Player Discussion Brady Tkachuk (LW) - Part XI

[Micklebot]

Different players and different success rates. Obviously different times with different amount of teams making the playoffs.

But Yzerman was 31 the season the wings finally won the cup.

But going into that season, Yzerman had made the playoffs 11/13 years. He has 93 career playoff games. He had made the conference finals 3 times.

It wasn't that Yzerman was so bad he couldn't get his team into the playoffs. It was that he was good enough to get his team in the playoffs, but needed to alter his game to get his team past the third round where they were 0/3 for getting to the finals.

That's a huge contrast from Brady who is going into his 7th year without making the playoffs. At Tkachuks age, Yzerman had made the playoffs 5/7 years, had made the conference finals, and had played 32 playoff games.

It was about tweaking yzermans game as a leader whereas tkachucks

Yzerman joined the league at a time when 76% of all teams made the playoffs, and only the worst team in his division would miss so you're definately right about different times, probably should have just stopped the comparisson there though.

Wings were a .500 team in two of Yzerman's first 8 seasons. Judging them on team success doesn't really make a lot of sense given the context they respectively played during.

All that said, people tend to bring up Yzerman in situations like this because he overhauled his game to put defensive play first when Bowman took over as head coach, and it lead to sustained team success and turned them into a dynasty, not because they think Brady is similarly gifted offensively or as good as Yzerman was before he changed how he played.

Also, tweaking Yzerman's game as a leader? come on now, they were inches away from trading him because they weren't sure they could win with him. He almost got traded to Ottawa and that was the 2nd time he had been made available.

 

[lancepitlick]

I don't think you are ever going to see Brady turn into an Yzerman type of player.

He's too slow to be a great defensive player and to generate offense he HAS to cheat somewhat given how slow he is. He's a power forward, but doesn't have wheels like an Iginla, Ovi, Lindros. He needs to be parked around the net to be effective.

The problem is expectations as a huge "name" and as the Captain.
 
He's like a Dave Anderchyuck or a more physical/less skilled Dany Heatley. Or Milan Lucic.

You generally don't see these types of players (slow one-ish dimensional goal scorers) become a captain (geriatric Anderchyuck aside) and for good reason. Same as a Phil Kessel or Mike Hoffman etc.

They can't drive play or play a complete game and be effective. The Sens management were morons though and hoisted all of this on Tkachuck and now people expect to see a Doug Gilmour/Alfie/Sid/Brindamour or even Mike Fisher.

That's not what Tkachuck is or what he is capable of being. IMO he should have been an Assistant and these kind of unreasonable expectations wouldn't have been foisted on him. Even Brett Hull, a way better player, got stripped of the C in St.Louis and run out of town for similar reasons.

Kessel, Heatley, Hull, Neeley, Bure, these guys need Crosby/Alfie/Modano/Bourqe/Linden

 

[jbeck5]

Of course not, it's a team sport so it's never all on one player, but frankly the evidence suggests it's mostly on him given Forsberg seems to be doing just fine.

Our differential between GA and xGA at 5v5 is the worst in the league at -0.64 per 60. Ullmark himself is -0.96/60 while Forsberg is +0.06

Goalies can have the biggest impact on games, positive or negative. if there was a stat on "bad goals/60" I have no doubt Ullmark would be way up the list this year, which is a shame since he had been so reliable earlier in his career.

I think you showed me something similar, "bad starts"? Was that based on bad goals or relative to expected goals against or was it based on GA regardless of SA, or was it just based on sv%?


I wonder if you would still counter my argument that Anderson didn't seem to have nearly as many bad games.

I think ullmark at that point had already 1/3 of Anderson's season totals of bad starts and ullmark had only played like 6 games at that point lol.

Aren't 1/3 of his starts bad starts? Lol

 

[umma gumma]

How did you not see the clear humour in that post? It was littered with sarcasm.

