Prospect Info: Cale Fleury

Bud Light is the worst

 

Well it's perfectly convenient that the worst beer on the market went with the worst stat in hockey don't you think

 

Fleury sometimes gets into uncomfortable situations. Without thinking about that or any extra action done could be costly. Perfectionistly perfectionist. Throwing himself soul and body in the heat of the moment.

Some of his decision-making must be reviewed thought.

 

Reminds me of myself in college. Coincidently, I'm not allowed in certain public places anymore !

 

You don't think +/- fits when you look at Drouin's game at the moment?

 

He's having a hell of a rookie pro season honestly, really proud of him and pumped FOR him, hope he pans out in some sort of way
Even a "weber-lite" would be a huge addition to the team

 

it has it merits if used in the right context since it's often more of a team stat but if you see them play and can confirm if the minus was deserved or not. For instance if someone saw that Brook was a -1 last night but didn't see the game, they might think he made a bad play in his own end but in fact it was more Alzner's fault cause he didn't trust Brook could get back quick enough but he did, Alzner treated it like a 2 on 1 and yet didn't stop the pass.

 

His development curve is looking better than his brothers, who was 7th or 8th overall.

 

Had Fleury played on a good team during his draft year he would have been drafted much higher.

 

Agreed, but more often than not the player is not not responsible for the + or - and the aggregate is completely useless. A player can play exactly the same and be a +20 one season and a -20 another season. It is a dumb Stat when applies to a single player. It is a much more useful Stat when applied to a 5 man unit specifically against another 5 man unit. Even the you have to factor in zone starts and poor/excellent goaltending. After all of that you have to go back and watch every goal. At best, just like Corsi, it is only a flag for expert eyes to investigate. Fans who arrive at definitive conclusions from these stats are fools.

 

He’s trending a lot better than his brother is, and he was drafted much later.

How great would it be if he could become a #3-4 for us?

 

Kind of like Connor Brown with the Leafs. Played on a putrid team and was a -72. That’s what teams saw on the surface and kept passing on him.

 

I’m thinking Eric Desjardins, which is a good thing!

 

Leafs fans are so sour that Fleury, our 5th or 6h best prospedt is better than their 2nd best prospect

 

In context it can have it's uses. For example if you look at Laval, if they have a 2-1 lead late in the game who do you want on the ice? Alzner, Lernout, Sklenicka, who all happen to be top plus players on the team along with Vejdemo. Who's at the bottom, Fleury, Ouellet on defense along with Grenier. (not counting guys with say under 30 games).

I like Ouellet in Laval for his offense but man is his bad in his own end, while Alzner has been very steady in his own end, Lernout has shown good improvement there and Sklenicka plays a solid game imo. I was disappointed when they broke up the Alzner Fleury pairing and put Fleury with Ouellet as I thought that was not good for him as Alzner would be better to learn from.

But at the same time I'm sure there are lots of examples of where that doesn't work, where the leaders in either plus or minus ends up being the best or worst defensively as there's so much that goes into how they get there of course.

 

The stat itself is useless but at times it does coincidentally align with fact. The broken clock analogy fits here. It only takes one player to ruin a line's +/-. A defensive unit is only as strong as it's weakest link and most players +/- is at the mercy of the worst skater and/or goaltender on the ice at any given moment. The stat is the most volatile of any traditional stat as wild variations occur in many players who otherwise put up similar stats on a yearly basis. This is because they have very limited control over the outcome.

 

but it does have some merit as it's not like that one player is going to be consistently on the ice making mistakes that cost goals for 4 other players throughout the season. When I watch Laval, it's clear what defensmen are solid in their own end and which aren't and their plus minus is very reflective of that. That said it has to be a case by case basis where you have seen most of the games to know that it fits. I'm sure there are tons of examples where it doesn't fit for various reasons.

I just think some that stat watch either rely on it too much or dismiss it too quickly as I think if used correctly it can be helpful.

 

Advanced stats people like to say that +/- for goals is useless but their favourite statistic is basically +/- for shots!!!

Last I saw, they award the win to the team with the greatest goals +/- in the game (incl PP and Shootout).

Until they start awarding points to the team with the most shots, or the tallest players, or the best quality of opposition, +/- for goals will have value for the individuals that make up a team. It's up to the analyst to take some clear relevant factors into account, however.

 

Relying on the eye test only is as bad as stats watching. Everyone have a subjective view of what hockey should be and if you rely on the eye test only your judgment will be affected by what you think hockey should be and what type of players you love. It's inevitable. At the end of the day you must watch the games and check the stats to see if they match what you think you see. If they don't then you should ask advise from other people (pro scouts in the case of a gm) to be sure you're not out for launch.

There is three major problems with stats. Small sample size, age of players and definition in the case of advance stats.

The small sample size problem, let's call it friendly the Niemi Wing effect or the DLo Syndrome, is easily solved by totally ignoring any sample size of less than 40 games and be very cautions with samples size of less than around 120- games or so. This way you prevent players like Niemi or DLo by the punctual deployment of their wings or their sheer likeness to crate a pulsar somewhere in downtown Montreal.

The 2nd problem aging is a little bit more tricky. Personally i'm very cautions when a player is over 30 and even more over 35. At this point past accomplishment is what it is, past accomplishment. Unless i've seen the player extensively i'm not sure if he's in the process of slowing down or not. Sometimes stats don't show that. A good example is 2015-2016 Plekanec. Nobody expected him to crumble like that but you could already see he was not as affective as his prime years.

The last problem definition is an advance stats problem. When i read we are number 1 in the whole league for controlled zone exits i cringe. For one what the **** is a controlled zone exit? If getting the puck out of the zone and dumping it once you reach the red line a controlled zone exit then i don't know what to say. Since we are 1st there's a high probability that me and the guys compiling those stats clearly have a different opinion of what is a controlled zone exit.

 

"I think for me it's been with all my partners having a good year on D. Taken much stuffs on and off the ice. Playing with Alzner, Kulak and all that other guys with NHL experience. I can take little things from each others game and tryna to make a combine..."

"For me, I think it's just getting faster. Especially, as a defenseman never like stops working on skating. So that's what I'm working on."

"It did for sure... Personally, I didn't have too much expectations for myself coming the year. But off the ice and the lifestyle I think the guys here really made another transition rather than I could've imagined."

"I've a lot of pride on that. Speaking with reliable guys and coaches I think the points will come. But for me it's just the biggest thing is just having the confidence of the coach to put me out there in those situations."

 

How does Fleury project into our lineup with Weber, Petry, and Brook all at RD?

 

If you're talking to this short-term, I'm not projecting anything. In the long-term, when he get ready he'll dictate himself where he should be. Like in which line of D he'd be.

 

With Brook, Juulsen and Fleury we certainly have good competition at the RD spot. We'll have to wait and see how all 3 look next year at the NHL/AHL level depending on where each plays. Then you have to wait and see on trades not just next year but down the road since you also have the expansion draft but that's 2 years away so too early to say how that will play out as well.

 

I think for the first time in a while, we have the luxury to develop our young defensemen in the AHL without them to be rushed... Im expecting both Fleury and Brook to play for the Rockets next year since they are in good hands under Bouchard...

 

we'll see how they look at camp, Fleury needs more time in the AHL imo, but I could see him getting some NHL games as injuries will happen at some point. My hope is that under Bouchard he will push for the Habs not to rush these kids but we'll see.