Player Discussion Jacob Trouba

[mas0764]

Here’s the thing.

If you have to argue that advanced stats show Trouba sucks at defense just because he starts in his own zone so much, you’ve already lost the high ground. Ok, so maybe he just sucks a little less because of his usage.

He gets paid $8m.

You can get someone to take all the defensive zone assignments and suck at it for far less.

This is only a debate because the fan base has developed an unhealthy attachment to him because ooooooh big hits.

 

[NickyFotiu]

 

[McRanger92]

The only good defense is having the puck at all times, or so I've been told.

 

[CasusBelli]

Love this guy. He isn’t just a leader. He makes the game entertaining and gets fans into the game with huge hits and clutch plays. Can’t overstate the importance of that.

 

[nyr2k2]

Love this guy. He isn’t just a leader. He makes the game entertaining and gets fans into the game with huge hits and clutch plays. Can’t overstate the importance of that.

He was clearly the right choice for Captain. Zibanejad is too much of a flake and Kreider is just a weirdo. Those two are always bro-ing out with everyone, which is fine (I think they have a tight clubhouse in large part because of that stuff) but Trouba is the guy who really seems to set the tone.

 

[McRanger92]

He was clearly the right choice for Captain. Zibanejad is too much of a flake and Kreider is just a weirdo. Those two are always bro-ing out with everyone, which is fine (I think they have a tight clubhouse in large part because of that stuff) but Trouba is the guy who really seems to set the tone.

Trocheck and Trouba are the 2 guys who really drag the others into the fight when it's needed.

 

[GAGLine]

fancy stats? there's nothing fancy about "scoring chances". zone starts dont mean a damn thing, especially when we're the best faceoff team in the league.

Haven't the advanced stat zealots been telling us for years that faceoffs don't matter?

 

[Machinehead]

Haven't the advanced stat zealots been telling us for years that faceoffs don't matter?

"Don't matter" is a strong phrase and a bit of a mischaracterization.

What people have said is that there's no correlation demonstrating that faceoffs drive possession metrics.

That should make sense given how much of the game doesn't occur right after a faceoff.

That's the same reason zone starts don't really matter.

 

[Machinehead]

As for Trouba, I haven't seen enough of a sample of him without Miller to render a fair judgement of the player he is now, and vice versa for Miller.

I have seen plenty enough to know that the pair sucks.

That play is a perfect example, actually. Nice recovery by Trouba, and I give him credit for that, but they still give up a very good look because Miller has a chance to get the puck out of danger and sends it right to an opponent. That they both have a tendency of doing that and are always together is the problem.

 

[80shockeywasbuns]

The only good defense is having the puck at all times, or so I've been told.

Well that’s just not true. What players do to regain possession for their team is still important, and this was a great play by Trouba to do that. The problem is he can’t give someone CTE every single play and he sucks at higher frequency essential skills like managing the puck under pressure and denying the blue line.

 

[McRanger92]

Well that’s just not true. What players do to regain possession for their team is still important, and this was a great play by Trouba to do that. The problem is he can’t give someone CTE every single play and he sucks at higher frequency essential skills like managing the puck under pressure and denying the blue line.

I'm just busting balls. I can enjoy the play without lamenting the on-ice process that went into it. People tend roll their eyes at the analytics zealots because they have to "well actually" everything. It was a good defensive play and a big hit, thats fun hockey to watch imo

 

[Machinehead]

I'm just busting balls. I can enjoy the play without lamenting the on-ice process that went into it. People tend roll their eyes at the analytics zealots because they have to "well actually" everything. It was a good defensive play and a big hit, thats fun hockey to watch imo

I'll "well actually" the play if the player f***s up and then fixes their own f*** up with a hail mary hit.

This was Miller's fault to begin with, so a good play all around by Trouba.

 

[Number 9]

He was clearly the right choice for Captain. Zibanejad is too much of a flake and Kreider is just a weirdo. Those two are always bro-ing out with everyone, which is fine (I think they have a tight clubhouse in large part because of that stuff) but Trouba is the guy who really seems to set the tone.

