Player Discussion Kris Russell (Do we need him next year?)

[Aceboogie]

To add to above. There are Oiler bloggers who track each and every game and track stats for the D. So they are basically do same tracking (TP says it takes 9 hours to track one fame). Yet they get completely different numbers? WheatnOil tracks each game and each stat is logged so you can verify what they track, they have Russell has by far the worst zone exit and zone entry D on the Oilers.

 

[stoff]

Not saying Truperformance is not legit, but they really need to disclose methodology or some atleast overall rankings (not just top 10)

Truperformance could be the equivalent to the textbooks in the southern states of US that "recognize" climate change and evolution but then explain it away with religion or whatever. Basically the certain group of people are so against something but overall the culture pressures them to accept something (through tons of research) so they sort of accept it but do it in a way that confirms their overall POV

Seems like TruPerformance is doing this to get clicks and notoriety from certain mainstream media. Analytics is becoming every prevalent and tons of research is going on to back it up (and teams are moving towards this stuff at fats pace). Just you have old school MSM who dispise this but are pressured to recognize it some way. So then an old school favourite Russell comes along (blocks shots, grit, tough player) and analytics craps all over him. Then TP comes along with this theory hes actually really good even from analytics POV. So now old school MSM get to say "Ha! see I used analytics and proved hes actually good!"

Well who knows about their methodology, I mean I can read it on the website but after that you cant verify anything. All their player ranking appear to be in consensus with regular held opinions tho. But no ranking after that. So it seems they just "ranked" popular players with their made up valuation score and now when they say "Player X ranks really high, you cant see where or how we came up with it, but hes high, and look we ranked noted defensive D in our top 10 so its legit" they can point to their top 10 ranking

So best way to get this out and sell this prodict is to go to every old school MSM writer and go "Psst, is your favourite throw back style of player getting disregarded by analytics, here's our analytics software that ranks him really high" And then it gets printed in a major news outlet and credited back to them

Maybe this sounds a bit conspiracy theory-ish, but until they can back up claims Ill continue to be skeptical

It's pretty common and i like the way you explained it. People are more receptive to new ideas that mesh with their personal experience. That's why analytics is a tough sell for some because it doesn't pass the "eye test". The TruPerformance metrics pass the eye test and thus people are more willing to buy into them, even though they seem to be pulled out of thin air. As an aside, this bother me. Why bother looking at analytics if you are using them solely to back up your pre-conceived notions? It becomes useless. They are meant to allow to question conventional notions and dig deeper into the matter. By only accepting those that pass the eye test you are doing yourself a disservice and just wasting time.

When the Staples piece originally came out alot of people who have consulted with NHL teams or people who blog/work on analytics came out against TruPerformance saying they were "snake oil" and a complete black box that doesn't release their measurements in order to be peer reviewed or evaluated.

Who knows, maybe they do have legitimate methodologies. But it doesn't accord with publicly available information and they don't reveal whatever methodologies they use, so people have to be very skeptical of their "rankings".

 

[Aceboogie]

It's pretty common and i like the way you explained it. People are more receptive to new ideas that mesh with their personal experience. That's why analytics is a tough sell for some because it doesn't pass the "eye test". The TruPerformance metrics pass the eye test and thus people are more willing to buy into them, even though they seem to be pulled out of thin air. As an aside, this bother me. Why bother looking at analytics if you are using them solely to back up your pre-conceived notions? It becomes useless. They are meant to allow to question conventional notions and dig deeper into the matter. By only accepting those that pass the eye test you are doing yourself a disservice and just wasting time.

When the Staples piece originally came out alot of people who have consulted with NHL teams or people who blog/work on analytics came out against TruPerformance saying they were "snake oil" and a complete black box that doesn't release their measurements in order to be peer reviewed or evaluated.

Who knows, maybe they do have legitimate methodologies. But it doesn't accord with publicly available information and they don't reveal whatever methodologies they use, so people have to be very skeptical of their "rankings".

Thats a better way to explain it. TP could totally be legit and it would fantastic if a company found a way to do this time of analysis (ie break down plays to assign a value ot players) but it would need to be peer reviewed first. I said this before but TP said Russell was amongst best in league for actual puck possession time. But in reality a lot of that was due to him standing behind the net more often.

Its also so ironic that Staples calls on corsi and then his example is saying "Here i sorted corsi by highest to lowest, this guy is really high but hes not regarded as that good so corsi is wrong and people legit do this to value players". Yet noone actually simply sorts by corsi and says "this guys corsi is good, hes good". A lot more context is brought in, and corsi does have exceptions. But its similar to some southern teacher saying "well some people in them big cities believe in global warming but it was snowing here just last week and its May, so how could it be snowing if the earht is getting hotter. Oh and also they say we are cousins with monkeys and evolved from them, lets go find a monkey and tell him to evolve for us..crazy stuff right"

 

[VainGretzky]

Yes dmem who can skate defend move the puck and block shots help teams to playoffs. Would love to see him re-signed at reasonable rate.

