Nick Ritchie discussion - clears waivers

[Funk21]

He will be in the next game Wednesday night against Edmonton.

Yes because Kerfoot will likely switch to C while AM is out.

I posted this on the trade discussion around available D men and I’d be all for something around Ritchie and Holl/Dermott plus a pick (later round in 2023 or 2024) for Lyubushkin.

Bunting AM Marner
Kerfoot JT Nylander
Mikheyev Kampf Kase
Simmonds Engvall Spezza
Clifford

Rielly Brodie
Muzzin Lyubushkin
Sandin Liljegren
Whoever is not in the trade package.

 

[Larcos_Unal]

When the Bruins decided to not resign him it should have been a red flag. Lazy, dopey hockey that Ritchie plays is not welcomed by that leadership group.

 

[Leaf Fans]

Yes because Kerfoot will likely switch to C while AM is out.

I posted this on the trade discussion around available D men and I’d be all for something around Ritchie and Holl/Dermott plus a pick (later round in 2023 or 2024) for Lyubushkin.

Bunting AM Marner
Kerfoot JT Nylander
Mikheyev Kampf Kase
Simmonds Engvall Spezza
Clifford

Rielly Brodie
Muzzin Lyubushkin
Sandin Liljegren
Whoever is not in the trade package.

If he is out, he has the PCR result upcoming, so he might.

 

[zeke]

Lol. You. You'd be the first person to point out a player shooting at one quarter of career average is likely to regress to the mean, and warn about small sample size. IF doing so didn't run contrary to your feelings on the player.

And lol at all of
-assigning serious weight of aggregate on ice defensive performance to winger
-describing 2.06 GA/60 (7th among forwards) as "awful"
-describing a xGF/GA within a rounding error of breakeven (not to mention several teamates) as "awful"

Your posts are so weird.

He's last, by far, in all of production, goal differential, and expected goals differential (raw and relative).

That seems pretty bad, no?


If you want to say that his shooting percentage is just bad luck and that he's actually played well, then just say that.

Don't make up some fake idea of something I would supposedly argue in some weird attempt to catch me out in a figment of your imagination - just say what you want to say and what you believe.

Why do you think I even have something against Ritchie? I defended the signing when it happened. Me pointing out he has been bad is actually me admitting I was wrong. Why do you think I am biased against him?

Why is every one of your posts to me this same weirdness of fake accusations?

 

[Antropovsky]

I kinda like Burke's candidness but yeah he has an ego

I liked how candid he was as well and his cockyness to an extent but his loosened tie, grizzled demeanor was depressing and unexciting. The guy needed to smile once and awhile... he's in the entertainment business.

 

[meefer]

Whatever Ritchie's other problems are his main weakness is his skating. Lumbering would be a kind way to put it. He's too slow to keep up with the play in transition, and he can't get back to defend in the D zone. In essence, he's almost always late to the party. His numbers last year had me fooled. Move him however you can and take the cap savings.

 

[Macallan18]

Ok reading this thread, we need Robidas Island for him until the playoffs

 

[4thline]

Your posts are so weird.

He's last, by far, in all of production, goal differential, and expected goals differential (raw and relative).

That seems pretty bad, no?


If you want to say that his shooting percentage is just bad luck and that he's actually played well, then just say that.

Don't make up some fake idea of something I would supposedly argue in some weird attempt to catch me out in a figment of your imagination - just say what you want to say and what you believe.

Why do you think I even have something against Ritchie? I defended the signing when it happened. Me pointing out he has been bad is actually me admitting I was wrong. Why do you think I am biased against him?

Why is every one of your posts to me this same weirdness of fake accusations?

I don't think he's played particularly well. He's been ok. On a team full of play drivers he's the passenger. But, he's a passenger that can contribute in other ways, and has for the most part done so.

But, yes. His shooting percentage is clearly short term bad luck. Using those 6 charts as a comprehensive assessment of his play was superficial, lacks context, and has outright bad conclusions.

He's last in production and goal differential because 3 pucks didnt go in that normally would have (his iXG agrees). Full stop.

His xGF differential isnt near as bad as you're making it seem. Breakeven isnt awful. It's .07 per 60 in the red. Based on 10 minutes a night, we're talking about an extra 5v5 goal lost every ~15 games -IF these numbers hold.


I just find the fly by superficiality hilarious coming from you. Maybe Ritchie's not important enough to give serious thought. But its weird that someone who agrees with the concept I'm talking about, and has argued at length for its application in the past, is doubling down rather than saying "hey I missed that, maybe he(Ritchie) hasn't been as bad as I portrayed." I find it frustrating when a numbers guy uses numbers badly. It gives using numbers a bad name.

