What is your point? He plays gritty against softer competition. Perry isn't that great defensively, and anyone who suggests that is outright mad.
My original point was not that Perry is great defensively, nor did I ever say that. I was simply stating that Perry is a better all-round player than Kessel and that is why he commanded the contract he did. At least Perry will check and put in a solid effort to maintaining puck possession. Kessel relies on others to do the lifting and get him the puck.
It's not like the Ducks are going to intentionally hold him back against top competition. Datsyuk, on the other hand, produces against the top lines.
Again, the original point was not if Datsyuk is better than Perry.. you're wandering off the point. Datsyuk is one of the best in the game, period. And like you said, it has a lot to do with what goes on outside his point totals, since he is a supremely talented puck possessor.
Crosby isn't gritty either. What the hell is your point?
Crosby is far more gritty than Kessel...checks...takes the abuse to make his plays...blocks shots with his face....
People who are barely familiar with the game, of course.
Logical fallacy: appeal to authority. Perry was noted by Randy for floating. You know, his own damn coach at that time. I don't see
much changes in his style of play.
It takes a team to win a cup, not an individual. Corey was a side character on a team with two elite defenceman, an elite top line, and elite centre as his linemate. That shut down line
Ask anyone. The better all-round player is Corey Perry and until Phil wins a Rocket Richard, Hart, and a Cup, I don't think he really has anything on him.
It's obvious that you don't watch the games. Kessel has been producing against the shut down lines. To consider him a PP specialist would ignore his presence during ES.
It's obvious that you don't understand how hockey works. And you're only looking at one side of the balance sheet, but not at all surprising.
See, in the game of hockey...chances are, you won't have the puck all the time...so that necessitates the need to change gameplans to try to reclaim the puck. We call this defence.
So in summation,
Offence (causing scoring chances)
AND
Defence (preventing scoring chances)
are the two aspects of even strength play that are to be analyzed for players. Kessel has a very bipolar impact even strength. He'll produce when given the opportunity, but he also coasts around, surrenders puck possession a lot (especially when played physically), half ***** his forechecks, and is noticeably absent in most physical battles in all areas of the ice...and this results in his line coughing up MORE goals than they can create.
So while he scores against "shutdown lines" (I'll go along with your Google stats for a second), he is getting scored on by those very same lines, to a greater degree.
Now why are "shutdown lines" scoring against Kessel's line? If they are scoring with as much ease as the Kessel line, I'd hardly call that being shutdown, I'd call that being outplayed by an altogether superior line of players...since after all (going back to the equation)...your line is only as good as your ability to both get chances and preventing them. You can't just ignore 50% of the job and expect success.
Umm...Getzlaf was normally sheltered during the regular season. That is, used offensively. During the playoffs, the opposition was essentially shutting him down. His production fell to 2 points, while in the 2011 playoffs, he produced, but in favourable (or sheltered) conditions.
Right...so while he was a rookie winning the Cup with Perry...sheltered. Fast forward and they are the number one line...sheltered. According to what again? Oh right,
Corsi = Shot Attempts FOR - Shot Attempts AGAINST
Means absolutely nothing...
The Leafs as a team had the 30th place CORSI in the entire league...they finished 9th in the standings.
Compelling rebuttal..
Thanks to Phil's speed and vision, he's probably better than Perry in that regard. If you watch the games, Perry is never used like Datsyuk.
Again, you can say Kessel is a better checking and defensive player than Perry all you want.
Doesn't make it real. Ask anyone...it will be a lopsided result in favor of Corey Perry.
It doesn't matter if I use quantitative data, or I use qualitative data. Corey Perry started out as a sheltered forward and will only produce in those settings.
According to a faulty set of information that in no way, shape, or form can be used to analyze a player independently...
You keep reverting back to these silly free internet stats that have no credibility in the world of hockey.
Offensive specialists are more likely going to be starting in the offensive zone. To re-gain possession against the top lines is going to tire you out offensively. Have you ever personally played against talented athletes?
