Recalled/Assigned: Dermott to the Leafs Marincin back to the Marlies

[Morgs]

I can't figure out people's reason for making the claim that we have a better PK without Polak than with him. Does it NOT miss the point that he's 2nd or 3rd up for Dmen - ahead of Rielly by almost a full minute/60 - in terms of PK TOI/60, and we are tied for 2nd or 3rd best overall PK in the league.

He is one of the players on the PK team!

If our PK is better with Hainsey and Ziet than with the next pairing, it doesn't mean our PK teams are better off without Polak all together. At least, I'm not seeing that. Doesn't it just mean that he isn't our BEST PKer?

Wouldn't it be like saying, since JVR's PP unit is better than Matthews PP unit, that Matthews unit somehow sucks!

You're not wrong. But the stats dictate that his effect ON the penalty kill is the same as they are when he's OFF the kill.

Basically for a guy who's technically replacement level on the PK, you should expect him to at least not be by far the worst 5v5 player on this team (and one of the worst in the league).

 

[Rogie]

It's one bloody game

Gardiner has been **** This season but he's not even close to Polak awful



Nobody is picking him up, the only reason he's playing now is because Babcock has a burning love for him that's goes beyond rational thought

Franson didn't get picked up and he's miles better than Polak, surprisingly enough most teams don't want absolute ****



PK with Polak on it 83.3%
Leafs killing a Polak penalty 84.6%

Yeah he's a stud alright, he's ****** awful and it's provable and still this rubbish narrative continues

I can NOT find any source for these numbers and I think they are simply WRONG.

Please provide a source, or the original poster needs to provide a source, otherwise, going on and on about Polak's PKing is just simply ********T AND I think you know it.

I'm not arguing about how good Polak is, but, this *(*** about his PKing seems to be COMPLETELY made up unless you can provide some source or some explanation - which I doubt very much.

 

[Rogie]

You're not wrong. But the stats dictate that his effect ON the penalty kill is the same as they are when he's OFF the kill.

Basically for a guy who's technically replacement level on the PK, you should expect him to at least not be by far the worst 5v5 player on this team (and one of the worst in the league).

What stats are you talking about - I don't see any stats that show that he is worse IN FACT, most stats show he is better on the PK than pretty much anyone this year!

PLEASE SHOW ME THE STATS

Better yet, go back and read what I've posted about the PK.

Edit: I've made at least 5 posts about PK stats that are available if you chose to read them.

 

[SprDaVE]

I can NOT find any source for these numbers and I think they are simply WRONG.

Please provide a source, or the original poster needs to provide a source, otherwise, going on and on about Polak's PKing is just simply ********T AND I think you know it.

I'm not arguing about how good Polak is, but, this *(*** about his PKing seems to be COMPLETELY made up unless you can provide some source or some explanation - which I doubt very much.

The numbers were from before the Sens game and Jeff Veillette posted them on twitter. They aren't wrong, at least not at the time posted.

 

[Morgs]

What stats are you talking about - I don't see any stats that show that he is worse IN FACT, most stats show he is better on the PK than pretty much anyone this year!

PLEASE SHOW ME THE STATS

Better yet, go back and read what I've posted about the PK.

I know all about the PK. What you'll find is that the total success is usually based on goaltending and system. Unless you have someone who far exceeds what the rest of the team is doing, you can infer most people are replacement level.

When you look at Polak's FA/60 and his xGA/60 you notice it is a little better than Hainsey/Zaitsev. You can also infer that him being the 2nd pairing to go on that he doesn't face the other teams top-PP as often as Hainsey/Zaitsev and he starts less in the defensive zone (because obv all PKs start in the dzone).

 

[WestCoastLeafs]

So, I can't find the actual numbers anywhere for Individ PK% to compare it to the team numbers. So, I will just do more basic calcs fromt eh numbers that I can find, that I know (think) have to be relevant.

So, the total number of PK minutes played divided by the number of goals scored by the other team. There is a modification. Some players, while short handed, the team scored, so, there is a plus minus number that I will use for calculating.
Player PKTOI total ...................... goals against+/- ........ GA/min

Rielly 59 mins .............. 7 ......................... 1/8.4 mins
Ziets 115 mins ............... 10 ....................... 1/11.5 mins
Hainsey 188 mins. ............. 14 ..................... 1/13 mins
Polak 55 mins. .................. 2 .............................. 1/27.5 mins


Results shows when Polak is on the ice,
the team is scored on just 1 every 27 minutes when shorthanded, compared to the other players - YOU CAN SEE.

So, I'm not sure how those earlier number of 84.x% with and without Polak could have been anything more than very anecdotal.

