Eklund Rumor: Leafs in on Cam Fowler

[JetsHomer]

You're in an ANA-TOR thread, not a WPG thread. I'm not following you. You're following us Duck fans.

Trouba sucks. Get over it. His defensive game is terrible. Both Gardiner and Trouba both have top 2 shot generation numbers, but Trouba bring his offensive qualitative down by being a such a poor playmaker. He's basically a #4 offensively and a #6 defensively. You guys better hurry and sign him before someone else grabs up such a sweet player .

Trouba has bust written all over him. Gardiner is much, much better. Shouldn't even be putting Trouba and Gardiner in the same sentence. Trouba is in Nick Holden territory in terms of skill and ability - http://public.tableau.com/shared/PPSC9HDR7?:display_count=no

Even if this is all true (its not) both Gardiner and Trouba are much better Cam Fowler (who actually does suck)

 

[Makar Goes Fast]

Even if this is all true (its not) both Gardiner and Trouba are much better Cam Fowler (who actually does suck)

cant argue with that flawless logic.

 

[mytduxfan*]

Even if this is all true (its not) both Gardiner and Trouba are much better Cam Fowler (who actually does suck)

Did you see the numbers? It's true.

Knew it though. Basically, when it comes to slating Fowler, the numbers are the gospel truth. When those same numbers get flipped to slate your precious Trouba, the numbers are "not the truth". Either you believe them and both Fowler and Trouba suck or you don't and neither Fowler or Trouba can be judged by a stat sheet.

cant argue with that flawless logic.

The logic is:

Slating Fowler = "the numbers don't lie".

Slating Trouba = "the number aren't telling the whole story".

Classic stat-watcher logic.

 

[JetsHomer]

Did you see the numbers? It's true.

Knew it though. Basically, when it comes to slating Fowler, the numbers are the gospel truth. When those same numbers get flipped to slate your precious Trouba, the numbers are "not the truth". Either you believe them and both Fowler and Trouba suck or you don't and neither Fowler or Trouba can be judged by a stat sheet.



The logic is:

Slating Fowler = "the numbers don't lie".

Slating Trouba = "the number aren't telling the whole story".

Classic stat-watcher logic.

But the numbers aren't the truth?

Trouba has great shot differentials, both overall and relative to team. Far better than Fowler in fact. You are aware that a player that gives up 50 shots against and gets 60 shots for is just as valuable as a player that gives up 20 shots against and gets 30 shots for , right? Trouba's shot suppression numbers would make him an average 4/5 guy in suppression and a #1 in terms of shot generation. This would average him to about a 2/3 guy overall, considering he does this against top comp. Fowler has shot suppression like a 5/6 guy and shot generation...also like a 5/6 guy. He faces tough comp as well so he's probably not as bad as his numbers actually suggest, probably more of a 3/4 guy when played in an appropriate role...which brings us to Jake Gardiner, who did benefit from facing only middle of the road comp, but who is actually legit good in his own right. His numbers suggest he plays like a top pairing player*

*When played in an appropriate role, which is as a great #3 Dman

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

But the numbers aren't the truth?

Trouba has great shot differentials, both overall and relative to team. Far better than Fowler in fact. You are aware that a player that gives up 50 shots against and gets 60 shots for is just as valuable as a player that gives up 20 shots against and gets 30 shots for , right? Trouba's shot suppression numbers would make him an average 4/5 guy in suppression and a #1 in terms of shot generation. This would average him to about a 2/3 guy overall, considering he does this against top comp. Fowler has shot suppression like a 5/6 guy and shot generation...also like a 5/6 guy. He faces tough comp as well so he's probably not as bad as his numbers actually suggest, probably more of a 3/4 guy when played in an appropriate role...which brings us to Jake Gardiner, who did benefit from facing only middle of the road comp, but who is actually legit good in his own right. His numbers suggest he plays like a top pairing player*

*When played in an appropriate role, which is as a great #3 Dman

I love Gradiner, Gradiner is not a top pairing D

 

[Liferleafer]

I love Gradiner, Gradiner is not a top pairing D

I think both Gardiner and Fowler are both excellent 2nd pair (#3) who both can fill in on the top pair if need be. I agree that the numbers favor Fowler slightly, but i wonder what the numbers would be if Fowler played in TO last season and Gardiner in Anaheim.

