HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > National Hockey League Talk > Polls - (hockey-related only)
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2

Is Grabovski a top-six centre on a contender?

View Poll Results: Is Grabovski a first or second line centre on a contender?
Yes 164 56.94%
No 77 26.74%
Not if they want to win 47 16.32%
Voters: 288. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-19-2012, 02:42 PM
  #226
Interactif
Registered User
 
Interactif's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: North York
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,813
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Podium View Post
So again they are better because of the type of player and because you think so.... The stats back up my claim only your opinion backs up yours. The only ones you can argue Is zajac but even then, production wise and defensively Grabovski blew him out of the water which is incredible considering who zajac had the benefit of playing with, and hanzal but I stand by my claim considering I even recognized hanzal as the better player.
All I know is Grabovski has played on 30th worst defensive team in 2 of the 4 years he has been a Leaf, 29th last year, while being called the shut down Center of the Leafs. Lauding his defensive prowless is silly, especially when consider the above stat and since he went -7 once Nik Kulemin a winger that you guys infer is garbage, when he was +7 before Nik Kulemin went down.

Interactif is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 02:48 PM
  #227
Elvs
Registered User
 
Elvs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Pitea
Country: Sweden
Posts: 6,668
vCash: 500
If you swap Grabovski with Fisher or Legwand in Nashville, or with Berglund in St. Louis, or with Stepan in NY, or with Bolland in Chicago... Would you no longer see those teams as contenders?

Elvs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 03:04 PM
  #228
Interactif
Registered User
 
Interactif's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: North York
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,813
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elvstrand View Post
If you swap Grabovski with Fisher or Legwand in Nashville, or with Berglund in St. Louis, or with Stepan in NY, or with Bolland in Chicago... Would you no longer see those teams as contenders?
This is really not the point, on that note we may as well say you could replace Tyler Bozak who was only 4 points less than Grabovski last year while winning a lot more faceoffs could be a Center in place of those players. For people only interested in stats and not other parts of a player.

Don't cloud the discussion if Grabovski is truly in the same caliber as other top 6 contending centers. If you want to discuss in a tactically disingenous manner, let's just say you can plug a bag of pucks behind these centers and they would still be contenders.

The discussion is, is player X a top 6 C on a contending team? Since year 11-12 is the last year, we are looking at the quality of top 6 Centers on contending teams and seeing if player X matches up to the standard. In this case Grabovski.

Interactif is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 03:10 PM
  #229
RollTheBones109
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 306
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Interactif View Post
This is really not the point, on that note we may as well say you could replace Tyler Bozak who was only 4 points less than Grabovski last year while winning a lot more faceoffs could be a Center in place of those players.

Don't cloud the discussion if Grabovski is truly in the same caliber as other top 6 contending centers. If you want to discuss in a tactically disingenous manner, let's just say you can plug a bag of pucks behind these centers and they would still be contenders.

The discussion is is player X a top 6 C on a contending team? Since year 11-12 is the last year, we are looking at the quality of top 6 Centers on contending teams and seeing if player X matches up to the standard. In this case Grabovski.
Then the answer is no, because Grabovski is a top 6 center on the Maple Leafs.

RollTheBones109 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-19-2012, 03:48 PM
  #230
Elvs
Registered User
 
Elvs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Pitea
Country: Sweden
Posts: 6,668
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ponder View Post
I see a lot of people are questioning me calling McDonald a "weak #1 centre." Obviously his production was high, but he was also very undersized, not at all physical, and a bit of a 1 dimensional player. The very next season after the cup win, he was traded fairly early in the season (in December) for virtually nothing just to free up cap space to bring Niedermayer back. This was the season where Niedermayer was considering retirement, then decided to sign/come back mid-season. The Ducks traded McDonald for an ageing/washed up Doug Weight just to free up a bit of cap space. Note that McDonald was super healthy at the time (didn't miss a single game that year or the two years prior, and even the season before that he played 79 games), signed to a reasonable contract ($3.3 mil cap hit for that season and the next season), and wasn't that old (he was 30), but he was still the first piece the Ducks looked to dump to free up some cap space. That doesn't exactly scream "good #1 centre."
When he was traded, Burke said it was hard to trade 'one of the best players in team history'. While he wasn't anything special defensively, he was/is defenitely not bad defenisvely. He wasn't physical either, but boy would he skate and never took nights off. The guy was all heart.