Please, someone point out what I am missing. This seems like very basic math, but, hey, I'm pretty old and stuff, so.
Again, this is based on 4v5 time on ice for each player and the number of goals score against the team (minus goals we scored while we were shorthanded), and then dividing the time on ice by the number of goals scored.
Polak was on for 4 shorthanded goals during 55 minutes of shorthanded ice time. But (probably Hyman) we scored 2 goals during that time, so, effectively, he just gave up 2 goals shorthanded in his 55 minutes.

This is from Corsica website.
Edit: my MISTAKE, these numbers are ALL 4v5, which is NOT technically the Pk which includes 3v5, and 3v4, etc etc. But, it doesn't change the numbers drastically, and when the numbers are slightly different, they don't favor any player one way or the other.

Your process is correct - because penalties get killed in shifts, best way to look at is how many goals allowed per 60, or how many minutes to allow a goal (which are essentially the same thing.)

Maybe people were looking at how good the PK is with Polak in the lineup vs when he's not in the lineup? (which would not be a good measure at all.)

I would like to see the numbers ignoring short-handed goals for - i.e. instead of a PK +/-, just look at number of minutes per PPGA. I don't think Polak has anything to do with the shorties we have scored, so it is just puck-luck as to whether he has been on for those or not.

Also, there is no way that Polak is twice as good as Hainsey - it would be remarkable if one 4-man unit was that much better than another, and there is no way a single player could have that much of an effect. So it is definitely puck luck, small sample size, etc. etc., but your numbers still smash any theory that he is making it worse.

Out of interest, what site did you find these numbers from? I'm interested in looking at a league-wide thing.

 

[Rogie]

The numbers were from before the Sens game and Jeff Veillette posted them on twitter. They aren't wrong, at least not at the time posted.

So, how is this different from saying the following:

JVR's PP% unit is higher than Matthews; our PP% is lower with Matthews on it than with the JVR/Marner unit;
so, we might as well not have Matthews on the PP because it is worse without him than with him - WHICH IS TRUE!

 

[saltming]

So, how is this different from saying the following:

JVR's PP% unit is higher than Matthews; our PP% is lower with Matthews on it than with the JVR/Marner unit;
so, we might as well not have Matthews on the PP because it is worse without him than with him - WHICH IS TRUE!

Because one is the golden boy and the other is the whipping boy
Polak is not the best defenseman in the world but he is not nearly as bad as some posters think. Cognitive bias is a real thing

 

[WestCoastLeafs]

So, how is this different from saying the following:

JVR's PP% unit is higher than Matthews; our PP% is lower with Matthews on it than with the JVR/Marner unit;
so, we might as well not have Matthews on the PP because it is worse without him than with him - WHICH IS TRUE!

This argument isn't really valid, because powerplays (especially for the Leafs) work as units, whereas with PK there is much more mix-and-matching based on when people can get to the bench and so forth, making it easier to measure individual performances.

A better way to reject Veillette's numbers would be to point out that you can run the same in the lineup vs. out of the lineup numbers for guys who don't even penalty kill, and still find discrepancies that would supposedly suggest they are better/worse at PK (despite never having stepped on the ice for a second of PK time.)

 

[Willchel Marlynder]

So, how is this different from saying the following:

JVR's PP% unit is higher than Matthews; our PP% is lower with Matthews on it than with the JVR/Marner unit;
so, we might as well not have Matthews on the PP because it is worse without him than with him - WHICH IS TRUE!

You're creating a straw man. Polak is terrible 5 on 5. People"say" his main redeeming quality is on the PK, but if the PK is fine with him or fine with out him he has no reason for playing as he's a liability 5 on 5. You're Matthews argument is terrible because

1. Matthews is the best scorer in the league 5 on 5 so why on earth would we not dress him.

2. JVR's unit isn't going to play the PK for a whole 2 minutes anyway. So, not having your best player on one of the 2 units seems ridiculous.

 

[GermanLeaf]

Because one is the golden boy and the other is the whipping boy
Polak is not the best defenseman in the world but he is not nearly as bad as some posters think. Cognitive bias is a real thing

Or maybe because one of them is a positive 5 on 5 and the other is among the worst players in the league in that regard.

 

[Rogie]

This argument isn't really valid, because powerplays (especially for the Leafs) work as units, whereas with PK there is much more mix-and-matching based on when people can get to the bench and so forth, making it easier to measure individual performances.

A better way to reject Veillette's numbers would be to point out that you can run the same in the lineup vs. out of the lineup numbers for guys who don't even penalty kill, and still find discrepancies that would supposedly suggest they are better/worse at PK (despite never having stepped on the ice for a second of PK time.)

