Dan Boyle Mod post #696

[haveandare]

Jumping the gun talking about getting rid of him IMO.

I thought he was fine last year once you put aside the what could have been with stralman.

This year he's been trash. I can live with giveaways as a result of having the puck a lot but he's been just passing straight to the other team and that is unacceptable from a vet.

I'd still hold onto him and give him time to get it together though. He can be 7 for a bit while he works.

 

[DanielBrassard]

Doesn't account for ZS, but still.

 

[Mac n Gs]

Doesn't account for ZS, but still.

The discrepancy between their zone starts and competition faced definitely plays a big part of those numbers.

Last year was a different story anyways. Boyle looks horrible compared to last season. Now, that's not saying he can't improve his play, which I'm sure he will, but so far, Boyle has been our worst defenseman.

 

[TheTakedown]

ya exactly we get the cap space we need and he is more appealing to the teams trading for him at $2.25 than $4.5.. he could be a insurance policy or 6-7 for a team like the guy from philly to chicago last year(blanking on his name)

Timmonen.

And Boyle is worlds better than Timmonen...

 

[eco's bones]

Make Boyle the 7th D and we will see how fast his tune changes.

His tune might change---but if it doesn't?---we're probably stuck with him.

Moving Dan Boyle to a contender at half his contract isn't a bad move... Trade him to Winnipeg or Philly for like 3rd or 4th

I don't see why Winnipeg would want him. They're carrying 8 D right now and at least 6 of them are better players. They also have Josh Morrissey--a very highly rated former 1st round pick who may even be closer to NHL ready than Brady Skjei.

As for Philly--they already have similar players in Streit and Del Zotto and Del Zotto's quite a bit younger. They really could use a d-man who could be a shutdown guy--not another d-man with defensive issues.


I don't see a good fit either place.

 

[DanielBrassard]

The discrepancy between their zone starts and competition faced definitely plays a big part of those numbers.

Last year was a different story anyways. Boyle looks horrible compared to last season. Now, that's not saying he can't improve his play, which I'm sure he will, but so far, Boyle has been our worst defenseman.

That graph is vs star forwards. And I agree that he's been the worst D, but it's 3 games.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Doesn't account for ZS, but still.

I'm starting to think its even more laughable those of you who complain about Girardi's corsi. If I am interpreting that correctly, when he's on the ice, we have 46% of the shot attempts.

Considering that he's known more for his defense (defending shots) than offense (creating shots) and he has terrible zone starts, 46% doesn't even seem bad. He's obviously not known for his ability to control possession for us. His corsi seems very average, not even worth mentioning.

So really, it seems like you guys are just upset because he doesn't have fancy puck-handling skills.

 

[Machinehead]

I'm starting to think its even more laughable those of you who complain about Girardi's corsi. If I am interpreting that correctly, when he's on the ice, we have 46% of the shot attempts.

Considering that he's known more for his defense (defending shots) than offense (creating shots) and he has terrible zone starts, 46% doesn't even seem bad. He's obviously not known for his ability to control possession for us. His corsi seems very average, not even worth mentioning.

So really, it seems like you guys are just upset because he doesn't have fancy puck-handling skills.

Girardi's corsi against (defending shots) is much worse than his corsi for (creating shots)

And 46% is not average. Not for any type of player in any situation. It's just bad.

You don't have to believe in corsi, but I wouldn't advise talking about it like you know anything about it.

 

[Raspewtin]

Today I learned 46% CF% is average

Yeah, if you're on the Coyotes maybe.

 

[DanielBrassard]

I'm starting to think its even more laughable those of you who complain about Girardi's corsi. If I am interpreting that correctly, when he's on the ice, we have 46% of the shot attempts.

Considering that he's known more for his defense (defending shots) than offense (creating shots) and he has terrible zone starts, 46% doesn't even seem bad. He's obviously not known for his ability to control possession for us. His corsi seems very average, not even worth mentioning.

So really, it seems like you guys are just upset because he doesn't have fancy puck-handling skills.

You really don't have any idea with what you are talking about here. 46% is awful, He's worse at suppressing shots than generating shots, and he's playing with ****ing McDonagh a large majority of the time which makes him look better than he even is. We aren't upset because he isn't a good puck-handler, we are upset because he's just not that good period. Even when you adjust his numbers they are bad.

 

[Machinehead]

Today I learned 46% CF% is average

Yeah, if you're on the Coyotes maybe.

