Alex Burmistrov (Part II)

[garret9]

...But, players on teams that have secured spots do slowdown and relax. Especially teams that have been there before. they maybe dont go into the corner as hard as they did last month, or will next month, Teams that realise the presidents trophy is nice but not really worth anything in the play-offs, not worth a season ending injury for.

Not every player in the losing teams is "playing for a job" or even "playing for pride" some are just playing for the cheque and hoping next year is better. I'm not saying they aren't trying, just that its harder to get "Up" for games for some players. and suggesting every player in the league is a GUNG-HO superstar like Wheeler at this time of year isn't rational.

Guys with a sore muscle go on IR, rookies with 0 games get brought up. NCAA guys sign and play 2-3 down the stretch the list goes on.

so yeah, there are indeed meaningless games.

Citation needed for the impact it has on players that you are speculating.

Plus you know... all these games that weren't in "meaningless periods" where he still performed better than others you are not crying over being on the team:

I know we all hope Lowry or Copp becomes that 3C to usurp Burmi, but I'm not sure they are good enough.

However, I think Petan may be able to do it. Or at least, I hope he does. Having a 3C better than Burmi would be a good thing.

And doing better than others in those "meaningless games" means either:
a) he's got better character by not giving up
or
b) he's still better

 

[csk]

the problem with this, is you can do it for just about any block of games in the season if you want.

The first 20 games of the season are meaningless because the players on most teams are still getting comfortable so i'm not impressed by what anyone does there
​

See? It's just as valid. So now, rather then an 82 game season, we've got a 55 game season

I don't put any value on any players first five games with a new team after trade because he's just settlign into a new team and we might not be getting an accurate picture of him.​

I don't put any value on any players first five games with a new team because he's so jacked up and trying so hard he'll perform waybetter then he ever will in the future again​

.

The problem with making these "adjustments" is unless your willing to comb through every 5-10 game stretch of the season for every single player and "adjust" the worth of those games accordingly for all of these factors, all your doing is punishing one player for the sake of it.

I agree with your overall point but the bolded does seem like a reasonable thing to do. Systems are important, so a player playing outside of them will perform differently than if they knew the system

 

[Grind]

I agree with your overall point but the bolded does seem like a reasonable thing to do. Systems are important, so a player playing outside of them will perform differently than if they knew the system

my point wasn't to show unreasonable points.

My point was to show taht if you look for them you can create reasonable doubt about the weight of specific games verse others.

the issue is it's invalidly weighted and does more harm then good if your not going to apply the same rigorous testing/criteria to all blocks of games.

It's the same issue of people loving players on other teams over their own guys. It's because all they see are 2 games a year and highlight packages. Other teams stars don't get exposed to our fanbase the way our teams stars do, so we tend to deflate the effectiveness of our players. ex: Third Line Ladd.

 

[Skidooboy]

Citation needed for the impact it has on players that you are speculating.

Plus you know... all these games that weren't in "meaningless periods" where he still performed better than others you are not crying over being on the team:


And doing better than others in those "meaningless games" means either:
a) he's got better character by not giving up
or
b) he's still better

Players play through injury when games are meaningful. Citation Andrew Ladd last year down the stretch.

Are you suggesting Ladd would play similar minutes with same injury this year on this team that is out of contention?

Meaningless games.

Where is your citation that every player on revert team plays st 100 percent commitment level all 82 games regardless of standings.

 

[KCjetsfan]

some of you have the patience of a saint. sometimes there's just no point trying to convince someone that they may not be correct.

i suppose we should discount everything that's happened since like game 25, because at that point we were pretty much done for the year. Scheifele's development into a very good C - meaningless. Wheeler's record year - meaningless.

burmi's (mostly) terribleness in the first half of the year - meaningless since we weren't going anywhere near playoffs anyways.

And besides, very few teams until very recently actually secured their spots IN the playoffs, let alone their seed. It's laughable to think that teams just quit trying their hardest once they're past the magic playoff line. And i think it's way overstated how many teams purposefully tank on a game to game basis (it's likely 0, even if there are teams that may make moves that will lead to tank-like results).

 

[Grind]

Players play through injury when games are meaningful. Citation Andrew Ladd last year down the stretch.

