Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XV
- Thread starter aufheben
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
- Status
He's actually a really good passer and shoots the puck incredibly hard. Hands, not so much.
NYR Viper
Registered User
I'm still game for a Staal for Backes trade
There is no correlation between scoring goals when winning a face off in the offensive zone or giving up goals when loosing a face off in the defensive?
I agree. We see that happen in games in the season. Not always, but it seems to me that it is rather poor logic to state that whether or not when you win a face off in the offensive zone, that has absolutely no bearing on if you score a goal. Same for loosing one in the defensive zone.
Chytil wins the draw in the offensive zone. The puck is now on DeAngelo's or Fox's stick. Do the Rangers have a greater opportunity for a goal than if he had lost the draw?
NYRFANMANI
Department of Rempe Safety Management
Y'all talking about Kreider?
Sure, you take him out of our top-6, it becomes softer ... but it's not like he made it a whole lot tougher.
I think we only have to replace his speed, and then his poise and defensive play maybe. That's all of Kreider's exceptional traits. Afaic Lemmy is a much tougher player, as poised and almost as fast, offensively less gifted. But we can ignore the offense, we have so many offensive players more now.
Panarin, Barron, Lemmy ... I'm very cool with this and it definitely replaces Kreids. I'd rather have the pick and prospect.
Irishguy42
Mr. Preachy
Recency bias.
Chytil wins the draw in the offensive zone. The puck is now on Staal's stick. Do the Rangers have a greater opportunity for a goal than if he had lost the draw?
See, this is what you call a strawman. An attempt to debate a point that is actually not being debated because of no good answer to the actual debate.
NO ONE is talking about Staal. You are purposely inserting an old Staal into this equation to try to deflect the argument.
But yes, if Staal is on the blue line with the puck on his stick after Chytil has won it, then yes, the Rangers chances of a goal are greater than if Chytil lost the face off and now the opposition is breaking out of their zone because they have the puck.
NYR Viper
Registered User
I would say that a team who wins more face-offs in general would fare better in the playoffs than one who is not very good. The simple fact is that it is more tiring to play defense than offense and playing with the puck is easier than without. So if we are speaking of regular season, maybe it's not such a big deal for point totals, etc but cumulative I think it takes a toll. It's a 50/50 battle that your team either wins or loses where no clear possession has been made prior so while it may not be the end all be all, it's important.
All you have to do is replace a top line player. We can debate where on that spectrum he is, but there is no debating of what he is. And the fact that Panarin's presence allows you to play your top line player on the second line makes the team better. Lemieux, much as I like him, is not going to be a top liner. And neither you nor I know if Barron is even a top-6 player of an NHL player at all.
Jaromir Jagr
Registered User
This is the second time this week that a group of posters on here has gotten upset at the verbiage on one of my posts. Maybe trash is too 'harsh' of a word, but I didn't intend to spark a firestorm. It's so funny how easily everyone here can get up in arms over something so small.
Kreider has been exactly what he's been his entire career. Volatile, continuous disappearing acts, various boneheaded plays, and penalties and shifts where he's completely dominant. Unfortunately, as it has been consistently with him, those bursts of dominance and effort are few and far between. All the talk last year about him becoming a leader was over the top. He is not the model I want any player following.
Maybe I'm expecting too much from a veteran player who has time and again shown us what he is. Rarely improving, rarely declining. But I think someone who is coming up on 30 years old, playing in his 8th NHL season, on the final year of his contracct, should, at the very least, not be making completely reckless plays.
I can forgive a lot. I can certainly forgive a lack of production or streaky production. What I can't forgive are the idiotic plays and penalties, seemingly often at inopportune times.
I have no interest in signing him, even more so with the emergence of Kakko, Panarin, Buchnevich's improved play, etc.
When a fancy stats tell you face offs aren't important, they're garbage. And when you have 3 percentage points separating the top team from the bottom team, it's even more garbage.
- Jul 20, 2005
- 4,926
- 2,340
It was unlikely that Kreider would become a top line player so its unlikely Barron does.
That said I'd don't really see Barron much behind Kreider's development curve.
I disagree. The expectation of Kreider was a top line wing. And that is exactly what he became. I do not think that Barron has such an expectation. That said, of course I would hope for that. That would be wonderful. Heck, if Barron turned out to be Kreider 2.0, that pick is an absolute home run. And then some. It would be a grand slam.
NYRFANMANI
Department of Rempe Safety Management
What? I think that premise is very soft. "All you have to do is replace a top line player." Kreider is/never was a 1st line player. He may have played on the top line, but that doesn't mean jack. Has no offensive consistency and his brain farts are too much. He seldomly took the team by the balls.
Bringing in Panarin didn't "allow us" to drop our top line player to the 2nd line. A true 1st liner came in and he drops rightfully so to the 2nd line.
I agree that Lemmy is not a top-6 winger. Barron could be anything from 2nd, to 4th line, to nothing, yes. Get the picks and prospect and go from there.
Kreider is an institution here, I love him, but team hasn't come up an endorsement. No C or extension so far. He hasn't come up with a stamp.
I'm fine with a reasonable deal (5-6-ish/y), but that won't come, so we have to deal him.
Irishguy42
Mr. Preachy
Faceoffs do mean something in a single game sample size. No major advanced stats proponents out there will be telling you otherwise.
But in a larger sample size, over the course of 10 games, or a full season...it doesn't mean much.
Even in small sample sizes, especially faceoffs in the NZ, the teams change puck possession quickly or don't even do anything with their puck possession within a small window following the FO win.
Special teams it's more important, but the inconsistency of when specials teams usage occurs makes it less reliant as an important stat.
Your attitude and ignorance here is straight garbage, btw
Yikes, did I strike a nerve? You talk about ignorance, what's your level of hockey knowledge outside of a spread sheet?
Irishguy42
Mr. Preachy
If you're resorting to any variation of "have you even played the game?" you've already lost the argument.
Bye.
It was a honest question, without a hint of variation. But you just answered it for me, thanks.
- Jul 20, 2005
- 4,926
- 2,340
You don't need a spreadsheet or to be a math whiz to know that fancy stats look at hockey in terms of minutes and hours while something like face offs or <insert hockey thing that doesn't matter when creating a team> matters only when you are viewing hockey in terms of seconds, any more than you need to have worked in a skate factory to know that they go on your feet.
- Status
