I'll add my thoughts here as deals come in. My Flames stuff is elsewhere, but I'll talk about everything else here.
Some initial thoughts:
- I'm really interested to see what Minnesota will do. As of right now, I have no idea what direction the new regime will take. Risebrough was almost never a player on July 1, so I half expect Fletcher to try to make splash or two. I also think Saku Koivu will end up a Wild by the end of the day.
- The Montreal Canadiens and New York Rangers both have a lot of spaces to fill and, with the Gomez deal, both have some money to spend. If every third contract today involves NYR or MON, I won't be surprised.
- Mike Cammalleri will end up in Toronto I think. Burke was probably hoping to see the Sedins make it to free agency, but with them off the table he'll turn his attention to other shiny baubles like Cammalleri.
Wednesday, July 01, 2009
Monday, June 29, 2009
Trickle up
From Nathan Fournier via The Hockey Program:
I think the new trend from now on is goalies aren't going to be selected in the first round unless they are elite. Goalies who I thought were late 1st round or second round players went in the third round or later. Goalies I thought were late round picks went earlier then I expected.
I noticed the same thing this season: for the first time in recent memory, a puck stopper wasn't chosen in the first round. Coincidence? Or is theory from the lowly blogosphere somehow trickling into the NHL team's offices?
I think the new trend from now on is goalies aren't going to be selected in the first round unless they are elite. Goalies who I thought were late 1st round or second round players went in the third round or later. Goalies I thought were late round picks went earlier then I expected.
I noticed the same thing this season: for the first time in recent memory, a puck stopper wasn't chosen in the first round. Coincidence? Or is theory from the lowly blogosphere somehow trickling into the NHL team's offices?
Draft Thoughts
- Not sure what to make of the Flames draft at this point. I was somewhat surprised with the Erixon pick and disappointed Calgary didn't grab Schroeder when he fell to them at 20. Bjorklund and Howse are intriguing mid rounders, especially the Swede who will playing in the SEL as a teen this coming season. I know absolutely nothing about the goalie and Gaelen Patterson was passed over in his draft year but put up decent enough numbers to be worth a late round gamble this time.
I was surprised Calgary took a d-man with their first pick, although Tod Button mentioned in a post-draft interview that the focus after that was to get scoring wingers (as I surmised previously). Thus the Howse, Bjorklund, Bennett picks later on.
Whether or not Bouwmeester signs with the Flames, I approve of Sutter's gambit to acquire his rights, if only because the price was so small. Leo wasn't coming back anyways and a 3rd rounder is about a 19% chance at a future NHLer.
- The Oilers draft looked like a mix of good and bad to me. They got a really nice player in the first round in Paajarvi-Svaslkahjsdlkasj*&! but then opted to use their 3rd round choice on a guy might have an Eric Godard-type ceiling. Now, as established, 3rd rounders aren't exactly worth a whole lot anyways, but pissing one away on a potential goon makes precisely zero sense to me. Goons don't have to be drafted or developed - there's plenty of them floating around for league minimum.
The Brodziak trade was pretty bizarre as well. He's never going to be a star but I got the feeling that at 25 he had established himself as an NHLer and still had a few years to grow...moving him for a 4th round pick is selling for pennies on the dollar. Unless he's roundly hated in the dressing room for some reason, doesn't make much sense to me.
- NYI moves at the draft were, appropriately enough, baffling. They moved a handful of picks to move up from 26-16...then did it again to move from 16-12...only to choose Calvin DeHaan, who very likely could have been available at 26 anyways. He was rated as the 25th skater in North America by Central Scouting and is said to have sizable holes in his game outside of the offensive zone. Erixon, Rundblad, Despres, Moore and Olsen were all still on the table at 12, BTW.
- Equally head scratching was the Nick Leddy choice by Minny at 16. He won the "Mr. Hockey" award in Minnesota for his work last season, but that's a fairly high draft choice to invest in a kid that hasn't played more than HS hockey.
- Scott Howson was quietly busy at the draft. He traded moved 16-77 for 26-37-62-92 and then dealt 26-37 to Ana for #21. He started with 16-77 and ended with 21-62-92. Decent work I'd say.
- My mock choice Landon Ferraro went to the Red Wings. Lucky bastard. And good on Detroit, Ferraro looks like decent value in the second round to me.
- Philly's trade for Pronger is either going to pay off in spades or completely blow up in their faces. He's 34 years old with a year left on his contract and the Flyers moved 3 first round picks and a somewhat useful roster player for him. That's a really high price to pay and one that may hobble the club in the future, especially if he starts to decline or doesn't sign to stay after this season.
All that said, a marriage of Captain Elbows and the broad street bully franchise seems like a match made in heaven.
- Im somewhat surprised LA kept the 5th overall choice. For two reasons:
1.) They're a club on the verge of breaking out of the basement I think. All they need is some true-blue veteran talent to prop up their bevy of skilled youngsters. A 5th for a signed star at either forward or defense really would have made sense.
2.) A huge portion of their roster is kids. Cheap kids for now, but once they all come up for renewal the Kings are going in for a world of hurt. Adding to that cohort may be a problem.
- It was terrible to see Vancouver scoop Schroeder at 21. He was the best value player at the time and apparently fell due to size and attitude concerns. I have a feeling he's going to be a quality NHL player though and I hope he doesn't make the Flames regret missing him at 20.
I was surprised Calgary took a d-man with their first pick, although Tod Button mentioned in a post-draft interview that the focus after that was to get scoring wingers (as I surmised previously). Thus the Howse, Bjorklund, Bennett picks later on.
Whether or not Bouwmeester signs with the Flames, I approve of Sutter's gambit to acquire his rights, if only because the price was so small. Leo wasn't coming back anyways and a 3rd rounder is about a 19% chance at a future NHLer.
