Post-Game Talk (GBU): All hail our savior ZemGOD

[mikemcburn]

Despite Stewart being a turn-over machine (luckily registered with only 6 giveaways, lol), he would appear to have the least worst CorsiRel among Sabres forwards so far this season (interesting seeing how he had the worst to end last season).

But Ennis, Moulson, Stafford? You say Hodgson's numbers are worse than theirs, but from the stats I'm finding that's just not the case so what am I missing? Am I using the wrong db sites?

behindthenet.ca has Hodgson as less pathetic than each of Ennis, Moulson & Stafford this season for CorsiRel this season (limited sample size), and less pathetic than Stafford & Stewart last season.

http://www.behindthenet.ca/nhl_stat...+3+5+4+6+7+8+13+14+29+30+32+33+34+45+46+63+67

war-on-ice.com is interesting for its comparison functionality, but I'm not sure how accurate the data is deemed to be? If it's accurate, then from the last 1/3 of the 2013/2014 season thru to this season, Hodgson's Corsi% that has been generally higher than each of Ennis, Stafford and Stewart, and relatively similar to Moulson.

http://war-on-ice.com/playerseason.html?name1=Cody0Hodgson

If these numbers are accurate then, although Hodgson is perhaps the most trendy target to bash for his defensive, it appears that in actuality he's no worse defensively Ennis, Stafford, Stewart and Moulson.

But again, I dunno how accurate these sites are? Maybe I'm missing something, not interpreting correctly? Perhaps there is something better to look at?

 

[joshjull]

Despite Stewart being a turn-over machine (luckily registered with only 6 giveaways, lol), he would appear to have the least worst CorsiRel among Sabres forwards so far this season (interesting seeing how he had the worst to end last season).

But Ennis, Moulson, Stafford? You say Hodgson's numbers are worse than theirs, but from the stats I'm finding that's just not the case so what am I missing? Am I using the wrong db sites?

behindthenet.ca has Hodgson as less pathetic than each of Ennis, Moulson & Stafford this season for CorsiRel this season (limited sample size), and less pathetic than Stafford & Stewart last season.

http://www.behindthenet.ca/nhl_stat...+3+5+4+6+7+8+13+14+29+30+32+33+34+45+46+63+67

war-on-ice.com is interesting for its comparison functionality, but I'm not sure how accurate the data is deemed to be? If it's accurate, then from the last 1/3 of the 2013/2014 season thru to this season, Hodgson's Corsi% that has been generally higher than each of Ennis, Stafford and Stewart, and relatively similar to Moulson.

http://war-on-ice.com/playerseason.html?name1=Cody0Hodgson

If these numbers are accurate then, although Hodgson is perhaps the most trendy target to bash for his defensive, it appears that in actuality he's no worse defensively Ennis, Stafford, Stewart and Moulson.

But again, I dunno how accurate these sites are? Maybe I'm missing something, not interpreting correctly? Perhaps there is something better to look at?

I think its because you are looking at whats happen so far this year and many others are looking at Hodgson since eh got here. he has been a terrible possession/defensive player for us even when he is producing offense. Thats not the case for those other players.

 

[mikemcburn]

I think its because you are looking at whats happen so far this year and many others are looking at Hodgson since eh got here. he has been a terrible possession/defensive player for us even when he is producing offense. Thats not the case for those other players.

Do you happen to know if those sites referenced are sound/accurate?

If not, can you direct me to alternative sources?

If so, then I'm confused because unless I'm reading the numbers incorrectly, Hodgson's defensive game hasn't been any worse - and has actually been arguably better - than the others named, and dating back to the last 1/3-ish of the 2013/2014 season.

I say "arguably" because while going back that far expands the sample size enough to show a possible trend, that's the same stretch where other factors come into play - he's been tossed around the lines, flipping from center/wing, with diff line mates, etc., and offsetting that he's possibly seen weaker competition, etc.?

Anyway, I realize it's trendy to bash Hodgson's defensive game but I'm just not seeing how it's truly any worse than the likes of Ennis, Stafford, etc. If I've got that wrong (data, interpretation, etc.) please point me in the right direction, thanks.

