HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

David Desharnais next contract

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-23-2012, 08:16 PM
  #326
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,757
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drydenwasthebest View Post
I think it is quite possible, yes. Look, DD got 60 points in his first full NHL season. Giroux got 47. The next season, Giroux got over 70 points, 51 of which were assists.
Do compare DD at 25 playing on the 1st line to Giroux at 20 playing on the 3rd line.

DAChampion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2012, 04:55 AM
  #327
ECWHSWI
5M? insulting!!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 15,562
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drydenwasthebest View Post
I think it is quite possible, yes. Look, DD got 60 points in his first full NHL season. Giroux got 47. The next season, Giroux got over 70 points, 51 of which were assists. So, yes, it is possible that DD can get 10 more assists and a few more goals this season and break the 70 point barrier. Especially if our second line produces more than it did last year, thereby forcing opposing teams to split their top defensive pairing duties, rather than focusing them on the Cole, DD, Pacioretty line.

Again, it is possible that DD does not get better, but as I said, I will believe in what Pacioretty says about him and look forwards to him improving this season.

On a side note, Ovechkin only scored 65 points last year, not too far above DD's 60. Does that mean DD is as good as Ovie? No. It does show that putting a player in a proper position to win is helpful. Ovechkin did not develop the right chemistry with his coach and the system he implemented, so his numbers dropped drastically. DD is in a good spot to succeed. So, before trying to trash him and make fun of anyone who thinks he can further develop, try giving him a second full season to see what happens.
Giroux has already close to 250 pts in the NHL and he isnt 25 yet. DD played his first full season at 25... you REALLY wanna compare the two ? seriously ?





huh... that's how you look at players ? among the 15 best of trash ?

sorry, I dont...

ECWHSWI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2012, 09:20 AM
  #328
One Man Rock Band
Slater's Gonna Slate
 
One Man Rock Band's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Habville
Country: Canada
Posts: 44,611
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewHabsEra View Post
WoW talk about losing credibility..
I don't think I'm losing any credibility -- not that I really care how much credibility I hold on a fan forum.

At the end of the day, Desharnais is a guy I've believed in since he was in the ECHL and I began to follow him. He's never let me down, why should I feel that he would now? His vision is better than 99% - he sees the ice that well. As for his passing? Its out of this world. He's got a good shot too, I just wish he would shoot more.

One Man Rock Band is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2012, 12:14 PM
  #329
DrunkenHabz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 197
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drydenwasthebest View Post
Then there is nothing to debate. By then we will know if DD is a one-hit wonder or the next Giroux, to one degree or another. If worse comes to worse, we move Galchenyuk to Plekanec's LW. Problem solved internally...
No! Don't you dare move my Galchenyuk, that big talented CENTRE we've been waiting for for more than 20 years!

On topic, I'd give DD about $8M on 2 years.

The fact that we got Plekanec, Eller, Galchenyuk and Desharnais all able to play top 2-3 C makes it stupid to ink any of them (except Galchenyuk) longterm if we don't know what will happen to them down the road. One of Pleks, Eller or DD will have to go, sooner or later.

This season will give us all the answers. If there's one.

DrunkenHabz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2012, 12:53 PM
  #330
Cyclones Rock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,625
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HawkeyeCB View Post
I don't think I'm losing any credibility -- not that I really care how much credibility I hold on a fan forum.

At the end of the day, Desharnais is a guy I've believed in since he was in the ECHL and I began to follow him. He's never let me down, why should I feel that he would now? His vision is better than 99% - he sees the ice that well. As for his passing? Its out of this world. He's got a good shot too, I just wish he would shoot more.
I've never seen an ECHL or AHL player with anything near his vision. I'm hard-pressed to think of too many NHLers who have it. Categorizing him as a top 12-15 NHL passer is not out of the question.

I'll guess that so long as DD as two players like Cole and Pacioretty as his linemates, he will continue to frustrate many of us with his lack of shooting. Those times when he obviously should shoot the puck and he doesn't will always stand out. However, there are many times when he passes the puck where lesser centers would shoot ineffectively. At the end of the day, two of the three linemates scored 30+ goals. It's all about goals by the team and DD is best suited to be a puck distributor when surrounded by these types of players. Still, I'd expect him to score 20 this season with his added experience. He probably will be able to eliminate a fair portion of the times when it was ridiculous that he didn't shoot.

