Post-Game Talk: The Gimmick Sucks (Your 3 Stars of the Game, though)

[MartyOwns]

Is this a serious question?

We're not doing the McKinnon breakout comparison here anymore?

i don't know what you mean with mackinnon, but yes it was a serious question. if you kept reading my post after the first sentence you'd understand why i asked it.

 

[My3Sons]

I posted these numbers a couple days ago - So when I calculated each of their last 100 games I believe Nico had 1 point.


Nico has been trending down ever year. Zacha has been trending up every year. Zacha has out produced Nico over each of their last 100 games. And Nico's 100 takes him back to February 2019


Nico's last 100
100 games 22goals + 33 assist = 55 points - 224 shots - .55 PPG
(Career .63 PPG -.08)

Pavel last 100
100 games 27 goals 36 assist = 63 points - 188 shots .63 PPG
(Career .46 PPG + .17 )

The important part is Zacha is +.17 PPG over his career average over his last 100 games and Nico down -.08 to his career average to his last 100.


And I don't think it can be understated that Nico has only played 100 games since February 2019. I mean everyone suffered with the schedules but 100 games in nearly 3 years is probably the biggest problem of them all.

Nothing you are saying is wrong, but on some level, it's not about individuals as I see it. It's about wins and losses. Why does it matter how they happen?

Zacha has been on for five goals against at 5 v 5. He has been on for three goals for NJ during that time. Scoring numbers or not that is not a recipe for success. Nico has been on for two goals against in more minutes at five by five. He's been on for four goals for NJ during that time. You win games if you score more than the other team. If NJ had four centers playing like Hischier they'd be amazing defensively and maybe they win one of the three games they haven't despite the low scoring.

I think that Nico should be scoring more (or generating more assists) and to my eyes something does look a bit off with him, but given the ongoing bumps and bruises that may be why. If Zacha scored 100 points and the team sucked would you be happy? I wouldn't no matter who scored 100 points. As a team they are doing well and given how bad they were last season that's a nice improvement. If Hischier picks it up at some point that will offset any downswing if Mercer gets tired. Once Hughes returns and Nico doesn't always have to be the matchup center he will probably generate some more offense -if - and it's a big if - he can stay healthy.

At the end of the day there are twenty guys playing each game. It's not about two of them to me. I'll suggest that having to play Wedgewood is a bigger problem than Nico's lack of scoring or Zacha's lack of positive results at five on five.

 

[tailfins]

It’s actually not.

I’m sure someone has done the work on this, but it’s not clear to me if any of the stats you quoted are causal for points or merely correlated.

I also don’t know how much they may explain. Is it really “in all likelihood” or just “somewhat likely”?

we like to throw around numbers as if there’s a defined relationship between stat a and result x. I haven’t seen anything where it’s that clear though.

ETA: I’m just picking on the “all likelihood” part of your statement. I do like the use of data to try to explain the underlying process, so not against your broad point. Just pushing back against the notion that the data are somehow definitive and unassailable.

 

[Triumph]

It’s actually not.

I’m sure someone has done the work on this, but it’s not clear to me if any of the stats you quoted are causal for points or merely correlated.

I also don’t know how much they may explain. Is it really “in all likelihood” or just “somewhat likely”?

we like to throw around numbers as if there’s a defined relationship between stat a and result x. I haven’t seen anything where it’s that clear though.

There's not, you're correct. But the very obvious rebuttal to this is that Nico Hischier is a career 11% shooter and is presently shooting half of that. Nico's 5v5 IPP is 63% - that means that so far in his career, Nico has gotten points on 63% of the goals scored when he's on the ice, but so far this season that number is 25%. There's nothing that says Nico can't sustain these poor results, but the odds of him doing so would be very, very unlikely.

 

[JimEIV]

i don't know what you mean with mackinnon, but yes it was a serious question. if you kept reading my post after the first sentence you'd understand why i asked it.

I did read it and your playing the circular game every one loves to play here...Dismiss the poor results of our current players who were very high picks and point to the next generation of hopefuls...

Problem is you were doing the SAME EXACT thing 4 years ago with the last batch...We got Nico, Bratt, Boqvist, McLeod...Things are so much brighter and the world is going to be awesome when these player mature...And they don't and we're on to the next batch hopefuls that are going to make the world better...Just gotta wait for tomorrow and tomorrow turns into a decade.