See now you're blurring the argument. When you start in the defensive zone there is about a 50% chance you will regain possession. And if you lose, it is still even strength and possession can be reclaimed, assuming the players are fit for the role (in which case Grabovski isn't).
So in other words, against "offensive specialists", Grabo can't center a line since he can't score, and drags others down with him, the 50% of the time he gets possession, and the 50% of the time the other team has it, they are scoring on him and running circles around him, tiring him out.
And of course there is so much more hockey that goes on between whistles, with these things called "changes on the fly"...and seeing as how CORSI neither accounts for first and last changes...a coach can easily switch his defence or forward pairing right after a whistle which also diminishes the stats meaningfulness.
That is, unless you're Patrice Bergeron, but what's interesting to note is that the top four teams tend to have petty defensively sound forwards. For instance, it wouldn't be a good idea to wander off in the offensive zone vs the Crosby, Krecji, etc. You'll likely be exposing yourself defensively.
Any model that places Tyler Seguin above Patrice Bergeron, nevermind being equal or even close, is not to be trusted. According to CORSI, Tyler Seguin is a better player than Patrice Bergeron lol
This is where this post is going to get fun.
I believe I asked a very straight-forward question.
How can a faulty set of inputs (Shots Attempted FOR - Shots Attempted AGAINST) yield an un-faulty set of outputs (CORSI)? This defies natural law.
Because you realize it is an equation.. (SFA - SFS
= Corsi)
If you put garbage in, you are going to get garbage out...and this is something that is a giveaway of someone's novice grasp of math and statistics. If the Left Side of the equation is invalid as a broad reaching analytical tool for hockey...then so too will the Right Side of the equation.
CORSI is an aggregate indicator.
It aggregates meaningless information...this is why it is not reliable or a valid way to rank players, lines, and teams.
Garbage in, garbage out.
Those shot selections would not be statistically significant.
Are you kidding me? Shot selection is everything in hockey. If a 5-man unit is pushing play to the outside, only letting the goalie handle perimeter shots and in turn high percentage saves, they should be rewarded for that, not punished based on a garbage stat like Shots Attempted AGAINST...and conversely the forwards shouldn't be rewarded for being unable to get net presence or a cycle game going that a garbage stat like Shots Attempted FOR accounts.
So again, why should we care about this garbage stat? And why would we then start categorizing the players based on the garbage stat? And then why would we even try to compare players from team to team with such a meaningless number?
It's all quite cute to me, this advanced stats stuff, but nothing more than a fad right now. The real stats, you know, meaningful ones? Well they are being used by real life NHL teams. Not this crap. That's why it's a free internet stat...and why people get paid to work for a scouting staff or agency.
If they were, that'd indicate poorer defensive zone coverage and a reduction in CORSI.
But who is responsible? Everyone on the ice? How can you even begin to start analyzing players individually with such a flawed metric?
If Dion Phaneuf stumbles at the blue line, and let's a player walk in for a breakaway goal...everyone is punished the same. There is no way to statistically prove why that shot was surrendered, where possession was lost, how possession was lost, by whom, and what could have been done to prevent it.
Well it turns out that is not a practical way to INDIVIDUALLY analyze a player when you paint the whole unit with the same broad stroke. Could it gauge possession for a line? In a very limited way. Can it gauge the quality of the shift for the line? Again, limited. Can it be used to rank players? Absolutely not.
Goaltending on average will be constant. Regardless of whether the CORSI changes, the same goalie ( in most cases) will be present.
A .920 save percentage one night is not the same as a .920 save percentage another night...because this doesn't take into account the frequency and quality of the scoring chance.
So goaltending is not constant. They are robots, they are people, and they go through peaks and valleys just as any individual player does. They can be on one night, off the other.
Someone who is out of touch with the game, and too in touch with spreadsheets wouldn't understand this.
The CORSI on the defending side would decrease.
For everyone. Not proportionally for the individual responsible for surrendering puck possession to the forechecker. And the forechecker is not rewarded for taking it back, under CORSI.
Superior puck distribution would result to higher an increasing CORSI for that team.
