Confirmed with Link: [NYR/NSH] Michael Del Zotto for Kevin Klein

[Rangerfan4life90]

Del Zotto was excellent the year before the lock-out. offensively and defensively. He was playing big minutes for a missing Staal. admirable showing in the playoffs. Lock-out seasons are always difficult to read and then under AV, with a healthy Staal in tow, it was a matter of which direction you wanted to invest in? Staal or MDZ? AV made his choice abundantly clear and really gave Sather no choice. Deal MDZ or watch AV destroy MDZ's skill and trade value even further. Ultimately, Sather hired AV but this is more about AV's personnel decisions rather than Sather's asset management. The return is good so I wouldn't give Slats a bad grade there. B/B-

love affair with Franson? I don't understand one bit. I'd take Klein and his defensive reliability over Franson's points and defensive gaffs any day. If we have sound defense, our goaltending is top notch enough to give us the best chance at success. The goal for/against differential between Klein and Franson, I don't know what it is but i'm betting Klein wins that one with a generous margin.

I would have figured AV would have preferred MDZ over Staal if given the choice, but I digress.

Anyways, MDZ got a raw deal here under AV, and nobody will change my mind on that. For example, MDZ getting benched 10-11 games during a time frame where other players were performing just as bad, if not, worse. Hypocritical stuff like that annoys the hell out of me.

It's the one thing I hate about sports. A coach being biased towards one particular player. Essentially like politics.

It's not to say I don't like the return we got. I like Klein, and he'll be a good top 4 right handed D-man for us on a very friendly team contract. However, MDZ WILL rebound. I can almost bet on that. He was already showing signs of that the past week or so.

 

[Kwayry]

And fantasy hockey has devolved the thought process around players to stat lines and box scores...according to your stats Del Zaster leads McD in every category except Blocks and Shot Accuracy...do your eyes tell you the same thing when you watch a game?

Last season MDZ played 46 games vs MCD's 47 games

Points

MDZ - 21
MCD - 22

PP/TOI per Game

MDZ - 2:54
MCD - 0:38

If your "Top 4 PMD offensive dman" (your words from above) is out pointed by a shut down dman who plays against the other teams top guys every night and who gets virtually no PP time, then really is he really a "Top offensive PMD" ?

2 quick corrections.
1 - McD did not score 22 last season, go back and recheck your math
2 - McD was part of a shutdown pair, but the shutdown Dman on the pair was Girardi.

I was responding to a post that said DZ was a bad D, why do you want to make it a McD vs DZ?
Is it either he is bad or he is not as good as McD? That's a dishonest argument to say the least.
As to your eye test argument. The eyes can deceive you and confirm what you already wanted to see.
Facts are supposed to help you form an opinion. You want it backwards, let's form an opinion and then let's selectively use facts to confirm it. That's called confirmation bias.

My eyes tell me DZ is a good Dman, facts support that.
You calling him Del Zaster tells me everything I need to know about your "eye test".
This is what Poile said today about DZ

Del Zotto is what we like to think is the type of player we want to add. He has some great offensive upside. Two years ago he scored 42 points and he has great skating ability, goes from D to O very quickly and can make that first pass out of the zone. We think this is the way the game is being played and where it’s going and it’s a team that struggles offensively a lot of our O comes from our D and I think that Del Zotto will help in that area. There are six years difference, that is not the reason we made the deal. Del Zotto has big time upside offensively and hopefully under our coaches that will be fulfilled. I think that is really about it, it’s a trade that we made for today believing that this push to get back into the playoffs, he can help us and more importantly this is a trade for a long-term. He is an RFA at the end of the season but as we made the deal it is our goal to sign him to a longer-term contract.

I believe our defense is better today and will be much better going forward. This was a hockey trade.â€
On DZ and AV, “that was one of the reasons he was made available. We have scouted him for years and it’s something that we have been talking about for a while. It’s been public knowledge that he was available so we have had time to watch him play, review tape and I think we pretty well know what we are getting and we like the potential.â€

http://snyrangersblog.com/former-ra...d-poile-on-why-he-acquired-michael-del-zotto/

I also posted elsewhere quotes from Torts praising DZ last season when Staal was injured. On many nights he was the Rangers best D, and yes that means he was better than McDonagh. They are on this thread, look for them.

So who should I believe, my own eyes, facts and the opinion of an NHL coach, NHL GM and his scouting department who has scouted DZ for years, or the collective opinion of a mob who has designated DZ as the whipping boy and every one of his mistake is overblown, whereas the mistakes of others, including McDonagh, Stralman are glanced over?

