Kurtosis
GHG
God yes it does.
One of the top 10 D in the league for 1 million more for one of the bottom 5 D in the league last season. Ugh.
Yes, of course. He was literally one of the worst 5 defenseman in the ENTIRE league last season.
GDT: 2016 Free Agent Frenzy!
- Thread starter Blackhawkswincup
- Start date
Yes, of course. He was literally one of the worst 5 defenseman in the ENTIRE league last season.
I would also like to see the stats that said Seabrook was a bottom 5 defensman in the NHL...
You are right in the fact that Seabrook was terrible defensively last season. However, Karlsson was also pretty bad for most of the season defensively. And if we're talking about PP time covering up defensive deficiencies, Karlsson was #2 in the NHL in PP TOI per game... is Karlsson in your bottom 5?
You are right in the fact that Seabrook was terrible defensively last season. However, Karlsson was also pretty bad for most of the season defensively. And if we're talking about PP time covering up defensive deficiencies, Karlsson was #2 in the NHL in PP TOI per game... is Karlsson in your bottom 5?
TLEH
Pronounced T-Lay
Whether JD's embellishing Seabrook's futility is kind of besides the point. Seabs was really bad, he looked old and slow, and that contract makes me want to cry. Hedman is a billion times better at approximately the same cost.
b1e9a8r5s
Registered User
Mark Lazerus
@MarkLazerus
#Blackhawks sign forward Spencer Abbott. He's 29, had 14 goals in Sweden last year. Originally traded for him last year, for T.J. Brennan.
@MarkLazerus
#Blackhawks sign forward Spencer Abbott. He's 29, had 14 goals in Sweden last year. Originally traded for him last year, for T.J. Brennan.
clydesdale line
Connor BeJesus
- Jan 10, 2012
- 24,660
- 22,765
b1e9a8r5s
Registered User
I bet the league does something about the all signing bonus deals in the next CBA. That's the worst part of a lot of these deals (Lucic, Ladd, etc). They are buyout proof.
Kurtosis
GHG
The no state income tax is so overrated. The fact is that Bowman completely ****ed up Seabrook's contract. At least he is competent unlike Bickell.
Blue Liner
Registered User
It's definitely getting overblown and over mentioned.
Yzerman is doing a damn fine job, plain and simple.
Toews2Bickell
It's Showtime
- Nov 24, 2013
- 23,393
- 23,306
TLEH
Pronounced T-Lay
JaegerDice
The mark of my dignity shall scar thy DNA
- Dec 26, 2014
- 25,171
- 9,421
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?p=118991503#post118991503
And no, Karlsson is not in the bottom five. He was towards the top of the league in all the categories listed. Karlsson essentially carried his team. The team with him on the ice performed WORLDS better than the team without him on the ice. By contrast, the Blackhawks performed worse every time Seabrook touched the ice, and that's despite the easiest zone starts of his career.
sketch22
Registered User
- Jul 18, 2011
- 1,540
- 7
Not sure what Stan's plan is now. The way I see it the Hawks still need a 3/4C, a 1LW, and another bottom six winger. I'm not seeing a lot left in FA that make sense from both a financial and scheme perspective.
Whatever Stan does to try and fill the top 6 spot it will be either a long shot, a risk, or both. It isn't all that reassuring that the best available forwards that I am seeing are: Hudler, Vrbata, Tlusty, Versteeg, PAP, Gagner, Ben Smith, and Pirri.
So unless Stan is currently working on a trade (which seems unlikely given our cap situation this year and next), is absolutely convinced the Hawks are getting either Ship or Vesey (which seems unlikely to me), or has a lot more faith in the prospect pool than I do, I'm not sure what can get done at this point to even start mitigating some of the serious issues on this team.
Whatever Stan does to try and fill the top 6 spot it will be either a long shot, a risk, or both. It isn't all that reassuring that the best available forwards that I am seeing are: Hudler, Vrbata, Tlusty, Versteeg, PAP, Gagner, Ben Smith, and Pirri.
So unless Stan is currently working on a trade (which seems unlikely given our cap situation this year and next), is absolutely convinced the Hawks are getting either Ship or Vesey (which seems unlikely to me), or has a lot more faith in the prospect pool than I do, I'm not sure what can get done at this point to even start mitigating some of the serious issues on this team.
RememberTheRoar
“I’m not as worried about the 5-on-5 scoring.”
