I have wondered about this myself.
My best guess is that Renney is trial running Schultz with a number of different options which accomplishes 2 things. It gives the Smid/Petry pairing more tough minutes which will be good for both of them and it allows Schultz to be paired with other players to get a read on these players. Schultz is pretty solid defensively so it give his partner an opportunity to get his game together. I expect Schultz to be moved around in terms of D partners for the rest of this season.
I don't have a problem with it at this point in the season.
However next season I fully expect Schultz to get top 4 minutes.
I very well could be wrong but I feel like schultz is getting eased in and by giving him middling-minutes it gives him an opportunity to absorb the system without getting into bad situations simply because he's not used to playing with this group...if his ice time starts to climb as the season comes to a close I think that'll validate this threory.
I doubt he'll play top-2 minutes but if he's not playing closer to the 20 minute mark it'll raise a few eyebrows (or at least it should).
I very well could be wrong but I feel like schultz is getting eased in and by giving him middling-minutes it gives him an opportunity to absorb the system without getting into bad situations simply because he's not used to playing with this group...if his ice time starts to climb as the season comes to a close I think that'll validate this threory.
I doubt he'll play top-2 minutes but if he's not playing closer to the 20 minute mark it'll raise a few eyebrows (or at least it should).
I'm not sure what he was playing in Minny, but I think he may also be a victim of his playing partner's time as well. If he was averaging 20-22 minutes in Minny, I see no reason why he can't duplicate that here, as long as he can handle it.
I'm not sure what he was playing in Minny, but I think he may also be a victim of his playing partner's time as well. If he was averaging 20-22 minutes in Minny, I see no reason why he can't duplicate that here, as long as he can handle it.
I'd have to double-check but I think he was playing between 18 and 20 minutes a night in minny.
I very well could be wrong but I feel like schultz is getting eased in and by giving him middling-minutes it gives him an opportunity to absorb the system without getting into bad situations simply because he's not used to playing with this group...if his ice time starts to climb as the season comes to a close I think that'll validate this threory.
I doubt he'll play top-2 minutes but if he's not playing closer to the 20 minute mark it'll raise a few eyebrows (or at least it should).
The only reason the team would play Schultz big minutes at the outset is if we were in a playoff race.
Its time to get him familiar, comfortable, and eased in as you say. We have that as a luxury, why not do it. Gotta be hard for a guy to play in a new place after 10yrs.
I very well could be wrong but I feel like schultz is getting eased in and by giving him middling-minutes it gives him an opportunity to absorb the system without getting into bad situations simply because he's not used to playing with this group...if his ice time starts to climb as the season comes to a close I think that'll validate this threory.
I doubt he'll play top-2 minutes but if he's not playing closer to the 20 minute mark it'll raise a few eyebrows (or at least it should).
Sounds reasonable enough to me.
I think the road games also skew the minutes. There were a few shifts were the Oilers were trapped in their own zone chasing the puck when the Sharks (and Ducks) were cycling.
I haven't seen to many teams worse than the Oilers at breaking up a cycle.
Sounds reasonable enough to me.
I think the road games also skew the minutes. There were a few shifts were the Oilers were trapped in their own zone chasing the puck when the Sharks (and Ducks) were cycling.
I haven't seen to many teams worse than the Oilers at breaking up a cycle.
yeah, peckham's minutes were inflated but I saw he got trapped a few times in the zone. That tends to extend your shift length tremendously.
Of all the Dmen in the league to bite us in the ass Tom Gilbert will never be one of them.
I wouldnt be so sure about that, the way they're playing, they might just be picking 2nd at the draft this year.
Have they even won a game since the trade? I think they have been blown out (and shut out) every game except one since the TD (obviously not all Gilberts fault, i know they traded most of their dmen and have injury problems too, just sayin though). Maybe thats why Minny trade for him though, they see how the Oilers are rebuilding and figured they would trade for Gilbert to get their own rebuild kick started lol. And that was just a joke btw, i dont need anyone reading anything more into that than there is.
I still say we won the trade though, but its still too early to tell either way imo. Schultz has looked pretty good so far for us.
I wouldnt be so sure about that, the way they're playing, they might just be picking 2nd at the draft this year.
Have they even won a game since the trade? I think they have been blown out (and shut out) every game except one since the TD (obviously not all Gilberts fault, i know they traded most of their dmen and have injury problems too, just sayin though). Maybe thats why Minny trade for him though, they see how the Oilers are rebuilding and figured they would trade for Gilbert to get their own rebuild kick started lol. And that was just a joke btw, i dont need anyone reading anything more into that than there is.
I still say we won the trade though, but its still too early to tell either way imo. Schultz has looked pretty good so far for us.
Your joking. But if Gilbert plays more like he has thru the vast majority of his career, rather than how he was playing right before we traded him... We absolutly robbed Miiny on this trade from what Ive seen of Shultz to date.
It's so funny how many people are so high on Gilbert. The guy was terrible for us except his contract year and then this year untill he got injured.
Your joking. But if Gilbert plays more like he has thru the vast majority of his career, rather than how he was playing right before we traded him... We absolutly robbed Miiny on this trade from what Ive seen of Shultz to date.
It's so funny how many people are so high on Gilbert. The guy was terrible for us except his contract year and then this year untill he got injured.
Nice to see, but I still cringe at the use of unit derived stats for individual analysis.
In a way though the Neilsen +/- is far less of a unit derived stat than almost any of the variants out there. The stat is based of of the individuals actual contribution to a scoring chance either positive or negative. So at least a player is given the + or the - if they actually had something to do with what really happened.
