So sure Briere is the better player? A 44 pt swing in +/- is rather demonstrable.
Actually...
Briere - 200 points in 229 GP - 0.87 PPG - -20
Staal - 147 points in 301 GP - 0.49 PPG - +6
Last 4 years it's even worse:
Briere - 310 points in 326 GP - 0.95 PPG - EV
Staal - 192 points in 387 GP - 0.49 PPG - +21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester
Last year:
Giroux: 16-31-47 -9
Staal: 21-28-49 +19
I think I already proved that Giroux produced significantly more per minute of not only PP ice time but even strength ice time as well, but since you insist, here is the last two years:
Giroux - 100 points in 153 GP - 0.65 PPG - +10
Staal - 112 points in 199 GP - 0.56 PPG - +15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester
Now, you could argue that Giroux will get better... but then you run into the problem that they're the same age, so Staal should get better, too. Not only that, Staal is the exact type of style and size that takes longer to develop in the NHL generally... so, he could theoretically get more better.
Sorry, that really bothered me. I have no idea why my English-major geek is coming out, but it is. Normally you're one of the best around here too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester
Add in that it sounds like he's going to play a larger role for that team offensively this year, and you could see a real jump in his numbers.
Except Staal doesn't have the offensive skill-set for a player like JVR. Yes, it normally takes bigger players longer to adapt, but it's not like Staal's bursting with true offensive potential. He's got a lot of talent, but he's not a PPG player-talent unless he has help from linemates.
His scenario is not like JVR or Ryan or Nash. Those players are more naturally gifted than he is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester
Staal is a much better player than Giroux as of right now all-around. Just brings more to the table and you can do more with him, and is a *ing hammer situationally.
Disagree. I don't think Giroux's that bad defensively at all. And while Staal is a much more physically imposing player, Giroux certainly does not shy away from physicality while remaining a much more elusive, crafty player particularly along the boards and on the forecheck.
Last 4 years is irrelevant, because the Buffalo Sabres, we are not.
Quote:
I think I already proved that Giroux produced significantly more per minute of not only PP ice time but even strength ice time as well, but since you insist, here is the last two years:
Giroux - 100 points in 153 GP - 0.65 PPG - +10
Staal - 112 points in 199 GP - 0.56 PPG - +15
ORLY?
Giroux last year: 1.48 pts/60 minutes 5 on 5.
Staal last year: 2.11 pts/60 minutes 5 on 5.
+.63 pts/60 to Staal.
Year before that?
Giroux: 2.39 pts/60 (42 games)
Staal: 2.05 pts/60
+.34 pts/60 to Giroux.
Net: +.29 to Staal.
Quote:
Sorry, that really bothered me. I have no idea why my English-major geek is coming out, but it is. Normally you're one of the best around here too.
Was on purpose, dude.
Quote:
Except Staal doesn't have the offensive skill-set for a player like JVR. Yes, it normally takes bigger players longer to adapt, but it's not like Staal's bursting with true offensive potential. He's got a lot of talent, but he's not a PPG player-talent unless he has help from linemates.
His scenario is not like JVR or Ryan or Nash. Those players are more naturally gifted than he is.
Don't think he's going to turn into a PPG player. I think he's got a good chance to turn into a 60 pt defensive beast a la Keith Primeau if he can develop his draws.
Quote:
Disagree. I don't think Giroux's that bad defensively at all. And while Staal is a much more physically imposing player, Giroux certainly does not shy away from physicality while remaining a much more elusive, crafty player particularly along the boards and on the forecheck.
He is. But he does try, and he gets points for trying... whereas as Briere doesn't even bother to try to play defense half the time. Giroux doesn't shy away from physical contact, which may be a problem going forward in itself.
I think I already proved that Giroux produced significantly more per minute of not only PP ice time but even strength ice time as well, but since you insist, here is the last two years:
Giroux - 100 points in 153 GP - 0.65 PPG - +10
Staal - 112 points in 199 GP - 0.56 PPG - +15
Wrong.
1) First of all, using PP points here is not a legit tactic at all as coaching is a huge factor when it comes to the PP. For instance, Giroux, Carter, and Richards all averaged more points than Crosby on the PP. Does that somehow make them magically better PP players than Crosby? No, it simply means that Pitt's PP blew ass.
2) The Pens routinely stacked their top PP unit with Crosby/Malkin/Gonchar and left those guys out for 90 seconds. Do you want to guess how much time Staal spent with Crosby and Malkin on the PP? 1.65% of Pitt's total PP time. I mean, Staal doesn't even feature in any of Pitt's top-3 PP units (source: Dobber Hockey). Contrast that with Giroux who appeared on 2 of our top-3 units with Richards, Gagne, and Hartnell.
Not really a fair comparison.
Moving to ES...
Giroux's points per 60 at ES: 1.48
Staal's points per 60 at ES: 2.11
Giroux's most common linemates: Gagne, Richards, JVR, Asham
Staal's most common linemates: Cooke, Kennedy, Kunitz, Guerin
I don't necessarily believe PPG tells the entire story though.
How about offense production per minute of ice time?