I think you're pretty much spot on with that, and there won't be a stud playing 1LW. I think he will look in-house for that option. So I think it's a competition between Schmaltz, Panik, Hinostroza, Motte, McNeill, and some dark horse candidate that emerges during camp.
Any Colour You Like
Regular bean eater
RememberTheRoar
“I’m not as worried about the 5-on-5 scoring.”
NHL GMs are literally insane.
$4.5M for Troy Brouwer? 7 years for Milan Lucic? Holy ****.
There were some bad contracts handed out today, but the "Stanley is the worst GM in the league" narrative probably won't change.
Hawkaholic
Registered User
Yes, Seabrook all by himself (not the other 4 guys on the ice) is to completely blame for everything.
JaegerDice
The mark of my dignity shall scar thy DNA
- Dec 26, 2014
- 25,171
- 9,421
WJSN
Cosmic
- Dec 22, 2013
- 2,876
- 267
Don't think I've ever seen anyone so obsessed with shot-attempt based analytics.
1) I'm not sure how you came up with the 1400 minute threshold. I looked up and there are only 21 defensemen that played 1400 minutes at 5on5 last season. Seabrook isn't even one of them. So you got your sample messed up. Even if he is included in your sample (he's not) and he is dead last in every category (he's not), you can't possibly come up with a conclusion that he's one of the worst dman in the league. You're only looking at a sample of ~20 heavily used defensemen 5on5.
2) With any "REL" stats, you're comparing the said player to his teammates. You can't use the REL numbers to draw a conclusion where someone ranks in the league. If you think Seabrook is one of the worst D in the league based on his CFREL/FFREL/SFREL, then you're doing it wrong.
3) Let me show you how unreliable these numbers can be. According to Corsi REL, Trevor Daley and Erik Gustafsson were the two best dman on the Hawks. In 2014-15, it's TvR and Rundblad. Does that make any sense to you? Yes those players were sheltered. But so are other possession beasts like Erik Karlsson (10.60 RelZSR) Victor Hedman (5.97), OEL (1.96) Ryan Suter (5.44). Context is important.
4) Here's another example
Player A: SFREL -3.28 CFREL -3.92 FFREL -2.75 ZSRREL -0.96
Player B: SFREL -1.66 CFREL -2.80 FFREL -1.39 ZSRREL -1.16
To me, these numbers look almost as bad as Seabrook's. Must be some terrible AHL-calbier dmen a la Seabrook, right? A is Roman Josi and B is Shea Weber. Unlike Seabrook who had a revolving door of rookies playing next to him, these two played with a stud all season long (each other, ~90% of the time).
5) Yeah, that's another important factor you continue to ignore. Q often paired Seabrooks with fringe NHL talent which conceivably had an adverse impact on his possession numbers. Keith had Hjalmarsson as his d-partner 71.3% of the time 5on5. Seabrook's most common d-partners were TvR(30.6%)/Gustafsson(21.5%)/Svedberg in that order. I'll go out on a limb and say his possession numbers would look better had he not had to babysit all those rookies.
6) These numbers are fun to look at but you can't take them too seriously, especially at the individual level. Same player playing on the same team puts up vastly different Corsi/Fenwick year to year. It's volatile. If a player consistently posts excellent (or bad) numbers over a long period time then maybe there's something there. In general, shot based analytics are a lot more useful in a more controlled setting - macro comparison between teams / comparing teammates etc.
tl;dr
I can make Patrick Kane look like an average player using fancy stats. Seabrook didn't have a good season possession-wise but he's nowhere near as bad you make him out to be. And no he's not one of the worst defensemen in the league.
JaegerDice
The mark of my dignity shall scar thy DNA
- Dec 26, 2014
- 25,171
- 9,421
1) You're right, that's a typo. It's 1200 minutes 5v5. My bad on that one. As far as the sample selection, 1200 minutes is roughly average for top 4 defensemen. If you want me to compare Seabrook to bottom pairing Dmen making 1 million a year and playing 10 minutes or less a night to make him look better by comparison I can, but that's hardly a convincing argument on his behalf.
And yes, I prefer shot-attempt data, because controlling the puck and directing shot attempts at the net, and suppressing the other team's ability to do so, is pretty much all a player can actively control. Sh%, Sv%, it's all variant and luck-influenced. That combined with the sheer number of data points compared to goals for/against make it the preferable measure of performance.
