Post-Game Talk: #33 on 3/3 @ 4pm PST — Whither Chara?

Status
Not open for further replies.

txpd

Registered User
Jan 25, 2003
69,649
14,131
New Bern, NC
There is no evidence to suggest that Tom Wilson being on the ice protects anyone from injury.

There is evidence to suggest that Tom Wilson being on the ice in a "protecting" role will lead to matching majors for fighting. There is also evidence to suggest that Tom Wilson is a much, much better player than Trent Frederic. Do you want Tom Wilson sitting in the penalty box for 5+ minutes instead of contributing? Do you want Trent Frederic in the penalty box for a matching major instead of being on the ice where he is a huge liability for the Boston Bruins?

Everything was great last night! I'd like to see it again tomorrow.

I know there are not analytics on that subject. So, there is really no point in continuing down this road. Agree to disagree. I will ask this question. Do you think hitting and intimidation plays any role in the NHL? One more. Are you old enough to have seen Dale Hunter play? Oh, damn. One more. Do you acknowledge that a reason that Wilson is so well thought of and is a leader on the team is his willingness to protect his teammates?
 

AussieCapsFan

Registered User
Apr 30, 2017
2,990
2,638
Gold Coast
Why fight him and take a productive Capital off the ice for 5+ minutes?

Let Frederic do his antics, as he is one of the worst players on the Bruins. They don't need Wilson to protect Ovechkin, Ovechkin knows how to deal with bad players: get quality opportunities against them and hopefully score some goals.

I wouldn't change much of anything from last game.

So you let him continue to behave that way and he possibly injures one of our star players with a cross check or a dirty hit? No way. I'd rather Wilson knocks him out and sits in the box for 5 minutes.
 

caps4cup

Dynasty
Dec 31, 2010
6,104
1,264
Caps have the best 5v5 xGF% in the league since Feb 13th (Kuznetsov played his first game after getting off the COVID list on the 14th). They’re at almost 56% in that time frame. Things are looking up. Boy is it nice having a good coach again. Would’ve been interesting seeing how much different the last 2 years would’ve played out with a different coach.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ALLCAPSALLTHETIME

pman25

Registered User
Aug 29, 2009
4,561
3,341
Richmond
If they’re gonna fight Frederic, do it immediately and get it out of the way. That likely settles it and the refs will squash any further shit. They’re probably already keeping an eye out for that since everyone saw the Ovi/Frederic incidents.

I don’t care much one way or the other, I’m guessing a much tighter game will be called since the one last night was chippy. Refs prep just like the teams do so I think they’ll be ready to toss Wilson or Frederic in the box at any little infraction or scrum.
 

AussieCapsFan

Registered User
Apr 30, 2017
2,990
2,638
Gold Coast
So you let him continue to behave that way and he possibly injures one of our star players with a cross check or a dirty hit? No way. I'd rather Wilson knocks him out and sits in the box for 5 minutes.

And also - Twabby - didn't you tell us the other day that Wilson's advanced stats show he's having a pretty bad year? 5 mins in the box won't really hurt us if that's the case :laugh:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Raikkonen

PaulD

Time for a new GM !
Feb 4, 2016
28,751
15,806
Dundas
Thumbs up to Big Z with tribute and win in Boston.
Thumbs down to OV for spearing Bruin in the nuts . Ouch !
 

twabby

Registered User
Mar 9, 2010
13,623
14,440
I saw Ov face planted into the boards just before Federic dropped his gloves. If Ov is injured in that face plant and misses games, you dont think that backing that kind of play off isnt a good idea?

How is Tom Wilson going to prevent Ovechkin from slipping into the boards? It wasn't an egregious hit at all, and indeed was not even penalized.

I recall Backstrom being concussed with a late hit last playoffs. That hurt the team. Wilson was with Kuznetsov at the time. Lee doesnt do that with Wilson there.