 

[justashadowof]

I liked how candid he was as well and his cockyness to an extent but his loosened tie, grizzled demeanor was depressing and unexciting. The guy needed to smile once and awhile... he's in the entertainment business.

The man is just naturally hilarious and entertaining regardless of whether he's spouting nonsense or posturing.

 

[zeke]

I don't think he's played particularly well. He's been ok. On a team full of play drivers he's the passenger. But, he's a passenger that can contribute in other ways, and has for the most part done so.

But, yes. His shooting percentage is clearly short term bad luck. Using those 6 charts as a comprehensive assessment of his play was superficial, lacks context, and has outright bad conclusions.

He's last in production and goal differential because 3 pucks didnt go in that normally would have (his iXG agrees). Full stop.

His xGF differential isnt near as bad as you're making it seem. Breakeven isnt awful. It's .07 per 60 in the red. Based on 10 minutes a night, we're talking about an extra 5v5 goal lost every ~15 games -IF these numbers hold.


I just find the fly by superficiality hilarious coming from you. Maybe Ritchie's not important enough to give serious thought. But its weird that someone who agrees with the concept I'm talking about, and has argued at length for its application in the past, is doubling down rather than saying "hey I missed that, maybe he(Ritchie) hasn't been as bad as I portrayed." I find it frustrating when a numbers guy uses numbers badly. It gives using numbers a bad name.

You've never seen me dismiss terrible xgf% due to sh%, though. That's a figment of your imagination. You've never seen me separate xgf from xga, and even if we looked at xgf all by its lonesome we see that the only guy worse than Ritchie thereby is Kampf - who has faced wildly extreme defensive usage this year.

Ritchie has the worst xgf% and xgfrel by a whole lot - and if you actually want to be comprehensive you'll note that he has had very easy usage, both on the top line and on a sheltered 4th line, and the only other guys that have come anywhere near Ritchie in the xgf% are kampf and kase - guys who have had some of the toughest defensive deployment in the entire league this year.

I didn't mind the Ritchie signing, but there's no use denying that Ritchie has been the worst regular leaf this year - whether that's by actual goals or expected goals.

 

[4thline]

You've never seen me dismiss terrible xgf% due to sh%, though. That's a figment of your imagination. You've never seen me separate xgf from xga, and even if we looked at xgf all by its lonesome we see that the only guy worse than Ritchie thereby is Kampf - who has faced wildly extreme defensive usage this year.

Ritchie has the worst xgf% and xgfrel by a whole lot - and if you actually want to be comprehensive you'll note that he has had very easy usage, both on the top line and on a sheltered 4th line, and the only other guys that have come anywhere near Ritchie in the xgf% are kampf and kase - guys who have had some of the toughest defensive deployment in the entire league this year.

I didn't mind the Ritchie signing, but there's no use denying that Ritchie has been the worst regular leaf this year - whether that's by actual goals or expected goals.

And neither am I dismissing "terrible" xgf% due to sh%. The sh% point only applied to 4 out the 6 graphs you initially posted. That was one issue.

The second issue is really one of hyperbole and statistical laziness. That you never separate goals for and against shouldn't be a point of pride.

Of the 12 forwards to play at least 60 minutes his 5v5 xGF/60 of 2.6 is for all practical purposes tied with Kerfoot and Kase for 9th. The next man up in 8th (Engvall at 2.72) amounts to 1 extra goal every ~10 games. League wide, 2.6 puts him 150/478 among forwards with more than 60 min.
Terrible awful horrible.

.... ... his 5v5 xGA/60 of 2.66 is 10th, for all practical purposes the same as Tavares and Kase. The next group up (Simmonds/Kerf/Nylander at 2.45-2.5) amounts to 1 less goal every ~5-7 games. League wide, 2.66 puts him 377/478 among forwards with more than 60 min.
Terrible awful horrible.

Combine them, that terrible horrible awful xGF% of 49.48 (again not last, and not far from the players above) translates into a terrible horrible awful expected -1 goal every ~14 games. (240/478)

Is he the worst / least impactful forward on the team in terms of pushing play? Yeah likely.
Is it by near the margin those 6 charts portrayed? No.
Does someone have to be the worst on a damn good team? Yup. In our case it's a flawed 3rd line level producer that doubles as a super heavyweight fighter

 

[Ashdown2]

When the Bruins decided to not resign him it should have been a red flag. Lazy, dopey hockey that Ritchie plays is not welcomed by that leadership group.

yes the continual "bruins are the best" .......... dude they did the same thing with KASE ........
the bruins would have been 100x better off with richie and KASE for the same money they are paying foligno who has been total shit....

frankly we dodge a bullet if the choice was foligno at that contract or ritchie

 

[TML1967]

Whatever Ritchie's other problems are his main weakness is his skating. Lumbering would be a kind way to put it. He's too slow to keep up with the play in transition, and he can't get back to defend in the D zone. In essence, he's almost always late to the party. His numbers last year had me fooled. Move him however you can and take the cap savings.

