Evolu7ion
#firelindenning
Yeah, that's the question I have too. My guess is that management feels Matthias is ready to take a step forward and become a legitimate checking C who can play against top 6 forwards.
News Article: Is this the start of the downward slope for the Sedins?
- Thread starter HometownHockey
- Start date
- Status
Yeah, that's the question I have too. My guess is that management feels Matthias is ready to take a step forward and become a legitimate checking C who can play against top 6 forwards.
If I were the Canucks and the coach I would try to knock a MPG or 2 off of the Sedins ice time and see how some of the other guys fare.
See if guys like Mathias, Kassian, Vey, Boninio and whomever else emerges from camp can play in a greater role going forward.
the thing is though that the management and coach will feel too much pressure to win now and realistically this isn't a playoff team, they need to look at the bigger picture 2,3,4 years down the road as the shorterm isn't going to produce a SC here.
Well that's essentially the depth argument, right? Until Kassian emerged late in the year, the Sedin line was still our best threat to score, and by a considerable margin. All those times we gave up the first goal really forced the issue.
It's partly a depth argument but more of a long term strategy to see which players will part of our next core going forward.
I think it is one or two years too late but hey 15 is a great draft year and being lousy next year will have it's silver lining.
We traded some decent assets to get Vey, Kassian and Boninio so let's see what they can bring, there is really no sense in playing the Sedins 21 MPG and 60% plus offensive situations going forward as they will not be part of the plan going forward except in a transition role.
Hopefully the new coach will be given a long term leash here.
Over the last 4 years, Toews is a 78 point guy based on 82 games.
I don't think that qualifies him as a 60+ point guy.
Sedins also bring little defensively, as they need to get a high percentage of offensive zone face-offs to get their points.
Toews takes a high percentage of his face-offs in the defensive zone, and generally covers the other teams top player.
This is just wrong but Toews does bring more than his stats to the game than Hank, and most other centers in the league for that matter.
y2kcanucks
Le Sex God
Yup. Sedins aren't very good in their own end. They're good at maintaining possession of the puck, which, combined with their offensive zone starts hides their defensive inabilities. But whenever they give up possession of the puck they tend to be useless in their own zone.
NoShowWilly
Registered User
might have been a depth issue but it was also a dumbass approach to the game by Tortorella. He proved from game one of the preseason that he was going to overplay the Sedins and Kesler.
They may not be the ones battling to dig out the puck all the time, but their sure hands and impeccable defensive positioning and decision making count for a lot.
Fair enough.
Then again, relating to this thread in general, not your post specifically, Henrik would have been 58-59 last year playing 82 games. And he played quite a few of those 70 injured. Add to that everything else that happened last year and I really can't see him doing worse than 65 this year - being much more likely to end up around 70-75. With an even further upside if things really "click" with Vrbata.
As for their defensive play it depends on how you define things I guess. They are not fast and the best transitional players so even if they could handle themselves in the D zone why waste their energy there? Even more so when you historically have had a 2nd and 3rd line much better suited to handle those situations? In my opinion they are much better defensive players than they are given credit for, but AV/Gillis built the team quite wisely in a way to get the best out of them. If we have had a young C like Stamkos or whatever coming through I'm sure the Sedins line would have been used differently, but they still would have handled it excellently. And I'm not sure if it would have made them score less points, because then the opposition would have had to "care" about two lines.
That's assuming people know What's going on out on the ice. Sadly stuff like positioning, having a good stick and the importance of having the puck are lost on fans that have little hockey knowledge.
Watching every game doesn't mean you understand the game otherwise I'd be a cooking expert by now.
The twins aren't selke level but in no way are they worse than the majority of centers...especially for top line centers, they are extremely cautious and don't cheat offensively. Rarely will you see them cheat out of the zone or coast back defensively.
And the zone starts argument is a weak one. Henriks best season was with him having regular zone starts for first liners. Their points are not explained by the zone starts nor do they need them to succeed. Their level was higher, their teammates were better and they dominates the opposition.
Now people want them to be at that level indefinitely, it's unrealistic.
The Sedins level has dropped off ( especially with Daniels head injury) its up to the to revitalize their careers. They've been doubted their whole careers and beat the odds I'll bet that they do it again and be 60-70 point players next season.
Won't be easy with a pitiful 2nd line of Burrows Bonino Kassian and a further weakened defence, but they are both hardworking and extremely talented. Good luck to them this upcoming season because they'll have to carry this talentless group of players again and try to drag them to playoffs.
Except in his 7 year career, he has had more than 69 points a grand total of once (which was four years ago), so yes, that qualifies him as a 60+ point guy.
Sedins are decent defensively, but of course no comparison to Toews.
of course his 48 points in a 48 game season don't count right?
That's just cherry picking and deliberately misleading, no one would call Hanks 48 game season playing below the 50 point mark either so at least be consistent here.
Toews is a guy who brings Selke defense along with a 70 points per 82 games played type of pace over a long period of time (7 years), your distortion of him above is why?
Evolu7ion
#firelindenning
Couldn't disagree more! The years the Sedins won their scoring titles they led the league in offensive zone start %, they were above 70%... Source = http://blogs.thescore.com/nhl/2011/04/04/the-sedin-twins-zone-starts/
If you want further info about the impact zone starts can have see below, mckeens has an outstanding article. It's literally a statistic, you generate 0.8 more shots per shift starting in the o zone than the defensive zone, so obviously if you get a higher % of starts in the o zone you're going to get more points because shots produce goals and goals produce points.
http://www.mckeenshockey.com/uncategorized/sedins-explained-introduction-player-usage-charts/
y2kcanucks
Le Sex God
Explains why they were absolutely dominated in the 2011 playoffs right? Also last season was a complete disaster but we already knew that.