 

[MartyOwns]

The main issue with having a 7M$+ 3rd line center decreases your odds of getting another high priced player at positions of weakness.

I’ll take a 3.5M$ 3rd line center and a 7M$+ winger to play alongside Hughes instead of the other way around.

With that said, I absolutely loved what I saw from Nico in his rookie year. I thought he’d be a poor man’s Patrice Bergeron but what I’ve been seeing from him in the last couple of years, he’s looking more and more like a 45–50 point center with a good defensive game.

right so he could be overpaid by a few million. that's honestly not that big of a deal to me given the current and near-future structure of the team.

personally, if nico eventually becomes a 50-60 point guy who is responsible defensively, i'm ok with that. i'm not going to get bent out of shape over some future hypothetical scenario where we can't bring in someone due to nico's price tag.

 

[My3Sons]

ETA: I’m just picking on the “all likelihood” part of your statement. I do like the use of data to try to explain the underlying process, so not against your broad point. Just pushing back against the notion that the data are somehow definitive and unassailable.

Is there any way to look at advanced stats and show how they will play out going forward? I know on some level, folks have tried with PDO, but while the advanced numbers tell what happened in the past do they work for saying what will happen in the future?

 

[Derps]

Is there any way to look at advanced stats and show how they will play out going forward? I know on some level, folks have tried with PDO, but while the advanced numbers tell what happened in the past do they work for saying what will happen in the future?

To some extent, they do -- that's partially the point.

 

[Zajacs Bowl Cut]

It’s actually not.

I’m sure someone has done the work on this, but it’s not clear to me if any of the stats you quoted are causal for points or merely correlated. Meaning, I don’t know how much they may explain. Is it really “in all likelihood”, “somewhat likely”, or “hopefully”?

we like to throw around numbers as if there’s a defined relationship between stat a and result x. I haven’t seen anything where it’s that clear though.

so just to be clear, it is your stance that players who control the play and generate many chances/high danger chances do NOT produce points over time? Just want to check what it is you're even saying.

 

[RememberTheName]

Yes, if Nico continues to have the underlying numbers that he currently does, the points will IN ALL LIKELIHOOD start coming

better?

I think the one issue that people are going to have with your argument is that we saw the same thing last year with guys like Jack Hughes, where his underlying numbers were ridiculously good and everyone kept waiting and waiting for the points to supplement those underlying numbers and they just never came. Now, we are seeing the same thing so far this year with Hischier. His underlying numbers are great, but the points aren't coming. They didn't come last year for Hughes, so why would they come this year for Hischier, is I think what a lot of people are getting at. Like you said, in all likelihood, points should come, but we have already experienced players where the points just don't come even with the underlying numbers looking great, so for a lot of people, it's tough to hold confidence in these underlying numbers when more often then not for us, they don't translate to points, for whatever reason that may be even though it shouldn't necessarily be the case.

I would also like to add one thing to this point. Hughes, at least through the eye test, looked fantastic while putting up those crazy underlying numbers. I think we can both agree that Hischier does not look nearly as good as Hughes did last year while putting up these numbers. At least with Hughes, you could see him before your eyes playing great and that great play just not translating. I personally am not getting those same vibes from Hischier. Like Lindy Ruff said earlier in the year, he will always look at the advanced stats in a meaningful way unless your play on the ice isn't backing it up (I believe this was in regards to good advanced stats for Bratt and Sharangovich for a game they both played terribly during). For Hughes, the advanced stats last year backed up what we were all witnessing on the ice. For Hischier, I am just not seeing the same level of play that will be capable of sustaining this high level of offense generation.

I agree with your point that in all likelihood, Nico should start producing more points with the numbers he has and probably should have had more points over the past 7 games given his great numbers. But, through the eye test, it's tough to tell whether he can maintain it, and even if he does maintain it, we have seen players, like Jack Hughes last year, maintain great numbers only to amount to not a whole lot of points.

 

[SteveCangialosi123]

The main issue with having a 7M$+ 3rd line center decreases your odds of getting another high priced player at positions of weakness.

I’ll take a 3.5M$ 3rd line center and a 7M$+ winger to play alongside Hughes instead of the other way around.

