Player Discussion Brady Tkachuk (LW) - Part XI

[RAFI BOMB]

My point is that your expectations are incredibly high.

I am not claiming that Brady cannot improve, and I don't think anyone is claiming that; however, there is a big difference between Brady improving and Brady improving to the point he can secure an Art Ross, have three straight top 10 point finishes, and be top 3 in points scored over a 4 year span. Additionally, not every player takes huge strides from solid young player to elite player. You can look at Evander Kane or Gabriel Landeskog. Why do you think Brady's offensive potential is closer to Benn than those two players?

Tkachuk has produced at a rate of around 25 goals and 50 points ever since being drafted. He has done that while primarily playing with 3rd liners and unproven offensive talent. Aside from his first season, he has not had any consistent time with any legitimate and established top six player. Each season he has played this organization has lacked offensive depth so he has not had the benefit of other offensive players to really help drive up his offensive production. This season would have been different with Batherson and Norris but both players received long term injuries.

Pretty much the only players in the league from the ages of 18-22 that have been able to produce significantly superior to that under the same kinds of conditions are phenoms and generational talents. Most players that people consider offensive talents around the league have benefited from having other offensive talents on their team. If you were to remove those other offensive talents and replace them with depth players, the vast majority of offensive players would see a significant decline in their production. Players who produce 70-80 points would likely produce closer to 50-60 points under those same conditions. In particular players aged 18-22 would have a much more difficult time producing if they weren't surrounded by established offensive talent.

Tkachuk will see an increase in his production as he is surrounded with more established offensive players. He was producing at close to a point per game when Batherson and Norris were healthy but has seen his production drop since they were injured. It is simply logical that players produce less when have less offensive talent around them. Particularly in an organization that lacks offensive depth it makes it easier for opponents to focus more effort on shutting down the few offensive talents that remain.

If Tkachuk were on a playoff bound team with decent offensive depth he would be a 30 goal + and 60 point + player this season. He could even be more than that considering what his production was like at the start of this season with Batherson and Norris healthy. Tkachuk also has very under rated passing and vision in the offensive zone. He regularly sets up players in the slot for good shooting opportunities. A lot of people seem to overlook this and don't seem to recognize how many more points he would have if we actually had some decent and proven goal scorers on this team.

The more offensive talent this team eventually gets from its prospect pool, the more the teams production will increase and the more Tkachuk's production will increase. With a bit more talent on the team he could quite easily be a 35+ goal scorer and a 70 point + player like he was projecting to produce when Batherson and Norris were healthy. If the team becomes really deep offensively then it is not unreasonable to think of him having a 40+ goal season and an 80-90 points season, if not multiple.

 

[BankStreetParade]

What context would you like me to provide? And why is the hit stat meaningless to you? What about the goal? Brady is 2nd on the team...points? Currently leads the team...

Feel free to provide me with the criteria you consider to be relevant in Brady's situation.

Provide the context for why the stat matters. If volume of hits is so important to the evaluation of a player, should I understand that Ennis' 60+ hits are vastly more valuable to the team than C. Brown's 10? What is the point of the stat?

Great, currently leads the team in points while maybe the only guy on the roster who hasn't missed a game this year. Without context, the stat is meaningless. Colin White has more points than Pinto. He also has more shots, hits, better faceoff pecrentage, more PPP, less giveaways, etc. What should I take away from that comparison? Trade Pinto? Colin White is vastly superior across the board?

Let's do another one: Josh Brown has as many points as Brannstrom. He also has a better plus minus, more shots, more hits, more blocked shots, more takeaways, etc. I'd love to hear what you think those stats mean in the bigger picture. Is J. Brown worth keeping over Brannstrom? He's clearly got better stats almost across the board.

Are you starting to see why context matters in this case and why cherry picking stats doesn't really make a ton of sense?

 

[BondraTime]

Tkachuk has produced at a rate of around 25 goals and 50 points ever since being drafted. He has done that while primarily playing with 3rd liners and unproven offensive talent. Aside from his first season, he has not had any consistent time with any legitimate and established top six player. Each season he has played this organization has lacked offensive depth so he has not had the benefit of other offensive players to really help drive up his offensive production. This season would have been different with Batherson and Norris but both players received long term injuries.

