article: NHL Offseason by the Numbers: Which Teams Have Improved the Most (and Least)?

[josh]

Blais played up the lineup in St.Louis. Can't we expect the same from Goodrow? These are players that are bottom six with potential to move up with the right linemates. I think Drury has made GREAT moves and I think this team undoubtedly adds wins in the W column.

 

He shouldn’t be in the top 6. Unfair to expect that from him. He has a limited skill set.

 

Blais, as well as Hunt, are guys that may be able to move up in a complimentary role. I’d put Barron in that bucket as well.

[fletch]

From a talent perspective, I have to agree with the article's premise. We have increased our toughness, and the hope is that with this infusion of toughness/veteran presence, a new coach/structure, that this will translate to more wins. But if you look at what the individuals are expected to produce on the ice, none of the additions will provide a substantial boost to offensive productivity.

 

This premise is assuming that the only thing that matters when determining wins and losses is individual player stats... And, as we've seen, you can have three superstars put up a billion points and the team still stinks, so obviously there's more to it.

 

I agree there is much more to a team's success than individual stats. My point simply is that the model is assessing the value of individual players from a production perspective. It can't measure intangibles things like willingness to clear the front of the net, compete in the corners, contributions to a cohesive line. The Rangers can be a better team next year. But with the loss of Buch you are expecting the young players to be more productive - our off-season moves haven't bolstered the top two lines but instead are focused on the bottom two lines. Generally that is a strategy for teams that are proven playoff commodities looking to take the next step and compete for a Cup. Frankly, I don't think we have the firepower in our lineup to be a serious contender, so I still view us as a rebuilding project trying to become a more serious playoff contender.

[Phil]

And then you have....

 

Boston: Boston struggled relative to expectations to start the season but eventually ended up almost exactly where it was expected to be. The Bruins were projected for 71 points and finished with 73, though in a tough division that was only enough for the third seed.

 

Jets: When it comes to such an average team, opinions don’t have to be so extreme. I was probably more right than wrong about the Jets this year and they only ended up two points higher than their preseason projection of 61 points. That’s pretty damn close.

 

Toronto: The model has nothing in the way of measuring intangibles or killer instinct come playoff time — something the Leafs seemed to have fixed with all their moves to bring in grizzled veterans — so that will always be a blind spot. I’ve never been one to put too much stock into those things, but it’s hard not to after Toronto’s latest collapse. It inspired me to start working on changes to next year’s model.

 

Nashville: They were somewhere from good to great, salvaging what looked like a lost season to make the playoffs. In fourth. With 64 points. Exactly as expected.

 

Rangers: The Rangers were projected for 59.9 points and ended up with 60. Right on the money … except it’s worth noting that projection changed to about 61.6 points once lineups were finalized. Either way, extremely close. There were a few who believed the model underrated him (Zibanejad) after his red hot finish to the 2019-20 season, but it turned out to be pretty accurate in forecasting regression. He came on strong after a sluggish start, but still finished well below his pace from the previous season. Also, it’s worth noting the Adam Fox love started really early, with the model earmarking him as elite before the season started. His projected 2.4 wins was the 10th highest at the time so the numbers were clearly on to something there.

 

Anyone who can read can cherrypick statements that support their stances; at least give the guy some credit for acknowledging the weaknesses in his model, working to fix them, and holding himself accountable to constantly improving it over the past five years. I think getting the standings for a chaotic as fuck sport like hockey within 7.4 points average error is an exceptional feat.

 

And I think it's a waste of time, because too few accept it as a flawed and imperfect model while too many treat it like gospel. Again, blue bar good, red bar bad. Every fucking signing, regardless of role, gets put through the same narrative, as though we're expected to believe the goal of every hockey player is to score. It isn't. Some guys go their entire careers literally preventing the other team from scoring. And guess what? They're extremely valuable. They're often the unsung (or sung) heroes of the playoffs.

 

Some guys are there simply to eat minutes. There's value in that, too. For years, some guys were there just to fight, and there was value in that. That value has diminished relative to the speed and skill level of the game today, but guess what? Hockey is still violent. Fear is still real, even if you can't plot it relative to all your peers.

