ATD2021 FINAL - Orillia Terriers vs. Guelph Platers

[ResilientBeast]

I have read history books that profile him as the #1 opportunist of the no-offside rule change and as a nonphysical center whose departure from Detroit (Barry replacement) heralded in Stanley Cup championships.

But.....he scored even better with offsides than just camping in front of the other net......

So is he an opportunist if he scored at a higher rate in a league with offsides or not?

 

[VanIslander]

RB, you miss the point HARD.

 

[ResilientBeast]

RB, you miss the point HARD.

Do you have a point? You don't like Weiland and your reasoning doesn't make sense

 

[ResilientBeast]

ATD 2021 Finals: Conney Weiland vs VanIslander

 

[VanIslander]

You don"t understand it? K.
At least that isn't intentional.
Thanks for that at least.

#trytounderstandoneanother

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Thanks TDMM. Someone finally referenced my second point.

Now how the heck could any stock be put into Weiland's 7-year vs.x?

I don't see why we wouldn't put stock into it. Frankly, I think it's ridiculous to want to remove a player's best season, unless you are going to remove the best season from basically everyone...

Under a 7 year average, he has 6 other seasons averaged together with his best year. I really don't see the issue.

Ace Bailey and Punch Broadbent each won an Art Ross, yet each has a 7 year score that is way lower than Weiland's, because their dropoffs were significantly more than Weiland's.

I have read history books that profile him as the #1 opportunist of the no-offside rule change and as a nonphysical center whose departure from Detroit (Barry replacement) heralded in Stanley Cup championships.

Frankly, those history books probably did what I used to - saw that Cooney had his outlier year in the year with the rule changes and assumed he took advantage of no-offsides... and yet...

NOW WE KNOW HE DIDN'T.

The NHL fairly recently released game logs of the early seasons right?

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Adding onto this...

Who cares if the Ross came in a season with no offsides (not that it did)? It's not like he was the only one playing under those rules. We don't ding players who won in the no forward pass era or the Rover era or the No Red-line era because the rules were different. Why would we make the exception here?

I mean... if he racked up a crap ton of points in the first part of the season when players could cherrypick and camp out, I wouldn't totally dismiss the season, but I would put a big asterix by it. Because at that point, it would barely be hockey.

But anyway, that's not what happened.

 

[The Macho King]

I mean... if he racked up a crap ton of points in the first part of the season when players could cherrypick and camp out, I wouldn't totally dismiss the season, but I would put a big asterix by it. Because at that point, it would barely be hockey.

But anyway, that's not what happened.

I guess that's the kind of... narrative I don't love. What's "hockey" at any given moment is more fluid in my mind. 6v6 is a pretty big departure from 5v5, but we still put our Nighbors, Taylors, Stuarts, etc. and don't really penalize them for the significant rule difference. No forward pass is similar - barely hockey the way we understand it now.

Some rule shifts are giant, and some are not. I guess the most notable part about the offside rule is *how* temporary it was, but that's an interesting historical tidbit not a way to knock the guys playing under the rules.

But yeah - academic because that's not what happened in this case.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I guess that's the kind of... narrative I don't love. What's "hockey" at any given moment is more fluid in my mind. 6v6 is a pretty big departure from 5v5, but we still put our Nighbors, Taylors, Stuarts, etc. and don't really penalize them for the significant rule difference. No forward pass is similar - barely hockey the way we understand it now.

Some rule shifts are giant, and some are not. I guess the most notable part about the offside rule is *how* temporary it was, but that's an interesting historical tidbit not a way to knock the guys playing under the rules.

But yeah - academic because that's not what happened in this case.

Yes, I had no idea until just now copying overpass's post that the lack of any rule against offsides only lasted for 14 games apparently.

The "narrative" going around (that I also used to believe) was that it lasted most of the season.

 

[VanIslander]

Is it ridiculous to factor out or discount the last year of WWII?

(This is getting silly.)

 

[The Macho King]

Is it ridiculous to factor out or discount the last year of WWII?

(This is getting silly.)

Completely different scenario. WW2 dramatically offered the available talent to the league - *that's* why it's important to contextualize that. It's a really disingenuous comparison, and I'm also really not surprised you're making it.

 

[VanIslander]

1. Standing in front of a net with no offside rule is 100% ok in a 7-yr vs. calculation? But a last year of WWII is often discounted?

2. The Macho King is also assassinating my character?!

Why the **** shouldn't i join the SEVERAL others who f off after complaining about the wolf-pack clique around here?

UGH.

 

[ResilientBeast]

1. Standing in front of a net with no offside rule is 100% ok in a 7-yr vs. calculation? But a last year of WWII is often discounted?

2. The Macho King is also assassinating my character?!

Why the **** shouldn't i join the SEVERAL others who f off after complaining about the wolf-pack clique around here?

UGH.

Ok then no stats from 1929-30 count for any player. There's a huge difference between rule changes and a dearth of talent because they're serving their country.

You seem to have an axe to grind regarding Weiland and will not budge on that

 

[Dreakmur]

If you erase all the points that happened during the crazy no offside rule, Weiland’s season score goes up to 132 from 118.

Ignoring the bad rule part of the season helps Cooney Weiland!

 

[Dreakmur]

PLEASE calculate his 7-year.vs.x WITHOUT that rule-crazy year. It will suck big time.

Ok, his new score is 82.6.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Ok, his new score is 82.6.

That's perfect because Tavares is 82.7

 

[Dreakmur]

That's perfect because Tavares is 82.7

Lol, I don’t actually think that should be his score. His whole season should be counted, just like any other season.

but... for anyone who really believes that brief period of bad rules should be deleted, they should also believe his score for that season is better!