In any case, DD's detractors will be just that. They define themselves that way. I'm unaware of any line in the NHL which had three 30 goal scorers on it. Expecting DD and his $850,000 cap hit to create the only line with three-30 goal scorers is simply absurd.

Cyclones Rock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2012, 01:09 PM
  #331
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,757
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclones Rock View Post
I've never seen an ECHL or AHL player with anything near his vision. I'm hard-pressed to think of too many NHLers who have it. Categorizing him as a top 12-15 NHL passer is not out of the question.
The fanbase doesn't want a top 12-15 passer. They want a top 12-15 center. That's a cumulative output of everything a player brings.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclones Rock View Post
I'll guess that so long as DD as two players like Cole and Pacioretty as his linemates, he will continue to frustrate many of us with his lack of shooting. Those times when he obviously should shoot the puck and he doesn't will always stand out. However, there are many times when he passes the puck where lesser centers would shoot ineffectively. At the end of the day, two of the three linemates scored 30+ goals. It's all about goals by the team and DD is best suited to be a puck distributor when surrounded by these types of players. Still, I'd expect him to score 20 this season with his added experience. He probably will be able to eliminate a fair portion of the times when it was ridiculous that he didn't shoot.

In any case, DD's detractors will be just that. They define themselves that way. I'm unaware of any line in the NHL which had three 30 goal scorers on it. Expecting DD and his $850,000 cap hit to create the only line with three-30 goal scorers is simply absurd.
It's not statistically valid to credit Desharnais for Pacioretty's production. He produced at the same pace last year with Gomez and Gionta in a similar role. No one doubts that Pacioretty would be a 30 goal scorer on the Plekanec line if that line had an offensive role, for example.

Cole is a better example. He played better with DD than he's ever played with Eric Staal, which some such as yourself are using as evidence that David Desharnais might be better than Eric Staal.

All in all, these conversations remind me of the beliefs from the summer of 2008, when some people in Habsland thought the Kostitsyn brothers were better than the Sedin twins.

DAChampion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2012, 01:22 PM
  #332
FlyingKostitsyn
Registered User
 
FlyingKostitsyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Quebec
Country: Australia
Posts: 8,054
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Cole is a better example. He played better with DD than he's ever played with Eric Staal, which some such as yourself are using as evidence that David Desharnais might be better than Eric Staal.
I don't think anyone argues that Desharnais a better player than Eric Staal. Its not out of the blue to claim he might be a slightly better puck distributor or playmaker however. After all the only time Eric had considerably more assists than Desharnais was in his rookie season on a stacked team years ago when league scoring was way higher.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion
The fanbase doesn't want a top 12-15 passer. They want a top 12-15 center. That's a cumulative output of everything a player brings.
Gorges is easily a top12-15 defensive defensemen but certainly not a top12-15 defensemen and yet he's magical according to these boards. Gill was a top12-15 PK specialist but not very good overall, people liked him. Plekanec is a top12-15 two way center but quite far from a top centerman, the fanbase likes him.

Our top12-15 center will hopefully be Galchenyuk in a few years, but he'll need other players. You need specialists in this league if you want a good cap compliant team. Desharnais is a good one because he's serviceable in many roles, unlike, say, MA Bergeron who was terrible outside his slapshot. Can't a top12-15 playmaker be useful? We have no other players except a healthy/prime Markov (which he might not be) that can see the ice like Desharnais.

Many good teams (contenders and cup winners) used diminutive scoring forwards with lethal efficiency even if they were complete players. Speaking of such - Andy McDonald. Undrafted, 26 in his first full season, 2 70+ point seasons and a cup. Thats another example for ECWHSWI that players can get better and become key players even after the venerable age of 25 without being drafted.


Last edited by FlyingKostitsyn: 08-24-2012 at 01:41 PM.
FlyingKostitsyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2012, 02:49 PM
  #333
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,757
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingKostitsyn View Post
I don't think anyone argues that Desharnais a better player than Eric Staal. Its not out of the blue to claim he might be a slightly better puck distributor or playmaker however. After all the only time Eric had considerably more assists than Desharnais was in his rookie season on a stacked team years ago when league scoring was way higher.
If you're saying Desharnais can be a top-15 1st line center, you're probably arguing he's better than Eric Staal.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingKostitsyn View Post
Gorges is easily a top12-15 defensive defensemen but certainly not a top12-15 defensemen and yet he's magical according to these boards. Gill was a top12-15 PK specialist but not very good overall, people liked him. Plekanec is a top12-15 two way center but quite far from a top centerman, the fanbase likes him.
Right, we want our 1st line center to be a top-15 1st line center. Top-15 in the role just like Gorges, Plekanec.

