The blind hate of Polak

[Nithoniniel]

Great, it's too bad we don't get to carry around a 7th D that we can only play for the PK. Outside that he is a nasty awful hockey player. Stats can take a back seat whatever they say. The blind could see Polak is terrible.

I made a comment on Polak's PK proficiency earlier in his career. I don't know why you respond as if I made that claim about his abilities now.

 

[fahad203]

Don't forget that Polak was part of the Sharks' run to the finals. Sure, he was absolutely terrible paired with Dillon (a player not entirely dissimilar to Borgman), but he was there for sure.

That should mean absolutely nothing. Polak of two years ago is not the same Polak, especially after his injury

This man is no longer an NHLer. Simple has that. PK is not the only part of a hockey game, especially in the new NHL where you have to move the puck, get in transition and play the game in high speed

Every game this man costs us a goal it seems. Considering we don't score many goals anymore, that's a huge liability. Even giving up one goal being down by a goal these days for the Leafs is a up hill battle

 

[Minus Mitch]

Probably won't be playing on this team by the TDL.

But he is today and being used. They could not wait for him to get back after injury.

 

[ShaneFalco]

But a large aspect of Leafs Nation does not seem happy. It seems to me Maple Leafs fans are never quite happy unless they get to complain about some aspect of their team.

That's funny. I mean what have Leaf fans had to complain about over the decades

 

[Minus Mitch]

The numbers mean nothing on their own of course. Without context it's basically just saying "this guy gets more shot attempts than this guy", or "this guy gets better chances than this guy. I mean people look at it and go "how is Cody Franson possibly better than Jaccob Slavin, underlying stats are stupid".

With context you see that Cody Franson is a sheltered 3rd pairing defenseman with high offensive zone starts, compared to Slavin who faces top-5 comp with hard zone starts. It's understandable why a guy like him will have worse stats than a guy like Franson.

Same goes for Polak. You compare him to what his comp/zone starts are and you see a guy who when he's on the ice we bleed shot attempts/HD chances, and a miserable penalty differential. All statistics that prove this guy can't cut it as a 3rd pairing defenseman in the NHL. Especially since his qoc is easier than most 3rd pairing defenseman because Babs knows he can't trust him.

Again the metrics mean nothing. You have no idea what a play at any given would look like with or without any given player. The law of averages? Ok maybe. But absolute not close. You list % but have no real comparison with the exact play with or without the player. So you are never comparing apples to apples. During an 80 game season any given time the QoC % could and will change. Hockey in the first quarter and then half is a lot different than hockey nearing and into playoff time so roles change.

 

[SeaOfBlue]

I just looked up penalty killing for the last 8 seasons (players that have played more than 500 minutes) [145 players] :

FA/60 - 69.65 (33rd)
xGA/60 - 6.43 (46th)
GA/60 - 5.72 (22nd)
Penalty differential - +8 (97th)

In a vacuum he's been a good penalty killer overall the last 8 years, but this lacks quite a bit of context. Don't know how much this actually means.

Were you not the one who posted that he was like and 83.6% while on the PK this year when the average was like 80.8% or something around there. 83.6% would be top 5 in the NHL I believe, so the 2% is a pretty big jump.

He is not as good as he was last year. The injury he took is likely a huge part of that. Could be that Hunwick to Borgman is a bigger drop off than people care to admit. Regardless, it's not like the Leafs have anything better in the wings who are ready to take his role(unless people like Marincin, which I think it is abundantly clear that most do not). This team lacks PKers as it is, and taking away one of the better ones in the league without anything close to a replacement is not a good idea.

 

[Morgs]

Again the metrics mean nothing. You have no idea what a play at any given would look like with or without any given player. The law of averages? Ok maybe. But absolute not close. You list % but have no real comparison with the exact play with or without the player

Have you ever heard of WOWY's? It literally shows each individual player with or without a certain player. It's not perfect, but it's a far better predictor of future success than a gut feeling.

So you are never comparing apples to apples. During an 80 game season any given time the QoC % could and will change. Hockey in the first quarter and then half is a lot different than hockey nearing and into playoff time so roles change.

Actually the way the TOIqoc works is its calculated based on the avgtoi based on the other teams lines with the assumption their best players play the most. Meaning it can change at anytime. But again it's all about context and sample size.

 

[Morgs]

Were you not the one who posted that he was like and 83.6% while on the PK this year when the average was like 80.8% or something around there. 83.6% would be top 5 in the NHL I believe, so the 2% is a pretty big jump.