Pretty much the only players in the league from the ages of 18-22 that have been able to produce significantly superior to that under the same kinds of conditions are phenoms and generational talents. Most players that people consider offensive talents around the league have benefited from having other offensive talents on their team. If you were to remove those other offensive talents and replace them with depth players, the vast majority of offensive players would see a significant decline in their production. Players who produce 70-80 points would likely produce closer to 50-60 points under those same conditions. In particular players aged 18-22 would have a much more difficult time producing if they weren't surrounded by established offensive talent.

Tkachuk will see an increase in his production as he is surrounded with more established offensive players. He was producing at close to a point per game when Batherson and Norris were healthy but has seen his production drop since they were injured. It is simply logical that players produce less when have less offensive talent around them. Particularly in an organization that lacks offensive depth it makes it easier for opponents to focus more effort on shutting down the few offensive talents that remain.

If Tkachuk were on a playoff bound team with decent offensive depth he would be a 30 goal + and 60 point + player this season. He could even be more than that considering what his production was like at the start of this season with Batherson and Norris healthy. Tkachuk also has very under rated passing and vision in the offensive zone. He regularly sets up players in the slot for good shooting opportunities. A lot of people seem to overlook this and don't seem to recognize how many more points he would have if we actually had some decent and proven goal scorers on this team.

The more offensive talent this team eventually gets from its prospect pool, the more the teams production will increase and the more Tkachuk's production will increase. With a bit more talent on the team he could quite easily be a 35+ goal scorer and a 70 point + player like he was projecting to produce when Batherson and Norris were healthy. If the team becomes really deep offensively then it is not unreasonable to think of him having a 40+ goal season and an 80-90 points season, if not multiple.

That’s just unreasonably high expectations offensively for him in my opinion, not sure it’s realistic to see Brady as a league wide top scorer at any point. He should be top 3 most years moving forward for the Sens, expecting top 10 league wide type production is a gigantic ask for a guy like Brady, unless we get a Rantanen/Mackinnon like situation on the first line with a couple 100 point players along with Brady.

 

[Ice-Tray]

The kid is awesome and I’m glad we have him as our captain.

 

[RAFI BOMB]

That’s just unreasonably high expectations offensively for him in my opinion, not sure it’s realistic to see Brady as a league wide top scorer at any point. He should be top 3 most years moving forward for the Sens, expecting top 10 league wide type production is a gigantic ask for a guy like Brady, unless we get a Rantanen/Mackinnon like situation on the first line with a couple 100 point players along with Brady.

Yeah, possibly. I am very optimistic but my expectations could be off. I think the challenge is how to make the best projection and how to weight all the factors appropriately. We know what his production looks like now and we can make a reasonable assessment of the quality of players he has had the chance to consistently play with and what can be expected from them from a production standpoint at that point in their respective careers. We know that Tkachuk is young and a very hard worker who is dedicated to improvement and that he hasn't hit his prime yet. So it is reasonable to expect some increase in offensive production but the question is quantifying how much. We know that power forwards tend to peak later and that part of what does and will eventually make Tkachuk successful will be his physical strength. We can make some estimations about how much that will impact his overall production but that can be a bit difficult to quantify.

We also know that Tkachuk's offensive output will increase as he is surrounded by more offensively capable players and the team becomes more competitive. We know that the way this team is being built is having prospects and young players that are really close in age so they will likely peak offensively around a similar time frame. I think part of the challenge is trying to determine what impact each individual player has on the players around them and how those players impact them in return. It is almost always the case that there is a mutual positive impact between players, that each player contributes in some way to the other players offensive production when playing together. But it can be difficult to quantify this and one player may have a more significant positive impact than the other which in turn can be difficult to weight.

Another thing to consider is that any given player needs an ideal set of conditions in order to perform at their peak and for an organization to get the most out of their skillset. Like every other player, Tkachuk has his own strengths and weaknesses so if the objective is to get the highest level of offensive production out of him, there will be certain kinds of players he will need to play with. That can take a fair bit of thought to really analyze the attributes of a given player and identify how the combination of them brings the most out of all of them.

What are your kinds of projections for Tkachuk? Particularly under the scenarios where he hits his peak and is surrounded by a reasonable amount of offensive talent, what are your projections then? If you prefer, you could even categorize your projections into 3 categories. The first would be your modest expectations that you have a lot of confidence in him achieving. The 2nd would be your more hopeful projections, where you think there is a chance he can achieve it, you aren't fully confident in it yet but that you would be pretty enthusiastic if he achieved it. The third would your shock projection, where you don't really have the confidence that he can achieve it but if he did or produced anything higher than that, you would be completely blown away and incredibly enthusiastic about that outcome.

 

[JungleBeat]

When hit stats are the main talking point for Tkachuk you know you're in trouble. Mathew showed much more than Brady in their first four NHL Seasons.

 

[Ice-Tray]

Hits can be the main talking point when people are talking about hits, or about stats that he leads the league in. The conversation around Brady is not confined to starting, nor stoping there.

There are talking points regarding Brady’s game at this point for sure, but it’s minutiae when considering the big picture of the player, the person, the draft pick, and the future. He was the best pick we could have made at that spot, and he’s been great for us since he arrived.

I suspect that his game will continue to get better, and that his skill set will expand as he gets more experience in the league, with his linemates as they also get better.

He is one of the high end player that this team needs, and is an absolute unicorn in his role. We don’t need to nitpick Brady’s game, we need to add players to it. It’s no surprise how well Batherson, Norris, and Brady we’re playing, all complimented each other virtually seamlessly. Scary to think how much better that line could get over the next few years!

In my opinion we are extremely lucky that the Habs passed on him, what a nightmare THAT would have been.

 

[Imnotagoodposter]

When hit stats are the main talking point for Tkachuk you know you're in trouble. Mathew showed much more than Brady in their first four NHL Seasons.

What a worthless post

 

[Masked]

Brady at his current price and production is def overpaid the numbers show that

lets see next year with a hopefully improved roster

Brady was signed at a price that should become a bargain when he hits his prime and the cap escalates post-pandemic.

We pay more now when we have lots of cap space but less when the team becomes more talented and there is much less cap space.

Assen na yo.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Also we got him with no signing bonus

 

[Agent Zuuuub]

Yeah, possibly. I am very optimistic but my expectations could be off. I think the challenge is how to make the best projection and how to weight all the factors appropriately. We know what his production looks like now and we can make a reasonable assessment of the quality of players he has had the chance to consistently play with and what can be expected from them from a production standpoint at that point in their respective careers. We know that Tkachuk is young and a very hard worker who is dedicated to improvement and that he hasn't hit his prime yet. So it is reasonable to expect some increase in offensive production but the question is quantifying how much. We know that power forwards tend to peak later and that part of what does and will eventually make Tkachuk successful will be his physical strength. We can make some estimations about how much that will impact his overall production but that can be a bit difficult to quantify.

We also know that Tkachuk's offensive output will increase as he is surrounded by more offensively capable players and the team becomes more competitive. We know that the way this team is being built is having prospects and young players that are really close in age so they will likely peak offensively around a similar time frame. I think part of the challenge is trying to determine what impact each individual player has on the players around them and how those players impact them in return. It is almost always the case that there is a mutual positive impact between players, that each player contributes in some way to the other players offensive production when playing together. But it can be difficult to quantify this and one player may have a more significant positive impact than the other which in turn can be difficult to weight.

Another thing to consider is that any given player needs an ideal set of conditions in order to perform at their peak and for an organization to get the most out of their skillset. Like every other player, Tkachuk has his own strengths and weaknesses so if the objective is to get the highest level of offensive production out of him, there will be certain kinds of players he will need to play with. That can take a fair bit of thought to really analyze the attributes of a given player and identify how the combination of them brings the most out of all of them.

What are your kinds of projections for Tkachuk? Particularly under the scenarios where he hits his peak and is surrounded by a reasonable amount of offensive talent, what are your projections then? If you prefer, you could even categorize your projections into 3 categories. The first would be your modest expectations that you have a lot of confidence in him achieving. The 2nd would be your more hopeful projections, where you think there is a chance he can achieve it, you aren't fully confident in it yet but that you would be pretty enthusiastic if he achieved it. The third would your shock projection, where you don't really have the confidence that he can achieve it but if he did or produced anything higher than that, you would be completely blown away and incredibly enthusiastic about that outcome.