 

[Canovin]

I appreciate what he did this year but we will need a upgrade to put us over the top next season.

 

[stoff]

I appreciate what he did this year but we will need a upgrade to put us over the top next season.

I agree. This seems like the best and most obvious place to upgrade. Expiring contract and opening in the top 4 D, with the need for a top 4 RHD PP QB. Seems like an obvious place to replace a surplus player with a player we badly need.

 

[CupofOil]

I appreciate what he did this year but we will need a upgrade to put us over the top next season.

That's how I feel as well. The Oilers really need a dynamic playmaker on the blueline (Nurse is not that yet, maybe never) and if they commit to Russell long term, that will hinder them from finding that guy.

I'd be more than fine with him on a short term deal (2 years max) if he's receptive to that but anything more than that and you're running into problems down the line. This is not the type of player that you commit big money to long term and his skillset is very replacable IMO.

Also, the Oilers already have $11.5M tied up into two other players who will be deep into their 30s when their contracts expire so they can't afford another contract like that to a player on the wrong side of 30 unless it was somebody who brought a different dynamic to the team, somebody like Green for example.

As far as the article posted above is concerned, he compared Russell to Vlasic defensively and that's where I stopped reading.
IMO, this team will never go far with a top 4 of Larsson, Klefbom, Sekera and Russell and if you commit 3+ years to Russell for big money, that's going to be the Oilers top 4 for the forseeable future.

 

[MessierII]

I agree. This seems like the best and most obvious place to upgrade. Expiring contract and opening in the top 4 D, with the need for a top 4 RHD PP QB. Seems like an obvious place to replace a surplus player with a player we badly need.

Maybe. We will lose Davidson this summer. Having him around on another 1 year deal for some depth isn't the worst thing. I remember an interview with Bob Murray he said he feels he needs 10 NHL caliber defensemen under contract at all times.

 

[LMFAO]

It sucks but I don't think it makes sense cap wise to have Russel making around 4.5M long term when we gotta Sign McDavid for 10 millions a year and Draisailt for about 7.5M a year.

I'd only give him 2 years.

 

[Aceboogie]

We have a couple different options, all that leave us in a pretty good spot. Here is my decision tree

1) Look for a top 4 D who can move the puck. Either via trade or FA
2) If none come at a reasonable price, talk with Russell about a deal. If he agrees to reasonable contract ($ and term), sign him
3) If Russells ask is too high, move on. If Davidson looks good at seasons end, he replaces
4) If Davidson is not ready to take over, look at reasonably priced LD in a trade or ufa

 

[Stoneman89]

Thats a better way to explain it. TP could totally be legit and it would fantastic if a company found a way to do this time of analysis (ie break down plays to assign a value ot players) but it would need to be peer reviewed first. I said this before but TP said Russell was amongst best in league for actual puck possession time. But in reality a lot of that was due to him standing behind the net more often.

Its also so ironic that Staples calls on corsi and then his example is saying "Here i sorted corsi by highest to lowest, this guy is really high but hes not regarded as that good so corsi is wrong and people legit do this to value players". Yet noone actually simply sorts by corsi and says "this guys corsi is good, hes good". A lot more context is brought in, and corsi does have exceptions. But its similar to some southern teacher saying "well some people in them big cities believe in global warming but it was snowing here just last week and its May, so how could it be snowing if the earht is getting hotter. Oh and also they say we are cousins with monkeys and evolved from them, lets go find a monkey and tell him to evolve for us..crazy stuff right"

There's new analytics coming on board all the time, and I suspect some will even usurp TP down the road. But it's like so many things we've seen before. Once someone gets hooked on a certain analytic, they don't have a lot of time or dislike for the new ones that come around, even it they might be more comprehensive and correct. The skepticism tends to cloud judgement of anything different. Human nature, and tough for some to be open minded about this stuff.

 

[Stoneman89]

That's how I feel as well. The Oilers really need a dynamic playmaker on the blueline (Nurse is not that yet, maybe never) and if they commit to Russell long term, that will hinder them from finding that guy.

I'd be more than fine with him on a short term deal (2 years max) if he's receptive to that but anything more than that and you're running into problems down the line. This is not the type of player that you commit big money to long term and his skillset is very replacable IMO.

Also, the Oilers already have $11.5M tied up into two other players who will be deep into their 30s when their contracts expire so they can't afford another contract like that to a player on the wrong side of 30 unless it was somebody who brought a different dynamic to the team, somebody like Green for example.

