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

[stokes84]

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

Zips example deals with an extremely ancillary debate point. If you want to use that point as a plus for Cody, go for it, but it's a stretch in my book to use it as a positive for him.

In debating who is the better player, why am I supposed to make the opposing views argument?

 

[BowieSabresFan]

Whether Ennis or Hodgson is better is rather irrelevant to the thread.

Believe it or not, I think Vanek is getting more out of having Hodgson on the line, than vice versa. As others have said, Hodgson centering that line is allowing Vanek to handle the puck more, and that is what has made all the difference.

If folks want to bring Ennis into this, it would only be to ask who the better center for Vanek would be. The answer to that is Hodgson.

 

[Zip15]

Zips example deals with an extremely ancillary debate point. If you want to use that point as a plus for Cody, go for it, but it's a stretch in my book to use it as a positive for him.

In debating who is the better player, why am I supposed to make the opposing views argument?

There's a distinct line between "not making the other side's argument" and "undercutting your own position by ignoring contrary evidence so as to seem biased and irrational."

Also, your use of the word "opposing" is telling. When you discuss Hodgson--in Kassian discussion, or talking about how much "credit" he deserves vis-a-vis VHP's success, or in comparison to Ennis--you come off as petulant. You seem genuinely disgusted when people so much as praise him--either by believing we got the better of the trade, or that Hodgson contributes meaningfully to that line, or someone believes Hodgson is our best center--and it pervades your opinions. Which, again, is why people are saying you have an agenda.

 

[SoFFacet]

This whole thread is bizarre to me. The worst you can say about Hodgson is that he's not the reason for his line's success. In context with the OP's previous posts we are supposed to infer that Ennis would be better on that line or is better in general, never mind that he has been so awful most of the time this year that he is nearly single-handedly responsible for the failure of the secondary scoring.

I'm fairly certain that Ennis' eventual role 2-3 years from now will be 3LW on a line with checking forwards, say, Girgensons and Foligno. On defense he harasses the puck when it goes to the point, threatening to poke it past for a breakaway, or looks to accept the first pass towards the middle with speed once one his teammates wins a board battle on the other side. On offense Ennis can do his thing and even if it doesn't work most of the time, at least he isn't wasting the shifts of anyone important.

 

[stokes84]

There's a distinct line between "not making the other side's argument" and "undercutting your own position by ignoring contrary evidence so as to seem biased and irrational."
.

And that line is apparently drawn when you don't consider our goalie's save % while each player is on the ice.

And if I do have an agenda, it's not an anti-Hodgson agenda, it's an anti-these types of posts agenda, which I do find irritating because they are misinformed, smug and unwilling to back up there claims. These were the posts that set off this side debate, which were responses to another poster stating that he thought Ennis was our best center.

That's cute.

thanks for the laugh

 

[FearTheBeard]

This whole thread is bizarre to me. The worst you can say about Hodgson is that he's not the reason for his line's success. In context with the OP's previous posts we are supposed to infer that Ennis would be better on that line or is better in general, never mind that he has been so awful most of the time this year that he is nearly single-handedly responsible for the failure of the secondary scoring.

I'm fairly certain that Ennis' eventual role 2-3 years from now will be 3LW on a line with checking forwards, say, Girgensons and Foligno. On defense he harasses the puck when it goes to the point, threatening to poke it past for a breakaway, or looks to accept the first pass towards the middle with speed once one his teammates wins a board battle on the other side. On offense Ennis can do his thing and even if it doesn't work most of the time, at least he isn't wasting the shifts of anyone important.

Ennis is a top 6 forward. He is below average defensively, having him on the third line would only be detrimental to the team.

 

[SoFFacet]

Ennis is a top 6 forward. He is below average defensively, having him on the third line would only be detrimental to the team.

Did you even read the rest of that paragraph, where I described exactly what he would be doing, so that it would work?

And that line is apparently drawn when you don't consider our goalie's save % while each player is on the ice.