- The Oilers draft looked like a mix of good and bad to me. They got a really nice player in the first round in Paajarvi-Svaslkahjsdlkasj*&! but then opted to use their 3rd round choice on a guy might have an Eric Godard-type ceiling. Now, as established, 3rd rounders aren't exactly worth a whole lot anyways, but pissing one away on a potential goon makes precisely zero sense to me. Goons don't have to be drafted or developed - there's plenty of them floating around for league minimum.
The Brodziak trade was pretty bizarre as well. He's never going to be a star but I got the feeling that at 25 he had established himself as an NHLer and still had a few years to grow...moving him for a 4th round pick is selling for pennies on the dollar. Unless he's roundly hated in the dressing room for some reason, doesn't make much sense to me.
- NYI moves at the draft were, appropriately enough, baffling. They moved a handful of picks to move up from 26-16...then did it again to move from 16-12...only to choose Calvin DeHaan, who very likely could have been available at 26 anyways. He was rated as the 25th skater in North America by Central Scouting and is said to have sizable holes in his game outside of the offensive zone. Erixon, Rundblad, Despres, Moore and Olsen were all still on the table at 12, BTW.
- Equally head scratching was the Nick Leddy choice by Minny at 16. He won the "Mr. Hockey" award in Minnesota for his work last season, but that's a fairly high draft choice to invest in a kid that hasn't played more than HS hockey.
- Scott Howson was quietly busy at the draft. He traded moved 16-77 for 26-37-62-92 and then dealt 26-37 to Ana for #21. He started with 16-77 and ended with 21-62-92. Decent work I'd say.
- My mock choice Landon Ferraro went to the Red Wings. Lucky bastard. And good on Detroit, Ferraro looks like decent value in the second round to me.
- Philly's trade for Pronger is either going to pay off in spades or completely blow up in their faces. He's 34 years old with a year left on his contract and the Flyers moved 3 first round picks and a somewhat useful roster player for him. That's a really high price to pay and one that may hobble the club in the future, especially if he starts to decline or doesn't sign to stay after this season.
All that said, a marriage of Captain Elbows and the broad street bully franchise seems like a match made in heaven.
- Im somewhat surprised LA kept the 5th overall choice. For two reasons:
1.) They're a club on the verge of breaking out of the basement I think. All they need is some true-blue veteran talent to prop up their bevy of skilled youngsters. A 5th for a signed star at either forward or defense really would have made sense.
2.) A huge portion of their roster is kids. Cheap kids for now, but once they all come up for renewal the Kings are going in for a world of hurt. Adding to that cohort may be a problem.
- It was terrible to see Vancouver scoop Schroeder at 21. He was the best value player at the time and apparently fell due to size and attitude concerns. I have a feeling he's going to be a quality NHL player though and I hope he doesn't make the Flames regret missing him at 20.
Friday, June 26, 2009
Draft day links and such
I'll be following today's action over at M&G. No doubt the Flames will be involved with a move or two, so it should be interesting. SBN also has a big draft hub here.
- The Nations Sites have sent Jason Gregor to Montreal to cover things close up. Im sure he'll be furnishing us with updates frequently.
- I also have some thoughts on the draft over at Cycle Like the Sedins. I discuss what I look for in evaluating prospects as well as Calgary's top 3 draft steals and busts over the years.
- Looks like we might have another Flames blogger on our hands. Stop by and make Cassie feel welcome - with Open Ice Hits and Battle of Alberta dwindling, Flames-centric fan writers are about as rare as desert flowers.
- The Nations Sites have sent Jason Gregor to Montreal to cover things close up. Im sure he'll be furnishing us with updates frequently.
- I also have some thoughts on the draft over at Cycle Like the Sedins. I discuss what I look for in evaluating prospects as well as Calgary's top 3 draft steals and busts over the years.
- Looks like we might have another Flames blogger on our hands. Stop by and make Cassie feel welcome - with Open Ice Hits and Battle of Alberta dwindling, Flames-centric fan writers are about as rare as desert flowers.
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Sign of the times
I rarely use this blog for anything besides hockey analysis, but this is one of those personal posts...
The small start-up/ R&D company I've worked for the last few years is having trouble paying me due to economy-related funding issues. As such, I'm on the look out for part -time or full-time contractual or long-term employment.
I have experience writing and editing business documents ranging from business plans/ executive summaries to producing PPT presentations and investor relation communications. I also have some skills at research and analysis. I have 6 years of formal education invested in business admin (2 years) and a Bachelor of Arts (4 years).
Some of my best work for this space can be browsed here. Anyone interested in my full resume and such can email me @ kent.wilson@gmail.com
This post may not bear any fruit, but I figure it can't hurt to get this kind of thing in front of as many eyeballs as possible.
The small start-up/ R&D company I've worked for the last few years is having trouble paying me due to economy-related funding issues. As such, I'm on the look out for part -time or full-time contractual or long-term employment.
I have experience writing and editing business documents ranging from business plans/ executive summaries to producing PPT presentations and investor relation communications. I also have some skills at research and analysis. I have 6 years of formal education invested in business admin (2 years) and a Bachelor of Arts (4 years).
Some of my best work for this space can be browsed here. Anyone interested in my full resume and such can email me @ kent.wilson@gmail.com
This post may not bear any fruit, but I figure it can't hurt to get this kind of thing in front of as many eyeballs as possible.
Thursday, June 18, 2009
The Best Player Available myth
It's commonly held that a dichotomy exists in fundamental draft strategy in hockey: pick for need versus best player available. Sensibly, most hockey fans and pundits eschew the first strategy: outside of picking a generational Crosby-like talent in the first round, a vast majority of prospects won't contribute anything valuable at the NHL level for at least 5 years, at which time the needs of the big club may have drastically changed.
