Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 81

Thread: Jimmy Vesey on the Block?

  1. #41
    HNIC BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    78,220
    Rep Power
    558
    Or he could be another great find in the scrap heap, like Stralman.

    We can go back and forth all day but the fact is you can't ice a team of guys younger than 25 and older than 30 and just swap out players like they are spare parts every 2 years. There's no one on this team under contract past 2021 except Lundy, Skjei and Z right now. You have to have some continuity, somewhere. That's really not how NHL locker rooms are successful. It's not baseball.

  2. #42
    Senior Member Bantam Division
    Fatfrancesa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    1,726
    Rep Power
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by Phil in Absentia View Post
    Well, out of the gate, you know I'm balking at the eye test as a measure of objective reality. It's not. It's remarkably unreliable, in fact, from sports to police lineups to simple historical recollection. Our eyes/brains lie to us all the time. It's evolutionary. It's why we often see things that aren't there, from optical illusions to the fear stimulated by a shadow in the bushes.

    I do agree that a players' shooting percentage alone isn't enough to judge them on, but it can be a major red flag given that player's proximity to UFA. Specifically, because we've seen too many guys cash in at around the same age Strome would only to end up thrown on the historical pile of regret. His inflated shooting percentage is directly linked to a career-high in goals and yet if you took only his production with the Rangers into account, he's still pacing (0.52) around his career average (0.46) in P/GP. What happens when that percentage regresses to the mean? To me, that's a giant, flashing "buyer beware."

    Right-handedness and multi-positionality I'll give you. Both are big positives. But big picture, I just don't see any long-term value in keeping a guy like this around for more than another year. In fact, I'd go so far as to argue his value as a trade piece has never been higher. I'd rather sell high on the 18 goals and 33 points in 63 games player he is right now than assume that won't regress to the mean next season in his walk year.

    This post sums up the exact problem with the advanced stat crowd. It is so arrogant it’s beyond belief. It’s not possible for somebody who’s been in hockey their entire life to pass judgement on a player by watching them? It’s ridiculous. Those who claim to use these stats to prove what they know only prove the opposite when they are so dismissive of others. evaluating players happened long before the video game stats and somehow the world didn’t miss some great players. So if stromes shooting % dips he basically becomes Namestnikov.

    Why is it so hard to use every advantage you can in assessing a player. Old school eye test and new school stats. Dismissing either is foolish. I’m guessing those who dismiss the eye test do it because they don’t properly understand what they are watching.

  3. #43
    The future is spelled K-A-K-K-O BSBH Legend
    Phil in Absentia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    87,545
    Rep Power
    476
    Quote Originally Posted by Fatfrancesa View Post
    This post sums up the exact problem with the advanced stat crowd. It is so arrogant itís beyond belief. Itís not possible for somebody whoís been in hockey their entire life to pass judgement on a player by watching them? Itís ridiculous. Those who claim to use these stats to prove what they know only prove the opposite when they are so dismissive of others. evaluating players happened long before the video game stats and somehow the world didnít miss some great players. So if stromes shooting % dips he basically becomes Namestnikov.

    Why is it so hard to use every advantage you can in assessing a player. Old school eye test and new school stats. Dismissing either is foolish. Iím guessing those who dismiss the eye test do it because they donít properly understand what they are watching.
    Hang on, hang on -- shooting percentage is advanced?

    As to the eye test, I don't trust it implicitly. That's not the same as dismissing it. It's an entry point to me to then look at data (a fancy word for fact) to draw conclusions that can actually be reproduced (also called science).

    For example, if you put Kreider with Zuccarello and see that the two appear to have tremendous chemistry, you can then look at the data to see if it support your instincts. In that case, it would. Everything from traditional boxcars (goals, points) to more advanced models (WAR, GAR, xG) would prove positive. If you then took Kreider away from Zuccarello and played him with another player, you could then see less chemistry, also likely supported by data. You can then reproduce your original instinct ó Kreider and Zucc together ó and the results would likely prove positive again. Thus confirming your instincts (what your eyes told you) with stats.

    Or you can just call everyone who posts a number arrogant and pretend your sport will forever buck the data revolution. Good luck with that.


    Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk
    "Everyone says you should be a good loser. If youíre a good loser, youíre a loser."
    - John Tortorella


    "Never be a spectator of unfairness or stupidity. Seek out argument and disputation for their own sake; the grave will supply plenty of time for silence."
    - Christopher Hitchens

  4. #44
    The future is spelled K-A-K-K-O BSBH Legend
    Phil in Absentia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    87,545
    Rep Power
    476
    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    Or he could be another great find in the scrap heap, like Stralman.

    We can go back and forth all day but the fact is you can't ice a team of guys younger than 25 and older than 30 and just swap out players like they are spare parts every 2 years. There's no one on this team under contract past 2021 except Lundy, Skjei and Z right now. You have to have some continuity, somewhere. That's really not how NHL locker rooms are successful. It's not baseball.
    Sure. I'm not dismissing that as a possibility. I'm saying I don't feel comfortable rolling those dice. Not like I did with Stralman, who had stronger underlying numbers, and less rocky boxcars (S%) to suggest less of a risk.

    That's what this actually boils down to -- risk assessment. I take a more pessimistic approach in this particular case.


    Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk
    "Everyone says you should be a good loser. If youíre a good loser, youíre a loser."
    - John Tortorella


    "Never be a spectator of unfairness or stupidity. Seek out argument and disputation for their own sake; the grave will supply plenty of time for silence."
    - Christopher Hitchens

  5. #45
    HNIC BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    78,220
    Rep Power
    558
    Quote Originally Posted by Phil in Absentia View Post
    Sure. I'm not dismissing that as a possibility. I'm saying I don't feel comfortable rolling those dice. Not like I did with Stralman, who had stronger underlying numbers, and less rocky boxcars (S%) to suggest less of a risk.

    That's what this actually boils down to -- risk assessment. I take a more pessimistic approach in this particular case.


    Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk
    Ok and what about the rest of the post unrelated to Stralman?

  6. #46
    The future is spelled K-A-K-K-O BSBH Legend
    Phil in Absentia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    87,545
    Rep Power
    476
    Also no disagreement. To that, I think Strome is a fine veteran player. But so too are better, clearer top-six players who I'd sooner invest in. Kreider, for example.

    Similar to my point earlier, I'd rather pay Kreider $6 million than Strome $4.5 million.
    "Everyone says you should be a good loser. If youíre a good loser, youíre a loser."
    - John Tortorella


    "Never be a spectator of unfairness or stupidity. Seek out argument and disputation for their own sake; the grave will supply plenty of time for silence."
    - Christopher Hitchens

  7. #47
    HNIC BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    78,220
    Rep Power
    558
    Quote Originally Posted by Phil in Absentia View Post
    Also no disagreement. To that, I think Strome is a fine veteran player. But so too are better, clearer top-six players who I'd sooner invest in. Kreider, for example.

    Similar to my point earlier, I'd rather pay Kreider $6 million than Strome $4.5 million.
    I think the reality is that Strome gets more like $4 over 3 and Krieder $6.5+ over 6. So that's not apples to apples.

  8. #48
    The future is spelled K-A-K-K-O BSBH Legend
    Phil in Absentia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    87,545
    Rep Power
    476
    Even in that scenario, I'd rather give Kreider — a sure-fire top-six player, albeit a maddening one at times — the $6.5 milion than Strome $4 million. The likelihood of Kreider turning into an expensive fourth-liner is significantly less than the likelihood of Strome doing the same.
    "Everyone says you should be a good loser. If youíre a good loser, youíre a loser."
    - John Tortorella


    "Never be a spectator of unfairness or stupidity. Seek out argument and disputation for their own sake; the grave will supply plenty of time for silence."
    - Christopher Hitchens

  9. #49
    HNIC BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    78,220
    Rep Power
    558
    Quote Originally Posted by Phil in Absentia View Post
    Hang on, hang on -- shooting percentage is advanced?

    As to the eye test, I don't trust it implicitly. That's not the same as dismissing it. It's an entry point to me to then look at data (a fancy word for fact) to draw conclusions that can actually be reproduced (also called science).

    For example, if you put Kreider with Zuccarello and see that the two appear to have tremendous chemistry, you can then look at the data to see if it support your instincts. In that case, it would. Everything from traditional boxcars (goals, points) to more advanced models (WAR, GAR, xG) would prove positive. If you then took Kreider away from Zuccarello and played him with another player, you could then see less chemistry, also likely supported by data. You can then reproduce your original instinct — Kreider and Zucc together — and the results would likely prove positive again. Thus confirming your instincts (what your eyes told you) with stats.

