TSN: Jake Gardiner or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Advanced Stats

[91Kadri91*]

oh man come on be nice haha he's had some bad years. I think he can bring it out but it's prolly a do or die year for him IMO.

 

[Hockey Talker29]

Garbage defensively but fantastic possession player.

On LA he would look like an All-Star but on the type of Team Toronto has been lately his weakness is magnified.

It's pretty much impossible to be garbage defensively, and a great possession player at the same time. The latter is one of the main factors that drives the former.

 

[MadSnowman42]

Another thing I don't understand; Why do people get up in arms about every D-man who is not physical in the corners, yet there is not a peep about how a Polak runs around with absolutely zero stick positioning?

Why is there always people harping on every D-man who gives the puck away (never mind context, never mind that Gardiner in this case does this the least among all our D-men), yet nobody ever mentions Phaneuf giving up the blueline as if getting close to puck-carrying players attacking his zone is toxic?

One would almost think people's understanding of defensive play in hockey is limited to being tough in the corners and not giving up the puck. Oh, and effort on the backchecking.

Let me try to explain: Because bodychecks and giveaways are more noticeable than good positioning and stickwork and, therefore, more important. Because watching how a play unfolded takes too much time and is, therefore, unnecessary. Because watching highlight reels is enough to judge players. Because what works in peewee/beer league/video games should also work in the NHL. Because penalty killing is defence in its pure form and not a different animal from 5-on-5 defence. Because offence and defence are not interlocked and, therefore, can be judged separately.

Case in point: This brilliant post:

I look at a guy like Letang, or Karlsson......these guys are highly paid defenders, who if you took away their offense, are below average d-men.

Let us transfer this thought to other areas: A Porsche sure is an expensive car, but if you took away the motor, the remaining body itself cannot even outrace a pedestrian. That makes perfect sense.

(Other than that there is of course the very interesting excercise in futility of naming 90 defenceman that play better "defensive" hockey than Karlsson and Letang.)

 

[GordieHoweHatTrick]

It's pretty much impossible to be garbage defensively, and a great possession player at the same time. The latter is one of the main factors that drives the former.

The latter drives the former but it is possible to be good at the possession side of the game and keeping the puck in the opposition`s end while providing garbage defensive zone coverage when you`re in your own end.

Garbage and great/fantastic was a bit hyperbolic but I, personally, don`t think he`s good defensively. The advanced stats suggest he`s good on the possession side of the game though and you won`t see me disagree with those findings.

 

[RLF]

Not sure if serious...

Zone-starts is literally a measure (an absolute measure, not a projection) of where a player starts their shift. Quality of competition is determined by measuring the performance of the players that played against a particular player, but means less than usage (how much a player plays) since QoC tends to be very similar (player to player) over the course of a season (the difference between Phaneuf's competition and Gardiner's competition is roughly two goals over 1200 minutes). Gardiner led the Leafs' defensemen in 5on5 ice-time (both per game and total) this season, and all of the stats you're seeing are even-strength statistics; he's already playing top-pairing minutes.

Although I am not really into the advanced stats, I more or less understand what each means. I thought you meant something else with your statement that made no sense to me. Forget it, too hard to explain what I thought you meant.

 

[Cams]

Most people who don't understand hockey analytics don't like Gardiner. He makes about 1 or 2 boneheaded plays per game. He also makes about 10-15 very good or great plays per game.

The fact is that he's much more effective than most players. However, cognitive biases tend to favour the more extreme plays (good or bad). As such, people remember both of Gardiner's bad plays, and none of his good/efficient ones.

No, absolutely not! 1 or 2 bonehead plays per game yes - 10-15 very good or great plays per game.......? When?

 

[HamiltonNHL]

http://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/545585

Good article from last year.

Jake mistakes in the D zone is all I remember - it seemed quite frustrating

 

[Leafsrock95]

I find it funny that you are perfectly fine forgiving all his perceived flaws if he had end results offensively (points), but won't extend the same courtesy regarding his end results defensively (shot/scoring chances/goal suppression).

Gardiner is not an offensive D-man. He is a puck-moving D-man. That's not the same thing.