He is not as good as he was last year. The injury he took is likely a huge part of that. Could be that Hunwick to Borgman is a bigger drop off than people care to admit. Regardless, it's not like the Leafs have anything better in the wings who are ready to take his role(unless people like Marincin, which I think it is abundantly clear that most do not). This team lacks PKers as it is, and taking away one of the better ones in the league without anything close to a replacement is not a good idea.

It was a Jeff Veillete tweet. The difference though was 0.3%, which is essentially nothing. Even a 2% boost (which is more likely luck than anything) is not enough to have a guy this bad for 75% of his actual minutes.

Borgman is better than Hunwick, but both of them have/had to carry Polak. Borgman looked wayyyy better beside Carrick (unsurprisingly).

 

[Minus Mitch]

Have you ever heard of WOWY's? It literally shows each individual player with or without a certain player. It's not perfect, but it's a far better predictor of future success than a gut feeling.



Actually the way the TOIqoc works is its calculated based on the avgtoi based on the other teams lines with the assumption their best players play the most. Meaning it can change at anytime. But again it's all about context and sample size.

What is the accuracy rate of these? I mean really easy to say that this or that is a possible peedictor but what is the accuracy rate? I mean look at team possession as an indicator of success. How many highly rated possession teams finish lower in the standings? Is possession 40% accurate? 90%? Is it a true indicator of success? This is a dynamic game. It isn’t a baseball thrown into a defined area by a pitcher throwing a fastball at 85mph. Hockey is a game where player A could look like a victim of a bad play yet really it was player B whom precipated the beginning of the play.

 

[freewilly]

What is the accuracy rate of these? I mean really easy to say that this or that is a possible peedictor but what is the accuracy rate? I mean look at team possession as an indicator of success. How many highly rated possession teams finish lower in the standings? Is possession 40% accurate? 90%? Is it a true indicator of success? This is a dynamic game. It isn’t a baseball thrown into a defined area by a pitcher throwing a fastball at 85mph. Hockey is a game where player A could look like a victim of a bad play yet really it was player B whom precipated the beginning of the play.

This is true of almost every sport that isn't a series of discrete events (baseball). I.e. basketball, a player looks like he gave up an easy layup, when in reality 3 screens earlier on the same possession, the help defender didn't rotate over when they were supposed to and a chain of events led to it looking as though the last defender was the culprit. Same with football (blown coverage), etc. The truth about analytics and stats and models is that nothing will (at least insofar as we can analyze today) ever be a 100% predictor of success. It all boils down to the following "famous" quote about models and analysis. If you understand it, you understand models and analytics:

"All models are wrong, but some models are useful." -George Box, one of the greatest statisticians of the 20th century

 

[SeaOfBlue]

It was a Jeff Veillete tweet. The difference though was 0.3%, which is essentially nothing. Even a 2% boost (which is more likely luck than anything) is not enough to have a guy this bad for 75% of his actual minutes.

Borgman is better than Hunwick, but both of them have/had to carry Polak. Borgman looked wayyyy better beside Carrick (unsurprisingly).

In what way? Why is Borgman rarely playing then? Why is he not out in crunch time, or playing 18-20 minutes a night, or getting any PK, like Hunwick consistently got for the Leafs? Babcock may have a predisposition to vets, but he'd play Borgman more than 13-14 minutes a night if he was capable of doing it.

And it does not surprise me either. Borgman-Carrick get baby minutes when they are together. If they couldn't handle that, then there is no reason either should be on an NHL roster right now.

I found the tweet, but there was something that compared him to league average. He says that it comes down to system more than skill, which is somewhat true, but then why not just have your worst players playing that all of the time? Why isn't Borgman a top PKer while Hainsey and Rielly still have to do a lot of PK on top of their ES and stuff? There is some sort of skill involved in PK, even if it is just picking up the system and knowing where to be in the defensive zone. Not every can do that at the same level as people like Polak can, and maybe that's why Babcock trusts him.

The league may be moving towards more puck moving defensemen, but I do not think we will ever see a defense fully composed of only puck movers. Guys like Polak are still necessary. Now I think if there were younger Polak's out there they would have to make sure their puck skills and skating skills were more up to par for the NHL than they were when Polak first came in. So maybe you want a sort of hybrid between Polak and Hainsey. Tough like Polak, a little bit better with the puck and skating like Hainsey. Sounds a lot like Borgman, but one common them is strong defensive awareness. Borgman is not there yet. He's young and he needs time. That's why I am content with Polak in the lineup for now (and sending Borgman to the AHL but that's irrelevant).

