Flyers town hall meeting (alternate jersey for 2014-15)

[Curufinwe]

The point of each game is to win. That's all that matters. The coaches job is to do whatever he can to help the team do that. If something is working then there's no reason to change it and if something isn't working then you have to switch things up to try to improve. It was obvious that Hartnell was hurting the 1st line every time he was there and it was obvious that Lecavelier was completely destroying the 2nd line. When Hartnell went down to the 2nd line with Schenn and Simmonds he looked better and the line was fairly successful. Lecavelier was also pretty successful on the 4th line because he was facing weak competition and he made the 4th line fairly usable. So as soon as they started seeing success in their new spots he put them right back to where they weren't being helpful, which also had a negative effect on their linemates. You can't look at it like they're being promoted or demoted, you just have to find what works.

Your claim that Hartnell hurt the first line every time he was on it is not supported by the evidence.

Giroux and Voracek both did better with Hartnell than without him.

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/showplayer.php?pid=329&withagainst=true&season=2013-14&sit=5v5

Giroux with Hartnell = 55.57 CF%, without Hartnell = 49.5 CF%
Voarcek with Hartnell = 57.1 CF%, without Hartnell = 52.5 CF%

 

[Striiker]

Your claim that Hartnell hurt the first line every time he was on it is not supported by the evidence.

Giroux and Voracek both did better with Hartnell than without him.

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/showplayer.php?pid=329&withagainst=true&season=2013-14&sit=5v5

Giroux with Hartnell = 55.57 CF%, without Hartnell = 49.5 CF%
Voarcek with Hartnell = 57.1 CF%, without Hartnell = 52.5 CF%

OK, so maybe I exaggerated a bit , but don't lie, you know how often Hartnell would kill great opportunities by either attempting stupid passes, flubbing great chances, turning the puck over, ect. LOTS of people were happy every time he got taken off the 1st line because Hartnell was an incredibly streaky and unreliable player. When he was on a hot streak he was great, but during the long stretches in between those times he was flat out detrimental and absolutely hurt the line.

 

[Random Forest]

Your claim that Hartnell hurt the first line every time he was on it is not supported by the evidence.

Giroux and Voracek both did better with Hartnell than without him.

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/showplayer.php?pid=329&withagainst=true&season=2013-14&sit=5v5

Giroux with Hartnell = 55.57 CF%, without Hartnell = 49.5 CF%
Voarcek with Hartnell = 57.1 CF%, without Hartnell = 52.5 CF%

That's a tad disingenuous. For one, when Hartnell was not with Giroux and Voracek, the third piece of that line was either Raffl or Lecavalier. Of course the WOWY stats will favor Hartnell.

Furthermore, Giroux played 57.5% of his ES ice time with Hartnell. During those minutes, Giroux only produced 46.3% of his total points. Giroux scored at a lower rate with Hartnell than he did without him. Those two figures would have to be closer to equal to conclude that Hartnell wasn't holding Giroux back.

That's pretty damning evidence against Hartnell, imo.

 

[Curufinwe]

Please source your stats.

 

[Striiker]

That's a tad disingenuous. For one, when Hartnell was not with Giroux and Voracek, the third piece of that line was either Raffl or Lecavalier. Of course the WOWY stats will favor Hartnell.

Furthermore, Giroux played 57.5% of his ES ice time with Hartnell. During those minutes, Giroux only produced 46.3% of his total points. Giroux scored at a lower rate with Hartnell than he did without him. Those two figures would have to be closer to equal to conclude that Hartnell wasn't holding Giroux back.

That's pretty damning evidence against Hartnell, imo.

I know what I saw, and what I saw was a player that was hurting his line very often.

People can post all the stats they want but I'm just honestly not the slightest bit interested in advanced stats so I'm not familiar enough with them to effectively argue against them. All I know is they certainly don't tell the whole story, obviously, and that there's a lot that they don't take into account.

 

[Curufinwe]

Hartnell spent plenty of time off the 1st line. Would you have kept Raffl there all season ahead of him? He really doesn't have the hands to be a first line winger.

 

[Striiker]

Hartnell spent plenty of time off the 1st line. Would you have kept Raffl there all season ahead of him? He really doesn't have the hands to be a first line winger.

And I would have preferred he spent more time off the top line. Raffl was just meh, but what I did like about him was that he was able to keep up with Giroux and Voracek, even if he wasn't a great finisher. I actually thought that Schenn, Hartnell, and Simmonds played some of their best even strength hockey together, and that solved a lot of lineup problems. Hartnell was off the top line and Lecavelier was off the 2nd line.

