The Vancouver Canucks are a well run outfit. At no time during their entire history has the team had more capable decision makers. Consider that not terribly long ago the face of the Canucks was Markus Naslund and that the club was still counting on Brendan Morrison to stay healthy.The 2007-08 Canucks featured Naslund, Morrison, Trevor Linden, Taylor Pyatt, Mattias Ohlund, Matt Cooke. Luongo was not yet Holy.
The current face of the Canucks (Sedins, Luongo, Kesler, Samuelsson, etc) is a mixture of past and present but they're all young enough to have a nice 5-year window of opportunity. The team has some weaknesses (blue, depth forwards) but they're plenty good enough to lap the field in their division.
The Vancouver Canucks might win the Stanley this spring.
--
Edmonton is a team playing well currently and it is fun to watch these kids having fun. Many of them won't be back in Edmonton this fall, so fans should enjoy these lovable losers while they can.
Item: Kevin Paul Dupont has an article up that is decidedly noxious if you're an Oiler fan. The money quote is this:
- The Oilers dangled Dustin Penner and Tom Gilbert Boston's way before the trading deadline. They could come calling with Ales Hemsky, Sam Gagner or Andrew Cogliano.
If the Edmonton Oilers plan to trade terrific young players like Sam Gagner in an effort to draft terrific young players like Sam Gagner, well then there's not much that can be said for the Oilers management group. Stupid is as stupid does.
I hate Canucks fans more then any other team. However, they may have one of the better all around teams out there, and have some solid two way talents that may be built for the playoffs. I know the Sedins have disappointed in the past, but the Samuelsson pick up is a solid one, and Kesler and burrows growth as talents has been impressive. Where they might get beat is their defense, and I think it will all be about who they match up against as to whether they go far. Like the rest of the West, if they play Detroit in the first round it could be lights out.
ReplyDeleteAgreed on Detroit.
ReplyDeleteAnother thing which works well in Van's favor is that a hot goalie covers over a lot of sins in the playoffs. If Bobbie Lou stops giving up a bad goal a game then they have a chance to make some noise.
But tonight its all Oil all the time! Goilers!
LT, you've never had the feeling of walking away from a Dys game (especially a win) feeling just a little unsatisfied with how the team in blue, white and green played?
ReplyDeleteThey're riding shooting percentages inconsistent with both league averages (a league with a ton of talented shooters) and their own past performances. At even strength with the score close, they're more high event in their own zone.
They have some nice players but the dice rolled right for them.
That does make me noxious. I hope its not true, and with any other organization it wouldn't be, but with these guys...
ReplyDeleteSo the Oilers plan to become the developmental team for the NHL?
ReplyDeleteDraft or trade for young players, go through the growing pains, train them up. Just when they start to become useful bonafide NHL players trade them for other draft picks or young players. Repeat.
Sounds about right.
The Vancouver Canucks might win the Stanley this spring.
ReplyDeleteC*ntnucks.
If Roberto Luongo getting steam-rolled tonight by Dustin Penner and suffering a high ankle sprain kills their Cup hopes, I'm all in favor of it.
I've seen far too many Sub-60 IQ idiots in Canorcs jerseys cause problems at Rexall place since 2003. Couple this with the fact said franchise has employed five-star douchebags such as Jarko Ruutu, Matt Cooke, Todd Bertuzzi, Ryan Kesler, Alex Burrows and Kevin Bieksa, and it adds up to me never wanting to see Stanley visit Canada's west coast as long as I live - I'd rather see the LEAFS win the damn thing.
To paraphrase Quahog 5 anchorman Tom Tucker, "they can all go and fornicate themselves with an iron stick."
Oh - I have no issue with the idea of moving a Penner, Cogliano or Brule (or some combination of) to get into position to draft 1/2, 1/3, or 2/3, but Hemsky, Gagner and Gilbert?
ReplyDeleteIt would be, in short, idiotic.
That's totally unfair, uni. Sometimes we trade them for soon-to-be-has-beens, too.
ReplyDeletethe vancouver canucks might not hopefully not ever win the cup not ever...
ReplyDeleteglad to see hemsky, penner, and gags in the dangletorium. we really need to get rid of those guys¡
seriously, where is alan funt and that hidden camera? i'm going to check the closets..
The Vancouver Canucks are a well run outfit.
ReplyDeleteDisagree. No well run outfit would hand over the captaincy of a team to an in-eligible player.
No matter how greasy his hair is.
I stick my pre playoff mouth on the Canucks winning the Conference. Maybe even the cup.
ReplyDeleteWhat I see is a well organised team.
Of course they're the losers of all time, we all know that, but they seem to have got their shit together since Gillis rode into town. maybe Oilers need Rich Winter, lol.
Nice to know Oilers are positioned to win the lottery. They can even win now, too late to catch anyone. Wonderful stuff for the last three weeks of the season. And even better, the Flames. They might as well call themselves the 1992-2006 Oilers, cuz all they have to look forward to is those chase for 8th regular seasons - just insane to have traded away Phaneuf. Now THAT would have been the blockbuster trade between Edmonton and Cowtown!
There's plenty of poo to pin on Oilers management without jumping on them because an Eastern reporter who knows very little about the team says they *might* come calling with Sam Gagner...not exactly an iron clad source there. I don't think anyone here is stupid enough to trade Gagner, even though this group is all kinds of stupid at times.
ReplyDeleteAgreed on trading Gagner, but if we can trade players with value today for players with value tomorrow, doesn't that make sense for this team.
ReplyDeleteWould the 2nd overall this year be worth Hemsky + Cogliano? What would the 3rd overall pick be worth to the Oilers?
The Oilers dangled Dustin Penner and Tom Gilbert Boston's way before the trading deadline. They could come calling with Ales Hemsky, Sam Gagner or Andrew Cogliano.
ReplyDeleteWhen I read this before, I got the impression that one or another of them would be trade bait, but I didn't realise 2 or all three were on offer together. It's so vexing, words fail me.
Well, actually, the words that come to mind are akin to Captain Haddock's rants.
Pithecanthropuses! Blackguards! Vegetarian! Dizzards! Fancy-dress freebooters! Centipede! Sea-lice! Ectoplasm! Savages! Gangsters! Wreckers! Vandal! Carpet-sellers! Numbskulls! Gang of thieves! Slave-trader! Picaroons! Visigoths! Mountebanks! Cannibal! Duck-billed platypus! Black-beetles! Rhizopods! Ruffian! Vermicellis! Lily-livered bandicoots! Rats! Logarithm! Cro-Magnon! Freshwater swabs! Beasts! Bully! Anthropophagus!
I agree with Hbomb Penner, Cogs, rule could be traded for the 2nd overall. Hemsky, Gagner, Gilbert, and major prospects are off limits.
ReplyDeleteMy bold prediction for the Stanley Cup:
Buffalo VS Kings in the cup finals
you heard it here first.
"The Vancouver Canucks might win the Stanley this spring."
ReplyDeleteAllahu akbar!
Why do people think one of the problems with the Canucks is on the blueline? Sure, Andrew Alberts has looked like a pylon in the games he played, but he wouldn't be the 7th d-man if Mitchell was healthy.
The depth forwards thing is important to note. If Samuelsson didn't have a 30 goal year I shutter to think what position we'd be in.
The Oilers wouldn't trade Gagner, would they?
This "trade everything we got for the 'second' overall draft pick" is like a fucking virus. It's been all over the 'sphere for weeks, but lately it's exploded into the MSM with the expected reduction in signal-to-noise ratio.
ReplyDeleteYesterday on talk radio it was "should the Oilers trade Hemsky AND Gagner for the pick?" and I heard about three idiots drooling yeah, yeah, yeah, and let's throw in Cogliano/Smid/Penner/Gilbert/Souray and/or the Great One himself if that's what it takes. I had to turn it off because there is nothing more discouraging than hearing Oiler fans sound like complete fucking morons.
Temujin: What seems to be the likelihood that Mitchell is done for the year? If I were a Cancuks fan - which I'm not, I hasten to add, but if I were - that would be a major fucking concern.
ReplyDeleteLets see! What has the MMS and Oiler web site been selling all year.
ReplyDelete1. Jagr may be comming back to the NHL
2. Eberle that Hockey Canada Hero.
3. Omark video's on oilers web site. Pipeline show saying Mgmt saying Omark would be Best Small Forward.
??? Gagner, Cogliano, PieceOS, Brule, Nilsson???
4. We have hope We are going to Get Hall or Seguin.
5. Souray wants to be out West.
6. Tried to Trade Penner, Cogliano at Start of Season , Tried to Trade Penner At deadline.
7. A lot of Fernando in the community.
8. Talk about buyouts.
Hmmm!