Jordan Staal:
Even Strength = 0.02855
Power Play = 0.04281
Claude Giroux:
Even Strength = 0.03218
Power Play = 0.09188
These are numbers based on TOI for even strength and power play while factoring in production across each season and postseason played for each player.
I have to say, I've been in a lot of arguments on this board, but I've never run into anyone flat-out making up stats to try to prove they're right.
Add up the total minutes of even strength time on ice played and divide by the total amount of points acquired at even strength.
How am I making up stats?
Are you sure you're not just using bits and pieces of stats and molding them to fit your argument instead of using the entire body of work at the NHL level for the players involved?
Again, how sure are you that behind the net isn't telling half-truths by not giving you everything?
Seriously?
And, btw, the postseason is a different animal entirely statistically. 7-game series make for skewed stats in a variety of ways. Giroux and/or Briere's postseason production is quite nice (though, Giroux needs to play more games before it's even remotely meaningful), but problematic at the same time.
For example, Briere led the team with 16 pts a couple of years ago. 11 of those points came in the series against the Caps, and then he was a cool 5 pts and -5 in the next 10 games we played. Now, Briere certainly was a big part of getting past the Caps, and that's a good thing, but one good series against a flimsy defense skewed his stat total considerably.
Bingo. Staal is living in a world where he constantly see the Krajicek's, Walker's, Bartulis', and O'Donnell's of the world. His line is dangerous because he is a good player facing (often) inferior competition.
Scratch Cindy or Malkin for a few games and tell me Staal's production then.
Pure horse ****. Staal's line is regularly used as a shut-down line against opposing teams' first or second lines when the matchup is possible.
Pure horse ****. Staal's line is regularly used as a shut-down line against opposing teams' first or second lines when the matchup is possible.
If you happened to notice, he only listed defensemen. That is because a shutdown line is generally out to counter a top OFFENSIVE line (which is generally lesser defensively than other lines) for the other team, which then also counters with their lesser defensive unit while attempting to save their best for shutting down the other team's OFFENSIVE units.
So, in actuality, a true shutdown line plays again skilled offensive forwards, many of whom have poor defensive skills/senses of responsibility, and the other team's lesser defensemen (or offensively gifted defensemen if the team has them, which are often poor defensively).
The problem with this argument; however, is it does not necessarily mean it is easier to score on a shutdown line, because you also have to take into account the fact that they while they may be playing against lesser defensive players who are focusing on offensive production, the shutdown players themselves are devoting most of their focus to defensive roles and not to offense.
I think I proved both arguments wrong... does that mean I win?
Btw, for anyone arguing it, Jordan Staal, skill wise, is one of the most under appreciated players in the league (even if I wouldn't touch him in fantasy, )
Btw, for anyone arguing it, Jordan Staal, skill wise, is one of the most under appreciated players in the league (even if I wouldn't touch him in fantasy, )
Might this year... given that hes' going to be playing a 2nd line role.
I feel bad saying this about another Flyers poster, but in this case, it's necessary.
Don't feed the troll.
I need to learn that. I do it all the time just because I'm not patient enough at times, and apparently quite a bit on the Flyers' forum between you and NWO.
I don't even really like the Flyers, but Richards is a beast when it comes to the pk. He's better than Rene ****in' Bourque. and Chris "I'm useless as ****" Drury.
I'd give both my testicles to have Mike Richards, Jeff Carter, Claude Giroux, Danny Briere, Nikolai Zherdev, James vanRiemsdyk, Scott Hartnell, and Ville Leino as my top 8 and Chris Pronger, Kimmo Timonen, Braydon Coburn, Andrej Meszaros, and Matt Carle as my top 5.
That lineup puts pretty much everyone else to shame, so yeah I'd probably do that de--Oh wait...
In my opinion, we have four centers better than Jordan Staal. If Pittsburgh has two, then good for them.
will this group go down as one of the best 13 players to never win a cup if they come up short? Or will there be an excuse from you on why they didnt win it all.
I need to learn that. I do it all the time just because I'm not patient enough at times, and apparently quite a bit on the Flyers' forum between you and NWO.
Girl dont go away mad, girl just go away. My Vince Neil quote of the day. Have you always had an inferiority complex?
will this group go down as one of the best 13 players to never win a cup if they come up short? Or will there be an excuse from you on why they didnt win it all.
Best 13? They may not even be the best offense in the NHL.
Best defense? It's very possible.
As for them winning the Cup, I guess we'll both find out at the same time won't we?
Best 13? They may not even be the best offense in the NHL.
Best defense? It's very possible.
As for them winning the Cup, I guess we'll both find out at the same time won't we?
Best 13, i was not talking about just the offense. I was talking about those 13 players you mentioned. They put all other lineups to shame you said. On paper could be the best defesne. I dont think it will shake out that way as much as i did previously. Think it will disappoint sadly. You do think they will win the cup though right?
Best 13, i was not talking about just the offense. I was talking about those 13 players you mentioned. They put all other lineups to shame you said. On paper could be the best defesne. I dont think it will shake out that way as much as i did previously. Think it will disappoint sadly. You do think they will win the cup though right?
Best 13 as in top 9 + top 4?
Well, if you were saying it correctly it would be best 20, as in 20 skaters (13 forwards + 7 defensemen).
