So Luongo coming to Van for poker tourney tomorrow. How awkward is it gonna be with Reimer, Schneider and Luongo practicing with the boys at UBC this weekend? Lol. The media are gonna have a hay-day.
Lol that will be funny.
The media: "Sooooo TO, whatdayathink?" "Any input Reimer?"
As an aside: I'd like to get a sense of what people actually think Kadri will become? Is he an NHLer?
People have remarked that AV will not allow Kadri to play here, but let's look a little deeper. In his short stint in the NHL, Kadri posted "good" possession numbers (Bozak article by Cam C), although the sample was quite small... In the AHL, he has had two PPG~ seasons, but could that be a product of a good Marlies team? Still, all throughout they have questioned his defense/attitude/worth ethic... He remains a gamble.
Saying all this, does he make for a better risk to take than either Bozak or Colborne? I can't imagine Carlyle to be that different than AV, so he's in tough either way -- But maybe this makes him a better "buy low" option than Bozak?
I look at the age of the Sedins, and the future of the Canucks and I wonder if taking on risky players like Kadri isn't worth the stretch? Sure, he lacks many things. He might not even establish a career. But if he does... You've just found a rare top6 addition, and the fact that you can push him to wing makes it even better. Could AV mold this guy into a player? Or would he struggle too much here and become a liability?
One thing is for sure, if he ever puts it together, you are not getting a player like this without paying a heavy price.
is hanging on to luongo an option?? i thought he asked for a trade....
He said it was time to move on, as Cory deserved his shot at bring a starter. But just recently he's said he had no problem starting the season with us.
As for Kadri, I wouldn't at all mind taking a flyer on him, I think we should accumulate as many high-ceiling prospects as possible regardless of risk if we want any chance at gaining top line talent as the Sedins decline.
Luongo to Chicago for Patrick Kane. Kane, summer of 2013, to Nashville for Shea Weber. Is this more interesting ?
1 - Luongo for Kane - not going to happen.
2 - Kane for Weber. Why would Nash ever do this. And if the new agreement is anything like expected, we would be in cap hell. The Canucks are unlikely to ever get Weber now .....
Refute the Jonathan Willis's article. He recognizes 34 points as the threshold, not me.
I'm sure when he wrote the article it wasn't to give one guy credit for consistent top 6 scoring with a 35 point season and call another unproven because he only managed 32. Some common sense should be used.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean
Do you consider Corsi On offense/defense/both? Further, what's your threshold for defining "good" Corsi numbers and why?
Corsi is a nice stat but as I'm sure you are aware it needs to be put into context. Zone starts, quality of competition and quality of teammate all need to be factored, it makes the stat somewhat subjective based on how strongly you feel those effects are. Somebody with a good Corsi number, imo, is having a positive effect, all things considered. I try to consider all the factors.
I also think the overall performance of the team in terms of possession has a significant effect on individual players Corsi. The relative number gives an indication how you're doing in comparison to your teammates but I don't think it translates well team to team.
The Leafs were a poor possession team last season, they gave up two more shots than they generated per game. Grabovski is the only guy that sticks out to me as having a really positive effect. How do you see it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean
I'm going to answer this by saying that Steen did more at a younger age. Nothing you say changes that.
OK, but what effect does that have on the players going forward? I understand why Logan Couture getting 56 points at 21 is significant, he's likely to keep progressing and piling up more points. Steen hasn't done that, so I'm not sure why it matters?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean
Did you say Bozak compares well at the same age? Please explain.
at 25/26
Tyler Bozak 18 goals 29 assists 47 points -4.99 corsi on -4.9 corsi relative
Alex Steen 24 goals 23 assists 47 points -0.87 Cosi on -3.8 Corsi relative
Steen played tougher minutes but he also played on a team that had much better possession numbers. Steen had the better season at 25/26, but not by much and he was obviously more seasoned at that point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean
Oh I buy them. I just think your arguments on the matter are unsound because you choose to highlight specific cases (which themselves are suspect) instead of expanding your data set: To get a better/accurate picture of where Bozak might project to be (instead of guessing) you will need to show many similar players following a Corsi On increase through their development track. You would also have to show TOs negative effects on such players. Otherwise, it's just wishful thinking on your part.
I'm not trying to make the case Bozak will end up being as good as Steen, I'm trying to make the case he can. You're acting like there is a world of difference between these two players up to this point in their career's but the numbers don't reflect that. Bozak is a nice throw in for us if we can tighten up his defensive game, something our coaching staff is very good at with forwards. When I watch him play, I see a guy that is committed defensively and plays the physical aspects well but needs to work on positioning and system play. Like I said, that was pretty standard on the Leafs, it shouldn't be surprising a young guy in their organization is lacking in those areas.
A return for a star player should start with a top 6 player/top line defender, a top 4 defender/2nd line winger and either a player that fills a glaring need or a prospect.
No. I want a guarantee in the deal somewhere, and there's no guarantees there.