To reiterate, I'm not denying that Desharnais is the best choice for the start of the 2012-2013 season.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingKostitsyn View Post
Our top12-15 center will hopefully be Galchenyuk in a few years, but he'll need other players. You need specialists in this league if you want a good cap compliant team. Desharnais is a good one because he's serviceable in many roles, unlike, say, MA Bergeron who was terrible outside his slapshot. Can't a top12-15 playmaker be useful? We have no other players except a healthy/prime Markov (which he might not be) that can see the ice like Desharnais.

Many good teams (contenders and cup winners) used diminutive scoring forwards with lethal efficiency even if they were complete players. Speaking of such - Andy McDonald. Undrafted, 26 in his first full season, 2 70+ point seasons and a cup. Thats another example for ECWHSWI that players can get better and become key players even after the venerable age of 25 without being drafted.
You can have 1 or 2 short forwards in the top-6 if the other guys are big. That could be Desharnais and Gallagher.

Since Carbonneau is no longer coach we are unlikely to see a line of Gallagher-Desharnais-Gionta next year.

DAChampion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2012, 04:12 PM
  #334
ECWHSWI
5M? insulting!!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 15,562
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclones Rock View Post
I've never seen an ECHL or AHL player with anything near his vision. I'm hard-pressed to think of too many NHLers who have it. Categorizing him as a top 12-15 NHL passer is not out of the question.

I'll guess that so long as DD as two players like Cole and Pacioretty as his linemates, he will continue to frustrate many of us with his lack of shooting. Those times when he obviously should shoot the puck and he doesn't will always stand out. However, there are many times when he passes the puck where lesser centers would shoot ineffectively. At the end of the day, two of the three linemates scored 30+ goals. It's all about goals by the team and DD is best suited to be a puck distributor when surrounded by these types of players. Still, I'd expect him to score 20 this season with his added experience. He probably will be able to eliminate a fair portion of the times when it was ridiculous that he didn't shoot.

In any case, DD's detractors will be just that. They define themselves that way. I'm unaware of any line in the NHL which had three 30 goal scorers on it. Expecting DD and his $850,000 cap hit to create the only line with three-30 goal scorers is simply absurd.
I havent read the thread from the beginning, but from what I've seen in the last few pages, there's very few of them... if anything, the difference seems to be that while pretty much everyone agrees he's good and had a great season last year, some understand that very few makes the "next step" and become 70 or 80 pts players... the others ? they prefer to compare the kid to guys like Giroux, Ovechking, Eric Staal... they'll probably mock him in a few years if he dare not becoming the PPG player they expect him to be...

you know

ECWHSWI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2012, 04:36 PM
  #335
Drydenwasthebest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,577
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ECWHSWI View Post
Giroux has already close to 250 pts in the NHL and he isnt 25 yet. DD played his first full season at 25... you REALLY wanna compare the two ? seriously ?





huh... that's how you look at players ? among the 15 best of trash ?

sorry, I dont...
Yes, I DO want to compare DD to Giroux. Look at how their first 3 seasons in the NHL follow almost identical point paths. Yes, DD is older. I guess that makes him useless and unable to take the next step. I know how in vogue it is to trash any player over 26, but let's get real. Yes, DD is older and it took him longer to make it to the NHL. However, I never said that DD was identical to Giroux. I never said DD would become a 90 point player. I simply said that "yes", it IS possible for him to go from 60 points in his FIRST FULL NHL SEASON up to 70 points in his next one. I used Giroux' progression as a simple example. You DO understand the concept of an "example", right? It does not mean "identical" or "exactly alike". Looking at how DD has PROGRESSED in his first 3 years at the NHL level, and looking at how Giroux PROGRESSED in his first 3 years at the NHL level, it gives me hope that a smaller center who plays with heart, vision, and is very good at playmaking, can actually take another step forward in his SECOND FULL NHL SEASON. Notice how I even point out that having an improved second line to take some of the pressure off DD, Cole, and Pacioretty could contribute to them all doing better.

