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

Status
Not open for further replies.

twabby

Registered User
Mar 9, 2010
13,625
14,446
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?

Yes.

Of course, referees aren't going to miss every call even if they missed this one, so on average you will still get a nice PP advantage if you let the refs do their job.
 

g00n

Retired Global Mod
Nov 22, 2007
30,433
14,292
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!

What premise are you disagreeing with? I asked a simple set of questions related to the proposition that there's a cost/benefit scenario at play.

It goes beyond the "data" and is not dependent on it. We are accepting incomplete and inconclusive "data". So...

Can you answer?

  1. ...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?
  2. So why not err on the side of caution given that analysis?
  3. In the absence of quantifiable data, what would most coaches and players choose?
  4. 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?
  5. 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
30,433
14,292
Yes.

Of course, referees aren't going to miss every call even if they missed this one, so on average you will still get a nice PP advantage if you let the refs do their job.

Can you prove this?
With data?
Do you realize that this is still entirely dependent on the "eye test" and not empirical evidence?
 

tenken00

Oh it's going down in Chinatown
Jan 29, 2010
9,863
10,089
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.

I don't think we should alter the lines for tonight's game either, but it is something to think about in the future if we meet in the playoffs. Still a lot of season to be played to get to that point though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Neil Racki

txpd

Registered User
Jan 25, 2003
69,649
14,131
New Bern, NC
I am learning new things. The opposition should let Tom Wilson run roughshod thru their team because he might get a penalty and get benched.

I was always under the impression that a pain delivery penalty was a good thing. You are going to kill 80-90% of minor penalties. If you can bury Ov from behind and just take a minor penalty, its worth it all day and night.

This is worth a 2 minute penalty all day

 

CapitalsCupReality

It’s Go Time!!
Feb 27, 2002
64,388
19,091
upload_2021-3-5_10-22-49.gif


It’s a new day Twabby!
 

CapitalsCupReality

It’s Go Time!!
Feb 27, 2002
64,388
19,091
I am learning new things. The opposition should let Tom Wilson run roughshod thru their team because he might get a penalty and get benched.

I was always under the impression that a pain delivery penalty was a good thing. You are going to kill 80-90% of minor penalties. If you can bury Ov from behind and just take a minor penalty, its worth it all day and night.

This is worth a 2 minute penalty all day



hey man.....watch it....if your not watching games with your calculator in hand, you’re behind the times! ;)

and I agree....worth the 2 mins every day of the week.
 

twabby

Registered User
Mar 9, 2010
13,625
14,446
What premise are you disagreeing with? I asked a simple set of questions related to the proposition that there's a cost/benefit scenario at play.

It goes beyond the "data" and is not dependent on it. We are accepting incomplete and inconclusive "data". So...

Can you answer?

  1. ...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?
  2. So why not err on the side of caution given that analysis?
  3. In the absence of quantifiable data, what would most coaches and players choose?
  4. 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?
  5. 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?

I'm disagreeing with the premise that tough guys, or enforcers, act as a deterrent. A lot of other people also disagree, including many current coaches who decide not to dress enforcers because they believe the cost/benefit scenario works out in favor of not dressing a tough guy, so I think it's fair to say that the deterrent factor is in question. I think it's reasonable that when something is disputed or in question and there's no consensus, then we should try to analyze it in as an objective way as possible.

The data presented shows, at best, that the deterrent factor is inconclusive, and more likely that dressing enforcers is correlated with more fights and more injuries.

So the cost/benefit analysis of dressing an enforcer is as follows:

COST: Be less likely to win the game. Be less likely to win future games due to an increased risk of injury, causing players to miss future games.
BENEFIT: None.

If you want to take the more inconclusive version of the data, and assuming injuries are relatively equal dressing or not dressing an enforcer:

COST: Be less likely to win the game.
BENEFIT: None.

Neither of these analyses lead me to want to dress an enforcer as a deterrent.