The only way to take the comment is with a chuckle, and you managed to be bothered lol.

Daddy, chill!

You're seeing what you want to see. I wasn't bothered in the least.

 

[Micklebot]

It depends what years we're talking about..this conversation is about this year but also the last 7 years...I think the problem used to be more so our players not being good defensively, and over 7 years it has shifted to more blame on our goalies for sure. Last year and this year is more on our goalies.

That doesn't mean we haven't seen our best forwards not back check...when we know that to succeed, we need our best forwards quite literally always back checking hard. I don't remember Hossa or alfredsson coasting back when the other team has an odd man rush, for example.

So yes, the goalies are to blame, but so are the forwards who don't know how to properly back check with effort consistently.

We can blame many people. We don't have to limit ourselves to 1.


But of course goalies are way more to blame this year or last year, but I like blaming all players that can shoulder blame.

You'll never see me criticize the players that play a good 200 ft game.

Well, I was replying and talking about the stats you posted, which were from this year. I don't care about why we lost last year, that's in the past and figuring it out probably won't help us now since the circumstances have changed.

 

[jbeck5]

Yzerman joined the league at a time when 76% of all teams made the playoffs, and only the worst team in his division would miss so you're definately right about different times, probably should have just stopped the comparisson there though.

Wings were a .500 team in two of Yzerman's first 8 seasons. Judging them on team success doesn't really make a lot of sense given the context they respectively played during.

All that said, people tend to bring up Yzerman in situations like this because he overhauled his game to put defensive play first when Bowman took over as head coach, and it lead to sustained team success and turned them into a dynasty, not because they think Brady is similarly gifted offensively or as good as Yzerman was before he changed how he played.

Also, tweaking Yzerman's game as a leader? come on now, they were inches away from trading him because they weren't sure they could win with him. He almost got traded to Ottawa and that was the 2nd time he had been made available.

I didn't create the comparison though.

I was just showing how the comparison was bad because Detroit actually had playoff success before Yzerman changed his game around , on top of the league being different.

The two situations are not comparable at all.

You're seeing what you want to see. I wasn't bothered in the least.

You definitely didn't respond with humour lol you looked bothered haha. Don't blame me for seeing it that way..I'm sure everyone else saw it that way.

Like I said, daddy, chill!

Meh, everyone keeps citing Stevie Y. He didn't figure it out the defensive side until he was 10+ years in the league.

The comparison is bad. He figured it out enough to lead his team to the conference finals. He just had to tweak it to get the actual cup win.

Brady? Not the same.

 

[Dionysus]

Really think people are overstating the importance of the C. The Sens need more players who can move the needle. When the team is on a slide, nitpicking and finger pointing become easy ways to vent frustration.

Brady has flaws, especially his positioning in the dzone, and cheating to the wrong side of the puck. His penalty leading to the 1st goal by Calgary is a great example of that.

He is also the Sens second best offensive player, with a very unique and valuable skillset. A bad team like the Sens needs more good players. They are tight cap wise, but Brady is not near the top of the list of issues for this team.

 

[umma gumma]

You definitely didn't respond with humour lol you looked bothered haha. Don't blame me for seeing it that way..I'm sure everyone else saw it that way.

Like I said, daddy, chill!

I never said I was trying to be funny, which proves my point: you're seeing what you want to.

 

[jbeck5]

Yzerman joined the league at a time when 76% of all teams made the playoffs, and only the worst team in his division would miss so you're definately right about different times, probably should have just stopped the comparisson there though.

Wings were a .500 team in two of Yzerman's first 8 seasons. Judging them on team success doesn't really make a lot of sense given the context they respectively played during.

All that said, people tend to bring up Yzerman in situations like this because he overhauled his game to put defensive play first when Bowman took over as head coach, and it lead to sustained team success and turned them into a dynasty, not because they think Brady is similarly gifted offensively or as good as Yzerman was before he changed how he played.

