• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

HockeytownRules19

Glendening signs 4-year, $1.8m AAV extension

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

This is a bad hockey team and the data reflects that more so than a single player. What a strange coincidence, every player that isn't used defensively has outstanding numbers and every defensive player has terrible ones. I guess that can only mean those guys are trash and Jurco and smith are elite. If you ran your team based off these stats you wouldn't have a good team

It's likely a "bad" hockey team because of player misusage. What a stranger coincidence that we did worse last year than we did with Babcock with basically a better team on paper (Dylan Larkin + Mrazek). Oh that's right, Babcock didn't play guys like Glendening 24 minutes a night against Ovechkin and if he did, he put him on a line with Datsyuk to mask his weaknesses.

But carry on believe what you gotta believe.

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not saying glendening Is the best defensive centre in the league but I know if he played on a good team all these stats would change drastically

This board is putting so much stock in our lower defensive signings. How about having top six forwards that can break 50 points? This team is bad in almost all areas aside from GAA and PK which is decent. But yes our defensive players were our demise. If you're a defensive player on a bad team you'll never ever have good numbers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not true because both Helm and Sheahan are considered defensive forwards with higher defensive zone starts than the top 6 and their numbers are far better than Glendening.

Far better. Would you like me to post another chart or is it going to end up in another excuse driven post?

Why bother I guess. I've said my piece. Last year when WIIM posted it we all called them crazy. At this point Mlive has caught on and I'm sure the rest of the press will follow suit.

BTW what does bad team mean? We were one of 8 teams to make the playoffs in the east. That's a bad excuse. In the chart I posted of top toughest usage forwards, Auston Watson and Mikka Salomaki both play for Nashville (7th seed). Bryon Froese plays for the Maple Leafs (Lol). I feel like you're completely ignoring charts and figures people are posting for you without even reading jumping to conclusions of denial. Unless you can actually look at the points I'm trying to make, and read the information on the charts (and realize those other players are also on "bad teams"), this is pointless. I'm basically arguing with someone who refuses to look at data.

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm starting to sound harsh against Glendog. Partly because people are overrating him including the coaching staff.

The guy needs a lesser role and there's others on the team that would do better.

We went from being a team that would outshoot opponents to a team that was consistently outshot last year and struggled to hang on to the puck. How is this not an issue for people? Getting outshot is not the first step to winning games. This is basic hockey. How many games did San Jose get outshot by Pittsburgh by wide margins in the cup finals last year and lost? All of them.

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dickie, your comment "I ignore facts because they say I'm wrong" seems like sarcasm when talking about Glendening, but you seem to have that exact mentality when evaluating Helm... I get that Glendening's inability is much more glaring than Helm's, but in my opinion Glendening is a borderline NHL player, while Helm is a very good (one of the best) bottom 6 players in the league... You acknowledge the stats when discussing Glendening, but fail to see them for whatever reason when discussing Helm...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thought about the shot generation against Glendening or any other defender (I agree the stats given thus far are quite damning). Is there a stat that is a derivative of Corsi regarding number of quality shots or high danger shots allowed as opposed to perimeter shots that are theoretically much lower chance of actually scoring? Wouldn't it be better to allow 3 or 4 low danger shots than one or two shots that are gimme goals unless the goalie pulls a miracle save out of his butt? I would be curious to see if that affects his relative rating to other defenders, though the goals against figure likely renders the point moot anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah on the PK he has the most goals against on our team (and is bottom in the league). Abdelkader has the lowest. This past season Abby was on ice for only 9 power play goals against while Glendening was on ice for 27 goals against. Glendening plays more on the PK so if you adjusted his and Abby's PK minutes for a simple scale like "PK goals against per minute of PK" - Glendog is twice as bad as Abby. (A rate of 0.13 for Glendog and 0.07 for Abby).

Abby also happens to have the least shots against while on the PK while Glendog has the most shots against on the PK per 60 minutes.

Abby might be the most underrated PKer on this team to be honest.

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a couple problems with this article.

- First of all, Glendening's extension doesn't kick in until next year so comparing him to players that are midway through similar deals isn't quite right. They're looking at the past 3 years so that should compare to players that had caphits similar to Glen's .628 (of course, they're looking at his new contract so it doesn't make sense for their purposes.)

- Another problem is they've only chosen 3 similar players, 2 of which that have a higher caphit than Luke will have (2 guys with 2 mill) Why not compare him to Matt Hendricks, John Mitchell, Letestu, Dwight King? All have similar contracts. Don't have the time to check, but I sense some cherry picking.