So, nice try at dismissing my post with nothing of any value, but it takes more than what you have to do it. It is NICE to know you have an opinion. Guess what? Opinions are like @$$holes, everyone has one. What is the difference between what I say and you? I look at comparable situations and take note that one makes me hopeful that a similar (please look it up, I don't want to be your dictionary) situation will allow for DD to succeed. Similar, NOT identical (I decided to help you a little on that one after all).

No, I do not think DD is a top 10 player in the NHL. I actually do not think he can develop into a top 10 NHL player. I do believe he can break the 70 point barrier with healthy line mates and a strong second line, an improved third line, and a (hopefully) better coaching system. Feel free to disagree, but try and do it with some kind of substance, please.

Drydenwasthebest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2012, 08:09 PM
  #336
habscup
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,811
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drydenwasthebest View Post
Yes, I DO want to compare DD to Giroux. Look at how their first 3 seasons in the NHL follow almost identical point paths. Yes, DD is older. I guess that makes him useless and unable to take the next step. I know how in vogue it is to trash any player over 26, but let's get real. Yes, DD is older and it took him longer to make it to the NHL. However, I never said that DD was identical to Giroux. I never said DD would become a 90 point player. I simply said that "yes", it IS possible for him to go from 60 points in his FIRST FULL NHL SEASON up to 70 points in his next one. I used Giroux' progression as a simple example. You DO understand the concept of an "example", right? It does not mean "identical" or "exactly alike". Looking at how DD has PROGRESSED in his first 3 years at the NHL level, and looking at how Giroux PROGRESSED in his first 3 years at the NHL level, it gives me hope that a smaller center who plays with heart, vision, and is very good at playmaking, can actually take another step forward in his SECOND FULL NHL SEASON. Notice how I even point out that having an improved second line to take some of the pressure off DD, Cole, and Pacioretty could contribute to them all doing better.

So, nice try at dismissing my post with nothing of any value, but it takes more than what you have to do it. It is NICE to know you have an opinion. Guess what? Opinions are like @$$holes, everyone has one. What is the difference between what I say and you? I look at comparable situations and take note that one makes me hopeful that a similar (please look it up, I don't want to be your dictionary) situation will allow for DD to succeed. Similar, NOT identical (I decided to help you a little on that one after all).

No, I do not think DD is a top 10 player in the NHL. I actually do not think he can develop into a top 10 NHL player. I do believe he can break the 70 point barrier with healthy line mates and a strong second line, an improved third line, and a (hopefully) better coaching system. Feel free to disagree, but try and do it with some kind of substance, please.
You are settIng yourself up for some real big dissapointments. David will be sent to the 4th line as soon as gally gally gally comes uP and soon enough he will be traded to some desperate teams like columbus.

habscup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2012, 08:26 PM
  #337
ECWHSWI
5M? insulting!!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 15,562
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habscup View Post
You are settIng yourself up for some real big dissapointments. David will be sent to the 4th line as soon as gally gally gally comes uP and soon enough he will be traded to some desperate teams like columbus.
pretty much


the guy is about to tell us DD is a better player than Giroux, I mean, he compares their seasons, basically saying DD is better since he had more point in his first full than Giroux...

he also already told that DD WILL succeed, clearly for this guy 60 pts seasons arent enough for DD... DD had yet to be succesful for this guy...

he also like to use the term TRASH whenever someone talks about less than 70 pts for DD... obviously, he think 60 or so points is meh...

very high standards if you ask me...

ECWHSWI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2012, 11:47 AM
  #338
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,757
vCash: 500
A good analogy is Michael Ryder scoring 25 goals in his first full season.

If you were to project him as a standard rookie, you'd think he would become a consistent 50 goal scorer. In the same way that Desharnais outproduced Giroux in his first season, Ryder outptoduced Iginla in their respective rookie seasons. Very few players score 25 goals in their first season as Ryder did, just like very few players produce 60 points as Desharnais did.

However, Ryder was 23 years old. He had played a full 3 seasons in the Q, 180 games in the AHL, and 25 games in the ECHL. "First season" didn't have as much of a eamning for Ryder as it did for 18 year olds straight out of the CHL. He was also playing on the 1st line that year with Saku Koivu, and thus getting plenty of opportunities.

