• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
unkempt

Hudler: More Icetime - Worse Performance ?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

It is an argument keeps reappearing across discussions - if you gave Hudler more icetime, his performance would decline.

I will throw you a gauntlet - do you know of any actual case, throughout the NHL, where a player was given more ice time and his performance suffered as a result (all other parameter ideally remaining the same - linemates, proportion of ES / PP etc.)?

And as a side note, I offer another explanation for Hudler's limited ice-time: Is it too far-fetched to suspect that Babcock is limiting Huds ice-time to prevent him from getting more points and thus eliminating all possible chances of resigning him? I mean, given three more minutes (+20%), is it unreasonable to believe that Hudler's point total could climb into high seventies? How could you offer 2.5mil to a player with 78 points for the season?

edit: grammar, grrr.

Edited by unkempt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is an argument keeps reappearing across discussions - if you gave Hudler more icetime, his performance would decline.

I will throw you a gauntlet - do you know of any actual case, throughout the NHL, where a player was given more ice time and his performance suffered as a result (all other parameter ideally remaining the same - linemates, proportion of ES / PP etc.)?

And as a side note, I offer another explanation for Hudler's limited ice-time: Is it too far-fetched to suspect that Babcock is limiting Huds ice-time to prevent him from getting more points and thus eliminating all possible chances of reassigning him? I mean, given three more minutes (+20%), is it unreasonable to believe that Hudler's point total could climb into high seventies? How could you offer 2.5mil to a player with 78 points for the season?

It was true of Hudler in the very first two games this year, where he played 16 minutes on the second line and did not register a point. Based on that (and ignoring the pre-season where he was scoring a point per game on the second line), Babcock slammed him back down to the 4th line. Since then, and not until months later, he has played above 16 minutes about 4 times now, averaging over a point per game in them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It was true of Hudler in the very first two games this year, where he played 16 minutes on the second line and did not register a point. Based on that (and ignoring the pre-season where he was scoring a point per game on the second line), Babcock slammed him back down to the 4th line. Since then, and not until months later, he has played above 16 minutes about 4 times now, averaging over a point per game in them.

uh, uh, cold start, maybe?

I actually meant a statistically significant decline ... two games mean nothing season wise, because such two game lows may be caused by any number of reasons ... big party, angry girlfriend, minor flu, whatever ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest EZBAKETHAGANGSTA
uh, uh, cold start, maybe?

I actually meant a statistically significant decline ... two games mean nothing season wise, because such two game lows may be caused by any number of reasons ... big party, angry girlfriend, minor flu, whatever ...

He was agreeing with you and pointing out how stupid the people who cite that argument were.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it has anything to do with Hudler's performance suffering if given more ice time, and I also don't think it's a conspiracy to lower his value. I think it is partly because he's had to overcome the perception that he's too small, I think it is partly because of some question about his defensive abilities (which are much improved in my opinion), and partly because he plays for a team that is loaded with talented forwards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think it has anything to do with Hudler's performance suffering if given more ice time, and I also don't think it's a conspiracy to lower his value. I think it is partly because he's had to overcome the perception that he's too small, I think it is partly because of some question about his defensive abilities (which are much improved in my opinion), and partly because he plays for a team that is loaded with talented forwards.

I think they would like him to work on his 2 way play a bit more before giving him more even strenght ice time. I doubt we will ever see him on PK, so that also limits his minutes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is an argument keeps reappearing across discussions - if you gave Hudler more icetime, his performance would decline.

I will throw you a gauntlet - do you know of any actual case, throughout the NHL, where a player was given more ice time and his performance suffered as a result (all other parameter ideally remaining the same - linemates, proportion of ES / PP etc.)?

And as a side note, I offer another explanation for Hudler's limited ice-time: Is it too far-fetched to suspect that Babcock is limiting Huds ice-time to prevent him from getting more points and thus eliminating all possible chances of reassigning him? I mean, given three more minutes (+20%), is it unreasonable to believe that Hudler's point total could climb into high seventies? How could you offer 2.5mil to a player with 78 points for the season?

You may not care (in fact most people probably don't) but I have always had a weird fascination with idioms. The phrase is actually "throw down the gauntlet." The expression goes back to Medieval times. Throwing down the gauntlet was a knight’s method of challenging another knight to a duel. If/when the other knight picked up the gauntlet that was the method for accepting the challenge. Thus, in this situation you would throw down the gauntlet and whomever wishes to accept your challenge would be the one to pick up the gauntlet. Again, really not trying to be a jerk or play gotcha, I just am interested in sayings and their origins. (Yeah I know - kinda dorky). :blush:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He was agreeing with you and pointing out how stupid the people who cite that argument were.

on second reading, ehm, you're most probably right ...

............

and I dont care if it is a conspiracy or not. If it helps Hudler stay in Detroit, it is fine by me :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
on second reading, ehm, you're most probably right ...

............

Yes, he is right... most people who make that idiotic statement point to "the beginning of the season" -- which in reality, was all of two games. Since then, whenever Hudler has been given even close to 2nd line minutes (over 16 minutes), he has produced at over a point per game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest MrSandMan

I'm sure it has nothing with trying to "keep his value down" conspiracy. I'm sure Babcock does it for good reason, which would lead one to think that either Hudler's defensive game has open holes, and probably mostly due to his small size.

I'm also a strong believer that Babcock isn't limiting Hudler's ice time just to piss of LGW members. I'm sure he knows more about Hudlers all-around-game than all of us combined here on the forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't you hear?

With similar icetime, Jiri Hudler could be just as good as any forward in the league and could possibly catch Gordie Howe for most points ever scored by a Wing.

That's why we have about 4 threads going on him right now.

Edited by GMRwings1983

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Didn't you hear?

With similar icetime, Jiri Hudler could be just as good as any forward in the league and could possibly catch Gordie Howe for most points ever scored by a Wing.

Let's not be too rash here. Let him catch up with Filppula first. :rolleyes:

Edited by unkempt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I posted this in another thread.

With Hudler's current ice time (13:28/g), he's scoring at a rate that would put him at 67 points over an 82 game season.

In games where Hudler has played 15+ minutes (9 games), he scores at a rate of 70 points over an 82 game season.

In games where Hudler has played 16+ minutes this season (7 games), he scores at a rate of 73 points over an 82 game season.

So yes. Judging from this season, the correlation is that the more ice time Hudler gets, the better his scoring rate is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not really ice time that is his problem. It is who is going against. When he plays on the top two lines, he is going against better forwards and defensemen. However, when he is on the lower lines, he matches up against weaker opponents, and he produces. His ice time is low just because Babcock uses his top two lines so much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to go against the grain a little here and say yes, to an extent. It's not that his production would falter.. it's that it becomes less efficient. To use YG's numbers in the previous thread, it's easy to realize that 67 points gained over an average of 13.5 ATOI is more efficient production than 73 to 16.

As someone here pointed out, that's probably due to the fact that with thse higher minutes, he's playing more against top lines.. at which point it may be that those extra 2-3 minutes are better off distributed to other players (that is, at their best possible A/TOI:points efficacy).

I'd say 13.5 is just about right for Hudler.. allows the Wings to save his energy for the times in the game when their opponents shorts are down for a midget boot in the ass.

Edited by Datsyerberger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm going to go against the grain a little here and say yes, to an extent. It's not that his production would falter.. it's that it becomes less efficient. To use YG's numbers in the previous thread, it's easy to realize that 67 points gained over an average of 13.5 ATOI is more efficient production than 73 to 16.

As someone here pointed out, that's probably due to the fact that with thse higher minutes, he's playing more against top lines.. at which point it may be that those extra 2-3 minutes are better off distributed to other players (that is, at their best possible A/TOI:points efficacy).

I'd say 13.5 is just about right for Hudler.. allows the Wings to save his energy for the times in the game when their opponents shorts are down for a midget boot in the ass.

To offer a bit of an example here.. well, I'm gonna use Leino, 'cause everyone here likes Leino. Won't set anyone off.

Suppose, over the course of an 82 game season, Hudler is playing 16 minutes a game for 73 points over 82 games.

Meanwhile, Leino is producing (just making s*** up for an example here) 50 points over 82 games with 10 minutes of icetime per game.

Now, Babcock, seeing Leino's potential, lower's Hudler's icetime to 13.5 minutes, and he's still producing at a 67 point pace.

However, Leino, now with the extra 2 and a half minutes Hudler had, at 12.5 himself, is now putting up at a 58 point pace over 82 games.

Due to several factors, including endurance and line matching, this is more efficient production, (a +3 point difference) even though Hudler's totals drop off.

The 58 in 12.5 ATOI is actually a slower rate than the 50 per 10 in which he was scoring, but it's not as much of a drop off as the 67 to 13.5 and 73 to 16 in Hudler's case. It's a matter of finding a peak in a curve.

Why would a player's production start to peak and then drop off (in efficiency) like that? Maybe the best endurance he has at a high amount of energy is 13.5 minutes. Maybe he starts having to play more against lines in which he matches up unfavorably with opposing players, like Hudler against large, physical players.. the sort of player another type (like Datsyuk) makes look like fools. There's any number of factors, all of which I'm sure successful coaches like Babs take into consideration.

Edited by Datsyerberger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Babcock just likes having a legitimate scoring threat on the bottom lines and it is as simple as that. More so than any forward outside of Datsyuk, Hudler makes the players around him better and will single-handidly make a line of Helm and McCarty a consistent scoring threat.

It's all about putting the right pieces together -- and obviously Hudler needs to play with someone with wheels and can backcheck:

Holmstrom Hudler Leino -- would get scored on every shift.

But I am dieing to see a Franzen Hudler Hossa line.

In fact, I am salivating over the potential of that line.

Franzen needs a playmaker - and Filppula does not cut it. Hossa can create plays by himself, but is not a bad passer once he has drawn a couple defenders to himself. Again, Filppula is not the guy you want him passing to. But both Franzen and Hudler are more than capable of burying it. You have two quality backcheckers, three goal scorers, one net front presence, one elite playmaker and another good one, two fast skaters and two big bodies -- What a line!

And it lets you keep the Euro Twins together, but still keeps a legitimate 1b line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With more ice time, it simply means that he will be playing on the first or second lines, rather than the third or fourth, meaning he would be playing with better players. In a recent game, I believe against Minnesota, Hudler was on a line with Hossa for a period and the two were feeding off of each other. Hudler has been playing with players not known for their high end offensive skills. It is not the ice time so much as the people that it comes with that play a similar amount.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure about production actually suffering, but I would certainly not expect points per minute to be the same, which is why I always laugh when people throw those stats around. A person will not automatically double their points if you doubled their ice-time, it simply doesn't work that way.

That said, if Hulder is getting 1 ppg playing 12 min per game, I certainly wouldn't expect him to get less than 1ppg if you increase his ice time to 20 min per game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not sure about production actually suffering, but I would certainly not expect points per minute to be the same, which is why I always laugh when people throw those stats around. A person will not automatically double their points if you doubled their ice-time, it simply doesn't work that way.

That said, if Hulder is getting 1 ppg playing 12 min per game, I certainly wouldn't expect him to get less than 1ppg if you increase his ice time to 20 min per game.

I could not agree more. As others have said, it is all about being the most efficient; about getting the most out of every player. For some, that means more time on the ice and for others, it means less. There is a definite parabolic curve measuring minutes played to points per minute, and the key to is to find that sweet spot for each player that will maximize the outcomes for the team as a whole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I could not agree more. As others have said, it is all about being the most efficient; about getting the most out of every player. For some, that means more time on the ice and for others, it means less. There is a definite parabolic curve measuring minutes played to points per minute, and the key to is to find that sweet spot for each player that will maximize the outcomes for the team as a whole.

Yea, that's where I'm at.. but I've already got a long winded post detailing that.

I found it interesting that YG actually worked against his own point by showing a significant decline in PPM as Hudler gains increased ice time.

He showed that with a 2 and a half minute differential, Hudler loses 6 points to his total, but his PPM also significantly increases.

On the other hand, if you were to scratch 2 and a half minutes off of Datsyuk's or Zetterberg's current average icetime, his point totals would also fall, but it probably wouldn't result in as significant of a PPM increase (and that's not even counting into discussion the defensive presence the team would lose those 2 and a half minutes).

The undertone in all of this is that some people here think that a player like Cleary or Flip, since they aren't producing as many points (but providing great defense) should be reduced 2 or so minutes in ice time, and that ice time should be given to Hudler. Interestingly enough, when Dats and Z were on seperate lines, you didn't see anyone arguing that Z, who is producing less than Dats, should be dropped 2 minutes in ice time so Dats could put up a handful of extra points.

It just doesn't work like that.

Edited by Datsyerberger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yea, that's where I'm at.. but I've already got a long winded post detailing that.

I found it interesting that YG actually worked against his own point by showing a significant decline in PPM as Hudler gains increased ice time.

I agree and you had a great post... I just didn't want to quote something that long! PPM is an interesting statistic but it is not an end-all-be-all. The statistical revolution has gone through baseball, and it's working it's way through basketball. I haven't heard a lot of it for hockey yet besides TSN's player rankings, but I do see it coming. It's definitely about finding how to maximize team efficiency in the context of each individual player efficiency. I in general do not have complaints about Hudler's role on the team. As long as he is a 2nd or 3rd liner on ES shifts, I think that's all that matters. He's not going to get PK time or 4x4 time so that will keep him lower than the stronger two-way forwards in front of him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This year's version of Chris Osgood is playing worse with more ice-time.... it had to be said!

Not to derail this into another goalie thread, but I think there might be some truth to this. I've been an Ozzie fan since he first came up from the minors, but I think he definitely does not play as well when he's the front runner. As the bona fide #1 guy, coming off a Cup run, he's struggling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this