Dan Girardi: Part II (All Girardi Talk here pls)

[silverfish]

Chara is damn impressive.

Its not that he is bad as much as it is that he is not suited for that role. He is in over his head. He is not performing well playing against top competition and getting unfavorable zone starts. I know AV can do a better job balancing this out. He did it last season.

This, in broad strokes, I can agree with. My main issue with Girardi's usage is that it is so rare, and so ridiculous, that we've asked a ton from G in his time on this team. I've posted in the spec thread today about why AV can't really do that on this team. I know you believe Boyle can handle a tougher role, but he really can't. I think you (or another poster) made the point that it would also be sort of wasting Boyle to give him less Ozone starts. That's where he needs to play.

We need a guy better than Klein. A guy like Stralman/Petry/Muzzin. I posted the 13/14 usage chart vs the 14/15 usage chart for Rangers d-men, and there is a SIGNIFICANT difference between the two years.

It's not just three of our own coaches. It's opposing coaches who line-match and don't want their guys on the ice with Girardi and McDonagh (see Washington and Pittsburgh).

Logical fallacy (this is tongue in cheek I swear)

This point goes hand in hand with sort of the 'talking heads' of hockey, and opposing players knowing how hard it is to go against G for 15 minutes a night. But it's definitely a good point.

 

[Doctyl]

No, Girardi just sucks. Obv.

Jon pls read my post. Not angry ras

Its not that he is bad as much as it is that he is not suited for that role. He is in over his head. He is not performing well playing against top competition and getting unfavorable zone starts. I know AV can do a better job balancing this out. He did it last season.

 

[Filthy Dangles]

Didn't Tyler Seguin say Danny G was the toughest/most frustrating player in the league to play against?

 

[Hunter Gathers]

Jon pls read my post. Not angry ras

You also wrote that he's not a competent defenseman in the Gorton thread, dude.

 

[Raspewtin]

The valuation done by actual professionals holds tremendous weight. It's basically the equivalent of a court's view on a law. You and I may read it differently, but the people making the decisions read it a specific way.

But we've seen many times where the coach is ignorant of other players and prefers to stay in their comfort zone. Did anybody reasonably expect AV to trot in here and break up the team's best pairing over the last two years? Stralman is on the top pair in Tampa now and he's getting a ton of points and playing very well. Meanwhile he was a #4 and nothing more here, supposedly, because he was never played on the top pair and nobody was willing to accept the fact that he probably could. The Hawks at multiple times scratched Teravainen for Handzus and Nordstrom, two incredibly inferior hockey players that don't provide much value.

I'm not saying their opinions are worthless or anything, but they've been wrong plenty of times. If there was any coach out there that was almost never wrong relative to his arsenal to make decisions, he'd be in the HOF.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

Frankly, I'm all for lowering G's minutes because I just don't think his body can take that beating over a full season.

 

[True Blue]

1. Appealing to authority isn't a very good argument. Just because the person is well respected and holds a position of authority doesn't mean he is infallible.

So in your view, BOTH Torts and AV are guilty of making the same mistake when it comes to Girardi? Renney too for that matter.

2. No. Girardi would get picked off reputation and age. If they were the same age, on the same contract and just had the seasons that they did, I would expect scouts to pick Dan Boyle.

Just making sure that we are getting the same response, if age and history was not a consideration, you believe that most NHL scouts would pick last year's Boyle's season over Girardi's?

3. I cannot answer that question. I did not watch those dmen with the intent of analyzing their play and the understanding to do it. They could very well have stats similar to Girardi where they suck at just about everything. I don't think that would be surprising. They could also have stats similar to Mike Sauer where he was a very good shot suppressor and a complete monster in front of his own net. I think that could also be quite likely. The league has and is changing. These metrics were not relied available (at least to the public) then. As the game is heading more toward analytics today, you see dmen like Girardi, who cannot generate or suppress shots, being phased out. The defensive dman is being redefined. Girardi playing 20 years ago would probably be one of the best dmen in the league without a question. In today's NHL players like Girardi are being starting questioned and going forward I think they will be the next dying breed of hockey players.