As for the trade, there weren't any other options really... They didn't have to free up space for that year, it was for the year after. I don't remember exactly the rule, but you couldn't overstep a certain percent in capspace tied up for future years. So, they had to trade a player with at least 2 years remaining (in exchange for a player with one year left) on the deal, and it had to be a significant contract.

They weren't gonna trade Getzlaf or Perry, and they didn't make a lot either, obviously. Beauchemin and Kunitz were also on bargain deals. Bertuzzi and Schneider were signed that summer, trading them that shortly after signing them wouldn't look good.

That really only left McDonald, Giguere and Pronger as trade options. By trading Giguere, they wouldn't have had a proven NHL starter anymore so that was out of the question. Also, McDonald struggled early that season while Getzlaf emerged into a star caliber top line center. It was awful how McDonald was treated at the time. Bertuzzi got injured only a few games into the season and Selanne wasn't playing... So when Kunitz found himself on the top line with Getzlaf and Perry, McDonald's linemates were Mark Mowers and Brad May. Not easy to produce points with those two...

Anyways, it's a bad example. It looked like a horrible trade at the time and it's probably the 2nd worst trade in Ducks franchise history. It's almost like saying Selanne couldn't have been that good, since he was traded for Jeff Friesen and Steve Shields... They should really have gotten something more for McDonald, unfortunately Doug Weight still had value because of his name.


Last edited by Elvs: 12-19-2012 at 03:58 PM.
Elvs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2012, 08:13 AM
  #231
Interactif
Registered User
 
Interactif's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: North York
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,813
vCash: 500
Corsi advanced stats should not be a determining factor in player comparisons. If anything they don't mention it is a team stat more than an individual stat as It also measures shot at the net to the shot differential while a player was on the ice. This includes not just goals and shots on goal, but also shots that miss the net, and in some formulations, blocked shots. It's no wonder why Clarke Macarthur had such a high corsi number in 10-11 season. Team stat not invidual, lots of variations.

As for puck possession, it is only relevant for teams that play a puck possession game, like Detroit or Vancouver. Why Datsyuk is often rated high when Corsi is mentioned, though it's another thing to have Teddy Purcell rated high in corsi thus why this stat is so debatable. Regardless when people cite corsi stats, it is merely an attempt to gain a discussional advantage. Really I think and most hockey people would agree, they are hardly conclusive to a player's worth. Grabovski is a player that loves to have the puck, I and others have stated he often hogs the puck, and this is one of the reasons why he would not mesh well on the #1 line on the Leafs. Not because it would reduce the #2C line's effectiveness, but it would reduce Kessel's and Lupul's output. When I read quotes like this:

Quote:
If we put Kessel, Grabo and Lupul on the same line, our 2nd line would be beyond useless.
I really question what people have been watching these past 4 years, since Grabo is not a gifted playmaker, but rather a goal scoring center. Can you imagine a line with these 3, who's going to be the 3rd man high with all 3 pressing the play for scoring opportunites? Kessel? Lupul? 2 of the most gifted offensive fwds on the team? It would be a defensive nightmare. Really illogical, something I hope some will think about. Reason why Bozak is a good fit on this line, just as Kulemin is a positive for Grabo and Macarthur, they are often the last men standing as the defensive consciences of their lines. Something the Grabo guys never seem to grasp. Putting 3 scorers on one line with conflicting styles is rarely the answer as some may believe.

Interactif is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2012, 01:03 PM
  #232
MastuhNinks
Registered User
 
MastuhNinks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: The Iron Throne
Posts: 4,417
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Interactif View Post
Corsi advanced stats should not be a determining factor in player comparisons. If anything they don't mention it is a team stat more than an individual stat as...
Stopped reading. The basis of your 'Grabovski is bad defensively' argument is team goals against statistics.


I don't think anybody is saying corsi is absolutely concrete, but statistics are the only objective argument we have and corsi is certainly a lot better than +/- or team GA. Corsi is definitely a better argument than nothing, which is what you base your argument on. Furthermore, users have posted a plethora of statistics and articles suggesting Grabovski is very good defensively. What is more likely, that the stars just aligned for Grabovski and he is the luckiest NHL player of all time, given that he is terrible defensively but somehow every statistic we can find suggests otherwise, OR, that Grabovski is just good defensively? I think Occam's Razor dictates that we should go with the latter.