Are you suggesting Ladd would play similar minutes with same injury this year on this team that is out of contention?

Meaningless games.

Where is your citation that every player on revert team plays st 100 percent commitment level all 82 games regardless of standings.

or you could just admit that no one has the time and energy to apply modifications to the weighting of every game and thus applying a 20 game penalty to one player is unfair, since you aren't comparing him to the average performance of all other players from games 15-70, etc, your including the meaningless games they performed in as well which would have inflated the average baseline your comparing him against.


do you see why this is problematic?

it is better to ignore modifiers that affect all players, then only apply them to one player. Which is what you are doing. which is the problem.

 

[csk]

my point wasn't to show unreasonable points.

My point was to show taht if you look for them you can create reasonable doubt about the weight of specific games verse others.

the issue is it's invalidly weighted and does more harm then good if your not going to apply the same rigorous testing/criteria to all blocks of games.

It's the same issue of people loving players on other teams over their own guys. It's because all they see are 2 games a year and highlight packages. Other teams stars don't get exposed to our fanbase the way our teams stars do, so we tend to deflate the effectiveness of our players. ex: Third Line Ladd.

doing more harm than good isn't unreasonable??

 

[garret9]

Players play through injury when games are meaningful. Citation Andrew Ladd last year down the stretch.

Are you suggesting Ladd would play similar minutes with same injury this year on this team that is out of contention?

Meaningless games.

Where is your citation that every player on revert team plays st 100 percent commitment level all 82 games regardless of standings.

That's not what I was asking citation for. It was your conjecture that this makes what Burmistrov is doing is less significant.

You have a theory, and you have a hypothesis why that may be, but at this moment it's nothing more than speculation.

It also ignores the fact that Burmistrov has a much larger sample size of two seasons putting around this performance.
It also ignores the fact that Burmistrov has still be doing better than the competition you want to usurp him with.

 

[allan5oh]

The forward choices for next year are mind boggling.

It really is. Probably Ehlers - Scheifele - Wheeler then build from there. In fact it might be the biggest free for all in the forward group since the jets came back.

 

[garret9]

It really is. Probably Ehlers - Scheifele - Wheeler then build from there. In fact it might be the biggest free for all in the forward group since the jets came back.

And they all know this... which is why the "meaningless" games excuse is more than laughable.

 

[Skidooboy]

That's not what I was asking citation for. It was your conjecture that this makes what Burmistrov is doing is less significant.

You have a theory, and you have a hypothesis why that may be, but at this moment it's nothing more than speculation.

It also ignores the fact that Burmistrov has a much larger sample size of two seasons putting around this performance.

what performance? I don't see any and have never seen any.
76 points in 269 games?

You implied there was no "meaningless games" or that players never slack off when games are meaningless. I posted an instance that showed there are meaningful games and that players do In fact do things differently when the team is playing meaningful games than they do when they are not. I didn't even talk about the things coaches and GMS do. limiting ice time, changing matchups etc.

Again
I don't buy your evidence.
You say his play leads to his line mates outshooting opponents. you infer that he makes players around him better. Why does he have such crappy career assist #s then? if his lines outshoots opponents so often and he's adding value to players around him, he should be generating assists. but he doesn't.


What is it he brings?
All I see is an unproductive east west game that does very little to help his line mates score, from a player who appears to have a negative impact on goal differential. A player who shrank from his opportunity for the first 50 some games of hockey this year.

Yet you argue he should be anointed 3c for next year based on 20 games? 20 games that we have lost the vast majority of, largely because of inconsistent play by our bottom six. A bottom six Burmi has been a big part of all year long.

 

[garret9]

what performance? I don't see any and have never seen any.
76 points in 269 games?

You implied there was no "meaningless games" or that players never slack off when games are meaningless. I posted an instance that showed there are meaningful games and that players do In fact do things differently when the team is playing meaningful games than they do when they are not. I didn't even talk about the things coaches and GMS do. limiting ice time, changing matchups etc.

Again
I don't buy your evidence.
You say his play leads to his line mates outshooting opponents. you infer that he makes players around him better. Why does he have such crappy career assist #s then? if his lines outshoots opponents so often and he's adding value to players around him, he should be generating assists. but he doesn't.


