Power vs L. Hughes vs Edvinsson vs Clarke

[Clam Jensen]

offense, 19>17>13>10 in the real world , add in the offense of the teams they play for and it looks much worst.

What?

 

[biturbo19]

As a Detroit fan I may be biased but I wouldn’t trade edvinsson straight up for any of these guys. If I could do it all over again I’d take edvinsson at 1. Hughes Is a fantastic talent, but for me that doesn’t make up for his lack of size compared to edvinsson (not that Hughes is small but Ed is just absurdly big). A 6’7 unicorn defenseman like him is unheard of.

While i do think there's probably a little bit of homer bias here, it's also kind of understandable. If you think you've potentially got even just a "Hedman lite" in Edvinsson, that's something you simply wouldn't give up. Even as good as Hughes is and could potentially be as well.

 

[Hisch13r]

While i do think there's probably a little bit of homer bias here, it's also kind of understandable. If you think you've potentially got even just a "Hedman lite" in Edvinsson, that's something you simply wouldn't give up. Even as good as Hughes is and could potentially be as well.

I think where I’d differ from them on that is Edvinsson will be more Parayko than Hedman. Hedman’s been great for a lot of his career defensively but Hedman’s offense has always been the true driver of his game and why he’s like one of the best ever. I’d be shocked if Edvinsson’s near that level offensively.

I also don’t say Parayko as a slight. Parayko before the back injuries was a really good offensive driver from the backend even if his production didn’t jump off the page while also being one of the best shutdown guys in the league and he was a key piece to a Cup winner. Parayko’s what my hopes are for Silayev. It’s not “unheard of” though

 

[biturbo19]

I think where I’d differ from them on that is Edvinsson will be more Parayko than Hedman. Hedman’s been great for a lot of his career defensively but Hedman’s offense has always been the true driver of his game and why he’s like one of the best ever. I’d be shocked if Edvinsson’s near that level offensively.

I also don’t say Parayko as a slight. Parayko before the back injuries was a really good offensive driver from the backend even if his production didn’t jump off the page while also being one of the best shutdown guys in the league and he was a key piece to a Cup winner. Parayko’s what my hopes are for Silayev. It’s not “unheard of” though

I'm not sure about that. Early years Hedman didn't necessarily jump off the page as an offensive dynamo either. Though it was always sort of ~there~ at least as a tease. Then something really "clicked" for him, team started to get better, and he absolutely took off.

I'd say my read on Edvinsson is probably more along that line you're talking about, but you never know. He's got most of the tools to eventually explode offensively. But if you believe that he's got more to give on that front as well as being a huge unicorn, i can definitely understand why you'd take him over others.

 

[RedHawkDown]

I think where I’d differ from them on that is Edvinsson will be more Parayko than Hedman. Hedman’s been great for a lot of his career defensively but Hedman’s offense has always been the true driver of his game and why he’s like one of the best ever. I’d be shocked if Edvinsson’s near that level offensively.

I also don’t say Parayko as a slight. Parayko before the back injuries was a really good offensive driver from the backend even if his production didn’t jump off the page while also being one of the best shutdown guys in the league and he was a key piece to a Cup winner. Parayko’s what my hopes are for Silayev. It’s not “unheard of” though

Hedman didn't develop the elite offense in his game until his 8th year in the NHL. Ed absolutely has that potential. However, he is unlikely to play a major offensive role in Detroit given that ASP will likely take the #1 PP role when he comes over. He could see time on PP2; he is a better driver of offense than Seider, to be honest.

 

[dgibb10]

Hedman didn't develop the elite offense in his game until his 8th year in the NHL. Ed absolutely has that potential. However, he is unlikely to play a major offensive role in Detroit given that ASP will likely take the #1 PP role when he comes over. He could see time on PP2; he is a better driver of offense than Seider, to be honest.

Hedman led all dmen in the league in non power play scoring in 2013-14

 

[Hisch13r]

I'm not sure about that. Early years Hedman didn't necessarily jump off the page as an offensive dynamo either. Though it was always sort of ~there~ at least as a tease. Then something really "clicked" for him, team started to get better, and he absolutely took off.

