Ryan Murray = 2nd pairing dman?

[blahblah]

5. How good is he?

That is used as a metric for #3 and, to a certain extent, #4.

 

[blahblah]

Washington shows that you cannot build a successful team from the wings in. I feel we have the same skill set in Panarin, but younger (and possibly) cheaper.

Overly simplistic and not entirely accurate.

 

[Cyclones Rock]

People here want Ryan Murray to be good. I get that. Facts are pretty clear that he isn't.

Over the past 3 years, his goals against/60 minutes 5v5 ranks 154 out of 191 for defensemen who have logged 1500 minutes. Clearly a bottom pairing/borderline AHL ranking:

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rat...1500&teamid=0&type=goals&sort=A60&sortdir=ASC


Over the past 3 years (same perameters) his Corsi for % ranks 160/191. Awful. Not second pairing. Not even close.

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rat...nse&minutes=1500&disp=1&sort=PCT&sortdir=DESC

He's had the advantage of playing in front of a Vezina winner as well-which really makes him a #6D. Throw in the fact that he's played on a good team 2 out of the last 3 years and we're looking at a #7D.

Where is the evidence that he's second pairing? Bueler, Bueler, anybody, anybody?

 

[mikeyp24]

He had a ****** defense and that Vezna trophy goalie didn't have a great previous 2 seasons because injuries and ****** defense. Look up his numbers with Jones last year to find his true ability. If he plays with a reasonable player he's a 2 or 3. If he's stuck with ****** players forcing him to babysit or rookies who never played in NA + playing his off side his numbers look bad even though his play shows different. If the eye test is pointless so are your stats without context...

 

[Cyclones Rock]

Per usual, a strong rebuttal

I don't watch TV 80 hours per week, so you'll have to explain your pop culture insults to me.

 

[Cyclones Rock]

He had a ****** defense and that Vezna trophy goalie didn't have a great previous 2 seasons because injuries and ****** defense. Look up his numbers with Jones last year to find his true ability. If he plays with a reasonable player he's a 2 or 3. If he's stuck with ****** players forcing him to babysit or rookies who never played in NA + playing his off side his numbers look bad even though his play shows different. If the eye test is pointless so are your stats without context...

OK. So 3 years of statistics get negated by your anectodal claims. Gotcha.

Last year, he was 178/197 for 500 minutes 5v5 in corsi:

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rat...ense&minutes=500&disp=1&sort=PCT&sortdir=DESC

He was 109/191 in goals against per 60:

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rat...=500&teamid=0&type=goals&sort=A60&sortdir=ASC

This is unspeakably bad when playing in front of a Vezina winner. Nutivaara was 9th. Savard 25th. Werenski 39th. JJ 41st. Jones was 89th.

The Jackets were SECOND in goals against. And Murray couldn't even manage top half numbers in goals against per minute.

Keep trying

 

[brianhatesu]

OK. So 3 years of statistics get negated by you anectodal claims. Gotcha.

Last year, he was 178/197 for 500 minutes 5v5 in corsi:

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rat...ense&minutes=500&disp=1&sort=PCT&sortdir=DESC

He was 109/191 in goals against per 60:

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rat...=500&teamid=0&type=goals&sort=A60&sortdir=ASC

This is unspeakably bad when playing in front of a Vezina winner. Nutivaara was 9th. Savard 25th. Werenski 39th. JJ 41st. Jones was 89th.

The Jackets were SECOND in goals against. And Murray couldn't even manage top half numbers in goals against per minute.

Keep trying

I tried to learn about Corsi once, the guy teaching me was trying to prove Brandon Saad was a better player than Crosby. The way I understand it, it's just not something I would put that much weight into for a defender. For example, wouldn't playing the end of game situations when the other team is in an attack phase be he reflected negatively in his score.

 

[Viqsi]

Henrique is good but Abramov is going to be incredible.

Probably, but I feel the same way about Bjorkstrand. And the resulting team would be rather stacked.

* * *​

People here want Ryan Murray to be good. I get that. Facts are pretty clear that he isn't.

