PDA

View Full Version : An Objective Look at Tanner Glass



leetchy2
10-26-2014, 01:14 PM
He's third on the team in points and a plus 5. I really don't have a problem with the way AV is using him. Let him play vs the smaller quicker teams that don't hit as much and toss Malone in there on nights when we need a more physical presence.

And in what games does Tanner (useless) Glass get to watch from the press box?

--


Moderator's Note:

This is being broken out from the Duclair thread to save it from being derailed. Ultimately, Glass and Duclair don't belong in the same breathe, and this has legs, so it's being given it's own platform.

If you've got a Glass-related opinion, feel free to jump in here. Otherwise, let's give the Duclair thread back to Duclair.

Thanks,
Phil

Dunny
10-26-2014, 01:40 PM
Glass is terrible, but they have totally different roles.

Pete
10-26-2014, 02:36 PM
Glass is terrible compared to Nash. Compared to the guy he's replacing, Dorsett, no difference.

Vodka Drunkenski
10-26-2014, 02:52 PM
Agreed, he is what he is

JOHN
10-26-2014, 05:16 PM
Honesty, neither were/ are that good, at least when you compare them to what Prust brought. We still haven't found that true replacement.

Dunny
10-26-2014, 05:58 PM
I don't agree. Last year the 4th line was a major factor. It was one of the 3 or 4 best 4th lines in the league. It's early but so far our 4th line is just a 4th line. Part of that is Boyle being gone but another reason is that Glass doesn't have the same offensive abilities as either Dorsett or Carcillo.

TwoMinutesForNothing
10-26-2014, 09:45 PM
The problem is that Glass and Malone play the same role and Malone is way better at it, yet Glass stays in.

Pete
10-26-2014, 10:14 PM
They don't play the same role. Malone can't skate. That's why he's the odd man.

TwoMinutesForNothing
10-27-2014, 12:16 AM
They don't play the same role. Malone can't skate. That's why he's the odd man.

It's the same role. Rugged 4th line winger with size who plays the PK. Only Malone also plays the PP.

RichieNextel305
10-27-2014, 12:39 AM
I think when it comes to it, Malone just brings more. But, Glass is a better fighter.

Yes, Malone isn't a speedster. No one ever has or ever will say he is one. That being said, while I do think Malone is a much better option that 4th-line, I don't see Glass coming out of the lineup anytime soon.

TwoMinutesForNothing
10-27-2014, 12:49 AM
We are blatantly ignoring advanced stats then. Other teams are hiring analysts to assess them while we are defying them. Granted they aren't the be all end all, but when there disparity is so huge, it has to mean something. Glass is a -7 Corsi, while Malone is a +14, for a whopping difference of 21%. There is no excuse for it.

RichieNextel305
10-27-2014, 02:07 AM
I'm not saying I agree with playing Glass over Malone. I just don't see that switch happening, at least not anytime soon.

I still believe Malone is gonna be a big help for this team across a full season. We're not even out of October yet. Lines are still unset. Some roles are not yet set. Hell, the roster itself is still not set.

When it is, and when this team begins clicking, I do believe Ryan Malone will be a constant in the Ranger lineup. I'm not mad at the way this is being handled. It's still a feeling-out process as to who fits where and who fits with who.

RichieNextel305
10-27-2014, 02:08 AM
I'm not saying I agree with playing Glass over Malone. I just don't see that switch happening, at least not anytime soon.

I still believe Malone is gonna be a big help for this team across a full season. We're not even out of October yet. Lines are still unset. Some roles are not yet set. Hell, the roster itself is still not set.

When it is, and when this team begins clicking, I do believe Ryan Malone will be a constant in the Ranger lineup. I'm not mad at the way this is being handled. It's still a feeling-out process as to who fits where and who fits with who.

Bretzky
10-27-2014, 06:06 AM
I'm not saying I agree with playing Glass over Malone. I just don't see that switch happening, at least not anytime soon.

I still believe Malone is gonna be a big help for this team across a full season. We're not even out of October yet. Lines are still unset. Some roles are not yet set. Hell, the roster itself is still not set.

When it is, and when this team begins clicking, I do believe Ryan Malone will be a constant in the Ranger lineup. I'm not mad at the way this is being handled. It's still a feeling-out process as to who fits where and who fits with who.

Great post.

If I'm being honest, I see Malone as a fixture on this roster come playoff time.

JOHN
10-27-2014, 06:06 AM
I don't agree. Last year the 4th line was a major factor. It was one of the 3 or 4 best 4th lines in the league. It's early but so far our 4th line is just a 4th line. Part of that is Boyle being gone but another reason is that Glass doesn't have the same offensive abilities as either Dorsett or Carcillo.

That's not what I'm saying. Last year our 4th line was good, but that doesn't mean we replaced Prust's skillset. We didn't. Prust could PK, play all 3 zones, was a good skater, had an edge and could score a bit. Last year was a sum of parts kind of deal, making it work with Carcillo as Dorsett, but neither brought the consistent value that Prust did. We still don't have that player on the bottom end.

Pete
10-27-2014, 07:32 AM
They didn't sign Glass for 3 years to sit him. The coach said he doesn't see how Malone fits. That's probably due to the fact he can't skate.

AmericanJesus
10-27-2014, 08:06 AM
Malone had a good preseason game for the Rangers, and that's about it. He's done nothing to earn a spot in the line up. Glass shouldn't be an every day player, but he should get in games where we play tougher teams. I don't mind keeping Malone around as a 13th forward to fill the 30 or so games Glass shouldn't play or maybe in case of injury if there's no one in Hartford that deserves a call up. He just can't keep up with the speed of the game we play at.

Pete
10-27-2014, 09:08 AM
Malone had a good preseason game for the Rangers, and that's about it. He's done nothing to earn a spot in the line up. Glass shouldn't be an every day player, but he should get in games where we play tougher teams. I don't mind keeping Malone around as a 13th forward to fill the 30 or so games Glass shouldn't play or maybe in case of injury if there's no one in Hartford that deserves a call up. He just can't keep up with the speed of the game we play at.

While we all understand Glass isn't a great player, he's hardly the issue with this team, and replacing him with Malone does a whopping nothing to fix the major problems.

Some people just get fixated on a player and won't let it go. First DZ was the issue, then Miller, now Glass.

IMO, the far bigger concerns are Hayes and Klein, simply because they are in higher profile roles than they should be, and MSL and Zuke sucking, and Staal's inconsistency (blaming that on Klein).

These are issues. Not Tanner Glass or lack of Malone.

AmericanJesus
10-27-2014, 10:40 AM
While we all understand Glass isn't a great player, he's hardly the issue with this team, and replacing him with Malone does a whopping nothing to fix the major problems.

Some people just get fixated on a player and won't let it go. First DZ was the issue, then Miller, now Glass.

IMO, the far bigger concerns are Hayes and Klein, simply because they are in higher profile roles than they should be, and MSL and Zuke sucking, and Staal's inconsistency (blaming that on Klein).

These are issues. Not Tanner Glass or lack of Malone.

Sure. I'm just talking about 4th line winger role, not necessarily fixing all the ails the New York Rangers. Have to start at top line center and work your way from there if you want to do that. I'm also interested to see if Talbot can battle back from a rough start. November is a month dense with games. Going to need to give Hank a breather here and there.

RichieNextel305
10-27-2014, 11:42 AM
I don't not like Glass. I think he fits, or can fit.

I just think it's gonna take some time to figure out who fits where.

jjweimar
10-27-2014, 11:53 AM
I don't think Duclair will be even close to a Calder candidate even if he does spend the entire season here. He has great skill which he hasn't quite came into yet, but I don't see the ability to be a top star like that in the first season, maybe season 2 or 3 you have a shot at him really coming into his own like age 22 sounds about right for him once he really builds his body and isn't fragile. I love his play but don't see Calder in his future this year

TwoMinutesForNothing
10-27-2014, 02:49 PM
While we all understand Glass isn't a great player, he's hardly the issue with this team, and replacing him with Malone does a whopping nothing to fix the major problems.

Some people just get fixated on a player and won't let it go. First DZ was the issue, then Miller, now Glass.

IMO, the far bigger concerns are Hayes and Klein, simply because they are in higher profile roles than they should be, and MSL and Zuke sucking, and Staal's inconsistency (blaming that on Klein).

These are issues. Not Tanner Glass or lack of Malone.

DZ and Miller were problems, now they are both gone. Glass is also a problem now.

Mike
10-27-2014, 03:17 PM
We are blatantly ignoring advanced stats then. Other teams are hiring analysts to assess them while we are defying them. Granted they aren't the be all end all, but when there disparity is so huge, it has to mean something. Glass is a -7 Corsi, while Malone is a +14, for a whopping difference of 21%. There is no excuse for it.

Advance stats in sports started with Billy Bean. He took a shit team, and made them into a contender. A contender that never won a championship. So just because some teams are hiring advanced stats experts, it doesn't mean a whole lot.

Dunny
10-27-2014, 03:27 PM
Well in baseballs case they certainly do. It's revolutionary and how any organization with half a brain runs things now.