Jagr
Eberle
Omark
Hall/Seguin
Pisani????
XXX-Gagner-Hemsky
XXX-Horcoff-XXX
Penner-Cogliano-Brule
XXX-Pouliot-XXX
Whitney-XXX
Smid-Gilbert
XXX-XXX
Could H bomb be correct! I hope not!
Jagr-Gagner-Hemsky
ReplyDeleteOmark-Horcoff-Eberle
Hall-XXX-pisani
Anyone who really believes in the Los Angeles Kings ought to look at these excellent reconstructed Western Conference standings.
ReplyDeleteFor that matter, the same goes for anyone wanting to write off Detroit (not that nayone would do such a thing).
LT: I'll say it now - as it's been so often said, "you can't fix stupid".
ReplyDeleteAnyone stupid enough to sell Hemsky or Gagner deserves to be exiled to Madgascar. Maybe this group is as bad as Milbury who destroyed the Islanders.
They could come calling with Ales Hemsky, Sam Gagner or Andrew Cogliano.
ReplyDeleteSounds pretty speculative to me. Penner and Gilbert would have been an interesting move.
It's a reporter merely speculating, stoking the fires amongst his readership.
ReplyDeleteWhy y'all up in arms?
It's a reporter merely speculating, stoking the fires amongst his readership.
ReplyDeleteBecause ownership has a nasty habit of sending up trial balloons through the media when they're thinking of making a move.
Looks like the Bluejackets will be taking over Springfield next season. Man, it's got to suck to cheer there.
ReplyDeleteThen, Schitzo, if that's the case oin this situation, I'd think that would be the Bruins management testing the waters on selling their likely Top 3 pick.
ReplyDeleteThis "trade everything we got for the 'second' overall draft pick" is like a fucking virus. It's been all over the 'sphere for weeks, but lately it's exploded into the MSM with the expected reduction in signal-to-noise ratio.
ReplyDeleteThe blogoshere greatly overvalues picks.
- Pithecanthropuses! Blackguards! Vegetarian! Dizzards! Fancy-dress freebooters! Centipede! Sea-lice! Ectoplasm! Savages! Gangsters! Wreckers! Vandal! Carpet-sellers! Numbskulls! Gang of thieves! Slave-trader! Picaroons! Visigoths! Mountebanks! Cannibal! Duck-billed platypus! Black-beetles! Rhizopods! Ruffian! Vermicellis! Lily-livered bandicoots! Rats! Logarithm! Cro-Magnon! Freshwater swabs! Beasts! Bully! Anthropophagus! -
ReplyDeleteOr, my favourite Captain Haddock Curse words. "Billions of Blue Blistering Barnacles!"
Oiler fans freaking out about trade rumours? Never change guys!
ReplyDeleteOr, my favourite Captain Haddock Curse words. "Billions of Blue Blistering Barnacles!"
ReplyDeleteIt's even better in French:
"Mille millions de mille milliards de mille sabords!" Lyrical almost.
It is hard to listen to the rumours and try to guess(based on past behaviours) what management might do.
On the one hand, there is this tendency to do nothing when action is needed, but on the other hand a tendency to sell the present on a speculative (though statistically improbable) future. This makes our discussions about the possibilities fantastical and often simply unrealistic.
June cannot come quickly enough (for many reasons). And I plan to enjoy the game tonight to avoid these unpleasant speculation.
2009 - John Tavares, Victor Hedman
ReplyDelete2008 - Steve Stamkos, Drew Doughty
2007 - Patrick Kane, James van Riemsdyk
2006 - Erik Johnson, Jordan Staal
2005 - Sidney Crosby, Bobby Ryan
2004 - Alex Ovechkin, Evgeni Malkin
2003 - Marc Andre-Fleury, Eric Staal
2002 - Rick Nash, Kari Lehtonen
2001 - Ilya Kovalchuk, Jason Spezza
2000 - Rick DiPietro, Dany Heatley
1999 - Patrik Stefan, Daniel Sedin
Aside from pulling a Milbury, there is pretty good value in the top 2 picks no? Also, consider the drop off from 1-2 should be slight this year, and that Taylor Hall been marked as a top prospect since he was 15.
Looks like the Oilers are scrambling for a backup goalie and Dubnyk is in military quarantine with the flu.
ReplyDeleteOff Topic: Interesting Malcolm Gladwell archived article on sports statistics (specifically basketball).
ReplyDeleteMoney Quote at the end
"One can play basketball," the authors conclude. "One can watch basketball. One can both play and watch basketball for a thousand years. If you do not systematically track what the players do, and then uncover the statistical relationship between these actions and wins, you will never know why teams win and why they lose."
http://www.gladwell.com/2006/2006_05_29_a_game.html
Gladwells book "outliers" is an interesting read. IMO he leans to heavily towards statistics to predict future results but an interesting read nonetheless.
ReplyDeleteTemujin: What seems to be the likelihood that Mitchell is done for the year? If I were a Cancuks fan - which I'm not, I hasten to add, but if I were - that would be a major fucking concern.
ReplyDeleteNot to mention that Salo is healthy for only 8 games a year.
Not sure if anybody here cares, but apparently the NHL and Sweden have signed a new transfer agreement.
ReplyDeleteSome the details as cribbed the HF Prospect board:
• $225,000 per player.
• Deadline for signings is June 15.
• For players drafted the same year, it is August 15.
• Players 22 years old or younger who fail to make the NHL roster have the option to return to Sweden.
• Seems even players without NHL out-clauses will be able to up and go.
At first glance, this increases the likelihood that MPS and Lander could attend camp this September.
Until this management team actually trades Gagner for a pick, I won't roast them for it.
ReplyDeleteAs for Hemsky and Penner, my thoughts are a little different.
Hesmky is quoted in today's Sun saying he thinks of Edmonton as home. In two years time this team might be good enough to entice him to re-sign so I work towards that end.
I am unsure of what Penner thinks of Edmonton or the organization, but he would probably be a bigger ticket than Hemsky at free agent time, so you may want to start talking extension with him now. If you get nothing back from him or his agent, you start trying to move him now to maximize return.
The window on this team being good enough to compete for the cup is after 27 and 83's current contracts are up at the end of 11/12.
I really don't think you will be able to afford to keep both with all the high end young-ens needing their 2nd pro/last RFA contracts around that time as well.
You need to pick one. I love em both, and Penner makes the entire team better when he steps on the ice, so you could go after him.
I think Hemsky is a special talent that has yet to have a full season with the right linemates, and he can outright win you games on his own.
Which is better is up for debate, but what is true is that if you can only keep one long term, pick one now and maximize return on the other.
A high end player with a similar window as the Gagner cluster (early twenties, late teens) is probably what you want to shoot for.
What you don't want to do if have your two highest valued assets in the organization walk for nothing in 2 years, and trading one/them at the deadline in two years for rental return is bad as well.
Just ask Sam Pollack, he'd tell you the same thing.
Gladwells book "outliers" is an interesting read. IMO he leans to heavily towards statistics to predict future results
ReplyDeleteWould you rather he use chicken entrails or astrology?
(Don't mean to pick on you Boo Pronger, because this is an interesting comment.)
But is there's no other reliable way to form conclusions about what is likely to happen in the future? How do you do it without using statistics, at least informally.
"Statistics" are just a more precise way of doing what we all do, what we have to do to make reliable predictions about the future or to try to discover laws of cause and effect. We all observe that there are regularities all around us, e.g. we see something which we see something which occurs over and over again: say we play B-ball and we observe that every team that outrebounds well usually wins. We then conclude that rebounding well will lead to winning games in the future. Even that is statistical; it's just an imprecise and a little bit lazy use of statistics.
There seems to be some mistrust of "statistics," amongst some around here; that's it's all -to use a Bush-ism, "fuzzy math." It's sort of an absurd position given that statistics are the only way you can learn anything about cause and effect or about what is likely to happen in the future. I mean, you can go wrong with statistics, but it's the only reliable way to learn about these subjects.
Even the sort of "hockey sense" which guys like Brownlee are always going on about is the use of imprecise statistics. Suppose you watch JDD play and observe that he lets in a lot of shots past his glove hand. Your "hockey sense" tells you he has a bad glove hand and that this will continue. Of course, you're not counting and being precise about how many glovehand shots he lets in , but you have a vague idea that the number he does let in is a higher number than the average number of other goalies. Using statistics-proper just requires you to be more precise than you are with your "hockey sense." You have to count up how many he lets in by his glove hand and count up how many other goalies let in, and then compare.
