HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > National Hockey League Talk
National Hockey League Talk Discuss NHL players, teams, games, and the Stanley Cup Playoffs.

Intangible Toews heating up

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-19-2012, 10:08 PM
  #101
TheStranger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,989
vCash: 500
At least Datsyuk will never be the complaining little whiny b**** that Toews is game in and game out.

I watch him and I'm like, MAN I love this guy. Then the play ends and it's nonstop whining to the refs. And then I hate him.

TheStranger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2012, 10:17 PM
  #102
CPHawksFan
That's Hockey Baby!!
 
CPHawksFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Crown Point, IN
Country: United States
Posts: 2,612
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheStranger View Post
At least Datsyuk will never be the complaining little whiny b**** that Toews is game in and game out.

I watch him and I'm like, MAN I love this guy. Then the play ends and it's nonstop whining to the refs. And then I hate him.
Maybe because he's the captain and the one who talks to the refs?

CPHawksFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2012, 10:20 PM
  #103
xX Hot Fuss
HFBoards Sponsor
 
xX Hot Fuss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 10,337
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DatsyukianDeke View Post
Yea because Toews really helped his team win the cup in the Final. He was invisible the last 7+ games of the playoffs. If thats the case I take the guy with two Stanley Cups.
Well hello there mister stat sheet...how was your trip to NHL.com? I only ask because that's obviously the venue through which you're forming your opinion, since it would be impossible to come to your conclusion if you actually watched the SCF's or any of the other Hawks playoff games in the 09-10 season.

xX Hot Fuss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2012, 10:23 PM
  #104
xX Hot Fuss
HFBoards Sponsor
 
xX Hot Fuss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 10,337
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadhouseOnMadison View Post
Very true. So enjoy it while it lasts.
True. In terms of value though, it's Toews. The hawks are a 6-7 seed without him. Without Dats the wings are still a 5-6 seed

xX Hot Fuss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2012, 10:33 PM
  #105
DanZ
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 7,201
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by xX Hot Fuss View Post
True. In terms of value though, it's Toews. The hawks are a 6-7 seed without him. Without Dats the wings are still a 5-6 seed
For real? You know this how?

Datsyuk is the biggest part of the Wings success right now. The Wings are in a three way race for first in the division by the way. All three teams within a point. I wouldn't consider the Wings a 5-6 seed unless you want to also consider the Hawks a 5-6 seed.

DanZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2012, 10:48 PM
  #106
IndianCommitted
Hello, Duncan Keef
 
IndianCommitted's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Denver
Country: United States
Posts: 685
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazyforhockey View Post
I dont have a problem with Toews up in the top 10 for centers.....

realizing that Chi have had a easier schedule...more home games and easier opponets than alot of the other centers.... would temper the claim so far...

and his splits vs "playoff teams" needs to be stronger otherwise its his intangibiles that are putting him up higher not his goal or pt totals vs playoff teams or even top teams
Uhhhhhhh....... Every team in the league plays 41 games at home and 41 on the road.......

IndianCommitted is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2012, 10:50 PM
  #107
TheStranger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,989
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CPHawksFan View Post
Maybe because he's the captain and the one who talks to the refs?
No, it's not "talking" to the refs, it's mid play throwing your arms up and yelling for a penalty for simple plays like being rubbed off the puck. He's especially annoying even to watch when the team is losing.

TheStranger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2012, 10:54 PM
  #108
Chris Hansen
Team Tyrion
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,122
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by IndianCommitted View Post
Uhhhhhhh....... Every team in the league plays 41 games at home and 41 on the road.......
I'm guessing he was referring to how the Hawks have played more home games than road games as of now.

Chris Hansen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2012, 11:22 PM
  #109
Kurtosis
Win it for Theo
 
Kurtosis's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Ravenswood
Country: United States
Posts: 10,669
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheStranger View Post
No, it's not "talking" to the refs, it's mid play throwing your arms up and yelling for a penalty for simple plays like being rubbed off the puck. He's especially annoying even to watch when the team is losing.
You are exaggerating, and frankly, way off base as well.

