2019 Training Camp Thread - Pride and Passion

[Chrispy]

If it is, they need to question the capability of their stats people, because you can't make statistical judgements based on sample sizes of 1, which is the number of points each player has.

The stats like P/60 are meaningless with such small sample sizes.

I doubt they would be making decisions on points-based metrics if they are using preseason analytics.

I also doubt they are doing much with preseason analytics in the first place. Maybe some zone entries or Corsi, but it's still disorganized preseason opposition.

Gauthier has earned more looks. We should see more of him in the next 3 preseason games, as well as more of Necas and others. Let all of them show more of their capabilities.

 

[tarheelhockey]

If it is, they need to question the capability of their stats people, because you can't make statistical judgements based on sample sizes of 1, which is the number of points each player has.

The stats like P/60 are meaningless with such small sample sizes.

Which is why I bothered to include all those other columns, providing the greatest amount of context available to us.

The point is precisely that Gauthier’s increasingly large sample size isn’t producing a corresponding difference in his measurable results — including not just points, but also shots, hits, anything that’s tracked officially. He’s also not playing PK minutes which is a flag for a guy trying to take a bottom-6 role.

It’s entirely possible that the Canes front office is using numbers which show him separating himself from the pack, but that’s not a given and is not suggested by the data we can access. So in turn, it’s not a given that they are as high on him as we are, based on having seen 1-2 more full games of him than anyone else. Clearly they’re giving him the tryout, but if he doesn’t translate it to results then this front office in particular has a history of moving on to the next guy pretty quickly (see CDH, Saarela).

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Which is why I bothered to include all those other columns, providing the greatest amount of context available to us.

The point is precisely that Gauthier’s increasingly large sample size isn’t producing a corresponding difference in his measurable results — including not just points, but also shots, hits, anything that we can see.

I get that, but the point really isn't meaningful when talking about such small sample sizes. Whether it be points, shots, hits, 3 games vs. 2 games, or whatever, it's just way too small to try to draw conclusions, particularly when you consider it's pre-season which is chaotic to begin with.

It’s entirely possible that the Canes front office is using numbers which show him separating himself from the pack, but that’s not a given and is not suggested by the data we can access. So in turn, it’s not a given that they are as high on him as we are, based on having seen 1-2 more full games of him than anyone else. Clearly they’re giving him the tryout, but if he doesn’t translate it to results then this front office in particular has a history of moving on to the next guy pretty quickly (see CDH, Saarela).

I don't disagree with any of that.

I think it's not that complicated though. He's looked good in the games he's been in, been aggressive, been fast, etc...and and thus they are giving him a longer look. He's looked good, but he's not exactly blowing the doors off either so I think you are probably right, that they may not be as high on him as some fans are.

He's at least got himself in the conversation though, which gives him a chance.

 

[tarheelhockey]

I get that, but the point really isn't meaningful when talking about such small sample sizes. Whether it be points, shots, hits, 3 games vs. 2 games, or whatever, it's just way too small to try to draw conclusions, particularly when you consider it's pre-season which is chaotic to begin with.



I don't disagree with any of that.

I think it's not that complicated though. He's looked good in the games he's been in, been aggressive, been fast, etc...and and thus they are giving him a longer look. He's looked good, but he's not exactly blowing the doors off either so I think you are probably right, that they may not be as high on him as some fans are.

He's at least got himself in the conversation though, which gives him a chance.

I don’t think we’re actually disagreeing on anything here. I’m just pointing to an organizational philosophy of evaluating players using a measuring stick which isn’t available to us on the outside, and which doesn’t necessarily square with our idea of “looks good”.

 

[My Special Purpose]

 

[CandyCanes]

A team would be smart if they put a waiver claim on McKeown.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

A team would be smart if they put a waiver claim on McKeown.

Problem is, a lot of teams have their own version of Roland McKeown that they are probably already waiving. I won't be shocked if he is claimed, but it won't surprise me at all if he passes through.

Maybe WPG after losing Myers, Trouba and maybe Buff? Toronto has Dermott injured and is always looking for a bottom pairing RHD so maybe them? Don't know the make-up of enough teams to speculate any more than that.

