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

[senor martinez]

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.

You really have to close carefully during these games to see everything in it. I often, almost everytime watch the coaches and gm's more than our players. They are much more important than any of our players. They tell what the players can do and who does it. Sometimes some players don't get to do anything. They are that much scum.

But yeah I'ma keep my eyes on these players and fools also. Look how weird Gardiner often seems to be. He is totally out there, making weird stuff up. He sometimes seems so empty, not anything going on his eyes or mind. He also has ticks. You know what I mean. Ticks like his eyes rolling or head spinning. Like one time or two times. Like neurosis or something. You really have to dig deep in it to see all this. Next season is yours truly. You really have a chance to get in it big this time. I love it.

 

[LeafingTheWay]

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.

Even though when we use WOWYS, Gardiners numbers are even better WITHOUT those 'better defensemen'

 

[91Kadri91*]

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.

You realize this is quantifiable, and absolute ********, right? Go look at Gardiner's WOWY on puckalytics.

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.

He led Leafs defensemen in even-strength ice-time this season (both per game and total), and has averaged top-pairing 5on5 ice-time over the last three seasons.

So, again, what you're writing is complete ********.

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.

I'll defer to your expertise on this one; I suspect that you know all about being 'off'.

 

[Beleafer4]

Even though when we use WOWYS, Gardiners numbers are even better WITHOUT those 'better defensemen'

I don't care about his top pair 5v5 time - he makes bottom pairing faces

 

[The Winter Soldier]

Gardiner > Pietrangelo



*runs and hides under a desk

Not only that, look where S Weber, Doughty, Karlsson, OEL, Hedman are.

This list.

 

[Bullseye]

Gardiner > Pietrangelo

I'd be tempted to make that trade.

 

[i1]

When Jake's on he's the Leafs' best player, when he's off he's one of the worst. I'll take that over consistent mediocrity ie. Holland.

No one hates a loser, people having high expectations in the first place means he's doing something right; under Babcock I would not be surprised if he ends the season on the top pair.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

When Jake's on he's the Leafs' best player, when he's off he's one of the worst. I'll take that over consistent mediocrity ie. Holland.

No one hates a loser, people having high expectations in the first place means he's doing something right; under Babcock I would not be surprised if he ends the season on the top pair.

My realistic expectations for Jake are to be the best 4th best D man on the team he can be. For if he is the best D man on our team at any given time, usually it is when this team is playing bad. You do not want to be the best of anything when others are bad. It's a dubious distinction.

 

[Pholus]

My realistic expectations for Jake are to be the best 4th best D man on the team he can be. For if he is the best D man on our team at any given time, usually it is when this team is playing bad. You do not want to be the best of anything when others are bad. It's a dubious distinction.

If there is any player on the team that does not want to be the best player on the team , even if only the best at his position, that player needs to be traded ASAP. Every player should want to be the best, no matter what the circumstances.

 

[Nithoniniel]

I don't care about his top pair 5v5 time - he makes bottom pairing faces

Right on.

If there is any player on the team that does not want to be the best player on the team , even if only the best at his position, that player needs to be traded ASAP. Every player should want to be the best, no matter what the circumstances.

That was a weird statement indeed. Of course you want to be the best if your teammates are bad, because what does it say about you if you're not?

 

[The Man with a Plan]

If there is any player on the team that does not want to be the best player on the team , even if only the best at his position, that player needs to be traded ASAP. Every player should want to be the best, no matter what the circumstances.

Well I think he meant that you want to be the best at something because you are good... not because everyone/thing around ***** the bed.

I see Gards being a 2nd pairing Dman who can help take the load off the top pairing as needed. Babcock and company will only help him round out his game.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

If there is any player on the team that does not want to be the best player on the team , even if only the best at his position, that player needs to be traded ASAP. Every player should want to be the best, no matter what the circumstances.

I think you are reading my post too literally. Read it again this way, if Gardiner is your best D man on your team. You probably do not have a very good defence.

 

[Morbo]

....weird faces...?

 

[Ovate]

When Jake's on he's the Leafs' best player, when he's off he's one of the worst. I'll take that over consistent mediocrity ie. Holland.

No one hates a loser, people having high expectations in the first place means he's doing something right; under Babcock I would not be surprised if he ends the season on the top pair.

Holland was 23 year old playing his first full NHL season. I don't know how you can say he's consistently anything.

 

[Cams]

Doughty and Keith in the same sentence/comparison of "numbers" as Gardiner..... We might as well sell a package of Mr. Noodles at the same price as a prime rib at The Keg. That is how similar those 2 are with Gardiner.