This is why "hockey sense" or intuition more generally are useful but should never be the final word. For example, if intuition tells you that outshooting doesn't lead to winning, that's good. But until you start actually counting up, precisely, how often teams get outshot and how often they don't win, you have to recognize that your intuition might be misleading because you weren't precise enough, i.e. that your hockey sense was lying to you. That's the value of the sort of precise statistical analyses that guys like Gladwell, or Tyler, Vic, and LT do. Using numbers you can observe regularities in the game of hockey more precisely than you can without them, and so statistics can either show us that our intuitive "hockey sense" was either right or wrong.
Sorry to sound so pedantic, but I think this is a very important point.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteYou don't trade Gagner for a chance to draft Gagner, you trade Gagner for a chance to draft Pat Kane or Steven Stamkos.
ReplyDeleteI'd move Gags+ in a heartbeat for either Hall or Seguin.
I wish Shannon Szabados was a legit option to sit on the bench tonight. It'd be a good story, and we could use one of those.
ReplyDelete//not systematically track what the players do, and then uncover the statistical relationship between these actions and wins, you will never know why teams win and why they lose."//
ReplyDeleteI hate this kind of nonsense.
Kind of Assumes the same opposition applies in all cases.
What if two completely different, perfectly effective defensive models need to be employed depending on the model of the attack? If you ground it all up and came up with 'the great defensive formula', somebody's going to devise an offence that will defeat it. And basketball's the simpler case, there's o-zone and d-zone play, there's no transition game to speak of.
Put the stats to work on repeatable work against a constant opposition, and you can probably learn a great deal about how to assemble a better car. Anything with Two teams and therefore an opposition coaching against you, I guess the best approximation would be war game simulations. It's a little more complicated than the authors would throw out there. I bet they have some no-fail options for your investments too. It can't be that hard, can it?
They could come calling with Ales Hemsky, Sam Gagner or Andrew Cogliano.
ReplyDeleteI don't see the need to worry about speculation either.
I'd move Cogs+ for the 2nd overall, but that isn't going to get it done.
ReplyDeleteBut you just don't ever see deals like that, do you? One blue chipper for another? I imagine both sides see a deal like that as too risky. Maybe team A thinks that Gagner is more likely to succeed. Maybe team B thinks that the pick has a higher chance of paying off. But they still don't make the deal because they're petrified they might be wrong, and they know that what they have can't be that much worse than what they'd get. None of it is very rational, unless you're really risk averse, but GM's seem to be pretty risk averse to me.
Kris:
ReplyDeleteThere seems to be some mistrust of "statistics," amongst some around here; that's it's all -to use a Bush-ism, "fuzzy math." It's sort of an absurd position given that statistics are the only way you can learn anything about cause and effect or about what is likely to happen in the future. I mean, you can go wrong with statistics, but it's the only reliable way to learn about these subjects.
I think in some cases the mistrust of "statistics" isn't of the raw data itself, but of the way it's interpreted. You can massage the data to support a preconceived idea, if you're so inclined, and a lot of people will buy into it because they find almost any use of numbers and formulas intimidating. In that sense, statistical analysis of anything can be used as rhetoric, to superficially conceal a flawed argument.
I'm not saying the "numbers guys" on here do that; the good ones generally don't, as far as I can tell. But you see this nonsense all the time, whenever the media reports on some study that's stats-heavy. I remember an article a while back reporting on a study finding that teens who smoked a lot of weed were more likely to suffer psychosis. I didn't read the study, but the article was reported in such a way as to imply causation (weed->crazy), when the causation could be reversed, or in fact could be nonexistent. This stuff happens all the time.
Alice,
ReplyDeleteMad respect for you but I'm not sure what you're saying.
I don't think anyone is claiming that a statistical analysis of what goes on in basketball will allow you to learn an unbeatable strategy in basketball. It's just that you if you carefully observe what sorts of strategies or behaviors on the court lead to winning -and you can break that down relative to defensive strategy: you can say a fast break team tends to win against a team with defense A but not defense B.
Of course if your increased knowledge of what leads to winning B-ball games helps you create a strategy which you deploy and start winning games, then, of course other teams will eventually adapt. But you can then use you increased knowledge of what leads to winning B-ball games again, to find out what the best strategy is against that new defense. (This is waht coaches do; they use their experience to tell them what behaviors lead to winning. The use of numbers would only help them notice -in more precise and reliable terms- which behaviors lead to winning and under what circumstances they do so.
No?
This all seems very uncontroversial to me.
Observation is the best tool for discovery.
ReplyDeleteStatistics are one form of observation.
As far as I know all these new advanced basketball stats are saying the same thing as coaches have been preaching for 50 years:defence,rebounds...
I'm pretty sure Sam Gagner wouldn't be in the discussion unless the Oilers had a player who was comparable. Andrew Cogliano, Ryan Potulny and Gilbert Brule are all shy of Sam Gagner's progress on this team. Gagner might not be a franchise player now, but there's nothing to say he won't be in a few years. Even if he wasn't "franchise" in the Sidney Crosby kind of way, he could still be franchise in the Paul Stastny kind of way.
ReplyDeleteBesides Penner and Hemsky, I don't see Boston being interested in much. They already have guys like Wheeler, Bitz and Lucic so I could see Boston being interested in reuniting Czech teammates Krejci and Hemsky. Perhaps they would be interested in Linus Omark.
On that "Wages of Wins" book from Gladwell's article, any formula that tells you the 2000-01 Sixers would have been better off with a shooting guard other than Allen Iverson isn't worth squat.
ReplyDeleteReally? He was the 91st best player in the league that year when he was the unquestioned leader of a Sixers team that had the second-best record in the league and took a game off the Lakers in the finals with Shaq playing the best ball of his life?
Makes you wonder what that squad would have been capable of if they'd had a 2-guard with a top-5 rating. 75 wins? 15-0 in the playoffs?
I didn't realize a team that featured George Lynch, Aaron McKie, Tyrone Hill, Dikembe Mutombo, Eric Snow, Raja Bell, Matt Geiger, Jumaine Jones, Toni Kukoc and Todd MacCulloch was potentially historic.
"Gagner might not be a franchise player now, but there's nothing to say he won't be in a few years. Even if he wasn't "franchise" in the Sidney Crosby kind of way, he could still be franchise in the Paul Stastny kind of way."
ReplyDeleteStastny is 6'0, 210 pounds and put up 78 points in his first year in the league.
I wish Shannon Szabados was a legit option to sit on the bench tonight. It'd be a good story, and we could use one of those.
ReplyDeleteTencer says she has yet to be contacted in his 1:45 update. Interesting situation here. It looks like the Oil Kings goalies are nowhere to be found.
Bruce, lace em up!
@kris:
ReplyDeletethat's why what you exchange balances the risk
Penner + Cogliano + 31st pick
for
Ryder + depth player + 2nd pick
If Ryder and the depth player are considered throw-ins I'd still see this as an overpay by Edmonton since that 31st pick is essentially a 1st round pick, assuming some of the players in the last first and early second are of equal talent. However, the Oilers would have to risk it if they were serious about loading up early in the first. It would also signal that the Oilers think the rebuild will be longer than the remaining duration of Penner's contract, and send the signal to Hemsky that they are serious about resigning him in a couple of years. Vice versa if Hemsky gets dealt.
However, I don't know if Penner's fed up with the organization yet since they did try to trade him once already.
It also depends on how much Boston values Penner and the 2nd pick. But I'd say Penner has more natural offensive skill than both Ryder and Lucic, but less than Wheeler. However, Wheeler is younger and still has more upside. If the Bruins acquired Penner they'd be a pretty huge team with the exception of Marc Savard.
@Traktor:
ReplyDeleteI'm not saying Sam Gagner IS Paul Stastny. I'm saying when he "gets there," he could play that kind of role.
How Stastny fell to the second round in his draft year remains one of the great mysteries of life.
ReplyDeleteLooking back, his stats coming into the draft all looked good. So considering his petigree, you'd think somebody would have taken a chance on his in the first round.
"Besides Penner and Hemsky, I don't see Boston being interested in much. They already have guys like Wheeler, Bitz and Lucic"
ReplyDeleteBoston traded Bitz to Florida at the deadline.
in some cases the mistrust of "statistics" isn't of the raw data itself, but of the way it's interpreted. You can massage the data to support a preconceived idea, if you're so inclined,
ReplyDeleteThis is exactly the problem when you don't use numbers and carefully laid out statistical arguments to try to form reliable conclusions about what causes what or what's likely to happen in certain circumstances in the future. The biases of perception are far more misleading than any "slant" that can be put on numbers. It's true that numbers can mislead us, but our eyes can be even worse.