Phil in Absentia
10-27-2014, 03:34 PM
We are blatantly ignoring advanced stats then. Other teams are hiring analysts to assess them while we are defying them. Granted they aren't the be all end all, but when there disparity is so huge, it has to mean something. Glass is a -7 Corsi, while Malone is a +14, for a whopping difference of 21%. There is no excuse for it.

There is plenty of "excuse" for it. Starting with the fact that CORSI, like plus-minus, like Fenwick, etc. is a relatively inert statistic that only tells a very small part of the story. Without the remaining context, it's really of no use, which is why you almost never see it used to justify, one way or another, the performance or lack there of of any players in this league. "Tanner Glass is a Minus-7 Corsi" means close to nothing when it's not juxtaposed against a lot more evidence and data.

The fact of the matter is, based on the role being asked of him, his being on a unit that sees more shots against than for isn't a negative. Not necessarily, at least. His job is to produce energy by means of fights and impact hits — the latter of which can only be applied when his line doesn't have the puck. That line, and his role on it, is primarily as a disruption unit designed to generate positive response for the follow-up lines by getting the crowd back into games, and riling up the bench when he sends a guy head-over-heels into his own bench. His CORSI, in this respect, low as it might be in and of itself, is of no real consequence to the fact that he's not actually costing them games.

Generally speaking, pointing out the poor CORSI and advanced stats numbers of fourth-line players isn't news to anyone. Fourth line players are generally not great NHL players. It's why they play on the fourth line, and not the first. Only the deepest of teams are equipped with 12 forwards who lack any defensive deficiencies or draw backs.

Future
10-27-2014, 03:36 PM
Well in baseballs case they certainly do. It's revolutionary and how any organization with half a brain runs things now.
That's because baseball isn't a team game like hockey is.

What one guy does doesn't have that much of an impact on the next guy, unless we're talking about RBIs and runs scored.

Pete
10-27-2014, 03:50 PM
DZ and Miller were problems, now they are both gone. Glass is also a problem now.Yes, DZ is gone and the answer Klein was relegated to 11 minutes a game in the finals. Miller is gone, and the answer Hayes is scratched tonight.

Glass is the flavor of the week. Would we have beat MTL with Malone? Probably not. Would we be 8-0 with Malone? Probably not.

The house is burning down and you're complaining the lawn isn't mowed.

TwoMinutesForNothing
10-27-2014, 03:51 PM
There is plenty of "excuse" for it. Starting with the fact that CORSI, like plus-minus, like Fenwick, etc. is a relatively inert statistic that only tells a very small part of the story. Without the remaining context, it's really of no use, which is why you almost never see it used to justify, one way or another, the performance or lack there of of any players in this league. "Tanner Glass is a Minus-7 Corsi" means close to nothing when it's not juxtaposed against a lot more evidence and data.

The fact of the matter is, based on the role being asked of him, his being on a unit that sees more shots against than for isn't a negative. Not necessarily, at least. His job is to produce energy by means of fights and impact hits — the latter of which can only be applied when his line doesn't have the puck. That line, and his role on it, is primarily as a disruption unit designed to generate positive response for the follow-up lines by getting the crowd back into games, and riling up the bench when he sends a guy head-over-heels into his own bench. His CORSI, in this respect, low as it might be in and of itself, is of no real consequence to the fact that he's not actually costing them games.

Generally speaking, pointing out the poor CORSI and advanced stats numbers of fourth-line players isn't news to anyone. Fourth line players are generally not great NHL players. It's why they play on the fourth line, and not the first. Only the deepest of teams are equipped with 12 forwards who lack any defensive deficiencies or draw backs.

This wasn't the role of our 4th line last season. What our 4th line did last season is what many consider to be a major factor in getting us where we ended up. A fourth line who's role is to simply hit and rile people up seems like a major step backwards to the days when we had the likes of Ryan Hollweg and others doing the same on teams that couldn't hold their own against the NHL's elite.

A line that can play hockey is much more valuable in today's NHL and these stats show that Tanner Glass is a major detriment to any line's ability to do just that. It's not just the numbers that show this, but the actual play on the ice that makes this quite clear. I could also see ignoring these stats when the difference is negligible, as it is with most players, however it's tough to ignore what is currently such a massive difference of between the two players.

TwoMinutesForNothing
10-27-2014, 03:57 PM
Yes, DZ is gone and the answer Klein was relegated to 11 minutes a game in the finals. Miller is gone, and the answer Hayes is scratched tonight.

Glass is the flavor of the week. Would we have beat MTL with Malone? Probably not. Would we be 8-0 with Malone? Probably not.

The house is burning down and you're complaining the lawn isn't mowed.

Never said anything about Klein or Hayes.

I'm complaining about Glass because he is imo the biggest problem. He is single handedly making us a three line team. Last season teams got no break against us and we wore them down with every line. Even if the fourth line wasn't scoring they were hemming teams in and making them work. Now our 4th line is a line that allows teams to catch their breath and regroup to go against our other lines. They don't have to worry when our 4th line is out there. This is a huge factor.

Phil in Absentia
10-27-2014, 04:01 PM
This wasn't the role of our 4th line last season. What our 4th line did last season is what many consider to be a major factor in getting us where we ended up. A fourth line who's role is to simply hit and rile people up seems like a major step backwards to the days when we had the likes of Ryan Hollweg and others doing the same on teams that couldn't hold their own against the NHL's elite.

A line that can play hockey is much more valuable in today's NHL and these stats show that Tanner Glass is a major detriment to any line's ability to do just that. It's not just the numbers that show this, but the actual play on the ice that makes this quite clear. I could also see ignoring these stats when the difference is negligible, as it is with most players, however it's tough to ignore what is currently such a massive difference of between the two players.

Glass can play. He just can't play as well as you'd like him to. I'd argue that opting for Malone there (who I like, mind you), is a kin to opting to have your left arm cut off instead of your right. Glass can hit extremely well (and hard as fuck), can fight and can kill penalties. He can also skate quite well for a part-time pugilist. Malone on the other hand can't skate well at all. I joked a few games back that he looks like he's dragging a parachute with him at full speed, because he basically crawls from point A to point B. He does hit well, when he can actually catch a guy to hit, and is probably more effective offensively (and can play on the PP if needed), but at this point in his career has plenty of his own defensive drawbacks.

In the case of Malone versus Glass specifically, it's still too early to really predict who the better player for that line is, because Moore, who should be the fourth-line center has moved up to the third line to be paired with Hagelin, and Mueller is a stop-gap solution at the moment who may be shit out of luck when Stepan gets back.

Show me a more concise set of data that says Malone and Moore (who has to go back to being fourth line center when Stepan is healthy, no?) are a better duo than Glass and Moore, and I'd be more inclined to read into the CORSI differential of one player based on eight games.

I said it when he signed and I'll say it again — he's low hanging fruit.

Pete
10-27-2014, 04:04 PM
Never said anything about Klein or Hayes.

I'm complaining about Glass because he is imo the biggest problem. He is single handedly making us a three line team. Last season teams got no break against us and we wore them down with every line. Even if the fourth line wasn't scoring they were hemming teams in and making them work. Now our 4th line is a line that allows teams to catch their breath and regroup to go against our other lines. They don't have to worry when our 4th line is out there. This is a huge factor.
A 4th line winger is not the team's biggest problem.

The lack of a true first line center was this team's problem last year, and it's exacerbated by Stepan's injury. The lack of a true PPQB was this team's problem last year and it's exacerbated by Boyle's injury.

Now add in Zuccarello isn't doing shit, MSL can't buy a goal, Staal has been inconsistent at best, and you have the position we're in now.

Now anyone who's watching a hockey game and claims to see a tangible difference between Dorsett and Glass would get a huge eye roll from me. The issue is they never really replaced Big Game Boyle or Pouliot for that matter, and it remains to be seen if DBoyle can do anything for Staal's game the way Stralman did.

We know last year's 4th line was a lot better, but that line is gone, that team is gone, this team is different. A team with the top 6 wingers we have should not be struggling to score, the 4th line should be the least of our worries. If some wingers were doing their jobs, then no one would give a rat's ass about Tanner Glass.

TwoMinutesForNothing
10-27-2014, 04:11 PM
Forget the 8 games, the career Corsi says it all for Glass because it's the same as it's always been. He has had some very talented linemates during his time with the Pens when he was at times elevated from the 4th line. He has proven time and again he isn't capable. It's not just the stats, it's watching the games. He can't control the puck, or make a pass. He struggles to even clear the zone on the PK.

To further my point. Even if Hayes or some other forward is underperforming on one of the top three lines, it may bring down the overall potential of the line, but his linemates are talented enough to make up the difference and still make that line a threat. However on the fourth line, though Dominic Moore and Stempniak, or whoever else are solid players, they don't have the talent to overcome being saddled with a player like Glass. Even if Glass was on the 2nd line or 3rd line it wouldn't be as much of a problem because those lines would still be semi-dangerous due to his linemates. However Glass playing with Moore and Stempniak, or Malone, or Mueller or whoever is just a line that will be dead in the water. Those players have the ability to be very good 4th liners, but they don't have the ability to drag someone along with them.

