Player Discussion Pavel Buchnevich: Part VI

[B17 Apricots]

So then Buch is immune from any criticism/concern about his consistency issues since he's just the same as 'any developing player'?

I don't share your mindset...This is a real concern with this particular/specific player.... These hot/cold streaks that result in unpredictable offensive production...



What do you mean elevated his game? He's scoring at the same pace as the prior season - same points but less goals



Organizations are reluctant to commit long term and high/higher AAV to players who are inconsistent and a bit of a question mark as to what you're going to get in terms of offensive production.... The closer Buch gets to UFA without becoming a more consistent player - the more likely he is to be dealt and viewed as a non-vital part of the rebuild moving forward....

When did I say you can't critique his play? What in the f***? There's nothing I said there that could be taken anything other than literal. Not sure what your 2nd part is about, I was talking about Zibanejad and to a larger point about some of the factors in reaching another level of play...

I shouldn't even have responded, almost everything you said had zero correlation to what I was talking about... just looking for an argument I swear...

 

[aufheben]

 

[Mac n Gs]

Yeah, but he sucks and we need to trade him or something like that, right?

 

[SnowblindNYR]

What's on the bottom? Why are these data visualizations always showing 20 different things? It's as if people don't know how to make data visualizations and are just trying to impress people with how smart they are.

 

[Raspewtin]

What's on the bottom? Why are these data visualizations always showing 20 different things? It's as if people don't know how to make data visualizations and are just trying to impress people with how smart they are.

top half is offensive zone impact bottom half is defensive zone impact.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

top half is offensive zone impact bottom half is defensive zone impact.

Is negative negative impact on the Rangers or the opponent is negatively impacted and thus positive impact on the Rangers?

 

[Raspewtin]

Is negative negative impact on the Rangers or the opponent is negatively impacted and thus positive impact on the Rangers?

the latter

 

[SnowblindNYR]

the latter

Thanks.

 

[romba]

the latter

So then translation = continuing to improve from year to year both in the offensive zone and and the defensive zone

 

[Mac n Gs]

So then translation = continuing to improve from year to year both in the offensive zone and and the defensive zone

Exactly, and I think should match up easily with the eye test too since Buch is noticeably stronger on the puck, backchecks really well, and has been using his size to get into position much more frequently in the slot.

Also, I'm surprised he hasn't been getting more recognition for his work at the netfront guy on the powerplay after Kreider's injury. I think he's actually been pretty good there in a small sample.

 

[Blue Blooded]

Exactly, and I think should match up easily with the eye test too since Buch is noticeably stronger on the puck, backchecks really well, and has been using his size to get into position much more frequently in the slot.

Also, I'm surprised he hasn't been getting more recognition for his work at the netfront guy on the powerplay after Kreider's injury. I think he's actually been pretty good there in a small sample.

He and Strome have also been switching positions more often than Strome/Kreider did, providing a left handed shot at the right boards/circle.

 

[EdJovanovski]

This guy went from the awkward quiet foreign exchange student to the class clown of the team

 

[haohmaru]

One point away from tying his career high.

Underrated around here this season. The guy has taken a huge step forward despite having little early puck luck.

 

[ViD]

He’s PPG in his last 12 or so

 

[duhmetreE]

It looks like I'm looking at bacteria under a microscope..

So Buch has more good bacteria than bad? That's USA Buch coming through

 

[ColonialsHockey10]

What's on the bottom? Why are these data visualizations always showing 20 different things? It's as if people don't know how to make data visualizations and are just trying to impress people with how smart they are.

This x1000. As someone that analyzes data and makes charts for a career, I get a nice chuckle out of how terrible literally every single hockey visualization is.

 

[kovazub94]

Pure case in point where stat analysis supports eye test if you know how to watch a hockey game. That 20% positive on the offensive side is impressive in its own right (and as an increase from the last year’s %), but one should definitely notice how stronger (American) Buch improved on the defensive side too.

Love it!