Moreover, if someone accidentally or mistakenly makes a poor conclusion on the basis of precise data, we can all see the mistake. We can discover the mistake, show how it is a mistake, and realize that we need to go back to the drawing board. If we just rely on "hockey sense" or intuition, there's no way to check and see if we've made a mistake in our thinking. For example, Brownlee says he just knows that JDD will be a good goalie, because he has a lot of experience, and his educated eyes tell him that JDD is going to be good. Is there any way to check to see if Brownlee is right? (We could use stats to look at similar goalies...)
More importantly, is there any way for Brownlee to check to see if Brownlee is right? He could do carefully laid out statistical comps like LT, but that's stats. So again, "stats" are the only reliable way to learn about the game.
Really, all the numbers guys are doing -or guys like Gladwell- is applying the scientific method to try and understand hockey a little better. It's not complex abstruse math -as Vic himself argues- it's careful observation to try to observe patterns.
That's the damn scientific method. Do you have the same worries about science being misleading? Do note that some science can be confusing and can be wrong or even intentionally misleading. But the scientific method is always the best bet.
So can the "math guys" please start calling themselves the "scientific guys." It's a far more accurate description, and it might help quell these worries about "math can't tell us about hockey."
Cogs + JDD + 2011 1st
ReplyDeletefor
TO pick (if top-2) + Thomas + filler
No idea if Boston would go for that, but they need to unload Thomas badly now that Rask is firmly their #1. If Khabbi comes back, we'd hopefully be able to string together 82 pretty good games out of two overpaid old guys in net.
The insanely huge gap between the best and worst-case scenarios for that goalie tandem over the next couple years would certainly make things entertaining.
And I'm a big fan of trading the 2011 question mark pick if it helps get us a sure thing for this year.
@Traktor:
ReplyDeleteThanks, I forgot about that.
"commonfan13 said...
ReplyDeleteCogs + JDD + 2011 1st
for
TO pick (if top-2) + Thomas + filler"
Gross. The only way I would touch Tim Thomas' contract is if Shawn Horcoff's was going the the way. Rebuilding clubs needs flexibility and that contract would paralyze us.
Trading our 2011 pick would be suicide. There's a good chance it ends up in the top 5.
Trading our 2011 pick would be suicide. There's a good chance it ends up in the top 5.
ReplyDeleteSo we end up trading a top-5 lottery ticket for a top-2 lottery ticket. Meh.
Heh heh, Kris. I completely agree with you. I'm just saying that some of the mistrust of hockey "stats guys" likely comes from the horseshit misapplication and over-simplification of statistical data we see thrown around in the media all the time.
ReplyDeleteI'm afraid that a lot of the rest of the hostility comes from the fact that the arguments are, usually, supported by clear evidence. Years ago I was hostile towards the "stats guys" myself, though I've since come around. In my case, it was because just like most people, I don't like it when people disagree with my preconceived ideas - it shakes my worldview. It's doubly irritating when the person disagreeing with me backs up their point with relevant data, as it's harder to write their point off as "just your opinion, maan."
The response more often than not degenerates into "well fuck you, nerd", eventually (see Oilersnation or HFBoards or day to day life). I'm not saying that's rational or mature, but it's human nature.
Tencer update....
ReplyDeleteOilers goalie update: a source with a source informs me that Nathan Deobald from U of C is going to be the guy...trying to confirm.
Neato.
"So we end up trading a top-5 lottery ticket for a top-2 lottery ticket. Meh."
ReplyDeleteAnd we give up Cogs and take on another paralyzing contract.
Pete:
ReplyDeleteThe reason for mistrust towards the statletes is because the goalposts are constantly changing.
Stauffer made an interesting point today about the Sedin's and how you need patience with young players (in reference to Sam Gagner)
ReplyDeleteHere is Herik's ppg compared to Sam Gagner's for the first three years of their NHL careers. Remember Henrik started in the NHL as a 20 year old, Sam started when he was 18.
Points per game
Year 1 Henrik .35 Sam .62
Year 2 Henrik .44 Sam .54
Year 3 Henrik .50 Sam .61
Year 4 Henrik .50 Sam ?
Henrik didn't hit .91 ppg in the NHL until 05/06 when he was 25/26 years old in his 6th professional season (played in Sweden during lock out)
So everyone who bitches about Sam Gagner not coming along fast enough needs to have more patience, he's coming along fine.
If those who want to get rid of Sam were Canuck fans in the mid 2000's they'd probably would have wanted to dump the Sedin's too and bitch about letting go of Bertuzzi.
You don't even thing of trading Sam, you get more players to play with him.
Gagner's one of the only Oilers worth keeping, let alone yapping about trading.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately a lot of Oiler fans have become so accustomed to losing they now think and talk like fans of losing franchises that is - trade away the future for an even more nebulous(and ridiculous) one.
Sorry Pete,
ReplyDeleteI sounded like an ass there. I like your posts and the one I was responding to was interesting.
I need more coffee. Or less. Not sure.
I'm not saying Sam Gagner IS Paul Stastny. I'm saying when he "gets there," he could play that kind of role.
ReplyDeleteDon't let tracktor bully you!
Age 18-20 career starts Gagner's .6 points/Gm rate is in the same area as Nash, Lecavalier, Courtnall, Iginla. That is the 45TH best in history.
Stastny is 6'0, 210 pounds and put up 78 points in his first year in the league.
ReplyDeleteMost sources have Stasny at 205, meaning in a year or 2 the physical difference between the two will be one inch and probably between 5 and 10 pounds, since it seems likely that Gagner will settle in somewhere between 195 and 200. It should also be noted that Stasny was 21 when he played his first year. Those are hardly insurmountable differences.
That isn't to say that Gagner will turn into a Stasny, but your reasoning doesn't show he will not either.
Woodguy see you already defended it.
ReplyDeleteYou can't unload a massive amount of players on Boston for a draft pick because they are at the cap.
ReplyDeleteSo you'd have to take some of their junk back in trade or there is no room for all of the added salaries they'd have to pick up.
The Oilers are in the middle of a massive rebuild folks.
They are at least 2 years away from the playoffs, and thats the point at which you start to be looking at in terms of a contending team.
When the dust finally settles in July this team will be massively different than even the lineup we are seeing now.
An I am not sure how many of the Vets that are left will want to wait out a rebuild.
Gross. The only way I would touch Tim Thomas' contract is if Shawn Horcoff's was going the the way. Rebuilding clubs needs flexibility and that contract would paralyze us.
ReplyDeleteSeems to me it might be kind of fun to own the two worst goaltender contracts in the league.
"Points per game
ReplyDeleteYear 1 Henrik .35 Sam .62
Year 2 Henrik .44 Sam .54
Year 3 Henrik .50 Sam .61
Year 4 Henrik .50 Sam ?"
Points per game
Year 1 Kane 0.87
Year 2 Kane 0.85
Year 3 Kane 1.12
Year 1 Stamkos: 0.58
Year 2 Stamkos: 1.15
Nobody is suggesting giving up Gagner for a quick fix. Seguin and Hall will likely come close to outscoring Gagner next year and then outscore him every year after that.
I'm not sure why Sedin is even being compared to Gagner. He is 6'2 and one of the most dominant players in the NHL on the cycle. Gagner will never have that in his bag. The things that Gagner is good at, he is already great at, and the things that needs improving (skating, shooting, size, strength, winning 50/50 battles) aren't likely to improve by a great deal.
"The things that Gagner is good at, he is already great at, and the things that needs improving (skating, shooting, size, strength, winning 50/50 battles) aren't likely to improve by a great deal."
ReplyDeleteThat's like saying Guy Lafleur wasn't going to be anything more than a 20 goal scorer after not dazzling in his first couple of seasons playing on the Lemaire line.
Kris, let me explain my comment a little more. And I am a big statistics guy myself. If you've read the book then you'll maybe understand what im trying to say a bit more.
ReplyDeleteGladwell seems to put almost no emphasis on natural talent. According to him, all results are based on numbers only. He claims that to truly master something, a person needs to put in 10,000 hours of practice time. So for the players who are not good enough in the NHL - they just havent put in enough hours yet. I dont really buy that line of thinking. Although there is something to what he is saying.
He then applies this rule to the Beatles. They were so good because they played 10 hours a night in clubs for who knows how many years. Im sorry but when it comes to music i just dont think you can put numbers to it and predict what bands are gonna be great in the future.
