View Single Post
01-21-2013, 02:11 PM
Global Moderator
tarheelhockey's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 53,771
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by wallym View Post
The drawing or taking of a penalty is, for the most part, unrelated to the success of the powerplay/penalty kill that follows.
I think (again, just a theory) that we're going to find that the most important thing is who it takes off the ice. If Gleason or Faulk takes a penalty, we have a problem. If both take one, our 3-on-5 will be a bad joke.

What I expect to find, and the data will either bear it out or not, is that guys like Corvo are even more of a liability than they seem. If a defenseman is prone to penalties, even if he's not a major penalty killer, the result is an increasing amount of strain on the other D-pairings as they compensate for him being off the ice. So while not playing good defense himself, he's making his teammates worse at the same time. That might be worthwhile if he were offsetting that issue with great offensive play, but as we see from the +/- thread it takes a truly exceptional defenseman to produce that much offense. I think what we'll find is a statistical confirmation of the eye test -- a player like Corvo is literally the worst model of defenseman available. It would be better to have a guy who does absolutely nothing than one who generates material negative impact on the outcome of the game.

tarheelhockey is offline   Reply With Quote