Like I said every year since dealing Polak to San Jose, I hope we do not have to bring him back next year, because that likely means our prospects are finally good and ready enough to properly replace him. I want them to get to a point where they can play PK and at least 16 minutes a night like Polak is getting. But they are not there yet, and until they are there, I can not see how you can fault Babcock for giving them the time they clearly need. Defensive development is something that needs to be done right from the beginning, or not at all. There is more room for forwards to be able to learn as they go if you need to (although clearly Babcock does not even want to do that until a spot truly opens up), but it's hard for defensemen. All I want out of Babcock is to make sure that when the time and opportunity comes, they do get that shot to take the next step.

 

[Minus Mitch]

This is true of almost every sport that isn't a series of discrete events (baseball). I.e. basketball, a player looks like he gave up an easy layup, when in reality 3 screens earlier on the same possession, the help defender didn't rotate over when they were supposed to and a chain of events led to it looking as though the last defender was the culprit. Same with football (blown coverage), etc. The truth about analytics and stats and models is that nothing will (at least insofar as we can analyze today) ever be a 100% predictor of success. It all boils down to the following "famous" quote about models and analysis. If you understand it, you understand models and analytics:

"All models are wrong, but some models are useful." -George Box, one of the greatest statisticians of the 20th century

Correct. Perfect quote. Some models are useful. What those are at this point in hockey know one knows. My guess is every team values things differently depending on players available to them.

 

[saltming]

In what way? Why is Borgman rarely playing then? Why is he not out in crunch time, or playing 18-20 minutes a night, or getting any PK, like Hunwick consistently got for the Leafs? Babcock may have a predisposition to vets, but he'd play Borgman more than 13-14 minutes a night if he was capable of doing it.

And it does not surprise me either. Borgman-Carrick get baby minutes when they are together. If they couldn't handle that, then there is no reason either should be on an NHL roster right now.

I found the tweet, but there was something that compared him to league average. He says that it comes down to system more than skill, which is somewhat true, but then why not just have your worst players playing that all of the time? Why isn't Borgman a top PKer while Hainsey and Rielly still have to do a lot of PK on top of their ES and stuff? There is some sort of skill involved in PK, even if it is just picking up the system and knowing where to be in the defensive zone. Not every can do that at the same level as people like Polak can, and maybe that's why Babcock trusts him.

The league may be moving towards more puck moving defensemen, but I do not think we will ever see a defense fully composed of only puck movers. Guys like Polak are still necessary. Now I think if there were younger Polak's out there they would have to make sure their puck skills and skating skills were more up to par for the NHL than they were when Polak first came in. So maybe you want a sort of hybrid between Polak and Hainsey. Tough like Polak, a little bit better with the puck and skating like Hainsey. Sounds a lot like Borgman, but one common them is strong defensive awareness. Borgman is not there yet. He's young and he needs time. That's why I am content with Polak in the lineup for now (and sending Borgman to the AHL but that's irrelevant).

Like I said every year since dealing Polak to San Jose, I hope we do not have to bring him back next year, because that likely means our prospects are finally good and ready enough to properly replace him. I want them to get to a point where they can play PK and at least 16 minutes a night like Polak is getting. But they are not there yet, and until they are there, I can not see how you can fault Babcock for giving them the time they clearly need. Defensive development is something that needs to be done right from the beginning, or not at all. There is more room for forwards to be able to learn as they go if you need to (although clearly Babcock does not even want to do that until a spot truly opens up), but it's hard for defensemen. All I want out of Babcock is to make sure that when the time and opportunity comes, they do get that shot to take the next step.

There is a reason a coach picks certain players fort the pk. Obviously some people think that's not the case but every coach at a competitive level will do this.

 

[Minus Mitch]

In what way? Why is Borgman rarely playing then? Why is he not out in crunch time, or playing 18-20 minutes a night, or getting any PK, like Hunwick consistently got for the Leafs? Babcock may have a predisposition to vets, but he'd play Borgman more than 13-14 minutes a night if he was capable of doing it.

And it does not surprise me either. Borgman-Carrick get baby minutes when they are together. If they couldn't handle that, then there is no reason either should be on an NHL roster right now.

I found the tweet, but there was something that compared him to league average. He says that it comes down to system more than skill, which is somewhat true, but then why not just have your worst players playing that all of the time? Why isn't Borgman a top PKer while Hainsey and Rielly still have to do a lot of PK on top of their ES and stuff? There is some sort of skill involved in PK, even if it is just picking up the system and knowing where to be in the defensive zone. Not every can do that at the same level as people like Polak can, and maybe that's why Babcock trusts him.