And if I do have an agenda, it's not an anti-Hodgson agenda, it's an anti-these types of posts agenda, which I do find irritating because they are misinformed, smug and unwilling to back up there claims. These were the posts that set off this side debate, which were responses to another poster stating that he thought Ennis was our best center.

People usually only bother to put effort into arguments when they feel that there is a legitimate opposing point of view that warrants something other than a raised eyebrow. Most people that have watched the games think that Hodgson has played well and Ennis has sucked, and aren't very interested in arguing over what they see as obvious.

 

[Myllz]

And if I do have an agenda, it's not an anti-Hodgson agenda, it's an anti-these types of posts agenda, which I do find irritating because they are misinformed, smug and unwilling to back up there claims. These were the posts that set off this side debate, which were responses to another poster stating that he thought Ennis was our best center.

Oh stop. The FIRST thing you replied with was:

"I don't think it's even really debatable right now. They're tied for points despite Ennis getting more difficult minutes and not having the benefit of playing consistently on a line with the league's top forward and captain, and he's a plus while CoHo's a minus despite playing on that line, plus the fact that Ennis has had far more past success in this league despite being in the same draft year."

You don't have a pro-Ennis/anti-Hodgson agenda, yet you don't think it's even debatable that Ennis is the better center. Give me a break.

 

[FearTheBeard]

Did you even read the rest of that paragraph, where I described exactly what he would be doing, so that it would work?

Yeah I did I just disagreed with it

On defense he harasses the puck when it goes to the point, threatening to poke it past for a breakaway,

When has he done this? If you are referring to last night that was Foligno who pushed it forward. Even so, that wouldn't justify him being a defensively responsible forward.

or looks to accept the first pass towards the middle with speed once one his teammates wins a board battle on the other side.

And with big slow line mates on the third line how do you figure they will match his speed and join him on the rush?

Ennis definitely needs a good power forward on his line to even out the size and to give him space, but he isn't a 3rd line player, and deserves more minutes than what he would get on the third line. The only way this works is if Ruff decides to roll 3 scoring lines again and we have 2 better LW's on the roster than Ennis

 

[stokes84]

Oh stop. The FIRST thing you replied with was:

"I don't think it's even really debatable right now. They're tied for points despite Ennis getting more difficult minutes and not having the benefit of playing consistently on a line with the league's top forward and captain, and he's a plus while CoHo's a minus despite playing on that line, plus the fact that Ennis has had far more past success in this league despite being in the same draft year."

You don't have a pro-Ennis/anti-Hodgson agenda, yet you don't think it's even debatable that Ennis is the better center. Give me a break.

Correct. And then I went on to lay out the entire argument as to why Ennis is the better of the two right now, and the only counter-points have been goalie save %, which is a huge stretch, and primary assists through 11 games in 5 on 5 play. Again, it's really not a debate right now. Almost all of the evidence favors Ennis. Feel free to go back through the last few pages and come up with some tangible counter points, if you'd like.

 

[SoFFacet]

When has he done this? If you are referring to last night that was Foligno who pushed it forward.

I'm not referring to what he does now, as a center, on a scoring line. I'm planning for what he should be coached to do, and that he clearly has the ability to do, once he is assigned to the role that we are hypothetically talking about.

And with big slow line mates on the third line how do you figure they will match his speed and join him on the rush?

At the moment I would just be happy with a clean exit from the defensive zone, scoring in transition is secondary. Offensively that line should have pretty excellent possession and cycling, and Ennis can periodically try something fancy. If it fails, it won't matter as much because his responsible teammates can cover for it, and probably weren't going to get a great scoring chance anyways.

In the alternative (superior offensive linemates) Ennis' line would probably suck defensively, and more important players would be exposed to wasted shifts on account of Ennis' turnovers and lost puck battles. This is why I don't think he will stick with those sort of players.

