Confirmed with Link: Canucks sign D Ian Cole to 1-Year, $3M Deal

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Well OEL was more like a 2nd pairing guy his last 3 seasons base on his average TOI. His minus 24 is why he was bought out and guys like Cole and Soucy brought in. You want to win games? You replace minus guys for plus guys.

If thats the case, ..Erik Karlsson shouldn't ever be allowed to skate on an NHL rink.

2017-18	Ottawa Senators	NHL	71	9	53	62	36	-25	--	--	--	--	--
2018-19	San Jose Sharks	NHL	53	3	42	45	22	6	19	2	14	16	8
2019-20	San Jose Sharks	NHL	56	6	34	40	16	-15	--	--	--	--	--
2020-21	San Jose Sharks	NHL	52	8	14	22	18	-18	--	--	--	--	--
2021-22	San Jose Sharks	NHL	50	10	25	35	14	-14	--	--	--	--	--
2022-23	San Jose Sharks	NHL	82	25	76	101	36	-26	--	--	--	--	--
	NHL Totals

 

[larueskee]

If thats the case, ..Erik Karlsson shouldn't ever be allowed to skate on an NHL rink.

2017-18	Ottawa Senators	NHL	71	9	53	62	36	-25	--	--	--	--	--
2018-19	San Jose Sharks	NHL	53	3	42	45	22	6	19	2	14	16	8
2019-20	San Jose Sharks	NHL	56	6	34	40	16	-15	--	--	--	--	--
2020-21	San Jose Sharks	NHL	52	8	14	22	18	-18	--	--	--	--	--
2021-22	San Jose Sharks	NHL	50	10	25	35	14	-14	--	--	--	--	--
2022-23	San Jose Sharks	NHL	82	25	76	101	36	-26	--	--	--	--	--
	NHL Totals

You might want to look at the teams players play on as plus minus is finnicky stat. Lets acknowledge that he won himself a Norris ( even though some would question on a non playoff team ). Now the team as a whole had a negative 87 goal differential. His personal minus of minus 26 is about 30% of his teams total. His point total of 101 seems pretty nice but when you subtract his power play points of 27 he becomes a 74 point even strength d man. Pretty good but when you subtract his personal minus of 26 it leaves him with a net of 48 points. Good but worth 6.5 million? I would rather have Cole's net of 30 ( points plus his plus minus ) for 3 million. On this particular Vancouver team. I know most love the offensive stats defensemen can and do provide but their primary job is playing defense at even strength or killing penalties. So Karlsson would not have gotten my vote for a Norris.

 

[Nucker101]

You might want to look at the teams players play on as plus minus is finnicky stat. Lets acknowledge that he won himself a Norris ( even though some would question on a non playoff team ). Now the team as a whole had a negative 87 goal differential. His personal minus of minus 26 is about 30% of his teams total. His point total of 101 seems pretty nice but when you subtract his power play points of 27 he becomes a 74 point even strength d man. Pretty good but when you subtract his personal minus of 26 it leaves him with a net of 48 points. Good but worth 6.5 million? I would rather have Cole's net of 30 ( points plus his plus minus ) for 3 million. On this particular Vancouver team. I know most love the offensive stats defensemen can and do provide but their primary job is playing defense at even strength or killing penalties. So Karlsson would not have gotten my vote for a Norris.

This seems like an incredibly over simplified way to determine player values.

 

[larueskee]

This seems like an incredibly over simplified way to determine player values.

Well i know, but don't blame me for my dated philosophies as they came directly from Al Arbour and Barclay Plager.

 

[Nucker101]

Well i know, but don't blame me for my dated philosophies as they came directly from Al Arbour and Barclay Plager.

Well times have changed. If Arbour was born 40-50 years later then I'm 100% sure he would not be using that method with access to the more detailed data that we have today.

I'm sure back in his time that method was considered to be more forward-thinking so I assume a smart man like that would use a better method these days.

 

[larueskee]

Well times have changed. If Arbour was born 40-50 years later then I'm 100% sure he would not be using that method with access to the more detailed data that we have today.