I'd say my read on Edvinsson is probably more along that line you're talking about, but you never know. He's got most of the tools to eventually explode offensively. But if you believe that he's got more to give on that front as well as being a huge unicorn, i can definitely understand why you'd take him over others.

The production might not have jumped off the page for Hedman immediately but the guy was driving play offensively to a high level off the jump as a teenager and as a prospect was an offensive force. Like sure it's possible for Edvinsson but it wouldn't be something I'd expect to happen.

 

[Preposterone]

While i do think there's probably a little bit of homer bias here, it's also kind of understandable. If you think you've potentially got even just a "Hedman lite" in Edvinsson, that's something you simply wouldn't give up. Even as good as Hughes is and could potentially be as well.

the thing with Edvinsson is he probably won’t ever be a major PP contributor. How you value him moving forward depends on how preference between a guy who tilts the ice substantially at 5v5 (which he does right now) vs that extra special teams production

 

[TBF1972]

As a Detroit fan I may be biased but I wouldn’t trade edvinsson straight up for any of these guys. If I could do it all over again I’d take edvinsson at 1. Hughes Is a fantastic talent, but for me that doesn’t make up for his lack of size compared to edvinsson (not that Hughes is small but Ed is just absurdly big). A 6’7 unicorn defenseman like him is unheard of.

devils hope they have that covered with silayev. chara was a nhl player.

the term unicorn is used too often. also on the devils board where some use it for bratt.

 

[Pavels Dog]

Hedman led all dmen in the league in non power play scoring in 2013-14

What numbers are you looking at? I'm seeing him 4th that year. Either way he was 23 years old.

When Hedman was 21 (same age as Edvinsson) he finished 61st in EVP among d-men.
Edvinsson currently sits 31st.

I think where I’d differ from them on that is Edvinsson will be more Parayko than Hedman. Hedman’s been great for a lot of his career defensively but Hedman’s offense has always been the true driver of his game and why he’s like one of the best ever. I’d be shocked if Edvinsson’s near that level offensively.

It's kind of like comparing Luke Hughes to Shayne Gostisbehere though. Ghost has been incredible offensively so it's hardly a slight. Would you entertain that comparison though? Probably not. Because Hughes has much higher pedigree, is trending far better, and has better tools. Same goes for Edvinsson vs. Parayko.

Luke is the only devils D above 59% at 61.1%.

Kovacevic at 59.9%? Either way the numbers will fluctuate from game to game, if Hughes is 1st, 2nd or 3rd doesn't really change my point that everyone's xG% is awesome on the Devils. I don't think that one stat can be used as the be-all-end-all of evaluating hockey players.

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

Kovacevic at 59.9%? Either way the numbers will fluctuate from game to game, if Hughes is 1st, 2nd or 3rd doesn't really change my point that everyone's xG% is awesome on the Devils. I don't think that one stat can be used as the be-all-end-all of evaluating hockey players.

I see Kovacevic at 58.8% per natural stat trick vs Hughes at 61.0% (+2.2)

Edvinsson is at 49.5% vs Holl at 47.7% (+1.8). Maatta and Johansson are both higher than Holl but in smaller samples.

My point is that Hughes is separating himself from the rest of the devils D core in the same way that Edvinsson has separated himself from Detroit's D core. But it's a lot harder to create separation from a stronger defensive group.

 

[Pavels Dog]

My point is that Hughes is separating himself from the rest of the devils D core in the same way that Edvinsson has separated himself from Detroit's D core. But it's a lot harder to create separation from a stronger defensive group.

Not sure I agree. I think there are reasons why players on really bad teams almost never have great analytics (actual or relative), and it's not as easy as "everyone on bad teams suck".

Nashville might be a decent control group because they were a good team last year and they suck this year.

Forsberg's gone from 55.7% and 4% relative to 51.6% and 4.1% relative.
Josi's gone from 54.9% and 3.4% relative to 51% and 4.4% relative

In both cases the impact of the team being worse is obvious - but their relative numbers haven't changed all that much.