1. How are you so sure about the bolded?
2. Assuming your speculation is true, why wouldn't Lee have instead concussed Kuznetsov, who would not have had Wilson on his wing to protect him? Or TJ Oshie?

I know there are not analytics on that subject. So, there is really no point in continuing down this road. Agree to disagree. I will ask this question. Do you think hitting and intimidation plays any role in the NHL? One more. Are you old enough to have seen Dale Hunter play? Oh, damn. One more. Do you acknowledge that a reason that Wilson is so well thought of and is a leader on the team is his willingness to protect his teammates?

Yes, I think hitting plays a role. I think some players can sometimes be intimidated into making mistakes if they fear they might get hit. Yes I watched Dale Hunter play, but I must admit I was quite young so my impression of him is from his later years rather than his earlier years. Yes, I acknowledge that Wilson is well-thought of and a leader on the team for the reason you stated.

I'm not saying that Tom Wilson should not hit people, I'm saying altering the lines right now is likely a bad idea because the current lines worked very well on Wednesday. I think that whatever gain you think they would get protecting Ovechkin, as if he has ever needed protection, would be way more than offset by the loss they would take by mixing up the lines again after their most impressive performance of the year.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ALLCAPSALLTHETIME

twabby

Registered User
Mar 9, 2010
13,623
14,440
And also - Twabby - didn't you tell us the other day that Wilson's advanced stats show he's having a pretty bad year? 5 mins in the box won't really hurt us if that's the case :laugh:

While his 5v5 xGF% numbers aren't fantastic, they aren't terrible either. And he is also performing well on the penalty kill and his numbers on PP2 are actually pretty good given the context.

There's also a cascading effect if he removes himself from the game for an extended period: other forwards have to get double-shifted, lines may be jumbled for a bit, etc.

Wilson certainly has room to improve at even strength this year, but to me it's still preferable that he stay on the ice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ALLCAPSALLTHETIME

twabby

Registered User
Mar 9, 2010
13,623
14,440
What evidence do you have for this statement?

It's a hypothetical. That's why the word "If" is placed at the beginning of the paragraph.

If you do not want to see Trent Frederic's face bashed in, then the paragraph does not (necessarily) apply to you. It's kind of a "choose your own adventure" post in that way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ALLCAPSALLTHETIME

AussieCapsFan

Registered User
Apr 30, 2017
2,990
2,638
Gold Coast
While his 5v5 xGF% numbers aren't fantastic, they aren't terrible either. And he is also performing well on the penalty kill and his numbers on PP2 are actually pretty good given the context.

There's also a cascading effect if he removes himself from the game for an extended period: other forwards have to get double-shifted, lines may be jumbled for a bit, etc.

Wilson certainly has room to improve at even strength this year, but to me it's still preferable that he stay on the ice.

I agree that he is more valuable on the ice than spending 5 mins in the box. But I just can't see tomorrow's game being all friendly and "hey it s a new day, all is forgotten!"
I'm expecting there to be some bad blood. These teams play each other another 5 times and at the moment they are the best in the division. Also a strong chance they'll encounter each other in the playoffs.
This feels like the beginning of a rivalry (at least until next season when the divisions go back to the way they were :laugh: )
 

Ridley Simon

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
18,125
9,066
Marin County — SF Bay Area, CA
What evidence do you have to suggest that putting Tom Wilson alongside star players will prevent them from getting injured? This includes Tom Wilson, who is also a star player for the Capitals.

The conversation is also kind of moot because if Tom Wilson is alongside Ovechkin and Kuznetsov, he is no longer alongside Backstrom and Vrana, who are also star players. I guess Frederic will just run roughshod over them instead.

Unless they put Garnet Hathaway alongside Backstrom and Vrana.

But then that will leave TJ Oshie exposed on the third line, so Frederic will just go after him.