But outside, say, the first five choices in every entry draft, is picking the "best player available" actually possible? From my own investigations into the matter, chances of picking an actual NHL player drop from 95% in the top 5 to about a coin flip by the end of the first round. Chances fall precipitously after that, to about 25% in round 2, 19% in round 3 and so on. In fact, as the draft progresses, the talent tends to be scattered more liberally throughout each round, rather than clustered close to the top as it is in first.
What I'm getting at is: things turn into a crap shoot pretty quickly in the draft. That means there isn't a lot to choose from once you get beyond the few sure-fire NHLers that exist at the very pinnacle of the prospect pyramid. This issue occurred to me while doing up profiles for potential Flames targets in this year's up coming roll of the dice - Rundblad, Kreider, Budish, Holland, Ferraro, etc - pretending all of them are available when the Flames take the stage on the 26th, which amongst those named is the "best player available"?
The challenges for an NHL scout extend beyond projecting the potential future contributions of some teenager some five years hence, but also -
1.) Comparing relative values of players across positions is problematic and rife with subjectivity and
2.) Many of these kids play at different levels in different leagues against different competition.
For example, let's talk about David Rundblad, a Swedish prospect who played as a teen in the SEL last season versus Zach Budish, an American High School winger. Rundblad garnered 10 points as a defender in the top professional level in Sweden last year against grown men. Budish collected more than 60 points in 30 games against pimply-faced HS kids in Minnesota. How does one even go about comparing the two players? Not only do they play different positions, but they performed against vastly different levels of competition - even subjective viewership and analysis would be effected. For intance, I would look like a thoughtful tactician and sniper if you put me on the ice against 12 year olds, but would be completely lost if I squared off against, say, the UofC mens team. That's an extreme example, but the principle is the same. This may be why clubs develop what I call "fishing holes", by which I mean they concentrate their scouting in certain amateur/developmental leagues (for the Flames, it's the WHL/CHL) - they can become familiar with the relative degree and value of the competition and therefore can more capably gauge a prospects level of performance. But I digress.
As such, I think it would be foolhardy to ignore an organizations areas of weakness when drafting. By that I certainly don't mean the woeful Florida Panthers should show up on the 26th this year and look to pick as many scoring forwards as possible because the big club had issues putting pucks in the net last year. That would be silly. However, simply due to the variable and unpredictable nature of developing prospects, every org is going to have certain areas that are weaker than others heading into the draft every year.
Taking the Flames again as an example, the club is relatively healthy at center and defense, but thin in terms of scoring wingers. Dustin Boyd - Warren Peters - Mikael Backlund - Mitch Wahl - Brett Sutter - John Armstrong are the young, promising pivots in the system. Calgary also has Phaneuf - Giordano - Pardy - Palin - Pelech - Aulie - Negrin - Brodie as young 20 something's and below on the blueline. However, aside from Moss and Glencross on the big club (who have already passed the quarter century mark), the org boasts overager Kyle Greentree, Greg Nemisz and tweeners like David Van Der Gulik and Kris Chucko on the wings. And that's about it.
As such, I honestly think this issue should inform if not dictate the Flames draft strategy heading into next week. We know that the org needs some offensively capable talent at the winger position. Therefore, unless they have the chance to pick Victor Hedman or perhaps Ryan Ellis in the first round, doesn't preferring a winger to a defender make sense from a Flames perspective? Back to the Rundblad and Budish example - since there's little chance of definitely determining which is the better player (either now or in the future), I would prefer the Flames emphasize the latter (Budish) over the former (Rundblad), given the clubs organizational strengths and weaknesses. In fact, considering we're dice rolling, Calgary should have a goal of claiming more wingers than defensemen and centers over the course of the 7 rounds in order to increase the chances of scoring a "hit" in that area.
Obviously clubs develop draft lists based on who-is-better-than whom and taking a 60th ranked forward ahead of the 12th ranked defender simply because the org has a greater need up front would be nonsensical. If an opportunity to choose a player who is *apparently* head and shoulders above the rest of the list occurs, it has to be taken. My guess is this seems more likely in theory than what happens in practice, however, especially due to the scouting challenges described above and especially once the cream of the crop has been skimmed. Overall, outside a few rare or extreme circumstances, I've come to think of the "BPA" draft strategy as rather meaningless and the whole "team need versus best player" dichotomy as a false one.
But outside, say, the first five choices in every entry draft, is picking the "best player available" actually possible? From my own investigations into the matter, chances of picking an actual NHL player drop from 95% in the top 5 to about a coin flip by the end of the first round. Chances fall precipitously after that, to about 25% in round 2, 19% in round 3 and so on. In fact, as the draft progresses, the talent tends to be scattered more liberally throughout each round, rather than clustered close to the top as it is in first.
What I'm getting at is: things turn into a crap shoot pretty quickly in the draft. That means there isn't a lot to choose from once you get beyond the few sure-fire NHLers that exist at the very pinnacle of the prospect pyramid. This issue occurred to me while doing up profiles for potential Flames targets in this year's up coming roll of the dice - Rundblad, Kreider, Budish, Holland, Ferraro, etc - pretending all of them are available when the Flames take the stage on the 26th, which amongst those named is the "best player available"?
The challenges for an NHL scout extend beyond projecting the potential future contributions of some teenager some five years hence, but also -
1.) Comparing relative values of players across positions is problematic and rife with subjectivity and
2.) Many of these kids play at different levels in different leagues against different competition.
For example, let's talk about David Rundblad, a Swedish prospect who played as a teen in the SEL last season versus Zach Budish, an American High School winger. Rundblad garnered 10 points as a defender in the top professional level in Sweden last year against grown men. Budish collected more than 60 points in 30 games against pimply-faced HS kids in Minnesota. How does one even go about comparing the two players? Not only do they play different positions, but they performed against vastly different levels of competition - even subjective viewership and analysis would be effected. For intance, I would look like a thoughtful tactician and sniper if you put me on the ice against 12 year olds, but would be completely lost if I squared off against, say, the UofC mens team. That's an extreme example, but the principle is the same. This may be why clubs develop what I call "fishing holes", by which I mean they concentrate their scouting in certain amateur/developmental leagues (for the Flames, it's the WHL/CHL) - they can become familiar with the relative degree and value of the competition and therefore can more capably gauge a prospects level of performance. But I digress.