Over the past 3 years, his goals against/60 minutes 5v5 ranks 154 out of 191 for defensemen who have logged 1500 minutes. Clearly a bottom pairing/borderline AHL ranking:

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rat...1500&teamid=0&type=goals&sort=A60&sortdir=ASC

And his GF/60 5v5 on that same chart shows him as #58 out of 191 - borderline top pairing, like we keep saying. Overall, that puts him right in the middle of the league at 105 out of 191 in GF%. Which suggests that he's being paired with folks who go hog-wild and produce a lot but also give up a lot, thus making him look pretty terrible - which is, of course, exactly what the eye test crowd keeps saying again and again and again. It also suggests that if he's paired with someone who's actually responsible with the damn puck that he'd be one of the more reliable blueliners in the game. Like we keep saying.

Oh, and if you go for the three seasons before last (taking out the season in which everyone acknowledges he was playing well below par because he was on his offhand) he gets even better. His GA/60 improves marginally (151 out of 197), but he reaches damn near #1D level on GF/60 5v5 (#33 of 197), putting him 84th in the league in overall GF% and well into established second-pairing range. And, again, pair him with someone better than rookie Nutivaara or cowboy Wisniewski, and oh hey good things just might happen.

So could he do a better job of covering for his partner? Probably. Apparently he's not a superhero in that regard. OTOH, he keeps the offense coming for us quite effectively at the same time. Which might come as a surprise seeing as though he doesn't get that much in the way of points himself. Curious. It's almost as though the eye test is on to something that simply looking at shot attempts doesn't always immediately reveal.

Today's Lesson: defensemen have an impact on all facets of the game, not just goals against. (You'd think, given how much of our offense runs through Jones and Werenski, this would be an obvious thing, but apparently not.)

 

[mikeyp24]

OK. So 3 years of statistics get negated by your anectodal claims. Gotcha.

Last year, he was 178/197 for 500 minutes 5v5 in corsi:

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rat...ense&minutes=500&disp=1&sort=PCT&sortdir=DESC

He was 109/191 in goals against per 60:

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rat...=500&teamid=0&type=goals&sort=A60&sortdir=ASC

This is unspeakably bad when playing in front of a Vezina winner. Nutivaara was 9th. Savard 25th. Werenski 39th. JJ 41st. Jones was 89th.

The Jackets were SECOND in goals against. And Murray couldn't even manage top half numbers in goals against per minute.

Keep trying

This isn't baseball where advanced stats are the end all be all. In a pure team sport you can't focus on stats especially for a defensive defensemen and on top of that he was playing offhand with a rookie. There is 0 anecdotal anything there is just facts of the situation. I'm sure I can find stuff that makes McDavid look like a ****** player too if I want to cherry pick stats.

This is the best way to explain it. Jarmo has the first pick next year... should he watch and have other people watch the top prospects or just go around looking for 5v5 numbers and their Corsi? If you say look at numbers that gives everyone the evidence to just keep reading past your opinion because that would be incredibly stupid to draft that way and a GM would be fired in a heart beat. You watch the players. So yes if you actually watch Murray play it is obvious he is a current 2/3. If you want to look up irrelevant numbers go ahead. It is different if it's a forward but a defensive defensmen is always going to have ****** stats.

 

[Cyclones Rock]

Probably, but I feel the same way about Bjorkstrand. And the resulting team would be rather stacked.

* * *​

And his GF/60 5v5 on that same chart shows him as #58 out of 191 - borderline top pairing, like we keep saying. Overall, that puts him right in the middle of the league at 105 out of 191 in GF%. Which suggests that he's being paired with folks who go hog-wild and produce a lot but also give up a lot, thus making him look pretty terrible - which is, of course, exactly what the eye test crowd keeps saying again and again and again. It also suggests that if he's paired with someone who's actually responsible with the damn puck that he'd be one of the more reliable blueliners in the game. Like we keep saying.

Oh, and if you go for the three seasons before last (taking out the season in which everyone acknowledges he was playing well below par because he was on his offhand) he gets even better. His GA/60 improves marginally (151 out of 197), but he reaches damn near #1D level on GF/60 5v5 (#33 of 197), putting him 84th in the league in overall GF% and well into established second-pairing range. And, again, pair him with someone better than rookie Nutivaara or cowboy Wisniewski, and oh hey good things just might happen.