No guarantees Gardiner maintains his from either. What that deal does is go heavy on the futures, and takes a gamble on Kadri. Frattin we know can play in the bigs.
Me thinks a TO-VAN deal is destined to bring Kadri here...
I'm sure when he wrote the article it wasn't to give one guy credit for consistent top 6 scoring with a 35 point season and call another unproven because he only managed 32. Some common sense should be used.
I can't say what Jon Willis's intention was when writing that article other than to outline a cut-off for top6 production. Is it common sense to ignore his conclusion? Are we saying the cut-off should include 32 point players as well?
Quote:
Corsi is a nice stat but as I'm sure you are aware it needs to be put into context. Zone starts, quality of competition and quality of teammate all need to be factored, it makes the stat somewhat subjective based on how strongly you feel those effects are. Somebody with a good Corsi number, imo, is having a positive effect, all things considered. I try to consider all the factors.
I also think the overall performance of the team in terms of possession has a significant effect on individual players Corsi. The relative number gives an indication how you're doing in comparison to your teammates but I don't think it translates well team to team.
The Leafs were a poor possession team last season, they gave up two more shots than they generated per game. Grabovski is the only guy that sticks out to me as having a really positive effect. How do you see it?
Cam finishes off his analysis by saying "I'm just not convinced he's a major league player." Now, he's looked into Bozak, run the numbers, and if you want to do the same feel free to do so. But until you do, and until you are able to relate significant Corsi jumps to TO+young players, you've got to expect people to question the viability of Bozak... and they have.
Quote:
OK, but what effect does that have on the players going forward? I understand why Logan Couture getting 56 points at 21 is significant, he's likely to keep progressing and piling up more points. Steen hasn't done that, so I'm not sure why it matters?
It matters because the earlier the track record of success the better the odds of success into the future. This has been confirmed over many cases. To apply it to Steen, you can expect him to be a continuing NHL contributor (all things equal), with Bozak you don't know if he's going to settle as a top6 forward or a utility guy like Ebbett (AHL/NHL).
Quote:
at 25/26
Tyler Bozak 18 goals 29 assists 47 points -4.99 corsi on -4.9 corsi relative
Alex Steen 24 goals 23 assists 47 points -0.87 Cosi on -3.8 Corsi relative
Steen played tougher minutes but he also played on a team that had much better possession numbers. Steen had the better season at 25/26, but not by much and he was obviously more seasoned at that point.
Steen also has that year, and three years prior to that registering top6 production, while Bozak does not. Meaning, a longer track record of said production.
Can you tell me if Bozak will again register top6 numbers next year, given a middle 6 role? Steen is a middle 6 player and he tends to do that, so I'd say he's a good bet to do it again. I'm completely unsure if Bozak will.
Quote:
I'm not trying to make the case Bozak will end up being as good as Steen, I'm trying to make the case he can. You're acting like there is a world of difference between these two players up to this point in their career's but the numbers don't reflect that. Bozak is a nice throw in for us if we can tighten up his defensive game, something our coaching staff is very good at with forwards. When I watch him play, I see a guy that is committed defensively and plays the physical aspects well but needs to work on positioning and system play. Like I said, that was pretty standard on the Leafs, it shouldn't be surprising a young guy in their organization is lacking in those areas.
The numbers do reflect the world of difference, and I'm bemused that you don't see it. Steen's production numbers are far more solid.
I think Bozak is a bad bet. Of course, he could do better here than there... He could also do worse or the same. There's no way to tell. At least with Steen there was more assurance of top 6 production, Bozak can't even claim that, let alone the gap in Corsi that now exists between the two.
Lastly, what makes you think Bozak is a "throw in" for TO? He played on their top line last year - why would they just give him away? If anything, his value has inflated like his point totals, and Gillis would be taking value out of the package elsewhere to have him included. Doesn't sound good either way.
My fear is that Gillis buys high on this guy, and then realizes he's got an another Andrew Ebbett on his hands when he was looking for a more permanent fix for the 3rd line C spot.
Seen it. It's hilarious for Eakins to be running damage control this early. He ripped him, and now he's praising him. Perhaps to bump up his value a bit?
- Frattin for his 56 NHL games, is a hard worker with good hockey IQ. and he's rh. 24 goals in 36 AHL games is intriguing. there seems to be upside there.
- Kadri has skill, got little ice-time in TO mostly with scrubs yet still made things happen, TO did not give him enough ice time or good linemates. reminds me of Ribeiro. definite upside there.
- Kulemin - never noticed him.
- Colborne - only saw him twice, seemed overwhelmed, don't see potential there but limited opinion.
Would rather deal Luongo to another team and not the Leafs.I think we could get somthing better from Chicago or Wahington.Personally i dont like any of the Leafs prospects or anyone on there roster really.
The media: "Sooooo TO, whatdayathink?" "Any input Reimer?"
As an aside: I'd like to get a sense of what people actually think Kadri will become? Is he an NHLer?
