Proposal: Rangers - Ducks

[gorangers0525]

It's more so AV's stubbornness to get past the left/right side crap. As long as he's here, he'll continue to play Girardi with McDonagh just because of the handedness and the side he plays.

No Ranger fan will argue that they would rather have Cementfeet McGee over Cam Fowler on their top pairing. It's just a matter of it having zero chance of happening with the moron behind the bench in NY.



I'd actually like to thank you, because you're one of a few people who actually understands that advanced statistics are all a matter of context. It's exactly why I haven't bothered to go crazy trying to read and understand them. There are so many variables (most notably quality of linemates - which to me almost negates the point of having these stats if they're not going to properly quantify how their performance affects said player in question's said statstic) that are not properly evaluated and included in the breakdown of the analytics. There are so many things that can go wrong with a said play down to the most smallest detail that one would think of that could affect a play that could change these statistics for the better or worse.

With that said, they're in the early stages. Maybe years down the road, they fix these problems and the stats become so advanced that all variables are accounted for.



I won't argue any of that. I watch bits of ducks hockey. As someone who has had the center ice package since 2002 and access to out of market games since 1998, I can only begin to tell you just how hard it is to watch all of the other teams on a regular basis.

I can guarantee you right now that 95% (at the very least) of the people on this website are lying through their teeth when it comes to how much they watch said player. Whether it's because of pride and wanting to look like they know everything, because after all, HF is a pissing contest of hockey intelligence, or whether it's just the simple desire to want to be included and not look stupid in said conversations, people will jump aboard what I call the HF Mob Mentality. They will see someone say something about a said player regardless of whether it's true or false and if enough people say it, others and soon everyone will believe it to be true.

Which is exactly why when it comes to these boards and "player value", unless it's something absolutely outlandish or can be proven by recent past history, I always claim to not know value because no one here does. Then again, like I said before, at least 95% of the people on here will feed you BS about how much they watch the player that's being discussed if he's not on their team.

I had someone telling me that Rick Nash's game changed, but couldn't give me details on a game to game basis, went straight to selke voting, which is a flawed system to begin with.

I know it's annoying, but I wouldn't get bent out of shape over it. Long story short, I'd take Fowler and I may not agree with him being a #2 (personally I think he's a very good #3, but how am I going to quantify that other than it being my opinion from my own personal eye test?) but he doesn't fit here at all and especially not for Hayes AND Miller.

The variability of an individual play is meaningless when you consider a large sample size. Context goes out the window when it's the same deal no matter the competition, teammate, etc. People act like these variables aren't considered with these stats...they are, and heavily.

 

[mytduxfan*]

The variability of an individual play is meaningless when you consider a large sample size. Context goes out the window when it's the same deal no matter the competition, teammate, etc. People act like these variables aren't considered with these stats...they are, and heavily.

Given that none of the statistics being thrown around here come with any form of standard error is a perfect example of how they do not consider variability. Sample size would be a strong argument if the difference between ones play from game-to-game was small and we were discussing 1000s of games. However, were talking about players who have huge swings in play and sample size of couple hundred games at best.

The fact you describe the sample sizes being used to formulate these statistics as "large" shows how little you really understand the numbers you're using. This, and the fact that no one seems to consider player usage, is the problem with advanced stats.

 

[Dijock94]

I don't understand why ducks fans keep proposing Fowler to NYR. The rangers have too many left handed defenseman as it stands right now and that is not going to change. It doesn't matter what the package is, and I'm not here to bash fowler. The Rangers are just not a good fit.

 

[lindholmie]

I don't understand why ducks fans keep proposing Fowler to NYR. The rangers have too many left handed defenseman as it stands right now and that is not going to change. It doesn't matter what the package is, and I'm not here to bash fowler. The Rangers are just not a good fit.

What? can you link once where a ducks fan proposed this? Op is a toronto fan

 

[Vipers31]

I don't understand why ducks fans keep proposing Fowler to NYR.

I usually don't attempt to speak for a big heterogeneous group like that, but I'll make an exception: we haven't, and we wouldn't. We know how that dance goes.

 

[Hagged]

Not being able to enter the zone you should be in is a huge ****ing weakness, and one that the Rangers already have.

Vatanen is one of the best zone entry defenseman in the league.

Then why not go after Vatanen? You would get him for pennies compared Fowler, due to their relative importance on the team.

 

[Dijock94]

What? can you link once where a ducks fan proposed this? Op is a toronto fan

Ok my mistake shouldn't have assumed it was a ducks fan, but there have still been a bunch of threads proposing fowler to the Rangers and it still doesn't make sense.

 

[Vitto79]

I don't understand why ducks fans keep proposing Fowler to NYR. The rangers have too many left handed defenseman as it stands right now and that is not going to change. It doesn't matter what the package is, and I'm not here to bash fowler. The Rangers are just not a good fit.

Yea but nyr could use young D. Skjei and Holden can play rd.

Nash for fowler . Rangers have cap space so could eat like 2 million

 

[Dijock94]

Yea but nyr could use young D. Skjei and Holden can play rd.

Nash for fowler . Rangers have cap space so could eat like 2 million

Left handed defensemen

McDonagh
Staal
Skjei
Holden
Graves

Right handed defensemen

Girardi
Klein
McIlrath
Clendening

The right side is clearly lacking. I also see what your saying about playing Skjei or Holden on the right, but it seems that AV is pretty OCD about his defensemen playing their forehand side.

 

[Not So Mighty]

Maybe if Ducks are taking Staal back with Hayes, but not Miller... no way. There is no room for him if Staal isn't leaving.

I've seen Fowler here and there so I'm no expert, but I don't understand why Ducks fans have been trying to move him in just about every trade thread concerning Anaheim. He's 24, has 2 seasons left at only $4M cap hit and, according to Ducks fans and mentioned many times in this thread, is a #2 on any team out there. Why wouldn't you want to hold onto the obvious #2 Dman and move one of the other guys?

Because a good GM trades from strength to address weakness. We feel we have other potential #2 defensemen to step up and replace Fowler and at a cheaper salary. We feel Fowler will fetch a bigger payout than those other potential #2 defensemen. All signs point to trading Fowler. We would LOVE to be able to keep Fowler but 1) money is an issue and 2) you have to give to get.

 

[gorangers0525]

Given that none of the statistics being thrown around here come with any form of standard error is a perfect example of how they do not consider variability. Sample size would be a strong argument if the difference between ones play from game-to-game was small and we were discussing 1000s of games. However, were talking about players who have huge swings in play and sample size of couple hundred games at best.

The fact you describe the sample sizes being used to formulate these statistics as "large" shows how little you really understand the numbers you're using. This, and the fact that no one seems to consider player usage, is the problem with advanced stats.

Hilarious. Fowler's entire career is a pretty nice sample size, and he's consistently gotten dominated throughout it. Furthermore, these stats can be adjusted for usage. Also, QOC and zone start % has a negligible effect on these stats. All the excuses in the world for this guy still doesn't explain his atrocious "advanced" stats. He is just not good enough for them to be better.

 

[gorangers0525]

Then why not go after Vatanen? You would get him for pennies compared Fowler, due to their relative importance on the team.

Awesome. Would love a better player for less of a price.

 

[mytduxfan*]

Hilarious. Fowler's entire career is a pretty nice sample size, and he's consistently gotten dominated throughout it.

So Fowler as an 18 year old = the same player he is today. So he's only gotten worse offensively and hasn't improve at all defensively? That would explain why he's been bumped up the D-pairings over the years... you know, because he's only getting worse. Or maybe he was being carried by Beauchemin in his early years, which bumped his stats, and now he's the one carrying his partner i.e. Bieksa, Lovejoy - all sub-par for the role they're in, which is dragging his numbers down? Nah.... that would make too much logical sense.

Furthermore, these stats can be adjusted for usage.

How? Please explain to me, detail-for-detail, how these stats can are adjusted for usage. In fact, given you're so well-versed on these stats, give me the formula. I want the actual formula.

Also, QOC and zone start % has a negligible effect on these stats. All the excuses in the world for this guy still doesn't explain his atrocious "advanced" stats. He is just not good enough for them to be better.

QoC is a joke stat anyway, but what you're telling me is that playing against 1st line competition instead of 4th line competition will have no effect on Corsi? Or that having the majority of your starts in the D-zone instead of the O-zone will have no effect on Corsi?

Go learn what these numbers actually mean and how they are calculated.

No one is making excuses for Fowler. His stats are bad, but there are legitimate reasons why that you're just straight up ignoring:

*He's a #2D in a #1D role
*Sub-par partners
*A higher proportion of D-zone starts.

This is the problem with advanced stats. People, like you, who use them on their own without any context whatsoever. By your standard, McDonagh sucks... CF% 47.5. Terrible. "He is just not good enough". I don't want to hear that he's playing with Girardi "the numbers account for variances like that". Also, why didn't you guys re-sign Yandle? Best D-man on the ice according to "THE NUMBERS"

Maybe try watching hockey for a change instead of staring at an excel chart.

P.S. I'm not even disputing that Fowler to NYR would make sense. However, you're talking pure ignorant, ass-gas when you say "Fowler isn't a top pairing D-man because of what numbers on a chart say".

 

[dracom]

Awesome. Would love a better player for less of a price.

You're not getting Vats for less than Fowler.

 

[One Winged Angel]

The variability of an individual play is meaningless when you consider a large sample size. Context goes out the window when it's the same deal no matter the competition, teammate, etc. People act like these variables aren't considered with these stats...they are, and heavily.

They actually aren't. Corsi for is the greatest example of this.

 

[Shootertooter]

If he's movable. Marc Staal is terrible. Just going on the numbers bro.

I agree but lots of guys here want to ignore the numbers. I'd prefer Vatanen and the Rangers could actually use him.

 

[mytduxfan*]

"If he's movable. Marc Staal is terrible. Just going on the numbers bro. "

 

[gump116]

Then why not go after Vatanen? You would get him for pennies compared Fowler, due to their relative importance on the team.

Vatanen would be the best fit for the Rangers, but what would the Ducks want? Rangers have a lot of wingers, so potentially one of Kreider, Nash (with salary retained), Zucc, or Miller.

 

[mytduxfan*]

Vatanen would be the best fit for the Rangers, but what would the Ducks want? Rangers have a lot of wingers, so potentially one of Kreider, Nash (with salary retained), Zucc, or Miller.

It would appear they want to keep Vatanen.

 

[gorangers0525]

So Fowler as an 18 year old = the same player he is today. So he's only gotten worse offensively and hasn't improve at all defensively? That would explain why he's been bumped up the D-pairings over the years... you know, because he's only getting worse. Or maybe he was being carried by Beauchemin in his early years, which bumped his stats, and now he's the one carrying his partner i.e. Bieksa, Lovejoy - all sub-par for the role they're in, which is dragging his numbers down? Nah.... that would make too much logical sense.



How? Please explain to me, detail-for-detail, how these stats can are adjusted for usage. In fact, given you're so well-versed on these stats, give me the formula. I want the actual formula.



QoC is a joke stat anyway, but what you're telling me is that playing against 1st line competition instead of 4th line competition will have no effect on Corsi? Or that having the majority of your starts in the D-zone instead of the O-zone will have no effect on Corsi?

Go learn what these numbers actually mean and how they are calculated.

No one is making excuses for Fowler. His stats are bad, but there are legitimate reasons why that you're just straight up ignoring:

*He's a #2D in a #1D role
*Sub-par partners
*A higher proportion of D-zone starts.

This is the problem with advanced stats. People, like you, who use them on their own without any context whatsoever. By your standard, McDonagh sucks... CF% 47.5. Terrible. "He is just not good enough". I don't want to hear that he's playing with Girardi "the numbers account for variances like that". Also, why didn't you guys re-sign Yandle? Best D-man on the ice according to "THE NUMBERS"

Maybe try watching hockey for a change instead of staring at an excel chart.

P.S. I'm not even disputing that Fowler to NYR would make sense. However, you're talking pure ignorant, ass-gas when you say "Fowler isn't a top pairing D-man because of what numbers on a chart say".

McDonagh has a positive corsirel overall (who even looks at raw corsi?) even while mostly playing with Girardi, and a ridiculous corsi away from him. Fowler's stats have been analyzed with every teammates he's ever played with. http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/showplayer.php?pid=1347&withagainst=true&season=2015-16&sit=5v5close Almost every teammate he's had does better away from him, even when adjusting for both zone start % AND score. Some go up as much as 5-6% away from him! Zone start adjusted corsi ignores the first 10 seconds after an offensive zone or defensive zone faceoff. The effect is still negligible on possession stats. So is QOC, and usage in general http://nhlnumbers.com/2012/7/23/the-importance-of-quality-of-competition. I just can't believe people still think "corsi nerds" go "cf% under 50..he SUcKS!!!!!". It is nothing like that. If Fowler's underlying statistics looked a lot better away from Bieksa, then yea that would be a legit reason! They don't. They're marginally
better.


Now look at McDonagh away from Girardi (who IMO, is worse than Bieksa)..A 12+% difference while still being used in a "defensive" role!

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/showplayer.php?pid=1439&withagainst=true&season=2015-16&sit=5v5close


Acting like the bolded factors haven't been looked into is....ignorance to say the least. Fowler is not a great possession player, and it is 100% his fault. You don't have to even like possession stats as a defensive metric, but in the end Fowler's are bad. It's his fault their bad. I like defenseman who can tilt the ice away from their own zone, not towards it.

Yandle was arguably the Ranger's best defenseman. Now the Ranger's have one of the worst defenses in the league. Idk what that has to do with anything though.

I watch plenty of hockey, from both coasts and everywhere in between. I enjoy going deeper into what makes a player or team effective or ineffective. It's a lot more objective than the "I see what I want to see" test. What I said I did see with Fowler, was just insulted anyway. Granted, I watch maybe 4-8 Ducks games a season, but I think I am able to keep a pretty level head while watching a player. And he is a player who, compared to his teammates, is incapable of transitioning past the red line and has plenty of defensive lapses in his own zone. His skill (especially his skating) is up there. He still can develop into his late 20's like many defenseman do. I wouldn't want him on the Ranger's first pair though.

 

[gorangers0525]

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/showplayer.php?pid=1826&withagainst=true&season=2015-16&sit=5v5close


Now Lindholm, dear god is he a player that elevates everybody he plays with. Just look at those stats with Kesler (who he played with even more than Fowler did) and look at what they did together compared to what Kesler did with Fowler, all with similar usage.

 

[HanSolo]

Why does this keep getting bumped? We get it. Fowler sucks and we shouldnt expect more than a bag of pucks for him. Can we just move on?