BluPuk Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 Yes, but it's not a particularly good draft anyway, at least in my opinion. If we get the top pick (unlikely, I think Edmonton has the inside track on that) would you want Mathews? I don't think he is the type of player we need. I think the best player for us would likely be Chychrun. Maybe we could trade down and get something good PLUS a first rounder in the 5-7 range? Hell, who am I kidding? I have no flippin' clue what to do.... Nothing seems to work with this team... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podein25 Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 4 hours ago, BluPuk said: Mathews? I don't think he is the type of player we need. I A big, skilled center who is mature enough to already be playing pro hockey (albeit it in Switzerland) No, the Leafs wouldn't want that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WordsOfWisdom Posted January 27, 2016 Author Share Posted January 27, 2016 6 hours ago, BluPuk said: Yes, but it's not a particularly good draft anyway, at least in my opinion. If we get the top pick (unlikely, I think Edmonton has the inside track on that) would you want Mathews? I don't think he is the type of player we need. I think the best player for us would likely be Chychrun. Maybe we could trade down and get something good PLUS a first rounder in the 5-7 range? Hell, who am I kidding? I have no flippin' clue what to do.... Nothing seems to work with this team... They're all assets. The Leafs could also flip one draft pick for another. I think they need "D" more than anything else, but @Podein25 is right that the top pick is almost always a good bet. I'm not convinced Marner or Nylander can be #1 guys until they prove it. The more centers the merrier. Let them compete for jobs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podein25 Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 30 minutes ago, WordsOfWisdom said: I'm not convinced Marner or Nylander can be #1 guys until they prove it. The more centers the merrier. Neither of those two are your prototypical BIG center. Mathews appears to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WordsOfWisdom Posted January 28, 2016 Author Share Posted January 28, 2016 Jan.27: TOR vs TB Polak, Grabner Final score: 1-0 TB. This was an easy game to score. Polak took a delay of game penalty, but Grabner's lazy clearing attempt was a give-away that resulted in the Stamkos PP goal. And there you have it folks. We have witnessed the total collapse of the Leafs. They don't score goals without JVR and on most nights they can't defend. They are cooked at both ends of the spectrum. The trade deadline isn't far off. Please blow this team up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BluPuk Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 I am beginning to agree with you, WOW..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BluPuk Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 16 hours ago, Podein25 said: A big, skilled center who is mature enough to already be playing pro hockey (albeit it in Switzerland) No, the Leafs wouldn't want that. You're right, @Podein25 he is likely the BAP at #1 draft position, but he doesn't play like a big centre. He isn't the franchise player (leader) that the Leafs are lacking. Oh, he's good alright, it's just too soon in the Leafs rebuild for him to help much. Like Eichel at Buffalo - a terrific player (better than Mathews) but his team is still tied for 30th. I'm looking for that franchise player and I don't see one on the horizon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podein25 Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 12 hours ago, WordsOfWisdom said: The trade deadline isn't far off. Please blow this team up I'd like to see them play Bernier more so that, if he plays well, could maybe be moved to get a fresh start. He showed last night what a good goalie he can be. Without him in net last night, it's 4-0 Bolts after the 1st. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podein25 Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 4 hours ago, BluPuk said: ...but he doesn't play like a big centre. He isn't the franchise player (leader) that the Leafs are lacking. Maybe. Hard to say. So you want to get this player through Free Agency or trade then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WordsOfWisdom Posted January 28, 2016 Author Share Posted January 28, 2016 8 minutes ago, Podein25 said: I'd like to see them play Bernier more so that, if he plays well, could maybe be moved to get a fresh start. He showed last night what a good goalie he can be. Without him in net last night, it's 4-0 Bolts after the 1st. I agree, although I can't imagine other teams taking a chance on him. His performance range is too wide. One night great, the next night he's Toskala. I don't know that other teams would trust him, and I suspect the Leafs aren't going to be able to move him. He'll likely just be released. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podein25 Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 20 minutes ago, WordsOfWisdom said: I can't imagine other teams taking a chance on him. I can, if he comes cheap enough. It's not like he always sucked. Before he got to Toronto he was considered the best non-starting goalie in the league arguably. Martin Jones was 3rd in line in LA at the time. He's not a bum. He has a pedigree and pedigree still matters in sports. Why would a GM not take a chance on a guy like that? They do it all the time. The Flyers traded for Mason, who couldn't stop a beachball by the time he left Colombus. It happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BluPuk Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 3 hours ago, Podein25 said: Maybe. Hard to say. So you want to get this player through Free Agency or trade then? No, a player like that will have to come through the draft. I'm just saying I don't see him in this years' draft - but I have been known to be wrong. I was thinking IF they get the top pick, they might trade it for other assets. Maybe turn it into a later first rounder plus other considerations - like a high second rounder and a player. Just spitballin'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podein25 Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 2 hours ago, BluPuk said: No, a player like that will have to come through the draft. I'm just saying I don't see him in this years' draft - but I have been known to be wrong Ok, so it will be another 489 years before the Leafs get close to touching the Cup again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WordsOfWisdom Posted January 28, 2016 Author Share Posted January 28, 2016 5 hours ago, Podein25 said: I can, if he comes cheap enough. It's not like he