That's a pretty tough one.

I like Klein as a Dman, I watched him play. He is a pretty good, but there is no doubt in my mind that Sather sold, and Poile bought, low on DZ.

 

[Kwayry]

I think that there is a good "risk", that if you go to the main board in say a year or two, and if MDZ can get his act together and hang on to a top 4 D role in Nashville next to a really good RD, that people will value him really high.

We will see.

I also think, IRL, that Klein is worth quite much more than those b-tier prospects and 2nd-3rd round picks that many of those posters proposed would come the other way for DZ...

And you know what they will tell you? Oh I was wrong, I will eat crow. That's all that will cost them. And they will continue making predictions based on NHL14 ratings and hearsay from other posters. HF has turned onto an alternate reality where the words of other posters is worth more than actually going out and doing research on your own. Too much effort.
Edit: If you produce facts that contradict their view, their ultimate refuge is the "eye test".

 

[EpicDing]

You forgot Falk dammit.

 

[RealCatFishHunter]

missed the game how was klein tonight?

 

[Kwayry]

missed the game how was klein tonight?

He was pretty good I thought. Had a nervous first shift, where he almost coughed up the puck, then he settled down to play his game, a couple of blocks, a couple of hits, a shot on goal. Nothing flashy.

 

[RealCatFishHunter]

He was pretty good I thought. Had a nervous first shift, where he almost coughed up the puck, then he settled down to play his game, a couple of blocks, a couple of hits, a shot on goal. Nothing flashy.

you're playing good D when you don't stand out. good to hear

 

[Chimpradamus]

... So who should I believe, my own eyes, facts and the opinion of an NHL coach, NHL GM and his scouting department who has scouted DZ for years, or the collective opinion of a mob who has designated DZ as the whipping boy and every one of his mistake is overblown, whereas the mistakes of others, including McDonagh, Stralman are glanced over?

That's a pretty tough one.

I like Klein as a Dman, I watched him play. He is a pretty good, but there is no doubt in my mind that Sather sold, and Poile bought, low on DZ.

These quotes are political. The only one who may criticize him in an interview is his own coach and never in a situation like this. Why would they ever say something negative to the snake media about Del Zotto? Anything at all that they can latch on to with their sensationalist fangs? The sellers don't want to downgrade their merchandise and the buyers want to tell everyone how right this move was (and show support in their new player). The neutral parties are smart enough not to get involved. In fact, when have you ever read negative remarks about players involved in trades? Yet the reasons why they were traded are always there and seldom given in an honest response.

Del Zotto's problem wasn't his talent, skating or skill. Technically, he's a good defenseman. The problem was it was none of those areas which a coach can easily help to correct. It was his smarts and his attitude. All players make mistakes, but when Del Zotto made them, you would sometimes question his hockey basics. He was wildly inconsistent, which is a big no-no if you want a successful team. He played more like a bad defenseman occassionally playing well, more than the other way around. When he couldn't calm down, he became a live grenade. You pressure him then, chances are he will lay an egg, with or without the puck.

Del Zotto has the talent, but not the head to live up to his potential. That makes him a big risk, because no one knows if he ever will get his head straight and play consistent, solid hockey where his upside outweighs his negatives. Nashville knows this and will take a chance on him, which is in no way a guarantee. His days in New York were over, AV's style fit him the worst, because man to man defense requires solid decision making from the players and Del Zotto got the raw deal. He simply fell of the LD depth chart and we lack a crease clearing RD after Sauer disappeared.

Boston traded both Seguin and Kessel and their problems weren't even the hockey smarts, only attitude. But then again, Boston are cup contenders and try to keep a consistent philosophy to their game plan. What does NYR want to have, a squad that can bring it or occassionally bring it? The trade of Del Zotto was a no brainer.

 

[Boom Boom Geoffrion*]

You're a riot

 

[Hi ImHFNYR]

I laughed.


errrr.....


Stralman has better possession numbers than McDonagh because he starts more shifts in the defensive zone and plays against a lot tougher opponents.

Top left to bottom right is progressively tough minutes.

What I read was him saying that advanced stats can be very misleading. To prove this point he then used an advanced stat which was misleading and showed Stralman was better than McD. The caveat is that he knows this can be easily explained away using logic, visual evidence and some other stats. So I have to ask: were you showing this chart to disprove his idea because you thought he was presenting it as actual evidence or just for fun? Because he was very clear that he already knew that the stat he was using was misleading and incorrect. It doesn't seem like you realized that this was the point of him bringing up that stat though.