 

[SnowblindNYR]

This x1000. As someone that analyzes data and makes charts for a career, I get a nice chuckle out of how terrible literally every single hockey visualization is.

My favorite are the ones with a bunch of colors and arrows and no numbers or legends. Literally saw something like that today. I had absolutely no idea what they were showing.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

I would however like to point out the charts in the real world are terrible too sometimes. We have some line graphs with like 20 different lines and I have no idea how anyone understands anything.

 

[nyr2k2]

This x1000. As someone that analyzes data and makes charts for a career, I get a nice chuckle out of how terrible literally every single hockey visualization is.

It's the single biggest barrier, IMO, to more people understanding some of the advanced metrics that exist. I look at half of the "advanced stats"-related charts and am like, WTF is this showing me? It's like people are making shitty charts exclusively for people who already understand the shitty charts. Which, okay, I guess that's fine, but don't you want to bring in some new people? These charts, they're like the Bernie Sanders campaign.

 

[kovazub94]

It's the single biggest barrier, IMO, to more people understanding some of the advanced metrics that exist. I look at half of the "advanced stats"-related charts and am like, WTF is this showing me? It's like people are making shitty charts exclusively for people who already understand the shitty charts. Which, okay, I guess that's fine, but don't you want to bring in some new people? These charts, they're like the Bernie Sanders campaign.

I like charts with some supporting tables - I’m a numbers and variance guy (smiling sheepishly ).

 

[ColonialsHockey10]

My favorite are the ones with a bunch of colors and arrows and no numbers or legends. Literally saw something like that today. I had absolutely no idea what they were showing.

My favorite are the scatter plots with regression lines that have some pretentious comment like “player xxx is decent I guess” when they can just be bar charts because one of the axes is completely useless to the story the chart-maker is trying to tell.

 

[duhmetreE]

He still has similar tendencies. He's a great forechecker but the 'old Buch' reaers his head once in a while. He has a drunk game every now and then. Maybe I'm still clinging to his 1st goal, but his finishing needs to be better. He could easily be a 30+ goal scorer with the chances he has.

Bottom line. What is he going to want with his next contract? Does Kravtsov make him expandable? I think he's gone if someone meets Gortons price.

 

[chosen]

Just read this:


There were 161 forwards in the NHL with at least 1000 minutes played at all strengths this year, per Evolving Hockey again. Of those 161 forwards, Buchnevich was 15th in WAR/60 minutes, finishing ahead of such luminaries as Connor McDavid, Auston Matthews, Sean Couturier, and Jonathan Huberdeau. No, I don't think Buchnevich is better than every name on that list, but yes, I do think he's very much underappreciated for how good he is. He's improved his WAR/60 mark every season he's been in the NHL and is still in his prime. He's been dogged by the coaching staff, being scratched or stuffed in the bottom-6 with frequency in his career, and despite that, he's still been excellent for them.
It's important to know that Buch gets a good chunk of his WAR value from his defence and penalty drawing. Those aren't things that show up on the fantasy sheet. But I do think that he's more than earned a top-6 role for the foreseeable future in New York, and that makes it easier to project 50-point seasons for him.

 

[UnSandvich]

Just read this:


There were 161 forwards in the NHL with at least 1000 minutes played at all strengths this year, per Evolving Hockey again. Of those 161 forwards, Buchnevich was 15th in WAR/60 minutes, finishing ahead of such luminaries as Connor McDavid, Auston Matthews, Sean Couturier, and Jonathan Huberdeau. No, I don't think Buchnevich is better than every name on that list, but yes, I do think he's very much underappreciated for how good he is. He's improved his WAR/60 mark every season he's been in the NHL and is still in his prime. He's been dogged by the coaching staff, being scratched or stuffed in the bottom-6 with frequency in his career, and despite that, he's still been excellent for them.
It's important to know that Buch gets a good chunk of his WAR value from his defence and penalty drawing. Those aren't things that show up on the fantasy sheet. But I do think that he's more than earned a top-6 role for the foreseeable future in New York, and that makes it easier to project 50-point seasons for him.

Where'd you get that from?