Okay, I appreciate your objectivity PLUS you seem to be a little in my corner. But, no, the PK runs as much on units as the PP, Hyman/Komi go out and then Brown/Marleau go out, in terms of forwards. For the D guys, they also try to go out in pairs the best they can. BUT NEVER MIND ABOUT THE UNITS.
This is about ONE player - Polak - and the claim (and this is all I have tried to refute) that he makes the PK worse, which I reject - ONLY BASED ON THE NUMBERS.
So, by the same numbers, Matthews has a worse PP% than our OVERALL PP%, so, that would mean, using the same logic that Matthews has no effect on the PP. FORGET ABOUT UNITS THEN.

Yeah, I just finally understood the second part of your post. Maybe the Leafs PK was way better or worse without Dermott in the line-up for 3 games, but, obviously, he likely didn't effect the PK% in a drastic way, esp. if he never played on the PK.

Good point, and I was trying to think about that but wasn't. Veillete's stats are all interesting, but, they are NOT really FAIR measures of PKing stats at all. I showed the numbers that are actually fairly relevant to PKing. I showed the TOI short-handed minutes and the GA scored and those are the relevant numbers really. Who cares what the Leafs PK% is for the however many minutes Polak was in the penalty box and wasn't available to kill penalties himself - it's not any different than when they are killing penalties PERIOD.

 

[Duke Silver]

If we’re not going to scratch him, we need to change how we deploy him:

- Home games only so we don’t lose the last change
- Match him exclusively against 4th lines at ES
- Save him for PK and play him less at even strength. Kind of like what Columbus did with Gagner last year on the PP.

It’s too bad we have to shelter multiple defencemen on this roster (Gardiner, Carrick, Borgman as well) because it really complicates our deployment strategy.

 

[SprDaVE]

So, how is this different from saying the following:

JVR's PP% unit is higher than Matthews; our PP% is lower with Matthews on it than with the JVR/Marner unit;
so, we might as well not have Matthews on the PP because it is worse without him than with him - WHICH IS TRUE!

That is the truth and probably why Matthews' unit doesn't start PPs or get as much ice time during them.

Matthews is also one of the best 5 on 5 contributors of the NHL. Polak isn't. That's sort of the point of this argument, one where you can't seem to realize.

Polak is only playing supposedly because of his PK work when in fact, we do just as good with or without him and he's a liability 5 on 5... so why is he playing? Shouldn't the younger more talented defenseman play instead?

It's pretty simple.

 

[Rogie]

You're creating a straw man. Polak is terrible 5 on 5. People"say" his main redeeming quality is on the PK, but if the PK is fine with him or fine with out him he has no reason for playing as he's a liability 5 on 5. You're Matthews argument is terrible because

1. Matthews is the best scorer in the league 5 on 5 so why on earth would we not dress him.

2. JVR's unit isn't going to play the PK for a whole 2 minutes anyway. So, not having your best player on one of the 2 units seems ridiculous.

I'm not trying to argue Polak is good ES AT ALL, I am simply responding and making an arguement that he does NOT hurt the PK. The numbers show this - maybe the eyeball not so much. Anyways, all I have said and tried to show is that, according to the numbers, he HELPS the PK and that even if he was not the best PKer, he is still on a PK team that is 5th in the league, so, that means ALL the PKers are doing a pretty good job.

Again, I'm not arguing Polak should play ES more minutes, I'm just trying to show he does NOT hurt the PK, and it seems the numbers support this.

IF he was the worst PKer on the team, but, the team had the 5th best PK in the league, which they do, then, you have to say, well, he's not as good as the other PKers, but, he contributes to making our PK better.

How is that different from what I said about the PP and Matthews.
Matthews is great - I LOVE HIM - I'm just saying, if there is someone better on the PP, in this case JVR, who, when he in on the ice, the team has a better PP%, then, you could say, well, Matthews does not have any effect on the PP because our PP is worse with him - I'M NOT SAYING THAT - but that is the argument against Polak - WHICH IS WRONG.
Polak, whether or not he is NOT the best player on the PK or not, still helps the PK, the same way Matthews helps the PP.

This is NOT about anything else.

I responded to a poster 20 posts ago or more who said that we are worse with Polak on the PK with him than without him and I disagree with that and have been trying to show that and that ONLY.

I'm talking ONLY about the PK - so, your stuff about Matthews is that and that is not relevant to this argument about whether Polak hurts the PK or not.

 

[Willchel Marlynder]

I'm not trying to argue Polak is good ES AT ALL, I am simply responding and making an arguement that he does NOT hurt the PK. The numbers show this - maybe the eyeball not so much. Anyways, all I have said and tried to show is that, according to the numbers, he HELPS the PK and that even if he was not the best PKer, he is still on a PK team that is 5th in the league, so, that means ALL the PKers are doing a pretty good job.