As such, I think it would be foolhardy to ignore an organizations areas of weakness when drafting. By that I certainly don't mean the woeful Florida Panthers should show up on the 26th this year and look to pick as many scoring forwards as possible because the big club had issues putting pucks in the net last year. That would be silly. However, simply due to the variable and unpredictable nature of developing prospects, every org is going to have certain areas that are weaker than others heading into the draft every year.
Taking the Flames again as an example, the club is relatively healthy at center and defense, but thin in terms of scoring wingers. Dustin Boyd - Warren Peters - Mikael Backlund - Mitch Wahl - Brett Sutter - John Armstrong are the young, promising pivots in the system. Calgary also has Phaneuf - Giordano - Pardy - Palin - Pelech - Aulie - Negrin - Brodie as young 20 something's and below on the blueline. However, aside from Moss and Glencross on the big club (who have already passed the quarter century mark), the org boasts overager Kyle Greentree, Greg Nemisz and tweeners like David Van Der Gulik and Kris Chucko on the wings. And that's about it.
As such, I honestly think this issue should inform if not dictate the Flames draft strategy heading into next week. We know that the org needs some offensively capable talent at the winger position. Therefore, unless they have the chance to pick Victor Hedman or perhaps Ryan Ellis in the first round, doesn't preferring a winger to a defender make sense from a Flames perspective? Back to the Rundblad and Budish example - since there's little chance of definitely determining which is the better player (either now or in the future), I would prefer the Flames emphasize the latter (Budish) over the former (Rundblad), given the clubs organizational strengths and weaknesses. In fact, considering we're dice rolling, Calgary should have a goal of claiming more wingers than defensemen and centers over the course of the 7 rounds in order to increase the chances of scoring a "hit" in that area.
Obviously clubs develop draft lists based on who-is-better-than whom and taking a 60th ranked forward ahead of the 12th ranked defender simply because the org has a greater need up front would be nonsensical. If an opportunity to choose a player who is *apparently* head and shoulders above the rest of the list occurs, it has to be taken. My guess is this seems more likely in theory than what happens in practice, however, especially due to the scouting challenges described above and especially once the cream of the crop has been skimmed. Overall, outside a few rare or extreme circumstances, I've come to think of the "BPA" draft strategy as rather meaningless and the whole "team need versus best player" dichotomy as a false one.
Friday, June 12, 2009
Congratulations Pittsburgh
I picked Detroit, but Pittsburgh was full value in the last two games. Congrats to the 2009 Stanley Cup champions!
Tuesday, June 09, 2009
A rare link day
- As the play-offs wind down, *other* NHL news is starting to pick up again. Most significant for Flames fans is the fact the Brent Sutter announced his departure from Devils today. I have discussions going here and here, while Duncan (who wins the "best headline" contest with his effort) and Matt add their thoughts elsewhere. Take a trip to In Lou we Trust for a NJD perspective.
- Heatley apparently wants out of Ottawa. Let the rampant speculation begin! I'll get the ball rolling - Jokinen + for Heater. Flames are weak on the left side, strong up the middle and Im not a fan of Jokinen anyways. Plus Heatley is a native Calgarian. It only makes sense (E3)!
- Some of the statzis around the blogosphere have made progress in adding further context to the numbers recently. Mudcrutch discusses the effect of face-off location and offensive/defensive zone ratios. This work will likely help me in determining relative value of defensive defensemen, which is going to be a summer project round here I think. JLikens has done some work with the "scoring chance" stat Dennis King put together this past year for the Oilers. Vic has some additional material on scoring chances, SH% and the importance of possession and outshooting here.
- The scoring chance thing intrigues me and I'd like to start doing it for the Flames next year. However, I'd also like to settle on a meaningful definition of "scoring chance" which is reliable across observers before proceeding. Perhaps something else to kick around in the dull days of August...
- Finally, I think the Cup is going to be awarded (either tonight or later this week) to the Red Wings for the second straight year. Love 'em; hate 'em; envy them; you have to respect that organization whatever your perspective. Everyone else is so far behind at this point, I think Ken Holland has actually lapped the field.
- Heatley apparently wants out of Ottawa. Let the rampant speculation begin! I'll get the ball rolling - Jokinen + for Heater. Flames are weak on the left side, strong up the middle and Im not a fan of Jokinen anyways. Plus Heatley is a native Calgarian. It only makes sense (E3)!
- Some of the statzis around the blogosphere have made progress in adding further context to the numbers recently. Mudcrutch discusses the effect of face-off location and offensive/defensive zone ratios. This work will likely help me in determining relative value of defensive defensemen, which is going to be a summer project round here I think. JLikens has done some work with the "scoring chance" stat Dennis King put together this past year for the Oilers. Vic has some additional material on scoring chances, SH% and the importance of possession and outshooting here.
- The scoring chance thing intrigues me and I'd like to start doing it for the Flames next year. However, I'd also like to settle on a meaningful definition of "scoring chance" which is reliable across observers before proceeding. Perhaps something else to kick around in the dull days of August...
- Finally, I think the Cup is going to be awarded (either tonight or later this week) to the Red Wings for the second straight year. Love 'em; hate 'em; envy them; you have to respect that organization whatever your perspective. Everyone else is so far behind at this point, I think Ken Holland has actually lapped the field.
Thursday, June 04, 2009
2009 Hockey New Media Awards
I was alerted recently that "The HockeyBarn Writers Association" (a community of writers open to all hockey journalists across the blogosphere) is holding the first ever New Media Hockey awards on June 17th.
