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.