The league may be moving towards more puck moving defensemen, but I do not think we will ever see a defense fully composed of only puck movers. Guys like Polak are still necessary. Now I think if there were younger Polak's out there they would have to make sure their puck skills and skating skills were more up to par for the NHL than they were when Polak first came in. So maybe you want a sort of hybrid between Polak and Hainsey. Tough like Polak, a little bit better with the puck and skating like Hainsey. Sounds a lot like Borgman, but one common them is strong defensive awareness. Borgman is not there yet. He's young and he needs time. That's why I am content with Polak in the lineup for now (and sending Borgman to the AHL but that's irrelevant).

Like I said every year since dealing Polak to San Jose, I hope we do not have to bring him back next year, because that likely means our prospects are finally good and ready enough to properly replace him. I want them to get to a point where they can play PK and at least 16 minutes a night like Polak is getting. But they are not there yet, and until they are there, I can not see how you can fault Babcock for giving them the time they clearly need. Defensive development is something that needs to be done right from the beginning, or not at all. There is more room for forwards to be able to learn as they go if you need to (although clearly Babcock does not even want to do that until a spot truly opens up), but it's hard for defensemen. All I want out of Babcock is to make sure that when the time and opportunity comes, they do get that shot to take the next step.

And Babcock is and should be the one to decide when that is.

 

[Wafflewhipper]

I thought the thread title said "The bling date of Polak".

That would be the be the only way to explain him getting signed.

 

[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, hurts his goal stats.
• ~
• 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

 

[CantLoseWithMatthews]

can someone change the title to "the reasonable criticism of Polak"?

 

[Kiwi]

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

He can't even break a 50.00CF% playing with the Bozak line which has the living **** sheltered out of it and he's getting curb stomped everywhere else

If he's doing an ugly job it's not decent, it's ugly

can someone change the title to "the reasonable criticism of Polak"?

I'd call it unreasonable not to criticize him

 

[CantLoseWithMatthews]

He can't even break a 50.00CF% playing with the Bozak line which has the living **** sheltered out of it and he's getting curb stomped everywhere else

If he's doing an ugly job it's not decent, it's ugly



I'd call it unreasonable not to criticize him

ugly is exactly the way I'd describe his play. Decent is pretty far off from that. all of the defensemen we've played except maybe Marincin have been clearly better than Polak. he's the only one of Polak/Dermott/Borgman/Carrick who's gotten outscored by the opposition at 5v5 for instance

 

[Mr Hockey]

He can't even break a 50.00CF% playing with the Bozak line which has the living **** sheltered out of it and he's getting curb stomped everywhere else

If he's doing an ugly job it's not decent, it's ugly

haha

He is not deployed in offensive situations with the Bozak line, offensive zone starts, favorable match ups, whatever else.

 

[Minus Mitch]

ugly is exactly the way I'd describe his play. Decent is pretty far off from that. all of the defensemen we've played except maybe Marincin have been clearly better than Polak. he's the only one of Polak/Dermott/Borgman/Carrick who's gotten outscored by the opposition at 5v5 for instance

Yet a Stanley Cup Gold Medal winning coach who was selected and paid to do a job millions of Canadians wish they were even 1/1000000th of a percentage close to doing, disagrees. Go figure.

 

[Kiwi]

ugly is exactly the way I'd describe his play. Decent is pretty far off from that. all of the defensemen we've played except maybe Marincin have been clearly better than Polak. he's the only one of Polak/Dermott/Borgman/Carrick who's gotten outscored by the opposition at 5v5 for instance

I don't think there's been a coherent argument for his inclusion on the team

If he's awful 5v5 and the PK isn't significantly better with him on it why play him? Besides thinking he's a great guy?

haha

He is not deployed in offensive situations with the Bozak line, offensive zone starts, favorable match ups, whatever else.

The Bozak line gets butter soft usage no matter what zone there in, those are some of the cushier minutes in the NHL

 

[CantLoseWithMatthews]

Yet a Stanley Cup Gold Medal winning coach who was selected and paid to do a job millions of Canadians wish they were even 1/1000000th of a percentage close to doing, disagrees. Go figure.

people want to coach the Leafs so everything Babcock does is the complete right decision. very good argument here

 

[Minus Mitch]

I don't think there's been a coherent argument for his inclusion on the team

If he's awful 5v5 and the PK isn't significantly better with him on it why play him? Besides thinking he's a great guy?



The Bozak line gets butter soft usage no matter what zone there in, those are some of the cushier minutes in the NHL

Except NHL people totally disagree with you. Thankfully.

 

[Kiwi]

Yet a Stanley Cup Gold Medal winning coach who was selected and paid to do a job millions of Canadians wish they were even 1/1000000th of a percentage close to doing, disagrees. Go figure.

So appeal to authority? That's your argument

Babcock is a good X and O type of coach but his personel choices leave a lot to be desired