Post-Game Talk: Bo Horvat represents Vancouver at the All-Star Game (And he scores!)

[PG Canuck]

Replacement level

 

[CanaFan]

https://www.nhl.com/video/t-283337240/c-49094403

Ya, Edler chased behind the net. At least he was putting in an effort.

Laugh about "replacement level" all you want, that's way short of the kind of effort that is expected defensively in the NHL… or beer league… or peewee.

Uh, you see worse all the time. That's how goals get scored. Wasn't even so much a weak play by Horvat as it was Baertschi (outmuscled by his man) and Edler (drifted too much to Tryamkin's side).

Relax.

 

[geebaan]

At some point I would like to have a reasoned, civil discussion about Horvat's consistently poor possession metrics. What thread should that be in?

what should we do about it?

 

[Bleach Clean]

https://www.nhl.com/video/t-283337240/c-49094403

Ya, Edler chased behind the net. At least he was putting in an effort.

Laugh about "replacement level" all you want, that's way short of the kind of effort that is expected defensively in the NHL… or beer league… or peewee.

I was thinking about that play and I was hoping you would bring it up... and you didn't disappoint.

First, you acknowledged that Edler chased behind the net --> Effort doesn't absolve a misread. He made the mistake that was compounded by Tryamkin's 2nd misread. And then Baertschi just continues gliding all the way through... Which _then_, after three players are caught chasing one player, leaves Horvat to decide to close off either the shooter or Granlund at the side of the net.

...And you come away with a complaint about Horvat's effort there? He was the only player left in a position to defend the play after three teammates lost their minds. Is this how you actually judge defense? Really?

 

[Rotting Corpse*]

what should we do about it?

Do about what? That we aren't capable of such a discussion?

 

[geebaan]

Do about what? That we aren't capable of such a discussion?

No, what should we do about his poor possession metrics?

 

[The Iron Goalie]

No, what should we do about his poor possession metrics?

Nothing?

 

[Samzilla]

dude needs a better number. 53 is one of the worst numbers in the alphabet.

he wears it in memory of a friend who passed away (was a goalie who wore 35)

 

[Reverend Mayhem]

How is 53 a weird number? It works for him. That's his number. Jeez.

 

[opendoor]

For all the talk of possession numbers, shot location is worth considering. This is from almost a month ago, but the discrepancy in the offensive zone when he's on the ice vs when he's off is pretty stark:

 

[Shareefruck]

"53 is one of the worst numbers in the alphabet."

hmm..

 

[Thad Castle]

"53 is one of the worst numbers in the alphabet."

hmm..

abcdefghijklmno53qrstuvwxyz

 

[PG Canuck]

dude needs a better number. 53 is one of the worst numbers in the alphabet.

Horvat wears that number for a reason, and a really good reason. This just highlights why Bo Horvat is such a great person, and why he will be a great leader for the Canucks one day.

COLUMBUS — Bo Horvat never actually met Ian Jenkins, but every time he pulls on his No. 53 jersey he honours the player who was to be his teammate with the London Knights.

Horvat and Jenkins were both selected by the Knights in the Ontario Hockey League draft in May of 2011. A few days later, Jenkins, then 15, died when he fell out of a pickup truck being driven by a friend near his Michigan home.

Jenkins, a goalie, wore No. 35. Horvat decided he would flip those numbers around and wear No. 53 to honour Jenkins.

“We were going to be teammates and I was probably going to meet him a couple of days after it happened at a camp we were supposed to attend,” Horvat said Friday before the Canucks met the Columbus Blue Jackets. “I didn’t know him personally. I just remember playing against him in a couple of tournaments. He was a great goaltender and I know a bunch of guys who did know him and he was a great kid.”

http://www.vancouversun.com/sports/Canuck+Horvat+purpose+wearing/10424227/story.html

 

[Scurr]

Uh, you see worse all the time. That's how goals get scored. Wasn't even so much a weak play by Horvat as it was Baertschi (outmuscled by his man) and Edler (drifted too much to Tryamkin's side).

Relax.

There were multiple mistakes on the play, none as egregious as leaving a player wide open in front of your net while you stand flat footed checking nobody. At best it was a complete brain fart, at worst a pathetic lack of effort. Both are inexcusable in a 1-1 hockey game that meant so much to the team.