Unless they move Brenden Dillon to the third forward line, move Carl Hagelin to the 3rd defense pairing, and put Conor Sheary on the 4th line.
But then what about the 4th line? They will get Frederic.

sigh. We just cannot win.
 

g00n

Retired Global Mod
Nov 22, 2007
30,430
14,290
It's a hypothetical. That's why the word "If" is placed at the beginning of the paragraph.

If you do not want to see Trent Frederic's face bashed in, then the paragraph does not (necessarily) apply to you. It's kind of a "choose your own adventure" post in that way.

It was mostly a joke. But since you seem to be taking it so seriously, let's consider the protection effect to be "hypothetical" as well. In both cases an assumption is being made based entirely on observation and experience, but without empirical evidence. Agree?

If that's the case then what's the cost-benefit calculation of erring on the side of caution when it comes to protecting your stars?

The upside of not protecting a star is maybe you can ice a non-fighter at a goon's salary, which isn't going to get you much scoring.

The downside is much more impactful, as you could lose a stud to injury or at the very least see a decline in production as some lunkhead is constantly harassing your top scoring threat. Even if it works some small fraction of the time it's probably worth it, as your best scorer is likely to produce more points in the instances where they're not being harassed/injured vs what you're probably going to get from a league-minimum plug.

So why not err on the side of caution given that analysis? In the absence of quantifiable data, what would most coaches and players choose? Isn't that essentially the same as playing a guy with 1% better (insert fancy stat) over another guy...because you perceive better odds/chances/etc?

These practices didn't just spring up out of nothing or some desire to see face-punching. They evolved as teams began to attack stars, and opponents responded. If they didn't seem to work, in the expert analysis of those closest to the situation, they wouldn't have done it for so long. If fighting became a sideshow later that's a different story.

As a side note, can you show me data that proves your (insert family member) loves you? Not a personal attack, just a hypothetical. Doesn't exist if there's no quantifiable data, right? ;)
 

g00n

Retired Global Mod
Nov 22, 2007
30,430
14,290
How is Tom Wilson going to prevent Ovechkin from slipping into the boards? It wasn't an egregious hit at all, and indeed was not even penalized.

Just because the refs missed it doesn't mean it wasn't a penalty, or was an accident. You're not trying to assert the infallibility of officiating now, are you? That officials using an "eye test" for penalties are never wrong? I hope you have evidence to back that up.

I've watched it many times. Go back and look, in slow motion if needed. The puck was nowhere near Ovechkin as he crossed the extended goal line with Frederic on his back. Ovie wasn't even playing the puck. Frederic got his stick (again nowhere near the puck) into Ovie's skate and took out his legs. As Ovie went down Frederic pushed him into the boards with his left arm.

Tripping, boarding, roughing. Whatever. It was a penalty and Ovie was lucky not to be hurt. And the only reason Frederic was doing it was because his job was to rough up Ovechkin, not play the puck.
 

twabby

Registered User
Mar 9, 2010
13,623
14,440
It was mostly a joke. But since you seem to be taking it so seriously, let's consider the protection effect to be "hypothetical" as well. In both cases an assumption is being made based entirely on observation and experience, but without empirical evidence. Agree?

If that's the case then what's the cost-benefit calculation of erring on the side of caution when it comes to protecting your stars?

The upside of not protecting a star is maybe you can ice a non-fighter at a goon's salary, which isn't going to get you much scoring.

The downside is much more impactful, as you could lose a stud to injury or at the very least see a decline in production as some lunkhead is constantly harassing your top scoring threat. Even if it works some small fraction of the time it's probably worth it, as your best scorer is likely to produce more points in the instances where they're not being harassed/injured vs what you're probably going to get from a league-minimum plug.

So why not err on the side of caution given that analysis? In the absence of quantifiable data, what would most coaches and players choose? Isn't that essentially the same as playing a guy with 1% better (insert fancy stat) over another guy...because you perceive better odds/chances/etc?

