HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

The Armchair GM Thread - XXXIX

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-08-2013, 08:07 PM
  #1
Nuckles
Bim Jenning
 
Nuckles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Benning's empty head
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,927
vCash: 50
The Armchair GM Thread - XXXIX

Last thread: http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh....php?t=1409085

Continue here

__________________
Richer's Ghost made my avatar

Fire Benning. Fire Linden. Fire Desjardins. Hire competent people.
Nuckles is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 08:11 PM
  #2
SonicY
Ad hominem
 
SonicY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Edinburgh
Country: Scotland
Posts: 3,017
vCash: 500
I'm going to repost my roster idea from the past thread because I didn't really get any feedback on it, and want to know if it's viable. I also want to steer the conversation around the petty arguments the thread is devolving into...


I re-thought my idea a bit, and put together a team that would likely solve our 2 most glaring deficiencies: a lack of secondary scoring, and not being difficult enough to play against.


Compliance buy out K Ballard

Sign F David Clarkson: 5 Years, $21 M ($4.2 AAV) +4.2
Sign F Raffi Torres: 3 Years, $6M ($2 AAV) +2
Sign F Adam Hall: 2 Years, $2.2M (1.1 AAV) +1.1
Sign D Rob Scuderi: 3 Years, $11.1M (3.7 AAV) +3.7
Sign D Davis Drewiskie: 2 Years, $1.9M (.95 AAV) +.95
Re-sign RFA D Chris Tanev: 2 Years, $3M (1.5 AAV) +1.5

Trade A Edler to PHI for S Couturier (1.375 AAV) -3.625
Trade R Luongo wherever for whatever -5.33

Sedin (6.1) – Sedin (6.1) – Clarkson (4.2)
Booth (4.25) – Kesler (4.25) – Burrows (4.5)
Higgins (2.5)– Couturier (1.375) – Hansen (1.35)
Torres (2)– Hall (1.1) – Kassian (.87)

Garrison (4.6) – Hamhuis (4.5)
Bieksa (4.6) – Corrado (.6)
Scuderi (3.7) – Tanev (1.5)
Drewiskie (.95)

Schneider (4)
Lack (.75)

Total hit: $63.795 ($505,000 room)

We get some legitimate secondary scoring in Clarkson, Couturier, Torres and a hopefully healthy Booth. We also get a lot more difficult to play against, with a strong 2 way 3rd line, and a big, punishing 4th line. Couturier and Hall are also penalty kill mainstays, and both are solid in the faceoff dot. We also get bigger on D with Scuderi and Drewiskie, and get a serious dose of playoff-style leadership in Scuderi, who has 2 rings and is the kind of blood and guts, stand up bruiser on the blue line that we have sorely lacked for years. It should also be noted that this would leave us with a team stocked entirely with Canadians and Americans, with the exception of the Sedins, Hansen & Lack.

Thoughts? Is this realistic? Satisfactory?


Last edited by SonicY: 05-08-2013 at 08:24 PM.
SonicY is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 08:16 PM
  #3
Bleach Clean
Moderator
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,236
vCash: 500
Quote:
Ah, see you should have added that hedging language originally. Because when it comes down to hard statistics you don't have a leg to stand on.

My original argument didn't mention production specifically. The statistical difference is there for everyone to see.


Quote:
Also, just because they did well on the PP that nullifys their performance? Somebody take back Hank and Dank's Art Ross trophies then! Doesn't matter how they go in they still count.

You can make up excuses for them all you want but when it comes down to it the Twins got outplayed by Thornton and Marleau and that wasn't good for us because they were 3 and 4 on the depth chart that series for the Sharks.

When SJ's PP jumps to an unprecedented 30%, it's going to inflate totals. Didn't help that that his frequency was accompanied by a 24 to 10 PP advantage as well. It's not that it doesn't count, but it should be kept in perspective. The Canucks were playing uphill the entire series.

The Twins didn't get outplayed by Thornton+Marleau. They got outproduced, but not outplayed.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 08:25 PM
  #4
Moore Money
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,980
vCash: 500
Philly fans seem to agree on Edler for couturier. I hope Gillis is all over that.

Moore Money is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 08:26 PM
  #5
Upoil
Zaboomafoo
 
Upoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 762
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
My original argument didn't mention production specifically. The statistical difference is there for everyone to see.

When SJ's PP jumps to an unprecedented 30%, it's going to inflate totals. Didn't help that that his frequency was accompanied by a 24 to 10 PP advantage as well. It's not that it doesn't count, but it should be kept in perspective. The Canucks were playing uphill the entire series.

The Twins didn't get outplayed by Thornton+Marleau. They got outproduced, but not outplayed.
Ah, silly me. [mod...] here I was trying to bring stats into the conversation to substantiate my view.