I dont care if Nickelback puts in 30,000 hours of practice time they are still gonna suck.
Statistically speaking the Oilers would win a trade of Gagner for the 2nd overall around 90% of time, wouldn't they?
ReplyDeleteSam is trending well, but not really looking likely to be elite at this point.
Gagner is having a decent season, but nothing thus far, that really sets him apart from the pack of JVR, Voracek, B.Sutter, Galiardi, and Perron. Pat Kane, a bonafide difference maker, is well clear of the pack.
I think I'd generally favour the idea of trading up for the second overall. I think convincing Boston to give up the pick is something of a pipe dream however.
But, hey this is the Oilers. They talk up about how they are going to trade up before every draft.
Guy Lafleur scored 78 goals in 216 games in his first 3 seasons. 0.36 goals per game.
ReplyDeleteSam Gagner has scored 44 goals 222 games. 0.19 goals per game.
Lafleur was also 6' and could actually skate.
PPV?
ReplyDeleteAs if I'd pay money to watch this sorry group.
Maybe now I can finally get some school work done on a weeknight.
And what's this on us not having a back-up G for tonight? The highlights from this one should be a treat.
Well Trak, I wasn't exactly trying to compare Gagner to Lafleur there...
ReplyDeleteForgive me if I'm repeating somethign already said - I've not read al the way to the bottom of the thread yet (damn you, prolific, thoughtful and engaged fans!).
ReplyDeleteSuppose you watch JDD play and observe that he lets in a lot of shots past his glove hand. Your "hockey sense" tells you he has a bad glove hand and that this will continue.
Sort of, but I think there's more to it than that. I think the 'saw him good' crowd are often written off as imprecise... it's an accusation that could equally be levelled at the stats crowd. First of all, I'm a fan of stats and I agree that at the end of the day, they tell us a lot more about a player than we could otherwise know from casual observation.
HOWEVER. There are huge, gaping flaws in statistical analysis that are not necessarily present in 'saw him good' (though naturally in both cases, it depends heavily on the quality of analysis). What you don't get from stats is the quality of the shot. Whether it was screened. How hard it was. If the goalie was out of position after blocking an earlier attempt or being knocked off-balance by another player. The angle. Et cetera.
In a perfect world, we would track all of these factors and incorporate all of them into a matrix that could isolate and account for, well, strangeness. But we don't live in a perfect world. 'Saw him good' tends to be more informed by deviations from the norm, to more instinctively differentiate good goals from bad ones from lucky ones.
To get esoteric, it's a bit like the difference between neural net processing (the human brain) and binary processing (computers). With a straightforward mathematical calculation, computers are so much faster than people it's not even funny. But when it comes to pattern recognition (ie: separating a person in an image from a background, learning to recognize specicic objects in a series of photographs), computers are still a long ways from matching the brain's ability to do this. If you're interested in the difference, challanges and complexities in different computing and cognitive models, I recommend reading anything by Ray Kurzweil on artificial intelligence.
The point is, stats are much more selective than we care to admit and tend to be disarmingly lacking in contextual perspective. In a game like hockey, every stat is massively reliant on context to be of use, with enough variables that direct one to one comparison of players - particularly ones on different teams, different conferences or different years, can reliably serve as little more than a starting point for any serious conversation of future trends.
Bank Shot, sure you could trade Gagner for the pick that nets you a Patrick Kane type difference maker, or you could trade him for a pick that nets you Turris.
ReplyDeleteTraktor, not every player explodes into the league at 20 years old and sets the world on fire.
Take a look at the top 30 scorers in the NHL right now.
Only about 1/3rd of them were anywhere close to a PPG pace by the end of their 20 year old NHL season.
Still lots of time.
I'm not sure it's legal to discuss worst goalie contracts in the league without bringing up DiPietro.
ReplyDeleteAnd remember the days when we thought Penner had one of the worst contracts in the league? Seems like only a year ago...
Who knows, a healthy Khabbi could shut us all up next year. None of us really have any idea what his condition is (other than, of course, tanked). Maybe we'll be pleasantly surprised at his recovery.
In resource management we call what you guys are talking about here triangulation. Stats + cultural practices + local knowledge. Trends or information indicated by more than one source are the ones that should be used to make decisions.
ReplyDelete"there is nothing more discouraging than hearing Oiler fans sound like complete fucking morons."
ReplyDeleteThere are a lot of people who cheer for the Oilers who are complete fucking morons, just as there are in every other group of people on the planet. Some of us have just found a few places to meet without them, and we find a few more every day.
Never forget that the many are still just stupid - some people are just really dumb.
"Because ownership has a nasty habit of sending up trial balloons through the media when they're thinking of making a move."
Something tells me that this was a rumor started to try to save Chiarelli. Boston fans have been really pissed with him this season. If the rumour were true and from Edmonton, someone local would have said something by now.
---
I really hope that the Canucks can win something in the next two years. Because after that, the Oilers will be coming on, and god help the Canucks if they can't get it done before we start our second dynasty.
Icecastles, the problem with your quality of shot assessment is that we inheritely see what we want. That's why someo people hate certain players on their team while others love them.
ReplyDeleteWe all have a natural bias and it influences what we see (especially when it comes to something you are passionate about).
Yes ideally if you could look at things as a neutral observer, it's a valuable tool. The problem is I don't trust myself to be unbiased so I'm surely not going to trust many others.
I really hope that the Canucks can win something in the next two years.
ReplyDeleteAgreed. Like a Roll Up The Rim prize.
Traktor:
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure why Sedin is even being compared to Gagner.
To show that 3rd year performance for even a top 4 pick isn't always close to the ceiling of that player.
commonfan, the Dipietro contract at least has an out.
ReplyDeleteThe Oilers (and B's) are stuck with their guys until the deal ends or possibly LTIR.
Guy Lafleur scored 78 goals in 216 games in his first 3 seasons. 0.36 goals per game.
ReplyDeleteSam Gagner has scored 44 goals 222 games. 0.19 goals per game.
Because lord knows if there's one thing the Oilers resemble, it's the 1970s Habs.
Sorry, I came off the wrong way too.
ReplyDeleteLove the stats. They can tell you tons about JDD, tons about Smid, situational data, sh%, etc. And in that they're a great reference check against your eyes. "He sucks". The numbers will add context to that, confirming it in spades or perhaps levelling it with some other information to consider. That's at the individual level, and it's of great use putting together a roster, which includes putting value on each contributor in a cap system.
But the quote just sounded like a million hours of basketball tape would tell you how to win 5 vs 5, which assumes and reduces to one strategy. That may not have been what was intended, but it's the over-simplification like this that I reject, which is what guys like to have fun with when they want to write an armchair-philosophy bit of entertainment.
The 10,000 hours, btw, I don't think that was the substitute for the talent, Gladwell was more trying to scuttle the 'overnight effortless genius' theory of success. The Beatles seemed to spring forth, fully formed, the truth was they came to that point through a heck of a lot of gigging, on top of what was born into them.
Also, Gladwell wrote an absolutely outstanding magazine profile on Ron Popeil, kitchen gadgeteer and late-night TV salesman. It's called The Pitchman, it's online. Seriously, it's beyond good.
And then there's the Oilers. They'll need more goals than the Canucks in order to win this one, I think.
My problem with statsguy remains the same; I believe he is showing me what, as opposed to why.
ReplyDeleteDetailed "what" is important. But "why" is also very important, especially when it comes to predicting future results and where to take risks.
Those that write this section off as "luck", do so at their own peril.
Gladwell seems to put almost no emphasis on natural talent.
ReplyDeleteI didn't get that from Gladwell. I thought he said talent and opportunity played a role. Bill Gates had talent, and he had the opportunity to work with computers at a time when that was rare. But his genius and success are more explained by "the 10,000 hours of deliberative practice" than talent or opportunity.
I like this quote that Gladwell wrote about Enron in the New Yorker, titled, ironically given what I'm saying, "The Myth of Talent." It describes the Oilers perfectly, IMO:
They believe in stars, because they don't believe in systems. In a way, that's understandable, because our lives are so obviously enriched by individual brilliance. Groups don't write great novels, and a committee didn't come up with the theory of relativity. But companies work by different rules. They don't just create; they execute and compete and coördinate the efforts of many different people, and the organizations that are most successful at that task are the ones where the system is the star.
Note to Tambellini on being a GM or to Quinn on being a coach: "The system is the star."
Kris: no worries. You sounded a bit heated, but I was amused, not offended.