    Or you can just call everyone who posts a number arrogant and pretend your sport will forever buck the data revolution. Good luck with that.


    Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk
    The issue exists on both sides. You can't solely look at data and say "Well he's shooting well above his career high, and that's not sustainable" without watching a game or doing more digging to find out why he's shooting at twice his rate. At least Future went through the process of cherry picking out the lucky goals. ;-)

    On his 31 Thoughts 'cast he told Freidman that Quinn told him to just go and make in impact on the game, even if it wasn't on the scoresheet. Maybe that led to taking some pressure off, making better shot selections, relax a little bit. There are plenty of middle 6 players who hover shooting 20%. Cody fuckin Eakin? It's not out of the realm of possibility that a guy who was drafted 5th overall improves on his career shooting percentage as a later bloomer.

    I'm not suggesting any of this is fact. I'm saying a lot more goes into it that some people think.

  10. #50
    HNIC BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    78,220
    Rep Power
    558
    Quote Originally Posted by Phil in Absentia View Post
    Even in that scenario, I'd rather give Kreider — a sure-fire top-six player, albeit a maddening one at times — the $6.5 milion than Strome $4 million. The likelihood of Kreider turning into an expensive fourth-liner is significantly less than the likelihood of Strome doing the same.
    But you're not paying them to be in the same role or do the dame job or anywhere near the amount of money, so it's moot.

  11. #51
    The future is spelled K-A-K-K-O BSBH Legend
    Phil in Absentia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    87,545
    Rep Power
    476
    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    The issue exists on both sides. You can't solely look at data and say "Well he's shooting well above his career high, and that's not sustainable" without watching a game or doing more digging to find out why he's shooting at twice his rate. At least Future went through the process of cherry picking out the lucky goals. ;-)

    On his 31 Thoughts 'cast he told Freidman that Quinn told him to just go and make in impact on the game, even if it wasn't on the scoresheet. Maybe that led to taking some pressure off, making better shot selections, relax a little bit. There are plenty of middle 6 players who hover shooting 20%. Cody fuckin Eakin? It's not out of the realm of possibility that a guy who was drafted 5th overall improves on his career shooting percentage as a later bloomer.

    I'm not suggesting any of this is fact. I'm saying a lot more goes into it that some people think.
    Sure, all of that is entirely possible, but it flies in the face of the historical record which largely suggests this is most likely an abberration. Some guys do thrive in that role. Strome could very well be one of them. I just don't like the risk. It's personal preference.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    But you're not paying them to be in the same role or do the dame job or anywhere near the amount of money, so it's moot.
    It's not. My argument is to pay impact players and not pay non-impact players. Top-line players get big bucks, top-six players get paid. In my world, third- and fourth-liners you ought to tread lightly with in both term and dollars. This is Strome. The same as it was Hagelin, or Dubinsky, or a slew of others.

    I don't want to pay Strome that kind of fringe second-line money for the same reason I wouldn't want to give it (and years) to the players above. I don't see enough reason.
    "Everyone says you should be a good loser. If youíre a good loser, youíre a loser."
    - John Tortorella


    "Never be a spectator of unfairness or stupidity. Seek out argument and disputation for their own sake; the grave will supply plenty of time for silence."
    - Christopher Hitchens

  12. #52
    Senior Member BSBH Prospect
    ThirtyONE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    11,986
    Rep Power
    138
    Quote Originally Posted by So Nashty View Post
    I am good with getting rid of both Vesey and Names if the return is decent.
    Return? You're hoping to give Namestnikov away. You might be able to get a 3rd for Vesey.
    GORTON 2020

  13. #53
    Senior Member Pee-Wee Division
    Sod16's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Minneapolis
    Posts
    794
    Rep Power
    23
    The return on Names, with one overpriced year on his contract, would be minimal, but there is no real reason to keep him around. Vesey would yield a slightly better return, but he has been in the NHL for three years and is no better than he was at the start. Trading them isn't a matter of getting something in return so much as clearing space to give others a shot.