Brady has never in his life put up high end numbers at any level, to expect him to start doing it in the NHL is setting yourself up for massive disappointment.

The guys people comparing Brady to like K. Tkachuk, Iginla, Benn, M. Tkachuk etc were elite producers at every level.

I'm not saying he can't get better. But he would need to improve his skating, balance, hands, shot, pass execution by a significant margin. Which he could, but its a lot to ask for.

 

[Answer]

Brady has never in his life put up high end numbers at any level, to expect him to start doing it in the NHL is setting yourself up for massive disappointment.

The guys people comparing Brady to like K. Tkachuk, Iginla, Benn, M. Tkachuk etc were elite producers at every level.

I'm not saying he can't get better. But he would need to improve his skating, balance, hands, shot, pass execution by a significant margin. Which he could, but its a lot to ask for.

To be fair, I think Brady might hit 70-80 points once or twice (or even more) in his prime, if Stutzle and Batherson become legit stars, or we draft a #1 Center to play with Brady.

 

[TheDebater]

Provide the context for why the stat matters. If volume of hits is so important to the evaluation of a player, should I understand that Ennis' 60+ hits are vastly more valuable to the team than C. Brown's 10? What is the point of the stat?

Great, currently leads the team in points while maybe the only guy on the roster who hasn't missed a game this year. Without context, the stat is meaningless. Colin White has more points than Pinto. He also has more shots, hits, better faceoff pecrentage, more PPP, less giveaways, etc. What should I take away from that comparison? Trade Pinto? Colin White is vastly superior across the board?

Let's do another one: Josh Brown has as many points as Brannstrom. He also has a better plus minus, more shots, more hits, more blocked shots, more takeaways, etc. I'd love to hear what you think those stats mean in the bigger picture. Is J. Brown worth keeping over Brannstrom? He's clearly got better stats almost across the board.

Are you starting to see why context matters in this case and why cherry picking stats doesn't really make a ton of sense?

The context is that if you understand the GAME of hockey, you would know the significance of playing a physical style every game, win or lose. It is extremely hard on the body, it takes a certain type of person to commit themselves to finishing their checks and making life miserable for opposing players. Throwing a hit takes effort, standing infront of the net takes effort, fighting and being in scrums all game long takes effort.

The point being is the hit stats is not being used in a vacuum to show that Brady "hits a lot", it is to highlight that although he exerts a ton of energy playing that style of game....he STILL manages to score goals and put up points at a very respectable rate.


The bottom line is some of you want $8 million dollar Brady to score 70+ points and be better defensively, whereas most of us want Brady to score maybe 60+ points but constantly be the force that he is on the ice so that this team does not get walked on.

 

[Agent Zuuuub]

To be fair, I think Brady might hit 70-80 points once or twice (or even more) in his prime, if Stutzle and Batherson become legit stars, or we draft a #1 Center to play with Brady.

Yea I can see 70-80 points maybe even 40 goals in that scenario.

 

[BankStreetParade]

The context is that if you understand the GAME of hockey, you would know the significance of playing a physical style every game, win or lose. It is extremely hard on the body, it takes a certain type of person to commit themselves to finishing their checks and making life miserable for opposing players. Throwing a hit takes effort, standing infront of the net takes effort, fighting and being in scrums all game long takes effort.

The point being is the hit stats is not being used in a vacuum to show that Brady "hits a lot", it is to highlight that although he exerts a ton of energy playing that style of game....he STILL manages to score goals and put up points at a very respectable rate.


The bottom line is some of you want $8 million dollar Brady to score 70+ points and be better defensively, whereas most of us want Brady to score maybe 60+ points but constantly be the force that he is on the ice so that this team does not get walked on.