[Pete]

And I think it's a waste of time, because too few accept it as a flawed and imperfect model while too many treat it like gospel. Again, blue bar good, red bar bad. Every fucking signing, regardless of role, gets put through the same narrative, as though we're expected to believe the goal of every hockey player is to score. It isn't. Some guys go their entire careers literally preventing the other team from scoring. And guess what? They're extremely valuable. They're often the unsung (or sung) heroes of the playoffs.

 

Some guys are there simply to eat minutes. There's value in that, too. For years, some guys were there just to fight, and there was value in that. That value has diminished relative to the speed and skill level of the game today, but guess what? Hockey is still violent. Fear is still real, even if you can't plot it relative to all your peers.

 

I left this place for a year because every signing was accompanied by a chart and judged based on that chart...Shot supression! FENWICK CLOSE!

 

Glad y'all grew out of it, and I've grown to accept it for where it's valuable instead of completely dismissing it.

 

Also, the people presenting the stats (not here, but elsewhere) are arrogant, know it all, douchebags. People forget Adam Herman used to post here when he was starting out and got ran out of town for trying to argue that based on QualComp and zone starts (alone, no other stats), Brandon Dubinsky was a top 5 center in the NHL.

[siddious]

I left this place for a year because every signing was accompanied by a chart and judged based on that chart...Shot supression! FENWICK CLOSE!

 

Glad y'all grew out of it, and I've grown to accept it for where it's valuable instead of completely dismissing it.

 

Also, the people presenting the stats (not here, but elsewhere) are arrogant, know it all, douchebags. People forget Adam Herman used to post here when he was starting out and got ran out of town for trying to argue that based on QualComp and zone starts (alone, no other stats), Brandon Dubinsky was a top 5 center in the NHL.

 

LMFAO!!

 

I loved Dubi I probably agreed with him

[Pete]

LMFAO!!

 

I loved Dubi I probably agreed with him

Oh wait, lemme walk that back... He was using QualComp and Quality of Linemates, when Dubi played with Cally.

 

Then, in another thread, argued that Cally was a legitimate top 6 winger on a good team.

 

How can Dubi be top 5 because he plays against toughest lines and he has shit linemates, and Cally also be a top wing?

[Flynn]

Today in The Athletic they had the current NHL power rankings per Luszczyszyn and Sean Gentille... Drum roll...........

 

They have the Rangers at 13th in the power rankings. My guy Dom seems to talk out both sides of his mouth a bit.

[LindG1000]

And I think it's a waste of time, because too few accept it as a flawed and imperfect model while too many treat it like gospel. Again, blue bar good, red bar bad. Every fucking signing, regardless of role, gets put through the same narrative, as though we're expected to believe the goal of every hockey player is to score. It isn't. Some guys go their entire careers literally preventing the other team from scoring. And guess what? They're extremely valuable. They're often the unsung (or sung) heroes of the playoffs.

 

Some guys are there simply to eat minutes. There's value in that, too. For years, some guys were there just to fight, and there was value in that. That value has diminished relative to the speed and skill level of the game today, but guess what? Hockey is still violent. Fear is still real, even if you can't plot it relative to all your peers.

 

It's why I'm so curious to see how Dom evolves his model to account for that. It's really hard to quantify the bottom 6 roleplayers, and it's probably part of the reason why you'll see the Rangers projected by the same folks dragging these signings to make the playoffs.

[Phil]

I left this place for a year because every signing was accompanied by a chart and judged based on that chart...Shot supression! FENWICK CLOSE!

 

Glad y'all grew out of it, and I've grown to accept it for where it's valuable instead of completely dismissing it.

 

Also, the people presenting the stats (not here, but elsewhere) are arrogant, know it all, douchebags. People forget Adam Herman used to post here when he was starting out and got ran out of town for trying to argue that based on QualComp and zone starts (alone, no other stats), Brandon Dubinsky was a top 5 center in the NHL.

 

It's not even so much the idea of grew out of, but grew past. I can still see a chart, read through, and go "yeah, that makes sense" because it tracks with what my eyes tell me, or be pleasantly surprised by how good (or bad) a player might appear, again, based on what my eyes tell me.