 

[Random Forest]

Please source your stats.

stats.hockeyanlysis.com and then a little extra math on my part.

EDIT: I'm working on a spreadsheet that reveals the numbers I listed for every forward pairing to see who had chemistry and who didn't. Hartnell and Giroux was not a solid match in terms of real production.

 

[ILoveStephanieBrown]

Hartnell spent plenty of time off the 1st line. Would you have kept Raffl there all season ahead of him? He really doesn't have the hands to be a first line winger.

Raffl has better hands than Hartnell. Hartnell has stone hands.

 

[Curufinwe]

I actually said Raffl had decent hands in another thread and posted a couple of gifs, and people lost their ****.

 

[FlyTimmo]

I agree with Striiker. I know what I saw and what I saw was that Hartnell brought down Giroux and Voracek. He was slow, took dumb penalties and single-handedly killed rushes. Raffl appeared to be much, much better. He was a much better puck possession player than Hartnell and he help continue rushes and continue pressure rather than kill pressure.

I don't care how many advanced stats you throw out there, I trust my eyes more than I trust some random figures.

 

[Curufinwe]

Raffl and Hartnell had very similar puck possession stats playing with Giroux. Right around a 56 CF%.

 

[Striiker]

I actually said Raffl had decent hands in another thread and posted a couple of gifs, and people lost their ****.

Honestly, I think people seriously exaggerate Raffls "lack of finishing skills". He did have two or three times where he really messed up, which I think stand out in peoples minds, but other than that I don't think he was that bad at all...

 

[Garbage Goal]

Raffl really just feels like a superior version of Nodl in many ways (back when Nodl started out here).

 

[markzab]

I never really get into the conversations in regards to these stats, but I follow you guys along and find them intriguing. I'm wondering something though and hopefully you guys have a way to figure it out. The stats, going off what you guys have said, show that Giroux produced at a higher number when he was without Hartnell than when he was with him. Can you recalculate the numbers and ommit the first 10 or so games of the season? Like start at a point where Giroux came out of that weird funk. I'm not asking to see this because I'm supporting Hartnell, nor am I against him. I'm just curious because I think not just Giroux's start to last season, but the teams start in general, was an enigma. Like when people say we have a very mediocre team and only barely squeaked in last year, I tend to think of the "what if" scenario where we didn't have the worst start in team history.

Basically, what would these stats have looked like with Hartnell on G's wing for the last 68-72 games of the season...if that's even possible to calculate.

 

[Sawdalite]

That's a tad disingenuous. For one, when Hartnell was not with Giroux and Voracek, the third piece of that line was either Raffl or Lecavalier. Of course the WOWY stats will favor Hartnell.

Furthermore, Giroux played 57.5% of his ES ice time with Hartnell. During those minutes, Giroux only produced 46.3% of his total points. Giroux scored at a lower rate with Hartnell than he did without him. Those two figures would have to be closer to equal to conclude that Hartnell wasn't holding Giroux back.

That's pretty damning evidence against Hartnell, imo.

Unless I'm missing something... You speak of Even Strength and then the percentage of Giroux's overall points in the ES time with Hartnell... Power Play and Shorthanded scores are a part of Giroux's overall scoring and has to be taken into consideration... His PP scoring most likely had Hartnell on ice with him... in any case the non-ES play has to be considered, and IMO the stats you cited ignored them. Hartnell's play with Giroux had to be better with everything factored in and/or an apples to apples situation.

I'm not arguing pro or con... merely looking for all aspects considered when analyzing.

 

[Random Forest]

Unless I'm missing something... You speak of Even Strength and then the percentage of Giroux's overall points in the ES time with Hartnell... Power Play and Shorthanded scores are a part of Giroux's overall scoring and has to be taken into consideration... His PP scoring most likely had Hartnell on ice with him... in any case the non-ES play has to be considered, and IMO the stats you cited ignored them. Hartnell's play with Giroux had to be better with everything factored in and/or an apples to apples situation.

I'm not arguing pro or con... merely looking for all aspects considered when analyzing.

All numbers used were ES. I can see how that was unclear, though.

 

[Sawdalite]

All numbers used were ES. I can see how that was unclear, though.

OOPS... My bad.

I have to stop reading things into things that just are not there. haha

 

[Random Forest]

OOPS... My bad.

I have to stop reading things into things that just are not there. haha

Not your fault. Saying "total points" wasn't exactly the clearest way of putting it.

 

[TheKingPin]

Hartnell would blow chance after chance. He would take dumb penalties. Add by sub.

