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?
Monday, June 29, 2009
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)