MastuhNinks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2012, 01:16 PM
  #233
Montreal Shadow
Registered User
 
Montreal Shadow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,989
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RollTheBones109 View Post
Then the answer is no, because Grabovski is a top 6 center on the Maple Leafs.
Grabovski is probably the 2nd or 3rd best forward on the Leafs. On a contending team he should be the 5th or 6th best.

Not to mention the Leafs have a defense that needs a lot of work and an enigma in the net. All in all, Grabovski is one of their bright spots. He shouldn't be used as a reason for the Leafs' failures.

Montreal Shadow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-22-2012, 08:01 PM
  #234
Interactif
Registered User
 
Interactif's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: North York
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,813
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MastuhNinks View Post
Stopped reading. The basis of your 'Grabovski is bad defensively' argument is team goals against statistics.


I don't think anybody is saying corsi is absolutely concrete, but statistics are the only objective argument we have and corsi is certainly a lot better than +/- or team GA. Corsi is definitely a better argument than nothing, which is what you base your argument on. Furthermore, users have posted a plethora of statistics and articles suggesting Grabovski is very good defensively. What is more likely, that the stars just aligned for Grabovski and he is the luckiest NHL player of all time, given that he is terrible defensively but somehow every statistic we can find suggests otherwise, OR, that Grabovski is just good defensively? I think Occam's Razor dictates that we should go with the latter.
Grabovski is supposedly good defensively on the Leafs, but he is not even close compared with the Bergeron's or Datsyuk's of the NHL. But when we examine how good he is without Nik Kulemin some may reconsider. Infact when he is without Kulemin who often covers up his linemates mistakes, he was rather lost without him.

Here's the proof, when Nik Kulemin went down on Mar 13, Grabovski went -6, while only scoring 3 points in 10 games. Matt Frattin the winger often used as the excuse to why Grabovski's play went in the toilet was -3 in the same span, +3 better than the so called good defensive fwd.

Conversely when Lupul went down on March 6, in the same timespan when Grabovski lost Kulemin, Tyler Bozak scored 8 points in 10 games and was -3. Without to this point some called the most complete winger on the Leafs, Lupul. The Bozak plays with Lupul and Kessel we often misleadingly read on the Leafs board, is only half true, half of that line went down and what did Bozak do, he increased his production.

Infact the other winger most liked with Grabovski, Clarke Macarthur was -3 when Kulemin went down. Still +3 better than Grabvoski. Whether it is coincidence or not, Grabovski's play suffered the most without his dependable winger. No one played worse down the stretch the last 10 games of the season.

Interactif is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2012, 11:29 AM
  #235
RollTheBones109
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 306
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Montreal Shadow View Post
Grabovski is probably the 2nd or 3rd best forward on the Leafs. On a contending team he should be the 5th or 6th best.

Not to mention the Leafs have a defense that needs a lot of work and an enigma in the net. All in all, Grabovski is one of their bright spots. He shouldn't be used as a reason for the Leafs' failures.
Oh, I agree. I just wanted to point out that the 'question' that poster suggested is not actually the basis for the discussion going on here.

5th or 6th best sounds about right. I believe he could be a second line center on a contending team, but he would need good wingers. Fortunately, Grabovski plays some decent defense considering his offensive output, so a playmaking winger (a la St. Louis or something, but one closer to 65 points than 95) would be a good compliment, along with a big-body for dirty goals.

That's how I envisioned a good second line with Grabovski. Two years ago the line of MacArthur - Grabovski - Kulemin looked capable of that, but they each either stagnated or regressed

RollTheBones109 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2012, 12:17 PM
  #236
Orr123
Registered User
 
Orr123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,368
vCash: 500
I'd say he is for sure a top six centre on a contending team. That said, he is NOT a first line centre on a contending team.

Basically agree with what's said above. I'd place him on an Elite team at around the 5-8th best player, but he gets a bit of a bonus by being a centre.

Orr123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2012, 12:32 PM
  #237
Hennig
It was 4-1.
 
Hennig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Ontario
Posts: 3,380
vCash: 1684
The Leafs give up more goals over 60 minutes when Grabovski is off the ice, and when he is on the ice, the Leafs consistently outshoot their opponents. In 2010-2011, Grabovski went a team high +14 on a team with a -33 goal differential. If we look at adjusted Corsi, Grabovski came in third in the entire league last year only behind Ryan Kesler, and Patrice Bergeron. He is a good two way center, I'm baffled at how you can try and argue that. Interactif, you can cherry pick all the stats you want, but Grabovski is without a doubt our best centerman, and as the poll shows, the majority of HF believes Grabovski is a top six C on a contender.