Then we're probably always going to disagree because you fundamentally overvalue the cumulative effect of Brady bumping guys his size as some sort of game changer while I think offense and defense are game changers. The fact is these stats are not compelling or telling in any way really except from an entertainment standpoint and the value of watching guys pummel each other like bloodsport. His style of play this year hasn't really resulted in much opportunity for himself or his linemates and his play has dropped off significantly since Batherson got injured in January.
He racks up hits, he battles guys down low, takes a beating in front of the net, stands up for teammates...and what is he accomplishing doing it? Have the Sens been seen as a particularly tough team to play against? Has he piled up points bulldozing guys around the net? Has his style of play generated an abundance of opportunities for his teammates? Cause what you're describing sounds to me like a guy heading toward physical oblivion and not getting much in return for his physical sacrifices. Is that more important to you than a guy who's less physical but accomplishing more offensively and defensively?

 

[Agent Zuuuub]

Then we're probably always going to disagree because you fundamentally overvalue the cumulative effect of Brady bumping guys his size as some sort of game changer while I think offense and defense are game changers. The fact is these stats are not compelling or telling in any way really except from an entertainment standpoint and the value of watching guys pummel each other like bloodsport. His style of play this year hasn't really resulted in much opportunity for himself or his linemates and his play has dropped off significantly since Batherson got injured in January.
He racks up hits, he battles guys down low, takes a beating in front of the net, stands up for teammates...and what is he accomplishing doing it? Have the Sens been seen as a particularly tough team to play against? Has he piled up points bulldozing guys around the net? Has his style of play generated an abundance of opportunities for his teammates? Cause what you're describing sounds to me like a guy heading toward physical oblivion and not getting much in return for his physical sacrifices. Is that more important to you than a guy who's less physical but accomplishing more offensively and defensively?

you've clearly never played hockey

 

[Golden_Jet]

Then we're probably always going to disagree because you fundamentally overvalue the cumulative effect of Brady bumping guys his size as some sort of game changer while I think offense and defense are game changers. The fact is these stats are not compelling or telling in any way really except from an entertainment standpoint and the value of watching guys pummel each other like bloodsport. His style of play this year hasn't really resulted in much opportunity for himself or his linemates and his play has dropped off significantly since Batherson got injured in January.
He racks up hits, he battles guys down low, takes a beating in front of the net, stands up for teammates...and what is he accomplishing doing it? Have the Sens been seen as a particularly tough team to play against? Has he piled up points bulldozing guys around the net? Has his style of play generated an abundance of opportunities for his teammates? Cause what you're describing sounds to me like a guy heading toward physical oblivion and not getting much in return for his physical sacrifices. Is that more important to you than a guy who's less physical but accomplishing more offensively and defensively?

Funny that coaches that get interviewed disagree with you. I recall just recently Boston’s coach, said Ottawa is a tough team to play against, Coop said the same thing. They aren’t the only ones.

 

[Answer]

Then we're probably always going to disagree because you fundamentally overvalue the cumulative effect of Brady bumping guys his size as some sort of game changer while I think offense and defense are game changers. The fact is these stats are not compelling or telling in any way really except from an entertainment standpoint and the value of watching guys pummel each other like bloodsport. His style of play this year hasn't really resulted in much opportunity for himself or his linemates and his play has dropped off significantly since Batherson got injured in January.
He racks up hits, he battles guys down low, takes a beating in front of the net, stands up for teammates...and what is he accomplishing doing it? Have the Sens been seen as a particularly tough team to play against? Has he piled up points bulldozing guys around the net? Has his style of play generated an abundance of opportunities for his teammates? Cause what you're describing sounds to me like a guy heading toward physical oblivion and not getting much in return for his physical sacrifices. Is that more important to you than a guy who's less physical but accomplishing more offensively and defensively?

Great post!

There is an unhealthy obsessions with Brady for some odd reason, with a couple of posters. There are 1 or 2 posters on here who literally patrol this forum just to make sure no one is objectively analyzing Brady's play and skill-set, especially offensively. It's seems that they have quit their day jobs to make this their only mission

 

[Answer]

Funny that coaches that get interviewed disagree with you. I recall just recently Boston’s coach, said Ottawa is a tough team to play against, Coop said the same thing. They aren’t the only ones.