According to the press release, there'll be prizes for "Writer of the year", Rookie of the Year", "Unsung Hero" "Mom/Dad writer of the year" and, yes, even the "Glenn Anderson Leader award". Judges for the contest include the ex-Oiler himself (who will also be handing out prizes apparently), Eric McErlain of "Off the Wing" fame and the venerable James Mirtle. You can nominate a writer for any one of the prizes listed via this link.
This isn't my transparent play for a nomination. Frankly, I don't belong in the conversation of hockey's best bloggers. Were I to pick writers for each award I'd go with:
"Writer of the Year": Lowetide, Mudcrutch, Mirtle (probably exempt, being a judge), Puck Daddy, Tom Benjamin
"Rookie of the Year": Contrarian Goaltender, JLikens, Jonathan Willis (is he still a rookie?) or TLP
"Unsung Hero": Vic Ferrari, Scott from Gospel of Hockey
Mom/Dad Writer: Uhh...not familiar enough with everyone's personal life Im afraid. How about BDHS since Pat should certainly be winning something for his unique style.
Glenn Anderson Leadership Award: for the "writer who best demonstrates a desire to grow hockey the popularity of ice hockey..." Paul Kukla?
No doubt there's others Im missing here - the Battle of Cali crew and Cycle Like Sedins put out good stuff this season too. Lots of deserving "New Media" writers out there right now.
According to the press release, there'll be prizes for "Writer of the year", Rookie of the Year", "Unsung Hero" "Mom/Dad writer of the year" and, yes, even the "Glenn Anderson Leader award". Judges for the contest include the ex-Oiler himself (who will also be handing out prizes apparently), Eric McErlain of "Off the Wing" fame and the venerable James Mirtle. You can nominate a writer for any one of the prizes listed via this link.
This isn't my transparent play for a nomination. Frankly, I don't belong in the conversation of hockey's best bloggers. Were I to pick writers for each award I'd go with:
"Writer of the Year": Lowetide, Mudcrutch, Mirtle (probably exempt, being a judge), Puck Daddy, Tom Benjamin
"Rookie of the Year": Contrarian Goaltender, JLikens, Jonathan Willis (is he still a rookie?) or TLP
"Unsung Hero": Vic Ferrari, Scott from Gospel of Hockey
Mom/Dad Writer: Uhh...not familiar enough with everyone's personal life Im afraid. How about BDHS since Pat should certainly be winning something for his unique style.
Glenn Anderson Leadership Award: for the "writer who best demonstrates a desire to grow hockey the popularity of ice hockey..." Paul Kukla?
No doubt there's others Im missing here - the Battle of Cali crew and Cycle Like Sedins put out good stuff this season too. Lots of deserving "New Media" writers out there right now.
Wednesday, June 03, 2009
Ranked even strength production by defensemen
I did something like this for forwards awhile back and it proved to be fairly popular. So, here's a ranked (by ESP/60) list of defensemen from the regular season. I've marked Flames players in yellow. Also included are QUAL COMP ratings, corsi/60 rates, ES plus/minus and the PDO numbers of guys inside the 90th percentile (plus a few others I bothered to look up). Excluded are players that failed to play more than 30 contests this year.
**(Spreadsheet won't publish for whatever reason - here's a handy link to the numbers instead)**
Looking at this list made me wonder: is there any way to rationally and quantifiably capture the contributions of low-offense, hard minute defensemen? I mean, none of Regehr's stats are impressive at a glance, but well all know he's the best defender the team's got. The issue for me is - how good is he, really? Is there any way to know outside of "he plays the big guns on the other team consistently and doesn't seem to get killed"?
Other items of interest: Mark Giordano's standing in ESP/60 and corsi rate, the ridiculous PDO's of Boston defenders and Jason Smith apparently not scoring a single ES point the entire year.
**(Spreadsheet won't publish for whatever reason - here's a handy link to the numbers instead)**
Looking at this list made me wonder: is there any way to rationally and quantifiably capture the contributions of low-offense, hard minute defensemen? I mean, none of Regehr's stats are impressive at a glance, but well all know he's the best defender the team's got. The issue for me is - how good is he, really? Is there any way to know outside of "he plays the big guns on the other team consistently and doesn't seem to get killed"?
Other items of interest: Mark Giordano's standing in ESP/60 and corsi rate, the ridiculous PDO's of Boston defenders and Jason Smith apparently not scoring a single ES point the entire year.
What's the opposite of a prophet?
Well, the NW division's "best coach" has been fired. Again. Course, he was pretty much a dead man walking as soon as the Avs approached Roy.
What a terrible mess that once great team has become. Good news for me as a Flames fan I guess, but it's still a little sad to see nonetheless.
What a terrible mess that once great team has become. Good news for me as a Flames fan I guess, but it's still a little sad to see nonetheless.
Saturday, May 30, 2009
Finals forecast
It's down to the rematch I see.
Both excellent teams this year, with Pittsburgh being a lot closer than they were previously. They don't have Hossa, but the whole club has improved leaps and bounds under Bylsma. If the puck bounces right or if the injuries favor them, they could be on the winning side this time.
That said, I still prefer Detroit. They have superior depth and have looked basically untouchable through the entire post season. Assuming Dastyuk and Lidstrom aren't out long term, I think they take it in 7.
Is there a more spoiled fan base in all sports than Red Wings supporters? I honestly don't think so.
Both excellent teams this year, with Pittsburgh being a lot closer than they were previously. They don't have Hossa, but the whole club has improved leaps and bounds under Bylsma. If the puck bounces right or if the injuries favor them, they could be on the winning side this time.
That said, I still prefer Detroit. They have superior depth and have looked basically untouchable through the entire post season. Assuming Dastyuk and Lidstrom aren't out long term, I think they take it in 7.