Michael Ryder went on to have a good career with Montreal, Boston, and Dallas. Some seasons were better than his rookie campaigns, and some were worse. He didn't really improve, he stayed about the same. He never became the 50 or 60 goal scorer that your naive methodology of extrapolating from rookie seasons would have predicted.


Last edited by Crimson Skorpion: 08-25-2012 at 04:24 PM. Reason: post is fine, quote is not
DAChampion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2012, 02:24 PM
  #339
Drydenwasthebest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,577
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
A good analogy is Michael Ryder scoring 25 goals in his first full season.

If you were to project him as a standard rookie, you'd think he would become a consistent 50 goal scorer. In the same way that Desharnais outproduced Giroux in his first season, Ryder outptoduced Iginla in their respective rookie seasons. Very few players score 25 goals in their first season as Ryder did, just like very few players produce 60 points as Desharnais did.

However, Ryder was 23 years old. He had played a full 3 seasons in the Q, 180 games in the AHL, and 25 games in the ECHL. "First season" didn't have as much of a eamning for Ryder as it did for 18 year olds straight out of the CHL. He was also playing on the 1st line that year with Saku Koivu, and thus getting plenty of opportunities.

Michael Ryder went on to have a good career with Montreal, Boston, and Dallas. Some seasons were better than his rookie campaigns, and some were worse. He didn't really improve, he stayed about the same. He never became the 50 or 60 goal scorer that your naive methodology of extrapolating from rookie seasons would have predicted.
Nothing I have stated has been naive. DD may turn into a flash in the pan. From having watched him, I believe he can do better. From having been involved in hockey in some fashion for almost four decades, I believe he can, and will, develop further. IF he "only" has another 60 point season, I will be very happy. Anything more than that and I will be ecstatic. I defend him from people who seem to think he can not improve, that he will never get better. I defend him against people who want to get rid of him because he is supposedly not a 1st line center. DD gave us a great season, and should not automatically be assigned to the 4th line as center because we drafted Galchenyuk. Give DD another season and see what he can do before trying to arrange for him to be replaced.

I never liked Ryder on the Habs. He scored garbage goals that had little to do with skill, and a lot to do with luck. I wanted to trade him after his rookie season because I knew, and told plenty of people at the time who thought I was nuts, that he would not become a great player for us. He was not a great goal scorer, he was simply lucky more often than not. DD looks far more skilled and involved in the production of his points. The situation is definitely comparable, but the type of players we are comparing are very different. I will admit that Ryder was always around the net, which was a key reason he was able to get the goals he did get, but he was not a guy who inspired confidence in you that he could score a game winning, or even an important, goal when necessary.

DD is good. He CAN get better. I believe he will score more IF his line stays healthy, AND our second line produces more points in order to take the pressure off our first line. YOU have yet to offer anything other than snide comments to disprove what I have stated. Since you have nothing to offer, why not wait until season's end and bring this thread back then. Whoever is shown to be right can choose an avatar for the other guy then.

Drydenwasthebest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2012, 02:53 PM
  #340
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,757
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drydenwasthebest View Post
Nothing I have stated has been naive.
You are using the "first full season" argument and comparing DD to Giroux, and thus ignoring the difference between age 20 and age 24, which is naive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drydenwasthebest View Post
YOU have yet to offer anything other than snide comments to disprove what I have stated.
I just gave you a detailed example explaining why a first full season at age 23-25 should not be evaluated as a "first full season" in the conventional sense.

It's basic point and very logical, and hardly snide at all. It does refute your argument that Giroux's first season was less productive than Desharnais', by exposing it as a non-argument.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drydenwasthebest View Post
DD may turn into a flash in the pan.
Nobody's arguing that he can't repeat his production given the same opportunities, it's a strawman.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drydenwasthebest View Post
DD gave us a great season, and should not automatically be assigned to the 4th line as center because we drafted Galchenyuk.
Nobody wants DD as the 4th line center either, another strawman.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drydenwasthebest View Post
I never liked Ryder on the Habs. He scored garbage goals that had little to do with skill, and a lot to do with luck. I wanted to trade him after his rookie season because I knew, and told plenty of people at the time who thought I was nuts, that he would not become a great player for us. He was not a great goal scorer, he was simply lucky more often than not. DD looks far more skilled and involved in the production of his points. The situation is definitely comparable, but the type of players we are comparing are very different. I will admit that Ryder was always around the net, which was a key reason he was able to get the goals he did get, but he was not a guy who inspired confidence in you that he could score a game winning, or even an important, goal when necessary.
There was nothing flukey about Ryder's first season: he maintained that pace over his entire career. He has 197 goals and 199 assists in 631 NHL games. That's a huge sample size, and thus we can conclude that luck has nothing to do with it.

