HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Notices

The Armchair GM Thread - Part XXX - Naughty Edition

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-27-2012, 02:40 PM
  #76
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 13,921
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Why are we comparing our players projections to the "average" top 6er? I would think it be more prudent to compare those stats with the final 4 teams in the playoffs on a yearly basis (and/or the top 4 teams in the entire league).

The article actually references the Bruins. Accordingly, the Bruins had 4 1st liners and 3 2nd liners. In comparison, the Canucks had 3 1st liners and 3 2nd liners. Bruins bettered the Canucks in this regard.


The comparison to the "average" is made to correct a few opinions on what actually constitutes a top6 player in today's NHL. It's "prudent" to understand first what this team actually has, in order to then understand what it needs. Instead of just speculating and supposing what it needs based on one's own subjectivity - and then proceeding to cram that opinion down other's throats in a most incessant manner...

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
09-27-2012, 05:58 PM
  #77
Drop the Sopel
Feaster famine
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 14,377
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
I don't think you read the article. There's no mention of pro-rating Booth's totals. Or pro-rating at all (AFAIK) That was a note I made.
The oversight is not factoring in games played and pace, which the article discounts entirely. Those numbers look a lot differrent if you do so. I would prefer to see what the totals look like factoring in points/game from top 6 forwards that play 40 games or more...

Booth's point totals are okay if you look at his pace, if you look at strictly his production like they did in that article it's not as impressive - he's averaged 29 points over the last 3 years and wouldn't be classified as a top 6 forward.

If all Gillis wanted out of his 2nd line forwards was a 40 point pace he wouldn't have gone after David Booth in the first place to replace Mason Raymond on the 2nd line. In reality, the bar must be set much higher if you have championship aspirations.

Drop the Sopel is offline  
Old
09-27-2012, 06:05 PM
  #78
Drop the Sopel
Feaster famine
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 14,377
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pitseleh View Post
I agree, but on a per minute basis things are the same - he was 160th at EV and 30th on the PP (with GP/TOI limits to eliminate small sample sizes), which makes him comfortably a top-6 forward. His EV productivity was also hurt by an abnormally low EV SH%. Even if you think Booth is generating lower quality chances than average, it's still very unlikely that he's generating chances that are 25-30% worse in quality than an average NHLer.
That's exactly it, 160th at EV puts Booth in the below average 2nd line forward category.

Now how many forwards in the NHL come with a bigger cap hit? You would have to think much less than 160...

Drop the Sopel is offline  
Old
09-27-2012, 09:55 PM
  #79
Outside99*
Sedins off Kas
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,347
vCash: 796
Quote:
Originally Posted by pitseleh View Post
The answer to your questions is quite simple: sample size. Scoring rates don't normalize over a single season because of a number of factors, most important of which is shooting percentage variability.

The reason that Corsi rewards quantity over quality is that over and over again it's been shown that quantity matters a whole lot more than quality for scoring at even strength, with the exception of a few players at the top end (like Crosby or the Sedins) and the bottom end (basically, goons).
The two problems I have with Corsi are a) it seems to me that a player can boost his #'s without too much difficulty and b) its a numerical representation of the player's on-ice performance and is not his actual performance - in other words, the devil is in the details - ex. Corsi might describe a single 45 second shift as 1 shot for and 2 against whereas the reality is much richer - broke up a pass, covered for his own dman, won 2 puck battles, kept cool after taking an elbow to the head. etc etc etc minor details.

When I watch Booth play, I'm always left unimpressed because I see a player who is not very aware defensively or of his teammates on offence.

Outside99* is offline  
Old
09-28-2012, 12:25 AM
  #80
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Outside99 View Post
The two problems I have with Corsi are a) it seems to me that a player can boost his #'s without too much difficulty
How so?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Outside99 View Post
b) its a numerical representation of the player's on-ice performance and is not his actual performance - in other words, the devil is in the details - ex. Corsi might describe a single 45 second shift as 1 shot for and 2 against whereas the reality is much richer - broke up a pass, covered for his own dman, won 2 puck battles, kept cool after taking an elbow to the head. etc etc etc minor details.
One shift isn't a great measure but over the course of a season all the good plays and bad plays are going to be represented in the shot totals. It's not meant to be used on a per game basis.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Outside99 View Post
When I watch Booth play, I'm always left unimpressed because I see a player who is not very aware defensively or of his teammates on offence.
Booth is a project, you don't get great hockey players in their prime for a couple of old guys, one with no knee's.