Last edited by Hennig: 12-25-2012 at 12:41 PM.
Hennig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2012, 03:32 PM
  #238
Interactif
Registered User
 
Interactif's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: North York
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,813
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hennig View Post
The Leafs give up more goals over 60 minutes when Grabovski is off the ice, and when he is on the ice, the Leafs consistently outshoot their opponents. In 2010-2011, Grabovski went a team high +14 on a team with a -33 goal differential. If we look at adjusted Corsi, Grabovski came in third in the entire league last year only behind Ryan Kesler, and Patrice Bergeron. He is a good two way center, I'm baffled at how you can try and argue that. Interactif, you can cherry pick all the stats you want, but Grabovski is without a doubt our best centerman, and as the poll shows, the majority of HF believes Grabovski is a top six C on a contender.
Grabovski was on the ice 5 on 5 for .939 goals against per 20mins of ice time in 2011-12, in comparison Clarke MacArthur was on the ice for .670 GA per 20mins of ice time. Compare that with Dave Steckel's average of .669 and Grabovski was on the ice for .270 more GA than Steckel. So while he was an even plus minus last year, he was on for a lot of goals for and against. This doesn't make him a good defensive Center, he is adequate, but not Patrice Bergeron whose average of GA per 20 mins was a mere .600. You can cite corsi stats to try and make Grabovski better than what he truly is, and you may say this is cherry picking stats, but I don't know how you cannot say the stats here are not accurate, they tell the true story of how many goals Grabovski was on the ice on at 5 on 5 when you read the above.

Interactif is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2012, 03:36 PM
  #239
WarriorofTime
Registered User
 
WarriorofTime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,541
vCash: 500
If he was making $3 million sure. But he makes too much now in a salary cap league.

WarriorofTime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2012, 03:45 PM
  #240
LEAFS FAN 4 EVER
GO LEAFS GO
 
LEAFS FAN 4 EVER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,775
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarriorofTime View Post
If he was making $3 million sure. But he makes too much now in a salary cap league.
Considering the lack of UFA Centre's available during July 2012 you can say Grabovski took a pay cut re-singing in Toronto, because any other team could have offered him more on the open market. Plus he earned his contract with his play the past few seasons, so it's not like it was a one year fluke.

LEAFS FAN 4 EVER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2012, 03:46 PM
  #241
Saintpatrick
Registered User
 
Saintpatrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,389
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bozak View Post
wrong, he's an above average second line Centre I would go as far as saying he is an elite number 2 centre. Defensively sound, he plays against the other teams top lines and still manages to put up 55-60. He's so under rated its frustrating. I would go as far as saying he's the leafs most important forward. Thats the problem though... he shouldn't be our best forward he should be our 4th best forward on the second line.. That's why we desperately need a number 1 so Grabovski doesn't have to be that guy.
Hmm a Leaf fan that vastly overrates a member of that team shocker

Saintpatrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2012, 04:07 PM
  #242
WarriorofTime
Registered User
 
WarriorofTime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,541
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LEAFS FAN 4 EVER View Post
Considering the lack of UFA Centre's available during July 2012 you can say Grabovski took a pay cut re-singing in Toronto, because any other team could have offered him more on the open market. Plus he earned his contract with his play the past few seasons, so it's not like it was a one year fluke.
Yeah I'm not saying he hasn't earned it. Just a contending team would be more likely to desire a young player on an RFA contract who is equally as good to Grabovski who makes a lot less to spend more elsewhere.

WarriorofTime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2012, 05:26 PM
  #243
Hennig
It was 4-1.
 
Hennig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Ontario
Posts: 3,380
vCash: 1684
Quote:
Originally Posted by Interactif View Post
Grabovski was on the ice 5 on 5 for .939 goals against per 20mins of ice time in 2011-12, in comparison Clarke MacArthur was on the ice for .670 GA per 20mins of ice time. Compare that with Dave Steckel's average of .669 and Grabovski was on the ice for .270 more GA than Steckel. So while he was an even plus minus last year, he was on for a lot of goals for and against. This doesn't make him a good defensive Center, he is adequate, but not Patrice Bergeron whose average of GA per 20 mins was a mere .600. You can cite corsi stats to try and make Grabovski better than what he truly is, and you may say this is cherry picking stats, but I don't know how you cannot say the stats here are not accurate, they tell the true story of how many goals Grabovski was on the ice on at 5 on 5 when you read the above.
First off comparing Steckel's and Grabovski's 5 on 5 GA/20 mins is like comparing apples to oranges. Mikhail Grabovski's QoC = 0.029 ---- Dave Steckel's QoC = 0.003

