Alex Tuch v Mikael Granlund

[Filthy Dangles]

Who's a better player?

Click to read more...

 

[firstemperor]

Tough choice, I would take Tuch today and moving forward but I think Granlund is the safer pick if your team needs an infusion of skill.

 

[VoluntaryDom]

Granlund, as much as I like Tuch as a solid top-6 wing Granlund is clearly better. Considering how much this site loves Finns im surprised Granlund is down 4-2 so far including my Granlund vote.

 

[Connor McConnor]

Granlund quite easily for me, no clue how he's losing this. One guy, although impressive so far this season, has a 30 game sample size versus Granlund coming off 2 very impressive seasons considering his weak supporting cast. I also think he's better defensively.

 

[VoluntaryDom]

tuch is interesting. last year 2nd line scoring and very good on ice numbers, but this year mid to high end 1st line scoring with bad on ice numbers. moving forward i expect something in between, unless he simply keeps improving which at his age would not surprise me one bit.

 

[tony d]

I went with Granlund.

 

[mphmiles]

tuch is interesting. last year 2nd line scoring and very good on ice numbers, but this year mid to high end 1st line scoring with bad on ice numbers. moving forward i expect something in between, unless he simply keeps improving which at his age would not surprise me one bit.

Tuch's rel on ice numbers only look bad because the team as a whole made a big jump in corsi tbh. Last year they were 10th at 51%. This year they're 3rd at 54.5. Tuch's flat corsi is actually 1% higher than last season at 53%.

 

[VoluntaryDom]

Tuch's rel on ice numbers only look bad because the team as a whole made a big jump in corsi tbh. Last year they were 10th at 51%. This year they're 3rd at 54.5. Tuch's flat corsi is actually 1% higher than last season at 53%.

hes 52.2% xgf% and -3.8 rel this season. last year he was 53.1% xgf% and +2.6 rel.

 

[mphmiles]

hes 52.2% xgf% and -3.8 rel this season. last year he was 53.1% xgf% and +2.6 rel.

Yeah, his QoC stats have gone up as a result of spending more time against opposing top 2 lines, so a little lower xgf% is expected- and the team's fenwick has gone up a lot as a whole, which positively affects the team's xgf%, which is why his rel numbers there also aren't as good.

Team xgf% made a giant jump from 50.67 in 2017-18 to 55.56 this season.

 

[sadpanda]

Granlund, as much as I like Tuch as a solid top-6 wing Granlund is clearly better. Considering how much this site loves Finns im surprised Granlund is down 4-2 so far including my Granlund vote.

Considering how much you hate finns I am surprised you voted for one. Woo

 

[HanSolo]

Granlund now. Tuch future.

Tuch is still figuring his game out a bit and posting near PPG numbers on the second line. A second line that hasn't been fully healthy for more than 5 games this season. He'll get over this experimentation phase and start producing more soon. He's arguably the most talented forward Vegas has and is still developing. Won't be long before he replaces Smith or his current line becomes the top line.

 

[VoluntaryDom]

Considering how much you hate finns I am surprised you voted for one. Woo

i really dont hate finns

 

[sadpanda]

i really dont hate finns

Sure buddy. Maybe it will change once you become an adult

 

[Foppberg]

i really dont hate finns

Just Mikko

 

[VoluntaryDom]

Sure buddy. Maybe it will change once you become an adult

i really dont hate finns lol idk why you think that

Just Mikko

i dont hate him i just think hes overrated

 

[Foppberg]

i really dont hate finns lol idk why you think that

i dont hate him i just think hes overrated

With zero reason

 

[VoluntaryDom]

With zero reason

ive given my reasons actually. not gonna derail this thread but you can find my posts

 

[Foppberg]

ive given my reasons actually. not gonna derail this thread but you can find my posts

I've heard your reasons, they're garbage

 

[HanSolo]

Way to keep it on topic, fellas.

 

[Regal]

Yeah, his QoC stats have gone up as a result of spending more time against opposing top 2 lines, so a little lower xgf% is expected- and the team's fenwick has gone up a lot as a whole, which positively affects the team's xgf%, which is why his rel numbers there also aren't as good.

Team xgf% made a giant jump from 50.67 in 2017-18 to 55.56 this season.

Yea, as usual the problem with relative stats are that they're supposed to level the playing field between players on good and bad teams, but often just ends up showing whether the players you don't play with are playing well or not

 

[VoluntaryDom]

Yea, as usual the problem with relative stats are that they're supposed to level the playing field between players on good and bad teams, but often just ends up showing whether the players you don't play with are playing well or not

yeah but with raw stats they can be dragged down by teammates. theres a reason i generally use both. to me a 48% +2 rel guy is comparable to a 50% 0 rel guy or a 52% -2 rel guy.

 

[Regal]

yeah but with raw stats they can be dragged down by teammates. theres a reason i generally use both. to me a 48% +2 rel guy is comparable to a 50% 0 rel guy or a 52% -2 rel guy.

Yea, I think using both is important, plus the context of why, such as whether there's a particularly good or bad line that plays big minutes

 

[VoluntaryDom]

Yea, I think using both is important, plus the context of why, such as whether there's a particularly good or bad line that plays big minutes

yeah. i tend to look at which line combos perform well usually. like, adam erne has great on ice numbers but he seems to only be a slight on-ice plus on the 4th line compared to most of the guys hes subbed in and out for. his numbers are carried by his time with cirelli and killorn.