Scurr is online now  
Old
09-28-2012, 03:04 AM
  #81
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 13,921
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drop the Sopel View Post
The oversight is not factoring in games played and pace, which the article discounts entirely. Those numbers look a lot differrent if you do so. I would prefer to see what the totals look like factoring in points/game from top 6 forwards that play 40 games or more...

Booth's point totals are okay if you look at his pace, if you look at strictly his production like they did in that article it's not as impressive - he's averaged 29 points over the last 3 years and wouldn't be classified as a top 6 forward.

If all Gillis wanted out of his 2nd line forwards was a 40 point pace he wouldn't have gone after David Booth in the first place to replace Mason Raymond on the 2nd line. In reality, the bar must be set much higher if you have championship aspirations.



Putting aside the motivation for Gillis to pursue Booth for a minute, let's look at the argument this article poses: By the strictest definition, people look at point totals first to determine top6 capable players. Do you disagree with this basic premise?

Meaning, is looking at the top 180 players' point totals disingenuous? If so, then you disagree with the premise outside of discussing how Booth fits within it. If not, then we have a basis for further argument.

Now, assuming you agree with the premise, I think it's better to take a larger sample than having an arbitrary cut off of 40 games and pro-rating totals alongside it. In this way, we get more stable results. So let's look closer at this:


In 2011-2012, the top 180 forward points cut off was 32 points.

2010-2011 - As pointed out through this article, the cut off was 34 points.

2009-2010 - The cut off was 33 points.

2008-2009 - The cut off was 35 points.

2007-2008 - The cut off was 33 points.

Hmmm I'm noticing a trend here... If we accept that injuries for differing players happen at different times, and if you take a large enough sample, we should be able to see patterns persist regardless of injured players affecting the outcome. Over the last 5 yrs, the range has been from 32 points to 35 points. The article purports the balance of 34 points to be the cut off... I'd say the theory still holds water without pro-rating the totals of injured players over _only_ this season.









For Booth, it means that he was definitely a top6 forward in 2008 and 2011. He was a 1st liner in 2009. Injured in 2010. And finally, pro-rated to be top6 in 2012...


Basically, if you want to argue semantics between Pitseleh's "comfortably in the top6" to being a "below average 2nd line forward", that's up to you. But if either case is true, and by your very own verbiage he's still a 2nd liner, then your comment on him being a step above waivers cannot be. Hence, the outlandish nature of your initial statements on Booth.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
09-28-2012, 06:58 AM
  #82
JuniorNelson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: E.Vancouver
Country: Australia-Aboriginal
Posts: 4,384
vCash: 50
Fire Gillis. Hire Davidson. Let him build around the core.

JuniorNelson is online now  
Old
09-28-2012, 10:00 AM
  #83
Drop the Sopel
Feaster famine
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 14,377
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Over the last 5 yrs, the range has been from 32 points to 35 points. The article purports the balance of 34 points to be the cut off...

Basically, if you want to argue semantics between Pitseleh's "comfortably in the top6" to being a "below average 2nd line forward", that's up to you. But if either case is true, and by your very own verbiage he's still a 2nd liner, then your comment on him being a step above waivers cannot be. Hence, the outlandish nature of your initial statements on Booth.
If you want to strictly look at production and ignore games played(which I said I don't agree is the best indicator) than David Booth has been a top 6 forward once in the last 3 years and 3 times in his 6 year career. So calling him a top 6 'tweener' by definition would be right on point.

Not to mention, I never said Booth isn't a top 6 forward, just that I don't think he's a particularly good one. Pitseleh's numbers further reinforced this - never mind that I believe his defensive game isn't as strong as his offensive one.

If all you want out of the Canucks 2nd line forwards is 34 points than I can see why we disagree here. From where I sit that's just not good enough on a team with an excellent puck moving defense that plays a very aggressive offensive style.

What an outlandish claim to say that Booth isn't far from waiver territory even though he returned absolutely nothing a calendar year ago coming off an 82 game season. I would offer just about as much value in trade for David Booth as I would for David Jones - very very little.

Drop the Sopel is offline  
Old
09-28-2012, 10:19 AM
  #84
pitseleh
Registered User
 
pitseleh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,569
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drop the Sopel View Post
That's exactly it, 160th at EV puts Booth in the below average 2nd line forward category.