So could he do a better job of covering for his partner? Probably. Apparently he's not a superhero in that regard. OTOH, he keeps the offense coming for us quite effectively at the same time. Which might come as a surprise seeing as though he doesn't get that much in the way of points himself. Curious. It's almost as though the eye test is on to something that simply looking at shot attempts doesn't always immediately reveal.

Today's Lesson: defensemen have an impact on all facets of the game, not just goals against. (You'd think, given how much of our offense runs through Jones and Werenski, this would be an obvious thing, but apparently not.)

Keep reaching. He's a second pairing on goals for

His contribution on goals for is virtually nothing. He has 11 in his career. He had 9 assists last season. He's a passenger on offense.

He was 5th on the CBJ in that stat last season. He beat out Nutivaara. LOL. 5/6=3rd pairing.

Today's lesson: Hanging on to a perception of a player that has been proved wrong over 4 years because of one's unquenchable need to justify a failed GMs bust of a #2OA pick (and he would have picked him first had he had the chance) is not a sound manner of hockey player evaluation.

 

[Cyclones Rock]

This isn't baseball where advanced stats are the end all be all. In a pure team sport you can't focus on stats especially for a defensive defensemen and on top of that he was playing offhand with a rookie. There is 0 anecdotal anything there is just facts of the situation. I'm sure I can find stuff that makes McDavid look like a ****** player too if I want to cherry pick stats.

This is the best way to explain it. Jarmo has the first pick next year... should he watch and have other people watch the top prospects or just go around looking for 5v5 numbers and their Corsi? If you say look at numbers that gives everyone the evidence to just keep reading past your opinion because that would be incredibly stupid to draft that way and a GM would be fired in a heart beat. You watch the players. So yes if you actually watch Murray play it is obvious he is a current 2/3. If you want to look up irrelevant numbers go ahead. It is different if it's a forward but a defensive defensmen is always going to have ****** stats.

I watch him. I look at stats. And I see-on both accounts-a bottom pairing dman.

Please do show me some "cherry picked stats" about McDavid. I'd also like to see some stats about Murray that justify your assertions other than your absurd "eye tests".

 

[Viqsi]

Keep reaching. He's a second pairing on goals for

Curious how numbers and methodology stop mattering to you when they fail to fit your narrative. And now I remember why I stopped bothering to try to counter your "stats" posts - because you always pull this bait and switch bull****.

 

[blahblah]

Crap, are we quoting advanced stats again? They are great in that you don't have to watch anything and can still pretend you are an expert at player evaluation. Basically societies idea of critical thinking these days is "what did Google tell me?".

I'll stick with actually watching the game and the players.

 

[Cyclones Rock]

Curious how numbers and methodology stop mattering to you when they fail to fit your narrative. And now I remember why I stopped bothering to try to counter your "stats" posts - because you always pull this bait and switch bull****.

The notion that Murray drives offense is laughably absurd-especially as a means to justify your assessment of him as a 2/3.

 

[Crede777]

I'm just amused that someone thinks Murray's skating has gotten worse because of injury.

It hasn't. Not according to the training staff, not according to coaching, and not according to the eye test.

Plus Murray isn't put in positions to contribute to goals for. He doesn't get PP time, doesn't get offensive zone starts, and doesn't get favorable matchups.

 

[Cyclones Rock]

I'm just amused that someone thinks Murray's skating has gotten worse because of injury.

It hasn't. Not according to the training staff, not according to coaching, and not according to the eye test.

Plus Murray isn't put in positions to contribute to goals for. He doesn't get PP time, doesn't get offensive zone starts, and doesn't get favorable matchups.

I mean, I'm as cynical as they come, but when it comes to Cyclones Rock... yeesh. That's just blind hatred.

Yeesh. Don't let facts stand in the way of your narrative.

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rat...0&teamid=8&type=corsi&sort=OZPCT&sortdir=DESC

Murray gets as many offensive zone starts as anyone. He doesn't get PP time, because he's not good enough to get PP time. Or is it something more sinister?

What match up info do you have to share?