Another thing I don't understand; Why do people get up in arms about every D-man who is not physical in the corners, yet there is not a peep about how a Polak runs around with absolutely zero stick positioning?

Why is there always people harping on every D-man who gives the puck away (never mind context, never mind that Gardiner in this case does this the least among all our D-men), yet nobody ever mentions Phaneuf giving up the blueline as if getting close to puck-carrying players attacking his zone is toxic?

One would almost think people's understanding of defensive play in hockey is limited to being tough in the corners and not giving up the puck. Oh, and effort on the backchecking.



So all he does is get lost, and then the opposition scores or having a scoring chance. And despite this, we surrender less goals and scoring chances than with any other D-man on the ice, over the sample size of three years.

Must just be the opposition feeling sorry for him and electing not to try and score, right?

Pretty much the pucks mostly in our zone when he's playing.

 

[Ovate]

Pretty much the pucks mostly in our zone when he's playing.

By our zone, do you mean our o-zone? Because that's where the numbers actually say the puck is when Gardiner's playing.

 

[tmlms13]

On the eye test: great with the puck, bad without the puck

 

[Nithoniniel]

Pretty much the pucks mostly in our zone when he's playing.

What?

It's the opposite way around completely. He is by far the D-man that helps us spend as little time in the defensive zone as possible.

This is just another example of how our cognition can fool us.

 

[TMLegend]

Best defencemen on the team, not a coincidence Rielly's play picked up after he got paired with Jake.

 

[Warden of the North]

He makes poor decisions which end up in the net too often. They look really bad. Figure those out and he'll be a gem

 

[91Kadri91*]

He makes poor decisions which end up in the net too often. They look really bad. Figure those out and he'll be a gem

And yet the puck ends up in our net much less often when Gardiner is on the ice.

 

[Ovate]

And yet the puck ends up in our net much less often when Gardiner is on the ice.

It's valid to say that he's a good defenceman who makes boneheaded mistakes. And it's ok for people to hold those against him more than goals caused by subtle mistakes, because they should be more correctable.

If he can figure out how to avoid the really dumb mistakes, while continuing his subtly good play in other areas, he'll be a better defenseman.

 

[senor martinez]

Gardiner is extremely underrated, people just look at how weak he is and assume he's useless

He is very good offensively yeah LOL, but defensively........ damn he is such a horrible d-guy. Looses the puck, the man.... everything. A catastrophe is the correct word I'm using here. He is exacty the type of player who would need a great d-partner with him. Doing all that D-stuff. And by no means I use the word D-guy in a sense of "druggy" type of guy. What I mean by that is the defensive guy of course.

 

[Purity*]

He is very good offensively yeah LOL, but defensively........ damn he is such a horrible d-guy. Looses the puck, the man.... everything. A catastrophe is the correct word I'm using here. He is exacty the type of player who would need a great d-partner with him. Doing all that D-stuff. And by no means I use the word D-guy in a sense of "druggy" type of guy. What I mean by that is the defensive guy of course.

Yet the puck still remains out of the net the most out of any D-man when he's on the ice.

And what do you mean by "D-stuff?" Since when is transitioning the puck not part of defense? Gardiner is easily our best D-man at exiting the zone.

 

[senor martinez]

Best defencemen on the team, not a coincidence Rielly's play picked up after he got paired with Jake.

Ahahahahaaa if that were to be true, then we would be in some deep deep trouble for sure.

I' glad Gardiner is not our best d-guy. He could almost be a forward. He is that good offensively. But as a d-guy.... LOL. He is one of the worst.

Phaneuf, Polak, Marincin, Hunwick... even Robidas is better defensively than Gardiner. And that's good to know. Now we have a chance to win.

 

[senor martinez]

Yet the puck still remains out of the net the most out of any D-man when he's on the ice.

And what do you mean by "D-stuff?" Since when is transitioning the puck not part of defense? Gardiner is easily our best D-man at exiting the zone.

At that he is, at that he is. Also in skating with the puck etc he is.

But... he looses the puck a lot, gives it away. Doesn't check, not a good poke checker ether... gets lost in the play. Looks weird on the ice at times. Makes weird faces. Doesn't understand the game well. Doesn't understand ice hockey that well. Etc. He is not a good d-guy.