What is it he brings?
All I see is an unproductive east west game that does very little to help his line mates score, from a player who appears to have a negative impact on goal differential. A player who shrank from his opportunity for the first 50 some games of hockey this year.

Yet you argue he should be anointed 3c for next year based on 20 games? 20 games that we have lost the vast majority of, largely because of inconsistent play by our bottom six. A bottom six Burmi has been a big part of all year long.

1) That scoring isn't great, but it's still legitimate NHL level. Please refer to the graph of Burmi's scoring vs the Jets other centres over the past few years.

2) That scoring is better than many of the players you are hoping to replace him. Please refer to graph above, or just look at him vs the other Jets now in "meaningless time".

3) I did not imply there are no meaningless games. What I said was meaningless is dependent on context. These games hold a lot of meaning to Petan, Burmi, Dano, Armia, etc. who are all jockeying for roster position next year... and pride.

4) Even if they hold less meaning (which is different than "meaningless"), it still doesn't tell you how much you should reduce Burmistrov's impact for how he's played.

5) He's still doing better than the competition in those "meaningless games" so the reduction would have to be applied to all the Jets that he's still doing better than a lot of. Better is still better.

6) Regarding outshooting/outscoring: You should learn to read:

This is happening all over again.
(truncated stuff)

What the facts are:
1) Burmistrov is a forward who between 2011-13 scored at a mediocre 3rd line rate while promoted the team to out shoot and outscore at a solid 2nd line rate for 120 games.
2) He came back to NA after a stint in the KHL and performed like a fourth line player you want to throw into the same tier as Thorburn in all three categories for 45 games.
3) Then for the next 20+ games he scored and outshot like a second line player.

Burmistrov's linemates controlled 48.6% of goals without him on the ice, they controlled 52% with him.

We care about outscoring, and Burmi DID improve his linemates outscoring by equal amounts as his outshooting.

Aside: The reason why we note outscoring is because when ever outshooting and outscoring say two different things, outshooting ends up being right in the future FAR more often than outscoring.

 

[garret9]

May be a good article for Skidooboy who doesn't understand/like Corsi and wants to know about how Burmistrov performed with goals:

http://jetsnation.ca/2015/9/24/does-corsi-fail-with-alexander-burmistrov

Burmistrov is not a case where goal differentials paint a player differently than Corsi.

Over the two seasons Burmistrov played for Winnipeg, the Jets controlled 52.5 per cent of shot attempts with Burmistrov on the ice, while they controlled 52.9 per cent of goals.

In both cases, the Jets were much better with Burmistrov on the ice versus on the bench. The Jets' Corsi% was 3.20 points better with Burmistrov, while Goal% was 4.93 points better.

Usage was only a minor impact as well. According to the most recent research, the largest outside factor to a player's results is the strength of their linemates and teammates. Zone deployment and line matching then comes at a distant second and third.

When looking at zone-start adjusted numbers, we see that Burmistrov's linemates did 2.5 points better in Corsi% and 2.5 points better in Goal% with Burmistrov than away from him. Burmistrov was not carried by his linemates, but instead improved them.

Analytically you would then describe Burmistrov as a player who improves goal differentials, and his Corsi suggests that his push was more likely sustainable and not variance (luck) driven.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

I really like MP centering that third line, I just can't figure out who takes his spot on line #2. Ladd would look good there next year
A third line of Connor MP Dano/Petan looks pretty good to me. Then eventually Connor takes over the spot on line #2, Im just not sold on anyone being close to compete with MP for that second line spot. The following year is a different story, and MP as third line centre before Petan is ready makes sense. I love Petan, just not sure how he'll do at centre just quite yet.

I like MP at 3C but I like him at LW better - unless we draft a top 6 LW, Laine or PLD if he doesn't play C. Of course if PLD plays C then Matty is back at LW.

You seem to be assuming that Ehlers stays at 1LW. I think we might need him on RW after next year, or sooner depending on when Stafford is moved. I see our top 6 LW's being Connor and Perreault, RW's being Wheeler and Ehlers if this years draft doesn't change the top 6. Scheif and Little are the C's.

