Proposal: Leafs/Canucks

[Liferleafer]

By you guys I mean Leafs fans. They (if you prefer that term) have been trying to convince every other team that Kapanen has and is a top 6 player (even before his 2g in 6 playoff games when « they » said he was a top 6 lock for the future)

I never it was bad but you guys are talking about a guy who produced at a 4th liner rate as a top 6 forwards. He’s not. He couldn’t even pass guys like Komarov in Leafs depth chart

Well, at least we can always count on this Habs fan to come into EVERY Leafs thread to set the record straight....

 

[Baksfamous112]

Well, at least we can always count on this Habs fan to come into EVERY Leafs thread to set the record straight....

Yeah you only quote me when it fits your agenda. Why don’t you go on the Manson/Rielly thread and quote me there too? Maybe you’ll see I have nothing against the Leafs but against people who are delusional about their players value/performance. Jesus..

 

[Baksfamous112]

lol, go argue with "them" then, I have not at any point said Kapanen is a lock to be a top 6 player, so quit looking for opportunities to dump on all things Leafs as I imagine you're going to find yourself on the wrong end of the balance of those opportunities for the next 5 to 10 years as a Habs fan

what Kapanen has done so far is shown that he is a very good bottom 6 player, he has not disqualified himself as having the potential to be more. When he has had scoring line opportunity, he has produced absolutely in line with what you would expect of a prospect with top 6 potential, that opportunity has just been in the 2nd best pro league in NA rather than the NHL, so we have yet to see whether he is or is not a top 6 player

All signs point toward he is not and will not be a top 6 player. Top 9? Most likely.

 

[Randy Randerson]

All signs point toward he is not and will not be a top 6 player. Top 9? Most likely.

all signs except the ones that are not based on your own biases, sure. Look past the hockeydb page, it will help your evaluations

 

[Baksfamous112]

all signs except the ones that are not based on your own biases, sure. Look past the hockeydb page, it will help your evaluations

Oh, I did. Other than speed there’s absolutely nothing in his game that screams top 6.

But then again, he was a top 6 player after 6 playoff games where he scored 2 goals. Same as Dermott who was a solid top 4 D after 9 NHL games (wink wink @Liferleafer)

 

[Randy Randerson]

Oh, I did. Other than speed there’s absolutely nothing in his game that screams top 6.

But then again, he was a top 6 player after 6 playoff games where he scored 2 goals. Same as Dermott who was a solid top 4 D after 9 NHL games (wink wink @Liferleafer)

except his production in top 6 usage? If young AHL scorers are a dime a dozen, I would like to give you many of my dimes

using someones opinion on Dermott after 9 games against them is probably not a great idea from where we stand right now, he has been utterly dominant in the NHL

you're still quoting boxscore stats, to which I will say again: look past hockeydb (and this is meant to be a metaphor for all boxscore stat sites)

 

[Horse McHindu]

who is "you guys"? I don't speak for anyone, and no one speaks for me. I would also suggest that you're spewing some butt hurt hyperbole here

He's produced at very high end 4th line rates with very good underlying numbers in defensive 4th line usage, not sure how that's bad

Underlying numbers aren’t Biff Tannen’s Sports Almanac. It can make predictions, but as the ol’ Saying goes, “The proof is in the pudding.”

All Kapanen has proven thus far, is that he’s a quarter step above the AHL level.

Look. I have absolutely no problem having a rational and logic discussion about the potential of players, but to say or imply that Kapanen is this burgeoning gazelle of a talent is ludicrous at best and outrageous at worst. Sticking to facts, logic, and rationality is the best way to go I believe.

 

[Randy Randerson]

Underlying numbers aren’t Biff Tannen’s Sports Almanac. It can make predictions, but as the ol’ Saying goes, “The proof is in the pudding.”

All Kapanen has proven thus far, is that he’s a quarter step above the AHL level.

Look. I have absolutely no problem having a rational and logic discussion about the potential of players, but to say or imply that Kapanen is this burgeoning gazelle of a talent is ludicrous at best and outrageous at worst. Sticking to facts, logic, and rationality is the best way to go I believe.