 

[91Kadri91*]

Ahahahahaaa if that were to be true, then we would be in some deep deep trouble for sure.

I' glad Gardiner is not our best d-guy. He could almost be a forward. He is that good offensively. But as a d-guy.... LOL. He is one of the worst.

Phaneuf, Polak, Marincin, Hunwick... even Robidas is better defensively than Gardiner. And that's good to know. Now we have a chance to win.

You do understand that the job of a defenseman, defensively, is to prevent goals, shots and scoring chances (especially goals), right? Gardiner has done that better than any defenseman on the Leafs.

You're getting lost in your arbitrary variables, and completely missing what actually matters.

 

[Purity*]

At that he is, at that he is. Also in skating with the puck etc he is.

But... he looses the puck a lot, gives it away. Doesn't check, not a good poke checker ether... gets lost in the play. Looks weird on the ice at times. Makes weird faces. Doesn't understand the game well. Doesn't understand ice hockey that well. Etc. He is not a good d-guy.

Makes weird faces?

And again, despite all those faults, the puck still stays out of the net more than any other D-man on our team, on top of being our best shot-suppression D-man, and having the best corsi, we spend way more time in the offensive zone with Gardiner on the ice.

In the last 3 years, Gardiner has the best GA/60 of any D-man on the Leafs. Clearly he's doing something right.

I MUCH prefer Gardiner to a defensemen like Polak. A d-man like Polak is great at all the supposed "D-stuff" like blocking shots and checking hard. When it comes to exiting the zone and transitioning, he's utterly terrible. Blocked shots and hits are stats the indicate you don't have the puck enough. Pretty good reason you never see guys like Doughty or Keith lead those stats.

 

[Nithoniniel]

I can greatly appreciate any poster that includes "Makes weird faces" in their analysis of a player's defensive ability.

 

[senor martinez]

You do understand that the job of a defenseman, defensively, is to prevent goals, shots and scoring chances (especially goals), right? Gardiner has done that better than any defenseman on the Leafs.

You're getting lost in your arbitrary variables, and completely missing what actually matters.

Makes weird faces?

And again, despite all those faults, the puck still stays out of the net more than any other D-man on our team, on top of being our best shot-suppression D-man, and having the best corsi, we spend way more time in the offensive zone with Gardiner on the ice.

In the last 3 years, Gardiner has the best GA/60 of any D-man on the Leafs. Clearly he's doing something right.

I MUCH prefer Gardiner to a defensemen like Polak. A d-man like Polak is great at all the supposed "D-stuff" like blocking shots and checking hard. When it comes to exiting the zone and transitioning, he's utterly terrible. Blocked shots and hits are stats the indicate you don't have the puck enough. Pretty good reason you never see guys like Doughty or Keith lead those stats.

I can greatly appreciate any poster that includes "Makes weird faces" in their analysis of a player's defensive ability.

It all combines together gentlemen. Everything combines to together in the end. Other d-men have made gardiner better. Every d-guy he's played games with has made him better. Gardiner often has the possibility to move the puck and skate with it when he's playing. He also sits a lot because coaches hate his play. They even scratch that sucker. But yeah, I love gardiner's offensive game and keeping the puck game. He is GREAT at that. Defensively and understanding the d-game itself... he is the worst. Worse than Reilly.

Making weird faces is also not a good thing. It tells something about us everytime. We are not in the zone or not in this life if we look off. We are really off.

 

[Gary Nylund]

This facial expression stuff is interesting. Perhaps we'll see a revolution in this area, maybe the Leafs can add a facial expression expert to their staff and we'll be on the cutting edge of this exciting new area of analytics.

I'm no expert in this area but I suspect that based on facial expressions, the US made a gargantuan mistake selecting Kessel for the Olympic team.

 

[TeamBester]

The problem with Jake is he lacks a lot of hockey sense, he's good at holding onto the puck for long periods of time, but during that time he has no idea what to do with the puck. That's why he ends up doing lap after lap in the Ozone and why he gets in trouble and makes really dumb plays.

Edit: and why his point totals are lower than they should be with the skill set he has.