 

[joshjull]

Do you happen to know if those sites referenced are sound/accurate?

If not, can you direct me to alternative sources?

If so, then I'm confused because unless I'm reading the numbers incorrectly, Hodgson's defensive game hasn't been any worse - and has actually been arguably better - than the others named, and dating back to the last 1/3-ish of the 2013/2014 season.

I say "arguably" because while going back that far expands the sample size enough to show a possible trend, that's the same stretch where other factors come into play - he's been tossed around the lines, flipping from center/wing, with diff line mates, etc., and offsetting that he's possibly seen weaker competition, etc.?

Anyway, I realize it's trendy to bash Hodgson's defensive game but I'm just not seeing how it's truly any worse than the likes of Ennis, Stafford, etc. If I've got that wrong (data, interpretation, etc.) please point me in the right direction, thanks.

It gets bashed because its been consistently terrible since he got here. Ennis has also been bad since he's been the #1 center. Which impacts his wingers Moulson/Stafford. Just like Hodgson impacts his wingers.

The difference though is Hodgson, until the tail end of last year, has played the position he was projected to play in the NHL. That being center and he was projected to be one in the top 6. Because he has been so bad defensively they've tried him at wing to mitigate that issue. They've also given the #1 center spot to Ennis. A player no one ever projected to be a top 6 center, let alone #1 center in the NHL. When Ennis was on the wing or a secondary center behind a #1, not surprisingly, his goals against per 60mins was much better than it is now. Same for Stafford when he wasn't being centered by Ennis on the top line.

What you're missing is that no matter what position Hodgson plays, no matter what line he plays on or who he plays with. He is consistently one of the worst defensive players on the team and the stats back that up. Whereas when Ennis and Stafford weren't playing over their heads in roles better suited to them. Their defensive numbers improved.

There really is no way to defend his lack of defensive game. All the deflecting towards Ennis, Stafford and Moulson is somewhat missing that point.

 

[mikemcburn]

It gets bashed because its been consistently terrible since he got here. Ennis is also been bad since he's been the #1 center. Which impacts his wingers Moulson/Stafford. Just like Hodgson impacts his wingers.

The difference though is Hodgson, until the tail end of last year, has played the position he was projected to play in the NHL. That being center and he was projected to be one in the top 6. Because he has been so bad defensively they've tried him at wing to mitigate that issue. They've also given the #1 center spot to Ennis. A player no one ever projected to be a top 6 center, let alone #1 center in the NHL. When Ennis was on the wing or a secondary center behind a #1, not surprisingly, his goals against per 60mins was much better than it is now. Same for Stafford when he wasn't being centered by Ennis on the top line.

What you're missing is that no matter what position Hodgson plays, no matter what line he plays on or who he plays with. He is consistently one of the worst defensive players on the team and the stats back that up. Whereas when Ennis and Stafford weren't playing over there heads in roles better suited to them. Their defensive numbers improved.

There really is no way to defend his lack of defensive game. All the deflecting towards Ennis, Stafford and Moulson is somewhat missing that point.

Ahh!

So, presuming those data references are accurate, then the fact that the defensive games of Stafford, Ennis, Moulson, etc. are statistically (though only moderately, of course) worse than Hodgson's is irrelevant because they all have excuses while Hodgson was projected to be a top 6 so has none.

Gotcha.

Nevertheless, the point that was made holds true - from the final 1/3 of the 2013/14 season thru the first 15% of this season, Hodgson's defensive game has been no worse, and arguably better, than a bunch of others who are not held to the same scrutiny.

There is a bit of irony in your final comment, btw. I mean, seeing how you're the one defending the play of the others to deflect away from the point that was actually being made...

 

[joshjull]

Ahh!

So, presuming those data references are accurate, then the fact that the defensive games of Stafford, Ennis, Moulson, etc. are statistically (though only moderately, of course) worse than Hodgson's is irrelevant because they all have excuses while Hodgson was projected to be a top 6 so has none.

Gotcha.