Now how many forwards in the NHL come with a bigger cap hit? You would have to think much less than 160...
He's also been 24th and 33rd, with the only difference between those seasons and his last two being his on ice shooting percentage. Basically you've got a guy who in his last four qualifying seasons has twice scored like a top end first liner and twice scored like a bottom end second liner. If you average things out, he profiles like an above average second liner.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Outside99 View Post
The two problems I have with Corsi are a) it seems to me that a player can boost his #'s without too much difficulty and
Obviously a player could (Scott Gomez is a prime example of this) but the point is that most players don't, and neatly fit into a small range of on-ice shooting percentages, meaning that Corsi is a better predictor that the quality of shots produced. Ideally, you'd use scoring chances to measure players, but there's around a .9 correlation between Corsi and scoring chances as measured by various stats websites over the last few years.

Quote:
b) its a numerical representation of the player's on-ice performance and is not his actual performance - in other words, the devil is in the details - ex. Corsi might describe a single 45 second shift as 1 shot for and 2 against whereas the reality is much richer - broke up a pass, covered for his own dman, won 2 puck battles, kept cool after taking an elbow to the head. etc etc etc minor details.
Scurr already mentioned this but the key is that players that make those good plays will, over the long term, end up with more positive Corsi events than an equivalent player who doesn't make those plays. Corsi isn't a tool for short term evaluation - for that, no stat can beat the eyes (at least for now).

pitseleh is offline  
Old
09-28-2012, 10:39 AM
  #85
Drop the Sopel
Feaster famine
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 14,377
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pitseleh View Post
He's also been 24th and 33rd, with the only difference between those seasons and his last two being his on ice shooting percentage. Basically you've got a guy who in his last four qualifying seasons has twice scored like a top end first liner and twice scored like a bottom end second liner. If you average things out, he profiles like an above average second liner.
Do you mean his pace? Booth has only broken 40 points once in 6 years...

I view Booth as a half point per game player with a below average defensive game. He's essentially our David Jones/Clarke MacArthur - an average 2nd line forward that doesn't check very well and will find himself often bouncing between the 2nd and 3rd lines.

____________

The problem I have with corsi is that each player only represents roughly 10% of what happens on the ice. I would assume players numbers swing wildly from season to season. Is that accurate?

Drop the Sopel is offline  
Old
09-28-2012, 10:49 AM
  #86
pitseleh
Registered User
 
pitseleh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,569
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drop the Sopel View Post
Do you mean his pace? Booth has only broken 40 points once in 6 years...
No, his EV points/60.

Quote:
The problem I have with corsi is that each player only represents roughly 10% of what happens on the ice. I would assume players numbers swing wildly from season to season. Is that accurate?
Numbers can swing wildly but usually do so in response to changes in usage. Players that see similar minutes season to season generally don't have significant swings one way to another (i.e. a major positive Corsi player becoming a negative player the next season).

pitseleh is offline  
Old
09-28-2012, 10:59 AM
  #87
Drop the Sopel
Feaster famine
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 14,377
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pitseleh View Post
No, his EV points/60.



Numbers can swing wildly but usually do so in response to changes in usage. Players that see similar minutes season to season generally don't have significant swings one way to another (i.e. a major positive Corsi player becoming a negative player the next season).
Which corsi number do you think is the best indicator? What do you think of the criteria for what constitutes 'quality of competition'?

Drop the Sopel is offline  
Old
09-28-2012, 03:45 PM
  #88
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 13,921
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drop the Sopel View Post
If you want to strictly look at production and ignore games played(which I said I don't agree is the best indicator) than David Booth has been a top 6 forward once in the last 3 years and 3 times in his 6 year career. So calling him a top 6 'tweener' by definition would be right on point.

Not to mention, I never said Booth isn't a top 6 forward, just that I don't think he's a particularly good one. Pitseleh's numbers further reinforced this - never mind that I believe his defensive game isn't as strong as his offensive one.


You said this:
Quote:
I would peg his value as very low, not far from waiver territorry...
So how is a player that is a legit 2nd liner not far from waiver territory? These two points do not coexist. Calling him a 2nd liner explicitly states that he has value to an NHL team.