 

[Ryker]

Honestly, I think people seriously exaggerate Raffls "lack of finishing skills". He did have two or three times where he really messed up, which I think stand out in peoples minds, but other than that I don't think he was that bad at all...

Yeah, neither do I. He certainly didn't stand out in the flubbed chances department, and others such as Couturier, Giroux, Voracek and Hartnell had just as many missed opportunities. But, as you said, there were a couple that stick in people's minds.

Raffl really just feels like a superior version of Nodl in many ways (back when Nodl started out here).

OK, but if you watched the Olympics, you would've seen how superior Raffl was to Nodl, and there's more to his game than Nodl's. I think his playmaking abilities are way better than Nodl's ever were. Nodl was pretty much just able to hang with his linemates and never or rarely produced anything on his own. Personally, I don't see many commonalities other than that they're both Austrian.

 

[Larry44]

Yeah, neither do I. He certainly didn't stand out in the flubbed chances department, and others such as Couturier, Giroux, Voracek and Hartnell had just as many missed opportunities. But, as you said, there were a couple that stick in people's minds.

OK, but if you watched the Olympics, you would've seen how superior Raffl was to Nodl, and there's more to his game than Nodl's. I think his playmaking abilities are way better than Nodl's ever were. Nodl was pretty much just able to hang with his linemates and never or rarely produced anything on his own. Personally, I don't see many commonalities other than that they're both Austrian.

Raffl very quickly became one of my favourite players last year. He's got smarts, speed, grit and better hands than he gets credit for. Scored some big goals. Had the speed and strength to initiate on the forecheck. Moved up and down the lineup, doing well at all 3 fwd positions. He even pushed Schenn off the C spot on the 2nd line at times. Berube likes him and I think he could end up back at 1LW.

 

[Random Forest]

The great thing about Raffl is that you don't have to worry about who you're playing him with. He can play on every line at every position. That's an awesome guy to have. With some of our other players (namely Schenn, Simmonds, and Lecavalier), you have to worry about getting the right linemates. Not so with Raffl. Just plug him in the lineup and play. He's not a core piece, but he's an excellent asset that gives us increased flexibility with our other players. The value of that should not be understated.

If Lecavalier is still around, I would want him with Raffl. I want to keep VL's linemates as low maintenance as possible so he has something to work with but no one to drag down if he sucks. Raffl is the definition of a low-maintenance linemates.

Hopefully Bellemarre can be something along the lines of a Raffl 2.0.

 

[BrimFullofAsham45]

The great thing about Raffl is that you don't have to worry about who you're playing him with. He can play on every line at every position. That's an awesome guy to have. With some of our other players (namely Schenn, Simmonds, and Lecavalier), you have to worry about getting the right linemates. Not so with Raffl. Just plug him in the lineup and play. He's not a core piece, but he's an excellent asset that gives us increased flexibility with our other players. The value of that should not be understated.

If Lecavalier is still around, I would want him with Raffl. I want to keep VL's linemates as low maintenance as possible so he has something to work with but no one to drag down if he sucks. Raffl is the definition of a low-maintenance linemates.

Hopefully Bellemarre can be something along the lines of a Raffl 2.0.

Unfortunately, Simmonds Schenn and Lecavalier are likely to play on the same line again. The idea of Schenn on Giroux's wing is the most logical solution but it's far from a guarantee, especially after Berube's comments on the 1LW spot. I don't see Couturier and Read being broken up and neither Lecavalier, Simmonds or Schenn will play with them. The one wildcard here is if Laughton makes the team and shows he can play a some of Couturier's defensive minutes. If that were the case there is less impetus to keep Read and Couturier together, and Couturier could be eased into a more offensive role.

Schenn-Giroux-Voracek
Simmonds-Couturier-Lecavalier
Umberger-Laughton-Read
Bellemare-Raffl-Rinaldo

On a side note, I cringe when I see Akeson written into lineups. He should be an NHL player but not on this team IMO. I don't think he sees a regular spot on the team, especially given Hextall and Berube's emphasis on play away from the puck. We don't need another forward who needs to be sheltered.

To a lesser extent I cringe when seeing Bellemare's name, too, even though I wrote him into my lineup. But that is more because he's simply an unknown at this point.

I also wouldn't be surprised to see Blair Jones make the team.

 

[The Rage Kage]

To a lesser extent I cringe when seeing Bellemare's name, too, even though I wrote him into my lineup. But that is more because he's simply an unknown at this point.

I include him is because he's likely an upgrade over Rinaldo, and I doing he would come over to North America to play in the AHL