Buppy

Um, that's exactly the kind of thing advanced stats can tell you. How players impact the game beyond the typical stats. Except instead of relying on imperfect perception and faulty memory, they rely on actually recording events.

At least you got your wish to see Ferraro replace a Miller on someone's roster. http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=789180&navid=nhl:topheads

I hope Janmark wins it, because it would be hilarious.

He played about 400 minutes combined 5v5 time with Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Nyquist, Tatar, and Franzen. Another 70ish minutes on the PP. That's around 30% of his total ice time spent with the best scorers on the team. Another 430 minutes combined with Abby, Sheahan, Weiss, Pulkkinen, and Helm. That's another 30% spent with secondary scorers, often in combination with one of the top players. At the very least, he played just as much in a scoring role as he did in 13-14. At best you could say he stagnated in a scoring role while scoring zero points in a third of a season on the 4th line. Same 4th line role where the likes of Helm, Miller, Glendening, Eaves, Andersson, and Emmerton have managed to be at least modestly productive. If he produced at all from the 4th line, then you have to admit he regressed in a scoring role. Either way it was poor, and there's no way to spin it otherwise. He had a poor year. It happens. Happens even to vets. Happens pretty often with young guys. There's no need to make excuses for it. It wasn't because he wasn't ready. Wasn't because he was misused, or mishandled. Doesn't mean he sucks. Doesn't mean he's lazy. Doesn't mean he won't improve. If someone wants to think he's a bust because of one moderately disappointing season, the only counter-argument needed is that he's 22 and has barely 100 games. Not some concocted and inaccurate excuses. Many people would probably argue that the quality in the CHL is as good or better than the NCAA. Maybe SM Liiga too, but most people probably don't know much about that league. Plenty of players around the league go from juniors to the NHL with less than two years in the AHL. It's not unusual, even for the Wings. It's also not unusual for young guys to struggle at first. Again, excuses aren't necessary.

Made me curious, so did some looking. Unfortunately, war-on-ice doesn't filter by time in game, so it's not quite conclusive. Combined last year and this year, leading by one, with opposing goalie pulled, both are nearly identical. 2 GA for each, on 16 shots for Mrazek, 15 for Howard. Leading by one, all situations there's quite a difference though: Howard - 44 games, 548.5 TOI, 32 GA on 306 shots, 89.54 sv% Mrazek - 32 games, 570.1 TOI, 16 GA on 293 shots, 94.54 sv% The team is better defensively with Mrazek, but Mrazek is also much better. Better on all shot types too. Low-danger (perimeter shots basically): Howard 7 goals/155 shots, Mrazek, 2/137 Medium (high slot/circles inside the faceoff dots): Howard 6/69, Mrazek 3/90 High (low slot/goal mouth): Howard 19/82, Mrazek 11/66 I figured there would be a difference, but I'm surprised by how dramatic it is. Among all goalies with at least 300 minutes in that situation (42 of them), Mrazek is 4th best, Howard is 3rd worst. Oddly, when trailing by 1, Howard is 21st of 47 while Mrazek is 44th. Trailing by any amount, Mrazek is 56th of 61, with Howard 20th. Tied Mrazek is 2nd of 61, Howard 38th. Granted, Howard wasn't great last year. Limited to just this year, they are much closer. Overall, I don't know if you can say Howard is particularly prone to giving up late, tying goals. Not enough information available (unless someone cares to dig through game logs). But it does look like Mrazek, so far, is generally better in tied games or when protecting a lead, but more likely to get a bit rattled when behind.

I wish they'd expand the skills competition to include participants from each team in every event. Obviously couldn't televise the whole thing, but edited down to highlights would be less downtime between events.

He had played over 100 games in GR. Similar amount of time to what Helm, Abby, Nyquist, Sheahan, and Pulkkinen spent there. Jurco and Miller have a nearly identical goals per game rate. Assuming he would be an "awesome improvement" is just speculating based on perceived potential. By the same logic, you'd think Jurco-Glen-Miller would have been an awesome improvement over Andy-Glen-Miller, but it wasn't. Most likely it would just be slightly better offensively but still largely ineffective, and a bit worse defensively while also forcing a better player to spend more energy taking on Miller's PK responsibilities. Wouldn't be the worst thing ever, and better for Jurco to be playing than sitting, but I wouldn't expect it to improve the team in any meaningful way.

Certainly an exaggeration to say he's "blamed for all that's wrong", but I think he is turning into a scapegoat for the struggling offense. People nitpick him more than most players. Notice mistakes they'd overlook in others. Larkin has missed a lot of shots and had a lot blocked as well, no one notices. Every GDT has some form of "Pulkkinen sucks". People notice when he loses a battle or makes a bad play, but never notice anything good other than goals. Even those sometimes get comments like "I still hate Pulkkinen". It's irrational. It's far too early to try to predict what Pulks can be. He's played 54 games. 11 goals and 18 points. At 54 games, Tatar had 11 goals and 21 points. Nyquist had 8 goals and 21 points, or 6 and 17 if you count playoffs. He's following the same trajectory as those two so far, and there's no reason to think he won't or can't improve the same way they did.

You're wrong. He had plenty of opportunities. 60% of his ice-time last year. Half of that with at least one of our top scorers. Plus, it is actually possible to score even in a lesser role. He had a poor year. Just like with Mantha, it's ok to say it. Doesn't make him a bust or mean he'll never be better. Not even that terrible a year either, all things considered. It's one thing to refute the few who seem to writing him off, but you don't need to make excuses. And I wouldn't say he was mishandled at all. He was originally called up as an injury replacement, and performed well enough to earn a spot last year. Even if he had started in GR, he'd have been called up for injuries soon enough anyway. If anything, he's been mishandled this year. Playing, even in a less than optimal role, is better than not playing.