Let's use baseball (Jays) as an example to compare what Gardiner is. Gardiner is like Hutchison. Numbers say he is great, when in fact, as a fan, you really hope he does well, but it's an adventure every time he takes the mound. Plus, you cringe, knowing it is only a matter of time before the runs start piling up (and not in your favour). But, I am sure there are some who will say he is the best pitcher on the team ( just like finding numbers that say Gardiner is the best d-man - which is laughable), and is better than a guy like Dickey (just for example). He's 13-4, Kershaw is 13-6. The numbers say this is true right???? Let's ignore ERA (+/-).....

 

[Nithoniniel]

Doughty and Keith in the same sentence/comparison of "numbers" as Gardiner..... We might as well sell a package of Mr. Noodles at the same price as a prime rib at The Keg. That is how similar those 2 are with Gardiner.

Let's use baseball (Jays) as an example to compare what Gardiner is. Gardiner is like Hutchison. Numbers say he is great, when in fact, as a fan, you really hope he does well, but it's an adventure every time he takes the mound. Plus, you cringe, knowing it is only a matter of time before the runs start piling up (and not in your favour). But, I am sure there are some who will say he is the best pitcher on the team ( just like finding numbers that say Gardiner is the best d-man - which is laughable), and is better than a guy like Dickey (just for example). He's 13-4, Kershaw is 13-6. The numbers say this is true right???? Let's ignore ERA (+/-).....

Actually, when Keith was Gardiner's age he was talked about around HF in pretty much exactly the same way. The similarities are almost eerie.

Of course, not saying Gardiner will develop into Keith. Shouldn't have to be pointed out, but in this place...

 

[91Kadri91*]

Doughty and Keith in the same sentence/comparison of "numbers" as Gardiner..... We might as well sell a package of Mr. Noodles at the same price as a prime rib at The Keg. That is how similar those 2 are with Gardiner.

Let's use baseball (Jays) as an example to compare what Gardiner is. Gardiner is like Hutchison. Numbers say he is great, when in fact, as a fan, you really hope he does well, but it's an adventure every time he takes the mound. Plus, you cringe, knowing it is only a matter of time before the runs start piling up (and not in your favour). But, I am sure there are some who will say he is the best pitcher on the team ( just like finding numbers that say Gardiner is the best d-man - which is laughable), and is better than a guy like Dickey (just for example). He's 13-4, Kershaw is 13-6. The numbers say this is true right???? Let's ignore ERA (+/-).....

Hutchison's numbers say that he's been unlucky, not great; no one uses (or should use) win-loss record anymore. Hutchison's second-half numbers (meaningful numbers, like FIP, xFIP, xFIP-, FIP-, SIERA, WAR, WPA, RA9-WAR to a degree etc) indicate that he's been pitching poorly. Most people who argue in favour of Hutchison (myself included) are simply stating that there's reason to believe he will be a quality starter in the future, and that he is a better pitcher than those currently receiving praise (Estrada), not that he has, to this point, pitched better.

The difference between Gardiner's metrics and Hutchison's metrics is that Gardiner's numbers indicate that he's playing very well defensively, not that he will, at some point, begin playing well defensively. Gardiner's plus-minus (a terrible statistic by the way) is poor because he's not productive offensively, not because he's poor defensively. The numbers are not saying that Gardiner is a better player than the names being bantered about in this thread, they're simply stating that he's better in that particular area (preventing shots from the slot); this can't be argued. You can argue the importance of preventing shots from the slot, but you can't argue with the results: they are what they are. Of course, in order to completely discredit Gardiner's effectiveness defensively, you'll also have to argue that preventing goals is not a measure of a productive defenseman (defensively), which simultaneously tarnishes your reputability.

Best of luck.

 

[The Thin White Duke]

Actually, when Keith was Gardiner's age he was talked about around HF in pretty much exactly the same way. The similarities are almost eerie.

Of course, not saying Gardiner will develop into Keith. Shouldn't have to be pointed out, but in this place...

I don't recall anyone talking about Keith's faces or his head.. spinning? Here's hoping he only turns into Keith after signing a 6 mil long-term extension though.

 

[Nithoniniel]

I don't recall anyone talking about Keith's faces or his head.. spinning? Here's hoping he only turns into Keith after signing a 6 mil long-term extension though.

There has been links to threads where people bashed Keith. "Running around like a headless chicken", "abundance of turnovers in his own zone", "only liked because he can skate", "just a stupid player", "he's good offensively, but can't defend a lick". Some of the things I've seen.

You can find most of those comments in this very thread about Gardiner as well.

Note that just because people had that particular opinion about Keith then, and have the same opinion about Gardiner now, doesn't mean that it's just as wrong, or that Gardiner has just the same strengths as Keith. It's just a fun read, more than anything else.

I don't think anyone had a problem with the faces Keith made though, so that might be what stops Gardiner from walking the same path.