3rd line this year coming up:
Connor - Burmi - Armia I think is most likely but Petan could take 3C. The year after Connor has moved up and that is Petan's chance. We get; Petan - Burmi - Armia but again Petan could take over 3C. If so does Burmi play 3LW or does he drop down to 4th line or drop out altogether? If Petan is 3C and Burmi drops down who plays 3LW, Lowry maybe? Does Harkins move to LW?

Assuming that Burmi continues to play like he has the last 25 games either he or Petan can play 3C and the other can play 3LW. Just depends on which is more effective at C. Between them, with either Armia or Dano they give us a pretty good third line going forward for quite a few years. Maybe Roslovic competes for the RW spot in a few years or he becomes top 6 material.

I'm not penciling in any F's from this draft or any that are still too far away to be able to project ahead of the ones we are dealing with now. Just too uncertain. This may be the last top 10 pick we get for a while so we may not be getting the high end picks who are easy to project into the top 6.

I call the top 4 F prospects to be AM, Laine, Pulju and PLD. I think Nylander and Tkachuk belong lower down. If we miss out on those first 4 I hope we are picking D, possibly with our first 3 picks or at least 2 of them, depending on who is available of course.

 

[Skidooboy]

1) That scoring isn't great, but it's still legitimate NHL level. Please refer to the graph of Burmi's scoring vs the Jets other centres over the past few years.

2) That scoring is better than many of the players you are hoping to replace him. Please refer to graph above, or just look at him vs the other Jets now in "meaningless time".

3) I did not imply there are no meaningless games. What I said was meaningless is dependent on context. These games hold a lot of meaning to Petan, Burmi, Dano, Armia, etc. who are all jockeying for roster position next year... and pride.

4) Even if they hold less meaning (which is different than "meaningless"), it still doesn't tell you how much you should reduce Burmistrov's impact for how he's played.

5) He's still doing better than the competition in those "meaningless games" so the reduction would have to be applied to all the Jets that he's still doing better than a lot of. Better is still better.

6) Regarding outshooting/outscoring: You should learn to read:

Burmistrov's linemates controlled 48.6% of goals without him on the ice, they controlled 52% with him.

We care about outscoring, and Burmi DID improve his linemates outscoring by equal amounts as his outshooting.

Aside: The reason why we note outscoring is because when ever outshooting and outscoring say two different things, outshooting ends up being right in the future FAR more often than outscoring.

round and round we go.

my point was that in meaningless games the OPPONENTS are working less hard/fielding weaker line-ups(dependant on standing situation), so of course he will look better.

after 5 years of pro hockey experience he better look good against the 2nd string AHL line-up Vancouver showed up with. But against top teams? he disappears. Just like he did all year.

I get Corsi thank you. but its part of the picture. I think even you have repeatedly admitted that.

the rest of the picture however is pretty bloody grim.
He doesn't score, He doesn't stop opponents scoring, he isn't a major physical presence. he's "difficult to play with" needs special understanding from the organisation and coach, had a horrible season, is probably at his ceiling, BUT!!!! But we should definitely keep him and just hand him the 3C roll next year.

Nope.

 

[garret9]

round and round we go.

my point was that in meaningless games the OPPONENTS are working less hard/fielding weaker line-ups(dependant on standing situation), so of course he will look better.

after 5 years of pro hockey experience he better look good against the 2nd string AHL line-up Vancouver showed up with. But against top teams? he disappears. Just like he did all year.

I get Corsi thank you. but its part of the picture. I think even you have repeatedly admitted that.

the rest of the picture however is pretty bloody grim.
He doesn't score, He doesn't stop opponents scoring, he isn't a major physical presence. he's "difficult to play with" needs special understanding from the organisation and coach, had a horrible season, is probably at his ceiling, BUT!!!! But we should definitely keep him and just hand him the 3C roll next year.

Nope.

Listen, it's only going around in circles because you keep saying stuff that either isn't true or ignoring half of my argument when you aren't able to argue against it (or deliberately building a straw man argument).

1) I brought up the Corsi thing because you said the Jets outshot but didn't outscore. I'm saying: no, you are full of **** and he did both. The Corsi thing matters because it means it was more legit that he outscored. I get that Corsi is only a part of the picture, but the part that it is is the part you are refusing to believe, that he tilts the ice and outscored over the 2011-13 seasons.