TwoMinutesForNothing
10-27-2014, 04:17 PM
A 4th line winger is not the team's biggest problem.

The lack of a true first line center was this team's problem last year, and it's exacerbated by Stepan's injury. The lack of a true PPQB was this team's problem last year and it's exacerbated by Boyle's injury.

Now add in Zuccarello isn't doing shit, MSL can't buy a goal, Staal has been inconsistent at best, and you have the position we're in now.

Now anyone who's watching a hockey game and claims to see a tangible difference between Dorsett and Glass would get a huge eye roll from me. The issue is they never really replaced Big Game Boyle or Pouliot for that matter, and it remains to be seen if DBoyle can do anything for Staal's game the way Stralman did.

We know last year's 4th line was a lot better, but that line is gone, that team is gone, this team is different. A team with the top 6 wingers we have should not be struggling to score, the 4th line should be the least of our worries. If some wingers were doing their jobs, then no one would give a rat's ass about Tanner Glass.

Every year the team's that go the furthest are the teams that have 4 lines that can score and bring offensive pressure. Right now we have three lines that can do that, so as far as I'm concerned that fourth one that can't is our biggest problem. Stepan will be back in a couple weeks and Boyle a couple more, so those are not really long term problems.

Phil in Absentia
10-27-2014, 04:21 PM
Forget the 8 games, the career Corsi says it all for Glass because it's the same as it's always been. He has had some very talented linemates during his time with the Pens when he was at times elevated from the 4th line. He has proven time and again he isn't capable. It's not just the stats, it's watching the games. He can't control the puck, or make a pass. He struggles to even clear the zone on the PK.

To further my point. Even if Hayes or some other forward is underperforming on one of the top three lines, it may bring down the overall potential of the line, but his linemates are talented enough to make up the difference and still make that line a threat. However on the fourth line, though Dominic Moore and Stempniak, or whoever else are solid players, they don't have the talent to overcome being saddled with a player like Glass. Even if Glass was on the 2nd line or 3rd line it wouldn't be as much of a problem because those lines would still be semi-dangerous due to his linemates. However Glass playing with Moore and Stempniak, or Malone, or Mueller or whoever is just a line that will be dead in the water. Those players have the ability to be very good 4th liners, but they don't have the ability to drag someone along with them.

Even if this were all true, you are building a bridge from this fact to "Glass is the biggest problem on the team". If anything, what this illustrates, again were it all true, is that the top-nine forwards aren't doing enough (and they aren't) to allow Glass to not be noticed.

Like Pete just said, if MSL is scoring, if Hayes isn't drawing at 24%, if Zuccarello is doing anything of value, etc. why would we even be talking about Tanner Glass? I just don't understand how a fourth-line player can ever be considered the biggest problem on a team. It just doesn't make sense. There's no logic to support it.

A problem? Fine. The problem, as in the biggest? Unless Tom Renney is coaching again and our fourth line is seeing more minutes than our second, I just don't see how that's possible.

TwoMinutesForNothing
10-27-2014, 04:25 PM
Even if this were all true, you are building a bridge from this fact to "Glass is the biggest problem on the team". If anything, what this illustrates, again were it all true, is that the top-nine forwards aren't doing enough (and they aren't) to allow Glass to not be noticed.

Like Pete just said, if MSL is scoring, if Hayes isn't drawing at 24%, if Zuccarello is doing anything of value, etc. why would we even be talking about Tanner Glass? I just don't understand how a fourth-line player can ever be considered the biggest problem on a team. It just doesn't make sense. There's no logic to support it.

A problem? Fine. The problem, as in the biggest? Unless Tom Renney is coaching again and our fourth line is seeing more minutes than our second, I just don't see how that's possible.

I'm not even factoring in how we are playing right now, because it's almost irrelevant. Obviously we have bigger problems at the moment, but I expect us to be fine when we get healthy. I'm not gonna worry about guys missing that will be back shortly. Zuc and MSL will be fine because they are good players. The 4th line will be the biggest problem because that's the only real problem we have right now. The rest are being fabricated by short term injuries.

Pete
10-27-2014, 04:27 PM
Every year the team's that go the furthest are the teams that have 4 lines that can score and bring offensive pressure. Right now we have three lines that can do that, so as far as I'm concerned that fourth one that can't is our biggest problem. Stepan will be back in a couple weeks and Boyle a couple more, so those are not really long term problems.

Correct, and at that point, you evaluate the team as a whole, not line by line/player by player.

Pete
10-27-2014, 04:29 PM
This is the problem with a position rooted in advanced stats. Bad CORSI ≠ bad player.

The issue isn't Glass, because Glass = Dorsett. It's the other wing (whomever isn't Boyle) that's the problem.

Phil in Absentia
10-27-2014, 04:30 PM
I'm not even factoring in how we are playing right now, because it's almost irrelevant. Obviously we have bigger problems at the moment, but I expect us to be fine when we get healthy. I'm not gonna worry about guys missing that will be back shortly. Zuc and MSL will be fine because they are good players. The 4th line will be the biggest problem because that's the only real problem we have right now. The rest are being fabricated by short term injuries.

Then you see my point about why the verbiage being used here is misleading. Glass is a problem, not the biggest. He can't ever be the biggest, because at the end of the day he's at the bottom, if not rock bottom, of the teams' playing chart and he doesn't make enough money for the salary aspect to matter either (despite what people said all summer about it).

Right now, there are much bigger fish to fry, so why are we even talking about Glass? The only reason he's getting radio air is because Stepan is hurt, and because his injury has thrown everything else into a frenzy. Once that settles down and Stepan gets back into his role (he not being a 1C aside), Glass will again be an irrelevant talking point, because the team doesn't live and die with him. It lives and dies with the guys with the biggest cap hits, and the biggest roles. The success or failure of this team rests solely on their shoulders. There's just no conceivable reality where Tanner Glass and his level of play are going to make or break this team. If they are breaking aspects of it, they can turn around and deal him in a heart beat. There's no shortage of teams who'd pick up his contract without a second thought. Especially in the regular season when fighting still matters.

TwoMinutesForNothing
10-27-2014, 04:32 PM
This is the problem with a position rooted in advanced stats. Bad CORSI ≠ bad player.

The issue isn't Glass, because Glass = Dorsett. It's the other wing (whomever isn't Boyle) that's the problem.

Except that last season Dorsett's Corsi was 11% higher than Glass's.

Mike
10-27-2014, 04:36 PM
Well in baseballs case they certainly do. It's revolutionary and how any organization with half a brain runs things now.

Yes, and now sometimes the advanced stats are playing too much of a role, just like when guys over-manage a game in itself. Look at the moves Oakland made when they were up by 10 games in the West. After those moves they were garbage, and made the playoffs on the last day of the season. Scouts watch the games, and make their assessments based on their knowledge of the game. Advanced stat keepers don't have to know much, they're just tracking things that are indeed factual in a game, but other things aren't taken into consideration. It's like giving a book to someone that knows nothing about poker, give them the mathematical odds, and probabilities of each hand, and pot, and they can sit down and play. That doesn't mean they know what they're doing or have a feel of the game or their opponent. Each hand has it's own identity, same goes for every shift, and game played in the NHL.

TwoMinutesForNothing
10-27-2014, 04:37 PM
Then you see my point about why the verbiage being used here is misleading. Glass is a problem, not the biggest. He can't ever be the biggest, because at the end of the day he's at the bottom, if not rock bottom, of the teams' playing chart and he doesn't make enough money for the salary aspect to matter either (despite what people said all summer about it).

Right now, there are much bigger fish to fry, so why are we even talking about Glass? The only reason he's getting radio air is because Stepan is hurt, and because his injury has thrown everything else into a frenzy. Once that settles down and Stepan gets back into his role (he not being a 1C aside), Glass will again be an irrelevant talking point, because the team doesn't live and die with him. It lives and dies with the guys with the biggest cap hits, and the biggest roles. The success or failure of this team rests solely on their shoulders. There's just no conceivable reality where Tanner Glass and his level of play are going to make or break this team. If they are breaking aspects of it, they can turn around and deal him in a heart beat. There's no shortage of teams who'd pick up his contract without a second thought. Especially in the regular season when fighting still matters.

Because if this team ends up clicking everywhere the way most people expect then he will be the weakest link and he will be the reason we don't go all the way. As I said, true cup contenders need to have 4 effective lines and it has been proven by both advanced stats and actual on ice history that Tanner Glass cannot be a part of that. The Pens have fallen apart in the playoffs in every recent season due to the lack of depth and inability to have an effective bottom 6. He was a major part of that. No 4th liner is going to be able to make up for his inefficiencies.

Pete
10-27-2014, 04:38 PM
Except that last season Dorsett's Corsi was 11% higher than Glass's.

Yea, and in every other (more) relevant metric, they're comparable. So you have one thing to cling to. And it's a pretty subjective stat, at that.

Again, this is the entire problem with advanced stats. This is the exact same argument Leahy made on PD when he was trying to say TJ Bodie was better than Ryan McDonagh. "Well advanced stats say so!!!"