Is there a more spoiled fan base in all sports than Red Wings supporters? I honestly don't think so.
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Anything you can do, I can do better...
Apparently, the same day the Flames will officially announce the firing of re-tread Mike Keenan, the Edmonton Oilers will be announcing hiring of re-tread Pat Quinn. I've never personally thought much of as Quinn as a coach, so this is good news - both because he's now working for the Edmonton and it means he won't be working for Calgary.
Maybe he's a good presence in the dressing room
Mirtle is reporting that the Canadiens have allegedly offered Alexei Kovalev a one year, $6M contract to stay in MTL.
Just in case you didn't know, Kovalev will turn 37 in February and settled right back into his 65 point career normal pace this season after some percentages and bounces on the PP made him seem like a demi-god in 07/08. He didn't even top 2.00 ESP/60 this year and his corsi was a negative one (in fact, marginally worse than Plekanec, Lang, Higgins, Koivu, Latendresse and Andrei Kostitsyn). He was decent again with the man advantage (5.25 PPP/60) but not so mind-blowingly good that it in any way validates 6 large. He led Montreal in points but probably only he played a bunch while Lang, Koivu and Tanguay missed huge chunks of time to injury.
In short, Gainey is either truly desperate or...well, I'm not sure how else to explain this offer. Personally, I don't even know if I'd pay Kovalev half that amount.
Just in case you didn't know, Kovalev will turn 37 in February and settled right back into his 65 point career normal pace this season after some percentages and bounces on the PP made him seem like a demi-god in 07/08. He didn't even top 2.00 ESP/60 this year and his corsi was a negative one (in fact, marginally worse than Plekanec, Lang, Higgins, Koivu, Latendresse and Andrei Kostitsyn). He was decent again with the man advantage (5.25 PPP/60) but not so mind-blowingly good that it in any way validates 6 large. He led Montreal in points but probably only he played a bunch while Lang, Koivu and Tanguay missed huge chunks of time to injury.
In short, Gainey is either truly desperate or...well, I'm not sure how else to explain this offer. Personally, I don't even know if I'd pay Kovalev half that amount.
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Is it safe?
So apparently Pierre McGuire is a finalist for the Wild GM position. If he lands the job, does anyone else picture his entry discussions with players playing out like the infamous Marathon Man scene:
McGuire: "Do you get it?"
Player: "Get what?"
McGuire: "Do you get it?"
Player: "I don't now what you mean."
McGuire: "Do you JUST get IT?"
Player: "I can't tell you if I get it until you tell me what 'it' is."
McGuire: "Do you get it?"
Player: "Yes, yes I get it completely."
McGuire: *quietly* "Do you get it?"
Player: "No. I guess I don't really get it at all."
McGuire: *reaches for sharp torture implements*
UPDATE - Damn. Apparently it's going to be Chuck Fletcher.
McGuire: "Do you get it?"
Player: "Get what?"
McGuire: "Do you get it?"
Player: "I don't now what you mean."
McGuire: "Do you JUST get IT?"
Player: "I can't tell you if I get it until you tell me what 'it' is."
McGuire: "Do you get it?"
Player: "Yes, yes I get it completely."
McGuire: *quietly* "Do you get it?"
Player: "No. I guess I don't really get it at all."
McGuire: *reaches for sharp torture implements*
UPDATE - Damn. Apparently it's going to be Chuck Fletcher.
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Question for regular readers of this space...
...is Richard Pollock cribbing me or do we just think really, really similarly? Read the linked article and then take a gander at some of my old stuff.
Post journalism, revisited
Being involved as I am in "new media", I'm captivated by the changes and upheavals going on in the MSM and classic journalism. A few months ago, I shared a lengthy dissertation on the subject by Kevin Carson.
In a similar vein, here's a recent op-ed piece by Professor Robert Picard on what's killing the old guard:
To comprehend journalistic value creation, we need to focus on the benefits it provides. Journalism creates functional, emotional, and self-expressive benefits for consumers. Functional benefits include providing useful information and ideas...
These benefits used to produce significant economic value. Not today. That's because producers and providers have less control over the communication space than ever before. In the past, the difficulty and cost of operation, publication, and distribution severely limited the number of content suppliers. This scarcity raised the economic value of content. That additional value is gone today because a far wider range of sources of news and information exist.
The primary value that is created today comes from the basic underlying value of the labor of journalists. Unfortunately, that value is now near zero.
...
Today, ordinary adults can observe and report news, gather expert knowledge, determine significance, add audio, photography, and video components, and publish this content far and wide (or at least to their social network) with ease. And much of this is done for no pay.
...
Unfortunately, journalistic labor has become commoditized. Most journalists share the same skills sets and the same approaches to stories, seek out the same sources, ask similar questions, and produce relatively similar stories[...]Across the news industry, processes and procedures for news gathering are guided by standardized news values, producing standardized stories in standardized formats that are presented in standardized styles. The result is extraordinary sameness and minimal differentiation.
With this stuff in mind, take gander at Robin Brownlee's defense of Darren Dreger today over at Flamesnation. All of his points about protecting sources, the fluidity of deals in the NHL and the need to present information "now" in order to feed demand and avoid being scooped are all probably fair given the landscape these guys operate in. Which is often why I find so little value in what is produced via this method. I think the criticism of Dreger's fluff piece and Brownlee's resultant protestations are probably both simultaneously valid. '"N" is the best we can do under "X", "Y" and "Z" conditions' doesn't change the fact that "N" (to my mind, at least) is pap. "You're doing it wrong" is my response, even if I'm somewhat sympathetic to the circumstances.
There's a push by the overlords at my other place to get accreditation for the various contracted bloggers. While I wish them well in their endeavors, the possibility holds absolutely no interest for me whatsoever.
