Morgan Rielly Appreciation Thread.

[zeke]

Just to point-out, because I think you are using only TOI to determine and that is a flaw. Rielly actually played tougher QOC minutes than every single one of those DMen you listed. He was #2 in the ENTIRE NHL last season in that category. Due to this, it's hard to agree that the coaching staff don't somehow trust him defensively.

you're right, but TOI does still matter, and Mo really does need to play more to truly earn a top-end #1 dman label imo.

 

[BehindTheTimes]

Habs fan in peace. Always loved Rielly. I still believe he's a stud with absolute 1st d pairing talent. Slowly coming into his own. I don't see the Phil Housley com-parables at all. I always had him pegged as a Brian Leetch type dman, smooth skating, high end offensive skill, reads the play well and more than adequate defensively.

 

[Nithoniniel]

Berkshire still doesn't value qoc properly.

which is why named a sheltered bottom pair guy like Colin Miller as one of the elite dmen in hockey.

Isn't the issue there that it's quite hard to find support for a more severe adjustment? Personally, I tend to evaluate players from how they perform within the bracket of their usage, but that's a luxury that Andrew doesn't really have.

 

[GBLeaf]

I'm just here to say I appreciate Morgan Rielly.

 

[MyBudJT]

Berkshire still doesn't value qoc properly.

which is why named a sheltered bottom pair guy like Colin Miller as one of the elite dmen in hockey.

Can you elaborate? Have we determined a ‘proper’ way to evaluate QoC???

 

[613Leafer]

Burke says a lot of absurd headline grabbing things.

But him saying they had Rielly ranked as #1 in that draft I do actually believe and in hindsight he's definitely in the conversation with 2-3 other guys. He's head and shoulders above all four guys drafted ahead of him.

 

[zeke]

Can you elaborate? Have we determined a ‘proper’ way to evaluate QoC???

i'm pretty sure i've found a decent rough proxy that has an obvious impact, yeah. that's using opponent's TOIqoc - but converting it to more of a relative stat than only tge absolute number that is currently available on corsica. unfortunately I don't have the maths to fully flesh it out yet.

remembering, of course, that common sense tells us that playing against the opponent's top line is not really even the same sport as playing against their 4th line - I.e. the burden of proof is still heavily on those who deny qoc matters. they need to look much harder than they have so far to dispel such an obvious truth, imo.

as an example, my qoc number tells us that there is no surprise that kadri's possession numbers are way up this year, even with worse linemates and with him seemingly not playing great - it's because he's gone from playing tough 1st line qoc last year to just ok 3rd line qoc this year.

 

[White Shadow]

Berkshire still doesn't value qoc properly.

which is why named a sheltered bottom pair guy like Colin Miller as one of the elite dmen in hockey.

Could not agree more.

 

[zeke]

Isn't the issue there that it's quite hard to find support for a more severe adjustment? Personally, I tend to evaluate players from how they perform within the bracket of their usage, but that's a luxury that Andrew doesn't really have.

well I think that the analytics community has far too eagerly dismissed qoc as a factor, based largely on poorly thought out experiments - and they have far more work to do if they actually want to dismiss such an obviously important factor out of hand.

the analytics community will tell you that nate Schmidt was much better in 16-17 as a bottom pair dman for Washington than he was as a #1 elite tough usage dman for the knights last year, which is obviously dumb. they'll also tell you that sheltered Colin Miller was actually the best dman on the knights last year, which again is silly. meanwhile, relative toiqoc would explain why Vegas is missing Schmidt so damn much this year.

and they keep doing this - whether it's Gardiner or Klefbom or skhei or Miller, they keep convincing themselves that sheltered dmen are actually elite. it's killing their credibility imo.