People have remarked that AV will not allow Kadri to play here, but let's look a little deeper. In his short stint in the NHL, Kadri posted "good" possession numbers (Bozak article by Cam C), although the sample was quite small... In the AHL, he has had two PPG~ seasons, but could that be a product of a good Marlies team? Still, all throughout they have questioned his defense/attitude/worth ethic... He remains a gamble.
Saying all this, does he make for a better risk to take than either Bozak or Colborne? I can't imagine Carlyle to be that different than AV, so he's in tough either way -- But maybe this makes him a better "buy low" option than Bozak?
I look at the age of the Sedins, and the future of the Canucks and I wonder if taking on risky players like Kadri isn't worth the stretch? Sure, he lacks many things. He might not even establish a career. But if he does... You've just found a rare top6 addition, and the fact that you can push him to wing makes it even better. Could AV mold this guy into a player? Or would he struggle too much here and become a liability?
One thing is for sure, if he ever puts it together, you are not getting a player like this without paying a heavy price.
I keep going back and forth on Kadri. After watching a few Marlies games, I think AV will eat him alive. Realistically, he's David Booth when he first came to Van. Their defensive shortcomings and risky plays entering the o-zone were near identical. David Booth was 27 and he managed to 'buy in' to AV's system and turn things around. Kadri is 22, theoretically easier to mold, I think he could be taught.
Unlike in Tor, Van can flank him with a glutton of strong 2-way wingers and solid defensemen. They did the same with Hodgy, but Kadri has an added luxury of being able to play wing.
The work ethic/nutrition situation could be comparable to Kassian. Gillis said 'he's young, he's still learning', then they sent him touring N. America last summer to train. Look at him now, he's lost weight, gained strength and a full stride.
Despite what many people believe, AV has a good track record developing players and young guys. I think he could work in Van.
I keep going back and forth on Kadri. After watching a few Marlies games, I think AV will eat him alive. Realistically, he's David Booth when he first came to Van. Their defensive shortcomings and risky plays entering the o-zone were near identical. David Booth was 27 and he managed to 'buy in' to AV's system and turn things around. Kadri is 22, theoretically easier to mold, I think he could be taught.
Unlike in Tor, Van can flank him with a glutton of strong 2-way wingers and solid defensemen. They did the same with Hodgy, but Kadri has an added luxury of being able to play wing.
The work ethic/nutrition situation could be comparable to Kassian. Gillis said 'he's young, he's still learning', then they sent him touring N. America last summer to train. Look at him now, he's lost weight, gained strength and a full stride.
Despite what many people believe, AV has a good track record developing players and young guys. I think he could work in Van.
David Booth is also 215lbs and takes the puck to the net...Kadri plays every game like its shinny and he wants to be flashy. That said I dont even get the basis for comparison between Booth and Kadri.
Didn't like Kadri when I watched him with the Kitchener Rangers as a 17 year old. Stil dont....I know he has a lot of puck skills, but so did Robbie Schrempf.
Kadri being a tertiary piece is one thing, him being the focal point of the package would forever tarnish anything MG has ever done.
I keep going back and forth on Kadri. After watching a few Marlies games, I think AV will eat him alive. Realistically, he's David Booth when he first came to Van. Their defensive shortcomings and risky plays entering the o-zone were near identical. David Booth was 27 and he managed to 'buy in' to AV's system and turn things around. Kadri is 22, theoretically easier to mold, I think he could be taught.
Unlike in Tor, Van can flank him with a glutton of strong 2-way wingers and solid defensemen. They did the same with Hodgy, but Kadri has an added luxury of being able to play wing.
The work ethic/nutrition situation could be comparable to Kassian. Gillis said 'he's young, he's still learning', then they sent him touring N. America last summer to train. Look at him now, he's lost weight, gained strength and a full stride.
Despite what many people believe, AV has a good track record developing players and young guys. I think he could work in Van.
I agree. He could work here, but it will be a long road for him... anywhere. I think that ability for him to transition to wing is key. Hodgson couldn't do that well. Perhaps Kadri could?
If you have to take a chance, Kadri is actually a "safer" bet than say Colborne because the latter doesn't have the same offensive component. Colborne is probably just as unlikely to transition into a bottom6 role as well.
Maybe I'm just wanting to see a bit more skill in the line-up, and Kadri brings that...
David Booth is also 215lbs and takes the puck to the net...Kadri plays every game like its shinny and he wants to be flashy. That said I dont even get the basis for comparison between Booth and Kadri.
Didn't like Kadri when I watched him with the Kitchener Rangers as a 17 year old. Stil dont....I know he has a lot of puck skills, but so did Robbie Schrempf.
Kadri being a tertiary piece is one thing, him being the focal point of the package would forever tarnish anything MG has ever done.
What if Kadri was the secondary piece to a 1st rounder? Still bad?
1st, Kulemin, Frattin, Bozak, Colborne (This is the absolute limit of "quantity")
These are the sorts of trades I'd want from Toronto. You're either giving up a good asset, an alright asset and a lesser young player, or a star player, or most frequently, far more then the actual value may hold because each individual piece isn't of significant interest to Vancouver.