You have 20 years of hockey evaluation experience, but clearly you sometimes make mistakes if you thought Ryder's production was all about luck.

DAChampion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2012, 03:44 PM
  #341
FlyingKostitsyn
Registered User
 
FlyingKostitsyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Quebec
Country: Australia
Posts: 8,054
vCash: 500
I've been a staunch DD defender all this thread but come on Dryden, comparing Desharnais to Giroux?

Desharnais has great vision but he doesn't have the skills or speed to be a superstar. Thats about as likely as him being fodder on the fourth line in the near future (like Habscup suggests)

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion
I just gave you a detailed example explaining why a first full season at age 23-25 should not be evaluated as a "first full season" in the conventional sense.

It's basic point and very logical, and hardly snide at all. It does refute your argument that Giroux's first season was less productive than Desharnais', by exposing it as a non-argument.
I think the truth lies between your two arguments. A 20 year old rookie is not the same as a 25 year old rookie. The 20 year old will grow physically and gain much maturity as well as gain experience and learn. The 25 year old won't grow physically (he can still get stronger, but not as much) and he should already be more mature. He can still gain experience, learn and work on weaknesses however. Think of Emelin for example, he's as old as Desharnais yet he gets better every game as he adapts to the NHL. The difference is bigger between KHL and NHL than AHL and NHL but there is still a need for adaptation.

If Desharnais was 20 we could expect him to score 80 or more points in the near future. Since he's older we can expect him to get better but mainly from adapting to NHL speed and style of play. It is unlikely (but not impossible) that he scores 80 or more points but its far from unreasonable to expect that he gets better. How it translates in points depends much on the team and how they play.


Last edited by FlyingKostitsyn: 08-25-2012 at 04:00 PM.
FlyingKostitsyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2012, 03:53 PM
  #342
Roulin
Registered User
 
Roulin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Montreal
Posts: 4,242
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drydenwasthebest View Post
DD is good. He CAN get better. I believe he will score more IF his line stays healthy, AND our second line produces more points in order to take the pressure off our first line. YOU have yet to offer anything other than snide comments to disprove what I have stated. Since you have nothing to offer, why not wait until season's end and bring this thread back then. Whoever is shown to be right can choose an avatar for the other guy then.
DAChampion, you should take the bet! Aside from it being (IMO of course, on-ice shooting % regression, Cole's possible decline, DD probably already in his prime) a safe bet, you've got the lockout on your side.

Roulin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2012, 04:36 PM
  #343
ECWHSWI
5M? insulting!!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 15,562
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingKostitsyn View Post
I've been a staunch DD defender all this thread but come on Dryden, comparing Desharnais to Giroux?

Desharnais has great vision but he doesn't have the skills or speed to be a superstar. Thats about as likely as him being fodder on the fourth line in the near future (like Habscup suggests)



I think the truth lies between your two arguments. A 20 year old rookie is not the same as a 25 year old rookie. The 20 year old will grow physically and gain much maturity as well as gain experience and learn. The 25 year old won't grow physically (he can still get stronger, but not as much) and he should already be more mature. He can still gain experience, learn and work on weaknesses however. Think of Emelin for example, he's as old as Desharnais yet he gets better every game as he adapts to the NHL. The difference is bigger between KHL and NHL than AHL and NHL but there is still a need for adaptation.

If Desharnais was 20 we could expect him to score 80 or more points in the near future. Since he's older we can expect him to get better but mainly from adapting to NHL speed and style of play. It is unlikely (but not impossible) that he scores 80 or more points but its far from unreasonable to expect that he gets better. How it translates in points depends much on the team and how they play.
Voila.

ECWHSWI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2012, 05:31 PM
  #344
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,757
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roulin View Post
DAChampion, you should take the bet! Aside from it being (IMO of course, on-ice shooting % regression, Cole's possible decline, DD probably already in his prime) a safe bet, you've got the lockout on your side.
Not sure what the terms of the bet are?