 

[Ovate]

Doughty and Keith in the same sentence/comparison of "numbers" as Gardiner..... We might as well sell a package of Mr. Noodles at the same price as a prime rib at The Keg. That is how similar those 2 are with Gardiner.

Let's use baseball (Jays) as an example to compare what Gardiner is. Gardiner is like Hutchison. Numbers say he is great, when in fact, as a fan, you really hope he does well, but it's an adventure every time he takes the mound. Plus, you cringe, knowing it is only a matter of time before the runs start piling up (and not in your favour). But, I am sure there are some who will say he is the best pitcher on the team ( just like finding numbers that say Gardiner is the best d-man - which is laughable), and is better than a guy like Dickey (just for example). He's 13-4, Kershaw is 13-6. The numbers say this is true right???? Let's ignore ERA (+/-).....

GAA is the closest stat to ERA, and Gardiner's is the lowest on the team. When Gardiner is on the ice, the Leafs have less goals scored against them.

Hutchison is a terrible comparison, and using Ws to say he's a good pitcher is in no way similar to using advanced stats to say Gardiner is a good defenseman.

 

[The Thin White Duke]

There has been links to threads where people bashed Keith. "Running around like a headless chicken", "abundance of turnovers in his own zone", "only liked because he can skate", "just a stupid player", "he's good offensively, but can't defend a lick". Some of the things I've seen.

You can find most of those comments in this very thread about Gardiner as well.

Note that just because people had that particular opinion about Keith then, and have the same opinion about Gardiner now, doesn't mean that it's just as wrong, or that Gardiner has just the same strengths as Keith. It's just a fun read, more than anything else.

I don't think anyone had a problem with the faces Keith made though, so that might be what stops Gardiner from walking the same path.

Oh I'm with you on the actual comparison, Keith is a best case scenario of a player with great tools eventually finding a toolbox to put them together in. The other intriguing parallel is that Keith broke out at age 24 the season they hired Quenneville. He was also in the same 'good possession stats/mediocre production' boat that Gardiners in now.

 

[champs*]

very skilled and soft player....

 

[Joey24]

Anyone can see Jake has loads of talent. The problem is his effort and it makes his decision making look bad.
Maybe if he can have some drive installed into his game, some compete he could be a special player..

But that is yet to be seen, he's been around for three seasons you would think something would have changed by now, but he pretty much still is the same type of player, and people keep saying the same thing about him, wait until he matures. He's not 20 years old any more, and to me his compete and overall game has not shown any kind of improvement.

He still makes the same lazy mistakes he did in his rookie season, and for so people seem to be fine with what he is and for some I guess that's enough, but he won't be on Mikes team for long if he continues to play that lazy style he's become accustom to.

 

[leafs in five]

That was a weird statement indeed. Of course you want to be the best if your teammates are bad, because what does it say about you if you're not?

of all the hysteria caused by the team making the playoffs in the 2013 half-season the idea that being a 'good player on a bad team' was somehow a strike against a guy was among the most absurd. like a team would be better off for getting rid of a good player because he showed himself to be a good player during seasons when the team was bad. as if it's not more difficult to play well on a crappy team, or in Gardiner's case, to limit goals against/shots against on a team that, at least before January of last year, bled goals and chances against at a rate worse than teams that were actively trying to lose.

even if you ignore the fact that the Leafs weren't ever very good it's just a completely bonkers argument to make. and it's been used against Grabo, Kadri, and Gardiner.

it's weird cuz i don't expect it will be used against, say, Connor Brown if he wins a spot this season and performs.

 

[Joey24]

of all the hysteria caused by the team making the playoffs in the 2013 half-season the idea that being a 'good player on a bad team' was somehow a strike against a guy was among the most absurd. like a team would be better off for getting rid of a good player because he showed himself to be a good player during seasons when the team was bad. as if it's not more difficult to play well on a crappy team, or in Gardiner's case, to limit goals against/shots against on a team that, at least before January of last year, bled goals and chances against at a rate worse than teams that were actively trying to lose.

even if you ignore the fact that the Leafs weren't ever very good it's just a completely bonkers argument to make. and it's been used against Grabo, Kadri, and Gardiner.

it's weird cuz i don't expect it will be used against, say, Connor Brown if he wins a spot this season and performs.

I agree, but I think the problem with Gards is he's a lazy player on the ice. He gets caught fluffing around way too often, for a guy who's such a gifted skater he gets caught way too often being way too casual getting to lose pucks that result in goals or high end scoring chances... Last season he seemed to give these up at at least 1-2 per game rate.

I said before he has talent, but he just for some reason refuses to compete and exert himself at a rate you need to in the NHL. Unless Babcock has some sort of magic want I can see Gardiner finding a home in the press box until he does some how figure out he has to work in this league not because everyone is skilled and you can never afford to be lazy or fluff around on the ice.

I hope he figures it out this season.