That's the impression I get on Kreider a bit of a hippie.

 

[PuckLuck3043]

"Don't matter" is a strong phrase and a bit of a mischaracterization.

What people have said is that there's no correlation demonstrating that faceoffs drive possession metrics.

That should make sense given how much of the game doesn't occur right after a faceoff.

That's the same reason zone starts don't really matter.

They matter and they matter even more on the PP and PK. That drives possession at critical times in the game.

 

[McRanger92]

I'll "well actually" the play if the player f***s up and then fixes their own f*** up with a hail mary hit.

This was Miller's fault to begin with, so a good play all around by Trouba.

I get what youre saying but you proved my point.

 

[GAGLine]

"Don't matter" is a strong phrase and a bit of a mischaracterization.

What people have said is that there's no correlation demonstrating that faceoffs drive possession metrics.

That should make sense given how much of the game doesn't occur right after a faceoff.

That's the same reason zone starts don't really matter.

If neither matter, then using one to prove that the other doesn't matter is a poor argument by the other poster.

Both faceoffs and zone starts make a difference. We can argue about how much of a difference, but regardless, the context shouldn't be ignored.

 

[Machinehead]

If neither matter, then using one to prove that the other doesn't matter is a poor argument by the other poster.

Both faceoffs and zone starts make a difference. We can argue about how much of a difference, but regardless, the context shouldn't be ignored.

But they kind of don't make a difference. Not in the specific context of analytics.

Sure, the argument you responded to a bit contradictory in that sense, but the arguments have generally been "faceoffs don't matter to analytics" versus "faceoffs do matter to hockey." This is an apples to oranges comparison.

 

[GAGLine]

But they kind of don't make a difference. Not in the specific context of analytics.

Sure, the argument you responded to a bit contradictory in that sense, but the arguments have generally been "faceoffs don't matter to analytics" versus "faceoffs do matter to hockey." This is an apples to oranges comparison.

I'd rather win the most games than have the best analytics. Different models produce different results and none of them are fully accurate representations of reality. That's not to suggest that the statistics don't have value as a tool. They do. But they should never be used as the only tool, and there are times when they should be ignored completely in favor of actual results.

 

[80shockeywasbuns]

I'd rather win the most games than have the best analytics. Different models produce different results and none of them are fully accurate representations of reality. That's not to suggest that the statistics don't have value as a tool. They do. But they should never be used as the only tool, and there are times when they should be ignored completely in favor of actual results.

The problem is that the “faceoffs=possession” people are the ones ignoring actual results. It’s absurd to stress the importance of faceoffs and then ignore what happens immediately afterwards. Bonino is a great example. He’s a monster on draws and yet every time he’s on the ice we don’t have the puck and are bleeding shots and scoring chances. It doesn’t matter if he wins the D zone draw because we’re just going to lose the puck anyway 2 seconds later due to his awful skating/puck skills

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

Its accurate to say that Face offs are situationally impactful (for example, odd man situations.)

Zone starts however are not. If you're good you're good and if you suck, you suck so it doesn't really matter where you start your shifts. At ES the lion share of your shifts are starting on the fly as it is.

This argument is really only ever used to prop up bad players (Girardi, Staal, Goodrow, etc.) Those guys would have sucked with heavy OZ usage too.

 

[GAGLine]

The problem is that the “faceoffs=possession” people are the ones ignoring actual results. It’s absurd to stress the importance of faceoffs and then ignore what happens immediately afterwards. Bonino is a great example. He’s a monster on draws and yet every time he’s on the ice we don’t have the puck and are bleeding shots and scoring chances. It doesn’t matter if he wins the D zone draw because we’re just going to lose the puck anyway 2 seconds later due to his awful skating/puck skills

You gave an isolated example that doesn't prove your case. If Bonino wins the draw, is he the one actually turning it over? One of the other players will be the one actually possessing the puck after the faceoff. Maybe the puck eventually makes its way to Bonino again and he cedes possession, but you're making a false equivalency. Bonino being good or bad doesn't validate or invalidate the benefits of winning faceoffs.