To answer your questions:

1. There is some data to indicate enforcers as deterrents don't work, and likely cause more injuries to your team. Please see the links I posted. So no, I don't agree. The assumption that deterrents don't work is based on data, and the assumption that deterrents do work is not based on data. Unless you have some other data to suggest enforcers reduce injuries? You mentioned that there is evidence that support both sides of the argument.
2. The side of caution would be to follow the data when in doubt. One side has data, the other doesn't
3. They'd choose whatever they feel is right, probably based on past experience. Of course that does not apply here. Currently, most coaches do not dress enforcers because the collective experience and data support "enforcers and deterrents are of little value."
4. Yes. Again, under the assumption that there is a deterrent effect, it is reasonable to play an enforcer in this role. But the assumption is false, in my opinion.
5. Of course I can't: none of my family loves me.

So now that I've gone through answering some of your questions, I'd like to ask again: 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?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ALLCAPSALLTHETIME

CapitalsCupReality

It’s Go Time!!
Feb 27, 2002
64,388
19,091
Looks like VV again and not Sammy



as it should be....

(not at you Tenken)

And oh yeah....Lavi can shift Wilson with Ovy any time he wants to send a message or respond in kind. It doesn’t have to be on the lineup card to start the game.

So simple...rather than trying to goad Goon into saying Lavi is making a mistake.

The mistake is letting Frederic continue his actions with no retribution IMO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AussieCapsFan

txpd

Registered User
Jan 25, 2003
69,649
14,131
New Bern, NC
I'm disagreeing with the premise that tough guys, or enforcers, act as a deterrent. A lot of other people also disagree, including many current coaches who decide not to dress enforcers because they believe the cost/benefit scenario works out in favor of not dressing a tough guy, so I think it's fair to say that the deterrent factor is in question. I think it's reasonable that when something is disputed or in question and there's no consensus, then we should try to analyze it in as an objective way as possible.

The data presented shows, at best, that the deterrent factor is inconclusive, and more likely that dressing enforcers is correlated with more fights and more injuries.

So the cost/benefit analysis of dressing an enforcer is as follows:

COST: Be less likely to win the game. Be less likely to win future games due to an increased risk of injury, causing players to miss future games.
BENEFIT: None.

If you want to take the more inconclusive version of the data, and assuming injuries are relatively equal dressing or not dressing an enforcer:

COST: Be less likely to win the game.
BENEFIT: None.

Neither of these analyses lead me to want to dress an enforcer as a deterrent.

To answer your questions:

1. There is some data to indicate enforcers as deterrents don't work, and likely cause more injuries to your team. Please see the links I posted. So no, I don't agree. The assumption that deterrents don't work is based on data, and the assumption that deterrents do work is not based on data. Unless you have some other data to suggest enforcers reduce injuries? You mentioned that there is evidence that support both sides of the argument.
2. The side of caution would be to follow the data when in doubt. One side has data, the other doesn't
3. They'd choose whatever they feel is right, probably based on past experience. Of course that does not apply here. Currently, most coaches do not dress enforcers because the collective experience and data support "enforcers and deterrents are of little value."
4. Yes. Again, under the assumption that there is a deterrent effect, it is reasonable to play an enforcer in this role. But the assumption is false, in my opinion.
5. Of course I can't: none of my family loves me.

So now that I've gone through answering some of your questions, I'd like to ask again: 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?

What is your definition of enforcer? Enforcers are out of the game because they cant play the game as well as a Hathaway can. What makes Wilson suck a monster is that he is an all situations player that also carries heavy weight enforcer cred.

As for deterrence. Frederic is not a unique player in the NHL. There are many players like him. How many players in recent years have done to Ovechkin what Frederic did repeatedly on Wednesday night? They dont. The difference is that Wilson was replaced by Sheary. Do you want Ov fighting his own battles? Yes or no? Do you want to encourage more teams to do what Frederic is doing because he got away with it. The entire league saw that.

Laviolette has said he has spread the lines to manage wear and tear on the players during the compressed schedule. I am confident that Wilson will be with Ovechkin come playoffs
 
  • Like
Reactions: g00n

AlexBrovechkin8

At least there was 2018.
Sponsor
Feb 18, 2012
26,745
24,942
District of Champions
Ok this has gone off the rails, as usual, and has nothing to do with Wednesday's game so I'm locking it. Someone start today's GDT please and bring the roster talk to the roster thread.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->