 

The problem with these things is they're taken as gospel and treated as unflappable. The methods are admittedly flawed, and use a narrow approach to "quantifying" the value of a player. They effectively judge everyone by the role of "scorer," so if you don't score, you literally don't score well on the test. The problem is, we all know there's more than one role on Cup-winning teams, and often, the most talented players aren't necessarily the most important when the games matter most. The Lightning just won a second Cup playing their "third" line nearly 20 minutes a night.

 

Moreover, it's easy to "game" this system because it so transparently favors a very specific type of player. Tomas Tatar, for example, is usually blue-as-fuck, but in reality, is a regular season even strength warrior who's game falls apart completely in the playoffs when games get physical and tight. So what the fuck use is he, really?

[Ozzy]

It's not even so much the idea of grew out of, but grew past. I can still see a chart, read through, and go "yeah, that makes sense" because it tracks with what my eyes tell me, or be pleasantly surprised by how good (or bad) a player might appear, again, based on what my eyes tell me.

 

The problem with these things is they're taken as gospel and treated as unflappable. The methods are admittedly flawed, and use a narrow approach to "quantifying" the value of a player. They effectively judge everyone by the role of "scorer," so if you don't score, you literally don't score well on the test. The problem is, we all know there's more than one role on Cup-winning teams, and often, the most talented players aren't necessarily the most important when the games matter most. The Lightning just won a second Cup playing their "third" line nearly 20 minutes a night.

 

Moreover, it's easy to "game" this system because it so transparently favors a very specific type of player. Tomas Tatar, for example, is usually blue-as-fuck, but in reality, is a regular season even strength warrior who's game falls apart completely in the playoffs when games get physical and tight. So what the fuck use is he, really?

 

He's going to be a $4.5 million traffic cone when we visit the Devils!! :rofl:

[LindG1000]

It's not even so much the idea of grew out of, but grew past. I can still see a chart, read through, and go "yeah, that makes sense" because it tracks with what my eyes tell me, or be pleasantly surprised by how good (or bad) a player might appear, again, based on what my eyes tell me.

 

The problem with these things is they're taken as gospel and treated as unflappable. The methods are admittedly flawed, and use a narrow approach to "quantifying" the value of a player. They effectively judge everyone by the role of "scorer," so if you don't score, you literally don't score well on the test. The problem is, we all know there's more than one role on Cup-winning teams, and often, the most talented players aren't necessarily the most important when the games matter most. The Lightning just won a second Cup playing their "third" line nearly 20 minutes a night.

 

Moreover, it's easy to "game" this system because it so transparently favors a very specific type of player. Tomas Tatar, for example, is usually blue-as-fuck, but in reality, is a regular season even strength warrior who's game falls apart completely in the playoffs when games get physical and tight. So what the fuck use is he, really?

 

I don't think that fully tracks. There's a reason why guys like Kakko, Eriksson Ek, Danault, Nichuskin, Hjarlmarsson, and a few others are "analytics darlings". Sure as shit ain't because of scoring.

[Phil]

I don't think that fully tracks. There's a reason why guys like Kakko, Eriksson Ek, Danault, Nichuskin, Hjarlmarsson, and a few others are "analytics darlings". Sure as shit ain't because of scoring.

 

Sorry, you're right. They do account for some defensive metrics — namely xGA — to drive value on the "other side "of the puck. But the model still has no way to capture physical play of any stripe in any meaningful way, which is why it's constantly used as "proof" that physical players are shit.

[The Dude]

Well taken points. What is needed is a tough forward with some skill to play on Zib's line, not Ryan Reeves to end up -2 for the night with a fight against the other team's bottom six. We need someone to do what Vic Hadfield did for Ratelle and Gilbert (who will now be Zib and LaF).

 

I had the biggest boner when it was mentioned Tkachuk wanted out of Calgary. That was months ago and that gained zero traction.

 

I think the assumption that the Goodrows and Blais types will likely find their way into the top 6. Would make sense with Goodrow since he can take the faceoff and jump back to what ever his role is on wing. Probably see him with Panarin who seems to want lunchpail type on his opposite wing. It's also totally something I expect from Gallant. It also justifies that shitty contract.