If Connor McDavid wins a faceoff and he has a 60% xGF or whatever, does that suddenly make faceoffs important? No. This is just common sense. If you win the faceoff, you have possession. To suggest that it has no impact on possession is nonsensical. What happens after the faceoff is won or lost doesn't change that.

 

[BS45]

The hate for Trouba is unreal! Take Trouba out of the lineup/ put Hamilton in the lineup and this team would be LUCKY to be 500! To the Rangers, Trouba is worth all 8 million and then some. I think the Devils would be willing to trade Hamilton for Trouba even up because- a Jacob Trouba is exactly what the Devils need, they have tons of offense. The Devils like most NHL teams need exactly what Trouba brings. There are more Dougie Hamilton's in the NHl then there are Jacob Trouba's. Trouba ia a unicorn and unicorn's are very valuable!!

 

[80shockeywasbuns]

Zone starts however are not. If you're good you're good and if you suck, you suck so it doesn't really matter where you start your shifts. At ES the lion share of your shifts are starting on the fly as it is.

This argument is really only ever used to prop up bad players (Girardi, Staal, Goodrow, etc.) Those guys would have sucked with heavy OZ usage too.

im convinced the people who interpret “faceoffs dont matter” 100% literally are intentionally being dense just so they can segway into a “get off the spreadsheets” comment.

Of course faceoffs “matter” in a sense that you’d rather win them then lose them. Even analytics have found a non-negligible value to special teams faceoff wins especially on the PK. But if someone is winning draws and still getting completely decimated in scoring chance/xG differential then where is the value in their faceoff wins? I’d rather just give the D zone faceoff to a guy who can actually help the team transition the puck up the ice and get it as far away from Igor as possible

 

[GoAwayPanarin]

The problem is that the “faceoffs=possession” people are the ones ignoring actual results. It’s absurd to stress the importance of faceoffs and then ignore what happens immediately afterwards. Bonino is a great example. He’s a monster on draws and yet every time he’s on the ice we don’t have the puck and are bleeding shots and scoring chances. It doesn’t matter if he wins the draw because hes just going to lose the puck anyway 2 seconds later due to his awful skating/puck skills

Yeah this is basically it.

Sticking with Bonino as the example here - it's fair to say that he has value on the PK. He's a good shot blocker, good positionally and his FO ability will give the team the opportunity to get a clear right off of puck drop - these are all good things. This applies late in games when face with a 5v6 too, even with the threat of icings against.

The ability for him to win a FO at ES has far less value because your end goal isn't (or shouldn't be) to fire the puck out of your zone. The drawbacks in his game are glaring here.

Plus the bulk of the teams in the league (not the outlier teams that are either way ahead of the pack or way behind) are within range of one another. I have a hard time saying that winning an extra 3-4 faceoffs for every 100 taken is going to dramatically impact a team's performance vs the majority of the league.

It's a nice to have quality and being at basically 56% as a team is hardly a bad thing. I'd easily sacrifice some of that to strengthen other areas though.

 

[GAGLine]

Its accurate to say that Face offs are situationally impactful (for example, odd man situations.)

Zone starts however are not. If you're good you're good and if you suck, you suck so it doesn't really matter where you start your shifts. At ES the lion share of your shifts are starting on the fly as it is.

This argument is really only ever used to prop up bad players (Girardi, Staal, Goodrow, etc.) Those guys would have sucked with heavy OZ usage too.

My argument isn't to suggest that bad players are actually good. I just think it's disingenuous to ignore context because it's not the sole reason, or even a particularly significant reason, why the player is bad or good. My argument is that these things matter regardless of the individual players. Again, we can argue the degree to which they matter, but I would suggest that on the small scale, they can be very impactful. The margin between winning and losing is often very narrow. No advantage, however slight, should be discounted.