Pete
10-27-2014, 04:39 PM
Because if this team ends up clicking everywhere the way most people expect then he will be the weakest link and he will be the reason we don't go all the way. As I said, true cup contenders need to have 4 effective lines and it has been proven by both advanced stats and actual on ice history that Tanner Glass cannot be a part of that. The Pens have fallen apart in the playoffs in every recent season due to the lack of depth and inability to have an effective bottom 6. He was a major part of that. No 4th liner is going to be able to make up for his inefficiencies.

Now I've heard everything...Teams that lose Cups because of 4th line wingers don't deserve Cups.

TwoMinutesForNothing
10-27-2014, 04:42 PM
Yea, and in every other (more) relevant metric, they're comparable. So you have one thing to cling to. And it's a pretty subjective stat, at that.

Again, this is the entire problem with advanced stats. This is the exact same argument Leahy made on PD when he was trying to say TJ Bodie was better than Ryan McDonagh. "Well advanced stats say so!!!"

McDonagh has a better Corsi than Brodie every season. It's a negligible difference of 2-3% anyway, which I would say could be ignored in every case because there are other factors. Hard to ignore 11% though. The stat obviously holds some value since it is getting attention from teams all over the league and it's the reason Stralman became such a big deal. Tanner Glass is dead last in the entire NHL in the stat. That means something.

TwoMinutesForNothing
10-27-2014, 04:44 PM
Now I've heard everything...Teams that lose Cups because of 4th line wingers don't deserve Cups.

Teams have been getting there with 4th lines for years now. Even when the Devils knocked us out in the ECF, it was their 4th line. Remove Ryan Carter or Bernier and replace them with Tanner Glass and they don't do it.

Pete
10-27-2014, 04:44 PM
McDonagh has a better Corsi than Brodie every season. It's a negligible difference of 2-3% anyway, which I would say could be ignored in every case because there are other factors. Hard to ignore 11% though. The stat obviously holds some value since it is getting attention from teams all over the league and it's the reason Stralman became such a big deal. Tanner Glass is dead last in the entire NHL in the stat. That means something.

Teams are giving it their required attention. They don't base every single signing they make on it, and you're apparently making all your hockey related decisions on it.

Not quite the right move, IMO.

Pete
10-27-2014, 04:46 PM
Teams have been getting there with 4th lines for years now. Even when the Devils knocked us out in the ECF, it was their 4th line. Remove Ryan Carter or Bernier and replace them with Tanner Glass and they don't do it.
Well we had the best 4th line in the NHL last year, why didn't we win the Cup?

Phil in Absentia
10-27-2014, 04:46 PM
Because if this team ends up clicking everywhere the way most people expect then he will be the weakest link and he will be the reason we don't go all the way. As I said, true cup contenders need to have 4 effective lines and it has been proven by both advanced stats and actual on ice history that Tanner Glass cannot be a part of that. The Pens have fallen apart in the playoffs in every recent season due to the lack of depth and inability to have an effective bottom 6. He was a major part of that. No 4th liner is going to be able to make up for his inefficiencies.

Pat, I get what you are saying about four effective lines being the key to success. I do.

But you are building a bridge every time you try to pin the failures of a line, which is composed of three forwards and two defenders on a single forward. Even Ryan Hollweg didn't deserve that. He was ridiculed for that awful penalty against the Penguins, and you can say that he cost them that game, but he didn't cost them that series. He didn't cost them the season. Were they a better team from the onset, Hollweg's play can be chalked up to bad timing by a mostly irrelevant player.

The same holds true of almost every single player like him, that has been preceded by the likes of Derek Dorsett and Tanner Glass.

At the end of the day, it's the effectiveness of the top three lines that will matter the most. It's like weight distribution. The fourth line are essentially the shoes on your feet. Yeah, it'd be more comfortable wearing them than not, but if you're not, you can still walk. If you lose your legs, however, you're not going anywhere.

TwoMinutesForNothing
10-27-2014, 04:47 PM
Well we had the best 4th line in the NHL last year, why didn't we win the Cup?

Come on. We got to the cup finals. When was the last time we did that?

!br-avery!
10-27-2014, 04:51 PM
Carcillo>glass

Phil in Absentia
10-27-2014, 04:52 PM
Carcillo>glass

In what sense?

TwoMinutesForNothing
10-27-2014, 04:53 PM
I'm not going to keep harping on this because I've made my stance clear by now. I respect your opinions. I started this season with hope for Glass, but I hadn't seen him much before. I just don't see how he can be effective when he can't do anything with the puck (based on me watching the games, not the stat). Though even Hollweg himself had a Corsi 8% higher than Glass in his time as a Ranger.

I'm just not worried about the top three lines right now because I'm an optimist I guess, just like I wasn't worried at all at this time last year when we sucked. Glass is just the one piece on this team that I don't see any hope or upside for, so to me he is of course the biggest problem.

Pete
10-27-2014, 04:54 PM
Come on. We got to the cup finals. When was the last time we did that?
How's that relevant?

Look, you hate Glass. We get it. Fact is, Glass will not be the reason we win or lose a Cup. You're focusing all your attention on 1 guy, and not even acknowledging the fact that only 1/3 of the line from last year returned. They team didn't replace Boyle. That's clearly a far bigger issue.

And better yet, your whole argument is based on a peripheral stat.

You know what? When the top-dollar guys play up to the paychecks and the team is still losing, then we can talk about Glass. Something tells me that when the team is firing on all cylinders, Glass will only be the scab that people like to pick after a loss.

There is one of these guys on the team every year.

Phil in Absentia
10-27-2014, 04:56 PM
I'm not going to keep harping on this because I've made my stance clear by now. I respect your opinions. I started this season with hope for Glass, but I hadn't seen him much before. I just don't see how he can be effective when he can't do anything with the puck (based on me watching the games, not the stat). Though even Hollweg himself had a Corsi 8% higher than Glass in his time as a Ranger.

I'm just not worried about the top three lines right now because I'm an optimist I guess, just like I wasn't worried at all at this time last year when we sucked. Glass is just the one piece on this team that I don't see any hope or upside for, so to me he is of course the biggest problem.

And that's fine. Assuming this is all true, I wouldn't disagree with anything about it... except him being the biggest problem on the team. And in a world where Tanner Glass' play is your teams' biggest problem, then you're probably the best team in the NHL, so it's negligent again.

Ultimately I think the Rangers have a number of bigger fish to fry before Glass' name is even brought up — most notably being one piece shy of the Holy Trinity of hockey (1C, 1D, 1G). I'll let you figure out which one they're missing. :)

!br-avery!
10-27-2014, 04:56 PM
In what sense?

In every sense,just like carcillos game better ,period.Glass might have an edge in fighting now but that's about it.

Pete
10-27-2014, 04:58 PM
Corsi...talk about a stat given too much credence.

Look, we all get the trend toward AS, but you can't use them as the end all be all, or Tyler Dellow would be a GM. Obviously there's other shit that goes into it. These guys are hired to be advisors, not to run teams and make every team decision based on Fenwick.

Phil in Absentia
10-27-2014, 04:59 PM
In every sense,just like carcillos game better ,period.Glass might have an edge in fighting now but that's about it.

Glass doesn't come with the same stigma Carcillo did, which is reaching an Avery-level of not getting the benefit of doubt in games where calls are going against him. That alone, not even accounting for his short fuse/temper, is enough to put a chink in the armor of this line of thinking.

You saw that clearly last season in that game against the Flyers when he lost his fuckin' mind after being called for a phantom hook. Same game he came back and had the game winner in and got flipped off by Flyers' fans at the glass.

Speaking as one of his most vocal fans, if Carcillo still had the value he used to, how could he have gone nearly the entire summer without being signed? Why would he have been released from his PTO from PIT? Why would he even have had to have signed one in the first place? Glass, Thornton, McCormick, Engelland, Gazdic and others all signed early in July, which means every team that inked them passed over Carcillo. If his value were as high as you say it is, that would never have happened.

Travis Bickle
10-27-2014, 05:07 PM
Good thread.

Morphinity
10-27-2014, 06:23 PM
Corsi...talk about a stat given too much credence.

Look, we all get the trend toward AS, but you can't use them as the end all be all, or Tyler Dellow would be a GM. Obviously there's other shit that goes into it. These guys are hired to be advisors, not to run teams and make every team decision based on Fenwick.

Kyle Dubas would like to have a word. Even Dellow doesn't use them as a be all end all. He watches a ton of game tape.

Pete
10-27-2014, 06:31 PM
A word about what? Did he become GM when I wasn't looking?

Morphinity
10-27-2014, 06:52 PM
A word about what? Did he become GM when I wasn't looking?
Well, he was the general manager of the Sault St. Marie Greyhounds and is the Assistant GM of the Toronto Maple Leafs. If you think he's not influencing decisions, I don't know what to tell you.

And are you trying to downplay advanced stats because the major players are only "advisors" and not "decision makers" on National Hockey League teams?

Again, no one who is knowledgeable about this stuff is trying to use AS as the be all end all.