Looking at production across the league, over a 5 yr sample, normalizes the impact injuries has on the data. It better lets us determine what constitutes top6 points totals on average. That said, we know that Booth was injured in 2 of his past 3 seasons. We have to factor that in when evaluating him alone.


You're using Booth's low end totals to prove your case. When in fairness, you should be using the average... at the very least. Booth's high end is a G/60 that rivals Rick Nash, and a defense that allows the lowest shots against per 60 on the team (adjusted for zone starts). This guy actually can score like a 1st liner. Granted, he's not going to benefit from higher assist totals, but then if he had that, we'd be talking about how Gillis swindled a 1st liner for scraps, instead of a very good and young 2nd liner.




Quote:
If all you want out of the Canucks 2nd line forwards is 34 points than I can see why we disagree here. From where I sit that's just not good enough on a team with an excellent puck moving defense that plays a very aggressive offensive style.

What an outlandish claim to say that Booth isn't far from waiver territory even though he returned absolutely nothing a calendar year ago coming off an 82 game season. I would offer just about as much value in trade for David Booth as I would for David Jones - very very little.


Again, your valuation of Booth based on what he was traded for is still quite amusing. I'm sure this has got to be an exact science.





What I want most out of Booth is for him to score at a 1st line rate. As in, get back to doing this. Everything else is secondary, including his assist totals. The nice two-way play is also a bonus. Like Hornqvist in Nashville, I'm just fine with sub-50 point totals if a big chunk of those are goals. Essentially, a faux 1st line scorer getting 2nd line money...

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
09-28-2012, 03:49 PM
  #89
Vankiller Whale
Win it for AV
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,759
vCash: 5100
I expect Booth to get 50 points, give or take 5. A full season healthy, and being centred by Schroeder(a playmaker) for part of the season may also help.

Vankiller Whale is online now  
Old
09-28-2012, 04:23 PM
  #90
Drop the Sopel
Feaster famine
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 14,377
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
You said this: So how is a player that is a legit 2nd liner not far from waiver territory? These two points do not coexist. Calling him a 2nd liner explicitly states that he has value to an NHL team.

You're using Booth's low end totals to prove your case.
His value is not far from waiver territory because he has durability concerns and is a half point per game player making over $4mil that doesn't bring value to special teams, intangibles or strong defensive play. That, and he returned next to nothing one calendar year ago. I'm not saying the Canucks will waive him, I'm saying if they looked at trading him they wouldn't get much value back without taking on undesirable salary.

I refered to Booth as a half point per game player without a good defensive game. If that helps prove my case, so be it. That's the player I see.

Contrary to what Cam Charron is selling, I don't view David Booth as a "two-way force". IMO Booth lacks hockey sense and defensive awareness - I have him pegged as the Canucks 10th best defensive forward behind Daniel, Henrik, Burrows, Kesler, Higgins, Hansen, Raymond, Malhotra and Lapierre.

If points told the whole story in what constitutes being a valuable top 6 forward than Clarke MacArthur would be an excellent target for Gillis in a Luongo deal. After all, by definition he's been a 1st line forward over the last 2 years. In reality, I doubt that will be the case.

Drop the Sopel is offline  
Old
09-28-2012, 04:26 PM
  #91
Drop the Sopel
Feaster famine
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 14,377
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
You said this: So how is a player that is a legit 2nd liner not far from waiver territory? These two points do not coexist. Calling him a 2nd liner explicitly states that he has value to an NHL team.
Does this also apply to Andrei Kostitsyn as well? He's been a 1st or 2nd line forward by definition for 5 consecutive years and produces more than David Booth and I would be willing to bet he didn't garner any offers north of $4mil.

Things aren't always black and white.

____________________

Last 3 years-

Mason Raymond- 44P/82GP
David Booth- 42P/82GP

If being a half point per game player is all we're expecting out of David Booth from the 2nd line why go out and get him in the first place to replace Raymond? Especially considering he comes in at close to twice the cap hit...

Is it safe to say expectations for this player are more than the 40 odd points/82 games he's been able to put up since the Mike Richards hit? Are Canuck fans happy with another season like the one he just had?


Last edited by Drop the Sopel: 09-28-2012 at 05:01 PM.
Drop the Sopel is offline  
Old
09-28-2012, 05:48 PM
  #92
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 13,921
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drop the Sopel View Post
His value is not far from waiver territory because he has durability concerns and is a half point per game player making over $4mil that doesn't bring value to special teams, intangibles or strong defensive play. That, and he returned next to nothing one calendar year ago. I'm not saying the Canucks will waive him, I'm saying if they looked at trading him they wouldn't get much value back without taking on undesirable salary.



