Player Discussion Anthony Duclair

[slamigo]

He does so much good night in night out. He will score soon. I can't believe folks are questioning his abilities. He has skill, speed and is always pushing the play.

 

[JD1]

He does so much good night in night out. He will score soon. I can't believe folks are questioning his abilities. He has skill, speed and is always pushing the play.

Lately though....it is a little easier to understand Torts' comment "he thinks he can do whatever he wants out there"

To me, he's looking for too perfect a chance to score...too many deke attempts instead of ripping the puck

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

He has still been one of our best forwards imo.

I still think we have to take in to context just how bad this team is and that our best center is suited for a 3rd line.

 

[playasRus]

At this rate, I wouldn't sign him to more than a 1-2 year show me contract unless he wanted to get ~1.5 mil again for 3-4 years.

 

[Nac Mac Feegle]

What I mean is ... I’m not sure a 20 goal streaky scorer is any better or worse than a 20 goal consistent scorer.

A consistent player is one you can rely on and plug in those numbers/probability into games. A streaky guy is more of a complementary bonus type player. Not a core/foundational guy.

You build the core around guys are are reliable and consistent, then add the streaky and quirky guys onto that core. Duclair is the perfect kind of guy to add to a contender as that wildcard.

 

[Sweatred]

A consistent player is one you can rely on and plug in those numbers/probability into games. A streaky guy is more of a complementary bonus type player. Not a core/foundational guy.

You build the core around guys are are reliable and consistent, then add the streaky and quirky guys onto that core. Duclair is the perfect kind of guy to add to a contender as that wildcard.

There is no evidence that suggests either result in more or less wins. In reality all 20G scorers are inconsistent. They score in less than 25% of games.

 

[Stylizer1]

There is no evidence that suggests either result in more or less wins. In reality all 20G scorers are inconsistent. They score in less than 25% of games.

Streaky players never score when you need them too. Consistent players are the ones who are threats almost every night.

 

[Sensinitis]

Streaky players never score when you need them too. Consistent players are the ones who are threats almost every night.

Well yeah obviously, but there’s only about 50 of them in the entire league...

 

[Sweatred]

Streaky players never score when you need them too. Consistent players are the ones who are threats almost every night.

Respectfully .... any proof of that ?

 

[Stylizer1]

Respectfully .... any proof of that ?

Bobby Ryan?

 

[Sweatred]

Bobby Ryan?

What I mean is can you prove a 20G streaky scorer produces less wins than a 20G consistent scorer.

It applies to any sport - Does a streaky 30 home run hitter result in more wins than a consistent how run hitter ?

I think the answer is no. There are too many variables not even counting strength of opponent etc.

For example Duc single handily won a few games (say 2) over that 20 game stretch than went cold. Over that time a consistent 20 G scorer would have scored 5 goals that resulted in something like 1.0 Additional wins (like WAR on baseball) . While Duc was cold for the next 20 that consistent scorer keeps getting 1.0 wins every 20 game or whatever but in the end both player results in producing 2 extra wins over 40 games.

I don’t think it is perfect but I think the evidence would support consistency not having an advantage vs any evidence that shows that streaky players are less valuable.

 

[Stylizer1]

What I mean is can you prove a 20G streaky scorer produces less wins than a 20G consistent scorer.

It applies to any sport - Does a streaky 30 home run hitter result in more wins than a consistent how run hitter ?

I think the answer is no. There are too many variables not even counting strength of opponent etc.

For example Duc single handily won a few games (say 2) over that 20 game stretch than went cold. Over that time a consistent 20 G scorer would have scored 5 goals that resulted in something like 1.0 Additional wins (like WAR on baseball) . While Duc was cold for the next 20 that consistent scorer keeps getting 1.0 wins every 20 game or whatever but in the end both player results in producing 2 extra wins over 40 games.

I don’t think it is perfect but I think the evidence would support consistency not having an advantage vs any evidence that shows that streaky players are less valuable.

In his 1st 3 seasons where he averaged 20 goals he went cold in the 2nd half of each of those seasons. He was not a contributing factor in helping us get to the playoffs. Turris and Mac both had a little more than 20 goals in those seasons but along with Spezza and Karlsson got us close. Had Ryan been average in those game left in the season the team probably could have made it.

 

[Sweatred]

In his 1st 3 seasons where he averaged 20 goals he went cold in the 2nd half of each of those seasons. He was not a contributing factor in helping us get to the playoffs. Turris and Mac both had a little more than 20 goals in those seasons but along with Spezza and Karlsson got us close. Had Ryan been average in those game left in the season the team probably could have made it.

You are missing my point. Your trying to apply your account of your eye test to the value of goals. I think that is a mistake and the evidence wouldn’t support it.

The 20 goals he had early in the season produce wins equally as the goals scored late in the season. If you shift ten of his goals to the second half you remove 1-2 wins from the first half and move them to the second half. The team ends with the same number of points.

 

[Stylizer1]

You are missing my point. Your trying to apply your account of your eye test to the value of goals. I think that is a mistake and the evidence wouldn’t support it.

In the end we all use our own perception to form our reality.