Pete
10-27-2014, 07:08 PM
Well, he was the general manager of the Sault St. Marie Greyhounds and is the Assistant GM of the Toronto Maple Leafs. If you think he's not influencing decisions, I don't know what to tell you.

And are you trying to downplay advanced stats because the major players are only "advisors" and not "decision makers" on National Hockey League teams?

Again, no one who is knowledgeable about this stuff is trying to use AS as the be all end all. That's my point.

Where did I downplay AS or say AS guys aren't influencing decisions? You're putting words in my mouth.

Fact is NHL teams are factoring AS into decisions, but they aren't driving the decisions.

Morphinity
10-27-2014, 07:10 PM
That's my point.

Where did I downplay AS or say AS guys aren't influencing decisions? You're putting words in my mouth.

Fact is NHL teams are factoring AS into decisions, but they aren't driving the decisions.
I'm not putting words in your mouth. I was asking you to clarify your stance. That's how it came off to me.

And the bold is obvious. I'm not sure that means anything other than AS clearly has a place in the game.

Mike
10-27-2014, 07:26 PM
I'm not putting words in your mouth. I was asking you to clarify your stance. That's how it came off to me.

And the bold is obvious. I'm not sure that means anything other than AS clearly has a place in the game.

It's still in it's infancy. There might be something to it, but how far it goes is tbd. A team hasn't been totally constructed by this yet, so we'll have to see how it plays out. I think teams like the Leafs, and Oilers are trying to get a jump start on something that has the potential to improve their clubs.

Morphinity
10-27-2014, 07:46 PM
It's still in it's infancy. There might be something to it, but how far it goes is tbd. A team hasn't been totally constructed by this yet, so we'll have to see how it plays out. I think teams like the Leafs, and Oilers are trying to get a jump start on something that has the potential to improve their clubs.

I think that's the point, Mike. A team will not and should not be totally constructed by this. It should be used to supplement teams - think how we picked up Pouliot for his pretty stat-lines.

TwoMinutesForNothing
10-27-2014, 07:46 PM
Since we are speaking about the legitimacy of Corsi, I found this interesting...

:tweet: Patrick Kearns @PatrickKearns 42m 42 minutes ago
In 2,336 mins, Staal is a 48.5 CF% player with Girardi.

Without Girardi, Staal is at 52.3 CF%

Phil in Absentia
10-27-2014, 07:48 PM
No one is denying the legitimacy of CORSI. That's silly. That's like saying "are goals really goals?", or "are shots against actually against?". It's a valid statistic. It's in how it's applied to make a determination that's up for debate.

That said, it doesn't shock me that Girardi's CORSI numbers are probably poor.

Mike
10-27-2014, 07:51 PM
No one is denying the legitimacy of CORSI. That's silly. That's like saying "are goals really goals?", or "are shots against actually against?". It's a valid statistic. It's in how it's applied to make a determination that's up for debate.

That said, it doesn't shock me that Girardi's CORSI numbers are probably poor.

This. Facts are facts, but how they effect this, or that is unknown at this point.

Phil in Absentia
10-27-2014, 07:54 PM
This. Facts are facts, but how they effect this, or that is unknown at this point.

Right. The combative nature "against CORSI" isn't actually against CORSI. It's against theories that essentially posit that "Player X has a bad CORSI, therefor Player X is a bad player". That's why I always use the plus/minus argument as an example of why that is wrong. There is so much that can go into why a player is a plus or minus and seeing as CORSI (standard CORSI) is essentially plus/minus except for shots for/against instead of goals for/against, the same logic applies to it that applies to plus/minus. Being a player in either direction doesn't in and of itself tell you much of anything about a given player. It needs context.

TwoMinutesForNothing
10-27-2014, 07:58 PM
Yeah so if someone is below average at it then you can say it doesn't mean much because there are other ways to measure a player, but if a player is the literal worst in the entire NHL in a stat that is used by some to measure the overall effectiveness of a player, as Glass is, then I find it hard to believe that he would be an attractive player to most teams. Would the Leafs be willing to dress him?

Pete
10-27-2014, 08:00 PM
I'm not putting words in your mouth. I was asking you to clarify your stance. That's how it came off to me.

And the bold is obvious. I'm not sure that means anything other than AS clearly has a place in the game.
Again, no one said they don't. But hockey tape also has a place in the game, but not a bigger place than a stick. :)

Right. The combative nature "against CORSI" isn't actually against CORSI. It's against theories that essentially posit that "Player X has a bad CORSI, therefor Player X is a bad player". That's why I always use the plus/minus argument as an example of why that is wrong. There is so much that can go into why a player is a plus or minus and seeing as CORSI (standard CORSI) is essentially plus/minus except for shots for/against instead of goals for/against, the same logic applies to it that applies to plus/minus. Being a player in either direction doesn't in and of itself tell you much of anything about a given player. It needs context.
Bingo. When you're whole stance on a player is based on CORSI, you're doing it wrong.

Phil in Absentia
10-27-2014, 08:03 PM
Yeah so if someone is below average at it then you can say it doesn't mean much because there are other ways to measure a player, but if a player is the literal worst in the entire NHL in a stat that is used by some to measure the overall effectiveness of a player, as Glass is, then I find it hard to believe that he would be an attractive player to most teams. Would the Leafs be willing to dress him?

Again, you're building a massive bridge here. CORSI is, in essence, plus/minus for shots versus goals. It literally measures shots against versus shots for when you are on the ice. You know who have a ton of poor CORSI numbers? The Leafs, in general. They give up a fuck ton of shots every game. Does that mean every player on their team are poor defenders, because they post poor defensive numbers? I'd argue not, because there's a context to the role of players, and the quality of line mates, etc. that's simply being ignored for the sake of using a single statistic to define players.

Hell, I wouldn't even use goals to define players alone. Any idiot can have a hot year. It's consistency, quality of line mates, ice time, etc. that add context there to separate the Jonathan Cheechoo's from the Steven Stamkos'.

Glass being the worst CORSI player in the NHL indicates he is probably not a great defensive player, but there's a required context you are refusing to acknowledge in making that determination.

TwoMinutesForNothing
10-27-2014, 08:04 PM
I didn't put much faith in Corsi until recently. Watching Tanner Glass play so far this season is actually what has changed my mind on it. I can't deny that it was correct at this point. I hope he can improve.

TwoMinutesForNothing
10-27-2014, 08:09 PM
Again, you're building a massive bridge here. CORSI is, in essence, plus/minus for shots versus goals. It literally measures shots against versus shots for when you are on the ice. You know who have a ton of poor CORSI numbers? The Leafs, in general. They give up a fuck ton of shots every game. Does that mean every player on their team are poor defenders, because they post poor defensive numbers? I'd argue not, because there's a context to the role of players, and the quality of line mates, etc. that's simply being ignored for the sake of using a single statistic to define players.

Hell, I wouldn't even use goals to define players alone. Any idiot can have a hot year. It's consistency, quality of line mates, ice time, etc. that add context there to separate the Jonathan Cheechoo's from the Steven Stamkos'.

Glass being the worst CORSI player in the NHL indicates he is probably not a great defensive player, but there's a required context you are refusing to acknowledge in making that determination.

I don't think it's meant to measure defensive ability. I'm taking it as a means to measure the ability of players to have the puck. Low Corsi means poor puck control, which is what I see when I watch Glass play, giveaways and poor awareness. He basically just hits. His defensive positioning is actually one of the few things he's not bad at. It's his ability to get the puck to a teammate when it comes to him in the D zone or on the PK that takes away from his effectiveness in his own end.

Mike
10-27-2014, 08:30 PM
And Malik is a career +150

leetchy2
10-27-2014, 10:47 PM
Regarding Corsi numbers, sure they can be misleading. However, my opinions of Glass are based mostly on his play on the ice in combination with his poor stats, compared to other players on the team who are being benched but I feel are more deserving of the ice time.

Regarding statements in previous posts like "Glass is lowest hanging fruit, we have deeper problems, and Glass isn't costing us games", I would like to mention this originally wasn't a debate of playing Glass instead of Malone. My main objection was benching better players like Duclair (and now Hayes) over Glass. I don't care if Duclair doesn't have the same "role" as Glass, because Glass doesn't excel at any role and is bad at many others. It would be different if he was great on faceoffs, or checked everyone really hard, or was a great fighter, but he's none of those. So in this sense I think it does cost the Rangers by not putting a better player on the ice.

Pete
10-27-2014, 11:02 PM
You can say you don't care, but that's the reason.

leetchy2
10-27-2014, 11:28 PM
I understand that's the reason, but it's not a reason that's defendable given Glass's play.

Pete
10-28-2014, 07:19 AM
Glass has been no worse than Dorsett.

leetchy2
10-28-2014, 08:59 AM
Glass has been no worse than Dorsett.

Red herring. Last year we weren't sitting anyone who was appreciably better than Dorsett, otherwise I would have complained too.

Phil in Absentia
10-28-2014, 09:16 AM
I understand that's the reason, but it's not a reason that's defendable given Glass's play.

That depends on what your expectations of Glass' play were from the start. What were you expecting? What is his role on this team, to you? Once you answer that, we can have an honest discussion about this.