Also, tweaking Yzerman's game as a leader? come on now, they were inches away from trading him because they weren't sure they could win with him. He almost got traded to Ottawa and that was the 2nd time he had been made available.

Yzerman potentially getting traded for yashin because they couldn't get over the hump is more comparable to Alfredsson almost getting traded for Conroy lol.

They are both very different than Tkachuk. Both were much better all around players already with much higher success rates.

Those situations were not at all like Tkachuk.

 

[Micklebot]

I think you showed me something similar, "bad starts"? Was that based on bad goals or relative to expected goals against or was it based on GA regardless of SA, or was it just based on sv%?


I wonder if you would still counter my argument that Anderson didn't seem to have nearly as many bad games.

I think ullmark at that point had already 1/3 of Anderson's season totals of bad starts and ullmark had only played like 6 games at that point lol.

Aren't 1/3 of his starts bad starts? Lol

Hockey reference has "really bad starts" stat, it's based on sv% vs league average except that for a really bad start it has to be a certain threshold below league average.

Ullmark now has 5 Really bad starts out of 13 while Forsberg has 1. Certainly Anderson never had that ratio, Ullmark is not playing well, and it is concerning at this point, far more so when he had 2 in his first 9 games or whenever it was when we had that conversation, it's this recent stretch of 3 of his last 4 games being "really bad" that has sunk us, he had a .904 sv% before that.

 

[jbeck5]

I don't think you are ever going to see Brady turn into an Yzerman type of player.

He's too slow to be a great defensive player and to generate offense he HAS to cheat somewhat given how slow he is. He's a power forward, but doesn't have wheels like an Iginla, Ovi, Lindros. He needs to be parked around the net to be effective.

The problem is expectations as a huge "name" and as the Captain.
 
He's like a Dave Anderchyuck or a more physical/less skilled Dany Heatley. Or Milan Lucic.

You generally don't see these types of players (slow one-ish dimensional goal scorers) become a captain (geriatric Anderchyuck aside) and for good reason. Same as a Phil Kessel or Mike Hoffman etc.

They can't drive play or play a complete game and be effective. The Sens management were morons though and hoisted all of this on Tkachuck and now people expect to see a Doug Gilmour/Alfie/Sid/Brindamour or even Mike Fisher.

That's not what Tkachuck is or what he is capable of being. IMO he should have been an Assistant and these kind of unreasonable expectations wouldn't have been foisted on him. Even Brett Hull, a way better player, got stripped of the C in St.Louis and run out of town for similar reasons.

Kessel, Heatley, Hull, Neeley, Bure, these guys need Crosby/Alfie/Modano/Bourqe/Linden

I would have hoped that he improved his skating like another big player we had, mark stone.

Ok will say Brady has improved his skating drastically, but you're right that it's still a bit of a burden when it comes to trying to be a superstar all over the ice. He would need to have league leading smarts to make up for it.

 

[umma gumma]

They are both very different than Tkachuk. Both were much better all around players already with much higher success rates.

No argument in regards to their overall game, but neither player had much success by the age of 25, Alfie in particular.

 

[jbeck5]

Well, I was replying and talking about the stats you posted, which were from this year. I don't care about why we lost last year, that's in the past and figuring it out probably won't help us now since the circumstances have changed.

Well, the stats I posted of this year are quite telling..if we're talking about the plus minus of our best players.

Goaltending is to blame as well as poor efforts occasionally from our best players.

Also, goaltending, which I think I argued was brutal and you were saying it wasn't that bad and to be patient lol.

So when I blame goaltending, citing that when we were good, we got better goaltending...you argued against that.

Then when I say that our back check and defensive effort could be better or more consistent from our best players, you criticize goaltending.

So why didn't you agree with me in the thread where I criticized our goaltending? Colour me confused.

 

[Micklebot]

Yzerman potentially getting traded for yashin because they couldn't get over the hump is more comparable to Alfredsson almost getting traded for Conroy lol.