 

[Randy Randerson]

But the numbers aren't the truth?

Trouba has great shot differentials, both overall and relative to team. Far better than Fowler in fact. You are aware that a player that gives up 50 shots against and gets 60 shots for is just as valuable as a player that gives up 20 shots against and gets 30 shots for , right? Trouba's shot suppression numbers would make him an average 4/5 guy in suppression and a #1 in terms of shot generation. This would average him to about a 2/3 guy overall, considering he does this against top comp. Fowler has shot suppression like a 5/6 guy and shot generation...also like a 5/6 guy. He faces tough comp as well so he's probably not as bad as his numbers actually suggest, probably more of a 3/4 guy when played in an appropriate role...which brings us to Jake Gardiner, who did benefit from facing only middle of the road comp, but who is actually legit good in his own right. His numbers suggest he plays like a top pairing player*

*When played in an appropriate role, which is as a great #3 Dman

Nice to see Gardiner getting a little love from a non-leaf fan, not sure if its because the leafs are a bad team or that no one has faith in our management but he always seems to be dismissed.

I think your assessment of Trouba is about right as well, and he's complimented by a very good supporting cast in Winnipeg's D corps. He'll be fine and should have some big offensive years coming, which always spikes value

 

[WhatTheDuck]

I think both Gardiner and Fowler are both excellent 2nd pair (#3) who both can fill in on the top pair if need be. I agree that the numbers favor Fowler slightly, but i wonder what the numbers would be if Fowler played in TO last season and Gardiner in Anaheim.

What would Fowler's numbers look like if he wasn't asked to carry a top pairing with a two hundred pound backpack for a partner? Put him with an equal or greater partner and he'd be a great #2 guy.

 

[mytduxfan*]

But the numbers aren't the truth?

Of course they're not

Trouba has great shot differentials, both overall and relative to team. Far better than Fowler in fact. You are aware that a player that gives up 50 shots against and gets 60 shots for is just as valuable as a player that gives up 20 shots against and gets 30 shots for , right? Trouba's shot suppression numbers would make him an average 4/5 guy in suppression and a #1 in terms of shot generation. This would average him to about a 2/3 guy overall, considering he does this against top comp. Fowler has shot suppression like a 5/6 guy and shot generation...also like a 5/6 guy. He faces tough comp as well so he's probably not as bad as his numbers actually suggest, probably more of a 3/4 guy when played in an appropriate role...which brings us to Jake Gardiner, who did benefit from facing only middle of the road comp, but who is actually legit good in his own right. His numbers suggest he plays like a top pairing player*

*When played in an appropriate role, which is as a great #3 Dman

I don't know why you keep bringing up Fowler. I've already said that, based on the numbers, he sucks.

Your analysis of Trouba is completely incorrect. Trouba faced the 4th best competition of anyone on WPG and by quite a margin. Meanwhile, Lindholm, Manson, Bieksa and Fowler all faced fairly similar competition. So, you're absolutely wrong in saying that Trouba faced top competition. If anything, he was sheltered compared to guys like Buff, Myers and Enstrom who each faced much better competition then Trouba. So Trouba's stats are still bad. He has bottom 6 shot suppression stats against weak competition. His shot generation numbers aren't that impressive given the competition he faced and paired with his horrendous shot suppression stats only confirms that he's just not that good.

You can keep pumping his tyres, but "the numbers don't lie".