I'm sure back in his time that method was considered to be more forward-thinking so I assume a smart man like that would use a better method these days.

I'm not so sure. You can have all of the fancy stats but I'll take mine. Like Brett Pesce being on the ice for 60 % of his teams goals allowed. The Canes missed that trend for years and now look to move him but have found no takers. I am confident he will not be resigned by them.

 

[Nucker101]

I'm not so sure. You can have all of the fancy stats but I'll take mine. Like Brett Pesce being on the ice for 60 % of his teams goals allowed. The Canes missed that trend for years and now look to move him but have found no takers. I am confident he will not be resigned by them.

Fair enough. We can agree to disagree.

All I believe is that a dman matchup against top lines is going to get punished by this method and a dman who gets sheltered will get overrated. You’re going to end up buying high and selling low quite a bit using this method compared to whatever Tulsky and the Hurricanes use

 

[RobertKron]

You might want to look at the teams players play on as plus minus is finnicky stat. Lets acknowledge that he won himself a Norris ( even though some would question on a non playoff team ). Now the team as a whole had a negative 87 goal differential. His personal minus of minus 26 is about 30% of his teams total. His point total of 101 seems pretty nice but when you subtract his power play points of 27 he becomes a 74 point even strength d man. Pretty good but when you subtract his personal minus of 26 it leaves him with a net of 48 points. Good but worth 6.5 million? I would rather have Cole's net of 30 ( points plus his plus minus ) for 3 million. On this particular Vancouver team. I know most love the offensive stats defensemen can and do provide but their primary job is playing defense at even strength or killing penalties. So Karlsson would not have gotten my vote for a Norris.

Holy moly

 

[biturbo19]

I'm not so sure. You can have all of the fancy stats but I'll take mine. Like Brett Pesce being on the ice for 60 % of his teams goals allowed. The Canes missed that trend for years and now look to move him but have found no takers. I am confident he will not be resigned by them.

Uhhhh...i don't think Carolina are lacking for "takers" on Pesce. I think they're lacking for buyers who will pony up the assets he's clearly worth to them. He's a big ticket acquisition on a risky 1-year deal with the ability to walk as a UFA. That's what is hurting his value on the market.

He's a stout defensive defenceman capable of playing really solid top-pairing minutes. And a RHD with size at that. He's basically the unicorn everyone is looking for. But that makes his value to Carolina extremely high. So they might risk keeping him, even if he's going to walk as a UFA.



I think in this situation, you're also overlooking the fact that Carolina are notorious under Dundon, for refusing to make long-term commitments to players. Even very good ones.

 

[DFAC]

Uhhhh...i don't think Carolina are lacking for "takers" on Pesce. I think they're lacking for buyers who will pony up the assets he's clearly worth to them. He's a big ticket acquisition on a risky 1-year deal with the ability to walk as a UFA. That's what is hurting his value on the market.

He's a stout defensive defenceman capable of playing really solid top-pairing minutes. And a RHD with size at that. He's basically the unicorn everyone is looking for. But that makes his value to Carolina extremely high. So they might risk keeping him, even if he's going to walk as a UFA.



I think in this situation, you're also overlooking the fact that Carolina are notorious under Dundon, for refusing to make long-term commitments to players. Even very good ones.

If Pesce somehow makes it to UFA - the Canucks should be going hard after him with Myers salary freeing up.

I wonder what he could cost.. probs 6.5m+?

 

[biturbo19]

If Pesce somehow makes it to UFA - the Canucks should be going hard after him with Myers salary freeing up.

I wonder what he could cost.. probs 6.5m+?

What'd Severson cost? That's your bottom dollar. Pesce is a much better player.


But you're right. Myers money expires and they've got the full amount to throw around. I don't get the impression that Pesce wants to come play in Canada though. So sadly, its probably a lost cause.


But man, he'd be a terrific partner for Hughes.

 

[larueskee]

Uhhhh...i don't think Carolina are lacking for "takers" on Pesce. I think they're lacking for buyers who will pony up the assets he's clearly worth to them. He's a big ticket acquisition on a risky 1-year deal with the ability to walk as a UFA. That's what is hurting his value on the market.