They are both very different than Tkachuk. Both were much better all around players already with much higher success rates.

Those situations were not at all like Tkachuk.

Again, the comparison tends to be brought up by those pointing to how Yzerman changed his game to be more responsible and being impatient waiting for Brady to do the same, so I agree it's not the same exact situation, but you are moving the conversation to something that was never really the point, also trying argue leadership was part of the difference which is a tenuous link at best.

 

[jbeck5]

Really think people are overstating the importance of the C. The Sens need more players who can move the needle. When the team is on a slide, nitpicking and finger pointing become easy ways to vent frustration.

Brady has flaws, especially his positioning in the dzone, and cheating to the wrong side of the puck. His penalty leading to the 1st goal by Calgary is a great example of that.

He is also the Sens second best offensive player, with a very unique and valuable skillset. A bad team like the Sens needs more good players. They are tight cap wise, but Brady is not near the top of the list of issues for this team.

I agree with you that I would rather add to the core because it's not good enough..I just don't know how to do that without doing a pretty big rebuild...again.

I criticize Brady not because he's bad...I just expect him to be a leader of effort...to lead by example. So I compare to Alfredsson who I thought was a good captain. Maybe my memory is failing me, but I remember way more of a consistent defensive effort from Alfredsson than I do from Tkachuk.

I just wish Tkachuk put as much effort catching up on the back check to strip a puck from the other team as he does when he has an opportunity for a breakaway. I see two very different speeds and effort levels on potential offensive chances vs defending. Reminds me more of Spezza who was always criticized defensively and was gone after one year of being captain.

 

[Micklebot]

Well, the stats I posted of this year are quite telling..if we're talking about the plus minus of our best players.

And I posted stats that showcase why +/- devoid on context tells a story that doesn't always align with reality.

Goaltending is to blame as well as poor efforts occasionally from our best players.

Also, goaltending, which I think I argued was brutal and you were saying it wasn't that bad and to be patient lol.

Well it wasn't that bad at first, it's been brutal since.

So when I blame goaltending, citing that when we were good, we got better goaltending...you argued against that.

What I said was Ullmark hadn't met expectations, but given his history patience was needed before hitting the panic button. The fact that he got worse after doesn't make my position less valid, everything I said then was as true as it is now, the only difference is his play degraded further instead of regressing to his historical mean.

Then when I say that our back check and defensive effort could be better or more consistent from our best players, you criticize goaltending.

Actually, I point to the factual metrics that show a big improvement in our defensive play, and show that Ullmark specifically has fallen off the cliff. My opinions are always based off the the current situation, without a crystal ball, I couldn't know Ullmark would have a .835 sv% in his last 4 starts, so I didn't blame him for the games that we hadn't yet lost

So why didn't you agree with me in the thread where I criticized our goaltending? Colour me confused.

Because I use current facts when analyzing how the team is playing, and the current facts didin't align with your criticism at that time.

 

[jbeck5]

I never said I was trying to be funny, which proves my point: you're seeing what you want to.

Of course you weren't. You sounded pissy lol no one who is trying to be funny sounds pissy.

I quite literally agreed with you that you were not trying to be funny. So what I saw was accurate.

And I posted stats that showcase why +/- devoid on context tells a story that doesn't always align with reality.


Well it wasn't that bad at first, it's been brutal since.


What I said was Ullmark hadn't met expectations, but given his history patience was needed before hitting the panic button. The fact that he got worse after doesn't make my position less valid, everything I said then was as true as it is now, the only difference is his play degraded further instead of regressing to his historical mean.

Actually, I point to the factual metrics that show a big improvement in our defensive play, and show that Ullmark specifically has fallen off the cliff. My opinions are always based off the the current situation, without a crystal ball, I couldn't know Ullmark would have a .835 sv% in his last 4 starts, so I didn't blame him for the games that we hadn't yet lost


Because I use current facts when analyzing how the team is playing, and the current facts didin't align with your criticism at that time.