I agree on the facts and logic, let's get you started down that path:

firstly, you obviously don't understand the underlying numbers. They are not predictive by nature (at least the common ones like Corsi/Fenwick, there are predictive measures like x.GF and a myriad of other complicated stuff that we won't get into), the common ones are a measure of what is actually happening when the player is on the ice and the relative versions of those are a measure of what happens to a player's linemates' numbers when that player is absent versus when he is present - this is correlative by nature, not predictive, but there gets to be a sample size at which the likelihood of that players' presence not being the cause is a statistically insignificant chance. So, let's recap - the underlying numbers are a measure of what's happening, not what will happen in the future

Kapanen has proven to be an effective checking line player in the NHL, in that the results that are generated when he's on the ice in checking line usage are generally positive coupled with the relative versions of those results also being very positive, implying that Kapanen has a positive effect on already positive numbers in a sample size that is large enough to be statistically significant (typically considered to be a few hundred minutes, Kapanen's at about 575 cumulative 5v5 minutes in his career). He has done this in spite of being set up to appear in a negative light by the same metrics with heavily defensive zone usage (most of these metrics are shot-attempt based, you don't get shot attempts for in your own zone and you do get shot attempts against) with low quality linemates

If you're evaluating Kapanen by box score stats (ie. 10 pts in 55 games) he won't look like anything, but there's a bunch of things you need to consider there that I'm guessing you're notm like: "game" is not a standard unit of measure as it varies by ice time and usage (PP/PK/Linemates/zone start/etc) and his career OIsh% (the percentage of shots that have gone in when he is on the ice) is about half of what an average NHL'er sees so he has been unlucky/his linemates are garbage and can't finish

secondly, when given top 6 usage at lower levels, Kapanen has produced at rates that place him firmly in "high likelihood to be a top 6 NHL scorer" territory. Again, this is a correlative observation, but his peer group of AHL scorers at 20 had about a 90% success rate of becoming top 6 NHL'ers by the article I posted (which I think framed Kapanen in too positive a light by including 1ppg and up players, rather than 1ppg + or - the same variance range, but the implication would still be a very positive one with that change made)

the original post you quoted also referenced Kapanen's floor being high, not the incredible ceiling that you seem to be projecting on to my opinion, so let me clarify: Kapanen is an NHL floor prospect with the chance to be a complementary 1st line player at the peak of his potential a la Patrick Hornqvist

now, please support "Jake Virtanen has a legit shot to be a premier NHL power forward" with evidence of some kind

 

[Notsince67]

I agree on the facts and logic, let's get you started down that path:

firstly, you obviously don't understand the underlying numbers. They are not predictive by nature (at least the common ones like Corsi/Fenwick, there are predictive measures like x.GF and a myriad of other complicated stuff that we won't get into), the common ones are a measure of what is actually happening when the player is on the ice and the relative versions of those are a measure of what happens to a player's linemates' numbers when that player is absent versus when he is present - this is correlative by nature, not predictive, but there gets to be a sample size at which the likelihood of that players' presence not being the cause is a statistically insignificant chance. So, let's recap - the underlying numbers are a measure of what's happening, not what will happen in the future

Kapanen has proven to be an effective checking line player in the NHL, in that the results that are generated when he's on the ice in checking line usage are generally positive coupled with the relative versions of those results also being very positive, implying that Kapanen has a positive effect on already positive numbers in a sample size that is large enough to be statistically significant (typically considered to be a few hundred minutes, Kapanen's at about 575 cumulative 5v5 minutes in his career). He has done this in spite of being set up to appear in a negative light by the same metrics with heavily defensive zone usage (most of these metrics are shot-attempt based, you don't get shot attempts for in your own zone and you do get shot attempts against) with low quality linemates

If you're evaluating Kapanen by box score stats (ie. 10 pts in 55 games) he won't look like anything, but there's a bunch of things you need to consider there that I'm guessing you're notm like: "game" is not a standard unit of measure as it varies by ice time and usage (PP/PK/Linemates/zone start/etc) and his career OIsh% (the percentage of shots that have gone in when he is on the ice) is about half of what an average NHL'er sees so he has been unlucky/his linemates are garbage and can't finish

secondly, when given top 6 usage at lower levels, Kapanen has produced at rates that place him firmly in "high likelihood to be a top 6 NHL scorer" territory. Again, this is a correlative observation, but his peer group of AHL scorers at 20 had about a 90% success rate of becoming top 6 NHL'ers by the article I posted (which I think framed Kapanen in too positive a light by including 1ppg and up players, rather than 1ppg + or - the same variance range, but the implication would still be a very positive one with that change made)

now, please support "Jake Virtanen has a legit shot to be a premier NHL power forward" with evidence of some kind

 

[Liferleafer]

Oh, I did. Other than speed there’s absolutely nothing in his game that screams top 6.

But then again, he was a top 6 player after 6 playoff games where he scored 2 goals. Same as Dermott who was a solid top 4 D after 9 NHL games (wink wink @Liferleafer)

No idea why you tagged me here...

 

[Liferleafer]

Yeah you only quote me when it fits your agenda. Why don’t you go on the Manson/Rielly thread and quote me there too? Maybe you’ll see I have nothing against the Leafs but against people who are delusional about their players value/performance. Jesus..

You don't like the way Leafs fans value players? Well my dear Habs fan, i have a solutiin for ya...maybe just steer clear of Leafs thread

 

[Michel Beauchamp]

Well, at least we can always count on this Habs fan to come into EVERY Leafs thread to set the record straight....

"Mirror, mirror..."

 

[Michel Beauchamp]

all signs except the ones that are not based on your own biases, sure. Look past the hockeydb page, it will help your evaluations

Do you really believe in magic beans, aka "advanced stats" ?

I thought you were better than this.

Per 60.

 

[Liferleafer]

"Mirror, mirror..."

Lol....yes i admit...I, like that Habs fan, am in every Leafs thread....BECAUSE I AM A LEAFS FAN.

IIrc....the last non-Leafs thread i was in was the Nurse signing thread....i believe i posted something like "well done Oilers...good signing".

 

[Michel Beauchamp]

View attachment 140681

A Leafs fan patting another Leafs fan on the back...

The Apocalypse must be near...

 

[Michel Beauchamp]

You don't like the way Leafs fans value players? Well my dear Habs fan, i have a solutiin for ya...maybe just steer clear of Leafs thread

The main board is now off limits ?

 

[Liferleafer]

The main board is now off limits ?

Heck no...have at it. If they made rules like that, you and Baks would have to much time on your hands....i wouldn't be able to tell it was a Leafs thread without you guys making your obligatory appearences.

 

[Michel Beauchamp]

Heck no...have at it. If they made rules like that, you and Baks would have to much time on your hands....i wouldn't be able to tell it was a Leafs thread without you guys making your obligatory appearences.

Someone has to keep the Tea Party faction of the Leafs fans honest.

It's a full-time job, unfortunately.

 

[Canadian Canuck]

Sutter doesn’t do much but we have no other centers rn. Still wanna see what Jake can do in a full year too, although it might be grasping at straws. Leivo is nothing more than waiver fodder, and in a year or two Grundstrom and Brown are really whatever to us. We have plenty of them in our farm system

Agree with everything except your first point. We have Too Many centers not sure what you mean!

Horvat
Pettersson
Gaudette
Sutter
Gagner
Beagle
Even Schaller can play center.

 

[LemonSauceD]

Agree with everything except your first point. We have Too Many centers not sure what you mean!

Horvat
Pettersson
Gaudette
Sutter
Gagner
Beagle
Even Schaller can play center.

Add Granlund too.

We have a lot of centers, but other than Pettersson and Horvat, none of them are worthy enough to be playing top 6. We don't need another fringe 3rd line center.

 

[Canadian Canuck]

Add Granlund too.

We have a lot of centres, but other than Pettersson and Horvat, none of them are worthy enough to be playing top 6. We don't need another fringe 3rd line centre.

Forgot about him. Sutter is a great 3rd line center and great locker room guy and leader; however, because we signed Beagle, I want that 3C spot for Gaudette.

 

[Randy Randerson]

Do you really believe in magic beans, aka "advanced stats" ?

I thought you were better than this.

Per 60.

I believe that anyone that calls advanced stats "magic beans" needs to do more reading, they are hard measurement of things that are happening, just a more in-depth measurement than hockeydb has

 

[Michel Beauchamp]

I believe that anyone that calls advanced stats "magic beans" needs to do more reading, they are hard measurement of things that are happening, just a more in-depth measurement than hockeydb has

I don't dispute that hockeydb is very basic.

But as long as the collection of data varies so much from playing surface to playing surface, I do not intend to put my faith in so-called "advanced metrics".

It's a nice shiny new toy that I often compare to the Emperor's New Clothes.

Per 60.

 

[Randy Randerson]

I don't dispute that hockeydb is very basic.

But as long as the collection of data varies so much from playing surface to playing surface, I do not intend to put my faith in so-called "advanced metrics".

It's a nice shiny new toy that I often compare to the Emperor's New Clothes.

Per 60.

sounds good man, I guess we can't depend on anything but the eye test right?

 

[Michel Beauchamp]

sounds good man, I guess we can't depend on anything but the eye test right?

Nope, it'a start but it needs a wholla lot of fine tuning.

Their predictive value, in the meantime, is quite limited.

People putting all their faith into some of them... Well, it makes it easy for them.

Per 60.