ReplyDeleteI would have replied sooner, but I was off buying a new computer. It's been hard arguing on the internet when my laptop keeps freezing and eating my posts.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAlice:
ReplyDeleteThe Beatles played in a German city called Hamburg for how long I don't know(several months at least), but do know they played about 5 sets a night, night in and night out - compared to 99.9% of bands who rehearse a few dozen times then hope they make it.
Naturally this doesn't mean they would make it on the fact they gigged an awful lot prior to their Ed Sullivan North American debut, but playing in front of the roughest and toughest audiences imaginable(they played in a strip club) would if nothing else give them huge performing chops when faced with any other imaginable "tough" audience in future.
Also of course they're scousers.
Now why am I trying to equate the AHL to a Hamburg strip club?
Dawgbone- Turris with a second is a risk. Though in the last ten years, the scouts have been getting it right basically all the time when it comes to the top two picks. 6 out of ten are bona fide stars. One had his career ruined by injury, and the jury is still out on the other three.
ReplyDeletePlus, the math loves the top two this season.
There is risk involved in dealing established players for a top two pick, but I think it's a minimal risk. It probably sets back any thought of putting a decent team on the ice for another couple of seasons however. I'm one of the fans that can live with 2-3 more seasons in the sewer.
The Oilers have been a nothing team for the majority of the years that I have been a fan. I could live with a couple more.
ya i guess you're right Kris - it was more about opportunity with cases like Gates.
ReplyDeleteJust because I said I thought Gladwell leans to heavily towards statistics doesnt mean i have a mistrust of math and think its all voodoo. It was just my opinion of his book.
Do you honestly believe music can be simplified to be a mathematical equation like Time Practiced = Better Album Sales?
Can't agree more with Icecastles - stats play an important role in evaluation but so does "seen him good" which takes advantage of the very complicated neural net processing and pattern recognition capabilities of the human brain. There is - however - one very large caveat. The person doing the "seeing" absolutely must have a deep pool of knowledge and experience to draw on in order to provide any reliable pattern recognition results. Novices are just flipping coins and need not apply or may even provide inaccurate result disproportionately.
ReplyDeleteSo stats and "seen him good" are complimentary as long as the person seeing is highly experienced.
Good point BP. Musical and artistic success are probably more talent driven. But you know, the only artist I know spent his whole, and I mean whole, youth practicing drawing and painting. He seems to have innate talent now, but maybe it's just, or mostly just, the result of practice and drive.
ReplyDeleteI think with Gretzky and Lemieux it was practice by and large. IMO, anyway.
Stastny is 6'0, 210 pounds and put up 78 points in his first year in the league.
ReplyDeleteStastny NHLE82
18 - USHL
19 - 35
20 - 46
Gagner NHL82
18 - 51
19 - 44
20 - 50
Stastny is 6'0, 210 pounds and put up 78 points in his first year in the league.
ReplyDeleteKris,
ReplyDeleteAnd thats a debate that i have with my friends from time to time. Theres no way to prove either way but its interesting to discuss how much of how good a player is attributed to talent vs practice. 90% practice 10 % talent? 50-50?
Even listening to Crosby talk about his younger days (real young) he says he was never really the best player on the ice. Never really scored a ton of goals. But even watching him now you can see that he is probably one of the hardest working players in the NHL.
Ya you mentioned that Traktor.
ReplyDeleteMusical and artistic success are driven, I think, by an unquantifiable combination of talent, practice, timing, marketing, (both self-promotion and promotion by others), charisma, image/looks, the fickle tastes of the public, and sheer luck.
ReplyDeleteIf talent and practice were the only factors, Steve Vai would be on the top of the charts. Or not even Vai, but some fat guitar nerd in Arkansas who practices 18 hours a day and nobody's ever heard of. Meanwhile people with no talent, who have almost never practiced, can sell records if they're in the right place at the right time - see Kelly Osbourne, as one of many examples.
If trying to quantify and enumerate things related to sports can cause such dissent, imagine trying to analyze the arts like that. The mind boggles.
Stastny also has 4 years on Gagner. No big deal, right?
ReplyDeleteJordan Weal's NHLE is better than players like Getzlaf, Carter, Richards, J.Staal, Nash ect but he isn't even projected to go in the 1st round.
ReplyDeleteWhy is that?
Do you honestly believe music can be simplified to be a mathematical equation like Time Practiced = Better Album Sales?
ReplyDeleteI seem to be in book recommendation mode today. For anyone who wants a mind-bogglingly cynical (and depressingly accurate) view on this, I can't place enough value on The Manual (How to Have a Number One the Easy Way), by Jimmy Cauty and Bill Drummond of the KLF who applied the formula to astounding levels of success in the early 90s before burning all their money, destroying their music (they maintained rights ownership so they actually managed to do this rather effectively) and telling the press to fuck off onstage at the BMAs.
"Stastny also has 4 years on Gagner. No big deal, right?"
ReplyDeletePaul Stastny put up 78 points two years after being drafted.
Gagner under the same circumstances is well short of that pace.
Probably an unfair comparison though as Stastny was more physically mature at 20 than Gagner will be at any point in his career.
re: trading Gagner for #2 pick.
ReplyDeleteSam Gagner in draft year: 118pts, 2.2 pts/game on a team with 301 goals
Taylor Hall: 106 pts., 1.9 pts/game on a teamwith 331 goals
Tyler Sequin: 106 pts., 1.7 pts/game on a team with 167 goals
I hardly think that Hall/Seguin > Gagner is the slam dunk people are making it out to be. Any talk of trading Gagner for the #2 is foolish in my opinion. The guy is at an age when many players are just cracking an NHL roster to begin with and he's had 3 seasons of development already.
Traktor - how much do you think the stat differentials are affected by team, linemates and division? That's got to have a massive impact on these guys' ability to come into the league and produce. Not just in terms of the skill they play with, but how physical the games are in divisions like the Northwest compared to what Washington faces in the SE.
ReplyDeleteAnd yeah, I know Stasny played his rookie year in the NW, but he was also mentored by Joe Sakic rather than Ethan Morose.
BRIDub: completely agreed. And Samwise seems to have really worked at becoming a more complete player this season. I'd love to see him be a 50-goal scorer one day, but I think his value as a complete and responsible centre who can score is much higher than a scoring machine who is a defensive sieve.
ReplyDeleteBRIdub:
ReplyDeleteSam Gagner was wonderful against junior players. No debating that.
Ryan Getzlaf on the other hand didn't even produce a point per game in his draft year.
Traktor: every high draft pick is wonderful against junior players. That is why they are a high draft pick. You're absolutely right that some such as Getzlaf develop later, but many also don't. That is just another reason it would be bad to trade Gagner. We would be trading someone we know is at minimum a 45-55 point guy with some upside for someone who may be a 100 point guy, but may also be Patrick Stefan 2010 edition.
ReplyDeleteI think Gagner's slow evolution as a two-way player needs to be mentioned here.
ReplyDeleteNot every offensive prospect shows Gagner's defensive acumen; which is some evidence that Gagner will be able to outscore tough comp. That's really valuable and I don't know if we have as much reason to think Hall or Seguin will do that. They might do that but with Gagner we have more evidence that he will.
Well said, Kris.
ReplyDeleteI think the biggest arrow pointing the right way for Gagner right now though, is that Traktor doesn't seem to like him. I'd say that's about the biggest endorsement you can get. :)
This is probably crazy but what about:
ReplyDelete31st pick this year
Next years 1st
o'sullivan
for ryder and lotto ticket 2nd pick....
I know it's not great but either Ryder works or he does not and POS quite possibly could outperform his numbers for them at a mill savings. We take salary off them next year. They take POS off of us.
We do dice roll on the pick next year...but maybe we switch that to a 1st/2nd next year. Try to load up this year. If the goal is to be turning the corner 2011-2012 then I think it's worth a shot to jump a year up in the lottery for tops....
Traktor, do you have a more substantial response to coach than just NHLE failed in one case? Do you think NHLE is completely unreliable, somewhat reliable, or very reliable in predicting NHL offense.
ReplyDeleteIf the answer is even somewhat reliable, why are you so down on Gagner's chances of improving his offensive numbers in the exact same way that Stastny improved his NHLE numbers over the same development period?
Please be specific.
Hell I'd even throw cogs in there as sweetner. (He may pan out but it won't be here)
ReplyDeleteI think you steer clear of Penner, Gags and Hemsky here. If we do that at the expense of next years draft then so be it. I would even be willing to take back another not so great contract off the B's as long as it's done next year.
ReplyDeleteTim Thomas contract is a no go though.
JDD in net tonight - great way to put a stop to this pesky winning streak :)
ReplyDeleteWierd question:
ReplyDeleteWhy the hell does capgeek have souray listed as active since Nov 15?