He's a $4m 0.5PPG player that is vastly underrated defensively (Charron article) and does play on the PP (special teams). Intangibles,... well opinions differ. I personally like when a player is so determined to score that he crashes the net with abandon, that is a good room guy, and is one of the fittest guys on the team. Some pretty good intangibles there.


On the undesirable salary bit: I think he's more or less in line with his peers: Other 2nd liners. Now before you go on extolling the virtues of these names while deriding Booth, this is just to point out those players that you might find on a team's 2nd line. And how their salaries compare:


David Booth 4.25m (40 point pace last year)

Patric Hornqvist 3.083 (43 points) (RFA at the end of his current contract (25 yrs old))

Brooks Laich 4.5m (41 points)

RJ Umberger 4.6m (43 points)

David Jones 4.0m (42 points)

Devin Setoguchi 3.0m (43 points) (25 yrs old)

Brandon Dubinsky 4.2m (36 points)

Nik Antropov 4.062m (42 points)

Tuomo Ruutu 4.75m (39 points)

Ales Hemsky 5.0m (43 points)


If Booth is a 2nd line forward himself, does this show him to be so much out of line with his peers that he becomes waiver fodder? Remember that these players have their own weaknesses too.



Quote:
I refered to Booth as a half point per game player without an underrated defensive game. If that helps prove my case, so be it. That's the player I see.

Fixed.


Quote:
Contrary to what Cam Charron is selling, I don't view David Booth as a "two-way force". IMO Booth lacks hockey sense and defensive awareness - I have him pegged as the Canucks 10th best defensive forward behind Daniel, Henrik, Burrows, Kesler, Higgins, Hansen, Raymond, Malhotra and Lapierre.

If points told the whole story in what constitutes being a valuable top 6 forward than Clarke MacArthur would be an excellent target for Gillis in a Luongo deal. After all, by definition he's been a 1st line forward over the last 2 years. In reality, I doubt that will be the case.


Ahh so Cam is a quack now too huh?... I mean, what could all the funny numbers mean when they don't support your argument right? Far better to keep your opinion subjective and roll with it... Good call there.


Any "analysis" you've done here pales in comparison to his article. It is well reasoned and logical. If you want to question it, attack the numbers themselves - it's what he's going off of. Why not do the same?


Edit: Pro-rated point totals per Y2K's catch.


Last edited by Bleach Clean: 09-28-2012 at 06:10 PM.
Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
09-28-2012, 05:57 PM
  #93
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 44,580
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
^ why would you take Booth's prorated numbers but not do the same for others? For example Hemsky's pace was 43 points.

y2kcanucks is online now  
Old
09-28-2012, 06:02 PM
  #94
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 13,921
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drop the Sopel View Post
Does this also apply to Andrei Kostitsyn as well? He's been a 1st or 2nd line forward by definition for 5 consecutive years and produces more than David Booth and I would be willing to bet he didn't garner any offers north of $4mil.

Things aren't always black and white.


Wasn't Kostitsyn making 3.5m this year? Do you honestly believe that had he not gone through that Nashville fiasco, and had teams unfairly black ball him as a result, that he would not have garnered north of $4m in FA? You must be joking.


Quote:
Last 3 years-

Mason Raymond- 44P/82GP
David Booth- 42P/82GP

If being a half point per game player is all we're expecting out of David Booth from the 2nd line why go out and get him in the first place to replace Raymond? Especially considering he comes in at close to twice the cap hit...

Is it safe to say expectations for this player are more than the 40 odd points/82 games he's been able to put up since the Mike Richards hit? Are Canuck fans happy with another season like the one he just had?


Like I said, if he kept similar point totals but regained his 1st line scoring form, that's a major win here. It's a pretty unique thing to have. That, coupled with his size, make him a better offensive option than Raymond IMO.


Look, I want him to do better than last year obviously. 50 points would be great. I'd be happier with him. That said, I still like what he brings right now. If he can just regain that 1st line scoring touch, the Canucks will be scary.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
09-28-2012, 06:34 PM
  #95
Drop the Sopel
Feaster famine
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 14,377
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Ahh so Cam is a quack now too huh?... I mean, what could all the funny numbers mean when they don't support your argument right? Far better to keep your opinion subjective and roll with it... Good call there.


