View Single Post
Old
04-24-2009, 07:34 AM
  #64
Catch-22
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 953
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
That's your prerogative, but you should be aware that in the end who wins a hockey game is purely a question of stats.

GF > GA = win. That's as simple as it gets -- and Tanguay generates GF and prevents GA to a greater degree than any other Hab.

It's ludicrous to want to get rid of arguably the team's best forward for a reason as nebulous and as subjective as "he doesn't compete". It's tavern GMing at its very worst. As if a player reaches his level of ability without being competitive to begin with.



We're talking about a guy who came early with a bum shoulder to help his team make the playoffs and is the best Hab at even-strength when it's hardest to get points, right?

A guy with a 21-points-in-23-games playoff performance as a rookie and a Stanley Cup winning goal on his resume, right?

Just checking.



Tanguay is a much better player than Ryder, and you have to be looking at reasons other than hockey not to realize that. Sutter got rid of him because of the cap squeeze and because his coach was forced to use Tanguay as a checker so his second line wouldn't get torched, resulting in lowered stats for Tanguay.

I'm sorry, but you're confusing style with effectiveness here. Next you'll want to get rid of Markov because he doesn't compete enough; in many ways he's the same kind of player as Tanguay.

Quite honestly, I don't have the time to write an essay on this. What I will tell you is that you are categorically wrong. And if you think you're right, ask any NHL player or GM if the only thing that matters is the number of points you have. Having played myself, I know this intuitively but many people I know have figured it out by watching point getters like Ribeiro, Yashin and co., who you wouldn;t want on your team if you were going into the playoffs.

GF > GA = win but as with so many math-based theories, they fail to capture the human elements of a problem. Your equation also makes the egregious error of assuming that one's opponent represents a constant force and that productivity for the player in question is consistent. All of this is significant. It changes the the equation altogether, and changes the nature of what is required to achieve a positive GF balance. It's worth noting that paper teams constructed on principles like this led to the Rangers of the late 1990s and early 2000s. Great on paper, yes. Couldn't get the job done. Add variable T (tough) to you opponent and the net contribution of soft players goes WAAAAAY down.

Sakic and Forsberg must have been nice linemates to have, btw. Maybe if we can get players like this, we can afford to have Tanguay as a complementary player. As it is, he's extremely overrated and we can't count on him to be a central player.

For now, I think the Habs have to focus financially on getting talented players who are more physical, won't get dominated in tough games, and who have that passion for winning. Tanguay doesn't fit the criteria so unless he's cheap, I want to get rid of him. Same goes for any other mature players.


Last edited by Catch-22: 04-24-2009 at 08:36 AM.
Catch-22 is offline   Reply With Quote