always sucked. Before he got to Toronto he was considered the best non-starting goalie in the league arguably. Martin Jones was 3rd in line in LA at the time. He's not a bum. He has a pedigree and pedigree still matters in sports. Why would a GM not take a chance on a guy like that? They do it all the time. The Flyers traded for Mason, who couldn't stop a beachball by the time he left Colombus. It happens. Agreed, but that's my point: Some team will take a chance on him during the off-season -- after the Leafs have bought him out and released him. Which is to say the Leafs will get nothing for him in return. His body of work in Toronto has been extensive, and has shown a year over year regression. It's a large sample size to draw conclusions from. Teams know that the reality of Bernier is far different from the potential of what he was supposed to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podein25 Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 2 minutes ago, WordsOfWisdom said: Agreed, but that's my point Oh, well why didn't you say so Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WordsOfWisdom Posted January 28, 2016 Author Share Posted January 28, 2016 1 minute ago, Podein25 said: Oh, well why didn't you say so Sometimes I take a long time to get to the point. Other times I have no point and I'm just talking out my arse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WordsOfWisdom Posted January 29, 2016 Author Share Posted January 29, 2016 Leafs Team Totals as of End of January: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podein25 Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 12 minutes ago, WordsOfWisdom said: Leafs Team Totals as of End of January: Ha! Bernier sucks less than Reimer! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WordsOfWisdom Posted January 29, 2016 Author Share Posted January 29, 2016 3 hours ago, Podein25 said: Ha! Bernier sucks less than Reimer! Au contrare mon ami..... (terrible French lol)...... Reimer has a slightly better MPBE (99.9) to Bernier's (95.8). The best players defensively are at the top of the list. I'm thinking I may have to compare by position in the future however, because defenceman seem to get charged with more errors than forwards do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WordsOfWisdom Posted January 29, 2016 Author Share Posted January 29, 2016 If you go best defensively by position, it looks like this: CENTER Froese: 126.0 Bozak: 87.0 Kadri: 79.6 Spaling: 67.4 Matthias: 56.2 LEFT WING JVR: 118.4 Lupul: 105.9 Winnik: 100.0 RIGHT WING Grabner: 128.3 Komarov: 121.6 Boyes: 87.4 Holland: 75.1 Parenteau: 64.8 DEFENCE Polak: 98.3 Marincin: 86.6 Gardiner: 80.0 Rielly: 71.4 Phaneuf: 65.9 Hunwick: 55.5 GOALIES Reimer: 99.9 Bernier: 95.8 Note: I have updated player positions on my spreadsheet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podein25 Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 46 minutes ago, WordsOfWisdom said: Au contrare mon ami..... (terrible French lol)...... Reimer has a slightly better MPBE (99.9) to Bernier's (95.8). Oh, ok I'm wrong again! That's like the 42nd time today alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WordsOfWisdom Posted January 29, 2016 Author Share Posted January 29, 2016 2 hours ago, Podein25 said: Oh, ok I'm wrong again! That's like the 42nd time today alone. Not to worry! I just did some tinkering and I've come up with a new way of representing the data -- something that might be more familiar. Fans are already familiar with save percentage and fielding percentage (in baseball), so I give you: Defensive percentage. (Yep, way too much time on my hands.) So the results now looks like this: Grabner: .992 Froese: .992 Komarov: .992 Van Riemsdyk: .992 Lupul: .991 Winnik: .990 Reimer: .990 Polak: .990 Bernier: .990 Boyes: .989 Bozak: .989 Marincin: .989 Gardiner: .988 Kadri: .988 Holland: .987 Rielly: .986 Spaling: .985 Phaneuf: .985 Parenteau: .985 Matthias: .983 Hunwick: .982 Bonus points if you can figure out how I calculate it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podein25 Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 2 minutes ago, WordsOfWisdom said: Bonus points if you can figure out how I calculate it. Not a chance. 2 minutes ago, WordsOfWisdom said: Fans are already familiar with save percentage and fielding percentage (in baseball) What about long-snapping percentage (football)? Sorry, that's an inside joke for some of the other folks here. Don't mind me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WordsOfWisdom Posted January 31, 2016 Author Share Posted January 31, 2016 On 29/01/2016 at 4:48 PM, Podein25 said: Not a chance. What about long-snapping percentage (football)? Sorry, that's an inside joke for some of the other folks here. Don't mind me. Not to worry! I know nothing about football. I wrote this HUGE post explaining everything and my ISP died (and was down for five hours) before I clicked Submit. So it's lost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WordsOfWisdom Posted January 31, 2016 Author Share Posted January 31, 2016 So to summarize my 2000 word post that my ISP dropped in transit...... Baseball consists of discrete units of play (discrete not discreet) which can be easily and accurately measured. Hockey is continuous. The plays are usually shades of grey, not black and white. That makes statistical measurement much more difficult in terms of certain events. Almost impossible to measure the actual number of "chances" (to commit an error) that a player has in hockey. Fielding percentage in baseball is not actually taking into account "total chances". (Story for another day.) Defensive percentage is similar. In fact, it's using TTOI as a measure of total chances, not the number of chances at all. This is because the number of chances will occur at a fixed rate over a large enough window of time. (Law of averages.) It would be like comparing errors to innings played on the field in baseball. Long story short: Def% is something I cooked up... for real... here in the forum. It depends on the reliability of DE (Defensive Errors). Whether it catches on or not depends on the value/accuracy of the results it supplies, and to a large extent, what people think of it. A value of .990 means that the player plays 99% of his minutes error-free. Def% is less "volatile" than MPBE (Minutes Played Between Errors). It doesn't fluctuate as wildly, and the values are familiar to fans because they resemble very high save percentages. Baseball fans would recognize the values immediately because they are identical to fielding percentage numbers. I wish I could get paid to do this for a living. This was an extra bullet point just because I was feeling happy to have my internet access back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.