You do see this kind of play a handful of times during an NHL game, almost exclusively when players are dog tired. That doesn't apply here. It's not a one off, either, Horvat consistently comes up short in defensive effort.

 

[CanaFan]

There were multiple mistakes on the play, none as egregious as leaving a player wide open in front of your net while you stand flat footed checking nobody. At best it was a complete brain fart, at worst a pathetic lack of effort. Both are inexcusable in a 1-1 hockey game that meant so much to the team.

You do see this kind of play a handful of times during an NHL game, almost exclusively when players are dog tired. That doesn't apply here. It's not a one off, either, Horvat consistently comes up short in defensive effort.

Horvat was within stick reach of his man. Edler was 15 feet away from where he should have been covering.

Most egregious my ass.

 

[Scurr]

For all the talk of possession numbers, shot location is worth considering. This is from almost a month ago, but the discrepancy in the offensive zone when he's on the ice vs when he's off is pretty stark:

All what talk? I haven't seen any of the people like yourself that have been using possession numbers consistently for years address it in any meaningful way. Did I miss it?

 

[Scurr]

Horvat was within stick reach of his man. Edler was 15 feet away from where he should have been covering.

Most egregious my ass.

Edler was trying to check somebody. Horvat was a complete passenger on the play.

 

[Bleach Clean]

There were multiple mistakes on the play, none as egregious as leaving a player wide open in front of your net while you stand flat footed checking nobody. At best it was a complete brain fart, at worst a pathetic lack of effort. Both are inexcusable in a 1-1 hockey game that meant so much to the team.

You do see this kind of play a handful of times during an NHL game, almost exclusively when players are dog tired. That doesn't apply here. It's not a one off, either, Horvat consistently comes up short in defensive effort.

Effort does not trump the 'Read'. His read was the best of the 4 players involved in that play. He even got to the shooter while the other three got caught chasing the wrong player. Then, he had to choose his target. And _still_ he got to the shooter in time so as to force a strong side (left) shot...??

The other three made worse mistakes. I don't even know how you can debate this? What type of game are you watching? Explain how the misreads by Edler, Tryamkin and Baertschi are less significant than Horvat's read on that play? Like, what are you watching? How does anyone come away from that play thinking Horvat is the _most_ guilty party? Because he was the only one left in position?

All what talk? I haven't seen any of the people like yourself that have been using possession numbers consistently for years address it in any meaningful way. Did I miss it?

Yes, you did "miss it". Or, chose to ignore it. Multiple posters have broken down his possession metrics for your benefit. Give those posts a read.

 

[CanaFan]

Edler was trying to check somebody. Horvat was a complete passenger on the play.

Edler doesn't check anybody. He drifts around, fishes for the puck a bit, then his man (Granlund) scores from the part of the ice Edler should have been in.

Bo does get caught watching (he should have been 3-4 feet closer) but ultimately his man only gets off a weak shot from the puck side of the ice which Miller stops easily. The goal happens cause Edler isn't where he should be more than Horvat's lack of "effort".

 

[Scurr]

Edler doesn't check anybody. He drifts around, fishes for the puck a bit, then his man (Granlund) scores from the part of the ice Edler should have been in.

Bo does get caught watching (he should have been 3-4 feet closer) but ultimately his man only gets off a weak shot from the puck side of the ice which Miller stops easily. The goal happens cause Edler isn't where he should be more than Horvat's lack of "effort".

If Horvat checks his man it's nearly impossible for Granlund to get that puck. Horvat leaves the most dangerous guy on the ice, his guy, completely unchecked. Not because he made a poor read but because he wasn't actively trying to check anyone. It's completely inexcusable.

 

[opendoor]

All what talk? I haven't seen any of the people like yourself that have been using possession numbers consistently for years address it in any meaningful way. Did I miss it?

There's not a lot to say. His Corsi is mediocre and his Fenwick is right around the team average, but he's the #1 C on the team in SCF%, GF%, and points despite starting in his own end 55% of the time. If you adjust for zone starts, his Corsi is indistinguishable from Henrik and Sutter. His possession numbers have also improved every year that he's been in the league.

