Player Discussion Ethan Bear: It's a Bear Market

[McCombo]

Yeah, this would be this lack of accountability for variables undermining credibility thing in a nutshell.

Why didn't he check those when he really likes to defend Russell? I want him asap to pressbox and get some actual quality players to this team. And Kris Russell doesn't qualify by my eye-test or statistically.

 

[TKB21]

Why didn't he check those when he really likes to defend Russell? I want him asap to pressbox and get some actual quality players to this team. And Kris Russell doesn't qualify by my eye-test or statistically.

Please stop, just stop....you’ve made a big enough fool out of yourself. I’m getting embarrassed for you.

 

[Ol' Jase]

Yes and when they match its great. If they don't I trust numbers, because numbers are completely objective. For human it is harder to be completely objective.

Not sure I understood everything, few words are outside of my vocabulary (I am Finnish). But when I watch games I see why Nurse isn't statistically considered #1 defenseman. I see Bear ability to move the puck. He has even more flaws than Nurse but he has played just over 100 games in the league. Is it sure that he develops further, absolutely not. But there are abilities that modern defensemen needs to have to be succesful and some like IQ/vision aren't really teachable. I see Russell's complete ineptitude with the puck and how it drags everyone around him down.

Basically, when someone is trying to use a number for deciding how good a player is and that number is calculated from an event that all five players (ten actually, counting opponents) have the value assigned equally to, the “objective value” of the number is diminished.

Not all players on the ice are involved in an on-ice event. Regardless of what the stat gurus argue, this is a significant issue when discussing the idea of “objective analysis”.

 

[McCombo]

Please stop, just stop....you’ve made a big enough fool out of yourself. I’m getting embarrassed for you.

I don't really care what people think of me.

Some people are posting stuff that nothing is wrong with our bottom 6, well nothing is wrong if you want to keep icing bad team outside of few players. Lots of posters laughed at me before the season started when I said that Montreal is a playoff team and they came back and said that something like: "Montreal had 2 points more than Buffalo last year and Buffalo improved more in the off-season so if anything it is Buffalo being the better team". And if Nurse signs a big deal (lets say 7+ million per), I will happily be against it and time will tell was that an overpayment for him or not.

 

[McCombo]

Basically, when someone is trying to use a number for deciding how good a player is and that number is calculated from an event that all five players (ten actually, counting opponents) have the value assigned equally to, the “objective value” of the number is diminished.

Not all players on the ice are involved in an on-ice event. Regardless of what the stat gurus argue, this is a significant issue when discussing the idea of “objective analysis”.

Sounds fair and thanks for clarification/simpler words. Then what is better way to measure players that we all have access to? Expected goals are widely considered as the most accurate info that is somewhat easy to get. Bettors use it to have better understanding of teams than just results for example.

What you think of Nurse, Bear and Russell?

 

[Ol' Jase]

I don't really care what people think of me.

Some people posting stuff that nothing is wrong with our bottom 6, well nothing is wrong if you want to keep icing bad team outside of few players. Lots of posters laughed at me before the season started when I said that Montreal is a playoff team and they came back and said that something like: "Montreal had 2 points more than Buffalo last year and Buffalo improved more in the off-season so if anything it is Buffalo being the better team". And if Nurse signs a big deal (lets say 7+ million per), I will happily be against it and time will tell was that an overpayment for him or not.

If you don’t believe Darnell Nurse’s market value is $7M dollars, I don’t know what to tell you.

Whether he gets it or not is one thing, but a quick look at defenseman UFA signings over the past couple of years should be a starting point here.

 

[CantHaveTkachev]

I don't really care what people think of me.

Some people posting stuff that nothing is wrong with our bottom 6, well nothing is wrong if you want to keep icing bad team outside of few players. Lots of posters laughed at me before the season started when I said that Montreal is a playoff team and they came back and said that something like: "Montreal had 2 points more than Buffalo last year and Buffalo improved more in the off-season so if anything it is Buffalo being the better team". And if Nurse signs a big deal (lets say 7+ million per), I will happily be against it and time will tell was that an overpayment for him or not.

what? a ton of people thought Montreal would make the playoffs...go to the main board and see most had them making it
then again, most people thought Calgary would be good too..