Do you have stats for the 2009- 2010 season when Henrik won the Art Ross and Daniel had similar ppg numbers? I'd be curious to see if the bump in production was due solely to zone starts.
EDIT- found it myself
2007-2008 - 54.8 === 76 points
2008-2009- 49.9 === 82 points
2009-2010- 57.7 === 112 points
2010-2011- 71.4 === 94 points
2011-2012- 78.6 === 81 points
By far Henriks best season occurred with 57.7 percent offensive zone starts, hardly that lopsided.
If you're going to be lazy and use zone starts as the reason for their production, explain why the most similar season to that one he ended up with 76 points.
After explaining that, explain to me why
57.7 % O zone starts lead to 112 points
whereas
78.6 % O zone starts lead to 81 points
It's an extremely lazy argument and you'd have to throw away pieces of data and ignore other pieces in order to make it fit your narrative.
I'm not sure why it's so hard for people to credit them for their breakout instead of running around trying to find reasons to discredit it. Here's my reasoning
1) They were dominant
2) They had a better supporting cast around them
Now they are lesser players and play with very little talent around them.
Evolu7ion
#firelindenning
The zone starts certainly wasn't the only contributing factor to their offensive success. Qualitative factors for the big year are that they had Ehrhoff and Edler providing elite puck moving, Kes was dynamite on the PP, and they were one of the highest scoring teams over multiple years with great depth and chemistry. Looking at the stats for the 2009/10 spike, the teams on ice shooting % was abnormally high at over 13.5% compared to the average of around 10 for all other years, and their PDO was 1046 which means they benefited from a lot of of puck luck as well.
If you honestly believe there is no correlation between offensive zone start %/player usage and points produced, I'm not going to sit here and try and argue that with you, we can just agree to disagree.
Go re-read your post. The year they crushed the league was the year before 2011, so you cited a year just to make an argument.
Look at those numbers and see if there's a correlation. It may help production, but lining up in the offensive end consistently makes their line easier to check/match up against....and on a whole makes it much easier to read what they are doing. Rely on number's all you want instead of watching the game but the numbers will be skewed by way too many variables.
In the end there's very little evidence by looking at their numbers and zone starts that they benefited much from the skewed zone starts. Especially when their best year was with normal starts and their most zone starts only led to average results.
opendoor
Registered User
- Dec 12, 2006
- 11,719
- 1,403
The figure is 0.8 more shot attempts, not shots, and that's per extra offensive zone start, not for every shift. That might sound like a lot, but when you run the numbers the overall effect is pretty slight.
For instance, back in 10-11 when the Sedins had 70-75% zone starts they were getting about 170 offensive zone starts above what they'd get with a 50/50 ratio over a whole season. Using the 0.8 per zone start figure that equates to 136 extra shot attempts over a full season due to their zone starts. The percentage of shot attempts that go in the net for the Sedins is generally around 5%, so that'd be 6-7 more goals over an entire season.
But obviously they're not in on every goal when they're on the ice. H. Sedin is usually in on about 70-75% of the goals that are scored when he's out there, so the grand effect of all of those zone starts is 4-5 more points for him over a whole season. So it has an effect, but not a whole lot of one.
Evolu7ion
#firelindenning
How do you figure 20-25% extra offensive zone starts produces only 170 extra offensive zone starts over a full season? Let's say they're average shift is 1 minute, so that means they get 20 shifts total per game. 25% of that would be 5, so 5 extra offensive zone starts in a game. 5 x 82 = 410 zone starts.
opendoor
Registered User
- Dec 12, 2006
- 11,719
- 1,403
That's a lot of assumptions that leads to a wildly inaccurate conclusion. You're ignoring a lot of things such as the fact that not all shifts have a faceoff, neutral zone faceoffs aren't considered in zone start numbers, non 5-on-5 situations aren't considered in the numbers either, etc.
The 170 figure was from 10-11 where H. Sedin was on the ice for 797 end zone faceoffs while 5-on-5, 569 of which were in the offensive zone. If he had a 50/50 ratio he'd have had 399 offensive zone starts, which means he had 170 OZone starts above 50/50 in 10-11. And based on the 0.8 increase in Corsi per offensive zone start stat, that equates to 4-5 more points over the 82 games for him.
Evolu7ion
#firelindenning
Ahh that's true, I didn't adjust for shifts without a zone start aka shifts on the fly. I'm still getting familiar with some of these stats, the new age is upon us, its an adapt or die situation!
The thing is that it's not an all or nothing proposition for the Sedins in 09-10 and other years/
There are other factors at play, like team mates, Erhoff, Samulesson and Burrows having great chemistry with a high peaking (out of the norm year, even in Vancouver guys weren't picking Hank #1 in regular season fantasy scoring only pools going into the season, and for good reason it was out of the blue).
The thing is, that generating 0.8 more SOG per offensive zone start really isn't a neutral thing and a dramatic increase post the 10 season certainly didn't hurt the Sedins did it?
Put another way, all things being equal, and of course they never are really, one would expect players to have more points playing 70%ish of their starts ion the offensive zone as the Sedins did the 4 years after the 09-10 year which is the huge outlier in their careers.
Last edited:
- Status