 

BUT, This pushes Kravstov or Kakko down to a third line role. Which I'm torn on, depending on what role Gallant gives that line. Are we going with 3 potential scoring lines and chopped meat for the 4th line? Is there going to be a shut down line?

 

Lots of potential different looks as far as lineups go. Maybe this varies against certain teams..

[skjeitheday]

Goorow and Blais have no chance being in the top 6. Just look at their career offensive production. Kakko is on the top 2 lines this year. As far as Kravtsov. I think he's gone in a deal for either Eichel or Dvorak.

[josh]

Blais and Hunt can move up the lineup and complement a skilled pair of linemates. I don’t know if you’d want to list either as a long term top 6 guy, but can certainly play a Fast-like role.

[Phil]

Goorow and Blais have no chance being in the top 6. Just look at their career offensive production. Kakko is on the top 2 lines this year. As far as Kravtsov. I think he's gone in a deal for either Eichel or Dvorak.

 

Blais was on the Blues' top line in the playoffs the year they won the Cup. Me thinks you're in for a rude awakening when he's on the right side of Panarin and Strome for good chunks of this season.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[RangersIn7]

Blais was on the Blues' top line in the playoffs the year they won the Cup. Me thinks you're in for a rude awakening when he's on the right side of Panarin and Strome for good chunks of this season.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

I’m not really sure where that’s coming from, because if you look at his game logs for that entire playoff run, he only played in 15 games that postseason, averaging 11:58 per game, and only topped 14 minutes in 3 of those games.

 

You wanna play Goodrow and Blais, both of whom I like, I’m your top-6 here and there, ok.

 

But if those guys are top-6 forwards frequently, me no likey.

[Phil]

It's coming from the fact he played with Perron and O'Reilly, LOL.

 

He's not only taken a spot on left wing with David Perron and Ryan O'Reilly, but it's hard to envision anyone taking it from Blais any time soon, if at all.

 

"He's played real well," Blues coach Craig Berube said of Blais, who is tied with O'Reilly with three points (two goals, one assist). "He's come into camp and he's done exactly what we've asked him to do in the summertime. He looks in great shape, he's strong and he's playing his game.

 

"He's a confident player even going back to the days in Chicago when I had him, he was a real confident player then too. He's got great puck skills and he plays a hard game. He's physical. He's an effective player for us."

 

Blais was inserted into Game 6 of the second round of the playoffs against Dallas last season, and he stepped into that role with Perron and O'Reilly and scored a goal scorer's goal. It was his forecheck that helped set up O'Reilly's goal in Game 7 of the Stanley Cup Final against Boston, and not being complacent as a young player winning it all, it was a summer of searching for ways to get better and solidify a spot on the team for the first time in his young career, Blais got back to work, came into camp and has made his name known.

 

Blais wanted to focus more on his offense, and he's balancing it quite nicely with a physical role.

 

"After playoff last year, they told me they were really happy with my game," Blais, who has 12 hits in two games, said of the Blues' coaching staff. "They wanted me to bring that again this year. I wanted to bring more offense in my game. I have the chance to play with two real good players, 'Perry' and 'O'Ry', and I'm just trying to make the most of it. It's been working good."

 

Blais has been used to people working hard getting him pucks in the past. Now he's working hard on retrieving pucks for not only his linemates but himself as well.

 

https://www.ksdk.com/article/sports/nhl/blues/sammy-blais-blues-offense-top-line/63-97a544d5-f8dd-4832-89fc-c696f08b7c43

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[RangersIn7]

It's coming from the fact he played with Perron and O'Reilly, LOL.

 

 

 

 

 

https://www.ksdk.com/article/sports/nhl/blues/sammy-blais-blues-offense-top-line/63-97a544d5-f8dd-4832-89fc-c696f08b7c43

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

Yes he did. But in spots. Not full-time. His ice time says otherwise

[BrooksBurner]

I like the idea of getting Blais, but there's a reason the Blues traded him despite him getting time with ROR in the Stanley Cup. If they felt he was that instrumental, he would have gotten more ice time and they wouldn't have traded him. Something about him they grew tired of...or they just love Buch that much. Could be that too...Buch was arguably our 2nd best forward last season on a team with some pretty good ones.

