Perreault will be hard to replace, but with the Jets' cap situation next season they either need to move Perreault or another core player like Trouba, Ehlers or Connor.
Player Discussion: Dr CJ Suess... Is it time to take this kid a little more seriously?
- Thread starter GaryPoppins
- Start date
When did Perrault last score a goal? Did he get any in the playoffs?
______________________________________________________
If I had to guess -the next 2 players to be moved will be:
1) Perrault --"for sure"--for cap reasons
2) Copp- because he's easily replaceable for much less $$$
_______________________________________________________
If you took Perraults last 30-40 games --I doubt that he scored more than 6-8 goals--if that, and maybe less. We can do a lot better for $ 4.5 mil per year. Because of what he's paid, he'll be moved --it only makes Cents $$$
garret9
AKA#VitoCorrelationi
As with every time someone makes this mistake, I just point out value and what I perceive as mistakes in evaluation with players... and I mean that as *fan* mistakes.
Ex: If people said Dano didn't score, I merely pointed out that he scored just as much as you'd hope for a depth player to score given his ice time. 22 points in his last 862 minutes of 5v5 time... is 1.5 points for every hour of ice time. That's the median scoring rate for a third line player (and unfortunately would pace him third on this Jets... right behind Tanev lol!). I would give higher odds for Dano than Tanev to reach 45 points, since Tanev has scored about 1.1 points for every 1.5 Dano has over the past 3 seasons.
If Dano was still here, I'd say the same thing for him: he's cheap depth and asset to be utilized. Neither are core pieces.
Hope that helps.
______________________________________________________
I do admire all your posts Garret, as they are backed up with fact and analytical study You see things at the microscopic levels, beneath the surface that many casual observers do not. I guess I fall into the "casual observer'. Right now I don't understand what Corsi numbers represent, or how you come up with these values, but it would be interesting to learn. I'm sure it's not all that complicated. In as much as the "hard data" doesn't lie, it's not always 100 % correct, as your dealing with human beings here, and not machines. These numbers generally reflect player's past performances, and project them into what likely they will accomplish in the future. If a player totally turns his career around, this kind of data ( Corsi etc) would not reflect this.
Re - Tanev
As for your bet at Under 45 Hard - you probably would win, and that's not a bet that I'd take. Realistically he will likely score in the 25 -30 range, if he plays a full season with decent ice time. He doesn't have the greatest scoring hands, but I'd say he has better hands than Lowry, and especially Copp.
Your studies or graphs cannot measure how a guy really hustles, and what kind of impact that has on a team. If you look at the playoffs last season, Tanev scored quite a few goals. He's actually impressed me quite a bit, and I'd keep him if I were the Jets
Where I would "disagree" with you, is when you say you'd "move on" from him, and replace him with cheaper depth --"definitely not". With Copp, I'd agree with this, and also Perrault, who looks to me like he's not producing at all, and he could be just about done ?? He's just a hard working 2 way player--who's good== but not worth $ $4 mil per year. I see a guy like Lemieux being way more effective and replacing him in the very near future. We'll see who's right Garret ??
The reason I like Tanev is that his desire level is unmatched, and the effort he puts out is also unmatched--"and he's on the rise". He's getting better all the time and his production is increasing. It's like if you have a good growth stock that is starting to rise and making you money --you don't sell it -right !!
Anyways--I enjoy reading your well researched posts, and keep up the good work. I just don't agree with you on Tanev -- we have to wait and see when he'll peak out, to determine what we have ? He could very well surprise a lot of people. He's already done that, and he's still on an upward trend.
Your data ( Corsi etc) cannot be used on Tanev, because his numbers have changed in the upward direction over the last year.
Can't someone be a core piece because they are so cheap that the value they provide vs how much they are able ask for in terms of money means that it enables the team to keep their better players. I'd bet on Tanev to score 45 in a season first, until I see if Dano is an everyday player for the Avs or a Pb guy there too.As with every time someone makes this mistake, I just point out value and what I perceive as mistakes in evaluation with players... and I mean that as *fan* mistakes.
Ex: If people said Dano didn't score, I merely pointed out that he scored just as much as you'd hope for a depth player to score given his ice time. 22 points in his last 862 minutes of 5v5 time... is 1.5 points for every hour of ice time. That's the median scoring rate for a third line player (and unfortunately would pace him third on this Jets... right behind Tanev lol!). I would give higher odds for Dano than Tanev to reach 45 points, since Tanev has scored about 1.1 points for every 1.5 Dano has over the past 3 seasons.
If Dano was still here, I'd say the same thing for him: he's cheap depth and asset to be utilized. Neither are core pieces.
Hope that helps.
Also how much money should you spend on your 4th line players (especially if they are playing second line minutes.) I mean, is it better to have 4 stars that eat up the majority of the money, or 2 stars and surround that player with higher level depth players?
garret9
AKA#VitoCorrelationi
Players score more goals when with Perreault. That's the value of Perreault.
This is not coincidental.
garret9
AKA#VitoCorrelationi
That would be Perreault. He's one of the best wins per dollar players in the NHL over his time as a Jet (obviously not including ELCs as that's just not fair).
And the latter question is about strong link vs weak link game. There's more than one way to skin a cat, but hockey is more strong linked than weak linked.
How many goals did PLL score this season? Why'd they move Ehlers into Perrault's spot? He was a complete passenger on the Little pp goal. How many has CLT scored? Tanev was also on for the one he passed to Schief. Tanev pks harder to be on the ice for team goals in that role vs pp. also Tanev is a quarter the price.
I'm sorry. Garret I'm being rude and defensive on here to you which is uncalled for. I am too enamored with Tanev who I see as more of as the little engine that could and that makes his working hard obvious therefore my favorite. The little guy who overcame the odds. etc. etc. etc.