With that said, I absolutely loved what I saw from Nico in his rookie year. I thought he’d be a poor man’s Patrice Bergeron but what I’ve been seeing from him in the last couple of years, he’s looking more and more like a 45–50 point center with a good defensive game.

Luckily you’re just hallucinating that Nico is a 3C and have absolutely no clue what 3Cs typically do.

 

[TBF1972]

Nice recap, and I also agree with pretty much every game note point you made.

On the guys who really need to step up, I echo that it is Rango, McLeod, Kuokkanen, Tatar, Nico. In that order particularly. Sharangovich most notably so, its almost like he's playing with a grenade each time he gets the puck on his stick. I agree that Nico did look better 2nd/3rd period, and Tatar has been "OK", but Tatar also needs to put up some points.. Given that they are our 1st line right now by labeling, they really need to put it in gear and go.

Smith maybe needs a game just to watch, but I'm pretty sure he learned that lesson real quick.

considering the devils don't have a top heavy roster, it would already be a good contribution to neutralize the other teams top line, if they are mainly matched up against them.

 

[MartyOwns]

I did read read it and your playing the circular game every one loves to play here...Dismiss the poor results of our current players who were very high picks and point to the next generation of hopefuls...

Problem is you were doing the SAME EXACT thing 4 years ago with the last batch...We got Nico, Bratt, Boqvist, McLeod...Things are so much brighter and the world is going to be awesome when these player mature...And they don't and we're on to the next batch hopefuls that are going to make the world better...Just gotta wait for tomorrow and tomorrow turns into a decade.

right so as i suspected, your issue here is nico's draft position. same as last year when hughes was a disgrace. again, they were picked where the consensus had them. if we had reached for them at 1OA and they were disappointing, i'd understand your position.

most teams would love to have hughes, nico and mercer down the middle, it just seems like a weird thing to get bent out of shape about. it's not so much that i'm "dismissing" the "poor results" i'm just saying that right now, nico should be pretty low on our list of concerns.

 

[Bleedred]

The difference between current Nico and what people were hoping for is, what, 2 extra points? Yeah no I'm not concerned about that.

What I am concerned about is Sharangovich, Kuokkanen, and McLeod being black holes offensively. Our whole gameplan is dependent on the ability to roll four lines and the entire bottom-6 outside of Vesey has been terrible.

I'm also starting to get concerned about Smith, yes he is coming back from an injury but he's made some really horrible defensive decisions.

There's also Tatar, who looked great the first ~3 games or so but has struggled quite a bit. Only Geertsen, Studenic, and Gauthier have a lower xGF over the past 4 games. For comparison, Nico is getting roasted alive for being 2nd on the team behind Hamilton.

So yeah, Nico's offense is not in my top-5 things I'm worried about right now.

I'm just about done with McLeod having any ceiling above what he is now. He's probably not gonna be much much more than a 4th liner.

Really, that was the first Shero draft pick that didn't have Lou and Conte's fingerprints on it and it's been a real Tedenby/Josefson special. And he was picked higher than those two picks.

There weren't a whole lot of really good forwards picked after him and Logan Brown, the guy that was picked with our original 11th overall pick that we traded with Ottawa to trade back a spot, is certainly is not any better. He's probably a bust. Luke Kunin has been better than him and probably always will be. He was the only forward picked in the next 6 spots after him. The others D-men. A couple of pretty good ones too, but I won't really go there because I think we needed forwards and scoring more at that time. Sadly, at least a couple of those defensemen will probably outscore him by quite a bit and already are. We still need more scoring and he's not providing it.

McLeod could be a good 4th line center too, but that pick is really starting to piss me off. If anybody wants to say ''Well it took Zacha quite a few years'' Zacha already had the 21 points McLeod has in 92 games in just 59 NHL games. Zacha's goal scoring wasn't quite as much better, as he got his 9th NHL goal in his 73rd game, whereas McLeod got his in his 83rd NHL game. But Zacha didn't need 39 games in the league before his first goal either. It took him only 10 games.