- Another problem is they're comparing 4 players at different points of their career. They're looking at the past 3 years. For Glendening, that's his whole career and includes a first year where he struggled, Fehr and Beagle are 30 and just went through their primes, and similarly Lewis is 29. All 3 other guys have played more than 6 years in the league.

- But most of All, The problem is the part on penalty-killing, where they say "He has played more than twice the amount of time short handed than any of the other players, but his per 60 marks aren't great." Despite the fact this his GA60 (5.88) is lower than 2 guys that that make more than he will (Fehr: 5.97 and Lewis: 6.04) ?!?! ...in his first 3 years while he made 0,628. Am I missing something?

- Also, these 3 played for Washington, Pitsburgh and LA - top teams, I'm sure this effects some of the stats.

Edited by PavelValerievichDatsyuk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most overrated qualities in an NHL player:

1. Grit

2. Penalty killing

3. Faceoff win percentage

Only makes sense that Glendening does all 3 of these pretty well

1. "Grit" is also one of the worst-defined terms on this site. What is grit? Is it fighting? Blocking shots? Finishing hits? Winning puck battles along the boards? I'd say it's a combination of all those things. With the exception of fighting, I'd say all of those things are imperative to winning games, especially in the playoffs. One of the major reasons Tampa was able to dispose of Detroit in 5 was because their forechecking wore down our defense and forced turnovers. Additionally, they won a ton of 50/50 puck battles along the boards.

2. Again, you can't have a deep playoff run unless you have a reliable core of PK specialists. I agree that some players' effectiveness on the penalty kill is used to justify their position on the team, specifically in the case of Drew Miller. He doesn't provide much else besides his role on the PK. Very little offense, not particularly fast, and ineffective on the forecheck.

3. This is ludicrous. Games are won and lost in the faceoff circle. Puck-possession is the name of the game. This is one of the most bat-s*** crazy things I've read on here in a long time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glendening is at best a mediocre pk guy. If he was matched up against second and third line players he'd be fine, but Trashill keeps putting his line against guys like Crosby and Ovechkin and they usually get dominated by the stars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So let them dominate Z and Larkin? Those guys are counted on to score. Glendening matches up against those guys so our other lines can do the scoring. If we had prime Z and Dats I guarantee Blashill would roll them out against the best in the league

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So let them dominate Z and Larkin? Those guys are counted on to score. Glendening matches up against those guys so our other lines can do the scoring. If we had prime Z and Dats I guarantee Blashill would roll them out against the best in the league

Yeah it worked perfectly well the last season didn't it? I mean we were such a good team. We were so good that we consistently out shot other teams and also outscored them.

Then we did so well that we ended up losing to the eventually Stanley cup finalists Pittsburgh. Ugh if only Larkin would have scored that game winner in game seven of the conference finals. Glendening basically had Crosby's number. He even have Ovechkin's number in the conference semi finals. And don't even get me started on how he shut down Johnson and Kucherov in the 1st round.

Our savior Glendening always seems to keep Crosby, Ovechkin, Malkin, Kane, Stamkos in their place. They like almost never score against us when Glendog is out on ice. All three times when Pittsburg destroyed us by wide margins last season (2-7, 3-6, 2-5) was just a fluke.

This new strategy is the way to go. It's the way to win Stanley cups. Nevermind the fact that the two teams that won 5 of the last 7 Stanley cups have their top centerman against tough matchups (Toews for Blackhawks and Kopitar for Kings). Nevermind all of that. That's a dumb strategy. They only won because they got lucky. Lucky all 5 times. The best strategy is clearly to have your 4th line player play 20 minutes a night against Ovechkin and allow him to shoot 15 times on Mrazek.

That's how you win those godam Stanley cups.

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah it worked perfectly well the last season didn't it? I mean we were such a good team. We were so good that we consistently out shot other teams and also outscored them.

Then we did so well that we ended up losing to the eventually Stanley cup finalists Pittsburgh. Ugh if only Larkin would have scored that game winner in game seven of the conference finals. Glendening basically had Crosby's number. He even have Ovechkin's number in the conference semi finals. And don't even get me started on how he shut down Johnson and Kucherov in the 1st round.

Our savior Glendening always seems to keep Crosby, Ovechkin, Malkin, Kane, Stamkos in their place. They like almost never score against us when Glendog is out on ice. All three times when Pittsburg destroyed us by wide margins last season (2-7, 3-6, 2-5) was just a fluke.