For the Devils, the 5 best players last year in relative xG% were Palat at 6.8%, Bratt at 6.3%, Haula at 4.4%, Hamilton at 4.3% and Hischier at 3.4%.
This year they have Meier at 8.7%, Hischier at 6.5%, Kovacevic at 5.7%, Jack Hughes at 4.7% and Luke Hughes at 4.6%, i.e. higher relative values on a stronger team.

Another example is Shayne Gostisbehere, who has far higher actual numbers AND a higher relative xG% playing for Carolina than he had last year with Detroit.

Finally, looking at the top players leaguewide in relative expected goals does not line up with it being easier on bad teams:

1. Cirelli
2. Hagel
3. Barkov
4. Quinn Hughes
5. Ross Colton
6. Seth jarvis
7. Filip Hronek
8. Sean Monahan
9. Leon Draisatl
10. Mark Jankowski (crazy high last year too)

I count 2 out of 10 on non-playoff teams.

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

Not sure I agree. I think there are reasons why players on really bad teams almost never have great analytics (actual or relative), and it's not as easy as "everyone on bad teams suck".

Nashville might be a decent control group because they were a good team last year and they suck this year.

Forsberg's gone from 55.7% and 4% relative to 51.6% and 4.1% relative.
Josi's gone from 54.9% and 3.4% relative to 51% and 4.4% relative

In both cases the impact of the team being worse is obvious - but their relative numbers haven't changed all that much.

For the Devils, the 5 best players last year in relative xG% were Palat at 6.8%, Bratt at 6.3%, Haula at 4.4%, Hamilton at 4.3% and Hischier at 3.4%.
This year they have Meier at 8.7%, Hischier at 6.5%, Kovacevic at 5.7%, Jack Hughes at 4.7% and Luke Hughes at 4.6%, i.e. higher relative values on a stronger team.

Another example is Shayne Gostisbehere, who has far higher actual numbers AND a higher relative xG% playing for Carolina than he had last year with Detroit.

Finally, looking at the top players leaguewide in relative expected goals does not line up with it being easier on bad teams:

1. Cirelli
2. Hagel
3. Barkov
4. Quinn Hughes
5. Ross Colton
6. Seth jarvis
7. Filip Hronek
8. Sean Monahan
9. Leon Draisatl
10. Mark Jankowski (crazy high last year too)

I count 2 out of 10 on non-playoff teams.

You're comparing variance in an 82 game sample vs variance in a 30 game sample.

Last year, 8 of the top 10 D in rel xG% (>500 mins) were from non playoff teams. The only 2 in top 10 were Bouchard and Ekholm, a pair with 60% ozone starts that played the plurality of their 5v5 mins with 2 of the top forwards in the game, on a team with really weak defenseman.

 

[dgibb10]

Not sure I agree. I think there are reasons why players on really bad teams almost never have great analytics (actual or relative), and it's not as easy as "everyone on bad teams suck".

Nashville might be a decent control group because they were a good team last year and they suck this year.

Forsberg's gone from 55.7% and 4% relative to 51.6% and 4.1% relative.
Josi's gone from 54.9% and 3.4% relative to 51% and 4.4% relative

In both cases the impact of the team being worse is obvious - but their relative numbers haven't changed all that much.

For the Devils, the 5 best players last year in relative xG% were Palat at 6.8%, Bratt at 6.3%, Haula at 4.4%, Hamilton at 4.3% and Hischier at 3.4%.
This year they have Meier at 8.7%, Hischier at 6.5%, Kovacevic at 5.7%, Jack Hughes at 4.7% and Luke Hughes at 4.6%, i.e. higher relative values on a stronger team.

Another example is Shayne Gostisbehere, who has far higher actual numbers AND a higher relative xG% playing for Carolina than he had last year with Detroit.