And Zacha is only 10 months older and one draft year before McLeod, even though it seems like Zacha is several years older than McLeod, just because he's been in the league full time for 5 years and has played in 231 NHL games, while McLeod is in just his second full time season in the league and has only played in 92 games. I think once you get to the 100 game mark as a forward, especially a 23 year old forward, you probably get a good idea of what they will become and McLeod will probably hit in the next few weeks and so far it's not looking good. And before somebody says ''It's not all about points!'' you don't draft a forward 12th overall to be a ''Defensive specialist'' or ''Penalty killer'' or a ''Face off guy''. The guys that were picked that low that have spent their years in the league as ''Defensive specialist'' or ''Face off specialists'' got that way because they were busts and way underperformed from what they were expected at their draft positions.

And just for fun, I looked up how long it took Jacob Josefson to get his 21st point in the league and it was in game 93. Josefson was still more than 2.5 years younger than McLeod at that time though. However, it did take Josefson 145 NHL games to score 9 goals. And he was merely just a few weeks older than McLeod currently is right now.

In better news, the first Fitzgerald draft is already starting to look better than probably 2 or 3 of Shero's drafts and maybe even more if you exclude his two first overall picks.

Mercer looks like he could wind up being better than anybody that Shero didn't draft at first overall. The only guy (excluding Hischier and Hughes) from the Shero drafts that I think might be better than Mercer is possibly Ty Smith. Different positions and both are still too young to tell. It's possible Blackwood winds up being a better than Mercer, but again it's a different position. I still think Mercer will be better than Zacha, even if it doesn't look that way by the end of the year. I think he could be better than Nico, but I still think Nico can be a 60+ point guy. I definitely don't think he'll ever be better than Jack though.

Still LOVE the Bratt pick during the Shero drafts, which was out of nowhere.

 

[Buck Dancer]

right so he could be overpaid by a few million. that's honestly not that big of a deal to me given the current and near-future structure of the team.

personally, if nico eventually becomes a 50-60 point guy who is responsible defensively, i'm ok with that. i'm not going to get bent out of shape over some future hypothetical scenario where we can't bring in someone due to nico's price tag.

The thing is, players will be looking at his salary and use it as a benchmark. Just look at the Bruins, they are paying their top guys and not one player will get a penny more then their respective leaders.

I love Nico and I do hope he’ll turn things around but having him as a 3rd line center moving forward is not a good thing, I don’t care how we slice this up.

 

[Bleedred]

That was my first really long post in a LOOONNNGGGGG time, that wasn't a goals review.

It feels good to be back to being a regular and spending most of my life on this forum and actually having the desire to make a post that long again.

 

[AfroThunder396]

right so he could be overpaid by a few million. that's honestly not that big of a deal to me given the current and near-future structure of the team.

personally, if nico eventually becomes a 50-60 point guy who is responsible defensively, i'm ok with that. i'm not going to get bent out of shape over some future hypothetical scenario where we can't bring in someone due to nico's price tag.

People like to pretend you can't be successful unless your cap is 100% hyper-optimal and everyone is overperforming their age, draft position, and contract. That's just simply not true. Every Cup winning team has overpaid players. It doesn't matter who is overpaid and who is underpaid as long as there's a balance.

 

[TBF1972]

Nico Hischier is dragging down our best forward, Pavel Zach, and a guy that was playing really well with Mercer, in Tatar.

It’s sad to see our captain and highest paid forward look like he completely lost his mojo offensively. Dawson Mercer looks like he’s the veteran and the kid has 7 pro games under his belt.

Something has to happen with him or else we’re looking at a crippling contract heading forward.

we are getting out of picks, if have to unload all of them.

 

[Buck Dancer]

Luckily you’re just hallucinating that Nico is a 3C and have absolutely no clue what 3Cs typically do.

That’s cool, if you feel Nico Hischier is playing like a top line center and is playing better then Mercer, more power to you.

Jack Hughes is our clear cut #1 center and if things stay as is, Mercer will be behind Hughes, leaving Hischier as our 3rd option down the middle. There’s no denying that Nico is the better defensive player out of the 3 options and turning him into Travis Zajac is not something I want to see because he’s way better then that and that might be what is bugging him in all honesty.

 

[JimEIV]

Nothing you are saying is wrong, but on some level, it's not about individuals as I see it. It's about wins and losses. Why does it matter how they happen?