 

[Randy Randerson]

What would Fowler's numbers look like if he wasn't asked to carry a top pairing with a two hundred pound backpack for a partner? Put him with an equal or greater partner and he'd be a great #2 guy.

Who was Fowler's partner?

I think the same would be more true for Gardiner given the leafs lineup last year

 

[mytduxfan*]

Who was Fowler's partner?

I think the same would be more true for Gardiner given the leafs lineup last year

The black hole of puck possession that is Kevin ****ing Bieksa. However, the stats say otherwise. Apparently, Fowler has been dragging Bieksa down. Funny how it doesn't show up on the ice. Must be my eyes not working.

 

[Randy Randerson]

The black hole of puck possession that is Kevin ****ing Bieksa. However, the stats say otherwise. Apparently, Fowler has been dragging Bieksa down. Funny how it doesn't show up on the ice. Must be my eyes not working.

Bieksa appears to have been really bad in his own right, I was thinking Fowler played with one of Lindholm, Vatanen or Manson. Gardiner I believe was primarily with Phaneuf and then Polak after the trade, so also saddled with some poor defensive partners

I have no issue with Fowler as a second pairing defenseman either, good enough to be a #3 with his offensive output, I just get tired of the Gardiner slagging

 

[Redline]

I can't believe the level of absolute certainty that stats have provided to so many posters here.
It's getting to the point where absolutely nothing else matters or is even worth mentioning. In fact It's nearing the point of being comical, if it's not already there.

 

[HawkeyTalkMan]

Why is Eklund even still considered a viable source anymore?

He literally puts out 99% bogus rumors that never come to fruition. Sure, when you are blanket shooting with shotgun shells from far enough away you're bound to hit something once in a while

But I called him out on his board one time because guys like McKenzie and Dreger were breaking trade rumors well before him on stuff that wound up actually happening and he was citing himself as the sources. I called him out and posted the timestamps of their quotes and told him to stop being a hack and insulting actual credible reporters by repackaging their coverage.

Naturally he banned and blocked me after that but the point being, why bother posting his stuff because any random poster on here can just look at team needs leaguewide and make up the same thought process of who MIGHT be talking and call it an Eklund level credible rumor

 

[Randy Randerson]

I can't believe the level of absolute certainty that stats have provided to so many posters here.
It's getting to the point where absolutely nothing else matters or is even worth mentioning. In fact It's nearing the point of being comical, if it's not already there.

I don't know, I don't think there's a definitive stat line to use on any player, its all just supporting evidence. With the introduction of advanced stats to hockey, the availability of that evidence has also improved.

I think most users are open to debate as long as there's support for the arguments, where the stats fall in.

I'll take the current state of things over entirely semantic debates using "I've seen him play in person" as the evidence. Obviously the hockey ops departments of NHL clubs believe in the stats too since they all monitor them

 

[JetsHomer]

Of course they're not



I don't know why you keep bringing up Fowler. I've already said that, based on the numbers, he sucks.

Your analysis of Trouba is completely incorrect. Trouba faced the 4th best competition of anyone on WPG and by quite a margin. Meanwhile, Lindholm, Manson, Bieksa and Fowler all faced fairly similar competition. So, you're absolutely wrong in saying that Trouba faced top competition. If anything, he was sheltered compared to guys like Buff, Myers and Enstrom who each faced much better competition then Trouba. So Trouba's stats are still bad. He has bottom 6 shot suppression stats against weak competition. His shot generation numbers aren't that impressive given the competition he faced and paired with his horrendous shot suppression stats only confirms that he's just not that good.

You can keep pumping his tyres, but "the numbers don't lie".

Lol so now you're at the point of the argument where you just straight make **** up! You're as predictable as a clock mytduxfan

 

[Redline]

I don't know, I don't think there's a definitive stat line to use on any player, its all just supporting evidence. With the introduction of advanced stats to hockey, the availability of that evidence has also improved.

I think most users are open to debate as long as there's support for the arguments, where the stats fall in.