As far as the article posted above is concerned, he compared Russell to Vlasic defensively and that's where I stopped reading.
IMO, this team will never go far with a top 4 of Larsson, Klefbom, Sekera and Russell and if you commit 3+ years to Russell for big money, that's going to be the Oilers top 4 for the forseeable future.

You don't think they can trade anyone? Good chance we lose Davey this summer anyhow, so there's one out of the mix.

 

[Stoneman89]

It's pretty common and i like the way you explained it. People are more receptive to new ideas that mesh with their personal experience. That's why analytics is a tough sell for some because it doesn't pass the "eye test". The TruPerformance metrics pass the eye test and thus people are more willing to buy into them, even though they seem to be pulled out of thin air. As an aside, this bother me. Why bother looking at analytics if you are using them solely to back up your pre-conceived notions? It becomes useless. They are meant to allow to question conventional notions and dig deeper into the matter. By only accepting those that pass the eye test you are doing yourself a disservice and just wasting time.

When the Staples piece originally came out alot of people who have consulted with NHL teams or people who blog/work on analytics came out against TruPerformance saying they were "snake oil" and a complete black box that doesn't release their measurements in order to be peer reviewed or evaluated.

Who knows, maybe they do have legitimate methodologies. But it doesn't accord with publicly available information and they don't reveal whatever methodologies they use, so people have to be very skeptical of their "rankings".

Because a trained and experienced eye is still the best source by far, and combined with proper analytics will reinforce what is already seen. Unfortunately, too many people look at the analytics first and then have already muddied the waters on a player. Or, conversely, they may not like a player to begin for whatever reason, and then try to find any type of analytics to help them reinforce their dislike.

 

[Aceboogie]

There's new analytics coming on board all the time, and I suspect some will even usurp TP down the road. But it's like so many things we've seen before. Once someone gets hooked on a certain analytic, they don't have a lot of time or dislike for the new ones that come around, even it they might be more comprehensive and correct. The skepticism tends to cloud judgement of anything different. Human nature, and tough for some to be open minded about this stuff.

The problem with TruPerfomance is that you cant validate the data even if you wanted to support it. They have NHL 16 style rating of 96,92,85 etc for players abilities, but it is not known where these come from. Newa analytics methods come up all the time, and while they may be complex and hard to understand/recreate at first glance, they use publicly available data. So while stats like expected goals for, or zone adjusted/score adjusted stats may be a bit out there, its recreatable data. You can disagree with methodology (ie shot attempts are a proxy for possession) but you can clearly see where data comes from

There would be nothing stopping me from creating a company called Boogie Stats corp and creating new private analytics that show Sbisa is actually a top pairing D and sell it to Benning. Ill bet you start seeing TruPerformances name pop up more and more when controversional trades/signings happen and they start showing those guys are actually good using their model. The MSM for that team will start referencing back to this company

 

[Aceboogie]

The best outcome with Russell by far is still that Vegas signs him in their FA period before July 1st and he becomes our player taken in the expansion draft. If you were going to lose him anyway (if he was asking for higher $) then better to lose him and be your teams contribution to Vegas.

 

[Jet Walters]

The best outcome with Russell by far is still that Vegas signs him in their FA period before July 1st and he becomes our player taken in the expansion draft. If you were going to lose him anyway (if he was asking for higher $) then better to lose him and be your teams contribution to Vegas.

That same scenario could happen with whoever rents Hanzal for a playoff run. Vegas would most likely be able to give him more cash and term than any other team in the league, and top 6 centers will not be as available as wingers IMO. That would certainly lessen the cost of acquiring him if it saved another player from being snatched.

Edit: I thought I was in the Proposals and Rumours thread so I'll add something Russell related.

The Oilers template on defense next year will look like this:

Klef Lars
Seks -----
Nurse Benning

I don't see a fit for Russell unless Chia strikes out on 3-4 other options via UFA (Stone most likely) or trade (Green/Barrie etc.)

 

[ujju2]

Yeah, while I like Russell and what he's brought this season, I'd still prefer for Vegas to take him. That would leave Davidson and Brossoit (the 2 most likely imo) on the Oilers. I feel like at least one of Davidson, Nurse, and Benning should be able to play top-4 minutes next season, and at a cheaper cost than Russell.

 

[Aceboogie]

As much as we have Russell to thank for a solid season thus far. Russell is/should be very thankful for us. We gave him a shot and probably really boosted his value league wide. He had a lot of value last offseason but waited too long and the demand for him nosedived when teams filled holes elsewhere. Stuck without a contract that late in the season, likely the only teams who could have fit his cap hit in was not as good teams with cap space. Had he chosen a bad team and that team stayed bad, his value probably plummets and he never gets a big pay day. But now he comes to the Oilers, both parties have success and his stock rises even more.

 

[oobga]

If we find our 2nd pairing RHD that can be a PP specialist, I can't see where Russell fits. And he's probably going to be able to get 4.5M AAV from someone, so it's not like he can be a cheap 3rd pairing guy. And would you want him locking up a 3rd pairing spot when you have Nurse and Benning?