 

[Nithoniniel]

well I think that the analytics community has far too eagerly dismissed qoc as a factor, based largely on poorly thought out experiments - and they have far more work to do if they actually want to dismiss such an obviously important factor out of hand.

the analytics community will tell you that nate Schmidt was much better in 16-17 as a bottom pair dman for Washington than he was as a #1 elite tough usage dman for the knights last year, which is obviously dumb. they'll also tell you that sheltered Colin Miller was actually the best dman on the knights last year, which again is silly. meanwhile, relative toiqoc would explain why Vegas is missing Schmidt so damn much this year.

and they keep doing this - whether it's Gardiner or Klefbom or skhei or Miller, they keep convincing themselves that sheltered dmen are actually elite. it's killing their credibility imo.

I agree completely. But I think the issue is that as an adjustment, there's just not been a version of QoC that does much. There's been so many attempts by now, and they all seem to end up "with increasing sample size, our QoC measurement at large just doesn't have a significant effect."

I think that eventually they'll figure it out. Like you said, the analytic community just haven't provided a well thought out experiment so far. Something I'd like to see would be a QoC experiment on d-men only based on the p/60 of the forwards they face. It's been well-documented that d-men are mostly affected by opposing forwards, so it might clarify things to just skip looking at opposing d-men there. And p/60 might be an interesting metric to look at. I would also focus primarily on the extremes, what happens to players who are very sheltered or play very tough minutes.

 

[zeke]

I agree completely. But I think the issue is that as an adjustment, there's just not been a version of QoC that does much. There's been so many attempts by now, and they all seem to end up "with increasing sample size, our QoC measurement at large just doesn't have a significant effect."

I think that eventually they'll figure it out. Like you said, the analytic community just haven't provided a well thought out experiment so far. Something I'd like to see would be a QoC experiment on d-men only based on the p/60 of the forwards they face. It's been well-documented that d-men are mostly affected by opposing forwards, so it might clarify things to just skip looking at opposing d-men there. And p/60 might be an interesting metric to look at. I would also focus primarily on the extremes, what happens to players who are very sheltered or play very tough minutes.

I'm pretty sure a Relative TOIqoc stat would do the trick.

The only problem with the current TOIqoc stat is that it doesn't adequately express the magnitude of the difference between playing against top line vs bottom line players - basically because the best players in the league only play about twice as much as the worst players, even though their actual talent difference is much bigger.

So the toughest TOIqocs are 30%, and the worst are 27%, which seems like a tiny difference - but that's a problem with the stat only being a proxy for relative talent, not an actual measure of absolute talent.

so if you look only at that 3% range, and compare TOIqoc only by where they fall in that range (I use grades because it's easy, but a relative stat would be much better), you get imo a very clear picture of what kind of usage that player gets...and even better, it seems to have a pretty blatant effect on that player's performance, in most cases.

iirc there is some minor correlation already with the plain TOIqoc stat - but I if you amplified the variance by a factor of 10 or so by turning it into a relative stat, I think it would be much clearer.

but again, i don't have the maths for that.

 

[Polaris1010]

and they keep doing this - whether it's Gardiner or Klefbom or skhei or Miller, they keep convincing themselves that sheltered dmen are actually elite. it's killing their credibility imo.

That is not really the problem with regards to credibility IMHO.

This is what I find problematic. Sometimes a method is posted, and inquires are made about the methodology.

If someone has questions on the methodology, then too often the analytics person gets all defensive. And that's BS.

Why are they comparing two numbers this way? Wouldn't it be better to compare those two number THAT way? Questions like this, you get a hostile reaction.

That tends to confirm that some people just do not know what they are doing with numbers and data.

Like you posted, and I agree, they are putting themselves into their own intellectual straight-jackets.

Just to mention that, and the sparks will fly.

 

[diceman934]

Rielly was a beast tonight. He control the play when he was on the ice tonight .

 

[Mr Hockey]

Rielly was a beast tonight. He control the play when he was on the ice tonight .

Sure, he played with the Matthews and Tavares line all night long.

 

[diceman934]

Sure, he played with the Matthews and Tavares line all night long.

No he did not that went to Gardiner and Zaitsev. Rielly was our Best D man tonight hardly a scoring chance against while he was on the ice tonight.