 

[BraveCanadian]

Lol, I don’t actually think that should be his score. His whole season should be counted, just like any other season.

but... for anyone who really believes that brief period of bad rules should be deleted, they should also believe his score for that season is better!

Tbh, as I mentioned in the thread that came up earlier in the draft, I don't think VsX is a really good measure for 3rd and 4th liners anyways. For the most part they aren't playing in a situation here that is similar to the roles they played in real life. I took Tavares because he did have a good VsX for a third liner, but more importantly he can score goals at ES (twice leading the league in ES goals) which is where his ice time will be here.

Even then it is dicey because Tavares did that with a lot more ES icetime than he would get here so...

 

[Dreakmur]

Tbh, as I mentioned in the thread that came up earlier in the draft, I don't think VsX is a really good measure for 3rd and 4th liners anyways. For the most part they aren't playing in a situation here that is similar to the roles they played in real life. I took Tavares because he did have a good VsX for a third liner, but more importantly he can score goals at ES (twice leading the league in ES goals) which is where his ice time will be here.

Even then it is dicey because Tavares did that with a lot more ES icetime than he would get here so...

Agreed that they won’t score as much, but I think they will score at the same pace. If they scored 100 points with 20 minutes, then they would score 50 points with 10 minutes.

So, while their offence is going to be less than first line forwards, I think their contributions can be compared to other 3rd liners in an apples to apples to manner. That’s why I started liking the ES measures. Some third liners play pp, and other doing, so how can you compare them without removing that aspect?

 

[BraveCanadian]

Agreed that they won’t score as much, but I think they will score at the same pace. If they scored 100 points with 20 minutes, then they would score 50 points with 10 minutes.

So, while their offence is going to be less than first line forwards, I think their contributions can be compared to other 3rd liners in an apples to apples to manner. That’s why I started liking the ES measures. Some third liners play pp, and other doing, so how can you compare them without removing that aspect?

I think that is reasonable but also simplistic because all the ES minutes aren't the same, either. At some point we have to admit that we're making educated guesses!

 

[The Macho King]

Agreed that they won’t score as much, but I think they will score at the same pace. If they scored 100 points with 20 minutes, then they would score 50 points with 10 minutes.

So, while their offence is going to be less than first line forwards, I think their contributions can be compared to other 3rd liners in an apples to apples to manner. That’s why I started liking the ES measures. Some third liners play pp, and other doing, so how can you compare them without removing that aspect?

Hmmmm... I don't know if I buy that. One of the reasons you want your top offensive guys playing the most minutes is (aside from obviously being better players), scoring is a random result to accumulated events. I don't think pace is linear in that way, because at least it seems as an avid watcher, "wearing down" defenses and goaltenders seem to be how a lot of third and fourth lines score, while top line players are more opportunistic.

So putting a top line player onto the third line and thinking the offense will scale with the minutes... eh, I don't know. Maybe, but I don't think it's guaranteed, and I think "type" of player may matter more in that scaling.

 

[Dreakmur]

Hmmmm... I don't know if I buy that. One of the reasons you want your top offensive guys playing the most minutes is (aside from obviously being better players), scoring is a random result to accumulated events. I don't think pace is linear in that way, because at least it seems as an avid watcher, "wearing down" defenses and goaltenders seem to be how a lot of third and fourth lines score, while top line players are more opportunistic.

So putting a top line player onto the third line and thinking the offense will scale with the minutes... eh, I don't know. Maybe, but I don't think it's guaranteed, and I think "type" of player may matter more in that scaling.

Oh, it’s definitely not linear... but the difference would be very similar.

Both Weiland and Tavares were top-6 centres. Going to the third line would have very comparable impacts.

There are so few true third liners in this thing. Even guys like Guy Carbonneau and Don Luce played top-6 minutes.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Oh, it’s definitely not linear... but the difference would be very similar.

Both Weiland and Tavares were top-6 centres. Going to the third line would have very comparable impacts.

There are so few true third liners in this thing. Even guys like Guy Carbonneau and Don Luce played top-6 minutes.

We used to have true shutdown lines in this thing and then they started getting killed in debates due to their lack of offense.

 

[Dreakmur]

We used to have true shutdown lines in this thing and then they started getting killed in debates due to their lack of offense.

Not just the lack of offense, but the fact that they also couldn't shut people down.

Yeah Guy Carbonneau, Bob Gianey, Claude Provsot, and some of the other elite guys could really slow down some star players, but a guy like Steve Kasper or Kris Draper would just get caved in.... and then they also don't score.

The strategy in hockey has changed. The best teams use their best players to match up. Chicago used Jonathan Toews, not David Kampf. Boston used Patrice Bergeron, not Chris Kelly. Los Angeles used Anze Kopitar, not Colin Fraser. St. Louis used Ryan O'Rielly, not Tyler Bozak.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Not just the lack of offense, but the fact that they also couldn't shut people down.

Yeah Guy Carbonneau, Bob Gianey, Claude Provsot, and some of the other elite guys could really slow down some star players, but a guy like Steve Kasper or Kris Draper would just get caved in.... and then they also don't score.

The strategy in hockey has changed. The best teams use their best players to match up. Chicago used Jonathan Toews, not David Kampf. Boston used Patrice Bergeron, not Chris Kelly. Los Angeles used Anze Kopitar, not Colin Fraser. St. Louis used Ryan O'Rielly, not Tyler Bozak.

Power on power matchups aren't a new thing. Things just go in cycles.