I think the moral of all this advanced stat talk is: it's for the use of people who are actually advanced in their thinking which disqualifies basically everyone on HF who tries to use them

 

[eco's bones]

These quotes are political. The only one who may criticize him in an interview is his own coach and never in a situation like this. Why would they ever say something negative to the snake media about Del Zotto? Anything at all that they can latch on to with their sensationalist fangs? The sellers don't want to downgrade their merchandise and the buyers want to tell everyone how right this move was (and show support in their new player). The neutral parties are smart enough not to get involved. In fact, when have you ever read negative remarks about players involved in trades? Yet the reasons why they were traded are always there and seldom given in an honest response.

Del Zotto's problem wasn't his talent, skating or skill. Technically, he's a good defenseman. The problem was it was none of those areas which a coach can easily help to correct. It was his smarts and his attitude. All players make mistakes, but when Del Zotto made them, you would sometimes question his hockey basics. He was wildly inconsistent, which is a big no-no if you want a successful team. He played more like a bad defenseman occassionally playing well, more than the other way around. When he couldn't calm down, he became a live grenade. You pressure him then, chances are he will lay an egg, with or without the puck.

Del Zotto has the talent, but not the head to live up to his potential. That makes him a big risk, because no one knows if he ever will get his head straight and play consistent, solid hockey where his upside outweighs his negatives. Nashville knows this and will take a chance on him, which is in no way a guarantee. His days in New York were over, AV's style fit him the worst, because man to man defense requires solid decision making from the players and Del Zotto got the raw deal. He simply fell of the LD depth chart and we lack a crease clearing RD after Sauer disappeared.

Boston traded both Seguin and Kessel and their problems weren't even the hockey smarts, only attitude. But then again, Boston are cup contenders and try to keep a consistent philosophy to their game plan. What does NYR want to have, a squad that can bring it or occassionally bring it? The trade of Del Zotto was a no brainer.

Very good post. Personally I originally thought the move from Torts to AV would benefit Del Zotto the most of all our d-men. In retrospect DZ could hardly handle the kind of system AV brought in.

Anyway Klein looked okay last night. Confused now and again about what he should be doing or where his partner was. St. Louis came with a heavy forecheck though and he didn't panic or make any big defensive blunder. Needs a bit more acclimation to get entirely into the groove. Basically it looks like he's going to be a steady guy.

 

[Ail]

What I read was him saying that advanced stats can be very misleading. To prove this point he then used an advanced stat which was misleading and showed Stralman was better than McD. The caveat is that he knows this can be easily explained away using logic, visual evidence and some other stats. So I have to ask: were you showing this chart to disprove his idea because you thought he was presenting it as actual evidence or just for fun? Because he was very clear that he already knew that the stat he was using was misleading and incorrect. It doesn't seem like you realized that this was the point of him bringing up that stat though.

I think the moral of all this advanced stat talk is: it's for the use of people who are actually advanced in their thinking which disqualifies basically everyone on HF who tries to use them

Yes, no one on HF is qualified to use or interpret advanced stats. Excellent conclusion. Speak for yourself.

 

[Cassano]

The whole article is pretty awesome. Recommended reading.

Funniest thing I've read in awhile.

Some definitions I found GOLD:

Character Guy (n.) — in theory, a term used to describe a player who is a strong leader and who exudes a positive presence in the dressing room by displaying courage and resolve in the face of adversity. In reality, a term awarded exclusively to players who regularly agree to speak to the media.

So true.

Enigmatic (adj.) — a term applied to any player whose personal motivations seem to be inconsistent with traditional hockey values but remain somewhat opaque because of the player’s reluctance to fully divulge his … oh, who are we kidding, it means “Russian.â€

FoxTrax (n.) — the glowing puck used on Fox NHL broadcasts in the mid-’90s. Saying that you kind of liked the FoxTrax puck is the easiest way to make a Canadian leap across a table and try to strangle you.

Intense (adj.) — showing strong emotions and/or passion for the sport of hockey.

Intensz (adj.) — nice try, Bobby Ryan.

 

[Cassano]

I'm sure they use it in conjunction with video rather than just numbers in a spreadsheet.

I thought this was commonly known. Sorta need to watch the games to track shots against, zone differences, etc.

 

[Trxjw]

What I read was him saying that advanced stats can be very misleading. To prove this point he then used an advanced stat which was misleading and showed Stralman was better than McD. The caveat is that he knows this can be easily explained away using logic, visual evidence and some other stats. So I have to ask: were you showing this chart to disprove his idea because you thought he was presenting it as actual evidence or just for fun? Because he was very clear that he already knew that the stat he was using was misleading and incorrect. It doesn't seem like you realized that this was the point of him bringing up that stat though.