 

[CantHaveTkachev]

What you think of Nurse, Bear and Russell?

Nurse is our best defenseman
Bear is up and down but young and still learning
Russell is barely an NHLer anymore, but can play bottom pairing minutes

I don't need fancy stats to tell me that

 

[McCombo]

If you don’t believe Darnell Nurse’s market value is $7M dollars, I don’t know what to tell you.

Whether he gets it or not is one thing, but a quick look at defenseman UFA signings over the past couple of years should be a starting point here.

Jared Spurgeon signed ~7.5mil contract fairly recently. He has a longer track record with way better results. Spurgeon is already 31 so age is the biggest issue here. If it would be just for few years I would take him over Nurse easily.

Edit. Ignoring handedness.

 

[McCombo]

Nurse is our best defenseman
Bear is up and down but young and still learning
Russell is barely an NHLer anymore, but can play bottom pairing minutes

I don't need fancy stats to tell me that

Yes. I agree. "Can play" is used to too many Oiler players. That is like nicer way of saying that he doesn't really improve the team (or help the team to win), but lets play him because we don't have other options. And that's why this team is miles away from best teams in the league.

 

[McCombo]

what? a ton of people thought Montreal would make the playoffs...go to the main board and see most had them making it
then again, most people thought Calgary would be good too..

Maybe in main boards. But at least nickname Joey Moss said that if I remember correctly. And he wasn't the only one.

 

[CantHaveTkachev]

Maybe in main boards. But at least nickname Joey Moss said that if I remember correctly. And he wasn't the only one.

a couple of posters...what's your point here?

 

[CantHaveTkachev]

Jared Spurgeon signed ~7.5mil contract fairly recently. He has a longer track record with way better results. Spurgeon is already 31 so age is the biggest issue here. If it would be just for few years I would take him over Nurse easily.

Edit. Ignoring handedness.

Spurgeon plays less minutes, and less points, has the worst ES goal differential on the Wild and is a -8
let me guess, his fancy stats are amazing he's just "unlucky" lol

thank god you're not the GM

 

[McCombo]

a couple of posters...what's your point here?

That was response to TKB21 post. That I should be embarrased about not keeping Nurse as #1 defensemen and liking/preferring Bears abilities. When here are people who are really out to lunch with basic concepts, like if two teams collect about the same amount of points to standings that they need to be considered about equal.

 

[Forgot About Drai]

12+ good games, 1 bad game. Here come the "Get Bear out of here!!!" posts.

 

[Ol' Jase]

Jared Spurgeon signed ~7.5mil contract fairly recently. He has a longer track record with way better results. Spurgeon is already 31 so age is the biggest issue here. If it would be just for few years I would take him over Nurse easily.

Edit. Ignoring handedness.

Spurgeon signed his extension in January 2019. You do realize that his partner for five years was Ryan Suter, yes? Do you think that may have influenced his numbers a bit?

I honestly think you just proved my point beyond expectations here.

 

[Broberg Speed]

12+ good games, 1 bad game. Here come the "Get Bear out of here!!!" posts.

The truth is closer to, "a bunch of mediocre to average games and one good game."

 

[McCombo]

Spurgeon plays less minutes, and less points, has the worst ES goal differential on the Wild and is a -8
let me guess, his fancy stats are amazing he's just "unlucky" lol

thank god you're not the GM

Because he has been on of the biggest reasons, if not the biggest that Wild have been the best defending team for years in NHL. He is one of the best shutdown defensemens in the league, can move the puck well and is very capable in the offensive zone too. This year has been worrisome I agree, in normal stats and "fancy ones". I will still believe in longer sample size rather than under 50 game one. But if this is new normal for him then it is different thing.

 

[McCombo]

Spurgeon signed his extension in January 2019. You do realize that his partner for five years was Ryan Suter, yes? Do you think that may have influenced his numbers a bit?

I honestly think you just proved my point beyond expectations here.

Yes and for last couple of years he has been the better player from that pairing.

 

[Forgot About Drai]

The truth is closer to, "a bunch of mediocre to average games and one good game."

I disagree. I think hes been above average to good most games, then great, then complete shit. lol.

But I expect that out my young D, thats the difference.

Development, especially for dmen, is never linear.