I, for one, think that getting outproduced (to the tune of 2:1) kinda points to being outplayed. Just me though.

Now don't get me wrong. The entire team got outplayed throughout the lineup. I just honestly believe that Thornton + Marleau outplayed the Twins. Their point totals (which funnily enough contribute to who wins) tells the story for me.


Last edited by Dado: 05-09-2013 at 12:44 AM.
Upoil is online now  
Old
05-08-2013, 08:31 PM
  #6
Bleach Clean
Moderator
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,236
vCash: 500
Quote:
Y2kcanucks & Bleach Clean: call a truce. You're both right, in essence.

Y2k is right in the sense that the Sedins/Burrows/Kes did not produce enough. Not only were the stats not there, but the chances weren't either. They never, until the 3rd period of game 4, looked dangerous. Kes was dangerous for all of 2 periods in Game 2, and silent for the other 10 periods. Primary scoring needs to be better.

Producing is relative I would say. Relative to their regular season production, and to their expected point totals in the playoffs, the Twins, Burrows and Kesler did what they were supposed to do.

There regular season totals were at 2.54 G/G. Their playoff totals at 2.00 G/G. A .54 G/G drop. Better games from Higgins, Edler, Bieksa and Hansen should have, theoretically, gotten them that extra 1G every other game, which would match their regular season pace. So really it comes down to expecting that extra .5 G/G from the big4, or through the depth.

Sedins+Burrows had 3 points each over 4 games. Kesler was .5PPG. Even if all are inconsistent, they all consistently end up at their expected point totals (given their larger sample).

To expect the team to outpace their regular season totals in the much harder playoffs, is, for lack of a better word, farcical. (Y2K's position)

I'm saying the secondary scoring has to be better to support the big4. To get them that half a goal every other game that they were missing. It rarely has been better or sufficient. It needs to be rectified.


Quote:
Bleach is also right: we had zero secondary scoring, and that will always have an averse effect on your primary scorers. The abysmal performance of our bottom 9 put pressure on the Sedins to perform on every single shift, and naturally, the lipn's share of blame for failures will rest (perhaps unfairly) on their shoulders. Secondary scoring a la Pavelski, Torres, Couture can alleviate the strain on the primaries, and allow them to play looser, and maybe get more favourable matchups.

You're both right. Bury the hatchet. Confirmation bias and all.

I understand you're trying to curb the argument here, but if this series loss is being strictly attributed to a lack of scoring, when the biggest change came in giving up a staggering amount of goals, per the stats, then I cannot see that position being correct.


Last edited by Bleach Clean: 05-08-2013 at 08:40 PM.
Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 08:35 PM
  #7
Bleach Clean
Moderator
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,236
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Upoil View Post
Ah, silly me. Sorry I didn't realize you were making an argument based on fuzzy feelings and here I was trying to bring stats into the conversation to substantiate my view.

I didn't realize all arguments had to be made on statistics. (Though that has been my preference). Especially when I didn't bring up a statistical argument myself, to which you chose to counter with statistics. Odd how that worked out.


Quote:
I, for one, think that getting outproduced (to the tune of 2:1) kinda points to being outplayed. Just me though.

Now don't get me wrong. The entire team got outplayed throughout the lineup. I just honestly believe that Thornton + Marleau outplayed the Twins. Their point totals (which funnily enough contribute to who wins) tells the story for me.


It is just you. Outproduced =/= outplayed. It's sad that you think it does.

Who played better? Hannan or Garrison? Hannan produced more.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 08:40 PM
  #8
Castle1*
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Victoria BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,670
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
My original argument didn't mention production specifically. The statistical difference is there for everyone to see.





When SJ's PP jumps to an unprecedented 30%, it's going to inflate totals. Didn't help that that his frequency was accompanied by a 24 to 10 PP advantage as well. It's not that it doesn't count, but it should be kept in perspective. The Canucks were playing uphill the entire series.

The Twins didn't get outplayed by Thornton+Marleau. They got outproduced, but not outplayed.
[mod] They got outplayed BECAUSE they were outproduced. That is their job is it not?


Last edited by Dado: 05-09-2013 at 12:44 AM.
Castle1* is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 08:41 PM
  #9
Castle1*
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Victoria BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,670
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoolChamp View Post
Philly fans seem to agree on Edler for couturier. I hope Gillis is all over that.
I hope a new Canucks GM makes the trade!

Castle1* is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 08:42 PM
  #10
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 51,232
vCash: 696
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Upoil View Post
Ah, silly me. Sorry I didn't realize you were making an argument based on fuzzy feelings and here I was trying to bring stats into the conversation to substantiate my view.

I, for one, think that getting outproduced (to the tune of 2:1) kinda points to being outplayed. Just me though.