Your stat also doesn't tell the whole story, for instance-

5 on 5 GA/20 mins --
Phillipe Dupuis- 0.149
Jay Rosehill- 0.409
Mike Brown-0.484

Opposite side of the spectrum--

Henrik Zetterberg-0.963
Jiri Hudler-0.893
David Krejci-1.228


Does that mean defensive plugs like Brown, Rosehill, and Dupuis are all superior defensively than Grabovski/Zetterberg/Hudler/Krejci? Obviously not.

Also, I'm not saying Grabovski is a Bergeron or a Kesler, I'm saying he is a good defensive center, but not in the league of the best two way centers in the league. I just wanted to clarify that.


Last edited by Hennig: 12-25-2012 at 05:54 PM.
Hennig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2012, 07:13 PM
  #244
LEAFS FAN 4 EVER
GO LEAFS GO
 
LEAFS FAN 4 EVER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,775
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarriorofTime View Post
Yeah I'm not saying he hasn't earned it. Just a contending team would be more likely to desire a young player on an RFA contract who is equally as good to Grabovski who makes a lot less to spend more elsewhere.
Eventually that young player will eventually be given a contract similar to Grabovski, so they won't be on what you think is a better contract. Plus since we know Grabovski is more proven then a player still on their entry level contract, I think a team would rather go for the player would more experience and that means they choose Grabovski.

LEAFS FAN 4 EVER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2012, 07:50 PM
  #245
Phion Keneuf
Top Dawg Ent.
 
Phion Keneuf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vaughan, Ontario
Country: Italy
Posts: 27,831
vCash: 500
I'd say yes.
Grabo should be the 4th/5th best forwards on a cup contender IMO.

Much like the BHawks having Hossa/Kane/Sharp/Toews.
Grabo would be a great 2nd line punch paired with 1 or 2 of those guys

Phion Keneuf is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2012, 08:31 PM
  #246
Interactif
Registered User
 
Interactif's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: North York
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,813
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hennig View Post
First off comparing Steckel's and Grabovski's 5 on 5 GA/20 mins is like comparing apples to oranges. Mikhail Grabovski's QoC = 0.029 ---- Dave Steckel's QoC = 0.003

Your stat also doesn't tell the whole story, for instance-

5 on 5 GA/20 mins --
Phillipe Dupuis- 0.149
Jay Rosehill- 0.409
Mike Brown-0.484

Opposite side of the spectrum--

Henrik Zetterberg-0.963
Jiri Hudler-0.893
David Krejci-1.228


Does that mean defensive plugs like Brown, Rosehill, and Dupuis are all superior defensively than Grabovski/Zetterberg/Hudler/Krejci? Obviously not.

Also, I'm not saying Grabovski is a Bergeron or a Kesler, I'm saying he is a good defensive center, but not in the league of the best two way centers in the league. I just wanted to clarify that.
This is what you said of Grabovski in your post prior:
Quote:
He is a good two way center, I'm baffled at how you can try and argue that. Interactif, you can cherry pick all the stats you want,
Now I gave you a factual answer based on the advanced stats of last year not cherry picking the stats as you had claimed, legitimate GA 5 on 5 stats that does not validate your assertion he is a good 2 way player, ironically it is not one of the better defensive forwards in the NHL anymore when stats are presented to throw cold water on that his reputation as a good 2 way player is simply not true.

As for Grabovski facing more talented offensive players, not according to the advanced stats he did.

Of the Leafs Center's he ranked behind Steckel and Connolly in GA20. The competition they faced was similar not that Grabovski was facing better scorers.

Weighted OPPGF20 for the 3 players that they played against:

Grabovski .785
Steckel .781
Connolly .786

And again Grabovski's average of GA20 was higher than both Steckel's and Connolly's last year.


Last edited by Interactif: 12-25-2012 at 08:37 PM.
Interactif is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2012, 10:40 PM
  #247
Hennig
It was 4-1.
 