He's a stout defensive defenceman capable of playing really solid top-pairing minutes. And a RHD with size at that. He's basically the unicorn everyone is looking for. But that makes his value to Carolina extremely high. So they might risk keeping him, even if he's going to walk as a UFA.



I think in this situation, you're also overlooking the fact that Carolina are notorious under Dundon, for refusing to make long-term commitments to players. Even very good ones.

I want you to know that i have watched every Carolina game for the past 3 years. I will tell you that near every time a goal is scored against them Pesce is on the ice. It amazes me that it would go unnoticed by NHL staff. Thing is that there are so many over rated and over paid players around the league that once they get some ink everyone continues to believe they are great. It is the same in baseball. take Mike Trout for example. He was great when he first arrived and some still speak of him as he is the best player in baseball. Truth is TRout has been striking out more times then he gets a hit for years.

 

[MS]

I want you to know that i have watched every Carolina game for the past 3 years. I will tell you that near every time a goal is scored against them Pesce is on the ice. It amazes me that it would go unnoticed by NHL staff. Thing is that there are so many over rated and over paid players around the league that once they get some ink everyone continues to believe they are great. It is the same in baseball. take Mike Trout for example. He was great when he first arrived and some still speak of him as he is the best player in baseball. Truth is TRout has been striking out more times then he gets a hit for years.

Brett Pesce was on the ice for 66 out of 162 ES goals scored against Carolina last year. Not sure what you were watching.

 

[krutovsdonut]

Brett Pesce was on the ice for 66 out of 162 ES goals scored against Carolina last year. Not sure what you were watching.

it takes a true stats guy to confidently contradict someone who has watched a player on another team in every game for three years.

yes his ga/60 at even strength last year is tied with burns and slightly better than skjei, but there may be a "reverse clutch" syndrome at play to make the goals he is on for stand out.

 

[strattonius]

it takes a true stats guy to confidently contradict someone who has watched a player on another team in every game for three years.

yes his ga/60 at even strength last year is tied with burns and slightly better than skjei, but there may be a "reverse clutch" syndrome at play to make the goals he is on for stand out.

Don't have to be a stats guy to confidently say calling Pesce a bad player is total nonsense. I would agree he has been over-rated due to a bleak market for defenseman but he is still a stable defender.

 

[MS]

it takes a true stats guy to confidently contradict someone who has watched a player on another team in every game for three years.

yes his ga/60 at even strength last year is tied with burns and slightly better than skjei, but there may be a "reverse clutch" syndrome at play to make the goals he is on for stand out.

Ha, seriously?

Sometimes it’s just blatantly statistically obvious that someone’s statement is factually incorrect.

Brett Pesce played about 40% of the ES minutes for Carolina and was on the ice for about 40% of the ESGA despite playing the highest-leverage minutes on the team.

The notion that he’s bad defensively or on the ice for a disproportionate amount of goals is just nonsense. It’s wrong. And as we can see on this board, people can watch a lot of Canucks games and have really bad takes on what they’re watching.

 

[krutovsdonut]

Ha, seriously?

Sometimes it’s just blatantly statistically obvious that someone’s statement is factually incorrect.

Brett Pesce played about 40% of the ES minutes for Carolina and was on the ice for about 40% of the ESGA despite playing the highest-leverage minutes on the team.

The notion that he’s bad defensively or on the ice for a disproportionate amount of goals is just nonsense. It’s wrong. And as we can see on this board, people can watch a lot of Canucks games and have really bad takes on what they’re watching.

yes seriously.

the notion that a player can have decent stats that don't track a metric is not exactyl controversial. if you are serious about learning about players rather than showing us how smart you are, then instead of dimissing that poster who has 100 times more experience scouting that player than you do, you could have asked him a couple of questions about his observation to see where it came from and perhaps learn something.

 

[Nucker101]

yes seriously.

the notion that a player can have decent stats that don't track a metric is not exactyl controversial. if you are serious about learning about players rather than showing us how smart you are, then instead of dimissing that poster who has 100 times more experience scouting that player than you do, you could have asked him a couple of questions about his observation to see where it came from and perhaps learn something.