AO: He's the only healthy goalie right now, from whatI understand.
ReplyDeleteNathan Deobald will be backing up tonight. Confirmed. I always hope these guys get a chance at a period.
ReplyDeleteMore Petry
ReplyDeletehttp://www.wilx.com/blogs/sportsblog/88947057.html
Gagner is an untouchable in my opinion.
ReplyDeleteYou have to draw the line somewhere and that's where i would place it.
This is all speculation at this point anyhow, the Leafs have been on a tear winning 7 of their last 10 games and are only 4 points back of the Herc's, Lightning and the Islanders.
Lots can happen in the last 10 games...
Kris:
ReplyDeleteYou need to keep in mind that NHLE tells us 1000's of players could put up 20-30 points in the NHL right now that will never play a single game.
I like NHLE for fantasy purposes but making actual decisions based on it is just crazy.
NHLE has been right many times but if you asked a random hockey fan how many points Stamkos would put up in his first year in the league I'm sure the answer wouldn't be far off from NHLE's.
I know LT loves his NHLE but he also thinks Omark should be used as a throw-in and NHLE says Omark is good for 25+ goals in the NHL.
If you're going to get behind something it should be all the way, no?
Traktor:
ReplyDeleteThe following forwards have also experienced an increase since last year:
POS: 3.71 (+1.10)
Pisani: 3.60 (+0.76)
Nilsson: 3.44 (+0.99)
Horc: 3.42 (+1.07)
Cogliano: 2.88 (+0.42)
Moreau: 2.70 (+0.26)
Penner2.48 (+0.38)
It's almost like playing for a 30th place team can be rough on your stats. Funny how that works.
You need to keep in mind that NHLE tells us 1000's of players could put up 20-30 points in the NHL right now that will never play a single game.
ReplyDeleteIs that really inaccurate, though? I mean, you give any AHL player enough ice time and they'll probably hit 20 points in the NHL.
NHLE also projects a 5'5 CHL player the same way it does to a player that stands 6'5.
ReplyDeleteNHLE has great value but we need to recognize the things it doesn't factor in when making a decision.
LT's NHLE from a few posts back...
ReplyDelete2009-2010
Linus Omark (22) (KHL) 20-15-35
From the link LT provided:
ReplyDeleteRick Comley seems resigned to the fact that his stellar junior defenseman, Jeff Petry, will give up his senior season and sign with the NHL's Edmonton Oilers.
Petry may even play in the minor league playoffs yet in April.
Ha.
Hahahahahahahahaha.
Traktor - the thing that drives me nuts about your posts is how the points you make are (at least partially) rebutted by evidence that I'm certain that you're aware of.
ReplyDeleteStastny had a better rookie season! (I won't mention that he was 20 instead of 18).
Gagner's GAON/60 went up this year, he must be regressing! (So did everybody else's, because this team is awful).
It's intellectually dishonest, and it drives me nuts because if I decided to do that sort of thing in practice I'd get my ass sanctioned by a judge.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteShitzo:
ReplyDelete"The thing that drives me nuts about your posts is how the points you make are (at least partially) rebutted by evidence that I'm certain that you're aware of.
Stastny had a better rookie season! (I won't mention that he was 20 instead of 18)."
I compared Stastny's rookie season to Gagner's 3rd year in the NHL.
"It's intellectually dishonest, and it drives me nuts because if I decided to do that sort of thing in practice I'd get my ass sanctioned by a judge."
I'm sure the judge would also appreciate it if you took the time to read the information presented to you rather than waste the courts time.
I compared Stastny's rookie season to Gagner's 3rd year in the NHL.
ReplyDeleteNo, you threw out what Stastny did in his rookie season without further explanation. It's being deliberately obtuse because you know it's not a fair comparison to Gagner's rookie season but you are perfectly happy if the reader draws that conclusion.
And then when you do get called out on it, you can say "oh, of course that wasn't meant to be the comparison, you guys need to read closer".
Traktor said...
ReplyDelete"Paul Stastny put up 78 points two years after being drafted.
Gagner under the same circumstances is well short of that pace."
Same circumstance obviously means two years after being drafted.
Rocking the 630CHED tonight.
ReplyDeleteJust tuned in and I find that the goalie we "recalled" from UofC is their Third. Stringer.
Wow. Nobody wants to play for the Oilers.
Stastny's 20 year old season: 78 points
ReplyDeleteGagner's 20 year old season: well short of that
If that better? Its not like my point is any less valid.
And another thing Schitzo,
ReplyDeleteJohn Ogrodnick put up more points than Mario Lemieux in 1985. Take that Lemieux...
"Gagner's GAON/60 went up this year, he must be regressing! (So did everybody else's, because this team is awful)."
ReplyDeleteSo what exactly is Gagner's defensive progression based on? The stats clearly don't indicate much progression, if any. Have the goalposts moved to "saw him good"?
Sorry if it's allready been mentioned, but MacT to coach Canada's WC team.
ReplyDeleteWonder if Penner will be asked or if he'd even go if asked?
Whats your point after all of this Traktor? Gagner ceiling is 50 points?
ReplyDeleteKris-Not every offensive prospect shows Gagner's defensive acumen; which is some evidence that Gagner will be able to outscore tough comp
ReplyDeleteI don't think he's shown much in the way of defensive acumen. He's been playing some of the most sheltered minutes on the team with the best possible line mates and he's still bleeding.
Gagner has put up some points each year, but he's also gotten endless rope from coaching and management. Maybe it's because of how high he was picked in the draft, respect for his dad, effort level in practice...whatever.
Gagner sure hasn't been getting the best ice time because of results, because they aren't that great.
It's possible that Sam could become something worth building around, but he's been showing a lack of clear progression in terms of results, and he has physical limitations to boot.
NHLE has been right many times
ReplyDeleteSo you think it's somewhat reliable. But then you don't think it's reliable in Gagner's case.
I know LT loves his NHLE but he also thinks Omark should be used as a throw-in and NHLE says Omark is good for 25+ goals in the NHL.
And you think it predicts that Omark is good for, roughly 20 goals. (I actually think this is a reasonable prediction if Omark were to play decent minutes and lots of PP time. But we don't know if Omark can play any sort of two way game. And if he can't, even if he plays here, he won't get the minutes to get the goals. I think LT is right to worry about Omark's two way game, but his NHLE, gives us pretty good reason to believe he can produce offense if he gets the minutes.)
Maybe your position is that NHLE is less reliable when the player is below 6'0. If so, that's good.I like that you're looking at context. (Finally.) IMO, you're right that a highe NHLE is less reliable for smaller players.
However a.) that doesn't mean it's completely unreliable, it can still be a good predictor even if context matters too. And b.) Gagner isn't that small. I see him at about 5'11 195. And c.) not all smaller players play the same game, i.e. there's more contextual evidence about Gagner. Gagner's game isn't quite the same as Omark's or a lot of skilled Euro's like Nilsson, who often have trouble playing in NHL-level traffic. Gagner has shown some real skill playing in traffic and while being pushed around. That means he's unlikely to fail for being too weak, so you're worries about him there are misplaced.
If you're going to get behind something it should be all the way, no?
No, that would be stupid all or nothing thinking.
Oh Traktor,
ReplyDeleteStastny's SH%:
2006/2007 15.1% 78 points
2007/2008 17.4% 74 points
It's funny that you focus on his 78 point campaign, since that's his highest total for his career, reflecting an unsustainable SH%, which has now come down sharply.
Stastny has been and will continue to be a nearly PPG game guy, but the start if his career was no more impressive than Gagner's, especially considering the SH% luck Stastny had in his rookie campaign.
Wasn't that what happened with Cogliano? Fool me once, etc., etc.
Gilbert?
ReplyDeleteQuinn's not going to like that kind of fancypants puck skills.
Guess he's going to Boston for the 2nd overall pick?
Is it concerning anyone else that the Oilers only appear to be able to play in situations of no pressure whatsoever?
ReplyDeleteMaybe something of a trend for our youngsters? It happened in 2007-08 too.
Goddam JDD letting in two softies....
ReplyDeleteWait a minute???
Hahaha, good luck riding that guy against the Hawks, Wings or even the Coyotes.
Robert Nilsson. He's the original girl with a curl.
ReplyDeleteBank Shot,
ReplyDeleteThere are no sheltered minutes on this team.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWin and You're in - UNLESS you are DD. What great coaching.
ReplyDeleteWhy have a system if you don't follow it.
Were they honestly worried about a streak? I want to see what DD can do with some work. We know what JDD can do.
