Prospect Info: Connor Carrick

[zeke]

Yea but what is his xtruculence60? Apparently this is the only stat that matters when evaluating how good a defenceman is at playing "defence".

funny but kid is pretty dang truculent too!

 

[GordieHoweHatTrick]

I like Carrick but he loses a lot of battles in the corners and has trouble with coverage from time-to-time, or at least it looks that way to me. Wish he were a little bigger.

Edit: Just noticed in the Pre-GDT thread that Gardiner and Carrick have one of the best possession stats in the league. Could shot-differential statistics like CORSI not look better due to superior possession numbers? I'm asking because Gardiner and Carrick seem to me like solid possession guys but below-average defensively; Gardiner worse than Carrick in that department as well.

 

[Gramsci]

Hunter joined the Leafs Oct 2014 , Nonis and the scouts were fired Apr 2015 .

Correct you are. my bad.

In any event, they got rid of the trogs who willfully ignored statistics. The main point I was making.

 

[zeke]

I like Carrick but he loses a lot of battles in the corners and has trouble with coverage from time-to-time, or at least it looks that way to me. Wish he were a little bigger.

Edit: Just noticed in the Pre-GDT thread that Gardiner and Carrick have one of the best possession stats in the league. Could shot-differential statistics like CORSI not look better due to superior possession numbers? I'm asking because Gardiner and Carrick seem to me like solid possession guys but below-average defensively; Gardiner worse than Carrick in that department as well.

carrick looks even better statistically when you hone down on scoring chances and high danger chances.

 

[Morgs]

So which is it?

So again, you're flaunting your ignorance. Also it definitely shows you didn't read my entire post and quoted ONLY the part you wanted to read. RIGHT after what you quoted I said corsi doesn't show a players worth by itself, but a whole number of stats do that.

 

[Community]

carrick looks even better statistically when you hone down on scoring chances and high danger chances.

I'm sorry, but I really don't understand the usage of stats to prove a player is playing well/bad 8 games into the season. Considering how important sample size is for statistical analyses, shouldn't we hold off on using them when we're only 8 games into the season?

Since it's so early in the season, any one of a hundred variables could significantly affect a player's statistical output:

For corsi: A small change in zone starts, competition quality, passes that should've been shots, quality of shots, etc.

For high danger chances: Unless you analyze every shot, really hard to determine if a high danger chance is really high danger... Not all shots in the "high danger area" are dangerous shots and every shot in the "low danger area" isn't always an easy save.

* A few more missed passes from the opposition when Carrick was on the ice could have caused a massive change in corsi% over an 8 game sample size. You also have to consider that corsi and high danger chances could be contributed to which forward group is on the ice.




There are way too many variables and stats like these are practically useless over 8 games. In addition to using things like Corsi and high danger shots against, you should also use other stats to give more context. I would argue that a big reason that Carrick's high danger shots against are so low is because he is being used in an offensive situation with more offensive zone starts. Over an 8 game sample size, you're going to see that have a significant affect on corsi and high danger shot attempts. It will still be a factor over 82 games, but over 8 games I think it stands out even more.

 

[HellasLEAF]

I dunno guys. Considering his age and experience I think Carrick has stepped right in and looked very good for us. I would say he has gotten better since the beginning of the season.

These guys are so far from the finished article!

 

[zeke]

I'm sorry, but I really don't understand the usage of stats to prove a player is playing well/bad 8 games into the season. Considering how important sample size is for statistical analyses, shouldn't we hold off on using them when we're only 8 games into the season?

Since it's so early in the season, any one of a hundred variables could significantly affect a player's statistical output:

For corsi: A small change in zone starts, competition quality, passes that should've been shots, quality of shots, etc.

For high danger chances: Unless you analyze every shot, really hard to determine if a high danger chance is really high danger... Not all shots in the "high danger area" are dangerous shots and every shot in the "low danger area" isn't always an easy save.

* A few more missed passes from the opposition when Carrick was on the ice could have caused a massive change in corsi% over an 8 game sample size. You also have to consider that corsi and high danger chances could be contributed to which forward group is on the ice.