  14. #54
    The future is spelled K-A-K-K-O BSBH Legend
    Phil in Absentia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    87,545
    Rep Power
    476
    Quote Originally Posted by ThirtyONE View Post
    Return? You're hoping to give Namestnikov away. You might be able to get a 3rd for Vesey.
    I think you've got that precisely backwards.
    "Everyone says you should be a good loser. If youíre a good loser, youíre a loser."
    - John Tortorella


    "Never be a spectator of unfairness or stupidity. Seek out argument and disputation for their own sake; the grave will supply plenty of time for silence."
    - Christopher Hitchens

  15. #55
    Senior Member Midget Division
    Kevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Central NJ
    Posts
    3,873
    Rep Power
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by ThirtyONE View Post
    Return? You're hoping to give Namestnikov away. You might be able to get a 3rd for Vesey.
    I think Names garners more attention than Vesey. He fits other teams needs more than a guy like Vesey who still, after 3 years, I'm not sure what he's supposed to be. Is he supposed to be a 2nd line winger that'll pot 20-25? Doubtful due to lack of consistency/ offensive acumen. Is he a 3rd line grinder that can chip in some goals? I think this is closer but he's still really not a great grinder/ recoverer. Too inconsistent in effort on a nightly basis to really fill this role either.
    I don't doubt that he's got some NHL talents it's just I still don't think he's got an identity.

    Sent from my [device_name] using http://Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile...ed by Tapatalk

  16. #56
    Let's talk about stickers Junior Division
    TwoMinutesForNothing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    North Jersey
    Posts
    6,799
    Rep Power
    74
    There isn't any place for either of them. Kreider isn't getting traded as much as people may want it. Besides the fact that he shouldn't be traded because he's really good, we're going to have probably five young Russians on our team and Kreider speaks Russian. That's a factor. Realistically he's probably our next captain.

    Panarin-Zib-Kakko
    Kreider-Chytl-Buch
    Lemieux-Howden-Kravtsov
    Fast-Andersson-Strome

    And damn it's really crazy to write Kakko in there without having to hope for a miracle to get him now.
    Last edited by TwoMinutesForNothing; 04-10-2019 at 03:55 AM.

  17. #57
    Rural Supremacist BSBH Prospect
    Dunny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    13,984
    Rep Power
    327
    I have to think they'll target a legit #2 C now, either in trade or via FA.

    Maybe they can start season like what's listed above, and see if that happens internally, but I think it's pretty low chance you get a 2C out of Chytil/Andersson/Howden.

    Should also be fun to watch Kakko sit every 4th game in the Quinn Bin.

  18. #58
    Moderator Pee-Wee Division
    RodrigueGabriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    DC Area
    Posts
    687
    Rep Power
    49
    Quote Originally Posted by Dunny View Post
    I have to think they'll target a legit #2 C now, either in trade or via FA.

    Maybe they can start season like what's listed above, and see if that happens internally, but I think it's pretty low chance you get a 2C out of Chytil/Andersson/Howden.

    Should also be fun to watch Kakko sit every 4th game in the Quinn Bin.
    Agree. All of a sudden makes Larry's mention of a Hayes encore sound a little less nutty.

    Sent from my [device_name] using http://Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile...ed by Tapatalk

  19. #59
    Senior Member Midget Division
    Kevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Central NJ
    Posts
    3,873
    Rep Power
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by TwoMinutesForNothing View Post
    There isn't any place for either of them. Kreider isn't getting traded as much as people may want it. Besides the fact that he shouldn't be traded because he's really good, we're going to have probably five young Russians on our team and Kreider speaks Russian. That's a factor. Realistically he's probably our next captain.

    Panarin-Zib-Kakko
    Kreider-Chytl-Buch
    Lemieux-Howden-Kravtsov
    Fast-Andersson-Strome

    And damn it's really crazy to write Kakko in there without having to hope for a miracle to get him now.
    I think we need to pull the reigns in just a little. I'm very excited about Kakko (or Hughes) but penciling either of them onto a top line seems a little premature. That's asking a hell of a lot of a 18 year old that's never consistently played against the best players in the world. Same goes with Kravtsov. I still think Names is in there based on a veteran presence while alleviating some of the pressure these super young kids will be feeling.

  20. #60
    HNIC BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    78,220
    Rep Power
    558
    There's no way in hell they break up Zib, Krieder and Buch right off the bat.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •