Dan Girardi: Part IV

[DanielBrassard]

Its like the same argument thats used to support Tanner Glass.

Similar for sure. But there was a post in the Stoll thread during the Glass discussion that because the Rangers won alot that Glass couldn't have contributed more to losses than he did to wins, which I find preposterous. And it ties in to the Girardi debate because its the idea that because the team around him was so successful and had contributed so much to the success of the team, that a guy like Girardi or Glass must have also been a positive contribution otherwise the team couldn't have been as successful as they were. But the fact is that there are 16 other players on the ice, plus factors such as luck that could make up for their poor contributions.

 

[Machinehead]

Enough with the personal ****, I feel like I'm in British Parliament.

 

[Tawnos]

I havent heard a legitimate argument fir why hes a good player. Ive heard arguments where he is overused and thats why plays so horribly, but never heard anyone prove why hes good.

#1: you definitely have heard legitimate arguments. You all have. Yet I see this repeated over and over again. I've posted, several times, what Girardi does as an individual on the ice that I think is there to like. None of those arguments that I have made were referenced by DMPD in his attempt to portray how Girardi supporters think.

#2: why would anyone be seeking proof in a matter of opinion? You can't prove that he's good or bad, either with observation or with statistics. All you can do is have an opinion, which can be backed up by observation, logic or statistics. This search for proof in the unprovable is a major problem in this discussion.

 

[Off Sides]

Girardi is good. He's just not great. Everything else is just exaggeration.

A real apples to apples comparison of Right Side League wide defenders who signed a contract including just their UFAs years, who have a similar cap hits

Everything else, all the other comparisons, they just are not direct comparisons. Either they play less minutes, they are on a contract with a lower cap hit because they have non UFA years in it, they play the left side, they play against lesser competition. How are those fair comparisons?

Player and Cap hit


Letang 7.25M
Boychuk 6M
Burns 5.76M
Niskanen 5.75M
Wisniewski 5.5M
Girardi 5.5M
Petry 5.5M
Wideman 5.25M
Bieksa 4.6M
Garrision 4.6M
Stralman 4.5M
Michalek 3.2M
Klein 2.9M
Gilbert 2.8M

Those are the right handed players who have signed a contract that only included their UFA years who even come close to playing in a comparable role.

Are some of those contracts better? Sure, do any of those players also play against who Girardi does? Maybe a couple. Do those who excel at it have higher cap hits? Mostly. Those who have lower cap hits, have they proven to be able to play the same amount of minutes against the same competition?

If people know of lefties who play the right side and would like to add them to the list, be my guest, but my point is that the list of players who are truly apples to apples comparisons is not very large, nor are there a whole bunch of players who are both better and do not carry a significantly higher cap hit. It's not like Girardi, where he is in terms of cap hit on that list sticks out like a sore thumb.

Don't like the contract, disagree that a defender should mostly concentrate on D, or one who does not move the puck brilliantly has no place in the league, think the Rangers could have gone a different direction, whatever, I'd probably agree with some of that but that he is not on the same level compared to his direct peers, that is where the debate in my opinion starts to fall apart.

 

[alkurtz]

Girardi performs like a bottom pairing/AHL dman in the role he's asked to play.

I don't see anything wrong with this statement.

Except that it contradicts reality. Come on, even people who appreciate Girardi, and I am one, are willing to admit that he has slipped a bit. We are willing to admit to the stats perhaps show that he is not as good as we think he is. But we also know that he remains a sound, smart, experienced NHL defenseman who can be trusted in high leverage situations.

Perhaps if you didn't put him on the same level as "bottom pairing/AHL dman," the defensive equivalent of Tanner Glass, we could have a real discussion and take what you say more seriously.

It is certainly going to be a frustrating season for you watching AV throw him out there against the 1st lines of every opponent we play or to protect leads in the 3rd period. But then, AV should be coaching in the ECHL, right?

 

[Kaapo Cabana]

Girardi is good. He's just not great. Everything else is just exaggeration.

A real apples to apples comparison of Right Side League wide defenders who signed a contract including just their UFAs years, who have a similar cap hits

Everything else, all the other comparisons, they just are not direct comparisons. Either they play less minutes, they are on a contract with a lower cap hit because they have non UFA years in it, they play the left side, they play against lesser competition. How are those fair comparisons?

Player and Cap hit


Letang 7.25M
Boychuk 6M
Burns 5.76M
Niskanen 5.75M
Wisniewski 5.5M
Girardi 5.5M
Petry 5.5M
Wideman 5.25M
Bieksa 4.6M
Garrision 4.6M
Stralman 4.5M
Michalek 3.2M
Klein 2.9M
Gilbert 2.8M

Those are the right handed players who have signed a contract that only included their UFA years who even come close to playing in a comparable role.

Are some of those contracts better? Sure, do any of those players also play against who Girardi does? Maybe a couple. Do those who excel at it have higher cap hits? Mostly. Those who have lower cap hits, have they proven to be able to play the same amount of minutes against the same competition?

If people know of lefties who play the right side and would like to add them to the list, be my guest, but my point is that the list of players who are truly apples to apples comparisons is not very large, nor are there a whole bunch of players who are both better and do not carry a significantly higher cap hit. It's not like Girardi, where he is in terms of cap hit on that list sticks out like a sore thumb.

Don't like the contract, disagree that a defender should mostly concentrate on D, or one who does not move the puck brilliantly has no place in the league, think the Rangers could have gone a different direction, whatever, I'd probably agree with some of that but that he is not on the same level compared to his direct peers, that is where the debate in my opinion starts to fall apart.

good post

Judging by the comparisons in your list, I would say that he is a bit overpaid, but its not that big of a deal. We have both good contracts and bad contracts on our team and it evens out as evidenced by our ability to ice a PT winning team under the salary cap.

 

[Off Sides]

good post

Judging by the comparisons in your list, I would say that he is a bit overpaid, but its not that big of a deal. We have both good contracts and bad contracts on our team and it evens out as evidenced by our ability to ice a PT winning team under the salary cap.

Burns, Niskanen and Stralman are the only ones I would confidently take over Girardi given the cap hits. Should preface that as, at this point, I am not super confident Girardi ages well. Possibly Boychuk just because he is not bad and he can freaking shoot the puck which is a dynamic the team just lacks. Burns was likely not coming here. I would have liked to see them keep Stralman, but rather than Boyle not so much rather than Girardi. Niskanen I actually think was a good signing, but also somewhat of a risky one as he at that point was just starting to really put it all together.

 

[Tawnos]

The one thing that could help Girardi as he gets older is his intelligence. Those kinds of players can usually figure out how to be effective as their physical tools deteriorate.

 

[DanielBrassard]

#1: you definitely have heard legitimate arguments. You all have. Yet I see this repeated over and over again. I've posted, several times, what Girardi does as an individual on the ice that I think is there to like. None of those arguments that I have made were referenced by DMPD in his attempt to portray how Girardi supporters think.

#2: why would anyone be seeking proof in a matter of opinion? You can't prove that he's good or bad, either with observation or with statistics. All you can do is have an opinion, which can be backed up by observation, logic or statistics. This search for proof in the unprovable is a major problem in this discussion.

To say that someone's opinion isnt provable is so ridiculous I cant even believe im reading it. So by your logic we dont have any proof that Henrik Lundqvist is a good goalie. We dont have proof that Sidney Crosby is a great player? If someone said "Sidney Crosby is bad IMO" and you said, hmm, based on this statistical data here, where he's lead the league in scoring this many times you are completely wrong, he is in fact the best player in hockey that would be considered proof, would it not? Problem is, people's opinions can be wrong (or right), and theres proof, AKA, statistics, logic, observation that show that if you think Henrik Lundqvist is bad, your opinion is wrong, and it sucks.

 

[Tawnos]

I think you are confusing universally held opinions with proof.

 

[Off Sides]

The one thing that could help Girardi as he gets older is his intelligence. Those kinds of players can usually figure out how to be effective as their physical tools deteriorate.

To a point, but I think by that point he will really be someone they are not going to want out there against the other teams best players. Which is probably why his NMC goes to a LNTC clause and his real salary goes down as the contract goes on.

I also missed Robidas at 3M, 38 years old, and Engelland at 2.9M.

I just think right side guys who are or would have been UFAs who are decent players are tougher to find than is being branded about. Finding ones who can both put up points or shots, or suppress them is even more difficult. There is just a give and take there unless it's among the most elite and even they are not impervious, Webers shot based metrics have not been so great here and there either.

Most of those players are signed and kept for as long a possible.

Hamilton for #15 #45 and #52 was just a ridiculously one sided deal.

 

[alkurtz]

I'm or the opinion that defensemen such as Girardi are just the type that age well. He knows his limitations. It is offensive D that tend not to age well. They are more likely to depend on quickness and skating than defensive defenseman.

So where are we?

Observation (the eye-test) is flawed.
The metrics are flawed (to many variables, don't take into consideration intangibles, group dynamics, etc).
The opinions of professionals (coaches) is of little worth.

Well, I guess that is why this is a sport played by people in real life and not as computer constructs.

There are many people here who try to strike a balance, who think deeply about the game, who are open to new ideas, who try to see all sides. Who are willing to change their opinions.

These are people who tend to have a lot of experience with life. They might be old or young; age is of no consequence here. They have been in many situations in their own lives that offer insight into situations that are nominally outside of their own. They don't rush to judgement but consider all sides of an issue. They don't bind themselves to one theory (unless that theory is no longer a theory and has been scientifically proven).

It is people who are convinced they are right to the exclusion of everything else, and let those beliefs blind themselves to reality, that are a problem here and elsewhere.; who make this board not a place for discussion and the interchange of ideas and perspective, but a place of constant and incessant rancor. Of course, they have every right to express those ideas, but it leads to the internet version of a bar fight rather than fans of different opinions discussing them civilly.

it is zealots, those who dismiss metrics totally or those who except them without question, who are wrong. Zealots dismiss other peoples opinions as worthless. They demean others of differing ideas as of no value.

I'm just as passionate about the Rangers as anyone else. I am a man of strong beliefs. But I'm also always ready to have a civilized discussion. Some here are not.

 

[Mac n Gs]

The one thing that could help Girardi as he gets older is his intelligence. Those kinds of players can usually figure out how to be effective as their physical tools deteriorate.

99.9% sure his skeleton is made of adamantium so I don't think physical deterioration will be an issue.

 

[Tawnos]

99.9% sure his skeleton is made of adamantium so I don't think physical deterioration will be an issue.

true. But to the point.. Physical deterioration doesn't just come in the form of things like skating or proneness to injury. Reaction time is a huge factor and that is where you see players lose something that affects their game.

Girardi could have the most resilient body in history, but that won't stop him from losing something from his reaction time.

 

[Ail]

#1: you definitely have heard legitimate arguments. You all have. Yet I see this repeated over and over again. I've posted, several times, what Girardi does as an individual on the ice that I think is there to like. None of those arguments that I have made were referenced by DMPD in his attempt to portray how Girardi supporters think.

#2: why would anyone be seeking proof in a matter of opinion? You can't prove that he's good or bad, either with observation or with statistics. All you can do is have an opinion, which can be backed up by observation, logic or statistics. This search for proof in the unprovable is a major problem in this discussion.

Dactyl pls respond.

Edit: I wasn't trying to account for all of the Girardi supporters fwiw.

 

[Miamipuck]

I'm or the opinion that defensemen such as Girardi are just the type that age well.

The defenseman that age well are the ones that are at the very least exceptional skaters when they're younger. I don't think Girardi fits that mold. In modern hockey if you can't skate well you're pretty much useless. There are exceptions but those exceptions are mostly guys in or entering their prime, like a Stepan(not Dman just an example).

 

[alkurtz]

Well, I'm not saying that he will be a 1st pair D forever, in fact he might have already slipped to the 2nd pair. Heck, he might even slip, in few more years, to the 3rd pair. That is the normal aging process in hockey.

But I just think that there is a type of player, who as they age, plays not from the outside in (their natural gifts and talents is what drives their game) but to the inside out (the experience and intelligence activates that ability and compensates for a loss of that ability.

I believe Girardi to be one of those types: smart, intelligent, experienced. That will allow him to play within his diminishing skills for many years. He will probably be able to "play up," using that knowledge to play effectively on the 1st pair when he should be getting 2nd pair minutes or on the 2nd pair when he should be on the 3rd pair. Defensemen such as this have always been in demand in the NHL no matter how the game and the ideal of what a D should be has evolved.

All of you who think that Girardi supporters are blind to the arc of his career, who are loyal to him no matter what, are absolutely incorrect and just using that argument to belittle others.

We see his faults but value his strengths. Those on the other side of the argument, who disliked Girardi even before they found stats to bolster their arguments, cannot say the same. Anyone who sees no value in Girardi whatsover, who equates him with Tanner Glass or AHL defensemen, has been blinded by their own hatred and cannot see things rationally.

 

[Filthy Dangles]

Still beating this horse, I see.

I pooled together video of some of Girardi's minutes these past playoffs to focus just on him and how he plays the game.

I was surprised at just how frequently he vacates the ice surface once the puck gets moving in his teams direction where his partner Ryan McDonagh will stay on the ice surface and then accumulate Corsi For.

Girardi pretty much never really steadily accumulates Corsi For in transition due to this, as evidenced by his abnormally low CF/60. This, then in turn, skews his CF% to look like he's always hemmed in his own zone as a Corsi Punching bag, which is false.

The way he plays the game simply entails the accumulation of CA while not really accumulating any CF because of evacuating the ice once his team turns in transition.

Advanced stats simply cannot account for this phenomenon. Girardi plays the game in a very nuanced way relative to most defenseman. There are better offensive guys from our backend, so why not try to get them out there once NYR have full control in transition like Boyle or Yandle.

Not expecting much of a retort from the h8ers on this, as again, the nuanced way Girardi plays the game is so strong and simply unaccountable in regards to adjusting for this...there is no way to prove this statistically.

That's not to say Dan Girardi would be a 55+CF% player if he stayed on the ice more during transitioning to offense, but his numbers look worse because of it.

 

[DanielBrassard]

Still beating this horse, I see.

I pooled together video of some of Girardi's minutes these past playoffs to focus just on him and how he plays the game.

I was surprised at just how frequently he vacates the ice surface once the puck gets moving in his teams direction where his partner Ryan McDonagh will stay on the ice surface and then accumulate Corsi For.

Girardi pretty much never really steadily accumulates Corsi For in transition due to this, as evidenced by his abnormally low CF/60. This, then in turn, skews his CF% to look like he's always hemmed in his own zone as a Corsi Punching bag, which is false.

The way he plays the game simply entails the accumulation of CA while not really accumulating any CF because of evacuating the ice once his team turns in transition.

Advanced stats simply cannot account for this phenomenon. Girardi plays the game in a very nuanced way relative to most defenseman. There are better offensive guys from our backend, so why not try to get them out there once NYR have full control in transition like Boyle or Yandle.

Not expecting much of a retort from the h8ers on this, as again, the nuanced way Girardi plays the game is so strong and simply unaccountable in regards to adjusting for this...there is no way to prove this statistically.

That's not to say Dan Girardi would be a 55+CF% player if he stayed on the ice more during transitioning to offense, but his numbers look worse because of it.

Unless you did this for every defenseman and for longer than some of his playoff minutes this is pretty much baseless speculation.

 

[Tawnos]

Still beating this horse, I see.

I pooled together video of some of Girardi's minutes these past playoffs to focus just on him and how he plays the game.

I was surprised at just how frequently he vacates the ice surface once the puck gets moving in his teams direction where his partner Ryan McDonagh will stay on the ice surface and then accumulate Corsi For.

Girardi pretty much never really steadily accumulates Corsi For in transition due to this, as evidenced by his abnormally low CF/60. This, then in turn, skews his CF% to look like he's always hemmed in his own zone as a Corsi Punching bag, which is false.

The way he plays the game simply entails the accumulation of CA while not really accumulating any CF because of evacuating the ice once his team turns in transition.

Advanced stats simply cannot account for this phenomenon. Girardi plays the game in a very nuanced way relative to most defenseman. There are better offensive guys from our backend, so why not try to get them out there once NYR have full control in transition like Boyle or Yandle.

Not expecting much of a retort from the h8ers on this, as again, the nuanced way Girardi plays the game is so strong and simply unaccountable in regards to adjusting for this...there is no way to prove this statistically.

That's not to say Dan Girardi would be a 55+CF% player if he stayed on the ice more during transitioning to offense, but his numbers look worse because of it.

This was an occurrence I mentioned a while back as something I instinctually felt was happening. Interesting to see someone watching his shifts and finding that it happens in reality.

Not even just CF60, but that negatively affects his CA60 too, since he's got more minutes concentrated with him physically being in the defensive zone. This is why I'm so intrigued by the more advanced player tracking that's coming.

 

[Filthy Dangles]

This was an occurrence I mentioned a while back as something I instinctually felt was happening. Interesting to see someone watching his shifts and finding that it happens in reality.

Not even just CF60, but that negatively affects his CA60 too, since he's got more minutes concentrated with him physically being in the defensive zone. This is why I'm so intrigued by the more advanced player tracking that's coming.

Exactly.

Although, with current data sets it is possible, it would be very dirty to try and prove what I just said.

You could consult the shift chart data to return Girardi's TOI and then consult the play by play data to see those Corsi For Events the the Rangers generated just after Girardi stepped off the ice, forfeiting CF and lowering his CF% somewhat artificially.

I doubt anyone here has the skill/time/desire to do anything like that but I would wager Girardi forfeits more CF than most if not all players in the league just based on how he plays the game.

 

[cwede]

the whole Girardi hate thing amuses me. Classic NY fan attitude, dumping on the guys that got us here. Too busy, thinking about the team they could invent, to appreciate the top contending team we've had these last few years, built on, among other things, Girardi's minutes and performance.
I look at last year and recall at least as many mediocre plays and games by McDonagh as by G. I wish they'd never made McD captain, coming off his breakout season, should've just let him keep performing and improving. But i am not dumping on McDonagh, love the guy.
The rest of the league is starving for a reliable Right D who can assume top-2/4 minutes (which i know will prompt some to say 'please take ours'). They're hard to find.
Franson was (still is) expecting that hole to get him richly paid, but truth is he ain't that.
And the nice guy, who had washed out of Toronto and Columbus before earning top 4 respect with NYR, might not be either in the long run.

 

[KrisLetAngry]

Yes Girardi isn't offensively dominate so he rushes off the ice to allow a player who has those gifts to come on the ice.

 

[haveandare]

lmao

This is the best criticism you guys have and it is completely reliant on MAKING **** UP.

The bold section is so ridiculous. Maybe if you post it a dillion more times it will finally be true. I am actually surprised you didn't use the idiotic phrase "end all be all" which is the favorite of metrics critics. I can't read that enough.

Edit:

I can't imagine why anyone would want to belittle people or be sarcastic. It couldn't possibly be related to constantly being put on the defensive over and over with the same senseless and completely false accusations about their beliefs and conclusions based on stats.

Nope, I'm sure these people are just really *******s and want to be nasty for no reason.

The bold isn't true, but here's a list of excuses that explain it away.

I'm sure people don't get testy for no reason, but there's no arguing that it happens a lot.

Making an unpopular argument and trying to bring people to see something that they don't see at first takes patience. No amount of complaining or wishing it weren't so changes that. And getting pissed off at everyone who wants to discuss the topic just turns people away.

I value possession stats. I think girardi has big problems. I also think it's hilarious when someone presents an argument with a pissed off, unwelcoming attitude and then is surprised when people don't buy into it. For example, I'm "you guys?" What guys? The ones who largely agree with the points being made and then try to explain why others don't?

 

[Raspewtin]

Still beating this horse, I see.

I pooled together video of some of Girardi's minutes these past playoffs to focus just on him and how he plays the game.

I was surprised at just how frequently he vacates the ice surface once the puck gets moving in his teams direction where his partner Ryan McDonagh will stay on the ice surface and then accumulate Corsi For.

Girardi pretty much never really steadily accumulates Corsi For in transition due to this, as evidenced by his abnormally low CF/60. This, then in turn, skews his CF% to look like he's always hemmed in his own zone as a Corsi Punching bag, which is false.

The way he plays the game simply entails the accumulation of CA while not really accumulating any CF because of evacuating the ice once his team turns in transition.

Advanced stats simply cannot account for this phenomenon. Girardi plays the game in a very nuanced way relative to most defenseman. There are better offensive guys from our backend, so why not try to get them out there once NYR have full control in transition like Boyle or Yandle.

Not expecting much of a retort from the h8ers on this, as again, the nuanced way Girardi plays the game is so strong and simply unaccountable in regards to adjusting for this...there is no way to prove this statistically.

That's not to say Dan Girardi would be a 55+CF% player if he stayed on the ice more during transitioning to offense, but his numbers look worse because of it.

Nobody will respond to something baseless, with a very small test sample, over a negligible period of time. Wow I'm so surprised!