2) I provided both raw stats and REL stats. Both his raw stats and rel stats were poor. I'm aware REL is comparing him to his teammates, or rather to the team average when he is not on the ice. And the team performed better when he was not on the ice. That's not typically what you want from a 6.8 million dollar defensemen. Ideally, you'd prefer the team perform better when he is on the ice, or at least par.
3) Obviously context is important, which is why I pointed out that Seabrook's possession woes were coming despite the easiest OZS%Rel of his career. The problem with comparing Seabrook to sheltered 3rd liners is 1) TOI and 2) salary. If Seabrook is making the same money as the Blackhawks players you mentioned, and playing as few minutes, then there's no issue.
4) All the fringe NHL talent Seabrook was paired with performed better away from him than with him. He was the anchor on his pairings, not his partners.
5) Actually no, year to year, corsi and fenwick is actually the most stable and repeatable stat, short of systems overhaul from new coaching. Goal based stats (for and against) on the other hand, are incredibly volatile, thanks to the variance inherent to goal scoring.
At the end of the day, whether you want to go by eye-test or statistics, Brent Seabrook was terrible. If you want to split hairs about just how bad he was relative to his peers, fine. I'm pretty confident saying he was among the worst defenders in the league last year, and his new contract makes him one of the most overpaid players in the league by a longshot.
And yes, I prefer shot-attempt data, because controlling the puck and directing shot attempts at the net, and suppressing the other team's ability to do so, is pretty much all a player can actively control. Sh%, Sv%, it's all variant and luck-influenced. That combined with the sheer number of data points compared to goals for/against make it the preferable measure of performance.
2) I provided both raw stats and REL stats. Both his raw stats and rel stats were poor. I'm aware REL is comparing him to his teammates, or rather to the team average when he is not on the ice. And the team performed better when he was not on the ice. That's not typically what you want from a 6.8 million dollar defensemen. Ideally, you'd prefer the team perform better when he is on the ice, or at least par.
3) Obviously context is important, which is why I pointed out that Seabrook's possession woes were coming despite the easiest OZS%Rel of his career. The problem with comparing Seabrook to sheltered 3rd liners is 1) TOI and 2) salary. If Seabrook is making the same money as the Blackhawks players you mentioned, and playing as few minutes, then there's no issue.
4) All the fringe NHL talent Seabrook was paired with performed better away from him than with him. He was the anchor on his pairings, not his partners.
5) Actually no, year to year, corsi and fenwick is actually the most stable and repeatable stat, short of systems overhaul from new coaching. Goal based stats (for and against) on the other hand, are incredibly volatile, thanks to the variance inherent to goal scoring.
At the end of the day, whether you want to go by eye-test or statistics, Brent Seabrook was terrible. If you want to split hairs about just how bad he was relative to his peers, fine. I'm pretty confident saying he was among the worst defenders in the league last year, and his new contract makes him one of the most overpaid players in the league by a longshot.
WJSN
Cosmic
- Dec 22, 2013
- 2,876
- 267
I guess we agree to disagree then 
fwiw my point is not that goal-based stats > fancy stats, rather it's dangerous to draw a conclusion from purely based on corsi/fenwick as you often do (Seabrook, Tikhonov, Daley among others). Especially on a 1 season worth of data.
fwiw my point is not that goal-based stats > fancy stats, rather it's dangerous to draw a conclusion from purely based on corsi/fenwick as you often do (Seabrook, Tikhonov, Daley among others). Especially on a 1 season worth of data.
JaegerDice
The mark of my dignity shall scar thy DNA
- Dec 26, 2014
- 25,171
- 9,421
TLEH
Pronounced T-Lay
Canucks signed the 2D from Forslings SHL team lol. He won't be anything but bet u they found him by watching the guy they traded away light it up for Linkoping
Ad
Upcoming events
-
TO ADVANCE SEMIFINAL - Borussia Dortmund @ Paris Saint-Germain - 2nd leg. 1st leg result: Borussia Dortmund1-0Wagers: 1Staked: $1,000.00Event closes- Updated:
-
2024 NHL Draft Lottery Team that wins #1 pick - PICK ONLY ONE TEAMWagers: 18Staked: $20,242.00Event closes- Updated:
-
Stanley Cup 2024 Stanley Cup Champion - ONLY BET ONE TEAMWagers: 10Staked: $17,327.00Event closes- Updated:
-
Game 2 Carolina Hurricanes @ NY Rangers - NYR leads 1-0Wagers: 4Staked: $2,309.00Event closes
- Updated:
-