spintheblackcircle
incoming!!!
- Mar 1, 2002
- 66,270
- 12,215
Ryan Murray = 2nd pairing dman?
- Thread starter Kritty
- Start date
Mayor Bee
Registered User
- Dec 29, 2008
- 18,085
- 531
Simply delusional.
Give him top pairing minutes against the toughest competition. Put him on the first power play unit. Give it a shot. No NHL coach would.
This is what Murray cost the CBJ:
http://deadspin.com/5921077/the-blu...he-islanders-entire-draft-for-their-no-2-pick
I suppose if I were completely tied to denying the failed legacy of Scott Howson, I'd have to keep pumping Murray's (flat) tires. But, I prefer dealing in reality.
Any role, any pairing. The luxury. That's rich
Let's try this as a trade offer:
To NYI: Ryan Murray
To Columbus: Griffin Reinhart, Ville Pokka, Adam Pelech, Loic Leduc, Doyle Somerby, Jesse Graham, Jake Bischoff
Wow, what a missed opportunity.
Let's try this as a trade offer:
To NYI: Ryan Murray
To Columbus: Griffin Reinhart, Ville Pokka, Adam Pelech, Loic Leduc, Doyle Somerby, Jesse Graham, Jake Bischoff
Wow, what a missed opportunity.
But Howson could have then packaged up all those picks + a roster player and moved up to #1 and then we'd really have something. He screwed us.
I'm having a hard time following this thread today. Why would anyone be hammering Howson on Murray? His issue is being on the ice, not what he does when he's on it. That was a poor draft and Murray is, clearly, the better player over Yakupov to this point. In the top 10 is was kind of rush on decent top 4 d-men. You have to get to 11 to see a good forward and he might end up being the best forward in the draft.
As far as Murray it's kind of Werekski and Johnson before you end up with Murray. No insult to Murray there. Murray's drop off in production directly related to less PP time. It's probably not all that likely you are going to see a lot of production on the third pairing with limited PP time.
If we don't re-sign Johnson, I don't have really any concerns with Murray moving up to the second pairing. Might be an interesting battle, long term, with Murray and Carlsson. Long term Murray's place on the depth chart is probably going to be determined more by how much he can stay on the ice.
alphafox
Registered User
- Jun 14, 2011
- 1,417
- 74
Let's try this as a trade offer:
To NYI: Ryan Murray
To Columbus: Griffin Reinhart, Ville Pokka, Adam Pelech, Loic Leduc, Doyle Somerby, Jesse Graham, Jake Bischoff
Wow, what a missed opportunity.
No Offense but even Howson was light years ahead of the Islanders it just as easily could have been
To Columbus: One of Morgan Reilly, Jacob Trouba, Hampus Lindholm etc. + those draft assets.
Obviously Murray is not close to being the best player of that draft with Trouba, Lindholm, Reilly, Galchenyuk, Dumba, Forsberg, Pouliot, Dumba, Vasilevski, Hertl, and Maata all better thank he is. Now that is the nature of the draft but stating that we couldn't have walked away from 2012 a better haul is pretty difficult to argue.
Viqsi
"that chick from Ohio"
This is very little different from just assuming we could have picked folks other than Murray and Dansk and has a similar degree of "validity" (i.e. none at all, because it's Hindsight Is 20/20 mishegaas).
Are they better or just been able to develop better? Better results, sure. I forgot about that offer, in hindsight that could have ended up being a good move. How much better is definitely up for debate. There isn't much outside of that first round to be honest.
However Howson ended up with Dansk, Korpisalo, Anderson out of that draft. Dansk wasn't good, but Korp and Anderson were good hauls out of that draft.
Mayor Bee
Registered User
- Dec 29, 2008
- 18,085
- 531
Bobrovsky was a pretty solid pickup, being acquired that morning for two 2012 picks and a 4th in 2013.
This isn't some Howson (appreciation) thread, what you quoted was about as far as I'm willing to go on the flattery. I thought he was decent on drafting, but I thought he wasn't very good on building a roster. I wouldn't recommend trying to use this as some area in which we can look back on Howson fondly.
I think some people were being unfair to him, but I'm not a fan. I'm more of a Savard fan than I ever was of Howson. At that time I was more in tune with the runnings of the front office, I'm convinced he was playing some politics at the expense of the team for a while.
Mayor Bee
Registered User
- Dec 29, 2008
- 18,085
- 531
Which is all well and good, but all I'm saying is that Bobrovsky was acquired on the morning of the 2012 draft for two picks in said draft plus one the next year. If a team trades three draft picks for a higher pick that was then used to take a player, is it really that much different than trading three picks at the draft for a physical player?
It's simply a matter of semantics, nothing more.
I was talking about what he drafted. You were talking about a roster move that impacted the number of picks we had.
Yes, that is a false equivalency not a matter of "semantics". Drafting is drafting, trading is trading. Trading doesn't become drafting because it happens on draft day.
Having said that it's a pointless conversation.