Nevertheless, the point that was made holds true - from the final 1/3 of the 2013/14 season thru the first 15% of this season, Hodgson's defensive game has been no worse, and arguably better, than a bunch of others who are not held to the same scrutiny.

I'm not defending their stats nor am I arguing they are irrelevant. I'm saying when playing their proper role they are not issues defensively or at least not as bad as they are in their current roles. Whereas no matter how or where Hodgson has been used he is an issue defensively. Its a pretty straightforward idea thats backed by the numbers. I'm sure you will yet again ignore this or not actually address it.

There is a bit of irony in your final comment, btw. I mean, seeing how you're the one defending the play of the others to deflect away from the point that was actually being made...

I'm not defending their play nor deflecting anything. This is just more of your ridiculous spin. You are just not following the point being made because you either don't get it or more likely refuse to accept it because of your love of Hodgson.


I'll clarify my point.

Hodgson sucks defensively and has since he got here. He's sucked on the 1st line, 2nd line, 3rd line, at center and on the wing. Basically in every situation he has been used he has sucked defensively. Thats why he gets bashed for his defense. No other player matters in relation to this. Hopefully this adds some clarity to the point I was trying to make.

 

[mikemcburn]

I'm not defending their stats nor am I arguing they are irrelevant. I'm saying when playing their proper role they are not issues defensively or at least not as bad as they are in their current roles. Whereas no matter how or where Hodgson has been used he is an issue defensively. Its a pretty straightforward idea thats backed by the numbers. I'm sure you will yet again ignore this or not actually address it.



I'm not defending their play nor deflecting anything. This is just more of your ridiculous spin. You are just not following the point being made because you either don't get it or more likely refuse to accept it because of your love of Hodgson.


I'll clarify my point.

Hodgson sucks defensively and has since he got here. He's sucked on the 1st line, 2nd line, 3rd line, at center and on the wing. Basically in every situation he has been used he has sucked defensively. Thats why he gets bashed for his defense. No other player matters in relation to this. Hopefully this adds some clarity to the point I was trying to make.

No matter how, in your Me-Moderator-So-I-know-All-Things-Tockey mode, you elect to rationalize excusing poor play of one player and giving no quarter to another, the fact remains -

The point that was made holds true - from the final 1/3 of the 2013/14 season thru the first 15% of this season, Hodgson's defensive game has been no worse, and arguably better, than a bunch of others who are not held to the same scrutiny.

 

[Corto]

No matter how, in your Me-Moderator-So-I-know-All-Things-Tockey mode, you elect to rationalize excusing poor play of one player and giving no quarter to another, the fact remains -

The point that was made holds true - from the final 1/3 of the 2013/14 season thru the first 15% of this season, Hodgson's defensive game has been no worse, and arguably better, than a bunch of others who are not held to the same scrutiny.

Dude, give it up.
Hodgson sucks defensively.

And IMO his offensive game will never be good enough for him to be a top-6 center on a contending team.

 

[mikemcburn]

Dude, give it up.
Hodgson sucks defensively.

And IMO his offensive game will never be good enough for him to be a top-6 center on a contending team.

FYI, don't think anyone has argued that Hodgson's defensive game doesn't suck.

And still, "the point that was made holds true - from the final 1/3 of the 2013/14 season thru the first 15% of this season, Hodgson's defensive game has been no worse, and arguably better, than a bunch of others who are not held to the same scrutiny."

 

[gallagt01]

FYI, don't think anyone has argued that Hodgson's defensive game doesn't suck.

And still, "the point that was made holds true - from the final 1/3 of the 2013/14 season thru the first 15% of this season, Hodgson's defensive game has been no worse, and arguably better, than a bunch of others who are not held to the same scrutiny."

Jesus Christ, who cares. The forwards you mentioned all suck defensively. You just admitted that Hodgson sucks defensively. There's no argument to be made.

 

[mikemcburn]

Jesus Christ, who cares. The forwards you mentioned all suck defensively. You just admitted that Hodgson sucks defensively. There's no argument to be made.

And now you got it too!