Yes, I am pretty sure McCann has been playing on the 4th line and the 3rd at times this year until recently. That sure seems to be sheltered, as it should be.
Post-Game Talk: Canucks 4 @ Panthers 5 | 20/12/15 | 1:00 PM SNP
- Thread starter Chairman Maouth
- Start date
- Status
Yes, I am pretty sure McCann has been playing on the 4th line and the 3rd at times this year until recently. That sure seems to be sheltered, as it should be.
WTG
December 5th
Jared McCann starts in the offensive zone less than Derek Dorsett and Brandon Prust
Derek Dorsett and Brandon Prust get matched against the other teams 4th lines.
This is a problem.
When we are down by 1 goal Prust and Dorsett have more offensive face off starts than Jared McCann and Henrik Sedin.
This is a problem.
I agree, I hope come the new year Willie will start giving McCann more leeway like he did with bo.
You are making outrageous claims without backing up anything. In general we don't want Dorsett or Prust starting more often in our defensive zone because they might get hemmed in there and not get out.
You haven't shown any stats showing the time on ice, or fancy stats when one goal down, so you can't make any of your claims based on those charts you posted.
WTG
December 5th
Number of offensive zone starts % by player, 5 on 5 when trailing by 1
Cool, thanks for that.
So going off that chart (TOI), it seems dorsett is a little high and vrbata is a little low. But nothing really jumps out at me shouting there is mismanagement going on.
I give a little more leeway to the offence zone and defensive zone starts because so many factors come into play there such as away vs home games (last change) or even random things like who was last on the ice or who is tired.
edit:
and I would guess McCann would be low because of his numbers being skewed from early on this year before he has had a chance to prove himself.
Last edited:
Number of offensive zone starts % by player, 5 on 5 when trailing by 1
Sorted by %OZFO? If you had 1 shift in the OZone and was benched the rest of the game, that'd score 100%, not a winner.
TOI is a better indicator of utilization. (Edit: ) ATOI would normalize for number of games played.
Last edited:
I don't know if it's as big a problem as you're making it out to be. McCann seems to be deployed equally in all situations. I don't want to over play the 4th line, nobody does, but you can't sit those guys like Torts did either.
Teams have highs and lows. We're just entering the lows now. Just. Doesn't need to be painted lower.
Watching that Vey, Burrows and Higgins line in action is the closest thing a 'Nucks fan will get to a near death experience.
WTG
December 5th
There is a difference between sitting the 4th line and spoonfeeding the 4th line.
Right now we are spoon feeding that line and it's not producing.
For development purposes we should be spoonfeeding the young guys not the old vets.
All goes back to the orginal point I was trying to make. The reason why the 4th line seems to be the only one consistently driving offense is because they are gifted prime offensive minutes. This isn't a result of them being good, it's a result of the coach gifting them sheltered minutes.
Is there another 19-year old in the league who's being asked to be a No. 1 centre right now?..even McDavid and Sam Bennett weren't being required to do that.
My original point is that you seem to be massaging war on ice data to confirm your feelings towards the coach, instead of something useful or enlightening. Is there some kind of middle ground between benching the 4th line and spoon feeding it prime offensive minutes?
WTG
December 5th
What?
I use advanced stats to confirm what I have been noticing. What's wrong with that?
WTG
December 5th
How is zone start data cherry picking.
Dorsett and Prust ARE starting too much in the offensive zone.
Dorsett and Prust ARE getting easier matchups.
I showed this using zone start data and QoC data. This isn't really cherry picking.
Sorting OZFO% to get your chosen players at the top was pretty blatant, did you click the other columns until you got the result you wanted? That's cherry picking. It's misleading.
At least you didn't dispute the spin factor.
WTG
December 5th
Why the **** would I sort by anything other than offensive zone starts when making a point on how the 4th line starts in the offensive zone too much.
What do you want me to do? Sort by defensive zone faceoffs to find if the 4th line starts in the offensive zone too much?
This isn't cherry picking. You just don't like the data so you're trying to dismiss it as misleading.
I feel for you McWTG.. some people are just daft.
There have been countless of games where big willy put the 4th line out on the ice (including OZS) in crucial moments. I'm not surprised the least that the stats confirm what I've been seeing night after night.
Seems like some people haven't closely watched the games and are not happy the stats don't support their narrative.
There have been countless of games where big willy put the 4th line out on the ice (including OZS) in crucial moments. I'm not surprised the least that the stats confirm what I've been seeing night after night.
Seems like some people haven't closely watched the games and are not happy the stats don't support their narrative.
If you think that is messing with data then obviously you never messed with data before.
Clicking on a column and sorting based on ONE metric is anything but spin.
I have no problem with the data. War on ice has some good tools and good data, but good tools need a good craftsman to make something worthwhile. Statistics in the wrong hands can be used to make pretty much any point and that's what it looked like upon scrutiny. To draw such strong conclusions made me think you drew the conclusions before the data, so I don't trust what you presented.
As for OZFO%, I wonder if you know how percentages work. The OZFO% is relative to the other zones, adds up to 100%. It could be 3 faceoffs or 300, but the number of faceoffs isn't indicated. Conclusion drawn, nonetheless.
And yes, Dorsett is overplayed. Didn't need a fancy stats website to say that.
I do, a bit. The data is fine, but the conclusions drawn are a little over the top.
I didn't say it lied, but I think it's misleading. I see good data in the wrong hands.
- Status