These practices didn't just spring up out of nothing or some desire to see face-punching. They evolved as teams began to attack stars, and opponents responded. If they didn't seem to work, in the expert analysis of those closest to the situation, they wouldn't have done it for so long. If fighting became a sideshow later that's a different story.

As a side note, can you show me data that proves your (insert family member) loves you? Not a personal attack, just a hypothetical. Doesn't exist if there's no quantifiable data, right? ;)

Your implication would be correct. If a player like Tom Wilson actually does protect superstar players, then it might be worth it to have them on the same line at least some of the time, even if it hurt the team's goal differential.

But I do not agree with your premise at all, and neither does some of the data:

What Is It Good For? Absolutely Nothing: The Myth of Enforcer Culture
Did Thornton Inadvertently End Savard's Career?
Enforcers are not deterrents
The Edmonton Oilers and the new era of the one-dimensional fighter | Edmonton Journal
The Enforcer Fallacy: Hockey's Fighting Specialists Don't Protect Anyone

The data showing that enforcers are a deterrent is, at the very most, inconclusive. My suspicion is that enforcers and "deterring" actually just makes the game more dangerous for everyone.

In that case I think coaches and player would err on the side of what we know, which is that the current line configurations just played an excellent game against one of the best teams in the division, and that they are more likely to continue their success than a new combination of lines. I'd be shocked if Peter Laviolette changes the lines for tonight.

If Laviolette doesn't put Tom Wilson alongside Alex Ovechkin, or if someone doesn't fight Trent Frederic to "deter" him, would you say Laviolette and the team is making a mistake?
 

twabby

Registered User
Mar 9, 2010
13,623
14,440
Just because the refs missed it doesn't mean it wasn't a penalty, or was an accident. You're not trying to assert the infallibility of officiating now, are you? That officials using an "eye test" for penalties are never wrong? I hope you have evidence to back that up.

I've watched it many times. Go back and look, in slow motion if needed. The puck was nowhere near Ovechkin as he crossed the extended goal line with Frederic on his back. Ovie wasn't even playing the puck. Frederic got his stick (again nowhere near the puck) into Ovie's skate and took out his legs. As Ovie went down Frederic pushed him into the boards with his left arm.

Tripping, boarding, roughing. Whatever. It was a penalty and Ovie was lucky not to be hurt. And the only reason Frederic was doing it was because his job was to rough up Ovechkin, not play the puck.

I'll eat some crow on this one: on second viewing it looks like you're correct. I didn't see the stick go into the skate the first time I looked at it, but it looks like it does. I can't judge intent, but it doesn't look like it was just an accident. It should have been a penalty (along with the one for dropping the gloves, which was a clear missed call at the time).
 

tenken00

Oh it's going down in Chinatown
Jan 29, 2010
9,863
10,089
If Laviolette doesn't put Tom Wilson alongside Alex Ovechkin, or if someone doesn't fight Trent Frederic to "deter" him, would you say Laviolette and the team is making a mistake?

I think that will be entirely up to Frederic and the Bruins. While all of this is based on our statistically best lineups in accordance to maximizing our best results, it doesn't account for the intent of the opposing team, or specifically the intent of an opposing individual. Physical play is one thing, but antagonizing solely for the purpose of disrupting the Caps outside of any actual hockey plays is another.

I would rather the game just be played, but unlike numbers, these guys are humans with real emotions, and our guys specifically are pretty much known to be a bit hot-headed.
 
Last edited:

g00n

Retired Global Mod
Nov 22, 2007
30,430
14,290
Your implication would be correct. If a player like Tom Wilson actually does protect superstar players, then it might be worth it to have them on the same line at least some of the time, even if it hurt the team's goal differential.