Again, I'm not arguing Polak should play ES more minutes, I'm just trying to show he does NOT hurt the PK, and it seems the numbers support this.

IF he was the worst PKer on the team, but, the team had the 5th best PK in the league, which they do, then, you have to say, well, he's not as good as the other PKers, but, he contributes to making our PK better.

How is that different from what I said about the PP and Matthews.
Matthews is great - I LOVE HIM -

Ahh I see, I thought the argument here was that Polak should be playing in the line up because he is fine on the PK (which he is as you're right, with or without him the PK hovers around the same percentage) in spite of being terrible 5 on 5. My mistake

He doesn't hurt the PK at all but when Zaitsev is back Polak should be benched asap as he is just a train wreck 5 on 5

 

[Rogie]

That is the truth and probably why Matthews' unit doesn't start PPs or get as much ice time during them.

Matthews is also one of the best 5 on 5 contributors of the NHL. Polak isn't. That's sort of the point of this argument, one where you can't seem to realize.

Polak is only playing supposedly because of his PK work when in fact, we do just as good with or without him and he's a liability 5 on 5... so why is he playing? Shouldn't the younger more talented defenseman play instead?

It's pretty simple.

No, I don't think you've read my posts. I TOTALLY agree Polak is not a great player, maybe a terrible player. I've ONLY tried to make the case, and believe I have, that he does NOT hurt the PK. I've never EVER said, because he is good on the PK or because he is just OKAY on the PK, that he should play more or that justifies him playing ES over any player like Dermott or whatever. I"m NOT interested in ANY OF THAT AT ALL.
So, I do understand.

People claiming that he has hurt the PK though - well, I guess they don't want to see it.

 

[Trapper]

Because one is the golden boy and the other is the whipping boy
Polak is not the best defenseman in the world but he is not nearly as bad as some posters think. Cognitive bias is a real thing

No I'm sorry Saltming, I need you to rank the following in terms of pure villainy.
Lex Luthor
Roman Polak
The Joker
The person at Tim Horton's that gets your coffee order wrong and you drove away
Larry Murphy

 

[Black hat blue eyes]

Well damn... I thought this was a Demott thread. Not a Roman "one leg" Polak thread.

 

[Menzinger]

Because he's awful in every other area and makes the team worse when he plays, how hard is that to understand?

The worst thing is this isn't Polak's fault, Babcock is the one shoehorning him onto the team

It’s funny really, his supposed main strength is the PK but he routinely gifts PPs to the opposition, he’s taken something like 17 penalties in his last 25 games or something like that

 

[CantLoseWithMatthews]

It’s funny really, his supposed main strength is the PK but he routinely gifts PPs to the opposition, he’s taken something like 17 penalties in his last 25 games or something like that

Sure but when he does PK, he's not really a huge liability like he is at ES. He certainly deserves a spot locked down for him

 

[thewave]

It’s funny really, his supposed main strength is the PK but he routinely gifts PPs to the opposition, he’s taken something like 17 penalties in his last 25 games or something like that

Just count goals scored on Polak penalties against his effectiveness. Just for fun add in goals scored on plays directly following when he ices the puck. If you do this you will arrive with a real world stat I use. Polak is a terrible high risk player to have out there when you factor that in.

 

[Mr Hockey]

Polak 5-vs-5...

• With Borgman ~ 240:46 TOI, 49.51CF% and a 46.94% ozone deployment. ~ plays most with the Bozak line
• ~
• With Gardiner ~ 65:15 TOI, 43.41CF% and a 42.11% ozone deployment. ~ QoC, QoT, the quality of the deployment / situation unknown
• With Rielly ~ 25:01 TOI, 46.67CF% and a 16.94% ozone deployment.. ~ QoC, QoT, the quality of the deployment / situation unknown
• With Hainsey ~ 21:22 TOI, 36.36CF% and a 16.67% ozone deployment..~ Qoc, QoT, quality the deployment / situation unknown

looks like Polak does a ugly but decent job 5-vs-5 to me

 

[saltming]

Or maybe because one of them is a positive 5 on 5 and the other is among the worst players in the league in that regard.

I think you missed the point or are proving the point.
The quote was about special teams

 

[saltming]

No I'm sorry Saltming, I need you to rank the following in terms of pure villainy.
Lex Luthor
Roman Polak
The Joker
The person at Tim Horton's that gets your coffee order wrong and you drove away
Larry Murphy

1 Tim's dude
2 Lex
3 Joker (how bad can he be? He's always smiling and laughing)
4 polak
I'm going to say Murphy was a trick question as he was miss cast here but tried his best while he was here