Alex Edler - Part II

[me2]

Edler trade was a hindsight miss, assuming it was ever offered. Has anyone seen it officially confirmed rather than just Eklund level rumour? If someone told me Sbisa would be one of the two players targeted in a Kesler deal I'd have spat out my coffee in disbelief - if someone floated out a rumour we turned down Silferberg, Theodore and Kerdilles......

 

[CanucksSayEh]

Terrible defenseman. His offense is so overrated, hardly any creativity to it. He just lets loose his big shot, but usually hits wingers shinpads. Waits too long to make passes, and is a complete liability on the blue line when under even minor pressure. Probably the biggest reason for our downfall these last few years have come from relying on Edler to play even slightly competent D, something he clearly can't do. Painful to watch all the screams for him to be traded years ago go unanswered. Now the rest of the league has caught on to his tricks, and we're stuck with him.

 

[Wilch]

It's entirely possible. I thought Rutherford, not unlike most ******* GMs in this league (Nonis), considered tossing their team's future in an attempt to keep his job.

 

[arsmaster*]

I don't think this is a fair assessment of Edler to tell you the truth. Up until our two 1st round playoff exits, Edler was generally known as a "playoff performer". Granted, he wasn't a Conn Smythe candidate in our run, but he did play quite admirably for most of the post season. He also managed 9 ES points in those 25 games, that's not a bad number for a defenseman. At least he managed to still produce offense when the refs literally decided to put their whistles away. My point is, to say he doesn't have a competitive bone in his body is quite extreme.

I keep hoping for that year to come where Edler puts it all together. In all honesty, I'm still hoping. He may never be a Norris winner, but I think he can be a physical, offensive minded defenseman who isn't a liability in his own end. He's turning 28 this season, so he is essentially entering his prime as a defenseman. For that reason, I'm not surprised the asking price for Edler was so high. Can you imagine what the reaction would be from this fan base if Edler went to Detroit, and started playing like we all hoped he could? I'd rather ride it out and see if he can give a little more. This last season was abysmal for the entire team, Edler is still young, and he's under contract for years to come. There is no reason to rush trading the guy, if we want to we can evaluate that possibility next summer.

Sure we can re-evaluate next summer but if he performs like he has the last 2 seasons he'll be worthless and we'll be stuck with a $5m dman who is a very very poor defender.

And I'm not going to touch your "playoff performer" comment.

 

[Luck 6]

Sure we can re-evaluate next summer but if he performs like he has the last 2 seasons he'll be worthless and we'll be stuck with a $5m dman who is a very very poor defender.

And I'm not going to touch your "playoff performer" comment.

You're right, there's a risk. I guess I'm going to gamble on him rebounding. I don't think the guy plain forgot how to play hockey, he should be able to at least recover to the state he was in before. Unless injuries have derailed him, I think the guy has a couple of excuses for this past season. The entire team was terrible, he hasn't had chemistry with any partner, he wasn't used in the #1 PP, he didn't mesh well with a new coach etc. I'll agree those are "excuses", but hey, I think they're legitimate enough to gamble on Edler regaining form with a new coach in an offensive system with Garrison gone. I'd rather gamble, I guess, even if the intent is to trade him next offseason.

Feel free to touch my playoff performer comment. Like I said, he was "pretty good" on our cup run and was excellent in the season before. He didn't have an extensive view in the seasons prior, but he was effective offensively to say the least. These past two post seasons have been pretty bad though, I'll fully admit that.

 

[Bleach Clean]

You're creating a false scenario here though with before/after the "objective" was achieved. He either passed up on a good deal or he didn't; I don't think that should really effect the value. If your narrative is believed (and let's say it is), then his mistake would be in over-valuing moving into the Top 10 instead of getting the best return possible for Edler. Moving Edler made sense: he's a good enough player, but he's too hard to find an effective partner for.

'Over-valuing' a move into the top10 is fine so long as it's not about overvaluing the player himself. Which is the contention.

The chronology clearly shows 3 parts to this.

1. The Canucks 'ask' (2 roster players + Pick (Kypreos)).

2. DET's rumoured offer (Smith + Tatar + Sheahan (Botchford))

3. The Canucks change the deal after Schneider is dealt (DET offer + 1st (Botchford))

Anything false there? If not, my immediate question is: Why doesn't DET include the 1st at stage 1 and get this over with? Why are they valuing each of Tatar/Sheahan/Smith _LESS_THAN_ a late 1st?

After that, I'm wondering what your explanation is to the change in the deal from stage 1 to stage 3? Why does the Canucks' 'ask' go up? (To me its the Schneider deal)

Last, does passing up on a good deal matter if they want to keep the player?

If anything, requesting a late 1st over one of those prospects is probably an even dumber mistake, as all three look like good NHLers at this point. If that offer was on the table and Gillis passed up on it, he made a mistake. Heck, I'm not saying I would have made the deal at the time, but I'm a complete homer -- I'm not paid to make those decisions

That's a fair criticism of Gillis. If he felt that Horvat + pieces was worth more than say Tatar + pieces, then that might be assessed as a mistake. But then that would come down to one's projections of Tatar/Horvat etc...