Every Canes fan on this site loves Pesce. I’d say it’s on the guy with the contrarian opinion(that goes both against stats and majority eye test opinions) to tell us more than just “he’s on the ice for a lot of goals”, especially when that’s incorrect.

Jim Benning has more experience scouting than you or I, he still made some terrible evaluations.

 

[Nucker101]

The hilarious part is that Pesce is even better at 5v5 when games are within 1 goal, look at the ga/60 rate.

I'll take these stats over one guy just saying "he's on for most goals against"

 

[RobertKron]

The hilarious part is that Pesce is even better at 5v5 when games are within 1 goal, look at the ga/60 rate.

View attachment 733743


I'll take these stats over one guy just saying "he's on for most goals against"

It's that "reverse clutch" effect in action.

 

[F A N]

I think +/- stats doesn't tell the whole story but it isn't a useless stat. Put into context, it is useful stat.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

I think +/- stats doesn't tell the whole story but it isn't a useless stat. Put into context, it is useful stat.

Its pretty much useless.

The context is all the info you really need.

 

[Fatass]

Its pretty much useless.

The context is all the info you really need.

If a defensive D man is minus 41 he’s had a terrible season. Plus minus might be a stat fans don’t care too much about but the players do care. They don’t like being a minus. Their coaches don’t like them being a minus either. Most bottom six forwards and bottom pairing D need to at least be evens for their club to be successful. Too many minus players in those roles equals a bad club. The elite scoring guys can be minus and still carry their teams on the PP.
So the plus minus is a good stat, especially for supporting role players.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

If a defensive D man is minus 41 he’s had a terrible season. Plus minus might be a stat fans don’t care too much about but the players do care. They don’t like being a minus. Their coaches don’t like them being a minus either. Most bottom six forwards and bottom pairing D need to at least be evens for their club to be successful. Too many minus players in those roles equals a bad club. The elite scoring guys can be minus and still carry their teams on the PP.
So the plus minus is a good stat, especially for supporting role players.

Completely disagree.

 

[biturbo19]

I want you to know that i have watched every Carolina game for the past 3 years. I will tell you that near every time a goal is scored against them Pesce is on the ice. It amazes me that it would go unnoticed by NHL staff. Thing is that there are so many over rated and over paid players around the league that once they get some ink everyone continues to believe they are great. It is the same in baseball. take Mike Trout for example. He was great when he first arrived and some still speak of him as he is the best player in baseball. Truth is TRout has been striking out more times then he gets a hit for years.

This is an absurd take, easily disproved statistically, completely lacking appreciation for context, and contrary to the majority of eye test evaluations of a very good shutdown defenceman.

It feels like at best, you're falling into a counting blue cars confirmation bias sort of trap.

Ha, seriously?

Sometimes it’s just blatantly statistically obvious that someone’s statement is factually incorrect.

Brett Pesce played about 40% of the ES minutes for Carolina and was on the ice for about 40% of the ESGA despite playing the highest-leverage minutes on the team.

The notion that he’s bad defensively or on the ice for a disproportionate amount of goals is just nonsense. It’s wrong. And as we can see on this board, people can watch a lot of Canucks games and have really bad takes on what they’re watching.

Yeah. There's obviously going to be more goals scored in those high leverage minutes against top scoring opposing players. That's just the reality of playing tough minutes...and playing a ton of them. But when you actually bring a shred of context in, you can appreciate that the rate (which is what really matters) is actually very solid for those type of minutes. Especially while having almost exclusively Skjei as a partner. Who is a decent player, but not some #1D who is carrying all the water for the pairing.


I could understand if there were concerns about Pesce going forward on his next contract that is likely to be too much, and for too long. As he's at the age where you can definitely start to expect some decline in performance. But nah...this is talking about his pretty unimpeachable track record over the last few years. It's a truly wild, way out on a limb take that doesn't align with my own "eye test" whatsoever, and flies pretty flagrantly in the face of pretty much every available metric in a very straightforward, empirical fashion.