Eklund Rumor: Leafs in on Cam Fowler

[Machinehead]

Wrong but ok i'll take a shot.

Kevin Bieksa was absolutely dreadful last year when he was playing Hampus Lindholm, but you know who he played his best hockey with? Cam Fowler. Now I know you are going to come up with some corsi stat, but remember Lindholm was among the elite in driving possession last year, so of course when Bieksa goes from him to Fowler it could go down, again this is CONTEXT which is what people like yourself and frankly many ranger fans who have a strange obsession with Fowler constantly fail to bring to the discussion.

So you're admitting that Bieksa was a better possession player with Lindholm, but "something something context something something I watch the games."

Yep, nothing to see here.

 

[KaseMeOutside]

So you're admitting that Bieksa was a better possession player with Lindholm, but "something something context something something I watch the games."

Yep, nothing to see here.

Bieksa had better possession numbers because of Lindholm, get it yet?

 

[Machinehead]

Bieksa had better possession numbers because of Lindholm, get it yet?

Exactly. He had better possession numbers because of Lindholm. And worse with Fowler. Because Lindholm is better than Fowler. I get it.

 

[Raspewtin]

oh **** its the ranger nerd squad. every OUT

I like it!

 

[Machinehead]

We've officially jumped the shark here. The argument here is literally "Bieksa was a much better possession player with Lindholm because of Lindholm" which somehow equates to Bieksa being horrible with Lindholm.

There is no argument anymore. It's just people repeating the word context over and over again in between the names of three players on the Ducks, hoping it will make sense.

 

[KaseMeOutside]

"Context", especially in Fowler's case, is nothing more than a thinly veiled "I'm right because I am and that's final" rebuttal in player discussion.

Last two years

Ryan McDonagh
47.7/49.4 Corsi
49.8/49.7 Fenwick

Cam Fowler
49.0/50.2 Corsi
49.6/51.1 Fenwick

Cam Fowler is better than Ryan McDonagh, Ryan McDonagh is overrated and is a 2nd pair defenseman.

 

[Currysux*]

How about

Fowler + 2nd

for

JvR + Kapanen

Swith Kapanen to Leivo. JVR is worth Fowler and maybe a little more. There is no point in trading Kapanen for a 2nd.

 

[KaseMeOutside]

Exactly. He had better possession numbers because of Lindholm. And worse with Fowler. Because Lindholm is better than Fowler. I get it.

Lindholm is better than 99% of the defensemen in the league in terms of possession numbers, so pretty much any other partner Bieksa had his numbers were going to go down.

 

[Machinehead]

Last two years

Ryan McDonagh
47.7/49.4 Corsi
49.8/49.7 Fenwick

Cam Fowler
49.0/50.2 Corsi
49.6/51.1 Fenwick

Cam Fowler is better than Ryan McDonagh, Ryan McDonagh is overrated and is a 2nd pair defenseman.

1) I don't think McDonagh is that good

2) Every partner Fowler has ever played with is much better than Dan Girardi

3) Fowler was 5th in quality of teammates. McDonagh was 472nd.

 

[KaseMeOutside]

We've officially jumped the shark here. The argument here is literally "Bieksa was a much better possession player with Lindholm because of Lindholm" which somehow equates to Bieksa being horrible with Lindholm.

There is no argument anymore. It's just people repeating the word context over and over again in between the names of three players on the Ducks, hoping it will make sense.

Bieksa was awful with Lindholm and if you had even followed the ducks at all while they were playing together you'd know that.

 

[KaseMeOutside]

1) I don't think McDonagh is that good

2) Every partner Fowler has ever played with is much better than Dan Girardi

3) Fowler was 5th in quality of teammates. McDonagh was 472nd.

Ben Lovejoy and Kevin Bieksa are/were Girardi level players

you are moving the goalposts

 

[Machinehead]

Ben Lovejoy and Kevin Bieksa are/were Girardi level players

you are moving the goalposts

No.

I could eat Taco Bell for six consecutive meals and then take a dump and it wouldn't be a Girardi-level player.

Girardi is basically if Tanner Glass played defense.

 

[Mitchy]

Definitely hope the Leafs aren't in on Fowler. Thankfully, with this Eklund rumour, it likely means they aren't interested in him at all.

 

[Ducks DVM]

1) I don't think McDonagh is that good

2) Every partner Fowler has ever played with is much better than Dan Girardi

3) Fowler was 5th in quality of teammates. McDonagh was 472nd.

Yes, I've often wondered how Fowler managed to not win the Calder when Paul Mara was carrying him.

 

[Machinehead]

Yes, I've often wondered how Fowler managed to not win the Calder when Paul Mara was carrying him.

Mara's beard is better than Girardi, but that's not really the point.

The point is when you have a resume of several seasons with a dozen and a half partners, and you suck with all of them, it's not their fault.

At least McDonagh is good with players who aren't named Girardi.

 

[Sojourn]

So you're admitting that Bieksa was a better possession player with Lindholm, but "something something context something something I watch the games."

Yep, nothing to see here.

You continue to show that your understanding of these new metrics is limited. If you had observed Bieksa, and Lindholm for that matter, you would have seen how bad they were. The fact that your precious metrics don't show that is just an example of their flaws. I really wish you weren't so committed to metrics that so clearly have limitations.

