when he doesn't read the play and gets caught. But that happens rarely, by my eyes, he just doesn't make those kinds of mistakes for that to be any kind of real problem for him. He is usually the first of the pairing to be back in his zone just because he reads the ice very well. Can you honestly say you've seen him burned like that much?

[CanucksJay]

37 minutes ago, kilgore said:

I may be overlooking some things.  Because I'm rooting for him. I'll admit that.

But we will agree to disagree. You could be right about a situation where Burroughs is playing up too high and gets caught.  I would counter with the fact that that can happen to any D, and what Burroughs does is simply not be in the position for that to happen much. (playing too high, or choosing the wrong time to jump in) He is very conservative with his positioning. He may get in that kind of trouble when he doesn't read the play and gets caught. But that happens rarely, by my eyes, he just doesn't make those kinds of mistakes for that to be any kind of real problem for him. He is usually the first of the pairing to be back in his zone just because he reads the ice very well. Can you honestly say you've seen him burned like that much?

I am a big Burroughs fan and want him to come back next year as the 6D or 7th D. 

Perhaps you are correct and I need to manage expectations. 

I think if paired with a solid player, Burroughs could be a reliable 6D. 

He can be like an Oscar Fantenburg from 2020 but with more bite and less size. 

I loved how Oscar played as well. Nothing flashy and got the job done. 

I see the same in Burroughs. I guess it's not realistic to expect top 4 did skillset in a bottom pairing guy.  I feel like with better skating, he can go from a 6D or even 7D to a decent 5D where he becomes the anchor of a pairing. Perhaps that's what I'm rooting for so that we can pair a guy like Hirose with him and have Burroughs being that stable presence. I feel like he has it in him to do that 

 

[Dazzle]

19 hours ago, Crabcakes said:

No model explains why Boeser was living in a fog after his father died or predicted when he started to come out of it.

 

 

Analytics are quite meaningless without the context. It's like +/-. Without any kind of reference point, the numbers can spun as both good and bad.

[eeeeergh]

3 hours ago, kilgore said:

 

You've already had replies similar but I just can't let this go.   Of course Burroughs helps win us games.  It's one dimensional thinking to think otherwise.  Sticking up for teammates can change momemtum. So can a big hit. So can efficiently getting the puck out of danger in his zone and smartly moving the puck up the ice, on a consistent basis, which Burroughs does exceptionally well.  You do not see Kyle make many mistakes.

 

Tanev had the same problem earlier at least, with some fans seeing any value in a defenceman that didn't put up numbers and could 'only'....you know....actually play defence. No matter how well. 

 

I swear it must be a kind of reverse bias with some fans. If a player is paid too much for what they bring they are rightly criticized.  But some players are also overlooked if they are paid too little.  (there must be a good reason!) Add onto that the "local boy" angle where its also assumed a player from here, like a Virtanten, always has an unfair advantage with multiple shots.

 

But no, IMO at least, Burroughs is one of our best D.  And his particular type of contributions ARE greater than Hughes in some areas.  Toughness, and even puck recovery using his size and angles.  Hughes is great when he actually has the puck. Which is why they make such great partners.

 

My opinion of this management would drop greatly if they were stupid enough not to re-sign Kyle. Even with a pay raise to a mill. or mill and a half, he is a bargain for what he  brings to help us WIN GAMES.

The reality is actually very simple

 

A #7D doesnt win you games, by definition they're replaceable players. They can be heart & soul, grit, culture, etc etc. but your team's success doesn't depend on them. 

 

A very simple test - 

 

Try 10 games with an identical lineup with Hughes in, but no Burroughs, then reverse it, and see how we do. 

[alt kilgore]

6 hours ago, eeeeergh said:

The reality is actually very simple

 

A #7D doesnt win you games, by definition they're replaceable players. They can be heart & soul, grit, culture, etc etc. but your team's success doesn't depend on them. 

 

A very simple test - 

 

Try 10 games with an identical lineup with Hughes in, but no Burroughs, then reverse it, and see how we do. 

You are correct.

 

Still even though Hughes has a skill set in multiple aspects of the game that exceeds anything any other defenseman has on the team now, there are still things a player like Kyle does better than Quinn. Every player helps to win games.  

 

 

[canuck73_3]

DAWG rating is so dumb and virtually meaningless 

[Miss Korea Bob.Loblaw]

31 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:

DAWG rating is so dumb and virtually meaningless 

My favourite metrics are actually NBA ones that Nate Silver tries to come up with each year.

 

Defensive Rating Accounting for Yielding Minimal Openness by Nearest Defender (DRAYMOND)

Career-Arc Regression Model Estimator with Local Optimization (CARMELO)

Robust Algorithm using Player Tracking and On/Off Ratings (RAPTOR)

Luck-adjusted player Estimate using a Box prior Regularized ON-off (LEBRON)

[iceman64]

On 4/24/2023 at 12:33 PM, CanucksJay said:

Im a big Burroughs fan. Love guys like him and schenn that gives some respect and credibility to the team. 

That being said said, the Dawg rating doesn't capture the importance of him to say Hughes for example. 

 

A really simple way to consider this would be to say look at the hits stat. 

Schenn out hits Hughes by a wide margin. 

 

But if my custom stat gave hits a 90 percent weight vs controlled zone exits at Like 10 percent, you would think Schenn is more valuable than Hughes. 

 

The problem in all of this is that we don't even know what variables and weight Faber is giving to any of these stats. 

 

A team definitely needs tough guys that can hit and block shots. But they also need elite skilled players. 

 

I would wager that an elite skilled player is a rarer commodity than a physical player. 

 

That's why I think the Dawg rating is stupid. Every team needs a dawg or 2. Maybe even 3.

 

So maybe this stat is only pertinent when looking at filling the role of a dawg and evaluating 2 dawgs when looking at free agency. 

 

However Faber compares all players on the same Dawg scale and that is why this whole thing is stupid. 

 

That's Chris Faber for you.. much like all the other hacks calling themselves "analysts" 

[Googlie]

On 4/23/2023 at 11:47 PM, Devron said:

What about CAT or PIG ratings?

PIG?  Penalties Induced per Game?

 

Garland has to be our Top PIG. ... He draws more Penalties than anyone else on the team.  (Honorable mention to Petey)