 

I like the fact Blais doesn't have a lot of games under his belt. He's got a good shot. He needs a bit more time. Put me down for him being a late bloomer and this is going to be a good get.

[Phil]

Yes he did. But in spots. Not full-time. His ice time says otherwise

 

I know -- scroll back. I said "for chunks" this season.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[The Dude]

Goorow and Blais have no chance being in the top 6. Just look at their career offensive production. Kakko is on the top 2 lines this year. As far as Kravtsov. I think he's gone in a deal for either Eichel or Dvorak.

 

I can see many scenarios where a grit guy is moved up into the top 6. People are still crying at the loss of Fast, as the guy that went into the corners for Panarin. Kakko could be that guy and more, yet Panarin didn't want him on his line. With the contract Goodrow got, I can see them trying him in many different spots. If he truly is a 15 goal guy, I'd say he fits much like Fast. Maybe better. I'd rather Kakko there, but it seems like Panarin isn't a fan. Not sure why that whole thing didn't bother more people last season.

 

In the end, I the see Kravtsov there. There won't be an Eichel deal.

[Long live the King]

I can see many scenarios where a grit guy is moved up into the top 6. People are still crying at the loss of Fast, as the guy that went into the corners for Panarin. Kakko could be that guy and more, yet Panarin didn't want him on his line. With the contract Goodrow got, I can see them trying him in many different spots. If he truly is a 15 goal guy, I'd say he fits much like Fast. Maybe better. I'd rather Kakko there, but it seems like Panarin isn't a fan. Not sure why that whole thing didn't bother more people last season.

 

In the end, I the see Kravtsov there. There won't be an Eichel deal.

 

Did you not watch Kakko last season? Kakko isn't going into the corners to recover the puck and give it to Panarin. Kakko is holding onto the puck and waiting until either the D breaks down or someone gets open for a shot. Panarin doesn’t like playing with Kakko because Panarin's game is also having the puck on his stick and being the decision maker in the O zone. This is why it didn't bother more people. It makes perfect sense to have them on different lines.

 

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[The Dude]

It's coming from the fact he played with Perron and O'Reilly, LOL.

 

 

 

 

 

https://www.ksdk.com/article/sports/nhl/blues/sammy-blais-blues-offense-top-line/63-97a544d5-f8dd-4832-89fc-c696f08b7c43

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

Mehhh. I'm not going to act like I followed that cup run very closely, but it reads like he was put in that spot in a game and it worked. Coaches do stuff like that for a different look in the playoffs. Not like he kept the job. Like Rangersin7 noted. game logs don't show this long stretch of games. These quotes also seem more like Berube praising a guy he had coached previously as a youngster. Citing that he got a few shifts or a game or 2 on a top line, shouldn't sway anyone to think the guy is a legit option for the top lines for long. You did day chunks of games though, so we agree. It's likely to happen. Yet, it's likely that most every lower linevwing gets the same opportunity. Even Reaves.

 

I mean, if he's this 1st liner, why did they deal him, and why is everyone saying the Rangers sold low on Buchnevich?

 

I'm sure he's a nice 3rd or 4th line player, but automatically thinking he's definitely capable of staying in any top 6 role is a reach IMO.

 

Gallant will likely make use of him. He used Stefan Matteau for a bit with Vegas. I think we see guys like this come and go under Gallant until he finds his guys. Looking at old Vegas rosters, you'll find a wide variety types of players he used. Not sure if he gets credit for that or their GM.

[The Dude]

Did you not watch Kakko last season? Kakko isn't going into the corners to recover the puck and give it to Panarin. Kakko is holding onto the puck and waiting until either the D breaks down or someone gets open for a shot. Panarin doesn’t like playing with Kakko because Panarin's game is also having the puck on his stick and being the decision maker in the O zone. This is why it didn't bother more people. It makes perfect sense to have them on different lines.

 

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

 

You mean his rookie season. This past season they transformed him into a guy that doesn't carry the puck as much and goes into the corners and along the boards. That's how he's deemed "a better player" now.. Isn't it?