Kurtosis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-19-2012, 11:31 PM
  #110
Follower of Yzlam
Believe the Yzerplan
 
Follower of Yzlam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Richmond, VA
Country: United States
Posts: 8,490
vCash: 1159
Stamkos may be the most criminally underrated player on these boards if people are taking Toews and Giroux over him...

Follower of Yzlam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2012, 12:03 AM
  #111
IndianCommitted
Hello, Duncan Keef
 
IndianCommitted's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Denver
Country: United States
Posts: 685
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MAB4Norris View Post
Stamkos may be the most criminally underrated player on these boards if people are taking Toews and Giroux over him...
Currently this season:

Points
Stamkos: 51
Giroux: 50
Toews: 48

PP Points
Giroux: 21 (1 shorty)
Stamkos: 12
Toews: 12 (2 shorty)

FO%
Toews: 61.4
Giroux: 52.0
Stamkos: 46.0

+/-
Toews: +16
Stamkos: +3
Giroux: -1

IndianCommitted is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2012, 12:11 AM
  #112
Tone King
Atomic Punk
 
Tone King's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Uranus
Country: United States
Posts: 8,422
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by MAB4Norris View Post
Stamkos may be the most criminally underrated player on these boards if people are taking Toews and Giroux over him...
Stamkos is a one trick pony....note that +3 vs. +16 of Toews at the moment. Toews plays a complete game unlike Stamkos or Tavares. I like Malkin and Dats as much as Toews. The others are a close second. And Crosby is done so that name can quit being mentioned. He has been Lindros'd.

Tone King is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2012, 08:52 AM
  #113
Chelios
Registered User
 
Chelios's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,522
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanZ View Post
Datsyuk is still clearly better than Toews.
Lets not turn this thread into a Toews vs Datsyuk debate.

Chelios is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2012, 09:21 AM
  #114
Illinihockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 14,067
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DatsyukianDeke View Post
Datsyuk wasn't 18 or 19 when he entered the league either, he was 23. Also he played on teams that were so stacked he was a 4th line player for his first 3 years, how can you even begin to compare them ? It wasn't until Datsyuk became a top 6 player that he took over, and became the beast he is now (2006 - present). Compare the years of Datsyuk's top 6 role to Toews top 6 role and the numbers really aren't even close.
I'm not downgrading Datsyuk, its a reference to physical maturity of players. Guys come into their prime in their mid-20's so it would be safe to assume that Toews is still getting better as a player. At 23 he's already on pace for a point per game season which none of the other elite scorers he's been compared to did. Its not fair to compare a physically mature 27 year old Datsyuk with a 21 year old Toews. That was my only point.

Illinihockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2012, 09:33 AM
  #115
hatterson
Global Moderator
 
hatterson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: North Tonawanda, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 11,220
vCash: 874
Send a message via Skype™ to hatterson
Is there a reason why people seem to believe that faceoff percentage is a primary stat in terms of correlation to winning?

The correlation is minimal, if it's even existent. Certainly it's better to be good at faceoffs than bad at them, but it's only barely above the level of tie-breaker and should never be user the way it is.

A couple posts up when someone compared Toews, Stamkos and Giroux using Points, PP points, FO% and +/- actually made me laugh.

__________________
Come join us on the By The Numbers forum. Take a look at our introduction post if you're new. If you have any questions, feel free to PM me.
hatterson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2012, 09:39 AM
  #116
MadhouseOnMadison
Man crush on Amonte
 
MadhouseOnMadison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 7,517
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chelios View Post
Lets not turn this thread into a Toews vs Datsyuk debate.
If he did that then DanZ would never have a reason to post.

MadhouseOnMadison is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2012, 10:12 AM
  #117
Chelios
Registered User
 
Chelios's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,522
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hatterson View Post
Is there a reason why people seem to believe that faceoff percentage is a primary stat in terms of correlation to winning?

The correlation is minimal, if it's even existent. Certainly it's better to be good at faceoffs than bad at them, but it's only barely above the level of tie-breaker and should never be user the way it is.

A couple posts up when someone compared Toews, Stamkos and Giroux using Points, PP points, FO% and +/- actually made me laugh.
Do you have stats to back this up? The reason I ask is because I have always believed (from playing, coaching and watching hockey) that face-offs are extremely important. If there are stats that refute that I would be interested to see them.

Chelios is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2012, 10:36 AM
  #118
hatterson
Global Moderator
 
hatterson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: North Tonawanda, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 11,220
vCash: 874
Send a message via Skype™ to hatterson
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chelios View Post
Do you have stats to back this up? The reason I ask is because I have always believed (from playing, coaching and watching hockey) that face-offs are extremely important. If there are stats that refute that I would be interested to see them.
I don't have anything offhand. I've read numerous things, but none were comprehensive enough to warrant a bookmarking.

A quick google turned up this article: http://www.dailyfaceoff.com/2324/how...-winning-games

End conclusion of the article (which the data seems to back up).
Quote:
Conclusion

I think it is fairly safe to assume that you cannot successfully predict the level of success of a team based on faceoff winning percentage, but it certainly does not hurt to know this information. There are so many other factors that go in to winning a hockey game, and I think General Managers who go out and find their faceoff dynamo (who also happen to suck at every other aspect of the game) are just plain nuts.
Winning faceoffs certainly doesn't hurt, but in and of itself, doesn't add that much value given that the difference between Toews (61whatever %) and RNH (37%) only amounts to about 5 wins a game and that's comparing the absolute best with the absolute worst

hatterson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2012, 10:38 AM
  #119
Dynheart
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,423
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chelios View Post
Lets not turn this thread into a Toews vs Datsyuk debate.
Pot meet kettle much?

Don't you think you already started this? I mean back on page three(4) you were cherry picking names...I mean Datsyuks name every time..Why? "Because these two are the most comparable" or something of that nature.

Then you went on about how Datsyuk was 23 the great Toews was 19 yada yada yada. Before that it was a Malkin, Crosby, Datsyuk and Toews type thread (With Stamkos and Giroux as HMs). Then you say this to somebody?

But agree, as I've been saying it since PAGE THREE(4)...There were other players mention for a reason.

Dynheart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2012, 10:49 AM
  #120
WarriorofTime
Registered User
 
WarriorofTime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,450
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheStranger View Post
No, it's not "talking" to the refs, it's mid play throwing your arms up and yelling for a penalty for simple plays like being rubbed off the puck. He's especially annoying even to watch when the team is losing.
Well considering that never happens I'm going to assume you're mistaken. You probably saw him ask for an explanation once (as captain, and probably yesterday after the Hawks were robbed blatantly of a goal) and assumed he's always whining to the refs.

WarriorofTime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2012, 10:49 AM
  #121
zytz
lumberjack
 
zytz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 6,734
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hatterson View Post
Is there a reason why people seem to believe that faceoff percentage is a primary stat in terms of correlation to winning?

The correlation is minimal, if it's even existent. Certainly it's better to be good at faceoffs than bad at them, but it's only barely above theIlevel of tie-breaker and should never be user the way it is.

A couple posts up when someone compared Toews, Stamkos and Giroux using Points, PP points, FO% and +/- actually made me laugh.
It's rather difficult to score goals if your team doesn't have the puck. If your team is winning all of the face offs then the only time the other team will possess the puck is through turnovers or takeaways. It's just one more facet of making life difficult for your opponent.

It's not some amazing predictor of a stat or anything... but I think. FO% does not get the love it deserves.

It's a big deal to know that you can send out your top FO guy in a defensive zone draw where. you need to clear the puck, and know he will be ale to get it done.

zytz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2012, 10:50 AM
  #122
PensFanSince1989
Registered User
 
PensFanSince1989's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,711
vCash: 500
He's finally earning a spot in the top 5 forward conversation. Good on him.

PensFanSince1989 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2012, 11:09 AM
  #123
brevard*
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Cocoa Beach, Florida
Country: United States
Posts: 1,891
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hatterson View Post
Is there a reason why people seem to believe that faceoff percentage is a primary stat in terms of correlation to winning?

The correlation is minimal, if it's even existent. Certainly it's better to be good at faceoffs than bad at them, but it's only barely above the level of tie-breaker and should never be user the way it is.

A couple posts up when someone compared Toews, Stamkos and Giroux using Points, PP points, FO% and +/- actually made me laugh.
It is extremely rare to have the puck go into the opponents net when your team does not have possession.

The majority of the time teams change lines after the whistle blows killing play.
So for the faceoff both sides have fresh troops out there.
Shifts in the NHL range from 20 seconds to possibly 45 or 50.
Lose the faceoff and you spend the 1st 10 to 30 seconds trying to get the puck back.
Often when this happens by the time you get the puck back your gassed, so once at the center line and dump it in to head off for a line change.
The other team now AGAIN has possession of the puck.

I bet folks could pull up data noting that maybe goals are not scored within xxx seconds of winning a faceoff so they will claim it's not important. My thought is that it is much less tiring to handle the puck on offense than it is to chase playing defense. Teams constantly on their heals wear down as the night goes on.

While it may not end up a goal I would guess that possibly every other faceoff loss in the defensive zone leads to a shot on goal against. ... Those add up too. Rebounds happen, flukes happen, deflections happen.

While you think it is not important I feel FO% is the most important ignored stat in hockey. ... Yet many look at useless stats like hits, giveaway/takeaway, and to a lesser extent +/-.

brevard* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2012, 12:06 PM
  #124
hatterson
Global Moderator
 
hatterson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: North Tonawanda, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 11,220
vCash: 874
Send a message via Skype™ to hatterson
Quote:
Originally Posted by brevard View Post
It is extremely rare to have the puck go into the opponents net when your team does not have possession.

The majority of the time teams change lines after the whistle blows killing play.
So for the faceoff both sides have fresh troops out there.
Shifts in the NHL range from 20 seconds to possibly 45 or 50.
Lose the faceoff and you spend the 1st 10 to 30 seconds trying to get the puck back.
Often when this happens by the time you get the puck back your gassed, so once at the center line and dump it in to head off for a line change.
The other team now AGAIN has possession of the puck.

I bet folks could pull up data noting that maybe goals are not scored within xxx seconds of winning a faceoff so they will claim it's not important. My thought is that it is much less tiring to handle the puck on offense than it is to chase playing defense. Teams constantly on their heals wear down as the night goes on.

While it may not end up a goal I would guess that possibly every other faceoff loss in the defensive zone leads to a shot on goal against. ... Those add up too. Rebounds happen, flukes happen, deflections happen.

While you think it is not important I feel FO% is the most important ignored stat in hockey. ... Yet many look at useless stats like hits, giveaway/takeaway, and to a lesser extent +/-.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zytz View Post
It's rather difficult to score goals if your team doesn't have the puck. If your team is winning all of the face offs then the only time the other team will possess the puck is through turnovers or takeaways. It's just one more facet of making life difficult for your opponent.

It's not some amazing predictor of a stat or anything... but I think. FO% does not get the love it deserves.

It's a big deal to know that you can send out your top FO guy in a defensive zone draw where. you need to clear the puck, and know he will be ale to get it done.
Although this seems true anecdotally, The empirical evidence says that the correlation between faceoff percentage and winning is very shallow and very weak.

On an individual player level, there is no correlation between faceoff percentage and +/-

hatterson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-20-2012, 12:22 PM
  #125
Follower of Yzlam
Believe the Yzerplan
 
Follower of Yzlam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Richmond, VA
Country: United States
Posts: 8,490
vCash: 1159
Stamkos is a +3 on a team that's like -20... which is actually pretty damn impressive.

Follower of Yzlam 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 06:05 AM.

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.