 

[grindline]

Please do show me some "cherry picked stats" about McDavid.

Was that a challenge or a rhetorical question?

I think I can prove McDavid is a defensive liability 5v5 in tied games. His o-zone starts are increasing but so is his Fenwick against. His GA/60 is fairly high and his WOWY for the Edmonton defensemen with the most ice time make them around 1 goal/60 worse off playing behind him.

I would probably still trade for him though if the price reflected these stats. Would Matt Calvert and a second get him? 😉

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

While I know there is nothing more American than arguing with people on the internet - and employing personal attacks to do it - let's find other ways to be quintessentially American that don't violate site rules. Acknowledging our shared struggles and common goals, perhaps. Building up our local communities, maybe. Mowing the lawn and drinking alcohol, to celebrate liberty.

Happy 4th, everyone!

 

[Maylo]

This is from avs board, i post this just for the sake of discussion.

Murray was used in important defensive situations next to Jones. Leftwinglock isn't going to show Torts benching Werenski to put Murray next to Jones in order to hold onto leads.

The other factor? Savard and JJ have great chemistry and held up really well as their second pairing. Murray being on the bottom pairing was not his fault this year. Murray's advanced stats are going to suck when hes put in the most difficult situations for short periods of time, and expected to carry all of their randoms on the bottom pairing.

Right now hes kind of like a Hamonic before having his bad season, but he does still have some potential to develop his offensive game.

Edit : The legit reason to want nothing to do with him is not his talent. It's his injury history. It's pretty easy to argue that they are all fluke stuff, but someone that gets injured that often ends up as kind of a stands out. It's not one specific issue he keeps having.

If you buy on him you don't bank on him being more than a #3, and if he turns into a #2 at some point you thank your lucky stars. He'd be great next to one of our offensive minded right handers.

 

[Hello Johnny]

This is from avs board

Great find. Whoever posted that actually has an understanding of the situation.

 

[Viqsi]

The notion that Murray drives offense is laughably absurd-especially as a means to justify your assessment of him as a 2/3.

It's right there in the numbers on the page you provided. Our goals for goes up when he's on the ice. You keep focusing on goals against when he's on the ice as though that's the end-all be-all, and that stat certainly isn't in his favor - but if you're going to blame him for that, you also have to credit him for goals for going up at the same time. Because both of these phenomena are happening simultaneously. Can't have one without the other. You can't blame him for everything bad and pretend he has nothing to do with everything good while retaining anything even remotely resembling objectivity or credibility.

You might not want to believe it, but it's right there, on the very page you pointed us to. Staring you right in your face.

 

[Johansen2Foligno]

All I can contribute to this conversation is that I saw him at the Giant Eagle on 3rd Ave. once during April and his girlfriend was talking and it looked like he was staring out blankly into space.

 

[Monk]

All I can contribute to this conversation is that I saw him at the Giant Eagle on 3rd Ave. once during April and his girlfriend was talking and it looked like he was staring out blankly into space.

What was she talking about? This lack of focus is concerning.

 

[CBJSlash]

Never thought of that and how it'd impact Murray's metrics.

Any game we were leading in the last 5 minutes it was Murray-Jones. Of course possession stats would take massive hits here. Are there score adjusted metrics that account for this?

Do those metrics exist in the 1st and 2nd period? I'd be curious what his looked like ignoring this end of game responsibility.


EDIT - Taking a look at the available data I'd think the difference between Werenski and Jones could be added to Murray for a proxy (Werenski is above Jones in all the metrics because Jones logged these critical minutes and Z didn't). Murray's still on the lower end of d for most metrics, but did have a rookie as his pair for most of the year.

This particular one is interesting though: http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rat...=50&teamid=8&type=corsi&sort=PDO&sortdir=DESC

Corsi PDO. Jones has the lowest on the team. Z is a whole 1 point above him. If you added this 1 point to Murray, he'd only be behind Savard.

 

[Xoggz22]

I watch him. I look at stats. And I see-on both accounts-a bottom pairing dman.

Please do show me some "cherry picked stats" about McDavid. I'd also like to see some stats about Murray that justify your assertions other than your absurd "eye tests".

Trouble with the curve... Use your stats.