Now don't get me wrong. The entire team got outplayed throughout the lineup. I just honestly believe that Thornton + Marleau outplayed the Twins. Their point totals (which funnily enough contribute to who wins) tells the story for me.
Not to mention the Sedins scoring chances:

Henrik: 13 for, 19 against
Daniel: 12 for, 19 against

And the Sharks:

Thornton: 14 for, 5 against (through games 1-3, I couldn't find stats for game 4)
Marleau: 3 for, 4 against (through games 1-3, couldn't find stats for game 4).

Marleau clearly wasn't getting many chances offensively, but the ones he did he scored on. Neither were bad defensively. Both out scored the Sedins, and outplayed the Sedins.

__________________
http://www.vancitynitetours.com
y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 08:44 PM
  #11
Castle1*
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Victoria BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,670
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
I didn't realize all arguments had to be made on statistics. (Though that has been my preference). Especially when I didn't bring up a statistical argument myself, to which you chose to counter with statistics. Odd how that worked out.






It is just you. Outproduced =/= outplayed. It's sad that you think it does.

Who played better? Hannan or Garrison? Hannan produced more.
Hahaha. Good one. No...it is not just him that thinks this.

Castle1* is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 08:44 PM
  #12
Bleach Clean
Moderator
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,236
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Castle1 View Post
That bolded sentence is nonsense. They got outplayed BECAUSE they were outproduced. That is their job is it not?
Please answer this question: Who played better: Hannan or Garrison? Hannan had 2 points and Garrison had none.

Or Kesler vs. Wingels. Both produced the same points.

Outproduced =/= outplayed. I can't believe this is even being argued.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 08:47 PM
  #13
Dado
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Or Kesler vs. Wingels. Both produced the same points.
Wingels. His..."improvisation"...single-handedly sunk us in the series decider.

 
Old
05-08-2013, 08:51 PM
  #14
Bleach Clean
Moderator
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,236
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Not to mention the Sedins scoring chances:

Henrik: 13 for, 19 against
Daniel: 12 for, 19 against

And the Sharks:

Thornton: 14 for, 5 against (through games 1-3, I couldn't find stats for game 4)
Marleau: 3 for, 4 against (through games 1-3, couldn't find stats for game 4).

Marleau clearly wasn't getting many chances offensively, but the ones he did he scored on. Neither were bad defensively. Both out scored the Sedins, and outplayed the Sedins.


Sedins CorsiRelQoC:

H.Sedin: 2.48
D.Sedin: 2.303

Marleau+Thornton CorsiRelQoC:

Thornton: -0.930
Marleau: -0.038

You were saying?

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 08:53 PM
  #15
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 51,232
vCash: 696
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Sedins CorsiRelQoC:

H.Sedin: 2.48
D.Sedin: 2.303

Marleau+Thornton CorsiRelQoC:

Thornton: -0.930
Marleau: -0.038

You were saying?
I thought these stats were meaningless without context? Or is that only when they don't suit a certain argument?

y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 08:54 PM
  #16
Wheatley
We Rabite You
 
Wheatley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,230
vCash: 500
Here's my "Blow up the core, NTCs be damned" idea:

Ryan Kesler
Alex Burrows
Kevin Bieksa
Alex Edler

for

Claude Giroux
Scott Hartnell
Brayden Schenn
Luke Schenn

Wheatley is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 08:54 PM
  #17
jimmythescot
Registered User
 
jimmythescot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,498
vCash: 500
This is going to be a very long summer.

jimmythescot is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 08:54 PM
  #18
Verviticus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 8,242
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
I thought these stats were meaningless without context? Or is that only when they don't suit a certain argument?
no, they're just hard to interpret without context

Verviticus is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 08:55 PM
  #19
Bleach Clean
Moderator
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,236
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post
Wingels. His..."improvisation"...single-handedly sunk us in the series decider.
Wut? Outdiving is outplaying now?

No, he didn't outplay Kesler.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 08:57 PM
  #20
Bleach Clean
Moderator
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,236
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
I thought these stats were meaningless without context? Or is that only when they don't suit a certain argument?
Oh I see, you provide chance differentials without context, I then provide context relative to Quality of Competion, yet I'm the one leaving context out of the discussion? Brilliant.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 08:59 PM
  #21
Castle1*
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Victoria BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,670
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Please answer this question: Who played better: Hannan or Garrison? Hannan had 2 points and Garrison had none.

Or Kesler vs. Wingels. Both produced the same points.

Outproduced =/= outplayed. I can't believe this is even being argued.

[mod] I have a moment so I will try to explain it in a few sentences.

Sedins job is to score. Not shut down other scorers. Not kill penalties. Not to stop pucks going into the net (goalie). Therefore, the Sedins are correctly judged on the points they put up. They have been very successful in their careers. They were not successful in this series compared to the Sharks you mentioned in your post.