Someone got it.

 

[Trxjw]

I mean, I'm not doubting that you're a MDZ supporter or hater, I'm just messing around with the idea of so called 'unbiased eyes' when you've already made it clear within your mind that these are 'clearly flawed' in your last post.

Why? I already stated that I had no problem with advanced metrics, simply that taking them out of context makes them flawed. You said "individually they don't tell the whole story" and yet the entire premise of your "DZ is superior to Klein" post was based on an individual statistic. You tried to use them to support your point, but in reality they do the opposite if you look at the big picture and not one column of the table.

My ability to watch a game with 'unbiased eyes' has absolutely nothing to do with my opinion of advanced metrics. My 'bias' lies with people's ability to make a cohesive argument using advanced metrics, not in the metrics themselves. For every one person who actually understands them, there are dozens who simply read the chart, find the better number, and point at it incessantly until people with common sense simply give up on a lost cause.

 

[Mikos87]

Player usage is a reflection of utility and not ability.

The chart shows how a coach thinks of his roster, and not what the player can do.

 

[Ail]

Player usage is a reflection of utility and not ability.

The chart shows how a coach thinks of his roster, and not what the player can do.

Yes and with that being said one can reasonably conclude generally that if the coach is giving the player tough starts/minutes/match-ups consistently, they are probably capable of said assignments. It is loosely connected to player ability.

 

[Thirty One]

Player usage is a reflection of utility and not ability.

The chart shows how a coach thinks of his roster, and not what the player can do.

It provides context.

If a player is getting hammered in puck possession, it's good to take a look to see if some of that can be explained by the type of minutes they're playing.

What I read was him saying that advanced stats can be very misleading. To prove this point he then used an advanced stat which was misleading and showed Stralman was better than McD. The caveat is that he knows this can be easily explained away using logic, visual evidence and some other stats. So I have to ask: were you showing this chart to disprove his idea because you thought he was presenting it as actual evidence or just for fun? Because he was very clear that he already knew that the stat he was using was misleading and incorrect. It doesn't seem like you realized that this was the point of him bringing up that stat though.

Well he asked to "see the whole story via statistics" so I provided some context.

I think the moral of all this advanced stat talk is: it's for the use of people who are actually advanced in their thinking which disqualifies basically everyone on HF who tries to use them

Agreed. You shouldn't use them.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

I thought this was commonly known. Sorta need to watch the games to track shots against, zone differences, etc.

Right, so you can't just look at stats and say the guy sucks.

 

[Thirty One]

If I don't think Chris Kunitz is a better player than Marian Hossa does it mean I can't use goals to support my view?

 

[Thirty One]

Right, so you can't just look at stats and say the guy sucks.

No, because of course, watching him play three games is always better than three years of data.

 

[Cassano]

No, because of course, watching him play three games is always better than three years of data.

**** this, we can all agree to go by the words of Joe Micheletti.

To him, every player is a 'solid, solid player'. Emphasis on the 2nd solid.

No need for stats, he is an unbiased observer of the game.

I mean, I think we can all agree to go by the words from him. No BS whacko stats or biased perspectives.

 

[Thirty One]

**** this, we can all agree to go by the words of Joe Micheletti.

To him, every player is a 'solid, solid player'. Emphasis on the 2nd solid.

No need for stats, he is an unbiased observer of the game.

I mean, I think we can all agree to go by the words from him. No BS whacko stats or biased perspectives.

I think you may find this interesting.

Klein's played over 100 5-on-5 minutes with 12 defensemen from 2009-2013. Two of them had a better CF% with him than without him. (I took out ice time shared with Weber/Suter to make sure it wasn't because of that.)

In total, they had a weighted average change of -2.6%. Del Zotto's is -0.6%.

 

[BlueshirtBlitz]

I think you may find this interesting.

Klein's played over 100 5-on-5 minutes with 12 defensemen from 2009-2013. Two of them had a better CF% with him than without him. (I took out ice time shared with Weber/Suter to make sure it wasn't because of that.)

In total, they had a weighted average change of -2.6%. Del Zotto's is -0.6%.

Could that be because of the forwards they played with?

Still trying to acclimate to exactly how to view advanced stats (WAR equivalent, plz. Get it done, Slats) and isn't Corsi dependent on anybody on the team stopping shots and taking shots?

As an MDZ advocate who thinks his defensive woes were overblown, this is interesting.