Pete
10-28-2014, 09:28 AM
Red herring. Last year we weren't sitting anyone who was appreciably better than Dorsett, otherwise I would have complained too.

There's no way to have an intelligent debate about this if you're going to ignore the roles of players.

NYR2711
10-28-2014, 10:04 AM
Regarding Corsi numbers, sure they can be misleading. However, my opinions of Glass are based mostly on his play on the ice in combination with his poor stats, compared to other players on the team who are being benched but I feel are more deserving of the ice time.

Regarding statements in previous posts like "Glass is lowest hanging fruit, we have deeper problems, and Glass isn't costing us games", I would like to mention this originally wasn't a debate of playing Glass instead of Malone. My main objection was benching better players like Duclair (and now Hayes) over Glass. I don't care if Duclair doesn't have the same "role" as Glass, because Glass doesn't excel at any role and is bad at many others. It would be different if he was great on faceoffs, or checked everyone really hard, or was a great fighter, but he's none of those. So in this sense I think it does cost the Rangers by not putting a better player on the ice.

There is a reason you don't play Duclair in Glass's spot. Duclair is still learning, and he isn't a 4th line player needing to learn the 4th line role. He is a player that needs to have some decent ice time in the top 9. Sitting a rookie and letting them watch the game from up top will help their development over throwing them onto the 4th line with limited ice. Duclair started to trail off a little when he got benched, and has been a better player since coming back. HAyes problem is that he wasn't winning any face-offs, which s key for the center position, and he and Glass don't play the same position, so its a moot point to say that HAyes should be playing over Glass.

Glass hasn't been that bad for the team. He is a 4th liner who is out there to play a couple of minutes a game, mix it up if he has to and just keep the puck out of the net while the big dogs are getting a rest. As of right now, I have no complaints about him, he hasn't made any glaring mistakes out there.

CCCP
10-28-2014, 10:40 AM
I'd say that THE main reason, other than hank, that we went as far as we did last season was our 4th line. Now due to injuries our 4th line of stepniak, moore, and glass have not played together yet, so im reserving judgement but so far im not liking what glass brings. If he was a replacemnt for dorsett and carcillo, why did the management let them go in the first place? His ability to PK? But so far he hasnt been all that great at it either.

leetchy2
10-28-2014, 10:54 AM
There's no way to have an intelligent debate about this if you're going to ignore the roles of players.

And what role does Tanner Glass play?

Pete
10-28-2014, 10:57 AM
And what role does Tanner Glass play?

Physical presence, gets in on the forecheck, throws big hits, kills penalties, defends teammates.

Duclair going to do that? You want Duclair getting 8-9 minutes? I know I don't.

FleshistheFever
10-28-2014, 11:13 AM
Glass does a very good job of pressuring opponents. He's a bruiser who skates with determination. He is what he is and thats what we use him for. My one gripe is his pricetag. Too much.

leetchy2
10-28-2014, 11:15 AM
There is a reason you don't play Duclair in Glass's spot. Duclair is still learning, and he isn't a 4th line player needing to learn the 4th line role. He is a player that needs to have some decent ice time in the top 9. Sitting a rookie and letting them watch the game from up top will help their development over throwing them onto the 4th line with limited ice. Duclair started to trail off a little when he got benched, and has been a better player since coming back. HAyes problem is that he wasn't winning any face-offs, which s key for the center position, and he and Glass don't play the same position, so its a moot point to say that HAyes should be playing over Glass.



Isn't the role of any line, whether it be the 1st line or the 4th line, to score more goals than the opposition? Why does the 4th line always have to be a "grinding" line that can't produce? Why can't it be a talented line? When the Olympic committees select players for their teams I didn't see team Canada choosing Matt Cooke, Chris Neal or similar type players for their 4th line. Instead they had players like Sharp, Nash, St. Louis, Bergeron, etc. Are you saying the Olympic committees are picking the wrong type of players for their 4th lines?

Duclair not being suited for a 4th line role is nonsense. Do you think Dom Moore would rather play with Glass or Duclair on the LW? Don't you think the line of Duclair - Moore - Malone would outperform the line of Glass - Moore - Malone?

As for Hayes I'd rather scratch Glass and have a line of Malone - Moore - Hayes. That way Malone and Hayes go to their natural positions and you don't have to worry about Hayes winning face offs. And if Moore gets kicked out of the face-off circle Hayes can always take the draw whereas with Glass you don't have that option.

Phil in Absentia
10-28-2014, 11:17 AM
Isn't the role of any line, whether it be the 1st line or the 4th line, to score more goals than the opposition? Why does the 4th line always have to be a "grinding" line that can't produce? Why can't it be a talented line? When the Olympic committees select players for their teams I didn't see team Canada choosing Matt Cooke, Chris Neal or similar type players for their 4th line. Instead they had players like Sharp, Nash, St. Louis, Bergeron, etc. Are you saying the Olympic committees are picking the wrong type of players for their 4th lines?

Duclair not being suited for a 4th line role is nonsense. Do you think Dom Moore would rather play with Glass or Duclair on the LW? Don't you think the line of Duclair - Moore - Malone would outperform the line of Glass - Moore - Malone?

As for Hayes I'd rather scratch Glass and have a line of Malone - Moore - Hayes. That way Malone and Hayes go to their natural positions and you don't have to worry about Hayes winning face offs. And if Moore gets kicked out of the face-off circle Hayes can always take the draw whereas with Glass you don't have that option.

Because when Olympic teams are chosen, there's a depth of offensive talent so deep that the traditional NHL model doesn't apply, and neither does fighting and overly physical play in the IIHF setting for that matter. You're comparing apples and oranges there.

Right now, today, in this NHL, physicality still matters, which is why most teams ice a fourth-line composed of players like this. It's why year-after-year, fighters still get jobs. The only caveat of late is that those fighters still need to be able to take regular shifts, which Glass clearly can.

Phil in Absentia
10-28-2014, 11:19 AM
Glass does a very good job of pressuring opponents. He's a bruiser who skates with determination. He is what he is and thats what we use him for. My one gripe is his pricetag. Too much.

Except that it really isn't. Not for a UFA.

It's actually right in line with exactly what players like that make.

http://capgeek.com/comparables/?player_id=841&year_id=2014

leetchy2
10-28-2014, 11:24 AM
Physical presence, gets in on the forecheck, throws big hits, kills penalties, defends teammates.

Duclair going to do that? You want Duclair getting 8-9 minutes? I know I don't.

If he could do all that then I'd be OK with it. However, he hasn't shown me the ability to do any of that this year. Hopefully he'll improve cause it looks like he isn't going anywhere.

Pete
10-28-2014, 11:28 AM
Isn't the role of any line, whether it be the 1st line or the 4th line, to score more goals than the opposition? Why does the 4th line always have to be a "grinding" line that can't produce? Why can't it be a talented line? When the Olympic committees select players for their teams I didn't see team Canada choosing Matt Cooke, Chris Neal or similar type players for their 4th line. Instead they had players like Sharp, Nash, St. Louis, Bergeron, etc. Are you saying the Olympic committees are picking the wrong type of players for their 4th lines?

Duclair not being suited for a 4th line role is nonsense. Do you think Dom Moore would rather play with Glass or Duclair on the LW? Don't you think the line of Duclair - Moore - Malone would outperform the line of Glass - Moore - Malone?

As for Hayes I'd rather scratch Glass and have a line of Malone - Moore - Hayes. That way Malone and Hayes go to their natural positions and you don't have to worry about Hayes winning face offs. And if Moore gets kicked out of the face-off circle Hayes can always take the draw whereas with Glass you don't have that option.

You do realize there's no salary cap in the Olympics, and that the game played on international ice is a totally different animal?

Slobberknocker
10-28-2014, 11:33 AM
wow. 92 posts on bottom two role players.

would think a better thread would be and objective look at ryan mcdonagh, or staal or msl right now.

Mike
10-28-2014, 11:42 AM
Isn't the role of any line, whether it be the 1st line or the 4th line, to score more goals than the opposition? Why does the 4th line always have to be a "grinding" line that can't produce? Why can't it be a talented line? When the Olympic committees select players for their teams I didn't see team Canada choosing Matt Cooke, Chris Neal or similar type players for their 4th line. Instead they had players like Sharp, Nash, St. Louis, Bergeron, etc. Are you saying the Olympic committees are picking the wrong type of players for their 4th lines?

Duclair not being suited for a 4th line role is nonsense. Do you think Dom Moore would rather play with Glass or Duclair on the LW? Don't you think the line of Duclair - Moore - Malone would outperform the line of Glass - Moore - Malone?

As for Hayes I'd rather scratch Glass and have a line of Malone - Moore - Hayes. That way Malone and Hayes go to their natural positions and you don't have to worry about Hayes winning face offs. And if Moore gets kicked out of the face-off circle Hayes can always take the draw whereas with Glass you don't have that option.

Olympics is a horrible comparison. It's a group of mercenaries thrown together for a 2 week tournament, no salary cap, no fighting, bigger ice, and a completely different coaching concept. There is no reason that Duclair should be in Glass' roster spot. He's not a 4th line player, nor will he ever be one. At 19, he should be watching a game or 2 from upstairs, and maybe even more in the future vs. skating 8 minutes a night, and not being utilized to his capabilities.