 

[Chrispy]

A team would be smart if they put a waiver claim on McKeown.

Seeing him sent down this early reminds me of 2018 Saarela.

By my count there are 11 D still in camp. That's not promising for McKeown.

Maybe WPG after losing Myers, Trouba and maybe Buff? Toronto has Dermott injured and is always looking for a bottom pairing RHD so maybe them? Don't know the make-up of enough teams to speculate any more than that.

Those are the two that make sense to me. Winnipeg is really short RHD and would have time to let him practice and play exhibitions before making the call. Toronto just needs cheap bodies.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Seeing him sent down this early reminds me of 2018 Saarela.

By my count there are 11 D still in camp. That's not promising for McKeown.

Maybe, but Bean and Sellgren don't need waivers and Sellgren is going back to Sweden if he doesn't make it, so I can see why they keep those two around a bit longer. Priskie and TVR both injured so while in camp, it doesn't mean much. I think it really boils down to the team prefers Fleury and Forsling over McKeown as a #6/#7 option.

Slavin-Hamilton
Gardiner-Pesce
Fleury-Faulk
Forlsing,

Bean, Sellgren,

TVR and Priskie both injured.

 

[Anton Dubinchuk]

Gibbons down before McCormick.

McCormick is this year’s McKegg. Calling it now. We can call him the Spiceman. (Pronounced like 30 Rock’s Dr. Leo Spaceman.)

 

[Lempo]

what would be stopping his sel team from picking up his salary? it's only 70,000, anyway.

I don't actually know, besides the contractual reasons. Such arrangement is explicitly allowed under an EA clause, so it *possibly* means it is not allowed in a regular Loan.

BUT, the non-public transfer agreements and by-laws may say something otherwise. Obviously the actual reason for Sellgren going to Sweden is the higher salary he gets paid in SEL over the 70k AHL, so it's quite likely the SEL team pays for it. (Canes surely won't beyond the AHL salary).

 

[geehaad]

(EDIT: removing the quote of tarheel, since it seems this is a comment to more than just him)

IIRC regarding the Tulsky interview, he said data drives 97% of player acquisition, but coaching drives 97% of roster decisions (and scouting drives 97% of the draft decisions).

EDIT: also, Tulsky said 20 games of data is needed to make sense of it. Data is not forming the roster for opening night.

 

[tarheelhockey]

(EDIT: removing the quote of tarheel, since it seems this is a comment to more than just him)

IIRC regarding the Tulsky interview, he said data drives 97% of player acquisition, but coaching drives 97% of roster decisions (and scouting drives 97% of the draft decisions).

EDIT: also, Tulsky said 20 games of data is needed to make sense of it. Data is not forming the roster for opening night.

Interesting to hear that perspective. It’s hard to imagine how this gets negotiated internally.

 

[LeafChief]

What's the deal with McKeown? I loved him in his draft year (I watched a lot of him in the GTHL) but haven't followed him closely since.

As is obvious, the Leafs have a hole at RD on the third pair (one could argue they have holes throughout the entire d-core but nevertheless). I'd imagine he would look better than Schmaltz/Marincin/Holl?

Is he still as steady as he was back in the day?

 

[Navin R Slavin]

What's the deal with McKeown? I loved him in his draft year (I watched a lot of him in the GTHL) but haven't followed him closely since.

As is obvious, the Leafs have a hole at RD on the third pair (one could argue they have holes throughout the entire d-core but nevertheless). I'd imagine he would look better than Schmaltz/Marincin/Holl?

Is he still as steady as he was back in the day?

He was great in Charlotte. He just can't break through because we've got 9 proven NHL d-men in front of him. I think he's a solid third pairing guy on most NHL teams at this point. Make an offer.

 

[ginner classic]

What's the deal with McKeown? I loved him in his draft year (I watched a lot of him in the GTHL) but haven't followed him closely since.

As is obvious, the Leafs have a hole at RD on the third pair (one could argue they have holes throughout the entire d-core but nevertheless). I'd imagine he would look better than Schmaltz/Marincin/Holl?

Is he still as steady as he was back in the day?