Zacha has been on for five goals against at 5 v 5. He has been on for three goals for NJ during that time. Scoring numbers or not that is not a recipe for success. Nico has been on for two goals against in more minutes at five by five. He's been on for four goals for NJ during that time. You win games if you score more than the other team. If NJ had four centers playing like Hischier they'd be amazing defensively and maybe they win one of the three games they haven't despite the low scoring.

I think that Nico should be scoring more (or generating more assists) and to my eyes something does look a bit off with him, but given the ongoing bumps and bruises that may be why. If Zacha scored 100 points and the team sucked would you be happy? I wouldn't no matter who scored 100 points. As a team they are doing well and given how bad they were last season that's a nice improvement. If Hischier picks it up at some point that will offset any downswing if Mercer gets tired. Once Hughes returns and Nico doesn't always have to be the matchup center he will probably generate some more offense -if - and it's a big if - he can stay healthy.

At the end of the day there are twenty guys playing each game. It's not about two of them to me. I'll suggest that having to play Wedgewood is a bigger problem than Nico's lack of scoring or Zacha's lack of positive results at five on five.

The scenario's you pose seem, to me anyway, trapped between two different worlds....A world where the Team is first and the individual is non-existent. And world where Super Star rule the roost and play 19 to 20 minutes and individuals get all the focus....The Team first/no individuals has been dead in New Jersey for a very long time.


EDIT:

Get this: When Patrik Elias scored 96 points in 2001 he averaged 18:44 of Ice time...When Zach Parise had 94 points in 2009 he averaged 18:45 of ice time.... Nico is averaging 19:56 today and producing at 1/2 point per game.

 

[Triumph]

The thing is, players will be looking at his salary and use it as a benchmark. Just look at the Bruins, they are paying their top guys and not one player will get a penny more then their respective leaders.

I love Nico and I do hope he’ll turn things around but having him as a 3rd line center moving forward is not a good thing, I don’t care how we slice this up.

Sure, let's look at the Bruins, who just paid Charlie McAvoy $9.5M. What do you think David Pastrnak is going to make on his next contract? So yes, the Bruins were both fortunate and smart to have a team where all the top guys were underpaid, but also what unites Bergeron and Marchand is that neither player was drafted high. Players who were drafted low who become stars tend to be underpaid.

 

[SteveCangialosi123]

That’s cool, if you feel Nico Hischier is playing like a top line center and is playing better then Mercer, more power to you.

Jack Hughes is our clear cut #1 center and if things stay as is, Mercer will be behind Hughes, leaving Hischier as our 3rd option down the middle. There’s no denying that Nico is the better defensive player out of the 3 options and turning him into Travis Zajac is not something I want to see because he’s way better then that and that might be what is bugging him in all honesty.

I’m really just done talking about this. Have your fit, I’ll just watch the season play out.

 

[MartyOwns]

The thing is, players will be looking at his salary and use it as a benchmark. Just look at the Bruins, they are paying their top guys and not one player will get a penny more then their respective leaders.

I love Nico and I do hope he’ll turn things around but having him as a 3rd line center moving forward is not a good thing, I don’t care how we slice this up.

i agree that it’s not ideal, but it’s certainly not as bad as it’s being characterized. especially when you draft well and have a guy like mercer who can move up as needed.

 

[Poppy Whoa Sonnet]

1c/2C/3C aren't actually things, just shorthand ways to understand team builds. There's even strength lines and PP / PK roles, and you put the players in those roles that help you win games. The "Nico is just a 3c" freakout looks like a "Nico isn't putting up enough points" freakout, and that will probably change based on stats. He's gonna be a key contributor at all facets for a long time, but he probably won't have the impact Cale Makar has and you'll just have to accept that.

If Devils get to a point where Nico is surpassed by Hughes/Mercer that's a good thing, and only a good thing. Trying to make it fit under the cap, is not worth worrying about at this point.

 

[JimEIV]

i agree that it’s not ideal, but it’s certainly not as bad as it’s being characterized. especially when you draft well and have a guy like mercer who can move up as needed.

When you draft well you have guys like Mercer who can move up to fill in for the guys that didn't fulfil their draft selections?

This is a twisted way to look at things..."When you draft well"....Your 18th overall becomes better than #1 overall? This is a head scratcher to me.