Thirty One
Safe is safe.
- Dec 28, 2003
- 28,981
- 24,357
Except in this case, the people writing off Buchnevich are the ones who have their eyes closed to the evidence.Oh, and by the way, I equate the people writing Buch off to flat earthers.
Except in this case, the people writing off Buchnevich are the ones who have their eyes closed to the evidence.Oh, and by the way, I equate the people writing Buch off to flat earthers.
@eco's bones I'm not trying to imply that Buchnevich will reach Tarasenko's level of dominance with some patience and hope. I don't think he will. I'm simply proving that the absurd premise of Buchnevich being a disappointment or not being a good player is just that: absurd.
One area I expected more from Buch is his shot. His accuracy needs work...
I feel he should have more than 14G...
He has missed on great opportunities..Why? He's never been a big goal-scorer, and his SH% is right around average.
Well they're not made up. Watching Buch miss great chances is what I'm talking about. He has good /soft hands, he should be able to bury more chances that have been presented to him.I feel like most of the "finishing" labels people attach to players are made up. A player's finishing is reflected in their shooting percentage. Some players shoot a little higher than others due to being a better goal scorer, like Laine, but most players are all in the same range. The difference in goal-scoring usually comes from the amount of shots they take.
You bring up simulations, how about this- in video games/sims players rarely miss open nets from prime real estate. In real life they do, unless you’re an elite scorer/finisher, and even then it happens occasionally. It’ll come, the game is still slowing down for him.Well they're not made up. Watching Buch miss great chances is what I'm talking about. He has good /soft hands, he should be able to bury more chances that have been presented to him.
This isn't a simulation. A computer doesn't force him to miss an open side of the net because his shot percentage can't go above 13.
I think he has the talent to be Tarasenko/Kucherov level but strikes me as lacking confidence. Not only is he a very young guy learning a new language, living in a foreign country, but he has to deal with a coach who has scratched him for Tanner Glass, burried him on the 4th line, misuses him, one of the lower TOI despite being one of our leading scorers, etc. I think next season under a new coach, maybe even with Kovalchuk; we’ll really see him come into his ownWell they're not made up. Watching Buch miss great chances is what I'm talking about. He has good /soft hands, he should be able to bury more chances that have been presented to him.
This isn't a simulation. A computer doesn't force him to miss an open side of the net because his shot percentage can't go above 13.
I think he has the talent to be Tarasenko/Kucherov level but strikes me as lacking confidence. Not only is he a very young guy learning a new language, living in a foreign country, but he has to deal with a coach who has scratched him for Tanner Glass, burried him on the 4th line, misuses him, one of the lower TOI despite being one of our leading scorers, etc. I think next season under a new coach, maybe even with Kovalchuk; we’ll really see him come into his own
They don't register as shots on net if they miss the net, which has been happening a lot since he came back from his concussion.What you are saying doesn't make logical sense.
He's at 14 goals, but lets say your theory is right and he has 20 goals. He'd be shooting 16.6%, which isn't a sustainable number over the course of a career. So unless these chances that you think he isn't finishing aren't even registering as SOG, its your imagination.
They don't register as shots on net if they miss the net, which has been happening a lot since he came back from his concussion.
That’s a fair point. @Pavel Buchnevich I guess shots on goal divided by shot attempts before and after his concussion might kind of verify what you’re saying but the data set might be too small and is filled with noise. Might take a look later.They don't register as shots on net if they miss the net, which has been happening a lot since he came back from his concussion.
What you are saying doesn't make logical sense.
He's at 14 goals, but lets say your theory is right and he has 20 goals. He'd be shooting 16.6%, which isn't a sustainable number over the course of a career. So unless these chances that you think he isn't finishing aren't even registering as SOG, its your imagination.
I think he has the talent to be Tarasenko/Kucherov level but strikes me as lacking confidence. Not only is he a very young guy learning a new language, living in a foreign country, but he has to deal with a coach who has scratched him for Tanner Glass, burried him on the 4th line, misuses him, one of the lower TOI despite being one of our leading scorers, etc. I think next season under a new coach, maybe even with Kovalchuk; we’ll really see him come into his own
Yes, my eyes don't make logical sense. Watching him miss on great chances has to do with his shooting percentage. It all makes sense now.
He couldn't have 18 goals right now, his shooting percentage wouldn't allow it. There's no variables or deviations in hockey .
I didn't say its impossible, I'm just saying its not sustainable. 18 goals would be 15%. How many players sustain 15%? There aren't many.
You seem to be making an awfully big deal about a few goals here or there, at most, that probably isn't even sustainable and would likely result in a goal-scoring drought that brings his SH% back to a normal number, anyway.
So unless you can prove he just flat out is missing the net a lot more often than other players, the point you are making seems to be nitpicking or maybe even not true.
None that I've seen. I don't think he does, even, I just feel like has lately.I said that, but is there any quantifiable data that says he misses the net more often than other shooters?