Phil in Absentia
10-28-2014, 11:47 AM
wow. 92 posts on bottom two role players.

would think a better thread would be and objective look at ryan mcdonagh, or staal or msl right now.

There's one of these guys every single year who gets debated and dissected season-after-season for not being good enough, hard enough, fast enough, etc.

Glass is just this years' version. Before him came Carcillo, Avery, Brashear, Voros, Dorsett, Asham, Shelley, Weise, Boogaard, Hollweg, etc.

NYR2711
10-28-2014, 12:15 PM
Isn't the role of any line, whether it be the 1st line or the 4th line, to score more goals than the opposition? Why does the 4th line always have to be a "grinding" line that can't produce? Why can't it be a talented line? When the Olympic committees select players for their teams I didn't see team Canada choosing Matt Cooke, Chris Neal or similar type players for their 4th line. Instead they had players like Sharp, Nash, St. Louis, Bergeron, etc. Are you saying the Olympic committees are picking the wrong type of players for their 4th lines?

Duclair not being suited for a 4th line role is nonsense. Do you think Dom Moore would rather play with Glass or Duclair on the LW? Don't you think the line of Duclair - Moore - Malone would outperform the line of Glass - Moore - Malone?

As for Hayes I'd rather scratch Glass and have a line of Malone - Moore - Hayes. That way Malone and Hayes go to their natural positions and you don't have to worry about Hayes winning face offs. And if Moore gets kicked out of the face-off circle Hayes can always take the draw whereas with Glass you don't have that option.

Im pretty sure you know the difference between the Olympics and NHL, thats a poor comparison. Its great when a 4th line kicks in a goal, but they are there to grind it out and try to shut down players.

It makes zero sense to play Duclair on the 4th line. He isn't a 4th liner and will learn more by watching the game from up top than playing 5 minutes a game. Again, Duclair and Glass have different roles on his team. As for Hayes, he is playing center, so why would you move him off the center position, once again to play 5 minutes a game. He is another player that can learn the center position from watching. And if Hayes is going to lose face-offs, what is the difference if you have him or Glass taking the face-off?

leetchy2
10-28-2014, 02:05 PM
You don't scratch Duclair and play Glass instead. If that isn't obvious by now, then further discussion is hopeless. Maybe you put someone else on the 4th line instead of Duke. Maybe you play Glass and scratch Malone. But the thought of Glass playing and Duclair sitting isn't making the team better, especially a team that has trouble scoring goals on a consistent basis.

Pete
10-28-2014, 02:09 PM
Further discussion was hopeless when you failed to acknowledge roles and compared an NHL team to an Olympic team.

Mike
10-28-2014, 02:13 PM
If you search the entire leagues games on a nightly basis, I think you'll find quite a few players that are top 6-9 scratched while the lesser talented 4th line players are in the lineup.

Pete
10-28-2014, 02:15 PM
If you search the entire leagues games on a nightly basis, I think you'll find quite a few players that are top 6-9 scratched while the lesser talented 4th line players are in the lineup.

Exactly. "Who says the 4th line has to be a grind line?"...I don't know, 26-27 other NHL GMs/coaches?

Phil in Absentia
10-28-2014, 02:15 PM
If you search the entire leagues games on a nightly basis, I think you'll find quite a few players that are top 6-9 scratched while the lesser talented 4th line players are in the lineup.

Specifically because of the nature of what fourth lines are designed to do across the league still.

I actually can't think of a single team that doesn't deploy these types of players on their fourth line.

Mike
10-28-2014, 02:17 PM
If Duclair, or anyone else for that matter needs to watch a game or 2 from up top, how is putting him in the lineup in a role that he doesn't play going to improve his game, or develop him the way he needs to be developed vs. watching not only his team play from the best angle possible, but how oppnents play as well ?

leetchy2
10-28-2014, 03:08 PM
FWIW, the 2010 Olympics in Vancouver were held on an NHL sized rink. Still don't see any "4th line" grinder types "to provide energy and bang bodies" selected to Canada or US teams. Why not? Because skill is more valuable. My philosophy is to play the best players. However, if two players competing for one spot are reasonably close in skill then you play the player that fills a needed role. Duclair & Glass are far enough apart in the skill & production category that the extra skill/production is worth more to the team than filling a nebulous "role".

Pete
10-28-2014, 03:16 PM
The role is only nebulous to you. Seems like others understand the concept.

There is no salary cap in the OLY.

I don't know if you realize it, but you're questioning the entire structure of the league. The draft has a limited number of rounds. The players at the end of the draft clearly will not be as good as those in the beginning (usually). What talent pool can support a skill player at every position?

It's not feasible or realistic in any way.

Slobberknocker
10-28-2014, 03:31 PM
I'm confused over what's being argued about here.

it surely isn't an objective look at Tanner Glass.

Pete
10-28-2014, 03:36 PM
More like

http://wallalay.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Broken-Glass-5.jpg

leetchy2
10-28-2014, 03:58 PM
The role is only nebulous to you. Seems like others understand the concept.

There is no salary cap in the OLY.

I don't know if you realize it, but you're questioning the entire structure of the league. The draft has a limited number of rounds. The players at the end of the draft clearly will not be as good as those in the beginning (usually). What talent pool can support a skill player at every position?

It's not feasible or realistic in any way.

Salaray cap is irrelevant in this discussion as well since Duclair makes less than Glass. So it's not like you have to play Glass over Duclair to meet the cap.

Of course there isn't enough talent pool in the NHL to have a Sidney Crosby as a 4th line center. My point is that given the choice I'd rather play a player who has skill and can produce (i.e., Duclair) instead of someone who can only bang bodies and has no other virtues (Glass). That's why when given the choice the olympic committees don't select grinders like Chris Neal to the team because that "role" is over-rated and because skill/production is far more important. When there isn't a large difference in skill/production between two players then you pick based on the needed role.

Phil in Absentia
10-28-2014, 04:06 PM
The role is only nebulous to you. Seems like others understand the concept.

There is no salary cap in the OLY.

I don't know if you realize it, but you're questioning the entire structure of the league. The draft has a limited number of rounds. The players at the end of the draft clearly will not be as good as those in the beginning (usually). What talent pool can support a skill player at every position?

It's not feasible or realistic in any way.

In actually thinking this over, the only team I can think of who intentionally question that are the Wings, who don't utilize traditional fourth-line players on their roster. Their fourth-line this year has been Drew Miller, Luke Glendening and Joakim Andersson.

So one team, out of thirty.

Phil in Absentia
10-28-2014, 04:09 PM
Salaray cap is irrelevant in this discussion as well since Duclair makes less than Glass. So it's not like you have to play Glass over Duclair to meet the cap.

Of course there isn't enough talent pool in the NHL to have a Sidney Crosby as a 4th line center. My point is that given the choice I'd rather play a player who has skill and can produce (i.e., Duclair) instead of someone who can only bang bodies and has no other virtues (Glass). That's why when given the choice the olympic committees don't select grinders like Chris Neal to the team because that "role" is over-rated and because skill/production is far more important. When there isn't a large difference in skill/production between two players then you pick based on the needed role.

It's not irrelevant to the league. It's irrelevant to this very specific circumstance, but few teams have the kind of forward depth to even allow for skilled players on their third and fourth lines.

And again, the format of Oly versus NHL is shattered by the fact that the Olys are not capped by a salary cap, hence they have a seemingly endless (at least Canada) wealth of skilled players to select from. They don't need traditional NHL fourth-line players because they can afford, figuratively and literally, to employ someone like Jason Spezza on their "fourth" line. The entire format of their hockey is just vastly different than the NHL game, which not only allows, but still in a way encourages fighting as well.

Pete
10-28-2014, 04:11 PM
Salaray cap is irrelevant in this discussion as well since Duclair makes less than Glass. So it's not like you have to play Glass over Duclair to meet the cap.

Of course there isn't enough talent pool in the NHL to have a Sidney Crosby as a 4th line center. My point is that given the choice I'd rather play a player who has skill and can produce (i.e., Duclair) instead of someone who can only bang bodies and has no other virtues (Glass). That's why when given the choice the olympic committees don't select grinders like Chris Neal to the team because that "role" is over-rated and because skill/production is far more important. When there isn't a large difference in skill/production between two players then you pick based on the needed role.

The Olympics can't be compared to the NHL in any way, shape or form. You're also talking about Canada who can send 2 full rosters of skill players.

Who do you think compromises Latvia's 4th line? I mean Jarko Ruutu was an Olympian...So, yea.

Pete
10-28-2014, 04:12 PM
In actually thinking this over, the only team I can think of who intentionally question that are the Wings, who don't utilize traditional fourth-line players on their roster. Their fourth-line this year has been Drew Miller, Luke Glendening and Joakim Andersson.

So one team, out of thirty.

Drew Miller is basically and bang-crash guy, he's not a skill player.