It seems you clearly understood the point he was trying to make. He never implied that the Sens are not a tough team to play against. Every team in this league is tough to play against. Besides I don't think any opposition's coach would just randomly diss a team and say "meh, we playing a weak a** team today" in public (unless their is a brewing animosity against the 2 teams)

 

[TheDebater]

Then we're probably always going to disagree because you fundamentally overvalue the cumulative effect of Brady bumping guys his size as some sort of game changer while I think offense and defense are game changers. The fact is these stats are not compelling or telling in any way really except from an entertainment standpoint and the value of watching guys pummel each other like bloodsport. His style of play this year hasn't really resulted in much opportunity for himself or his linemates and his play has dropped off significantly since Batherson got injured in January.
He racks up hits, he battles guys down low, takes a beating in front of the net, stands up for teammates...and what is he accomplishing doing it? Have the Sens been seen as a particularly tough team to play against? Has he piled up points bulldozing guys around the net? Has his style of play generated an abundance of opportunities for his teammates? Cause what you're describing sounds to me like a guy heading toward physical oblivion and not getting much in return for his physical sacrifices. Is that more important to you than a guy who's less physical but accomplishing more offensively and defensively?

This is actually very short sighted, and never in my post did I claim that physicality is more important than offensive and defense.

Absolutely ridiculous thread because the two members that "liked" your above post literally just agreed a couple of posts up on the following:

Yea I can see 70-80 points maybe even 40 goals in that scenario.

^^^ with the caveat that Brady needs a "true #1", whereas most of us think Brady can score 30 goals and 70 points eventually without a "true #1 center".

 

[TheDebater]

Great post!

There is an unhealthy obsessions with Brady for some odd reason, with a couple of posters. There are 1 or 2 posters on here who literally patrol this forum just to make sure no one is objectively analyzing Brady's play and skill-set, especially offensively. It's seems that they have quit their day jobs to make this their only mission

You literally just posted that you think Brady can be a 70-80 point player....are you aware of the hypocrisy being displayed here?

 

[NyQuil]

To be fair, I think Brady might hit 70-80 points once or twice (or even more) in his prime, if Stutzle and Batherson become legit stars, or we draft a #1 Center to play with Brady.

I'm in this position as well.

That's why I'm not sure why there's such a disconnect. I've admitted time and again that he's overpaid to the tune of $800K to $1.2M or $1.5M. It's done.

What would you expect from a $7M player? He's still leading the team in scoring and that's without his pivot and lead playmaker.

In short, he's not going to magically turn into an offensive catalyst. His offence will always be complementary to some extent.

I know there are posters here who do not believe that his physical style brings any benefit to the team, I tend to differ, and I think it will be proven at some point in the post-season.

There's a lot of arguing going on considering everyone agrees what his offensive ceiling is.

 

[Alf Silfversson]

Funny that coaches that get interviewed disagree with you. I recall just recently Boston’s coach, said Ottawa is a tough team to play against, Coop said the same thing. They aren’t the only ones.

I think we're becoming a team that gets in harder on the forecheck and takes the body when they get there. Which is, I guess, hard to play against. And certainly some NHL players don't like that. But what they like even less is having the other team score more than them, which we don't do nearly enough.

Taking the body and playing a hard game means nothing if it doesn't impact the bottom line, eg. goals for or goals against. So far being "hard to play against" isn't really moving the needle for us. Hopefully it plays dividends at some point because we seem to have a lot eggs going into that basket.

 

[Answer]

You literally just posted that you think Brady can be a 70-80 point player....are you aware of the hypocrisy being displayed here?

Where is the hypocrisy? Besides you didn't read or care to quote my entire post, so it would put some context to why I said that?

 

[BankStreetParade]

Funny that coaches that get interviewed disagree with you. I recall just recently Boston’s coach, said Ottawa is a tough team to play against, Coop said the same thing. They aren’t the only ones.

Coaches are well-known for their enthusiastic shit talking and downplaying of opponents to the media, so I guess what they're saying has to be what they actually believe, right?
Meanwhile, every coach about every team they play: "They're a tough team to play against and we'll have to stick to our gameplan. We've gotta do a good job neutralizing [insert name of star player(s)], get off to a good start and play a full 60 minutes."