In a similar vein, here's a recent op-ed piece by Professor Robert Picard on what's killing the old guard:
To comprehend journalistic value creation, we need to focus on the benefits it provides. Journalism creates functional, emotional, and self-expressive benefits for consumers. Functional benefits include providing useful information and ideas...
These benefits used to produce significant economic value. Not today. That's because producers and providers have less control over the communication space than ever before. In the past, the difficulty and cost of operation, publication, and distribution severely limited the number of content suppliers. This scarcity raised the economic value of content. That additional value is gone today because a far wider range of sources of news and information exist.
The primary value that is created today comes from the basic underlying value of the labor of journalists. Unfortunately, that value is now near zero.
...
Today, ordinary adults can observe and report news, gather expert knowledge, determine significance, add audio, photography, and video components, and publish this content far and wide (or at least to their social network) with ease. And much of this is done for no pay.
...
Unfortunately, journalistic labor has become commoditized. Most journalists share the same skills sets and the same approaches to stories, seek out the same sources, ask similar questions, and produce relatively similar stories[...]Across the news industry, processes and procedures for news gathering are guided by standardized news values, producing standardized stories in standardized formats that are presented in standardized styles. The result is extraordinary sameness and minimal differentiation.
With this stuff in mind, take gander at Robin Brownlee's defense of Darren Dreger today over at Flamesnation. All of his points about protecting sources, the fluidity of deals in the NHL and the need to present information "now" in order to feed demand and avoid being scooped are all probably fair given the landscape these guys operate in. Which is often why I find so little value in what is produced via this method. I think the criticism of Dreger's fluff piece and Brownlee's resultant protestations are probably both simultaneously valid. '"N" is the best we can do under "X", "Y" and "Z" conditions' doesn't change the fact that "N" (to my mind, at least) is pap. "You're doing it wrong" is my response, even if I'm somewhat sympathetic to the circumstances.
There's a push by the overlords at my other place to get accreditation for the various contracted bloggers. While I wish them well in their endeavors, the possibility holds absolutely no interest for me whatsoever.
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Round 3
Im a bit late and my predictions thus far have been *ahem* a little off, but why watch the post season if you can't be wrong about who's going to win?
DET vs. CHI
Im nothing but impressed with the Blackhawks thus far. That said, they're playing the team they can only hope they grow into. Detroit has looked every bit the Stanley Cup champion in these play-offs and I fully expect them to make the finals again. CHI has the upper hand in net, but so did CBJ and ANA.
Wings in 6.
PIT vs. CAR
The Canes have really messed up my predictions this year. I thought they were a better team than they showed during the regular season (their percentages were crap for a long time) but I honestly don't know how they've gotten to this point.
The Penguins on the other hand beat the crap out of the Capitals, which is no small feat. The turn around under Bylsma is a real one, making the Pens a legit contender.
Pits in 7.
Whatever the outcome, I expect whoever comes out of the West to beat whoever comes out of the east this year; neither EC club has the sort of forward or defensive depth boasted by Chicago or Detroit. It'll take a run of injuries or a great run of bounces to deliver the cup to the East this season methinks.
DET vs. CHI
Im nothing but impressed with the Blackhawks thus far. That said, they're playing the team they can only hope they grow into. Detroit has looked every bit the Stanley Cup champion in these play-offs and I fully expect them to make the finals again. CHI has the upper hand in net, but so did CBJ and ANA.
Wings in 6.
PIT vs. CAR
The Canes have really messed up my predictions this year. I thought they were a better team than they showed during the regular season (their percentages were crap for a long time) but I honestly don't know how they've gotten to this point.
The Penguins on the other hand beat the crap out of the Capitals, which is no small feat. The turn around under Bylsma is a real one, making the Pens a legit contender.
Pits in 7.
Whatever the outcome, I expect whoever comes out of the West to beat whoever comes out of the east this year; neither EC club has the sort of forward or defensive depth boasted by Chicago or Detroit. It'll take a run of injuries or a great run of bounces to deliver the cup to the East this season methinks.
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
Evidence mounts
Last summer I wrote a little piece on the value of drafting goaltenders. I was less sure of my conclusions then, but I've become more confident of my position as time has passed. The support the analysis has received from a number of people I consider bright hasn't hurt either.
On that note, Richard Pollock published a piece at Puck Prospectus today that echoes my thoughts on the matter pretty closely:
Half the netminders who were considered their team’s starters in the NHL this season were drafted in rounds many consider to be a crapshoot. In fact, five goalies were drafted in the eighth and ninth rounds (rounds which do not even exist anymore). So, in effect, there are as many goalies starting in the NHL that were drafted in the first round, as there are goalies who (by today’s draft rules) wouldn’t have been drafted at all (a.k.a.—undrafted free agents).
Actually, three goalies who were not even drafted (Backstrom, Roloson and Hiller) had dramatic effects on their team’s play to close this past season. Backstrom was nominated for the Vezina Trophy, Dwayne Roloson played almost every game for the Oilers in the second half of the season and Jonas Hiller has continued his strong regular season play with tremendous playoff play.
...
Considering the cost, or lack thereof, of making such a selection, I wouldn’t be surprised to see teams look for diamonds in the rough more often than drafting a goaltender with a first round selection.
Next time your team is considering drafting a goaltender in the first round, maybe they should instead try to sign Swedish free agent netminder Jonas Gustavsson.
Sounds about right.
On that note, Richard Pollock published a piece at Puck Prospectus today that echoes my thoughts on the matter pretty closely:
Half the netminders who were considered their team’s starters in the NHL this season were drafted in rounds many consider to be a crapshoot. In fact, five goalies were drafted in the eighth and ninth rounds (rounds which do not even exist anymore). So, in effect, there are as many goalies starting in the NHL that were drafted in the first round, as there are goalies who (by today’s draft rules) wouldn’t have been drafted at all (a.k.a.—undrafted free agents).