 

[Mr Hockey]

No he did not that went to Gardiner and Zaitsev. Rielly was our Best D man tonight hardly a scoring chance against while he was on the ice tonight.

Riellys minutes with teammates in order from tonights game at 5-vs-5,

Ron Hainsey

D

15:24

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Kasperi Kapanen

R

8:01

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Patrick Marleau

C

7:46

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

John Tavares

C

7:43

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Auston Matthews

C

7:31

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Mitchell Marner

C

7:31

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Zach Hyman

C

6:24

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Nazem Kadri

C

2:43

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

added: i never said he played bad, he looked good

 

[Wafflewhipper]

Pretty cool he breaks a Bobby Orr record that's awesome
Morgan Rielly breaks Bobby Orr record with historic start

The record breaking continues with this group of young players. Leaf fans are so lucky right now to he a part of this era of the franchise!

Owwwweeeee

 

[Wafflewhipper]

Everybody say "thank you Babs for developing Rielly " at the same time!!!

I have said before Morgs can do what Karlsson can and he just might this season)

The team north america jobbie was his coming out like many superstars have done in the past on a similar stage.

Babs incremental development is the game changer in this breakthrough i believe. He is still getting better and still developing. Keep that in mind instead of knocking aspects of his adv stats.

Sometimes people need to stop looking a gift horse in the mouth. )

 

[JT AM da real deal]

Always love Rielly's skating and offence. I wish he would get a little mean streak like Doughty. Take Rielly's skating and offence and combine with Doughty's defence and you have a perrenial Norris winner. But i understand it is very difficult to get the entire package. Personally the only defencemen who have the entire package is Hedman and Burns. I say that because Doughty can be off offensively for long stretches.

 

[Liminality]

Always love Rielly's skating and offence. I wish he would get a little mean streak like Doughty. Take Rielly's skating and offence and combine with Doughty's defence and you have a perrenial Norris winner. But i understand it is very difficult to get the entire package. Personally the only defencemen who have the entire package is Hedman and Burns. I say that because Doughty can be off offensively for long stretches.

It's possible that Rielly continues to develop his defensive game. Maybe not to the level of Doughty but still really solidifying Rielly as a true #1 defender.

 

[Damisoph]

I think we'll see this more often as the year goes on, but I could see Washington finishing their checks on Rielly specifically. I think he's starting to get the respect league-wide and they are adjusting accordingly. Mo gotta get himself a mean streak.

 

[Wafflewhipper]

It's possible that Rielly continues to develop his defensive game. Maybe not to the level of Doughty but still really solidifying Rielly as a true #1 defender.

He is a true #1 already. Disregard all the nit picking negatives! They are really really getting old and misleading.

I absolutely enjoy and appreciate watching Morgs mistakes included. There isn't a petfect defenseman in the league.

He definitely is still developing!

 

[hockeywiz542]

Kadri finally nets first goal, Leafs withstand late Jets charge to win on the road

…. Rielly is set through the 2021-22 season, having signed a six-year, $30-millon contract in April 2016.

When we put forth the idea that the contract works well in the Leafs’ favour, not that Rielly is at the bank with cap in hand, the 24-year-old wouldn’t hear it.

“I don’t look at that way,” Rielly said. “I feel lucky just to play for this team in the first place, let alone get paid to do it. By no means do I look back and wish I would have done it differently."

“It was a great move for both sides and I’m happy that it did not get dragged out, and happy there was no feeling of contention at all."

“You never want to be viewed as being greedy or selfish. You want to be a team guy, you want to do what is best for you and do what is best for the team. I think when we went through that it got handled very well, there was not a lot of talk about it in the media, we went about our business and made sure we were professional about it.”

 

[Apotheosis]

Rielly was IMO, the best D on the ice tonight. Hardly a bad move out there.

 

[Damisoph]

Kadri finally nets first goal, Leafs withstand late Jets charge to win on the road