Just can't see how it would work, as long as Chia does fill that RHD PP QB hole in the lineup.

 

[Stoneman89]

As much as we have Russell to thank for a solid season thus far. Russell is/should be very thankful for us. We gave him a shot and probably really boosted his value league wide. He had a lot of value last offseason but waited too long and the demand for him nosedived when teams filled holes elsewhere. Stuck without a contract that late in the season, likely the only teams who could have fit his cap hit in was not as good teams with cap space. Had he chosen a bad team and that team stayed bad, his value probably plummets and he never gets a big pay day. But now he comes to the Oilers, both parties have success and his stock rises even more.

That could all be true, but these guys don't play for a pat on the back. He'll be looking for some cash and term.

 

[Stoneman89]

The problem with TruPerfomance is that you cant validate the data even if you wanted to support it. They have NHL 16 style rating of 96,92,85 etc for players abilities, but it is not known where these come from. Newa analytics methods come up all the time, and while they may be complex and hard to understand/recreate at first glance, they use publicly available data. So while stats like expected goals for, or zone adjusted/score adjusted stats may be a bit out there, its recreatable data. You can disagree with methodology (ie shot attempts are a proxy for possession) but you can clearly see where data comes from

There would be nothing stopping me from creating a company called Boogie Stats corp and creating new private analytics that show Sbisa is actually a top pairing D and sell it to Benning. Ill bet you start seeing TruPerformances name pop up more and more when controversional trades/signings happen and they start showing those guys are actually good using their model. The MSM for that team will start referencing back to this company

But there is also a problem with other analytics that have a rather narrow set of criteria to base an opinion on.

 

[bobbythebrain]

As much as we have Russell to thank for a solid season thus far. Russell is/should be very thankful for us. We gave him a shot and probably really boosted his value league wide. He had a lot of value last offseason but waited too long and the demand for him nosedived when teams filled holes elsewhere. Stuck without a contract that late in the season, likely the only teams who could have fit his cap hit in was not as good teams with cap space. Had he chosen a bad team and that team stayed bad, his value probably plummets and he never gets a big pay day. But now he comes to the Oilers, both parties have success and his stock rises even more.

I doubt GM's are this shortsighted. Russell is doing the exact same thing in EDM that he has done on everyteam he's played on. You could argue equally as much that Dal is missing his services right now also.

They look at his body of work, not just his work in Edm

 

[Mr Positive]

I doubt GM's are this shortsighted. Russell is doing the exact same thing in EDM that he has done on everyteam he's played on. You could argue equally as much that Dal is missing his services right now also.

They look at his body of work, not just his work in Edm

Dallas lost half of their D over the summer, so it's hard to say it's on Russell.

Having said that, I'm inclined to agree. His style of play lends itself to being under estimated it seems. Losing Russell could hurt our D more than we think. The coach leans on Russell a lot.

But we shouldn't sign him long term just in case we need him. It's a cap world, and we have young D that will get better every game and might be able to take the loss of Russell in stride. We are deep on defense. We are probably looking to add a RHD with offense. With Russell I say delay this decision until after expansion. Russell might want it that way anyway, so he avoids being selected by Vegas.

I would give Russell a big overpayment if he'd agree to only one year, and even a NMC. Get him off the books in time for McDavid's extension to kick in, and trust that our young D is matured by then.

 

[Canovin]

Dallas lost half of their D over the summer, so it's hard to say it's on Russell.

Having said that, I'm inclined to agree. His style of play lends itself to being under estimated it seems. Losing Russell could hurt our D more than we think. The coach leans on Russell a lot.

But we shouldn't sign him long term just in case we need him. It's a cap world, and we have young D that will get better every game and might be able to take the loss of Russell in stride. We are deep on defense. We are probably looking to add a RHD with offense. With Russell I say delay this decision until after expansion. Russell might want it that way anyway, so he avoids being selected by Vegas.

I would give Russell a big overpayment if he'd agree to only one year, and even a NMC. Get him off the books in time for McDavid's extension to kick in, and trust that our young D is matured by then.

Losing Russell would hurt if we don't find a upgrade but signing him to a contract similar to Sekera will hurt us more.

 

[Aceboogie]

by Vegas.

I would give Russell a big overpayment if he'd agree to only one year, and even a NMC. Get him off the books in time for McDavid's extension to kick in, and trust that our young D is matured by then.

I would too, assuming we couldnt find an upgrade on RD or Davidson didnt prove hes legit

Having Russell for an extra year would be a good insurance thing, we also arent hurting of for cap space next year. The issue becomes year 2, then big time year 3 and on. But 1 year overpay is A-Ok with me assuming 2 things above dont happen