Of all of the "advanced stats" this is almost surely the one that has the broadest acceptance.
I think a better indicator would be comparing Shultz's numbers to the other MIN d-men. The Oilers are much worse as a team so it isn't surprising that Shultz would have better numbers than any of the Oiler d-men.
Edit: Nevermind, looks like the numbers are only for the time he has played with EDM.
Less sample size for sure, but looking pretty good IMO.
it would be interesting to see a stat that tabulates the number of scoring chances against that are prevented by a player. I bet Schultz with his great angle play and stick positioning would have good numbers.
it would be interesting to see a stat that tabulates the number of scoring chances against that are prevented by a player. I bet Schultz with his great angle play and stick positioning would have good numbers.
That would be kind of hard to tabulate because how do you qualify a scoring chance that doesn't happen, you know what I mean? It's something you can see in person but hard to tabulate it.
This is a really ignorant and dumb question, but who actually tracks those advanced stats for each game (Neilson scoring chances in particular)?
Its a really good question.
Answer: Formerly people like Staples plus whoever else helps out with it.
But its garbage in garbage out. AS it was with his infamous "errors" stat.
Years ago here Staples was a poster and there were long drawn out discussions on his "errors" stat.
Staples being a fellow that couldn't adequately understand that giving a Centre an "error" each time they lost a faceoff that led to a GA was going to produce significant noise in the data as compared to the analysis with other players. Or that D were involved in many more puck battles and so would lose more puck battles leading to GA
Heres another one:
I noted often that a player like Omark who never gets anywhere near his own net or battles in own zone rarely got credited with an error. He did great on this stat. For the fact being you won't find a player on this team that is more averse to doing anything in own zone. The players that were getting credited with errors leading to GA were the ones most likely being involved in a battle for puck in own zone. With the players you'd want to have on your team often being those that the errors stat would make out to be the worst offenders.
I would take some of these stats and apply the inverse of what they are indicating..
The Nielson numbers are better, but again its a case of who's inputting the numbers. That Staples is even presenting data on Schultz compared to other players after 3GP completely belies any operative understanding of statistics.
Last edited by Replacement: 03-08-2012 at 06:09 PM.
That would be kind of hard to tabulate because how do you qualify a scoring chance that doesn't happen, you know what I mean? It's something you can see in person but hard to tabulate it.
breaking up a 2 on 1, stopping a guy like Datsyuk on a 1 on 1 rush, lifting a guys stick at the right time like Horc did to Ladd. There are plenty of plays where it is obvious a guy prevents a scoring chance.
Answer: Formerly people like Staples plus whoever else helps out with it.
But its garbage in garbage out. AS it was with his infamous "errors" stat.
Years ago here Staples was a poster and there were long drawn out discussions on his "errors" stat.
Staples being a fellow that couldn't adequately understand that giving a Centre an "error" each time they lost a faceoff that led to a GA was going to produce significant noise in the data as compared to the analysis with other players. Or that D were involved in many more puck battles and so would lose more puck battles leading to GA
Heres another one:
I noted often that a player like Omark who never gets anywhere near his own net or battles in own zone rarely got credited with an error. He did great on this stat. For the fact being you won't find a player on this team that is more averse to doing anything in own zone. The players that were getting credited with errors leading to GA were the ones most likely being involved in a battle for puck in own zone. With the players you'd want to have on your team often being those that the errors stat would make out to be the worst offenders.
I would take some of these stats and apply the inverse of what they are indicating..
The Nielson numbers are better, but again its a case of who's inputting the numbers. That Staples is even presenting data on Schultz compared to other players after 3GP completely belies any operative understanding of statistics.
Good grief you HATE being wrong don't you? Even with perfectly good evidence (granted small sample size) that Schultz is trending to be a better defenseman for the Oilers than Gilbert, you will still turn your nose in the air and try to disbelieve or discredit it. Your man-crush on Gilbert has exceeded the silly stage and gone on to ridiculousness. This is coming from a guy who defended Tom....I just had the sense to realize how this trade could help us, and am happy to see Schultz do better than i had hoped.
Even though you (somewhat) admit that "The Nielson numbers are better", you still feel the need to cast a shadow of dubious belief over the data. Put your bias away already and be happy with a (so far) successful trade for once...jeez.
Good grief you HATE being wrong don't you? Even with perfectly good evidence (granted small sample size) that Schultz is trending to be a better defenseman for the Oilers than Gilbert, you will still turn your nose in the air and try to disbelieve or discredit it. Your man-crush on Gilbert has exceeded the silly stage and gone on to ridiculousness. This is coming from a guy who defended Tom....I just had the sense to realize how this trade could help us, and am happy to see Schultz do better than i had hoped.
Even though you (somewhat) admit that "The Nielson numbers are better", you still feel the need to cast a shadow of dubious belief over the data. Put your bias away already and be happy with a (so far) successful trade for once...jeez.
Holy reaction batman. Calm down.
How do you even get that from that post?
Anybody thats been on the board awhile knows my take on Staples and his house of cards analysis. That post had nothing to do with critiquing Schultz and everything to do with criticizing Staples clueless use of stats.
Not many people that even have a working understanding of Statistics would say much good about Staples use of them.
This is coming from a guy who defended Tom....I just had the sense to realize how this trade could help us, and am happy to see Schultz do better than i had hoped.
Put your bias away already and be happy with a (so far) successful trade for once...jeez.