It was mentioned earlier, but DD is quarantined with flu.
Our back up is the third stringer from the University of Calgary.
bookie: Dubynk has the flu.
ReplyDeleteAw come on bookie, don't be that way.
ReplyDeleteI'm doing a project on marten, sable and fisher for a University presentation, and this is the result of a google images search for "fisher"
ReplyDeletehttp://rustnbones.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/isla-fisher.jpg
My computer clearly knows me too well :)
Oh come on kris. Tonight thus far Gagner has been matched up against the Rypien-Johnson-Hordichuk line.
ReplyDelete"What Strudwick can do for other defensemen."
ReplyDeleteYes. Yes. Yes.
Cogliano with a brutal play in his own zone, loses possession 2-1.
ReplyDeleteThey traded Vis for trying to do that stuff.
Go go gadget Chorney! Just like Inspector Gadget, the guy is a machine. Another minus.
ReplyDeleteExcept of Vis could actually do that stuff.
ReplyDeleteHere's a stream
ReplyDeletehttp://sportsstop.tv/ch2/index.html
Here are a couple of sites I used for live feeds:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.fromsport.com/
http://www.atdhe.net/
Christ.
ReplyDeleteAndrew Cogliano is doing nothing but driving up his salary for next year.
It doesn't rain, it pours.
Cogliano realising he was playing hockey all along.
ReplyDeleteGood to see he might not be totally wasted.
dorito,
ReplyDeleteYes, very concerning.
It would be interesting to compare Gagner and Cogliano's career stats before and after the trade deadline at the end of this year.
If I'm Tambellini I'm bringing these stats to contract negotiations.
John Garrett's a Taylor Chorney fan I see. Poor Taylor.
ReplyDeleteDoes Rod Philips have his exitement-factor cranked to levels Pierre McGuire normally reserves for Crosby! tonight or is Deslauriers actually making some spectacular saves?
ReplyDeleteHeidi Pisani looks like a helluva a lot like a young Glenn Close.
ReplyDeleteDoes anyone else ever get sick of Moreau making the weakest dump attempt instead of making a short obvious pass? He must do it once a game.
ReplyDeleteThose Sedins certainly can cut piss from time to time.
ReplyDeleteTo bad it's not Kick A Ginger day.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteTraktor:
ReplyDeleteHockey-reference has Stasny playing his first year as a 21 year old. Gagner is still in his 20-year-old season.
Secondly, where do you get 210 from? Everywhere I looked has him at 205.
That pass from one Sedin to the other for the 2nd goal, I mean really. How do you defend that? I swear there's never been anything like it. Unique talents.
ReplyDeletePaul Stasntny's selection is one that make me doubt of the scouts.
ReplyDeleteHow on earth can a kid with stats like that fall so bad?
He was lightyears ahead of Jack Skille (First american product drafted thay year)
Sorry if someone has already mentioned it but:
ReplyDeleteWindsor wins 7-6 and Hall goes 2 goals and 1 assist and even.
Plymouth wins 8-1 and Seguin goes 1 g 1a and ends up -1.
Interesting night.
Does anyone else ever get sick of Moreau making the weakest dump attempt instead of making a short obvious pass? He must do it once a game.
ReplyDeleteGot sick of that one a couple of years ago.
Unless they beat the Dys' sieve at least once more, they have no hope of winning this one, Van is coming on strong and has too many guns.
JDD made a couple of pretty good saves in close, but of couse he looks likes like an epileptic in front of a strobe light while doing it.
I'm sure with Rod's eyesight he just saw a tumble of orange, blue, arms and pads that looked liked the tasmanian devil wrestling Underdog, and when the puck didn't go in the net, declared a "GLORIOUS SAVE!!"
I love Rod, always able to make you wish you were there.
You're telling me no one could have used Pisani from the deadline in? Really?
ReplyDeleteL.T.,
ReplyDeleteThey do seem to know where the other will be.
We were lucky enough to watch the Gretzky/Kurri combo for years.
Gretzky could be blindfolded, drunk, and in a dark alley and still hit Kurri on the tape with a no-look pass.
many teams could use a healthy Pisani. You just don't know what you're going to get with him.
ReplyDeleteYeah, that powerplay doesn't miss Hemsky at all (bookie!i)
ReplyDeleteRod's calling this as a spectacular game.
ReplyDeleteThoughts? possibly from someone watching the game from a calm, steady, non-homer presence?
I don't like this late season run.
ReplyDeleteAt all.
Yeah!
ReplyDeleteFuck you Vancouver!
Aw come on bookie, don't be that way.
ReplyDeleteI deleted it before I saw your comments. Yesterday Quinn was suggesting a change and then I saw that JDD was getting the start and thought wtf, within 30 seconds I saw DD was sick (backup from Calgary) and deleted it before I saw your responses... Sorry.
Wow, didn't expect them to keep Van off the board in the 3rd.
ReplyDeleteHahahaha fuck you Dys.
Toronto lost tonight, good thing there's only one game left in the homestand, they can't lose on home ice lately.
I hate Vancouver. Everything about it. Go Oilers!
ReplyDeleteYeah, that powerplay doesn't miss Hemsky at all (bookie!i)
ReplyDeleteoh oh, now my name has become the symbol for sarcasm...
Watching it from Vancouver. Good game. JDD did play very well. Lots of 5 bell saves although as Woodguy described he continues to look epileptic. I also liked Gilbert, Whitney and LT's son tonight. Penner had some chances but was snakebitten.
ReplyDeleteThe fact that "Go Canucks Go" was not being drown out at Rexall was an embaresment but I guess that pretty much sums up the season.
"Thoughts? possibly from someone watching the game from a calm, steady, non-homer presence?"
ReplyDeleteDeslauriers made some very good saves on a few very good Vancouver chances. in between those chances the intensity level was high but not spectacular.
was a good game to watch. oilers got a bit lucky.
9 points back with 9 games left. We'd better not find a way to fuck this up.
ReplyDeleteStarting to get a bit of a queasy feeling about the Oilers' streak of wins.
ReplyDeleteCome on, we've come this far, let's not ruin the whole season with a gratuitous and completely unnecessary hot streak.
DG,
ReplyDeleteI think Rod must just be happy to see the Oil win a game, in a fashion that resembles a decent 60-min effort (even tho van had plenty o jump for much of the game)... despite the fact that without 'Thank-Lou' the optics of this game would much different..
Jdd did have some nice saves, but I had to laugh at Woodguys analysis.. haha.. roll around, roll around, and didnt go in!! --> INCREDIBLE!!! ..jokes..
I liked how even tho the oil were under siege in the third, they were able to turn the tide in the last minute and get it deep to kill momentum...
I'm all for a win once in a while. God knows I've had to deal with enough losses this season. Not concerned in the slightest that we're "only" 9 points back. We can play .500 hockey and still secure the 2nd overall pick.
ReplyDeleteIt's not like they're going to increase our likelihood of winning the lottery if we suck any more than we already do. 20 points back of Toronto is going to get us the same percentages as being a single point back will.
Everyone kindly stop complaining atoub a win and open the next beer please.
and yes. I completely meant to say atoub.
ReplyDeleteIt was a rough weekend.
I'll sleep easy when it's mathematically ours, and not a night before that. If nothing else, this season has shown who on the blogs are the most neurotic.
ReplyDelete(Me and PJO for sure!)
RE: 9 points back with 9 games left. We'd better not find a way to fuck this up.
ReplyDeleteMagic number is 4.
4 Oiler losses and/or 4 Leaf wins and last place is in the bag.
Home
Anaheim
Road
Detroit, St Louis, Anaheim, Dallas, Phoenix
Home
Minnesota, Colorado,
Road
LA, Anaheim
I predict they win last place in Dallas...
Yeah baby. Making Bobbie Lou look human.
ReplyDeleteDeeDee: They don't play Anaheim on the road twice. You have an extra game in there.
ReplyDeleteA loss to Anaheim on Friday is vital - though with the way the Oilers have been playing, they might just win.
I figure Toronto will win 2 more games. The Oilers cannot thus go 6-2-1 in the final 9 games.
If Toronto wins 1 more game, the Oilers cannot go 5-3-1
If Toronto doesn't get a point all season, the Oilers cannot go 4-4-1
Odds are looking good, but it'd be nice to get some comfort damnit.
Another win!
ReplyDeleteImaginary playoffs? Here. We. Come. We're going to challenge the Islanders for the imaginary Stanley cup, but it's going to be tough because they have an imaginary dynasty and the greatest imaginary hall of fame goaltender.