Hennig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Ontario
Posts: 3,380
vCash: 1684
Quote:
Originally Posted by Interactif View Post
This is what you said of Grabovski in your post prior:


Now I gave you a factual answer based on the advanced stats of last year not cherry picking the stats as you had claimed, legitimate GA 5 on 5 stats that does not validate your assertion he is a good 2 way player, ironically it is not one of the better defensive forwards in the NHL anymore when stats are presented to throw cold water on that his reputation as a good 2 way player is simply not true.
I'm having a hard time interpreting this paragraph. But I proved in my recent post that your GA/20 stat is moot. Their are a lot of variables that need to be taken into consideration, and that stat will not tell you the whole story on how a player performs defensively.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Interactif View Post
As for Grabovski facing more talented offensive players, not according to the advanced stats he did.
What advanced stats are you reading? Could you please refer to this handbook, and scroll down to page 59. As you can see the Grabovski line had higher QoC compared to Steckel and Connolly. While you're there, do you notice Grabovski's big blue bubble? That represents someone who's teams take a lot more shots while Grabovskis on the ice. Meaning while Grabovski is on the ice, the leafs had possesion a lot more. Now notice Steckel's and Connolly's white bubbles? That means that while they were on the ice, the leafs were the ones getting outshot. Though we can give the benefit of the doubt to Steckel because he had minimal offensive zone starts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Interactif View Post
Of the Leafs Center's he ranked behind Steckel and Connolly in GA20. The competition they faced was similar not that Grabovski was facing better scorers.
Again, your GA20 stat isn't very reliable, when you have players like Zetterberg and Krejci having higher GA/20 then players like Mike Brown, Clarke MacArthur, and Joey Crabb.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Interactif View Post
And again Grabovski's average of GA20 was higher than both Steckel's and Connolly's last year.
And again, that stat is worthless. You're not really going to try and tell me "slow foot" Steckel, and Tim "the tin man" Connolly are better defensively than Grabo, are you? I'm honestly questioning if you even pay attention to Grabovski when he plays. I don't need stats telling me Grabovski is good defensively, because when I watch him I'm able to realize that. Anyway you're not going to be able to switch my mind into thinking Grabovski is bad defensively, and reading throughout this thread it seems you have been proven wrong many times before but are too stubborn to admit that Grabo is good defensively.

Heres an article that states Grabovski is a good defensive center.
http://hockeyanalysis.com/2012/10/30...rs-in-the-nhl/

Quote:
After doing this I got the following list of players sorted by GA20/TMGA20, or in English sorted by how much better defensively they were than their line mates.

Brandon Sutter
Samuel Pahlsson
Mikko Koivu
Frans Nielsen
Travis Zajac
Martin Hanzal
Mike Richards
Brooks Laich
Jordan Staal
Joe Pavelski
Honorable Mentions: Logan Couture, Pavel Datsyuk, Mikhail Grabovski and Alexander Steen missed the cut due to not having enough PK minutes.


Last edited by Hennig: 12-26-2012 at 02:02 AM.
Hennig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2012, 11:39 AM
  #248
Interactif
Registered User
 
Interactif's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: North York
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,813
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hennig View Post
I'm having a hard time interpreting this paragraph. But I proved in my recent post that your GA/20 stat is moot. Their are a lot of variables that need to be taken into consideration, and that stat will not tell you the whole story on how a player performs defensively.



What advanced stats are you reading? Could you please refer to this handbook, and scroll down to page 59. As you can see the Grabovski line had higher QoC compared to Steckel and Connolly. While you're there, do you notice Grabovski's big blue bubble? That represents someone who's teams take a lot more shots while Grabovskis on the ice. Meaning while Grabovski is on the ice, the leafs had possesion a lot more. Now notice Steckel's and Connolly's white bubbles? That means that while they were on the ice, the leafs were the ones getting outshot. Though we can give the benefit of the doubt to Steckel because he had minimal offensive zone starts.



Again, your GA20 stat isn't very reliable, when you have players like Zetterberg and Krejci having higher GA/20 then players like Mike Brown, Clarke MacArthur, and Joey Crabb.



And again, that stat is worthless. You're not really going to try and tell me "slow foot" Steckel, and Tim "the tin man" Connolly are better defensively than Grabo, are you? I'm honestly questioning if you even pay attention to Grabovski when he plays. I don't need stats telling me Grabovski is good defensively, because when I watch him I'm able to realize that. Anyway you're not going to be able to switch my mind into thinking Grabovski is bad defensively, and reading throughout this thread it seems you have been proven wrong many times before but are too stubborn to admit that Grabo is good defensively.