 

[TheGreat]

Maybe put a stop on JVR proposal for while heh HF? , cuz man these threads get very toxic

(I know this is a Cam Fowler thread but for future threads)


And why do people post Eklund stuff ? When has he ever come through ?

 

[Machinehead]

You continue to show that your understanding of these new metrics is limited. If you had observed Bieksa, and Lindholm for that matter, you would have seen how bad they were. The fact that your precious metrics don't show that is just an example of their flaws. I really wish you weren't so committed to metrics that so clearly have limitations.

Of course metrics have limitations. We're so far beyond limitations with this player that it's not even worth talking about. His resume is six seasons of constant garbage with every partner under the sun.

Watching the games, and "context" and all the other buzzword BS people like to throw out have limitations also. After SIX YEARS you are what the stats say you are if they remain constant.

I don't know how many times we have to keep watching the same player produce the same results before we have enough context; before he's had enough partners; before the limitations have been accounted for.

 

[Pyromaniac]

You continue to show that your understanding of these new metrics is limited. If you had observed Bieksa, and Lindholm for that matter, you would have seen how bad they were. The fact that your precious metrics don't show that is just an example of their flaws. I really wish you weren't so committed to metrics that so clearly have limitations.

And you and most Ducks fans in this thread continue to dismiss those metrics because it lets you prop up Fowler on a pedestal.

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

Definitely hope the Leafs aren't in on Fowler. Thankfully, with this Eklund rumour, it likely means they aren't interested in him at all.

I don't know I could see them being interested we do need a top4 d man after all we have 2 of them

 

[KaseMeOutside]

Of course metrics have limitations. We're so far beyond limitations with this player that it's not even worth talking about. His resume is six seasons of constant garbage with every partner under the sun.

Watching the games, and "context" and all the other buzzword BS people like to throw out have limitations also. After SIX YEARS you are what the stats say you are if they remain constant.

I don't know how many times we have to keep watching the same player produce the same results before we have enough context; before he's had enough partners; before the limitations have been accounted for.

Cam Fowler the last 3 years has seen his responsibilities consistently increase, all the way up to starting 53.6% of his shifts in the defensive zone. How are you so much smarter than Bruce Boudreau, who deployed him like this, and did quite well doing so? I mean you can't arbitrarily claim the stats you like are all right, and then be completely dismissive when someone posts a chart showing he's among the leagues elite at breakouts.

You call it "same results" I think nearly breaking even in "fenwick" when taking so many defensive zone starts is pretty good. but again you don't bring any context or further examine, you just see a number and draw a conclusion that suits the position you've taken.

Ranger fans can't come on here and trash Fowler for some of his metrics, but then call McDonagh a top 20 in the league no.1 dman it's not a consistent position.

 

[Paul4587]

Like how contrary to what people say he actually plays with some of the highest CF% quality of teammates in the NHL? Or how his stats are often on the bottom of his own team which is very abnormal for top-pairing defensemen? Or how most stats indicate the Ducks play better then he is off the ice? Not everyone just looks at HERO charts, there is plenty of context for him, and if he was so good it shouldn't be this difficult to show people why.

Do you know why the Ducks are so much better when he's off the ice? Because when he's off the ice chances are Lindholm (who has incredible advanced stats) is on the ice. That's obviously going to make his relative stats look bad.

Another reason they are better when he's off the ice - because nearly every time we had a defensive zone face off and the likes of Thornton or Kopitar or Kane Etc was on the ice BB would throw Fowler over the boards to try to get the puck out of the zone. Meanwhile when we have offensive zone faceoffs against bottom 6 players Vatanen would get the nod. Those are hardly favourable situations for Fowler and it didn't help he was playing with a number 6 defensemen the majority of the year.

I'm not a big fan of Fowler, I think Lindholm had clearly surpassed him last season and should have been given some of his minutes (particularly on the PP which is the area all the posters who don't watch Fowler think he's good at) But what I read on the main boards mostly from Rangers fans is absolute crap - that he's a second pair guy and nothing more. You guys are simply reading the hero charts and not applying any context whatsoever.

He's not a number one guy which is how he was used by BB but he is far from the mediocre second pairing guy he's made out to be by the advanced stats crowd. I would say on at least half of last years playoff teams he could have comfortably played as their number two guy.

If anything, Fowler is a better player when you apply no context. If you just look at his raw stats, they're not that bad.

But let's apply some context...

-He's the worst on an excellent possession team

-He makes every teammate he plays with worse

-He plays with some of the highest quality possession teammates in the league

With no context at all, you're looking at a 49% possession player. So what? Apply everything listed above and you're looking at something much worse.

I think Ducks fans are the ones who have interest in ignoring context.

See my answer above to your fellow Rangers fan who is basically taking the same stance you are.

 

[gabeliscious]

bozak + leivo

 

[al secord]

"I know it's Ek, but..."

 

[mytduxfan*]

Didn't the Ducks completely destroy the whole notion that good possession stats = good team/player. In 2014-15 we were 17th in the league in terms of possession and yet we were Western Conference champions, went to the WCFs and pushed the eventual SC winners and possession stat kings to game 7.

How did we manage that with Fowler and his turrrrrrrribbbleee possession stats being our #1D? Because the rest of the team was sooooooo good? That doesn't make sense because our teams overall possession stats were also tuuuurrrrribbbbllleeee and yet we still won the WC title made it to the WCFs. Something doesn't add up?