There are so many statistics/reasons that can paint any picture you want as to why a player played well or not. I like the eye test because I liked watching the Sens. That's how I gauge a players worth to the team. The value of a goal represents a contribution in out scoring the other team. When you are paid for that, goals are important. Consistent players keep other players involved during larger stretches of games. Streaky players are off far more than they are on and doesn't contribute to their line scoring in a major way. Duclair has 3 points in his last 9 or 5 points in his last 18 and a -5. 3 out of 4 of those games when Duclair scored they won. As he slumps so does the team. I would think any coach would rather a guy who scores 50 points over a season than a guy who goes on 10 game slumps that scores in bunches. Goals are equal but it's the timing that's important. The goal should be to have balanced scoring from all lines.

 

[Sweatred]

In the end we all use our own perception to form our reality.

There are so many statistics/reasons that can paint any picture you want as to why a player played well or not. I like the eye test because I liked watching the Sens. That's how I gauge a players worth to the team. The value of a goal represents a contribution in out scoring the other team. When you are paid for that, goals are important. Consistent players keep other players involved during larger stretches of games. Streaky players are off far more than they are on and doesn't contribute to their line scoring in a major way. Duclair has 3 points in his last 9 or 5 points in his last 18 and a -5. 3 out of 4 of those games when Duclair scored they won. As he slumps so does the team. I would think any coach would rather a guy who scores 50 points over a season than a guy who goes on 10 game slumps that scores in bunches. Goals are equal but it's the timing that's important. The goal should be to have balanced scoring from all lines.

Anyway, I’ll move on. I disagree that 1G every 4-5 games produces more wins than players who get goals in bunches. I think it all evens out.

 

[Stylizer1]

Do you prefer CT or Duclair ?

CT?

 

[BUCKLE UP]

CT?

Chris Tierney

 

[Stylizer1]

Chris Tierney

Oh, Duclair then.

 

[supsens]

What I mean is can you prove a 20G streaky scorer produces less wins than a 20G consistent scorer.

It applies to any sport - Does a streaky 30 home run hitter result in more wins than a consistent how run hitter ?

I think the answer is no. There are too many variables not even counting strength of opponent etc.

For example Duc single handily won a few games (say 2) over that 20 game stretch than went cold. Over that time a consistent 20 G scorer would have scored 5 goals that resulted in something like 1.0 Additional wins (like WAR on baseball) . While Duc was cold for the next 20 that consistent scorer keeps getting 1.0 wins every 20 game or whatever but in the end both player results in producing 2 extra wins over 40 games.

I don’t think it is perfect but I think the evidence would support consistency not having an advantage vs any evidence that shows that streaky players are less valuable.

war is a stat that isn't real, it gives all the credit of wins to a few guys and for some reason it does not work for some teams(flawed stat) if he scores 2 goals in a five nothing win and three goals in a 7-2 win it is not going to help as much as chipping in every other game.(or it might depending on the games he scored in)
on top of that its impossible to win any games by yourself.

 

[Sweatred]

war is a stat that isn't real, it gives all the credit of wins to a few guys and for some reason it does not work for some teams(flawed stat) if he scores 2 goals in a five nothing win and three goals in a 7-2 win it is not going to help as much as chipping in every other game.(or it might depending on the games he scored in)
on top of that its impossible to win any games by yourself.

Of course - but if a “consistent” scorer gets 1 goal over 5 games and it comes in a 4-2 loss it doesn’t influence a win either.

my point is I don't think we can find evidence that a consistent 20 goal scorer is better than a streaky 20 goal scorer as it relates at the bargaining table.

I do think Duc will need to score a couple in the last 20 games to secure his status as a legit 25G player at a potential arbitration hearing.

 

[DueDiligence]

Respectfully .... any proof of that ?

I would say BT is a very consistent player. He may not get points but he gets good chances virtually every game. And the rest of his game , playing physical and good D is always there. Inconsistent players disappear for games at a time.

 

[Sweatred]

I would say BT is a very consistent player. He may not get points but he gets good chances virtually every game. And the rest of his game , playing physical and good D is always there. Inconsistent players disappear for games at a time.

Brady as a 20 goal scorer is way more valuable than Duc. That’s why Brady will be paid more. The debate is whether Duc gets paid less because Duc is streaky.

 

[topshelf15]

To be fair ,Duclair and Tkachuk are pretty much alone in being NHL ready t6 forwards...They need help

 

[Sweatred]

To be fair ,Duclair and Tkachuk are pretty much alone in being NHL ready t6 forwards...They need help

Agreed. I would suggest Pager is a legit 2-3C but his worst skill is distribution which absolutely has affected Duc’ s goals this year.

Nobody can really pass to Duc so he is left generating scoring chances on his own. It makes him easy to cover etc. Hopefully we have stronger C options next year.

 

[JD1]

Anyway, I’ll move on. I disagree that 1G every 4-5 games produces more wins than players who get goals in bunches. I think it all evens out.

The better question to me is when does "consistency" start

A 20 goal guy
Scores in back to back games twice
Scores 2 in a game twice
That's 8 goals in 6 games. Only 12 more to go over 76 games.
By definition that's not consistent

I'm thinking consistent starts in the lower 30s but even that allows for some cold streaks