I'll take the current state of things over entirely semantic debates using "I've seen him play in person" as the evidence. Obviously the hockey ops departments of NHL clubs believe in the stats too since they all monitor them

That's where we disagree. Stats do have a place but most posters rely on them far to heavily and often are the sole basis for evaluation. There are literally thousands of examples of exactly that.

 

[Randy Randerson]

That's where we disagree. Stats do have a place but most posters rely on them far to heavily and often are the sole basis for evaluation. There are literally thousands of examples of exactly that.

I think the point of advanced stats is to be as all-encompassing as possible though, and we're making strides that way, the point is to quantify the impact on the game right? I think we're in a much better place to be able to do that than we were 5 years ago

Sure some people rely on them exclusively, and some look at them in isolation which can limit their value, but the best arguments I've seen on here have lots of statistical support.

agree to disagree I guess, I think advanced stats are making the game evaluation more analytical and producing better hockey

 

[Redline]

I think the point of advanced stats is to be as all-encompassing as possible though, and we're making strides that way, the point is to quantify the impact on the game right? I think we're in a much better place to be able to do that than we were 5 years ago

Sure some people rely on them exclusively, and some look at them in isolation which can limit their value, but the best arguments I've seen on here have lots of statistical support.

agree to disagree I guess, I think advanced stats are making the game evaluation more analytical and producing better hockey

Sounds good. Myself, if I don't have considerable viewing experience of players I don't bother to indulge in discussion of them regardless of the mountain of stats available to me.
To each their own.

 

[lindholmie]

Bieksa appears to have been really bad in his own right, I was thinking Fowler played with one of Lindholm, Vatanen or Manson. Gardiner I believe was primarily with Phaneuf and then Polak after the trade, so also saddled with some poor defensive partners

I have no issue with Fowler as a second pairing defenseman either, good enough to be a #3 with his offensive output, I just get tired of the Gardiner slagging

fowler-bieksa
lindhom-manson
depres/stoner-vatanen

 

[Randy Randerson]

fowler-bieksa
lindhom-manson
depres/stoner-vatanen

Seems a little under-utilized, no? At face value it looks like Vatanen gets a lot of PP and PK time, does that seem right?

 

[Randy Randerson]

Sounds good. Myself, if I don't have considerable viewing experience of players I don't bother to indulge in discussion of them regardless of the mountain of stats available to me.
To each their own.

I think when you get to trade forums, inevitably guys get brought up that you (the user, not you specifically) don't get a chance to watch often or have time because of the ~75,000 minutes of NHL hockey alone that get played each year. The stats become a necessary tool to get an idea of what a player contributes

the stats also help to remove the bias from a players evaluation, provided that they're collected without bias which I think we're making strides towards and some day soon will probably do electronically (interesting thread on that: http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=2115861)

Anyway, to each their own, I'm glad we have more data than we used to

 

[Goose of Reason]

Seems a little under-utilized, no? At face value it looks like Vatanen gets a lot of PP and PK time, does that seem right?

He definitely does. Boudreau would roll the pairings but Vatanen's pairing would tend to be more sheltered and utilized in a more offensive role even strength, while Fowler and Lindholm would handle the dzone minutes. Boudreau absolutely loved Vatanen offensively and his ice time would go up once we were behind a goal.

 

[Mr Hockey*]

Gardiner, lepsic + 2nd > Fowler?

 

[Randy Randerson]

He definitely does. Boudreau would roll the pairings but Vatanen's pairing would tend to be more sheltered and utilized in a more offensive role even strength, while Fowler and Lindholm would handle the dzone minutes. Boudreau absolutely loved Vatanen offensively and his ice time would go up once we were behind a goal.

Seems strange to me that Vatanen would get lots of PK time but not much defensive 5 on 5 time. I think Vatanen could be a first pairing guy if he was sheltered defensively a bit by a good partner cough *Lindholm* cough