Lowest of our regular forwards. I suppose you could consider Andersson and Ferraro a regular though. 2.5 minutes less than Tatar and 3.5 less than Nyquist. In this game, he played just under 12 minutes, while Tatar and Nyquist played about 17. LA game he did play more than them, one of the few times this year. One game is hardly enough to call a trend, especially considering tonight's game. You say he can't play defense, but his defensive metrics are among the best on the team, with similar usage to Tatar and Nyquist. You say he can't forecheck in the GDT for a game where his forecheck helped create two goals. Yeah, he's small, but no smaller than Nyquist or Tatar. And he's producing about as well as those two. If it turns out that Tatar and Nyquist do start losing ice time to Pulks, and he's not producing enough to warrant it, then a change would be in order. But for now it looks like we might finally have three good lines. Nyquist-Sheahan-Tatar has been a good line in pretty much every game they've been together. As has Larkin-Z-Abby. Richards-Dats-Pulks has been together 2 games, been our best possession line both games, and got a goal tonight. Let it ride. And he has 11 career goals.

Captaincy in hockey is by far the most over-hyped, over-analyzed aspect of any sport. Whatever is in that bowl that I'm afraid to touch in the back of my refrigerator could be the captain and it wouldn't make any difference. Leadership makes a leader, not a letter on your chest. Larkin's play is already making him a leader. If he's similarly good off the ice, he's already becoming a leader there too. Whether he gets a letter tomorrow or in 5 years or never gets one, if he's really a leader, he will lead.

He has the lowest ice-time of all our regular forwards, and has played more games with Miller/Andersson as a linemate than he's had with Datsyuk. Despite his limited use, he's one of the top producers on the team. He's not being carried to anything. He's earning everything. Except the irrational dislike so prevalent here. Definitely not earning that.

E has a modified NTC. Never seen the details anywhere, but I'd assume it's the typical "supply a list of teams" variety. Adding a top defenseman isn't a very realistic option. Probably not feasible unless we move all of E, Smith, and Kindl, or Howard in lieu of one of them.

10 mil for 13 years you mean. 10 mil is exactly what they average for the first 8 years of the deals they signed. Even if you offer that there's no guarantee they sign. Maybe Minnesota still would've matched or beaten it, or maybe they would've taken less to go there.

I'm thinking maybe when Blash said they have a long term plan for Jurco, it meant they're working with him in practice for now until he gets to wherever they want him.

According to war-on-ice, Nyquist has drawn 7 penalties this year. Pulks is 2nd with 5 (tied with Larkin). Probably not a coincidence. Like I said with Nyquist last year, the fines are a good start, but I think more needs to be done. Diving is effective, and will continue as long is it stays that way. Good chance for Blash to set a precedent here. Give Pulks a day off, tell him to knock that crap off.

No, it isn't.

Yeah, +/- isn't worth much. But he's a pretty good skater and his defense is no worse than Tatar or Nyquist. He's leading our team in takeaways, 3rd lowest Corsi against, and been on the ice for only 3 goals against, 2 of those being empty nets. He hasn't been playing with Sheahan by the way. Andersson and Helm for a couple, then AA replacing Helm last game. He also played with Tatar and Larkin for a few games. Plenty of good skaters. Hasn't stuck with anyone for more than a few games.

Trading him is one thing. I'd have no problem with that if it were for someone who'd make us better or more balanced. But I don't get the people who think he's been bad. As far as AA goes, I thought he was OK. Not sure he's any better than Jurco would be though.

For European players, I think that only applies if they were drafted by the CHL before the NHL. Tatar played in GR at 18/19 for example. But Tatar never played for his CHL team though. Since Saarijarvi did, he might have lost his eligibility.

Miller-Glen-Helm was together from the start. Not sure what your problem with Pulks is. By pretty much any statistical metric, he's been one of our better forwards. I have a feeling he's going to be our new Franzen. No matter how well he does, some people will always think it's not enough.

How so? Certainly not scoring.

Not really, we've always had grinders as key components of the PK, and our decline is probably more attributable to the loss of Lidstrom, But I'm not really talking about just the PK either. Again, not just talking about the PK, nor that Dats and Z should be primary Pkers. More just a general philosophy of prioritizing two-way players, which many teams already do quite a bit, but prioritizing skill more in the bottom of the lineup. Some for sure, as much for a lack of talent to go around as for cap concerns. But maybe not as many. We're already seeing the end of enforcers. The days of stay-at-home shot-blocking crease-clearers may be numbered as well. Guys who can contribute on offense, like Abby, Sheahan, maybe could include Helm in there. Glenny might get there eventually. And of course the elite two-way players. Those guys will always have jobs. But for the last few spots, instead of playing all of Miller, Ferraro, and Andersson you can play a guy like Jurco or another kid. Maybe even a really stacked team has enough two-way talent to not need even one of them, at least for a short time before the cap catches up to them. Not expecting a super dramatic change, but just a bit more evolution towards more skill.

Interesting topic. Similar to the topic a while back about stay-at-home defensemen. Defensive specialist may be an over-valued role. At the risk of fueling Bill's Miller-fire, the core concept of playing your most skilled players could be a better philosophy. Many top players already take a lot of defensive responsibility. With advanced metrics, we could see an evolution toward more of that, and players lie Abby and Sheahan becoming more valuable, while players like Miller and Glendening fall out of favor. More top-6 guys who can do it all, and more skill-oriented bottom-6 guys.

Gus-Sheahan-Tatar has been pretty good the last couple. If they keep it up until Datsyuk is back, just plug him in with Helm and Pulkkinen.