Last edited:
garret9
AKA#VitoCorrelationi
Not specific to your questions but things you should keep in mind when seeking out the answers to your question:
1) Don't be fooled by small samples.
2) Related: Don't confuse descriptive with predictive. If the performance we've had so far was predictive, Lowry and Tanev will be our top 5v5 point producers, doubling their normal performances, and the only players scoring at top-six rates. Laine, Wheeler, and Scheifele are all scoring at 4th line or worse rates. How someone did perform and will perform is correlated based on sample size.
3) Just because someone wasn't directly impacting a play doesn't mean they don't indirectly impact. Indirect impacts is one of the reasons why Perreault is as good as he is.
4)a) Coaches are humans and make wrong/poor decisions all the time.
4)b) Because of the multi facets to coaching (evaluation, teaching, inspiring, systems, etc.) a good coach doesn't mean they are good at all facets. Babcock for example is famously good at systems, making him one of the best coaches in the league, and teach while infamously poor at evaluation.
5) Being a better fit on a line doesn't mean that player is the better player.
6) Confirmation bias. Am I looking just at the evidence that confirms my opinion while ignoring all the evidence that counters it.
7) Players have ups and downs in performance as they are not robots
8) Sh% and sv% variance impacts outcomes and infamously impacts management, coach, and fan evaluations (it's how the whole PDO stat was discovered). You generally look at how many good events you remember vs how many bad events.
9) The Big Event (tm). People generally remember only the goals and those who drove the goal (negatively or positively), but not all the hundreds of events that influenced that goal. The other events matter.
10) Usage/QoT/QoC impacts results but also impacts what you perceive. Soft usage means lots of opportunity for good events vs bad events, and vice versa.
I'm not meaning to harp on you... but really I try to be fairly objective here. I don't have a "boy" and Dano is not one, nor is Tanev. I just point out what I observe the facts suggest. I'm imperfect but this is still the best I can do.
How do you measure indirect impact?
What does indirect impact mean? For instance in Lits goal. The team cleared the puck. Buff quickly passed it to Lits and lits scored on the backhand. How did Perrault indirectly impact that?
Also how do you not have a "boy" someone who emulates the qualities that you admire? If you don't have a "boy" and remain "objective" how do you have a team? Do you go around the board educating all the teams fans on their mistakes?
What players are huge impactors when it comes to indirect influence and how are they paid relative to Perrault?
Sorry getting OT.
Last edited:
- Jun 10, 2014
- 57,479
- 29,341
I don't want to leap full on into this discussion but I want to reply to that paragraph. I see similar statements to the bolded quite often and I disagree completely. The statistics do exactly that. They don't measure the micro inputs, but they reflect them. If a player A really hustles for a period, say 10 games and then dogs it for a similar period, the difference in his effort would show up very clearly in the various stats that are measured.
Tanev doesn't bring a great deal of talent to the game, beyond speed. He brings a motor that is always running at full speed. Without that he wouldn't be in the NHL. It is reflected in his scoring stats, and in his Corsi derived stats.
As for keeping him or not, you keep him until someone better comes along. Its just as simple as that. The same goes for Copp. It isn't a competition between those 2. They are very different players and have somewhat different roles.
I think you are selling Tanev short. He is good at forechecking seems to have good d instincts and his offensive instincts are growing every year.
- Jun 10, 2014
- 57,479
- 29,341
Nope, I'm not. I agree that he is making himself valuable and getting better. He's pretty close to his peak though. He soon turns 27. Nothing wrong with that peak and I love that he is scoring more. I agree that he might well score 30 pts this year.
I don't think there is much difference between your assessment of Tanev and mine. But you seem to want people to get all excited and gush about him. Or to leap to his defense any time he is deprecated. He is not a core player. He is a bottom 6'er who makes himself useful through great effort. I think everybody loves seeing that. It is hard not to cheer for a guy like him who puts out that kind of hustle. That doesn't mean he is not expendable.
yet another example of statistics not being able to account for intangibles.
Emotion
Effort
Psychology of sport
Exactly why the stats community need a lot more work on how they present statistics
If you're going to discuss Tanev, at least tangentially loop CJ into the conversation - this is his thread, after all.
Wheeler did not peak for years. Tanev is a late bloomer. Regarding the rest, guilty as charged. I think certain players are core players at certain price points. If he stays at a mil keep him, if he wants anything more get rid of him. I feel the same way about copp that you can be a core at a certain price point. For instance, if Connor asks for 8mil not worth keeping him. If he is at 6mil great building block.
But Dano - statistics!!!!!
Dano lacked the emotional intensity. Hendricks was a pretty awful hockey player, but he OBVIOUSLY brings something to teams for him to continually get jobs.
The fact that the stats community want us to think that the highest levels of professional managers don't know what they are doing and they do is friggin laughable.
This is what gets me fired up about everyone weighting statistics so heavily. Hockey might be the sport that is most heavily influenced by non-statistical, emotional, psychological impacts.
Start measuring that with any accuracy and I'll listen.
I thought I linked Dr. Seuss as he would be Tanev's replacement.If you're going to discuss Tanev, at least tangentially loop CJ into the conversation - this is his thread, after all.
SORRY!If you're going to discuss Tanev, at least tangentially loop CJ into the conversation - this is his thread, after all.
I get all excited.
I liked Suess but not sure at his age if he is going to be able to usurp anyone on this forward group. Maybe (heaven forbid) if we get a spite of injury
Perreault has been pretty terrible in my opinon over the past 6 months of hockey. I think I am starting to see a little spark between him and Roslo which is encouraging