 

[Broberg Speed]

I disagree. I think hes been above average to good most games, then great, then complete shit. lol.

But I expect that out my young D, thats the difference.

Development, especially for dmen, is never linear.

I think the player has upside. Last season I was comparing him generously to a young Giordano. This season I can't make that comparison.

 

[Ol' Jase]

Yes and for last couple of years he has been the better player from that pairing.

How can you possibly say that based on the metrics you use?

He doesn't play with Suter any more. He plays with Brodin and Suter plays with Dumba. Spurgeon's numbers have cratered and Suter's are still high, high level.

Literally, your assertion here is not only subjective beyond belief, it's totally wrong.

 

[Ol' Jase]

Because he has been on of the biggest reasons, if not the biggest that Wild have been the best defending team for years in NHL. He is one of the best shutdown defensemens in the league, can move the puck well and is very capable in the offensive zone too. This year has been worrisome I agree, in normal stats and "fancy ones". I will still believe in longer sample size rather than under 50 game one. But if this is new normal for him then it is different thing.

This is absolutely ridiculous. Ryan Suter was the anchor of that defensive corp in absolutely every respect.

Again, there is absolutely nothing in any metric you could provide that supports the bolded statement.

 

[McCombo]

This is absolutely ridiculous. Ryan Suter was the anchor of that defensive corp in absolutely every respect.

Again, there is absolutely nothing in any metric you could provide that supports the bolded statement.

"Jared Spurgeon is the leader here, a player who doesn’t really get the recognition he deserves for his play league-wide. It’s hard to be regarded as “elite” when you’re only a 40-point scorer, with a negative plus-minus, but neither stat does a whole lot to capture defensive value. In general, it’s more important to look at what a team does with a defender on the ice from a scoring chances perspective and then contextualize that. Few defensemen grade out better than Spurgeon in that regard.
Over the last three seasons, the Wild have had a 58, 56, and 60 percent expected goals percentage with Spurgeon on the ice. In that span, only one other defenseman has a higher percentage: Dougie Hamilton. Analytically, the company doesn’t get much better.

That’s consistent domination manifested mostly by Spurgeon’s incredible ability to limit chances against. Over his 10-year career, only once has he had an expected goals against rate above two and that was nine years ago where he was at 2.1. It’s insanely good and something that rarely gets noticed. Against Spurgeon, it’s hard to get many chances. Relative to the team though, it’s actually his offence that generally grades out stronger and that’s where he stands out best next to his peers. Together, his expected goals rate looks consistently elite and that’s translated to the scoreboard too where he’s only been negative relative to his teammates once. He’s been above 50 percent there in six of the last seven years."

 

[Ol' Jase]

"Jared Spurgeon is the leader here, a player who doesn’t really get the recognition he deserves for his play league-wide. It’s hard to be regarded as “elite” when you’re only a 40-point scorer, with a negative plus-minus, but neither stat does a whole lot to capture defensive value. In general, it’s more important to look at what a team does with a defender on the ice from a scoring chances perspective and then contextualize that. Few defensemen grade out better than Spurgeon in that regard.
Over the last three seasons, the Wild have had a 58, 56, and 60 percent expected goals percentage with Spurgeon on the ice. In that span, only one other defenseman has a higher percentage: Dougie Hamilton. Analytically, the company doesn’t get much better.

That’s consistent domination manifested mostly by Spurgeon’s incredible ability to limit chances against. Over his 10-year career, only once has he had an expected goals against rate above two and that was nine years ago where he was at 2.1. It’s insanely good and something that rarely gets noticed. Against Spurgeon, it’s hard to get many chances. Relative to the team though, it’s actually his offence that generally grades out stronger and that’s where he stands out best next to his peers. Together, his expected goals rate looks consistently elite and that’s translated to the scoreboard too where he’s only been negative relative to his teammates once. He’s been above 50 percent there in six of the last seven years."

Oh my god, man, you have just posted a quote from god knows where that 100% confirms what people have been trying to tell you for days.

You're using unit derived metrics to make wild assertions about individual players under the context of being factual. That is not "objective analysis", and nothing you say can ever make it so.

Spurgeon is a great player, but the fact that you STILL ignore multiple variables when making player assessment only hurts the credibility of the metrics.