We Want Ten
Make Chinakov Great Again
LetsGOJackets!!
Registered User
7 pages, & my love for Ryan Murray has not changed. He played with and covered for Nutti, who was jumping into the offense at every opportunity. The only fans that don't value a defenseman that can bring that kind of skill, allowing their partner to be a complete wildcard have never put on a pair of skates and tried to get from point A to point B to end up and anticipate where play was going rather than where it started. Of course his +/- went up negatively, he was covering play for a cherry picker. I'm glad he remains a Blue Jacket and I'm glad to see the support for Murray. Keep it up folks.. advanced stats are KPI, used for modeling behaviors, but often times to ignore situational conditions that caused the trend is to completely miss the boat and draw incorrect conclusions. Someone "Torts" wanted Nutti pinching in.. and was willing to allow this knowing Murray was putting out the fires.
Old Guy
Just waitin' on my medication.
- Aug 30, 2015
- 1,847
- 1,645
There is a difference between the sentiment contained in my post, and my sentiment for Murray and this team.
I love Ryan Murray, but he just feels like an enigma. He's clearly not as good as Jones and Werenski are/will be. So on this team he is not a #1/#2. The way he was used last year allowed Savard and Johnson to do that thing they do. It was awesome to watch those two guys have a full year of sustained success.
It was almost like Ryan Murray then allowed the luxury of giving cover to see what we had in Nutivaara. Will Nutivaara eventually become Bobby Orr or Scott Stevens? No. Neither will Ryan Murray for that matter.
But look at it this way. From the 2015 draft, amoung all 90 players drafted in rounds 5-6-7, there are 72 total NHL games played so far. Nutivaara has 66 of them. Tell me Jarmo couldn't flip Nutivaara for more than the 7th rounder that he was. Yes, nobody would give you a 2nd OA for Ryan Murray now, but he is making significant contribution to this team
I love Ryan Murray, but he just feels like an enigma. He's clearly not as good as Jones and Werenski are/will be. So on this team he is not a #1/#2. The way he was used last year allowed Savard and Johnson to do that thing they do. It was awesome to watch those two guys have a full year of sustained success.
It was almost like Ryan Murray then allowed the luxury of giving cover to see what we had in Nutivaara. Will Nutivaara eventually become Bobby Orr or Scott Stevens? No. Neither will Ryan Murray for that matter.
But look at it this way. From the 2015 draft, amoung all 90 players drafted in rounds 5-6-7, there are 72 total NHL games played so far. Nutivaara has 66 of them. Tell me Jarmo couldn't flip Nutivaara for more than the 7th rounder that he was. Yes, nobody would give you a 2nd OA for Ryan Murray now, but he is making significant contribution to this team
LetsGOJackets!!
Registered User
Ryan Murray gives us the luxury of having someone in the top 6 that can play bigger minutes if needed. In a full season injuries occur, Murray has the talent to play in any pairing. I like Nutti, and I am glad that Murray gives the luxury of having that 3rd pair ing D man that is jumping into the play. Nutti will get better at it this year and will generate more points, but it is Murray that allows this style to work. Don't kid yourself on that, Torts wouldn't play that wide open if he didn't have a lot faith in Ryan
Cyclones Rock
Registered User
- Jun 12, 2008
- 10,601
- 6,526
Make the case of Murray as a top pairing. You can't. Don't try. It's absurd that you'd even post such drivel.
Relative Corsis For to teammates are a very strong indicator of a player's performance.
Here are "first pairing" or "#1D" Murray's (I am literally LOLing right now) relative corsis to teammates last season and over his career.
http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rat...eamid=0&type=corsi&sort=F60RelTM&sortdir=DESC
Murray was 186/197 last season. Pitiful. First pairing type of stuff. Keep dreaming
No first pairing potential dman has probably ever had such an odius ranking in this category. Last year was his 4th as a pro. He's not going to get much better. The good news is that he can't get much worse.Savard (10) Werenski (27) Jones (48) and JJ (112) on this list.
Over his career he's 157/220 (3rd pairing)
https://drfbets.xb-online.com/xbo/main.aspx?xbOsid=40f66c04b9a468f62533a2abc5a8032a
Make the case of Murray as a top pairing. You can't. Don't try. It's absurd that you'd even post such drivel.
Relative Corsis For to teammates are a very strong indicator of a player's performance.
Here are "first pairing" or "#1D" Murray's (I am literally LOLing right now) relative corsis to teammates last season and over his career.
http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rat...eamid=0&type=corsi&sort=F60RelTM&sortdir=DESC
Murray was 186/197 last season. Pitiful. First pairing type of stuff. Keep dreaming
Savard (10) Werenski (27) Jones (48) and JJ (112) on this list.
Over his career he's 157/220 (3rd pairing)
https://drfbets.xb-online.com/xbo/main.aspx?xbOsid=40f66c04b9a468f62533a2abc5a8032a
Which one of you do you think is going to break and give in to the other first? I'll give you a hint if you want.
Viqsi
"that chick from Ohio"
His Corsi Rel has been previously acknowledged. Once again, are you ever going to respond to the "his teammates' scoring still improves while he's on the ice" bit, or are you just going to keep repeating "BUT HE SUCKS" over and over? Because your argument still appears to be "well, I can't pinpoint the cause, so clearly that means he's incapable" - forgetting the fact that advanced stats are not able to completely measure everything about a player (if they could, we'd actually have a viable WAR-type stat rather than the experimental ones being played with - and, oh, hey, those experimental stats still show Murray as second-pairing).Make the case of Murray as a top pairing. You can't. Don't try. It's absurd that you'd even post such drivel.
Relative Corsis For to teammates are a very strong indicator of a player's performance.
Here are "first pairing" or "#1D" Murray's (I am literally LOLing right now) relative corsis to teammates last season and over his career.
http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/rat...eamid=0&type=corsi&sort=F60RelTM&sortdir=DESC
Murray was 186/197 last season. Pitiful. First pairing type of stuff. Keep dreaming
Savard (10) Werenski (27) Jones (48) and JJ (112) on this list.
Over his career he's 157/220 (3rd pairing)
https://drfbets.xb-online.com/xbo/main.aspx?xbOsid=40f66c04b9a468f62533a2abc5a8032a
Anything that tells me that Savard is in the top 10 really isn't a stat I'm trusting.
It's fascinating, so we've reduced a player worth to how much or little the team scores (or shoots) with or without a player on the ice.
I'll just say it again, CORSI is a crutch for people that can't evaluate players by watching them. The stats are good to know, but they are hardly a defining factor in player quality.
If this information was remotely accurate and useful we were total morons for not acquiring Dougie Hamilton and Kempny is superior or Keith and Seabrook.
Clearly these stats favor those that put up points on the more productive teams. That's great, but I've never really considered Krug a defensive zone gem. Honestly with Savard sitting at a +33, is it a surprise he's rated highly? I think he's pretty good in the defensive zone, but with that +33 he's +25 in his career.
It's fascinating, so we've reduced a player worth to how much or little the team scores (or shoots) with or without a player on the ice.
I'll just say it again, CORSI is a crutch for people that can't evaluate players by watching them. The stats are good to know, but they are hardly a defining factor in player quality.
If this information was remotely accurate and useful we were total morons for not acquiring Dougie Hamilton and Kempny is superior or Keith and Seabrook.
Clearly these stats favor those that put up points on the more productive teams. That's great, but I've never really considered Krug a defensive zone gem. Honestly with Savard sitting at a +33, is it a surprise he's rated highly? I think he's pretty good in the defensive zone, but with that +33 he's +25 in his career.
Cyclones Rock
Registered User
- Jun 12, 2008
- 10,601
- 6,526
Dismiss what you can't (or won't) understand. Then use +/- to make a point
Relative corsi for shows shot generation for a player relative to his teammates. A player who has a positive number relative to his teammates is on the ice for more shots. More shots leads to more goals. If you can't grasp this concept, I really don't know what to say.
Keep "proving" your points with your unquantifiable yet unassailable "watching the them play" methodology. Good Gravy. LOL
Last edited:
Cyclones Rock
Registered User
- Jun 12, 2008
- 10,601
- 6,526
Still stuck on your lame and hardly proved notion that Murray improves teammates offense. He doesn't.
He was 186/197 in shot generation relative to his teammates last year. He's a bottom pairing guy over his career in the same stat.
Stats don't measure everything a player does. No kidding. But when a player is deficient in almost every measurement, it should signal something. His raw stats in terms of points are weak. His advanced stats range from pitiful to barely average. But I guess it's all those intangibles that only those with truly sophisticated hockey analytical skills can "see".
He's not tough. He's not acknowledged as a leader. His stats put him anywhere between #4D (I'm being generous here) and #7D, but you keep insisting that he is a ("don't argue with the facts, dammit you're a hater") second pairing dman with upper pairing potential.
Keep dreaming.
Mayor Bee
Registered User
- Dec 29, 2008
- 18,085
- 531
I remember many years ago, when I first discovered that there were underlying numbers beyond the "traditional" stats and I pretty much jumped headfirst into all of this. It took a while before I was able to fully grasp that all I was doing was simply using a larger vessel to draw from an almost incalculable ocean of information, and going slightly deeper was still barely touching the surface and didn't really clear up the picture.
Someday I hope you'll get to that level of realization, like I did 20+ years ago.
Someday I hope you'll get to that level of realization, like I did 20+ years ago.
I've come to a slightly different realization. Advanced stats are a tool. How useful the tool is depends on how you use it. Linking to a collection of stats going "He sucks" or "He's awesome" means that you are drawing conclusions with little to no thought. Stats are only once piece of the puzzle in evaluating players. You can't judge hockey IQ, speed, etc simply by looking at advanced stats.
The traditional stats are more than enough to move you to the next phase, evaluation.