He is the second coming of Nick Jensen. Full stop.

 

[Anton Dubinchuk]

I missed the joke. Nothing to see here, esp not if you’re a Leafs fan.

 

[WreckingCrew]

Make an offer? We waived him today. The only day so far where they don’t have to haha.

Shhhhhh, don't TELL them that...geez man! I think that was the point of winky face

 

[Anton Dubinchuk]

Shhhhhh, don't TELL them that...geez man! I think that was the point of winky face

Not sure what you’re talking about, what are waivers?

 

[LeafChief]

He was great in Charlotte. He just can't break through because we've got 9 proven NHL d-men in front of him. I think he's a solid third pairing guy on most NHL teams at this point. Make an offer.

I missed the joke. Nothing to see here, esp not if you’re a Leafs fan.

Shhhhhh, don't TELL them that...geez man! I think that was the point of winky face

The reason for my question was obviously regarding him being on waivers

 

[WreckingCrew]

The reason for my question was obviously regarding him being on waivers

Wa...wav...wayv...I'm sorry what is this whaviers you speak of? Could you detail the concept? Perhaps a dissertation or long essay? Probably needs a 24 hr explanation before I'll get it, then we can talk!!

 

[Anton Dubinchuk]

In seriousness, he’d be a fine pickup for any team looking for a 6/7. Worth taking a flier on. Truly on waivers because of depth, not because we have reason to believe he can’t make the jump and be a bottom pairing NHLer. Will almost certainly not be a world beater, but you could bet on worse (especially for free).

 

[GoldiFox]

Wonder if Warsofsky is nervous. 4/6 of his defense for next year is sitting on waivers, big day for Charlotte if they all clear. Bit of retooling to do if a couple are taken.

 

[Vagrant]

my interpretation of the mckeown demotion is that we're trying to do right by a player that has spent a lot of time in our system and has a possibility of continuing his career elsewhere. we could play the game where we give him false hope until the final day of cuts and then send him down with the mass exodus of players that will be sent down in the final cuts, but the waiver wire is going to be flooded that day and the chances that other teams have cemented their lineups by that point is incredibly high. it's different from the saarela demotion, which was intended to be an indictment of his lack of preparation and inconsistent commitment to defense. this is basically saying to mckeown, we're giving every team a fair chance to take a chance on you and if you aren't claimed, it's not because we're trying to stand in your way. he's a young dude, but he's at the prime earning years of his career and he is likely feeling the urgency of that situation.

as far as the "using preseason to determine who is ready and who isn't despite sample size" conversation, place me firmly in the camp of preseason matters a hell of a lot. it's borderline annoying to deal with "sample size" folks when talking about who has made the biggest contributions towards their future in these games. while it's logically true that preseason is only a few games, it's a few games when your prospects are playing against nhl talent in an nhl atmosphere and can all be fairly judged against each other with that information in mind. if quick preseason impressions didn't mean anything, they wouldn't play the games. these guys are going all out to get a glimpse of consideration and playing with that kind of pressure and thriving in it is key to understanding which of your players has the ability to elevate their game and who doesn't have it. it is most certainly the primary depth chart sorting tool we have.

 

[geehaad]

Interesting to hear that perspective. It’s hard to imagine how this gets negotiated internally.

I need to correct myself. My reply was regarding whether data would come into the decision-making process after 3 preseason games:

Regarding the standard we hold data to, but not a standard to which we hold the eye test:
"Stats often get held to a different standard from everything else. How often do you hear someone on TV talking about a player say 'yeah, I'm not sure about him yet...I've only seen him in 10 or 20 games'. There's a standard there where analytics are expected to equivocate in a way that other people aren't."

Regarding how much of a factor data is in determining a particular direction:
“I will provide a little bit of data here and there where I can, but on everything here, I’m just an advisor. The scouts deserve 97% credit for what we do in the draft, the GM deserves 97% credit for what we do in trades and contracts, and the coaches deserve 98.5% credit for what we do on the ice. My job is to provide them with tools, but they’re the ones who make the decisions, ultimately.”

So yeah, between those two statements, I don't think Tulsky's getting involved in the 44 vs 88 decision.