Turris also spent the season playing on a line with Alfredsson and one of Foligno, Greening and Condra.
Are you sure he wasn't getting those results because of his linemates?
Playing with who he did probably helped, but that doesn't take anything away from my original point of him being his team's best defensive forward statistically.
Omark has his flaws, to be sure, but the the Oilers did not put him into a situation in which he could succeed. Put him with a steady centre and a winger with some size and he could still be a top 6 forward in Samsonov's mold.
Playing with who he did probably helped, but that doesn't take anything away from my original point of him being his team's best defensive forward statistically.
Do you think Ben Eager is our second best forward defensively?
Did you completely miss where I said he was the best defensive forward statistically? I believe I've said it a couple times now.
I'm not sure why you're arguing against a point I'm not making.
You keep saying he is their best defensive forward statistically but the only stat you've mentioned is GA/60.
If you think Turris is their best defensive forward because he has the lowest GA/60 on their team you must think Gagner is our best defensive forward with Hemsky right behind him. Eberle would also be our worst defensive forward.
You keep saying he is their best defensive forward statistically but the only stat you've mentioned is GA/60.
If you think Turris is their best defensive forward because he has the lowest GA/60 on their team you must think Gagner is our best defensive forward with Hemsky right behind him. Eberle would also be our worst defensive forward.
For some reason you're assuming "best defensive forward statistically" = "best defensive forward".
All I've said is Turris produced the best defensive results on his team while playing significant time.
You're arguing as if I've named Turris as a lock for next year's Selke.
For some reason you're assuming "best defensive forward statistically" = "best defensive forward".
All I've said is Turris produced the best defensive results on his team while playing significant time.
You're arguing as if I've named Turris as a lock for next year's Selke.
Looking at Ottawa defensive stats I would question if Turris was any good at it. Didn't play hardly any SH minutes and wasn't much of a hitter or BSer. Ottawa played a run and gun game and prayed their goalie could keep them in the game. They allowed the 2nd most shots, only Carolina had more. I would seriously question if any of their forwards played any type of D at all.
For some reason you're assuming "best defensive forward statistically" = "best defensive forward".
All I've said is Turris produced the best defensive results on his team while playing significant time.
You're arguing as if I've named Turris as a lock for next year's Selke.
So you acuse him of assuming "best defensive forward statistically = best defensive forward", then clearly state the same thing in your next sentence... You were insinuating through your argument that Turris having the best GA/60 reflected him being proficient defensively compared to his teammates.
He's making a clear and valid point that using GA/60 in isolation is a terrible way to decide who is efficient defensively.
Looking at Ottawa defensive stats I would question if Turris was any good at it. Didn't play hardly any SH minutes and wasn't much of a hitter or BSer. Ottawa played a run and gun game and prayed their goalie could keep them in the game. They allowed the 2nd most shots, only Carolina had more. I would seriously question if any of their forwards played any type of D at all.
Well, when the Norris winner was essentially a 4th forward on ice, doesn't surprise me at all
So you acuse him of assuming "best defensive forward statistically = best defensive forward", then clearly state the same thing in your next sentence... You were insinuating through your argument that Turris having the best GA/60 reflected him being proficient defensively compared to his teammates.
He's making a clear and valid point that using GA/60 in isolation is a terrible way to decide who is efficient defensively.
For some reason, like OilerTyler, you've taken some stat to equal an unquantifiable title like best defensive forward. I don't know how you jumped from "best defensive results" to "best defensive forward".
What's the goal of playing defensive hockey? Not getting scored on. What does GA(or GA/60) show? How many goals are scored against. It's a fairly basic stat.
When looking at a stat like GA/60 I see some flaws in it. If it were done over a career, IMO it'd have much more meaning than over a single season or two. For one there are 5 players on the ice, if you are often times having your best defensemen playing behind you, that should help unless you are playing the Crosby's of the world every night. Then there is luck, some years a player seems lucky, others not so much. Then of course there are linemates, etc. In no way, shape, or form do I see Gagner as our best defensive player. He isn't great on the dot, he is small and weak, he isn't particularly great with his defensive stick work which means that he is not a good option to face the league's bigger centers. If Eberle's season was considered lucky by bloggers, then why isn't Gagner's defensive season considered lucky? Gagner IMO is our 4th best defensive center, he is better on draws than RNH, but RNH is a much better skater and has a much better stick defensively.
__________________ Treat Others As You Would Like To Be Treated