The question was, what kind of light would the advanced metrics shine on those 3 defensemen?

Do you believe that Scott Stevens would not be a successful defenseman in today's NHL?

 

[Doctyl]

This, in broad strokes, I can agree with. My main issue with Girardi's usage is that it is so rare, and so ridiculous, that we've asked a ton from G in his time on this team. I've posted in the spec thread today about why AV can't really do that on this team. I know you believe Boyle can handle a tougher role, but he really can't. I think you (or another poster) made the point that it would also be sort of wasting Boyle to give him less Ozone starts. That's where he needs to play.

We need a guy better than Klein. A guy like Stralman/Petry/Muzzin. I posted the 13/14 usage chart vs the 14/15 usage chart for Rangers d-men, and there is a SIGNIFICANT difference between the two years.

Boyle preformed very well in his role. I think he absolutely can handle some tougher minute. Not Girardi's minutes, but AV could spread it out little better.

Losing Stralman was a killer. I agree that we need someone else on this defense. Those guys are excellent shot suppressors. I would give up A LOT to get Muzzin in NY.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

But we've seen many times where the coach is ignorant of other players and prefers to stay in their comfort zone. Did anybody reasonably expect AV to trot in here and break up the team's best pairing over the last two years? Stralman is on the top pair in Tampa now and he's getting a ton of points and playing very well. Meanwhile he was a #4 and nothing more here, supposedly, because he was never played on the top pair and nobody was willing to accept the fact that he probably could. The Hawks at multiple times scratched Teravainen for Handzus and Nordstrom, two incredibly inferior hockey players that don't provide much value.

I'm not saying their opinions are worthless or anything, but they've been wrong plenty of times. If there was any coach out there that was almost never wrong relative to his arsenal to make decisions, he'd be in the HOF.

Again, I'd say "sure" if we are just talking about a small sample size.

We aren't.

We are talking about years and years of data, multiple coaches, multiple opposing coaches, etc.

 

[Doctyl]

You also wrote that he's not a competent defenseman in the Gorton thread, dude.

pls. did not. may have implied it though.

 

[silverfish]

Boyle preformed very well in his role. I think he absolutely can handle some tougher minute. Not Girardi's minutes, but AV could spread it out little better.

Losing Stralman was a killer. I agree that we need someone else on this defense. Those guys are excellent shot suppressors. I would give up A LOT to get Muzzin in NY.

Bolded the point of the off-season.

That's the focus. It's the baseline of every post I make in the spec thread.

You find a way to deal Klein and bring in a better shot suppressing D. McIlrath the 7th D. Then, you alleviate some of the burden on G with this new cat, and you increase Boyle's role A LITTLE BIT (because he was ridiculously sheltered this season).

Do that, you improve Girardi's numbers. This new cat will have good numbers that will help Staal. Boyle's numbers will decrease a bit, but he was ridiculous this season - that'll probably happen anyway.

Two pros come out of removing Klein and adding a 'shot suppressor' type D.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

pls. did not. may have implied it though.

Exactly my point.

As I wrote there, that's as ludicrous as if someone said that Girardi was a Norris-caliber d-man.

 

[Raspewtin]

I mean, you don't think there's something to be said about the defender who faces the third hardest competition and 5th worst zone starts in the NHL the past 8 years?

I've said all that I need to say regarding Girardi's minutes and et al. I don't think he's good regardless of who he matches up against.

You don't think it helps explain why his shot suppression statistics aren't as sexy as you'd like them to be?

I'll agree with you that Girardi should be seeing easier minutes, but this is the point I'm making.

I'm sure they'd look better away from them but I'm not sure by how much. Not facing top competition doesn't change the serious flaws in his game that leads to his miserable statistics.