All three did not look like "good NHLers" at the end of 2013.

 

[Verviticus]

I think you might be fixating on something not all that important. if he passed up that deal, there was a mistake somewhere. without internal knowledge, trying to apply that mistake to a single thing is likely impossible

I likely would have made the same mistake. heck, I'm still not high on sheahan

 

[The Bob Cole]

Before I address the bolded, I have to ask, where did you get this data? The public sphere generally does not track specific scoring chances as prolifically as they used to since corsi is more easily tracked and corresponds to the scoring chance data usually pretty closely while being more robust. Also, I'm not saying you're lying, but it's tough to agree with your conclusions without having access to the same data (and data for other Canucks and other teams for wider context).

Has anyone figured out yet where the poster got the data from?

 

[TheWanderer]

Did you watch his entire career? There is a reason why Edler was considered the closest thing we had to a #1 defenseman. I suspect that Edler's back injury has really ruined his game. But he also needs the right partner. Edler was good with Ohlund. Good with Salo. Good with Ehrhoff. But he isn't good on the right side and he wasn't good with Bieksa or Garrison.

Edler was inconsistent but he was certainly not a defensive liability in his early years. I still remember the playoff series we played against the Kings years ago. That was considered Edler's coming out party. Those few games were the most dominant performances I have seen out of a Canucks defender since I don't know when. Unfortunately, Edler couldn't keep up his physical play and then the last few years he's been bothered by brain farts. But to say that Edler has always been bad defensively is simply not true.

That's true. I remember when Edler showed promise.

 

[opendoor]

Has anyone figured out yet where the poster got the data from?

Scoring chance info is here:

http://somekindofninja.com/nhl/

 

[Wilch]

Scoring chance info is here:

http://somekindofninja.com/nhl/

Awesome find.

 

[Verviticus]

the problem with that is that it i think it uses nhl shot location data which is, put nicely, unmitigated garbage

 

[Ernie]

I haven't heard ANY complaints about Edler's role on the offensive end of the ice, where the lack of goal scoring by the Canucks when he was on the ice was the main reason for his terrible +/-. If you want to make a case, at least match it up with the facts.

Too much confirmation bias.

Here's some fun with and without you ES stats for Edler and Henrik (CF%).


2009-2010
Together: 54% Edler apart: 49.8% Henrik apart: 56.9%

2010-2011
Together: 54.8% Edler apart: 51.3% Henrik apart: 56%

2011-2012
Together: 57.9% Edler apart: 49.2% Henrik apart: 57.5%

2012-2013
Together: 62.1% Edler apart: 45.5% Henrik apart: 60.2%

2013-2014
Together: 57.3% Edler apart: 50.6% Henrik apart: 55.0%

The trend there is pretty obvious. It's not that Edler is all of a sudden a bad player. It's that he was never that good in the first place. If anyone actually thinks he's got #1 potential, he should be traded. But enough complaining about last season, where he looked bad due to a combination of poor luck and a lack of icetime with the Sedins.

Best case scenario: Willie Desjardins plays Edler with the Sedins again, his value increases, and he's moved for a package at the deadline.

 

[Verviticus]

lol dude, find me a single player that doesnt have that "chemistry" with henrik. he's one of the best players in the league

 

[Bleach Clean]

I think you might be fixating on something not all that important. if he passed up that deal, there was a mistake somewhere. without internal knowledge, trying to apply that mistake to a single thing is likely impossible

I likely would have made the same mistake. heck, I'm still not high on sheahan

Why is it a mistake if you don't want to trade the player? One had to go in order to get under the cap, not both.

It may be seen as a mistake now, but I don't begrudge Gillis for passing on a volume deal at the time. Smith was faltering in 2013. Tatar hadn't established himself and Sheahan had no experience.

I can understand the desire to substitute a 1st for one of those pieces. Especially in a deep draft.

 

[Wisp]

the problem with that is that it i think it uses nhl shot location data which is, put nicely, unmitigated garbage

Yeah and it's different from the recent hand charted ones from Canucks Army.

CA has 2011-12 scoring chances for Edler at 361:378 ratio. This has a 258:318 ratio. Where'd 162 scoring chances go?

Another example of how these counts are missing the plot is how Bobby Ryan and Erik Karlsson also had a negative chance differential this year despite positive puck possession and production.

 

[Verviticus]

its a mistake because he could be in a reality where the team has more value and instead it has less. there might not be any errors in the process used or the thinking applied, but there is a reality where the team is better off and its not ours, so getting to this point necessitates an error of some kind. i dunno if its particularly useful or reasonable to judge him for it, but it was a mistake nonetheless

again, i wouldnt have made that trade in his position. i didnt want to trade edler. i still don't want to trade edler.

 

[me2]

I think you might be fixating on something not all that important. if he passed up that deal, there was a mistake somewhere. without internal knowledge, trying to apply that mistake to a single thing is likely impossible

I likely would have made the same mistake. heck, I'm still not high on sheahan

At time

Failing defensive prospect was looking bad

OK but not great, maybe a 3rd liner

small 40-50 point forward

-----------------------------------------

I don't blame a GM looking for something with more upside. Hindsight that deal looks better because of how those guy progressed. But at the time Gillis would have copped it 10X worse than Benning is copping it for the Kesler deal if that went down.