There are way too many variables and stats like these are practically useless over 8 games. In addition to using things like Corsi and high danger shots against, you should also use other stats to give more context. I would argue that a big reason that Carrick's high danger shots against are so low is because he is being used in an offensive situation with more offensive zone starts. Over an 8 game sample size, you're going to see that have a significant affect on corsi and high danger shot attempts. It will still be a factor over 82 games, but over 8 games I think it stands out even more.

Possession stats are great because they are automatically a much bigger sample of events than any other stats we look at. If we are going to look at any stat this early in the year, then possession stats are the ones that would be by far the most worthwhile and meaningful.

As for how carrick is used - that is factored into the numbers I'm using already. These numbers are already adjusted based on zone starts and score.

and anyways, it's not just this year - he had just as good numbers last year.

 

[Judas Tavares]

Would be nice if he could better time his pinches. He's been good but this is an area he needs to reel it in a bit.

 

[SprDaVE]

So good. And he hasn't been shown his true worth, his offensive abilities. If anything, he's been fairly unlucky in that department.

He's not going anywhere anytime soon.

 

[Bullseye]

So good. And he hasn't been shown his true worth, his offensive abilities. If anything, he's been fairly unlucky in that department.

He's not going anywhere anytime soon.

I am really impressed with his abilities to push the push puck and make high pressure plays.

 

[Morgs]

Holy ****, I knew he and Marincin had a bad game based on the eye test, but come on:

Corsi:
Rielly +1
Zaitsev +1
Gardiner +1
Polak 0
Carrick -16!!!!!!!
Marincin -19!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What in the ****ing **** happened today, even Bozak got a positive Corsi for once....

Also for fun:
Smith -18
Martin -11
Sosh -9

 

[Morgs]

Guy has been our best possession defenseman, but holy **** does his style not work with Marincin. He really needs to get back with Jake.

 

[A1LeafNation]

It's a development year for the leafs defence. I'm okay with developing the chemistry between Marincin and Carrick as they will be our third pair moving forward.

Reilly _______
Gardiner Zaitsev
Marincin Carrick
Valiev

This defence will look exponentially better with a few years of seasoning and a big time UFA to push everyone one spot down the depth charts... like Burns.

 

[thewave]

Guy has been our best possession defenseman, but holy **** does his style not work with Marincin. He really needs to get back with Jake.

Marincin sucks just like he did last year and the years before that. Carrick was to be the offensive spark to Mari's defensive prowess but the problem is Mari sucks and should not really be in the NHL. Funny how Carrick looks good with Jake but not good with Hunny or Polak etc. Well, he is not there for the purpose of covering both sides of the ice, he is a reasonable compliment to a good D like Jake. He may end up our 5-6 and that's the truth but, this year he shouldn't be because he is better than the rest.

If I had it my way Valiev would be up for sure. Good D on the same level as Carrick only different styles.

 

[Anthrax442]

It's a development year for the leafs defence. I'm okay with developing the chemistry between Marincin and Carrick as they will be our third pair moving forward.

Reilly _______
Gardiner Zaitsev
Marincin Carrick
Valiev

This defence will look exponentially better with a few years of seasoning and a big time UFA to push everyone one spot down the depth charts... like Burns.

I like Valiev's game. Also think that that #2 needs to be addressed much more than the 3-7 spots.

 

[keon]

I like Valiev's game. Also think that that #2 needs to be addressed much more than the 3-7 spots.

I agree 99% with your statement but slightly modified. Our bottom 5 - 8 defencemen are a work in progress. We only have 3 "Top-4" defencemen. We are two years into a five year rebuild. We need to develop or acquire a Top-4 defenceman.

Lou secured the #1 Goalie we needed. We had fantastic luck and got the "Franchise" center we needed. We have a stable of complimentary prospects under-development. We will have valuable cap-space starting next year. I think we are one Top-4 defenceman away from having our CORE set.

 

[ToMaLe]

Guy has been our best possession defenseman, but holy **** does his style not work with Marincin. He really needs to get back with Jake.

nobodies style works with Marincin, he is a useless pylon! I would still like to see a few players dumped off of this team but this guy is #1 by a mile!