Eight years of data. Third toughest competition. Fifth toughest zone starts.

That is not the usage Dan Girardi should be having. And I think you need to recognize how ridiculous that usage is.

It's ridiculous but I'm not blaming Girardi sucking on his usage. My opinion has been very consistent.

I'm sure I sound like the adults in the Peanuts to you at this point, but I find it so hard to believe that you don't think these are necessary variables when discussing player performance.

I don't think they're unnecessary.

I think the blame for Girardi not having good stats is just misguided. It's a combination of him not being good AND rough competition.

 

[Doctyl]

So in your view, BOTH Torts and AV are guilty of making the same mistake when it comes to Girardi? Renney too for that matter.

Just making sure that we are getting the same response, if age and history was not a consideration, you believe that most NHL scouts would pick last year's Boyle's season over Girardi's?

The question was, what kind of light would the advanced metrics shine on those 3 defensemen?

Do you believe that Scott Stevens would not be a successful defenseman in today's NHL?

Yes. Abusing Girardi with tough competition and unfavorable zone starts is a bad idea. He cannot handle it.

Yes.

There is no answer to this question. I have no way of knowing that without going back and rewatching every one of Beukeboom's/Stevens's/Daneyko's games and counting every shot attempt myself.

I do not know if Stevens would be successful today. He could be. He could also be an obsolete player.

 

[Raspewtin]

I feel like Girardi would be one of those players we'd all make fun of for being on the opposition's top pair if he were on another team.

It's not just three of our own coaches. It's opposing coaches who line-match and don't want their guys on the ice with Girardi and McDonagh (see Washington and Pittsburgh).

I mean, we are all aware how much of a sieve Brooks Orpik is but AV tried damn hard to not send Nash's line out against him and Carlson.

 

[silverfish]

I've said all that I need to say regarding Girardi's minutes and et al. I don't think he's good regardless of who he matches up against.

I'm sure they'd look better away from them but I'm not sure by how much. Not facing top competition doesn't change the serious flaws in his game that leads to his miserable statistics.

It's ridiculous but I'm not blaming Girardi sucking on his usage. My opinion has been very consistent.

I don't think they're unnecessary.

I think the blame for Girardi not having good stats is just misguided. It's a combination of him not being good AND rough competition.

Hm. I think we're saying a lot of the same things ideologically, but we differ on some broad stroke opinions.

I just think Girardi is probably a #3/4 D, when I believe you think he's a bottom-pairing guy.

We differ on that. And we differ on how much usage effects a players stats.

I'm okay to agree to disagree here, for now. Fair?

 

[Raspewtin]

Hm. I think we're saying a lot of the same things ideologically, but we differ on some broad stroke opinions.

I just think Girardi is probably a #3/4 D, when I believe you think he's a bottom-pairing guy.

We differ on that. And we differ on how much usage effects a players stats.

I'm okay to agree to disagree here, for now. Fair?

You and I both know this isn't and will never be the end

 

[silverfish]

You and I both know this isn't and will never be the end

I said for now!

I really just want to see more science done on the variables that effect possession metrics (this is going to get a bit OT for this thread).

Because if you look at a usage chart, the guys with negative relZonestarts are overwhelmingly negative in relative corsi. The opposite exists for guys on the positive side.

It just makes "common sense" to me. Getting more zone starts in the defensive zone, you're going to give up shots. Getting more zone starts in the offensive zone, you're going to record more shots. And it's all relative, right? So if you're Girardi and getting **** zone starts, there's a guy on your team getting the opposite of your zone starts. That same guy (Boyle) is also benefitting from getting shots on net, ergo decreasing G's relative corsi.

Competition is not so cut and dry, because you have elite level D like Karlsson, Subban, Doughty, etc... playing top competition and still performing on the possession side. Because those guys are ****ing really, really good d-men.

We're scratching the surface.