This seems like something the Leafs may have thought they could improve a bit with Barbs tutelage.
I wonder if it makes sense to keep him as the 13th F / taxi squad (if possible) and just have him working on his skating every day to bring him up to at least league average.

 

[ottomaddox]

Real Kyper and Borne podcast fan 590

Kypreos yesterday: "There is some suggestion out there that they may have to send somebody down, or even waive Nick Richie"

 

[ACC1224]

Real Kyper and Borne podcast fan 590

Kypreos yesterday: "There is some suggestion out there that they may have to send somebody down, or even waive Nick Richie"

That's wonderful insight by Kypreos

 

[LeafChief]

Real Kyper and Borne podcast fan 590

Kypreos yesterday: "There is some suggestion out there that they may have to send somebody down, or even waive Nick Richie"

Wow - what a genius!

 

[The Iceman]

When the Bruins decided to not resign him it should have been a red flag. Lazy, dopey hockey that Ritchie plays is not welcomed by that leadership group.

But they replaced Ritchie with onegoalsincecolumbusnickfoligno at a higher cap it.

 

[The Iceman]

Real Kyper and Borne podcast fan 590

Kypreos yesterday: "There is some suggestion out there that they may have to send somebody down, or even waive Nick Richie"

Isn't there talk of a taxi squad not counting against the cap?
And with all the COVID cases and injuries Ritchie will get his PT.
Kase apparently dinged up now.

 

[zeke]

Real Kyper and Borne podcast fan 590

Kypreos yesterday: "There is some suggestion out there that they may have to send somebody down, or even waive Nick Richie"

Kypreos: "I get my ideas from HFboards"

 

[Macallan18]

That's wonderful insight by Kypreos

Kypreos never misses a chance to state the obvious. Its the only time he has a chance of being right.

 

[zeke]

The second issue is really one of hyperbole and statistical laziness. That you never separate goals for and against shouldn't be a point of pride.

One is meaningless without the other.

I could care less that Ritchie has slightly better xgf than Kampf, when Kampf is wildly more effective defensively in extreme defensive usage.

Ritchie being slightly better than Kampf in xgf without that xga context is entirely misleading, and just giving us a nonsense conclusion. It doesn't actually mean Ritchie has been better offensively.


There's no putting lipstick on this pig this year unfortunately - Ritchie has been by far the worst regular Leafs forward this year, both offensively and defensively.

 

[4thline]

One is meaningless without the other.

I could care less that Ritchie has slightly better xgf than Kampf, when Kampf is wildly more effective defensively in extreme defensive usage.

Ritchie being slightly better than Kampf in xgf without that xga context is entirely misleading, and just giving us a nonsense conclusion. It doesn't actually mean Ritchie has been better offensively.


There's no putting lipstick on this pig this year unfortunately - Ritchie has been by far the worst regular Leafs forward this year, both offensively and defensively.

Sigh, at least it's a better "one number" than corsi this time.

 

[Fogelhund]

There's no putting lipstick on this pig this year unfortunately - Ritchie has been by far the worst regular Leafs forward this year, both offensively and defensively.

The reality is, with. or without fancy stats, this is the way it is. Ritchie just appears to be a guy with no fire in the belly. He could be a force, should be a force... but you know... it's that look on his face all the time... like he's checked out on the world, his thoughts are elsewhere. I'm sure he'll get another chance, and what he should be, we'd love to have... but he's just not that enough.

 

[zeke]

The reality is, with. or without fancy stats, this is the way it is. Ritchie just appears to be a guy with no fire in the belly. He could be a force, should be a force... but you know... it's that look on his face all the time... like he's checked out on the world, his thoughts are elsewhere. I'm sure he'll get another chance, and what he should be, we'd love to have... but he's just not that enough.

I don't even say that really.

He's very slow. He's not too smart.

He's not an energizer buddy.

But I don't think he's super lazy or anything. I think he's trying. He finishes his checks.

 

[zeke]

Sigh, at least it's a better "one number" than corsi this time.

I guess it's too much to ask that you trust me a tiny little bit that I actually put fairly objective comprehensive stats out there in the first place, rather than accusing me of being lazy or cherry picking and biased.

But if you want less lazy and more comprehensive stats, they all say say the same thing. Goals based or expected goals based.


Starting with goals based:

And expected goals based: