Vanek's Success: How Much Credit Does CoHo Deserve?

[stokes84]

Stafford's been bad, too. The difference is you don't see anyone claiming Stafford's the better winger over Pominville because he has more difficult minutes and Pominville only gets points because he's playing with Vanek.

Because that would be ridiculous. Stafford is a -6 and has 0 goals or zero past history to suggest he's the better player. Ennis's stats are comparable with a better +/- and linemates who aren't producing while playing harder minutes and a stronger history despite being the same age. It's a cut and dry argument.

 

[Myllz]

Because that would be ridiculous. Stafford is a -6 and has 0 goals or zero past history to suggest he's the better player. Ennis's stats are comparable with a better +/- and linemates who aren't producing while playing harder minutes and a stronger history despite being the same age. It's a cut and dry argument.

Stronger history? What stronger history does Ennis have supporting the argument that he's a better center than Hodgson?

This should be good.

 

[1TuchAnd1NoTuch]

Stronger history? What stronger history does Ennis have supporting the argument that he's a better center than Hodgson?

This should be good.

Well he had a better rookie season and produced at a better PPG last season as well

 

[Zip15]

Because that would be ridiculous. Stafford is a -6 and has 0 goals or zero past history to suggest he's the better player. Ennis's stats are comparable with a better +/- and linemates who aren't producing while playing harder minutes and a stronger history despite being the same age. It's a cut and dry argument.

You cite the unsustainability of Stafford's low shooting% (true) as evidence that Ennis will start picking up primaries. That's fine. Yet you don't give Hodgson the benefit of the doubt about the fact that Buffalo's SV% when he's on the ice is .802--which, of course, is not going to continue over a large sample--and has a direct, negative bearing on Hodgson's +/-, which is a limited stat, anyways.

This is why people think you have an agenda. You contort to cast Ennis in the most positive light possible--fine, you like him, I have no problem with that--then not only don't do the same for Hodgson, you don't give him the benefit of any doubt, no matter how minor, and attempt to spin his positive points into negatives.

Stronger history? What stronger history does Ennis have supporting the argument that he's a better center than Hodgson?

This should be good.

These past 11 games. Duh.

 

[Myllz]

Well he had a better rookie season and produced at a better PPG last season as well

As a winger for the majority.

 

[Old Navy Goat]

Stronger history? What stronger history does Ennis have supporting the argument that he's a better center than Hodgson?

This should be good.

I'm kind of confused about that also as he broke into the league as a LW. He was removed from center in the AHL as he wasn't comfortable, and was only moved there last year out of desperation. Hodgson has a longer history as a center in the NHL than Ennis, albeit Ennis has played more games.

It think the biggest distinction between the two is the verbiage of better doesn't equate to more dynamic. Ennis is definitely more dynamic than Hodgson as he needs the puck on his stick to thrive, while Hodgson is more easily able to assimilate himself to his linemates.

 

[stokes84]

You cite the unsustainability of Stafford's low shooting% (true) as evidence that Ennis will start picking up primaries. That's fine. Yet you don't give Hodgson the benefit of the doubt about the fact that Buffalo's SV% when he's on the ice is .802--which, of course, is not going to continue over a large sample--and has a direct, negative bearing on Hodgson's +/-, which is a limited stat, anyways.

This is why people think you have an agenda. You contort to cast Ennis in the most positive light possible--fine, you like him, I have no problem with that--then not only don't do the same for Hodgson, you don't give him the benefit of any doubt, no matter how minor, and attempt to spin his positive points into negatives.

You are really stretching on that save% stat. Save% will go up when they aren't giving up high quality chances. If anything, it makes me think less of his defensive play.

 

[1TuchAnd1NoTuch]

As a winger for the majority.

True, I like ennis better on wing for defensive reasons but I think since he got moved he has been a PPG player at center

 

[Zip15]

You are really stretching on that save% stat. Save% will go up when they aren't giving up high quality chances. If anything, it makes me think less of his defensive play.

There you go again. So all or most of the 5-on-5 goals against when Hodgson is on the ice are his fault? Pominville's and Vanek's on-ice SV% suck, too. But that's Cody's fault, I'm sure.

 

[stokes84]

Stronger history? What stronger history does Ennis have supporting the argument that he's a better center than Hodgson?

This should be good.

In his career, Ennis has over double the assists, and a career .67 PPG. Hodgson has .52 PPG. So, so far, he's proven to be the much better scorer, regardless of position. When Ennis was switched to center, he had about a 30 game stretch last season where he about a point per game. Hodgson hasnt had any similar stretch yet.

Look, I hope Hodgson works out, I really do. But I struggle to find any argument that has me feeling sure about him. The best I can do is, he's young, give him time. But we can do the same with Ennis, given they are the same age.

 

[ZZamboni]

Look, I hope Hodgson works out, I really do. But I struggle to find any argument that has me feeling sure about him. The best I can do is, he's young, give him time. But we can do the same with Ennis, given they are the same age.

And there's nothing wrong with this in itself. But when you expand beyond this simple reasonable opinion of Hodgson, it looks like you have a major major problem with him on the Sabres.

 

[MGIII]

All I know is that I feel better when Hodgson is on the ice or has the puck than I do with Ennis.

 

[MLH]

I have little doubt that Hodgson will be better over the long term, but I do find it pretty funny that the same posters that are always bringing up advanced stats are ignoring that Ennis has the higher Corsi rating, starts in the defensive zone more than any center on the team (and despite that finishes in the offensive zone more than Hodgson), plays against a significantly better level of competition, and despite starting in the defensive zone more against better competition has been on the ice for 6 ES goals against compared to Hodgson's 16.

I guess advanced stats are only brought up when the argument suits you.

 

[La Cosa Nostra]

I have little doubt that Hodgson will be better over the long term, but I do find it pretty funny that the same posters that are always bringing up advanced stats are ignoring that Ennis has the higher Corsi rating, starts in the defensive zone more than any center on the team (and despite that finishes in the offensive zone more than Hodgson), plays against a significantly better level of competition, and despite starting in the defensive zone more against better competition has been on the ice for 6 ES goals against compared to Hodgson's 16.

I guess advanced stats are only brought up when the argument suits you.

it's funny because its true.

As for Hodgsons part in Vaneks success : Very little

Vanek would be this dominant with or without Hodgson. It's better to ask how much has Vanek helped Cody (and Pominville)

 

[Havok89]

Tyler Ennis has zero primary assists at 5-on-5 this year.

Factual agenda.

Drew Stafford has 0 goals this year.

Tyler Ennis hasn't played ES with the most productive LW in the NHL, and Stafford is half the player Pominville is.

Pominville and Vanek had a lot of success last year without Hodgson, and they've improved with him on their line.

Hodgson is going to be a great player. I see him as a 70 point center with better defensive abilities than Ennis, but he's going to get 70 points playing with the teams best wingers.

Ennis had 49 points in his rookie season, and finished the last 22 games near a PPG last season. It's not out of the question think Ennis will reach 70+ points in the future, and he'll do it on a line where he generates his own offense.

Ennis and Hodgson are both young players with great potential, and both have shown flashes of brilliance. Im just not ready to declare Hodgson the "best" center on the team, mainly because his playing style fits Thomas Vanek best.

Anyone who laughs at a possible debate between these two players clearly has an agenda. They're the same age, close in development, both have high ceilings, there is no clear cut #1 when there's arguements to be made for both players.

 

[Havok89]

Please read closer. See bolded. White had just taken his 4-minute penalty.

P.S. Should we start a thread about how many of Ennis' points "were all Vanek?"

Ennis did his job, and got open on the powerplay. Just like Hodgson scored 2 goals without his hockey stick by driving the net.

These arguements are brutal and can go both ways, and statistics don't tell the whole story.

It's pretty clear these two are too close to declare the better player right now. Everyone will have their own opinion.

 

[Zip15]

it's funny because its true.

As for Hodgsons part in Vaneks success : Very little

Vanek would be this dominant with or without Hodgson. It's better to ask how much has Vanek helped Cody (and Pominville)

I think a great question to ask is how dominant would Vanek be without Pominville. Vanek got off to a great start last season playing opposite Pominville, but didn't have a good second half, much of which was without Pommer. They get reunited and Vanek takes off again.

It's a symbiotic relationship for sure, but one could absolutely assert that Vanek needed Pommer more than vice-versa, at least last year when Pominville consistently produced no matter who his linemates were.

 

[Jame]

You cite the unsustainability of Stafford's low shooting% (true) as evidence that Ennis will start picking up primaries. That's fine. Yet you don't give Hodgson the benefit of the doubt about the fact that Buffalo's SV% when he's on the ice is .802--which, of course, is not going to continue over a large sample--and has a direct, negative bearing on Hodgson's +/-, which is a limited stat, anyways.

This is why people think you have an agenda. You contort to cast Ennis in the most positive light possible--fine, you like him, I have no problem with that--then not only don't do the same for Hodgson, you don't give him the benefit of any doubt, no matter how minor, and attempt to spin his positive points into negatives.

Exactly...

 

[stokes84]

Exactly...

I guess citing cold, hard facts equals contorting and spinning.

 

[Jame]

I guess citing cold, hard facts equals contorting and spinning.

siting facts through one prism in support of your position, but not viewing the other facts through that same prism, is "agenda driving"

(as zip pointed out)

 

[stokes84]

siting facts through one prism in support of your position, but not viewing the other facts through that same prism, is "agenda driving"

(as zip pointed out)

Please point out which facts I am sifting through different lenses, if you can.

 

[Jame]

Please point out which facts I am sifting through different lenses, if you can.

Please see Zips post. He gave you a great example.

 

[YouCantYandleThis*]

I have little doubt that Hodgson will be better over the long term, but I do find it pretty funny that the same posters that are always bringing up advanced stats are ignoring that Ennis has the higher Corsi rating, starts in the defensive zone more than any center on the team (and despite that finishes in the offensive zone more than Hodgson), plays against a significantly better level of competition, and despite starting in the defensive zone more against better competition has been on the ice for 6 ES goals against compared to Hodgson's 16.

I guess advanced stats are only brought up when the argument suits you.

This is a great post, and exactly what we saw happening here in Vancouver.

The guy has untapped offensive potential, but just can't seem to find his rhythm defensively. Alot of poorly timed rushes up the middle of the ice and off que passes.

He's an extremely smart hockey player though, so I have no doubt Cody will figure things out. It would help if he had a great defensive center there to show him the ropes. (you very well might, I'm not sure)

 

[Zip15]

I have little doubt that Hodgson will be better over the long term, but I do find it pretty funny that the same posters that are always bringing up advanced stats are ignoring that Ennis has the higher Corsi rating, starts in the defensive zone more than any center on the team (and despite that finishes in the offensive zone more than Hodgson), plays against a significantly better level of competition, and despite starting in the defensive zone more against better competition has been on the ice for 6 ES goals against compared to Hodgson's 16.

I guess advanced stats are only brought up when the argument suits you.

I sure hope you're not referring to me, who has consistently campaigned in the "Fire Ruff" threads that the very evidence you're now citing demonstrates that (a) this is a team of mismatched parts for Ennis to even be in that role--on Regier, too, of course--and (b) that Ruff doesn't know how to use his players if he's allowing Grigs to lop up easy offensive minutes while playing with limited offensive players (Hecht, Ott, et al.) to provide defensive protection. Additionally, I've consistently ripped Hodgson's defense--go check out the Carolina GDTs, as well as the Washington GDT. So, if you're referring to me, perhaps you're being a tad hypocritical (arguing as it suits you) and/or selectively reading.

I have no preference of Hodgson and Ennis. But this absurd anti-Hodgson agenda--and it is exactly that, an agenda--is fascinating to me, and I quite enjoy pointing out the hypocrisy of much of it.

 

[Endless Ike]

I'm sorry when you get 2 the bounce off of you (not even your stick) and 2 from driving the net you aren't finisher.

got andreychuk to the hall of fame...