Heres an article that states Grabovski is a good defensive center.
http://hockeyanalysis.com/2012/10/30...rs-in-the-nhl/
How is the GA20 stat worthless?

It illustrates perfectly the myth that Grabovski is a good defensive center that belie the plus-minus stats.

There is a term called playing safe mins, when Caryle became coach of the Leafs he liked Steckel's game because he played safe mins. Steckel may not score flashy goals nor does he have flashy points totals but he eats mins in a 60 min game not hurting the team as evidenced by his .669 GA20 advanced stat.

Grabovksi, had a .939 GF20 stat to go a long with a .939 GA20 advanced stat. What this means is Grabovski is on the ice for a lot of goals and he is on the ice for a lot of goals against. Again the competition he faces is no different than what Steckel or Connolly faces. All 3 were facing lines of .781-.786 OPPGF20.

These are all factual stats, there is no manipulation, anyone can see Grabovski plays a high offence game that produces at times secondary scoring, and at times gives up a lot chances that results in a high GA on 5 on 5 situations. He doesn't play safe mins that define an excellent defensive center.

Interactif is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2012, 11:51 AM
  #249
Interactif
Registered User
 
Interactif's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: North York
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,813
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hennig View Post
Heres an article that states Grabovski is a good defensive center.
http://hockeyanalysis.com/2012/10/30...rs-in-the-nhl/
Then why are you using a quote from the same sources that I just cited for 'advanced stats' that you said weren't reliable? You can't have it both ways, by using the above quote to prop of Grabovski and then say " that stat is worthless".

Again, your
Quote:
GA20 stat isn't very reliable, when you have players like Zetterberg and Krejci having higher
But you then cite the same source by using an opinion saying Grabovski was a good defensive center that doesn't even kill penalties. A little hypocritical.

Here's the bottom line.

Grabovski was on the ice for .939 GF20 and was on the ice for .939 GA20, when he's on the ice something is going to happen, either his line scores or they are scored against, he plays unsafe mins, it's part of the reason why The Leafs have had trouble protecting leads these 4 past years, you remember this don't you? Leafs habit of blowing leads.

Grabovski's does not know how to play safe mins, being the 29th worst GA team last year, 30th worst 2 of the last 4 years is plenty evidence enough.


Last edited by Interactif: 12-26-2012 at 12:04 PM.
Interactif is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2012, 12:27 PM
  #250
MastuhNinks
Registered User
 
MastuhNinks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: The Iron Throne
Posts: 4,417
vCash: 500
Just looking at GA ON/60 (or 20 or whatever) is pretty useless without context. If you look at the forwards with the highest GA ON/60 it's mostly filled with players that played on teams with poor goaltending (Leafs, Islanders, Blue Jackets, Lightning, Blackhawks, etc.). It's also highly dependent on the quality of competition and teammates, look at someone like Plekanec. He's considered one of the better defensive forwards in the league and actually got a few Selke votes and he has one of the highest GA ON/60 in the league among forwards (higher than Grabovski, and he played with a great goaltender). I guess Grabovski is a better defensive forward than Jonathan Toews and Jordan Staal as well because his GA ON/60 was lower than both of theirs.

If you want to look at GA ON/60 you have to compare it to GA OFF/60, but even that isn't entirely telling because it completely disregards quality of competition, which is a huge factor (again, even forwards like Jonathan Toews and Jordan Staal have a higher GA ON/60 than GA OFF/60 because of the quality of competition they face, I cannot emphasize enough how big of a factor that is). Grabovski's GA ON/60 is actually lower than his GA OFF/60 which is pretty impressive considering the quality of competition he faces.

But I have no doubts that you'll ignore this and focus on some minor detail, or claim that I'm trying to say Grabovski is better than Toews and Staal defensively, or bring up team GA again (), I don't know if Grabovski ran over your dog or something but it's seriously kinda sad how in denial you are right now. People bring up advanced statistics for pages saying that Grabovski is a great defensive forward, and all of a sudden you find one (largely useless) statistic where he doesn't fare too well and that's supposed to trump all that?


EDIT: It seems like you don't understand what these statistics mean or how to use them, you just found when where Grabovski didn't do too hot and instantly pointed to it. Although it is probably a more sound argument than looking at his +/- over a small handful of games or looking at team GA.


Last edited by MastuhNinks: 12-26-2012 at 12:40 PM.
MastuhNinks 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 07:58 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.