 

[FearTheBeard]

I'm not referring to what he does now, as a center, on a scoring line. I'm planning for what he should be coached to do, and that he clearly has the ability to do, once he is assigned to the role that we are hypothetically talking about.



At the moment I would just be happy with a clean exit from the defensive zone, scoring in transition is secondary. Offensively that line should have pretty excellent possession and cycling, and Ennis can periodically try something fancy. If it fails, it won't matter as much because his responsible teammates can cover for it, and probably weren't going to get a great scoring chance anyways.

In the alternative (superior offensive linemates) Ennis' line would probably suck defensively, and more important players would be exposed to wasted shifts on account of Ennis' turnovers and lost puck battles. This is why I don't think he will stick with those sort of players.

If he gets to happy at the blue line looking for breakaways he will be out of position. What about when other teams top lines are cycling down low? He can't be out at the blue line. He instead will be losing battles low in the zone and we won't be able to get the puck out.

As for your last paragraph you just described about half of the top 6 forwards in the NHL. Not every top6 guy is a 2 way forward. Guys like Kessel, Semin etc. are no better than Ennis defensively, and don't need 3rd line players to keep them from getting dominated.

I understand the point you are trying to make, the point that the line needs balance, and solid defensive minded forwards to play along side Ennis. However, that doesn't have to come from the 3rd line, they just need a solid 2 way power forward for Ennis to play along side. Many were probably hoping Foligno could be that player but he will lack the offense to play a top 6 role and is likely destined for the 3rd line

 

[stokes84]

Advanced stats suggest that Ennis has been very good in his own zone. This idea that he is a complete mess defensively misses the mark by a lot. There are a couple of plays that stick out, like the Staal and Parros goals, but, as a whole he's been good. I'd prefer it if he wasn't asked to play the role they have him in, and he'd probably be more effective, but he's handled it better than some would have imagined.

 

[SoFFacet]

If he gets to happy at the blue line looking for breakaways he will be out of position. What about when other teams top lines are cycling down low? He can't be out at the blue line. He instead will be losing battles low in the zone and we won't be able to get the puck out.

Come now, how often do we actually crash our wingers down into our own corner? Wingers are mostly responsible for the half-wall to the point of his own side, and for accepting outlet passes, and I think Ennis can do a decent job there.

As for your last paragraph you just described about half of the top 6 forwards in the NHL. Not every top6 guy is a 2 way forward. Guys like Kessel, Semin etc. are no better than Ennis defensively, and don't need 3rd line players to keep them from getting dominated.

Sucking defensively is really the secondary point here. The main point is that Ennis is prone to puck hogging and turnovers, and is nearly completely incapable of winning a board battle or otherwise loose puck. He can't be trusted to not waste the shifts of players better than him.

 

[FearTheBeard]

Come now, how often do we actually crash our wingers down into our own corner? Wingers are mostly responsible for the half-wall to the point of his own side, and for accepting outlet passes, and I think Ennis can do a decent job there.



Sucking defensively is really the secondary point here. The main point is that Ennis is prone to puck hogging and turnovers, and is nearly completely incapable of winning a board battle or otherwise loose puck. He can't be trusted to not waste the shifts of players better than him.

In your last post you were talking about how his line mates would be required to win puck battles along the board so he can accept the outlet pass through the middle for an easy breakout. Now you suggest he is capable of playing efficiently along the half board even though he is "nearly completely incapable of winning a board battle." There WILL be board battles along the half board in his own zone. Im not saying he can't play wing because he's shown he can, but you contradicted yourself.
By the bolded you are suggesting he must play with inferior players in order to not waste shifts of our better players. The way you are describing him sounds like you think he is a complete liability out there. Im lost on how you suggest a player who is once again "nearly completely incapable of winning a board battle" is suited for a 3rd line role?

 

[dma0034]

Okay let me clarify that I do believe that Hodgson is the better center on this team and better than Adam.