This new strategy is the way to go. It's the way to win Stanley cups. Nevermind the fact that the two teams that won 5 of the last 7 Stanley cups have their top centerman against tough matchups (Toews for Blackhawks and Kopitar for Kings). Nevermind all of that. That's a dumb strategy. They only won because they got lucky. Lucky all 5 times. The best strategy is clearly to have your 4th line player play 20 minutes a night against Ovechkin and allow him to shoot 15 times on Mrazek.

That's how you win those godam Stanley cups.

NEED MOAR GODAM STANLEY CUPZZZZ!!!@@11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our team would be able to score more if our team wasn't being consistently outshot.

And more shooting starts from giving Tatar, Nyquist and other scorers getting more ice time. Guess who has more ice time between Glendening and Tatar.

Guessssss

Luke Glendog

TA DA!

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You act like Glendening plays more than anybody, he doesn't. And that also includes all the time spent on the PK. Blaming Glendening cause guys like Z, Nyquist, Tatar had disappointing seasons is stupid. How was that power play again? Say what you want about Blashill's coaching staff not being able to generate any scoring but blaming Glendening for how bad we were offensively is dumb and wrong. The strategy mostly didn't work all season but we weren't shot out of the gym. Last I checked our defensive game was decent and our offensive game was complete trash. If we had good offensive players they could have taken advantage. Having one player hit 50 points on the season is very bad offensively

Edited by joesuffP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You act like Glendening plays more than anybody, he doesn't. And that also includes all the time spent on the PK. Blaming Glendening cause guys like Z, Nyquist, Tatar had disappointing seasons is stupid. How was that power play again? Say what you want about Blashill's coaching staff not being able to generate any scoring but blaming Glendening for how bad we were offensively is dumb and wrong

Have you said anything in this entire thread that's actually a solid factual point? All you've said is something along the lines of "I don't believe in analytics". "No one can score 50 goals". You're just spewing out nonsense here. I never blamed Glendening for lack of production, I'm blaming the icetime given by the coaches. Perhaps you should read twice before you post? Stop coming up with made up arguments about what other posters are saying.

You're complaining about players not scoring more than 50 points but the said players aren't even given enough ice time to begin with.

Tatar, Nyquist's icetime went down from Babcock to Blashill's coaching. How about you read up a little bit instead of coming out and calling other people's points as "dumb and wrong". If that's all you have to contribute then keep it to yourself rather than trying to start a flame war.

Edited by kickazz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then what's your point? You don't seem to have one. I never said anything about analytics. You mentioned how bad we were offensively was because of Glendening's ice time and I said you should probably start blaming our scorers for not scoring before our 4th line centre. Glendening didn't lead the team in ice time. Z and Larkin got pretty average ice time for first line players. I take into account how awful the other lines were for why Glendening's ice time went up. Remember how awful the Tatar-Sheahan-Tatar line was? There's a reason their ice time went down. Look at the power play. Everything suggests our offensive guys had a down year but defensively were pretty average. Logically we should blame our offensive players

Edited by joesuffP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Either you aren't reading, or chosing not to. I've stated my point a million times to you. Literally almost all of these posts have been directed at you, if you still aren't getting it then I can't spell it out any better. My entire point has been about usage and ice time for players on the team.

I don't mind having him if he wasn't treated like a savior defensive forward. I don't hate the guy at all. I hate how he's used. I also don't like how he's labelled as a great defensive forward when he's clearly not.

I present all these bad numbers of Glendening. But is that his fault? No. That's a coaching issue. When you put a player in a position to fail, that's on you as a coach. The difference between Babcock and Blashill is that Babcock used Glendening sparingly and in the right situations.

Blashill for whatever reason decided to take it up 3 or 4 notches and use the hell out of him last season.

The top two overusage issues on this team are:

1. Henrik Zetterberg

2. Luke Glendening

We went from being a team that would outshoot opponents to a team that was consistently outshot last year and struggled to hang on to the puck. How is this not an issue for people? Getting outshot is not the first step to winning games. This is basic hockey. How many games did San Jose get outshot by Pittsburgh by wide margins in the cup finals last year and lost? All of them.

Our team would be able to score more if our team wasn't being consistently outshot.

And more shooting starts from giving Tatar, Nyquist and other scorers getting more ice time. Guess who has more ice time between Glendening and Tatar.

You're complaining about players not scoring more than 50 points but the said players aren't even given enough ice time to begin with.

Tatar, Nyquist's icetime went down from Babcock to Blashill's coaching.

Edited by kickazz

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