 

[Verviticus]

Yeah and it's different from the recent hand charted ones from Canucks Army.

CA has 2011-12 scoring chances for Edler at 361:378 ratio. This has a 258:318 ratio. Where'd 162 scoring chances go?

Another example of how these counts are missing the plot is how Bobby Ryan and Erik Karlsson also had a negative chance differential this year despite positive puck possession and production.

*queue 3 page, irrelevant discussion about how canucks army doesnt like virtanen or horvat or something*

but yeah.... those numbers don't sound promising if they're that far off

 

[mossey3535]

While I give a lot of weight to advanced stats, I don't think Edler's Corsi was reflective of his season. As someone said earlier, he had a career high in shot attempts.

However, our top-5 guys on average took 32% more shots last year compared to the pro-rated 2012-2013 season in Tortorella's "shoot from anywhere" system. The total Corsi For also increased by 10%.

In fact, if you look at our top-5 guys only Bieksa did not significantly increase his total shots (+2%) which is probably because he takes a lot of shots anyhow.

An interesting side observation is that only Tanev managed to maintain his shooting percentage - everyone else experienced at least a 30-50% decrease in their shot conversion rate. This to me confirms the effect of the Tortorella system.

Indeed, the CF/60 increased by 8% for the entire team.

Because of this effect I distrust the general idea that Corsi For is a good metric for his play last year - it would seem everyone's Corsi For was inflated across the team. And Edler had the most time on the PP and the 2nd least time on the PK. He was also the only defenceman besides Stanton with over 50% offensive zone starts.

Having said that, he utterly failed the eye test last year. He wasn't good in our end. He was good in the other end. He seemed tentative in everything he did. I don't think this was a matter of good underlying numbers.

 

[Ventana*]

Edler is just a step away from being that #1 elite d-man. Quote me on it that he will find his way this season and be recognized as a top 20 d-man in this league.

 

[fancouver]

Edler is just a step away from being that #1 elite d-man. Quote me on it that he will find his way this season and be recognized as a top 20 d-man in this league.

I always felt Edler was the only Canuck to have the potential to become a true #1 defenceman.

Hamhuis is a very good #2 and Tanev is capable of becoming a very steady #3, but both these guys don't have that extra step.

Edler has the full package of physicality, offence and smooth skating. His defensive blunders last season was a result of the Torts system. But watching him play with Ehrhoff back in 2011 was night and day.

Hopefully Lidster brings the best out of him and he will thrive in the WD system.

 

[Ventana*]

I always felt Edler was the only Canuck to have the potential to become a true #1 defenceman.

Hamhuis is a very good #2 and Tanev is capable of becoming a very steady #3, but both these guys don't have that extra step.

Edler has the full package of physicality, offence and smooth skating. His defensive blunders last season was a result of the Torts system. But watching him play with Ehrhoff back in 2011 was night and day.

Hopefully Lidster brings the best out of him and he will thrive in the WD system.

Agreed. Hopefully Lidster has a similar effect to what Larry Robinson has on d-men. With the right coaching and the right defense partner, he could absolutely show he is a #1 d-man. I just have a really good feeling about him this season. Most improved player in the league this season.

 

[Verviticus]

While I give a lot of weight to advanced stats, I don't think Edler's Corsi was reflective of his season. As someone said earlier, he had a career high in shot attempts.

However, our top-5 guys on average took 32% more shots last year compared to the pro-rated 2012-2013 season in Tortorella's "shoot from anywhere" system. The total Corsi For also increased by 10%.

In fact, if you look at our top-5 guys only Bieksa did not significantly increase his total shots (+2%) which is probably because he takes a lot of shots anyhow.

An interesting side observation is that only Tanev managed to maintain his shooting percentage - everyone else experienced at least a 30-50% decrease in their shot conversion rate. This to me confirms the effect of the Tortorella system.

Indeed, the CF/60 increased by 8% for the entire team.

Because of this effect I distrust the general idea that Corsi For is a good metric for his play last year - it would seem everyone's Corsi For was inflated across the team. And Edler had the most time on the PP and the 2nd least time on the PK. He was also the only defenceman besides Stanton with over 50% offensive zone starts.

Having said that, he utterly failed the eye test last year. He wasn't good in our end. He was good in the other end. He seemed tentative in everything he did. I don't think this was a matter of good underlying numbers.

in a more general sense (ignoring how it specifically pertains to edler) i think the chances of the canucks repeatably being the team you're describing are lower than the chances of them simply being an outlier

 

[LiquidSnake]

Agreed. Hopefully Lidster has a similar effect to what Larry Robinson has on d-men. With the right coaching and the right defense partner, he could absolutely show he is a #1 d-man. I just have a really good feeling about him this season. Most improved player in the league this season.

The first mistake you made was comparing Robinson to Lidster.