Finally, looking at the top players leaguewide in relative expected goals does not line up with it being easier on bad teams:

1. Cirelli
2. Hagel
3. Barkov
4. Quinn Hughes
5. Ross Colton
6. Seth jarvis
7. Filip Hronek
8. Sean Monahan
9. Leon Draisatl
10. Mark Jankowski (crazy high last year too)

I count 2 out of 10 on non-playoff teams.

Are you claiming Forsberg and Josi have been as good this year as they were last year? Because they definitely haven't been.

And that worse play is a PART of why the team as a whole is worse.

Yes, your better players will have good relative xGoals% compared to your worse players, consistent accross the league.


What that MISSES, is that better teams have better players. Thats why they are better teams. Do you not see the issue with having 0% on the worst team in hockey and 0% on the best team in hockey say you are performing the same in relative numbers.

What fans of bad teams fail to recognize, is that better PLAYERS create better teams, not the other way around. The devils are better because they have dominant players like luke hughes.

Also, in terms of relative numbers, Luke has a better differential than Edvinsson now.

So your whole argument there is GONE. Luke IS seperating himself more

You're comparing variance in an 82 game sample vs variance in a 30 game sample.

Last year, 8 of the top 10 D in rel xG% (>500 mins) were from non playoff teams. The only 2 in top 10 were Bouchard and Ekholm, a pair with 60% ozone starts that played the plurality of their 5v5 mins with 2 of the top forwards in the game, on a team with really weak defenseman.

Important to note in this conversation.

Luke now has better relative numbers than Edvinsson too.

Edvinsson has struggled the last few games and Luke has continued to dominate (combined with a brutal dougie-dillon game vs Chi and a masterclass luke-pesce game)

 

[dgibb10]

Not sure I agree. I think there are reasons why players on really bad teams almost never have great analytics (actual or relative), and it's not as easy as "everyone on bad teams suck".

Nashville might be a decent control group because they were a good team last year and they suck this year.

Forsberg's gone from 55.7% and 4% relative to 51.6% and 4.1% relative.
Josi's gone from 54.9% and 3.4% relative to 51% and 4.4% relative

In both cases the impact of the team being worse is obvious - but their relative numbers haven't changed all that much.

For the Devils, the 5 best players last year in relative xG% were Palat at 6.8%, Bratt at 6.3%, Haula at 4.4%, Hamilton at 4.3% and Hischier at 3.4%.
This year they have Meier at 8.7%, Hischier at 6.5%, Kovacevic at 5.7%, Jack Hughes at 4.7% and Luke Hughes at 4.6%, i.e. higher relative values on a stronger team.

Another example is Shayne Gostisbehere, who has far higher actual numbers AND a higher relative xG% playing for Carolina than he had last year with Detroit.

Finally, looking at the top players leaguewide in relative expected goals does not line up with it being easier on bad teams:

1. Cirelli
2. Hagel
3. Barkov
4. Quinn Hughes
5. Ross Colton
6. Seth jarvis
7. Filip Hronek
8. Sean Monahan
9. Leon Draisatl
10. Mark Jankowski (crazy high last year too)

I count 2 out of 10 on non-playoff teams.

Ghost is an outlier in that Carolina utilizes him in a way that is perfectly built to maximize him.

Big credit to him for how good he's been, and big credit to carolina for how well they've used him. Now, he plays some of the easiest minutes in hockey, but he has dominated them. It's what he's built to do. It's what he's done throughout his career. He will never and has never been able to handle anything close to hard minutes. Buut god damn if he can't do that.

 

[Fantast100]

Luke Hughes

 

[HarrisonFord]

Hughes
Clarke
Power
Edvinsson

Clarke has upside to overtake Hughes though

 

[newfy]

Hedman led all dmen in the league in non power play scoring in 2013-14

Edvinsson's even strength production right now is really good while playing the hardest minutes in the league. If anything, you bringing that up just makes the comparison to Hedman more accurate

 

[dgibb10]

Edvinsson's even strength production right now is really good while playing the hardest minutes in the league. If anything, you bringing that up just makes the comparison to Hedman more accurate

I simply disagreed with the claim that hedman only became a threat offensively in 16-17