However; Vanek has 21 points in 10 games and Hodgson has 10 point in 11 games.... clearly Vanek is doing the majority of the work. Lets not forget the game Vanek sat out and the Pominville - Hodgson - Gerbe line was invisible... that hasn't happened when Vanek has played and when Vanek was struggling (presumably with injuries) last year with Hodgson as his center it wasn't like Hodgson was doing much (3-5-8). I also get that you could say Hodgson wasn't fully adjusted into the system yet but I honestly think that Hodgson's play has been influenced greatly by Vanek's presence on the ice (teams have to game plan for Vanek). I guess what I'm trying to say is I just don't give as much credit to him as you guys do when Pominville and Vanek made Luke Adam look like a #1 Center for 10-15 games to start the season last year (and no I don't see similarities in Adam's and Hodgson's game). If Ruff made a Foligno - Hodgson - Stafford line..... does anyone think Hodgson would put up as many points as he has thus far?

 

[1972]

"there are three kinds of lies, lies, damn lies, and statistics"

 

[BloFan4Life]

Ennis assists on Vanek goals: 3

Hodgson assists on Vanek goals: 3

Ennis barely plays with Vanek too. Hodgson is holding Vanek back imo. That line would be all the more lethal if Ennis was out there buzzing around drawing attention.

 

[Jame]

i think I've found my "chain". you know...that zen like state where you don't feel the need to reply to the stupidity any longer

... this will not last...

 

[Myllz]

Ennis assists on Vanek goals: 3

Hodgson assists on Vanek goals: 3

Ennis barely plays with Vanek too. Hodgson is holding Vanek back imo. That line would be all the more lethal if Ennis was out there buzzing around drawing attention.

Sigh.

 

[vcv]

Ennis assists on Vanek goals: 3

Hodgson assists on Vanek goals: 3

Ennis barely plays with Vanek too. Hodgson is holding Vanek back imo. That line would be all the more lethal if Ennis was out there buzzing around drawing attention.

Power Play. Next.

 

[FearTheBeard]

i think I've found my "chain". you know...that zen like state where you don't feel the need to reply to the stupidity any longer

... this will not last...

Sigh.

 

[dma0034]

Ennis assists on Vanek goals: 3

Hodgson assists on Vanek goals: 3

Ennis barely plays with Vanek too. Hodgson is holding Vanek back imo. That line would be all the more lethal if Ennis was out there buzzing around drawing attention.

So lets say the newly formed P-E-V gets into the offensive zone..... who do you want with the puck on their stick? Because if you say Vanek it eliminates Ennis' effectiveness of creating plays and vice versa. With Foligno and Stafford Ennis has two players that compliment his offensive skills.

 

[1TuchAnd1NoTuch]

So lets say the newly formed P-E-V gets into the offensive zone..... who do you want with the puck on their stick? Because if you say Vanek it eliminates Ennis' effectiveness of creating plays and vice versa. With Foligno and Stafford Ennis has two players that compliment his offensive skills.

To an extent, we've never seen vanek and ennis play together though and ennis actually has pretty good playmaking abililty, ennis could carry the puck through the neutral zone but would be pretty good at finding vanek in the offensive zone, I do think cohos a better fit but it's not like the puck stays on one players stick the whole shift, I think that whole argument of eliminating linemates possesion has been blown up.

 

[Havok89]

Ennis assists on Vanek goals: 3

Hodgson assists on Vanek goals: 3

Ennis barely plays with Vanek too. Hodgson is holding Vanek back imo. That line would be all the more lethal if Ennis was out there buzzing around drawing attention.

I believe Ennis is the better offensive player of the two, but this isn't true at all.

Hodgson is the better fit for Vanek, that is why he is on the top line. Vanek's stats wouldn't improve from Ennis, but Ennis' stats would improve with Vanek rather than playing with Stafford or Foligno.

Bottom line, Hodgson is centering the #1 and #7 scorers in the NHL and is outscoring Ennis by one point.

Anyone know Ennis and Hodgson's average TOI at ES?