Any "analysis" you've done here pales in comparison to his article. It is well reasoned and logical. If you want to question it, attack the numbers themselves - it's what he's going off of. Why not do the same?
You mean like David Booth's abominable -31 last year in Florida? Or that he had the worst goals against/60MIN of any player on the Panthers? Or that he had the 2nd worst goals against/60MIN of any Canuck forward last season?

Odd how these stats escaped the 'well reasoned and logical' Cam Charron article.

I have yet to converse with a hockey fan that thought of David Booth as a strong defensive player, let alone the 'two-way force' Charron tried to sell him as. If you disagree with my stance than which of the Canucks 9 forwards that I rated as stronger defensive players than Booth would you disagree with?

I like that Booth takes to the puck to the net and can score goals but if he can't show more than he did last season I'm just not enamoured with this player at all, considering his other shortcomings and cap hit. Wouldn't be disappointed in the least if he was shipped out to open up a roster spot and cap space for another impact forward.

Drop the Sopel is offline  
Old
09-28-2012, 07:15 PM
  #96
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14,983
vCash: 500
Booth is here for goals. He scored more per 60 than a lot of top 6 forwards around the NHL.

Hell he scored more than our captain.

arsmaster is offline  
Old
09-28-2012, 07:17 PM
  #97
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 13,921
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drop the Sopel View Post
You mean like David Booth's abominable -31 last year in Florida? Or that he had the worst goals against/60MIN of any player on the Panthers? Or that he had the 2nd worst goals against/60MIN of any Canuck forward last season?

Odd how these stats escaped the 'well reasoned and logical' Cam Charron article.

Please post a link to the Canuck related goals against/60min. That would be very odd considering he allowed the least amount of shots against per 60min...


Quote:
I have yet to converse with a hockey fan that thought of David Booth as a strong defensive player, let alone the 'two-way force' Charron tried to sell him as. If you disagree with my stance than which of the Canucks 9 forwards that I rated as stronger defensive players than Booth would you disagree with?

I like that Booth takes to the puck to the net and can score goals but if he can't show more than he did last season I'm just not enamoured with this player at all, considering his other shortcomings and cap hit. Wouldn't be disappointed in the least if he was shipped out to open up a roster spot and cap space for another impact forward.


Depends on who you are replacing him with, how much that player would cost in assets and cap, and what you do with Booth.


Of the Canuck forwards, if I'm giving you a subjective answer without looking into the objective data too much, I take Booth's defense over the twins (who I feel have slipped (visually)) and Raymond (Injury may be a factor). So Higgins, Kesler, Burrows, Hansen, Malhotra and Lapierre ahead of him.


So since I've answered your question, how about you answer one for me: Who on the team is a better goal scorer than Booth? I rank Booth 4th behind Burrows, D.Sedin and Kesler.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
09-28-2012, 07:19 PM
  #98
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 13,921
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
Booth is here for goals. He scored more per 60 than a lot of top 6 forwards around the NHL.

Hell he scored more than our captain.


I don't think people understand just how important this one trait is. A 2nd line forward scoring at a 1st line clip, enough to rival Rick Nash, is a very strong asset to have as depth. The emphasis on this should be weighted more than most anything else IMO...

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
09-28-2012, 07:27 PM
  #99
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 44,580
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
Booth is here for goals. He scored more per 60 than a lot of top 6 forwards around the NHL.

Hell he scored more than our captain.
People seem to value second assists more than actual goals, sadly.

__________________
May 17, 2014: The day nightlife changes in Vancouver...ask me how.
y2kcanucks is online now  
Old
09-28-2012, 07:35 PM
  #100
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drop the Sopel View Post
You mean like David Booth's abominable -31 last year in Florida? Or that he had the worst goals against/60MIN of any player on the Panthers? Or that he had the 2nd worst goals against/60MIN of any Canuck forward last season?
There is a lot of luck involved in +/- and GA/60 because of variation in shooting percentage. Booth doesn't play poorly enough defensively or an important enough position to justify finishing last in on ice save percentage in both those years. This is really why Corsi is good, shots produce more events than goals, making them much more reliable over a single season.

Scurr is online now  
Closed Thread

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 01:15 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.