Yeah those 3 goals in 25 games, what a feat.
I'll say this about possession (when i'm not using it to bash Tanner Glass or John Moore):
It's clear that a lot of NHL management still don't follow it. Marcel Goc goes for 1.3, while Steve Ott goes for 2.3? That's absolutely ridiculous.
Since it's clear that the best teams in the league are built on possession, and given the fact that it's undervalued, shouldn't good cap-strapped teams be looking for players like Goc, or even Stempniak who's still unsigned?
A very shrewd move the Rangers could make would be to see if Stempniak goes unsigned and they can sign him for a year or 2 at 1.5-1.75 million. Since stats like that are undervalued, shouldn't you be going for guys lik that instead of guys who have overvalued skill-sets, like Tanner Glass?
The conflation of a statistical trend with the construction of a roster based on individual stats is silly. It's the kind of thing a stats major does in their first economics course, only to find that nothing works as beautifully and mechanically as they expect it to.
I don't consider it to be an enormous leap to suggest that possession stats represent just one of a million other factors in the efficacy of a hockey team. What I've seen from this particular board contingency with every trade and every roster move has been either lamenting that we replaced a player with one with a worse corsi rating, or the opposite. People still can't grasp, somehow, that the MDZ for Klein trade was a good one.
If I judged every acquisition on plus/minus, and felt we should pursue every top plus/minus player each year, people might want to find a place to put me where I couldn't hurt myself. And yet, there's a statistical correlation between players with a high plus/minus, and their chances of making the playoffs and furthermore, winning a stanley cup. Interesting.
Having seen no one make assertion B, I'm not seeing the relevance.
I'll say this about possession (when i'm not using it to bash Tanner Glass or John Moore):
It's clear that a lot of NHL management still don't follow it. Marcel Goc goes for 1.3, while Steve Ott goes for 2.3? That's absolutely ridiculous.
Since it's clear that the best teams in the league are built on possession, and given the fact that it's undervalued, shouldn't good cap-strapped teams be looking for players like Goc, or even Stempniak who's still unsigned?
A very shrewd move the Rangers could make would be to see if Stempniak goes unsigned and they can sign him for a year or 2 at 1.5-1.75 million. Since stats like that are undervalued, shouldn't you be going for guys lik that instead of guys who have overvalued skill-sets, like Tanner Glass?
I think you might need a magnifying glass. Corsi is like god on this board... and it's ridiculous mostly because it does not always work when comparing player to player.
Klein and MDZ are completely different players... MDZ might have better Corsi %'s, but clearly Klein was the superior in the end.
He needs to produce more, no question. I'm just very encouraged by what I saw in the playoffs. If he plays that way, I have no worries about him getting goals.
No matter what kind of player you are, it's better if you have the ability to move the play out of your own zone and keep it out.I think you might need a magnifying glass. Corsi is like god on this board... and it's ridiculous mostly because it does not always work when comparing player to player.
Klein and MDZ are completely different players... MDZ might have better Corsi %'s, but clearly Klein was the superior in the end. By that, I mean that Comparing players possession is not always applicable, because not all players are the same... Hell, in NHL14, you have about 6-8 different "types" of players per position you can choose from... comparing the Corsi %'s of Marc Staal to Ryan McDonagh is just stupid, because McDonagh is an all around, offensive-capable defenseman, while Staal excels in his own zone where he continually shuts down players.
The fact that he was a top-4 on a top five team in the league in 2011-12 is enough.Somehow Klein's on ice possession stats suck, his 'regular stats' sucks, he barely gets ice time under AV, he has cost his defensive linemates possession over the years and John Moore somehow has worse stats with a 'steady guy' like him than an abomination of a defender in MDZ, yet we're supposed to believe he's a top 4 defender?
Lunacy. Delusional.
There is no evidence to support he'd be a viable option in that top 4 role. It's just mind-boggling.
I hope you're right.Heard it here first. Take it as you want it. I have source that Mike Ribeiro is set to go to the New York Rangers.
Other teams were Nashville and Ottawa. I will be back on this thread when this will get done.
Heard it here first. Take it as you want it. I have source that Mike Ribeiro is set to go to the New York Rangers.
Other teams were Nashville and Ottawa. I will be back on this thread when this will get done.
Hell, in NHL14, you have about 6-8 different "types" of players per position you can choose from... comparing the Corsi %'s of Marc Staal to Ryan McDonagh is just stupid, because McDonagh is an all around, offensive-capable defenseman, while Staal excels in his own zone where he continually shuts down players.
MDZ is the prototypical 3rd pairing offensive D. Drives Sh% at the expense of suppression.
On ice performance wise, I don't think he'll do worse than Richards, but important to shelter him at ES for him to produce. Ribeiro does have a nice niche of being a PP specialist before last yr though.
His off-ice demeanor is a concern. But the locker room is tight and I think they'll easily accept another player in.
No matter what kind of player you are, it's better if you have the ability to move the play out of your own zone and keep it out.
Del Zotto may be classified as a 'OFD' in NHL14, compared to a "DFD" in Klein, but I don't use that to form my opinions.
Given that:
1. Del Zotto is better at suppressing shots on his own goal, and
2. Defensemen have little-to-no control on what percentage of those shots go in
I'm unclear why one is considered significantly better at defending to the extent that it's apparently beyond debate.
It would be smart for the Rangers to ditch Nash after scoring 3 goals on 83 shots in the playoffs, just like it was smart for Boston to ditch Seguin after scoring 1 goal on 70 shots. In that it wouldn't be smart at all.
When you continue to generate shots, they start going in.
Look at this group of playoff chokers. Ugh. Who would want any of those players?
Heard it here first. Take it as you want it. I have source that Mike Ribeiro is set to go to the New York Rangers.
Other teams were Nashville and Ottawa. I will be back on this thread when this will get done.