Other players on the team are judged by different criteria.

Garrison: the reason he was hired was not just to get points. It was also to be solid on defense (which you know can be measured many ways), contribute on the PP (which someone forgot to mention to AV), etc.

Etc etc.

In this specific case that we are referring to (the 2013 Canuck vs Shark series) the Sedins were outplayed IMO.

But I'm old and have learned to live with many different opinions from all types of people. I just feel the way I think about this issue is logical.

And don't read anything else into this: I love the Sedins. I feel they are not soft as many have said. They just are not tough like Torres. They take a ton of abuse and keep on ticking unlike most other NHL players. In this instance they were outplayed IMO.


Last edited by Dado: 05-09-2013 at 12:43 AM.
Castle1* is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 09:06 PM
  #22
Bleach Clean
Moderator
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,236
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Castle1 View Post
Wow you really don't understand this? I have a moment so I will try to explain it in a few sentences.

Sedins job is to score. Not shut down other scorers. Not kill penalties. Not to stop pucks going into the net (goalie). Therefore, the Sedins are correctly judged on the points they put up. They have been very successful in their careers. They were not successful in this series compared to the Sharks you mentioned in your post.

Other players on the team are judged by different criteria.

Garrison: the reason he was hired was not just to get points. It was also to be solid on defense (which you know can be measured many ways), contribute on the PP (which someone forgot to mention to AV), etc.

Etc etc.
[mod]

Here's an example: Say the Sedins absolutely dominate the shot differential during a game. Come close over and over again but fail to cash. Then, the opposition line counters on one rush and scores. Did the twins get outplayed?


Quote:
In this specific case that we are referring to (the 2013 Canuck vs Shark series) the Sedins were outplayed IMO.

But I'm old and have learned to live with many different opinions from all types of people. I just feel the way I think about this issue is logical.

And don't read anything else into this: I love the Sedins. I feel they are not soft as many have said. They just are not tough like Torres. They take a ton of abuse and keep on ticking unlike most other NHL players. In this instance they were outplayed IMO.


The logic to this argument comes with the person who doesn't tie production to playing ability.

I respect your opinion, I just think it's not representative of playing ability. Scoring is a by product of good play most often, but not necessarily so. The exception is that team A can outplay team B, and still be outscored.


Last edited by Dado: 05-08-2013 at 09:38 PM.
Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 09:08 PM
  #23
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 51,232
vCash: 696
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
[mod]

Here's an example: Say the Sedins absolutely dominate the shot differential during a game. Come close over and over again but fail to cash. Then, the opposition line counters on one rush and scores. Did the twins get outplayed?






The logic to this argument comes with the person who doesn't tie production to playing ability.

I respect your opinion, I just think it's not representative of playing ability. Scoring is a by product of good play most often, but not necessarily so. The exception is that team A can outplay team B, and still be outscored.
Except that's not what happened.

They were out chanced, out scored, out played at both ends of the ice.


Last edited by Dado: 05-09-2013 at 12:43 AM.
y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 09:14 PM
  #24
Castle1*
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Victoria BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,670
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
There is a lack of understanding here, and it's not on my end.

Here's an example: Say the Sedins absolutely dominate the shot differential during a game. Come close over and over again but fail to cash. Then, the opposition line counters on one rush and scores. Did the twins get outplayed?

The logic to this argument comes with the person who doesn't tie production to playing ability.

I respect your opinion, I just think it's not representative of playing ability. Scoring is a by product of good play most often, but not necessarily so. The exception is that team A can outplay team B, and still be outscored.
I get what you are saying in the bolded above. In my mind when I compartmentalize the period we are referring to (just this series), because of the limited production of the Sedins and the higher production of the 2 sharks, I feel the Sedins were outplayed.

However, if the Sedins had absolutely played the best hockey they ever had in those 4 games and were still outscored, then I would not automatically say they were outplayed.

Castle1* is offline  
Old
05-08-2013, 09:19 PM
  #25
Bleach Clean
Moderator
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17,236
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Except that's not what happened.

They were out chanced, out scored, out played at both ends of the ice.

What? No more statistical brilliance coming from yourself?

You are responding to a hypothetical situation used to describe the difference between scoring/play. But way to keep up.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Castle1 View Post
I get what you are saying in the bolded above. In my mind when I compartmentalize the period we are referring to (just this series), because of the limited production of the Sedins and the higher production of the 2 sharks, I feel the Sedins were outplayed.

However, if the Sedins had absolutely played the best hockey they ever had in those 4 games and were still outscored, then I would not automatically say they were outplayed.

Ok fair enough. For me, it's not a requirement for them to play their best to judge their play even. That's the difference in our opinions, but I won't begrudge you your take.

Bleach Clean is offline  
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 12:30 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.