If there's a season, and he doesn't get injured, I think DD will be approximately as effective next year as this year. He got 60 points in 81 games this year, so I'd expect between 52 and 68 points next year, i.e. consistent production within the statistical margin of error.

DAChampion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2012, 06:52 PM
  #345
Drydenwasthebest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,577
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
You are using the "first full season" argument and comparing DD to Giroux, and thus ignoring the difference between age 20 and age 24, which is naive.

I AM using the "1st full season" argument because it is valid. DD, like other players in the past, entered later than many, but has still accomplished something very good that gives hope to Habs fans that he can get better. He HAS improved since he first entered the NHL, so there is no reason to assume he has hit his peak just because he is 25. You also seem to have ignored the example of Andy McDonald, offered earlier. I used Giroux because thy are similar types of players and have shown a similar path once they entered the NHL. I have no problem admitting DD is older, I just do not think it is a limiting factor. I also LIMITED the comparison, saying that I do not believe DD is as good as Giroux, stating that I do not see 90 point seasons in DD's future. I made a basic comparison based on statistical paths, skill set, size, and tenacity.

I just gave you a detailed example explaining why a first full season at age 23-25 should not be evaluated as a "first full season" in the conventional sense.

Yes, and it is wrong. A 1st full season is a first full season. Are you telling me that Subban is better than Chara because Subban's 1st two seasons are much better than Chara's first 5 seasons? Age is not the limiting factor you want it to be. Some guys need longer to reach the NHL, or longer to develop IN the NHL, but that does not mean they stagnate any more often than young guys who make it. DD's 1st full season is as valid as any other rookie.

It's basic point and very logical, and hardly snide at all. It does refute your argument that Giroux's first season was less productive than Desharnais', by exposing it as a non-argument.

Actually, it refutes nothing. It simply puts forward that Giroux was younger when he played his first full NHL season. Like I said, using that kind of argument puts Subban way ahead of Chara as far as defencemen go. I love Subban, but he is not Chara.

Nobody's arguing that he can't repeat his production given the same opportunities, it's a strawman.

The interesting strawman is trying to ask people to find how many 25 year olds went undrafted and then eventually had 70 point seasons. I would ask you how many undrafted 25 year olds scored 60 points in their first full NHL season. When you say DD is the only one, that might put your whole question to rest. If there is no equivalent pool to look at, you look at other aspects of your sample to determine an answer. I do believe there is nothing you can state that guarantees DD will do worse next season, which is pretty equal to me stating that DD will do the same or better. The difference is that you seem to be making it a clear cut statement that DD will NOT improve in his second season, and I am stating that he MIGHT. I have also acknowledged that he MIGHT NOT.

Nobody wants DD as the 4th line center either, another strawman.

Quote:
habscup:You are settIng yourself up for some real big dissapointments. David will be sent to the 4th line as soon as gally gally gally comes uP and soon enough he will be traded to some desperate teams like columbus..
So much for another claim of a "strawman" argument. Please look up the term so you can stop misusing it. That quote is #336 on page 14, 2 below one of your own posts.

There was nothing flukey about Ryder's first season: he maintained that pace over his entire career. He has 197 goals and 199 assists in 631 NHL games. That's a huge sample size, and thus we can conclude that luck has nothing to do with it.

You have 20 years of hockey evaluation experience, but clearly you sometimes make mistakes if you thought Ryder's production was all about luck.
Ryder was never a great player. He showed potential as a rookie, so in that regard, he is a fair comparison to DD because it IS possible that DD has gotten as good as he will get. However, like I have said, having watched DD, I see him as being better than Ryder in regards to his skill and compete levels. I believe that DD CAN and PROBABLY WILL get better. I was right about Ryder. He never became a premiere player because he was not very good. He was a .63 career PPG player. Nothing horrific, but nothing to write home about, either. DD is currently a .64 career ppg player, but his ppg totals have increased each and every NHL season he has played. Last season he put up a .74 ppg pace. So, IF he stays healthy, has healthy line mates, and our second line improves enough to be considered an offensive threat, it is quite likely, quite possible, that DD will get better since he seems to be the kind of player who improves if given the opportunity to do so. Another year of chemistry with Pacioretty and Cole will definitely help, as well.

Drydenwasthebest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2012, 07:57 PM
  #346
Drydenwasthebest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,577
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Not sure what the terms of the bet are?