OEL doe

 

[Machinehead]

Ok folks, back to Boyle before we end up in the eye of Girardi again

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

If 50% is average, how is 46% so out of the ordinary?

We aren't talking about 35% percent here. If I am understanding this correctly, the team is 52% and you are complaining that a player who gets awful zone starts and isn't a good possession player to begin with is 46%?

You guys make way too big of a deal over these numbers. I thought we were talking about a 35% percent corsi. 46% isn't even worth mentioning.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Didn't see Machinehead's mod note. I'll drop this conversation from here.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

Ok folks, back to Boyle before we end up in the eye of Girardi again

Can we discuss just how funny all of the offseason random praise for Boyle was and how it didn't really mesh with the "eye test" at all?

 

[aufheben]

I praised him all season, he was good. Him sucking for 3 games this year doesn't change that.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

I praised him all season, he was good. Him sucking for 3 games this year doesn't change that.

He was a solid 4/5 guy last year. But the praise was insane and over the top this offseason (to the point where I thought some were talking about some top pairing player).

 

[silverfish]

He was a solid 4/5 guy last year. But the praise was insane and over the top this offseason (to the point where I thought some were talking about some top pairing player).

There are definitely some posters who had Boyle on their top pairing after trading Girardi this off-season. You did not imagine that

 

[Hunter Gathers]

There are definitely some posters who had Boyle on their top pairing after trading Girardi this off-season. You did not imagine that

Oh, I don't doubt it. I probably tried to block out that ridiculousness from my mind because of how absurd it must have sounded at the time.

 

[Inferno]

i still think corsi needs to be weighted much better. i think a 46% corsi if youre up against the triplets or something like that isnt nearly as bad as a 46% corsi up against Tanner Glass. they need to weigh the competition in that number...as well as the linemates.

 

[Raspewtin]

i still think corsi needs to be weighted much better. i think a 46% corsi if youre up against the triplets or something like that isnt nearly as bad as a 46% corsi up against Tanner Glass. they need to weigh the competition in that number...as well as the linemates.

There's many different metrics that do that.

And just comparing similar players works too.

Girardi just isn't a good possession player. There is no context missing.

 

[SA16]

i still think corsi needs to be weighted much better. i think a 46% corsi if youre up against the triplets or something like that isnt nearly as bad as a 46% corsi up against Tanner Glass. they need to weigh the competition in that number...as well as the linemates.

Yea I don't want to get into the importance of zone starts or QoC or QoT or anything but the assumption that 50% should be the CF% baseline for every player is false. To argue simply that >50 is good and <50 is bad is blatantly false and ignoring many important things due to context (regardless of whether or not we currently have a good way to actually measure or adjust for that context). It is entirely possible that a 46 CF% could be above average if the expected CF% for a player in that particular situation is <46%.

 

[DanielBrassard]

Yea I don't want to get into the importance of zone starts or QoC or QoT or anything but the assumption that 50% should be the CF% baseline for every player is false. To argue simply that >50 is good and <50 is bad is blatantly false and ignoring many important things due to context (regardless of whether or not we currently have a good way to actually measure or adjust for that context). It is entirely possible that a 46 CF% could be above average if the expected CF% for a player in that particular situation is <46%.

Which is why we have dCorsi and CPM. Anyway to steer the conversation back to Danny B, the idea that he's the Rangers worst defenseman and that he can't play against tough competition is just not true, and the three games he's struggled in this far isn't enough to change that.

 

[SA16]

Which is why we have dCorsi and CPM.

Sure. No problem there. Just solely commenting on the use of raw CF% numbers. Of course dCorsi is very dependent on how well they are able to actually estimate what the "expected" performance in a given spot is but it doesn't need to be perfect. As long as it is better than other things that's all that matters. That and that it's constantly being reviewed/updated/tweaked as more info comes out.

 

[Raspewtin]

Sure. No problem there. Just solely commenting on the use of raw CF% numbers. Of course dCorsi is very dependent on how well they are able to actually estimate what the "expected" performance in a given spot is but it doesn't need to be perfect. As long as it is better than other things that's all that matters. That and that it's constantly being reviewed/updated/tweaked as more info comes out.

Agree with this. Everyone's like "corsi's not perfect so why bother?". It might not be perfect but it's a damn good option. Should everything that's not 100% time tested just be thrown out the window?