Maybe I'm just better at forecasting :p.

Also, the numbers were bad when we were looking at them. The fact they got worse just makes my point more...but it was always valid. He was on pace for the worst amount of BAD Starts that you showed and had like an .890 sv% at the time. So when I was saying he was bad, you should have agreed, but you didn't.

I wonder why you aren't still preaching patience instead of blaming everything on the goaltending. It's only been a couple weeks. We can't be that fickle lol we need to remain consistent.

 

[Tundraman]

Tkachuk is an irreplaceable gem. It's true that the pot boils over once in a while and he has been intercepted by a linesman a few times before he went too far but for me better hot than tepid. He cares and hates to lose and by the time things happen the game is usually out of reach anyway. He's the complete package, the leader on and off the ice but unfortunately also has to be the policeman on the team when guys take liberties with his linemates it's just too bad he doesn't have a Neil and a Chara to back him up.

The only thing that actually surprises me about Chucky is that he's a better consistent scorer than I thought he'd be.

 

[umma gumma]

So what I saw was accurate.

Give it up man. Like, let it go. Why do you care so much about my discussion with another poster anyway? Its not that intriguing.

 

[Relapsing]

Give it up man. Like, let it go. Why do you care so much about my discussion with another poster anyway? Its not that intriguing.

Well, I dont know about that...

 

[jbeck5]

Give it up man. Like, let it go. Why do you care so much about my discussion with another poster anyway? Its not that intriguing.

It's not that big of a deal. Someone made a clear joke, and you sounded pissy so I figured I would lead you to the mentality of taking things with humour more often.

It's not that deep. We should never get angry at another poster, just poke fun.

See...this goes back to those expectations I was taking about.

When the whole boards thinks we suck, everyone gets along. When certain posters think we're good before we prove it, this whole board becomes a pissing match of those who are positive about the team and those who are negative about the team.

It's best if we all just agree the team sucks, until we clinch a playoff spot, and then all agree the team is good when we're making the playoffs. Obviously we can all have different opinions, but these vastly different expectations seem to cause animosity.

Remember when everyone agreed we sucked last April? Everyone got along and just made fun of the sens. Let's bring that back.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

The simple syrup pot is boiling over here.. Going to leave a smell and its tough to clean up.

Brady is a really good if not great asset. He is finally getting some coaching .. and he has stuff to learn at the NHL level.

 

[umma gumma]

It's not that big of a deal. Someone made a clear joke, and you sounded pissy so I figured I would lead you to the mentality of taking things with humour more often.

I didn't realize you cared so much. You also know nothing about me and how I take things, so don't worry about it?

 

[jbeck5]

I didn't realize you cared so much. You also know nothing about me and how I take things, so don't worry about it?

I didn't claim to lol I was just talking about that specific post. I never made any claim about your life lol

You're still sounding pissy though lol not sure why.

For all I know, you could be the biggest jokester on here who's always in a great mood and laughing and just quite aren't projecting it on here right now.

I'm encouraging you to lighten up and make jokes, and you're responding with "you don't know me!" Lol it's exactly what I'm talking about.

You have to watch that chill daddy video a few times until you chuckle, and then you'll be good to come back and post and have some fun with it

 

[umma gumma]

I didn't claim to lol I was just talking about that specific post. I never made any claim about your life lol

You're still sounding pissy though lol not sure why.

For all I know, you could be the biggest jokester on here who's always in a great mood and laughing and just quite aren't projecting it on here right now.

I'm encouraging you to lighten up and make jokes, and you're responding with "you don't know me!" Lol it's exactly what I'm talking about.

You have to watch that chill daddy video a few times until you chuckle, and then you'll be good to come back and post and have some fun with it

Yes, and I'm encouraging you not to worry about it. Move on buddy! Thank you drive through.