If there's a season, and he doesn't get injured, I think DD will be approximately as effective next year as this year. He got 60 points in 81 games this year, so I'd expect between 52 and 68 points next year, i.e. consistent production within the statistical margin of error.
Wait a minute. I said DD will probably get better, and could hit 70 points. You have argued against that possibility. Now you say he CAN achieve 68 points?!?! You basically agreed with me with this post. Talk about a whole bunch of talking in circles...sigh..

Drydenwasthebest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2012, 08:53 PM
  #347
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,757
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drydenwasthebest View Post
Wait a minute. I said DD will probably get better, and could hit 70 points. You have argued against that possibility. Now you say he CAN achieve 68 points?!?! You basically agreed with me with this post. Talk about a whole bunch of talking in circles...sigh..
Dryden,

My estimate was from statistics 101. My apologies for not explaining it.

I'm expecting Desharnais to be a 60 point player just like last year. However, the intrinsic "statistical noise" on 60 is 7.75 (the square root of 60), which rounds to 8. That means I think that Desharnais will get between 52 and 68 points approximately 70% of the time, and between 44 and 76 points about 95% of the time. A player of constant skill can have and will have statistical fluctuations in production.

You can look up the normal approximation to the poisson distribution online or in any introductory statistics textbook. Or you can take my word that the intrinsic statistical noise on the number of points is the square root of the number of points.

Note that this is the intrinsic noise, it doesn't include the noise due to injuries, changing teammates, etc. Due to those factors you'll find that most players in the NHL have much larger fluctuations in the number of points than the square root of the average number of points.

DAChampion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2012, 10:03 PM
  #348
Drydenwasthebest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,577
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Dryden,

My estimate was from statistics 101. My apologies for not explaining it.

I'm expecting Desharnais to be a 60 point player just like last year. However, the intrinsic "statistical noise" on 60 is 7.75 (the square root of 60), which rounds to 8. That means I think that Desharnais will get between 52 and 68 points approximately 70% of the time, and between 44 and 76 points about 95% of the time. A player of constant skill can have and will have statistical fluctuations in production.

You can look up the normal approximation to the poisson distribution online or in any introductory statistics textbook. Or you can take my word that the intrinsic statistical noise on the number of points is the square root of the number of points.

Note that this is the intrinsic noise, it doesn't include the noise due to injuries, changing teammates, etc. Due to those factors you'll find that most players in the NHL have much larger fluctuations in the number of points than the square root of the average number of points.
In other words, you agree with me. Without statistics, I have stated that I believe DD can get 70 points next season. You just basically said the same thing. Why the heck have we wasted time arguing this rather than you simply saying you agreed in the first place??? Never mind, I do not need an answer, just the agreement. Lot of bloody posts and words to come to the same conclusion, though...

Drydenwasthebest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2012, 11:43 PM
  #349
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,757
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drydenwasthebest View Post
In other words, you agree with me. Without statistics, I have stated that I believe DD can get 70 points next season. You just basically said the same thing. Why the heck have we wasted time arguing this rather than you simply saying you agreed in the first place??? Never mind, I do not need an answer, just the agreement. Lot of bloody posts and words to come to the same conclusion, though...
There are a huge number of things that "can happen", I'm more concerned and more interested with what's most likely to happen.

I agree with the statement that almost anything can happen.

Maybe Gomez will bounce back next year.

DAChampion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-27-2012, 12:53 AM
  #350
FlyingKostitsyn
Registered User
 
FlyingKostitsyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Quebec
Country: Australia
Posts: 8,054
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
There are a huge number of things that "can happen", I'm more concerned and more interested with what's most likely to happen.

I agree with the statement that almost anything can happen.

Maybe Gomez will bounce back next year.
Players that can score 70 points don't grow on trees and are pretty rare. In the last 20 years 60 points would have been at least top3 in team scoring every year except in 93, 96 and 2007. Even if Desharnais only manages to get 50 points next year he will likely be a top scorer on the team. Thats why we are arguing that he's a very valuable asset, few can produce like that. True, he's no Evgeni Malkin or Steven Stamkos but unlike these superstars that can't be acquired at any reasonable cost we own his rights. Its not a question of ''do you want Desharnais or someone better?'', thats not a decision we have to make.

As for Gomez using your statistical noise tool he's likely to have between 19 and 28 points over a full season. I much prefer Desharnais' point range.

FlyingKostitsyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:03 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.