 

[Rotting Corpse*]

There's not a lot to say. His Corsi is mediocre and his Fenwick is right around the team average, but he's the #1 C on the team in SCF%, GF%, and points despite starting in his own end 55% of the time. If you adjust for zone starts, his Corsi is indistinguishable from Henrik and Sutter. His possession numbers have also improved every year that he's been in the league.

That's not quite true.

He and Baertschi have had the worst CF%relTM on the team both this season and last season.

It's an interesting thing and I'd like to better understand why that is.

Edit: http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rat...amid=29&type=corsi&sort=PCTRelTM&sortdir=DESC

I'm a huge fan of Horvat but would really like to have a reasoned discussion about his consistenly poor performance as measured by Corsi relative to his teammates beyond "Cause advanced stats are dumb lol math."

 

[CanaFan]

If Horvat checks his man it's nearly impossible for Granlund to get that puck. Horvat leaves the most dangerous guy on the ice, his guy, completely unchecked. Not because he made a poor read but because he wasn't actively trying to check anyone. It's completely inexcusable.

There are "ifs" all over the ice. IF Baertschi wins the puck battle, IF Horvat clamps down on his mans stick, IF Edler stays in front of the net and picks up Granlund drifting in. Horvat has almost no chance to prevent his man from getting that pass, given the movement on the ice and the direct line between Dumba and Zucker. Horvat could have been closer and therefore made it a *worse* shot (which maybe allows Miller to absorb it better) but it's highly unlikely Zucker gets no shot off at all. The play is too dynamic and Horvat can't possibly anticipate where the play is going to occur. He's close enough to keep it from being a great scoring chance, which is why it is more on Edler for being in poor position when the rebound occurs.

 

[Scurr]

There are "ifs" all over the ice. IF Baertschi wins the puck battle, IF Horvat clamps down on his mans stick, IF Edler stays in front of the net and picks up Granlund drifting in. Horvat has almost no chance to prevent his man from getting that pass, given the movement on the ice and the direct line between Dumba and Zucker. Horvat could have been closer and therefore made it a *worse* shot (which maybe allows Miller to absorb it better) but it's highly unlikely Zucker gets no shot off at all. The play is too dynamic and Horvat can't possibly anticipate where the play is going to occur. He's close enough to keep it from being a great scoring chance, which is why it is more on Edler for being in poor position when the rebound occurs.

He doesn't have to anticipate anything, there's one guy on the ice that's dangerous and it is 100% Horvat's man. Horvat doesn't check him… or anybody else. He stands completely flat footed and watches the play happen. He doesn't deserve credit for waving his stick across shin pads in a lame attempt to recover.

Horvat doesn't give an honest effort defensively. His speed and stoutness are often on display offensively but rarely defensively. He's not effective on the back check. He doesn't engage physically on the defensive end. At his best defensively he lets the play happen on the outside while he conserves energy and tries to poke the puck free for an offensive chance. At his worst he puck watches and fishes. He has a long way to go to live up to his two-way reputation and I wonder how it will affect his offensive game when/if he starts putting in an honest effort defensively.

 

[CanaFan]

He doesn't have to anticipate anything, there's one guy on the ice that's dangerous and it is 100% Horvat's man. Horvat doesn't check him… or anybody else. He stands completely flat footed and watches the play happen. He doesn't deserve credit for waving his stick across shin pads in a lame attempt to recover.

Horvat doesn't give an honest effort defensively. His speed and stoutness are often on display offensively but rarely defensively. He's not effective on the back check. He doesn't engage physically on the defensive end. At his best defensively he lets the play happen on the outside while he conserves energy and tries to poke the puck free for an offensive chance. At his worst he puck watches and fishes. He has a long way to go to live up to his two-way reputation and I wonder how it will affect his offensive game when/if he starts putting in an honest effort defensively.

That's an extremely predjudiced way of dissecting that play. His man didn't score and honesty would have to have a Brett Hull-like release to score from there. The onus on that play is Edler going on walkabout rather than trusting his partner and Baertschi to do their jobs. Defense is more position than effort and Edler fails the most on that play. Horvat could have been better but IMO it's incorrect to single him out like you have.