 

[alkurtz]

Agreed, the ideal for a defensemen is changing. I think it all started with Scott Niedermayer, who could skate, carry the puck, join the rush and still be dominent in his own end.

The closest we come to that ideal is McD.

But that is a rare combination of skills and I'm not sure there are or ever will be enough players to fill this roll on the top two pairs, let alone 1-6.

There will always be room, even on the top pair, for smart, experienced, shut down D who may lacking in other aspects of their game. Guys like Staal and Girardi will always be in high demand while the ideal will be McD, Weber, Doughty, Subban et al.

As for the idea that with G was on another team we would be making fun of him: I highly doubt it. I thing Girardi is incredibly well respected around the league.

 

[Filthy Dangles]

I said for now!

I really just want to see more science done on the variables that effect possession metrics (this is going to get a bit OT for this thread).

Because if you look at a usage chart, the guys with negative relZonestarts are overwhelmingly negative in relative corsi. The opposite exists for guys on the positive side.

It just makes "common sense" to me. Getting more zone starts in the defensive zone, you're going to give up shots. Getting more zone starts in the offensive zone, you're going to record more shots. And it's all relative, right? So if you're Girardi and getting **** zone starts, there's a guy on your team getting the opposite of your zone starts. That same guy (Boyle) is also benefitting from getting shots on net, ergo decreasing G's relative corsi.

Competition is not so cut and dry, because you have elite level D like Karlsson, Subban, Doughty, etc... playing top competition and still performing on the possession side. Because those guys are ****ing really, really good d-men.

We're scratching the surface.

I wonder how Girardi would perform on the Boston Bruins with patrice bergeron as his 1C and as his most common forward teammate. Bergeron over the last two seasons, got 44% OZS yet was a 60% CF player, which is ****ing insane. Especially considering the magnitude of players he play's against. I don't think a forward in the game faces tougher comp than PB. He also wins 60% of the draws he takes so he's not gonna yield a lot of shots or shot attempts when he starts in his own end. Derek Stepan's only been a 44% FOW% over the pas two seasons.

Not saying Chara only did well because of this, but definitely benefitted from it.

 

[Raspewtin]

Agreed, the ideal for a defensemen is changing. I think it all started with Scott Niedermayer, who could skate, carry the puck, join the rush and still be dominent in his own end.

The closest we come to that ideal is McD.

But that is a rare combination of skills and I'm not sure there are or ever will be enough players to fill this roll on the top two pairs, let alone 1-6.

There will always be room, even on the top pair, for smart, experienced, shut down D who may lacking in other aspects of their game. Guys like Staal and Girardi will always be in high demand while the ideal will be McD, Weber, Doughty, Subban et al.

As for the idea that with G was on another team we would be making fun of him: I highly doubt it. I thing Girardi is incredibly well respected around the league.

Staal and Girardi aren't that similar IMO.

Girardi relies on "positioning" and blocking high danger opportunities, but ultimately allowing them to happen.

Staal is better in the neutral zone and has a very strong defensive stick. He's also very strong in front of his own net.

 

[Machinehead]

I was looking back at some of our Jagr/Drury rosters the other day and Girardi was actually very good and an excellent possession player.

Then Torts happened.

 

[Cassano]

I was look back at some of our Jagr/Drury rosters the other day and Girardi was actually very good and an excellent possession player.

Then Torts happened.

He also played a lot with Tyutin IIRC and he was a great possession player on poor teams throughout his career. I remember he carried Nikitin to make a formidable pairing. He's quite underrated.

 

[Machinehead]

He also played a lot with Tyutin IIRC and he was a great possession player on poor teams throughout his career. I remember he carried Nikitin to make a formidable pairing. He's quite underrated.

Tyutin was excellent, yes. But Girardi had fantastic numbers in 2008-09 after we dealt Tyutin, paired with some guy named Wade...

 

[Machinehead]

Staal was also an elite possession D-man before Dr. Frankenstein was hired.