Phil in Absentia
10-28-2014, 04:23 PM
The Olympics can't be compared to the NHL in any way, shape or form. You're also talking about Canada who can send 2 full rosters of skill players.

Who do you think compromises Latvia's 4th line? I mean Jarko Ruutu was an Olympian...So, yea.

That's actually a great point. I'd imagine the third and fourth lines for more fringe countries (thinking Germany, Austria, Latvia, etc.) just don't have that same wealth of skilled personnel to choose from, so they approach their clubs much in the same way NHL teams do, by utilizing crash-and-bang and shut-down type players for those lines in an attempt to neutralize the more skilled lines of teams they face. Doesn't always work, clearly, and at some point (like when you are playing Canada), there's just no way to stop all the waves of attack, but it's also the best you can do.

I mean, that's the NHL in a nut shell. Clearly there isn't enough talent to go around to give every team a viable top-6, let alone a wealth of top-12 so that the Tanner Glass' of the world would no longer be necessary.

Pete
10-28-2014, 04:27 PM
That's actually a great point. I'd imagine the third and fourth lines for more fringe countries (thinking Germany, Austria, Latvia, etc.) just don't have that same wealth of skilled personnel to choose from, so they approach their clubs much in the same way NHL teams do, by utilizing crash-and-bang and shut-down type players for those lines in an attempt to neutralize the more skilled lines of teams they face. Doesn't always work, clearly, and at some point (like when you are playing Canada), there's just no way to stop all the waves of attack, but it's also the best you can do.

I mean, that's the NHL in a nut shell. Clearly there isn't enough talent to go around to give every team a viable top-6, let alone a wealth of top-12 so that the Tanner Glass' of the world would no longer be necessary.

Even if I could wrap my head around "why can't you have a scoring 4th line", the answer would be that 26-27 other teams don't, so if you want to see Duclair get this done to him, then sure, put him out there.

http://cdn.nextimpulsesports.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/scotthit2.gif

That's what happens when skill players go out against the 4th line.

Phil in Absentia
10-28-2014, 04:34 PM
Even if I could wrap my head around "why can't you have a scoring 4th line", the answer would be that 26-27 other teams don't, so if you want to see Duclair get this done to him, then sure, put him out there.

http://cdn.nextimpulsesports.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/scotthit2.gif

That's what happens when skill players go out against the 4th line.

Yup. This is just an example of what I've been saying as well, re: fighting in the NHL. In a room where 30 guys have guns drawn, I'm not gonna be the first to holster mine, kinda thing. The same applies to fourth-line players in general. You need a little size and snarl there until the NHL can support the kind of wealth of skill to make them unnecessary.

Duclair also already has a history of head injuries, having suffered a pretty severe concussion in the Q. Last thing the Rangers need is him on the shelf with another because the coach put him out against the John Scott's of the NHL.

leetchy2
10-28-2014, 08:18 PM
Then you might as well never play Duclair if you're afraid of a concussion. John Scott not the only one in the league who can deliver a career ending head shot. Such hits can come from anyone. Just look at last night. Is John Moore a big goon? No. That can happen on any shift against any team. So if you're not going to play Duclair cause your afraid he'll be concussed then you may as well send him packing. Same for Staal, same for Nash. Moreover, this can happen whether Duke plays on the 1st line or the 4th line if he doesn't keep his head up and isn't aware of his surroundings. Also, if we don't have home ice there's no guarantee we'll get a favorible line matchup during the game regardless of what line he is on anyway. Having Tanner Glass isn't a deterrent either.

Pete
10-28-2014, 09:18 PM
Your chances go up deploying him against 4th liners...obviously.

Phil in Absentia
10-28-2014, 09:40 PM
And it's more likely to happen playing against the leagues biggest and hardest hitters, who traditionally play on teams' fourth lines.

TwoMinutesForNothing
10-29-2014, 12:28 AM
This whole argument makes no sense. Just because you are scratching Glass in favor of Duclair doesn't mean you are playing Duclair on the 4th line. You obviously wouldn't do that. You would bump someone else down to the 4th line like Moore, Malone Mueller, Stempniak, or Hayes. There's five guys that would be fine in 4th line roles right there.

Pete
10-29-2014, 07:01 AM
This whole argument makes no sense. Just because you are scratching Glass in favor of Duclair doesn't mean you are playing Duclair on the 4th line. You obviously wouldn't do that. You would bump someone else down to the 4th line like Moore, Malone Mueller, Stempniak, or Hayes. There's five guys that would be fine in 4th line roles right there.

Talk to the guy who wants the 4th line to be a scoring line.

leetchy2
10-29-2014, 08:40 AM
Talk to the guy who wants the 4th line to be a scoring line.

Or Pete maybe you should re-read post #97 where I suggested basically the same thing.

Pete
10-29-2014, 08:41 AM
Or Pete maybe you should re-read post #97 where I suggested basically the same thing.

I read all your posts.

TwoMins jumped into a conversation blind and said it made no sense. I was just explaining how it got there.

You asked why the 4th line can't be a scoring line and referenced the Olympics. No?

Simply put, Duclair isn't fighting Glass for ice time. He's fighting the top 9, which Glass isn't. His place on the team is safe right now.

Slobberknocker
10-29-2014, 09:37 AM
Simply put, Duclair isn't fighting Glass for ice time. He's fighting the top 9, which Glass isn't. His place on the team is safe right now.

I think some people shouldn't be arguing in this thread if they don't understand this simple point.

Phil in Absentia
10-29-2014, 09:48 AM
I read all your posts.

TwoMins jumped into a conversation blind and said it made no sense. I was just explaining how it got there.

You asked why the 4th line can't be a scoring line and referenced the Olympics. No?

Simply put, Duclair isn't fighting Glass for ice time. He's fighting the top 9, which Glass isn't. His place on the team is safe right now.

I'd go so far as to say both their places on the team are safe right now.

Pete
10-29-2014, 10:04 AM
I'd go so far as to say both their places on the team are safe right now.

Agreed. Duclair has outplayed Hayes, that's who he's fighting for top 9 time. Hayes will have an even harder time when Steps gets back. Duclair has shown he can play in the NHL, even if he has to sit from time to time. But when he sits, the notion that "he shouldn't sit for Glass" is still false. If anything, when Stepan comes back and Stempniak is relegated to the 4th line, Mueller goes down, etc, it will be Glass, Malone and Stempniak fighting not to be the 13th forward.

If at any point Duclair falls off, you'll probably see Stempniak inserted/elevated and Malone/Glass play.

Phil in Absentia
10-29-2014, 10:08 AM
Agreed. Duclair has outplayed Hayes, that's who he's fighting for top 9 time. Hayes will have an even harder time when Steps gets back. Duclair has shown he can play in the NHL, even if he has to sit from time to time. But when he sits, the notion that "he shouldn't sit for Glass" is still false. If anything, when Stepan comes back and Stempniak is relegated to the 4th line, Mueller goes down, etc, it will be Glass, Malone and Stempniak fighting not to be the 13th forward.

If at any point Duclair falls off, you'll probably see Stempniak inserted/elevated and Malone/Glass play.

Exactly. It's all about roles, and who is in competition with whom. That's pretty much the exact scenario I see playing out, though I do think they face a bit of a tougher challenge with sending Mueller down this time. He's performed admirably, and has actually looked threatening on the PP.

Might just end up a numbers game for him though, unfortunately. Just like it did out of Training Camp and Preseason.

Pete
10-29-2014, 10:11 AM
Exactly. It's all about roles, and who is in competition with whom. That's pretty much the exact scenario I see playing out, though I do think they face a bit of a tougher challenge with sending Mueller down this time. He's performed admirably, and has actually looked threatening on the PP.

Might just end up a numbers game for him though, unfortunately. Just like it did out of Training Camp and Preseason.

Well I certainly like Mueller's game more than Stemniak right now. He fizzled out, quick,

Phil in Absentia
10-29-2014, 10:15 AM
Well I certainly like Mueller's game more than Stemniak right now. He fizzled out, quick,

Same. He's always been a hot and cold player though, and when he gets hot he usually goes on a tear, like we saw for three or four games there. He even won multiple SOTG threads here because he got so hot. I guess that's why he's such a journeyman these days.

I wouldn't be shocked to see them keep two spare forwards, honestly. My guess is it's Hayes who ultimately gets assigned to the AHL. I'd actually say his game has fizzled even faster than Stempniak's, and he he's brutal at the dot. He probably has the worst face-off percentage in the league at this point among natural centers.

Pete
10-29-2014, 10:23 AM
Same. He's always been a hot and cold player though, and when he gets hot he usually goes on a tear, like we saw for three or four games there. He even won multiple SOTG threads here because he got so hot. I guess that's why he's such a journeyman these days.

I wouldn't be shocked to see them keep two spare forwards, honestly. My guess is it's Hayes who ultimately gets assigned to the AHL. I'd actually say his game has fizzled even faster than Stempniak's, and he he's brutal at the dot. He probably has the worst face-off percentage in the league at this point among natural centers.

He spent a lot of time on wing in college, though. The Rangers wanted him in the middle, but he'll have to work on that. If it's in the "A", so be it.