But I do not agree with your premise at all, and neither does some of the data:

What Is It Good For? Absolutely Nothing: The Myth of Enforcer Culture
Did Thornton Inadvertently End Savard's Career?
Enforcers are not deterrents
The Edmonton Oilers and the new era of the one-dimensional fighter | Edmonton Journal
The Enforcer Fallacy: Hockey's Fighting Specialists Don't Protect Anyone

The data showing that enforcers are a deterrent is, at the very most, inconclusive. My suspicion is that enforcers and "deterring" actually just makes the game more dangerous for everyone.

In that case I think coaches and player would err on the side of what we know, which is that the current line configurations just played an excellent game against one of the best teams in the division, and that they are more likely to continue their success than a new combination of lines. I'd be shocked if Peter Laviolette changes the lines for tonight.

If Laviolette doesn't put Tom Wilson alongside Alex Ovechkin, or if someone doesn't fight Trent Frederic to "deter" him, would you say Laviolette and the team is making a mistake?


We've all googled the articles and you can find support for both sides of the argument. That's not part of the proposition.

Are you going to answer the general questions instead of redirecting and throwing out red herrings? Suspicions and assumptions are back to square one.
 

twabby

Registered User
Mar 9, 2010
13,623
14,440
I think that will be entirely up to Frederic and the Bruins. While all of this is based on our statistically best lineups in accordance to maximizing our best results, it doesn't account for the intent of the opposing team, or specifically the intent of an opposing individual. Physical play is one thing, but antagonizing solely for the purpose of being disrupting the Caps outside of any hockey plays is another.

I would rather the game just be played, but unlike numbers, these guys are humans with real emotions, and our guys specifically are pretty known to be a bit hot-headed.

Again, I'd make sure the refs know about this and get on them every time they miss a cross-check, or trip, or whatever.

If they don't respond with a penalty call after Frederic's first infraction, and the team feels like they have to fight Frederic to get the game under control, then I suppose my preference would be that they have Garnet Hathaway fight him. Of the "fighters" on the team, he is probably the least important to the team's success.

But I wouldn't have anyone "protect" Ovechkin by altering the lines.
 

twabby

Registered User
Mar 9, 2010
13,623
14,440
We've all googled the articles and you can find support for both sides of the argument. That's not part of the proposition.

Are you going to answer the general questions instead of redirecting and throwing out red herrings? Suspicions and assumptions are back to square one.

I'm agreeing with all of your answers under the assumption that there is a deterrent effect. Would you like me to type out the response?

I would also say that there is a reason enforcers are on the decline in the NHL and all but extinct now: coaches and GMs realized they didn't actually do their job of deterring, and they also usually stink at hockey.
 

g00n

Retired Global Mod
Nov 22, 2007
30,430
14,290
I'm agreeing with all of your answers under the assumption that there is a deterrent effect. Would you like me to type out the response?

You have a funny way of agreeing with people:

"But I do not agree with your premise at all, and neither does some of the data:"
 

twabby

Registered User
Mar 9, 2010
13,623
14,440
You have a funny way of agreeing with people:

"But I do not agree with your premise at all, and neither does some of the data:"

Agreeing with the implication as a whole does not mean you necessarily agree with the premise.

For instance, "If I were a famous athlete then I would be rich." I'd probably agree with this statement as a whole, but I certainly do not agree that I am a famous athlete!
 

g00n

Retired Global Mod
Nov 22, 2007
30,430
14,290
I'll eat some crow on this one: on second viewing it looks like you're correct. I didn't see the stick go into the skate the first time I looked at it, but it looks like it does. I can't judge intent, but it doesn't look like it was just an accident. It should have been a penalty (along with the one for dropping the gloves, which was a clear missed call at the time).

Well I think it was intentional, or at least not entirely accidental. At best a reflex. He got the stick in the skates when it had no business being there. And then the shove at the end? Not good.

But again, refs rely on the "eye test" to call penalties. One argument against fighting/deterrents/enforcers/whatever has been to let the refs call the game and punish the other side with your PP. This was a famous McPhee strategy for years.

Do you agree with that?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->