Actually, three goalies who were not even drafted (Backstrom, Roloson and Hiller) had dramatic effects on their team’s play to close this past season. Backstrom was nominated for the Vezina Trophy, Dwayne Roloson played almost every game for the Oilers in the second half of the season and Jonas Hiller has continued his strong regular season play with tremendous playoff play.
...
Considering the cost, or lack thereof, of making such a selection, I wouldn’t be surprised to see teams look for diamonds in the rough more often than drafting a goaltender with a first round selection.
Next time your team is considering drafting a goaltender in the first round, maybe they should instead try to sign Swedish free agent netminder Jonas Gustavsson.
Sounds about right.
Monday, May 11, 2009
Tracking Kevin Lalande
Lost amidst the other, far more immediately relevant deals this past deadline day was a fairly innocuous swap between the Calgary Flames and the Columbus Blue Jackets: Calgary moved Kevin Lalande for a 4th round draft pick. At the time, I was surprised the Flames managed to get anything as high as a 4th rounder for what was a at the time an ECHL goalie who had been previously drafted in the 5th round. Seemed like a steal, even when the return was so modest.
The Blue Jackets installed Lalande as their AHL starter (since their previous starter and back-up were up in the NHL at the time) and he promptly won 3 straight games and was named AHL player of the week. Since then, I've kept a closer eye on the former Flames property and am starting to come to the shakey conclusion that Calgary may have traded away their best goaltending prospect.
First, some background. Lalande spent 3 seasons in the OHL with the Bellville Bulls. His SV% over those three years was consistently good to excellent: .920, .916 and .919. He finished 4th, 3rd, and 3rd in the OHL in terms of SV% in each of those years respectively. In 04/05, his rookie season, his .920 SV% was the best of any freshman puck stopper in the league. He was named to the all-star team in 05/06.
His first few games as a pro didn't go so well for Kevin and may be the reason he was relegated to a third stringer by the organization. In 7 games for Quad Cities, he won just twice and stopped just 88.8% of the pucks he saw. That was last year, most of which he spent in the ECHL with the Las Vegas Wranglers, where he put up far more respectable numbers over a longer period (.932 SV% in 27 games played). Since then, Lalande has managed sparkling percentages where ever he's played: ECHL (.925 SV%), Quad Cities (.929 SV%) and Syracuse (.927 SV%).
What's significant is, as far as I can tell, neither the QC Flames nor SYR Crunch were good teams this season. The former placed 5th in the West Division and had a GD of -4. The latter were 5th in the North Division and actually worse defensively, allowing 10 more goals against than the Flames and had a nominally worse GD (-12). So it's not like he was playing behind juggernauts that were limiting the opposition to perimeter shots and winning each game by 4.
In addition, Lalande outperformed all his peers this season. No other Flames 'tender posted an equal or better SV% than Lalande. Ditto Syracuse, aside from Calder shoe-in Steve Mason who played a mere 3 games in the minors before being called up to save the Blue Jackets season.
Now, to some degree, I'm reading tea leaves here: Lalande hasn't even seen 1000 shots at the AHL at this point in his career, so we're talking small sample, potential for misleading results, yadda yadda yadda. Still, looking at Lalande's results both past and present shows a lot of arrows pointing in the right direction. And while Im not big on the value of goalie prospects in the first place, I find it's generally a good rule to try to keep the best ones around. Of course, maybe he's just a really, really good Junior/ECHL/AHL goalie and little else. Something to keep an eye on, anyways.
The Blue Jackets installed Lalande as their AHL starter (since their previous starter and back-up were up in the NHL at the time) and he promptly won 3 straight games and was named AHL player of the week. Since then, I've kept a closer eye on the former Flames property and am starting to come to the shakey conclusion that Calgary may have traded away their best goaltending prospect.
First, some background. Lalande spent 3 seasons in the OHL with the Bellville Bulls. His SV% over those three years was consistently good to excellent: .920, .916 and .919. He finished 4th, 3rd, and 3rd in the OHL in terms of SV% in each of those years respectively. In 04/05, his rookie season, his .920 SV% was the best of any freshman puck stopper in the league. He was named to the all-star team in 05/06.
His first few games as a pro didn't go so well for Kevin and may be the reason he was relegated to a third stringer by the organization. In 7 games for Quad Cities, he won just twice and stopped just 88.8% of the pucks he saw. That was last year, most of which he spent in the ECHL with the Las Vegas Wranglers, where he put up far more respectable numbers over a longer period (.932 SV% in 27 games played). Since then, Lalande has managed sparkling percentages where ever he's played: ECHL (.925 SV%), Quad Cities (.929 SV%) and Syracuse (.927 SV%).
What's significant is, as far as I can tell, neither the QC Flames nor SYR Crunch were good teams this season. The former placed 5th in the West Division and had a GD of -4. The latter were 5th in the North Division and actually worse defensively, allowing 10 more goals against than the Flames and had a nominally worse GD (-12). So it's not like he was playing behind juggernauts that were limiting the opposition to perimeter shots and winning each game by 4.
In addition, Lalande outperformed all his peers this season. No other Flames 'tender posted an equal or better SV% than Lalande. Ditto Syracuse, aside from Calder shoe-in Steve Mason who played a mere 3 games in the minors before being called up to save the Blue Jackets season.
Now, to some degree, I'm reading tea leaves here: Lalande hasn't even seen 1000 shots at the AHL at this point in his career, so we're talking small sample, potential for misleading results, yadda yadda yadda. Still, looking at Lalande's results both past and present shows a lot of arrows pointing in the right direction. And while Im not big on the value of goalie prospects in the first place, I find it's generally a good rule to try to keep the best ones around. Of course, maybe he's just a really, really good Junior/ECHL/AHL goalie and little else. Something to keep an eye on, anyways.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)