View Single Post
10-26-2012, 05:47 PM
Bleach Clean
Bleach Clean's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 16,765
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
I'm sure when he wrote the article it wasn't to give one guy credit for consistent top 6 scoring with a 35 point season and call another unproven because he only managed 32. Some common sense should be used.

I can't say what Jon Willis's intention was when writing that article other than to outline a cut-off for top6 production. Is it common sense to ignore his conclusion? Are we saying the cut-off should include 32 point players as well?

Corsi is a nice stat but as I'm sure you are aware it needs to be put into context. Zone starts, quality of competition and quality of teammate all need to be factored, it makes the stat somewhat subjective based on how strongly you feel those effects are. Somebody with a good Corsi number, imo, is having a positive effect, all things considered. I try to consider all the factors.

I also think the overall performance of the team in terms of possession has a significant effect on individual players Corsi. The relative number gives an indication how you're doing in comparison to your teammates but I don't think it translates well team to team.

The Leafs were a poor possession team last season, they gave up two more shots than they generated per game. Grabovski is the only guy that sticks out to me as having a really positive effect. How do you see it?

I agree that several factors need to be applied to Corsi to come to some sort of conclusion. This article seems to do that:

Cam finishes off his analysis by saying "I'm just not convinced he's a major league player." Now, he's looked into Bozak, run the numbers, and if you want to do the same feel free to do so. But until you do, and until you are able to relate significant Corsi jumps to TO+young players, you've got to expect people to question the viability of Bozak... and they have.

OK, but what effect does that have on the players going forward? I understand why Logan Couture getting 56 points at 21 is significant, he's likely to keep progressing and piling up more points. Steen hasn't done that, so I'm not sure why it matters?

It matters because the earlier the track record of success the better the odds of success into the future. This has been confirmed over many cases. To apply it to Steen, you can expect him to be a continuing NHL contributor (all things equal), with Bozak you don't know if he's going to settle as a top6 forward or a utility guy like Ebbett (AHL/NHL).

at 25/26

Tyler Bozak 18 goals 29 assists 47 points -4.99 corsi on -4.9 corsi relative
Alex Steen 24 goals 23 assists 47 points -0.87 Cosi on -3.8 Corsi relative

Steen played tougher minutes but he also played on a team that had much better possession numbers. Steen had the better season at 25/26, but not by much and he was obviously more seasoned at that point.

Steen also has that year, and three years prior to that registering top6 production, while Bozak does not. Meaning, a longer track record of said production.

Can you tell me if Bozak will again register top6 numbers next year, given a middle 6 role? Steen is a middle 6 player and he tends to do that, so I'd say he's a good bet to do it again. I'm completely unsure if Bozak will.

I'm not trying to make the case Bozak will end up being as good as Steen, I'm trying to make the case he can. You're acting like there is a world of difference between these two players up to this point in their career's but the numbers don't reflect that. Bozak is a nice throw in for us if we can tighten up his defensive game, something our coaching staff is very good at with forwards. When I watch him play, I see a guy that is committed defensively and plays the physical aspects well but needs to work on positioning and system play. Like I said, that was pretty standard on the Leafs, it shouldn't be surprising a young guy in their organization is lacking in those areas.

The numbers do reflect the world of difference, and I'm bemused that you don't see it. Steen's production numbers are far more solid.

I think Bozak is a bad bet. Of course, he could do better here than there... He could also do worse or the same. There's no way to tell. At least with Steen there was more assurance of top 6 production, Bozak can't even claim that, let alone the gap in Corsi that now exists between the two.

Lastly, what makes you think Bozak is a "throw in" for TO? He played on their top line last year - why would they just give him away? If anything, his value has inflated like his point totals, and Gillis would be taking value out of the package elsewhere to have him included. Doesn't sound good either way.

My fear is that Gillis buys high on this guy, and then realizes he's got an another Andrew Ebbett on his hands when he was looking for a more permanent fix for the 3rd line C spot.

Bleach Clean is online now