2) He doesn't score like a top six player, but he's scored fine for a bottom six player.

3) He does prevent scoring. How the hell do you think he outscores his opposition. It's through goal suppression. It's not the magical goal fairy.

4) He had a tough start of the season, but he is doing better. Now the importance context is history. Pavelec doing well at the end when he has a history of doing poorly is one thing, while Burmistrov it's different as he is performing like he did for the two previous seasons on the Jets. It may be a streak, it may not be. But, I'm more likely to believe Pavelec just is on a good streak than Burmistrov being on a good streak when the history is different.

5) No one is asking to gift him the 3C spot. The point is that he's been overall better than anyone else you would give that 3C spot too. All the non-scoring or non-outscoring issues you have with Burmi, realize that over his NHL career he has been relatively better than our alternatives.

6) You've consistently ignored what he does do well while focusing on what he doesn't do well, like reduce goals against, breakouts, neutral zone transition, backcheck, penalty kill, etc. Every bottom six player has their warts. It's why they are not in the top six. Everyone knows that Burmi sucks at some stuff.

6) Most people here are hoping the Jets do upgrade on him. Many of us have him listed on the 4th line, as a guy who That's why your entire argument has been nothing but a giant straw man debate over multiple posts as you whine about a player you don't like some things about.


We get it. You don't like Burmistrov.

Guess what, you are allowed to.

Congratulations, you found a player you don't like and wish wasn't on your team. I'm that way with Stafford. I still can take out my bias and notice that Stafford brings elements to the game that are useful and don't make up stuff about his performance.

 

[Skidooboy]

There lies the rub.

Anyone who disagrees with your maths is obviously ignorant and wrong.

Yeah I don't like him. But it's not irrational. He has baggage, he plays like a scoring forward bit scores like a fourth line grinder. He plays an east west game that confounds his teammates at times and has never really succeeded or helped his team win.He was given a show me deal and for 55 or so games he was awful.

But hey 3 years ago he was average under another coach and system with an almost completely different roster.

Ignore his struggles in the K, the benching a, his coaches complaints.....

None of that matters.

 

[garret9]

There lies the rub.

Anyone who disagrees with your maths is obviously ignorant and wrong.

Yeah I don't like him. But it's not irrational. He has baggage, he plays like a scoring forward bit scores like a fourth line grinder. He plays an east west game that confounds his teammates at times and has never really succeeded or helped his team win.He was given a show me deal and for 55 or so games he was awful.

But hey 3 years ago he was average under another coach and system with an almost completely different roster.

Ignore his struggles in the K, the benching a, his coaches complaints.....

None of that matters.

Again you create straw men... so many.

Where you are wrong is when you say things that were factually and demonstrably wrong, like:
1) He out shot but didn't out score
2) He didn't prevent goals
This has nothing to do with "disagreeing with my math" as anyone can look back and see you were wrong with these assumptions.

Everything else you could be right and I freely admitted it, like where I said you could be right that this is nothing but a mirage/hot-streak and his poor play at the start is the real him. I said it is possible!

I just simply said that his strong play in the past (not average) being consistent with his current play makes me less hasty to jump to the same conclusion you have.

And yes, I do believe his play in the past was strong, despite not scoring. Burmi may never be a good player again and my opinion on how he impacted the team before will not change. I believe you are wrong there with your thinking. That is only my opinion, although it is an opinion I base on evidence. I do believe your opinion is wrong, poorly reasoned, and weak.

But, that's just an opinion.

The irony of my avatar continues.

 

[Peluso the Punisher]

I like Burmistrov..I think he could fit in as our 4th line centre..
if I get what i want and we finish last AND get the first overall pick and we pick matthews..I can see the line going as such..oh and if Kyle Connor signs too..just run all 4 lines and wear through every team out there..we'd be pretty soft but, fast at least..

Ehlers - Shciefele - Wheeler
Connor - Little - Stafford
Petan - Matthews - Perrault
Dano - Bermistrov - Lowry

 

[TannedBum]

There is no words to describe how much i hate this guy. Absolutely idiotic dangles and guaranteed turnover every time he gets the puck. Every ****ing time. I just can't figure out what Mo sees in him. His diving is also annoying.