For everyone. Bergeron's incredible two-way play is reflected in Tyler Seguin's grossly inflated CORSI...because a shot for one is a shot for all. A shot of any kind too...not a scoring chance. I see nothing related to puck distribution embedded in this equation.
Corsi = Shot Attempts FOR - Shot Attempts AGAINST
Possession decreases during boneheaded defensive plays. Decrease in CORSI.
But Tyler Bozak is now punished because of Dion Phaneuf stumbling at the blue line and letting the player score on a breakaway.
A bonehead play for one is a bonehead play for all.
We know that Clarke MacArthur was sheltered, because we was playing with Kadri. Even on the defensive zone, McClement replaced Clarke, and it was a McClement - Grabs - Kulemin line.
And despite all that power on the wings, Grabo still could not be effective.
If it was Grabovski taking a spam shot from the top of the circle, he would be losing possession. Thus his CORSI will decrease and the linemate who purportedly helped him re-establish possession will be awarded a positive CORSI.
No it wouldn't. He just took a shot so his CORSI increases as well as any player on the ice...doesn't matter if a defenceman is tying his skate up in the other end, skating back to the bench, or anything..and again...shot quality is ignored too.
Do you know what's ridiculous? Grabovski had 80 shots, while Kulemin had 72 shots. Were Kulemin shots more higher quality than Grabovski? I really wonder, because Grabovski had a much higher shooting % than Kulemin.
Wonder all you like, it doesn't mean anything. Kulemin is the Leafs best defensive forward who is a better all-round player, and on a better contract than Grabovski.
Can you even keep up with the games? During the regular or post season, Bergeron was never used against Grabs line. Mikhail wasn't on the shut down unit (vs Krecji's line) during the playoffs even though he usually started in the defensive zone.
That's why I said he didn't even face the best lines...please re-read the post before misrepresenting my position.
I said Grabovski played poorly against Boston's second line. He didn't even go head to head against their first line...and did not go against Chara and Boychuk.
Starting away from the top lines increased his productivity. He was able to do more in the offensive zone. If he was used like his previous seasons, he would've produced at least 20goals and 50 points during the regular season.
He had 2 assists and 7 games!
Now as a pusher of stats, you'd think you would understand that this is not a 50 point, 20 goal kind of performance. He didn't play good at all, and the only reason anyone noticed him was because Boston was steamrolling him every chance they had.
Umm...offensive players normally start in the offensive zone. You have the Crosby-type guys who may not, but the high producing Perry, Tavares types are usually deployed in the offensive zone. To be utilized in that manner is going to mask a lot of defensive deficiencies.
Holy crap, it's just a whistle. How many whistles are there per period? Maybe 8-12 and that would included stoppages for penalties which lead to automatic offensive zone starts for the team with the man-advantage. There's 20 minutes of hockey to be played between these whistles so these faceoff starts are very limited in their usefulness and meaning.
If that is the case, CORSI would decrease, because Grabovski usually ends in the defensive zone. In other words, the possession positive guy would take the puck to the opposition zone.
No, once again, you're simply wrong. It seems you are very confused about stats, in general.
If Grabovski takes a low percentage spam shot and the goalie saves it, he is rewarded with a positive CORSI and an offensive zone finish, and the same goes for whoever else was on the ice.
He's rewarded the same as if Phil Kessel snipes a shot for a goal.
That spam shot is par value with an incredible goal.
Do you watch a game of hockey? I am starting to doubt that.
That's bogus..
Yes I watch hockey. I am also fluent in English and actually understand hockey and math/stats. How about you?
Why is Kulemin superior to Grabovski? I don't have to look at any spreadsheet to see that Grabs has a higher shoot percentage or that he establishes possessions better than Kulemin. After all, how is Grabs able to be the puck-hogging, tries-to-do-everything scrub in the offensive zone?
I have already debunked the notion that you can use CORSI to analyze players independently. So I don't know why you keep repeating the same senseless argument over and over.
Kulemin is a far better winger than Grabovski is a center and actually contributes in meaningful ways. Grabovski on the other hand, is a black hole offensively, and very underwhelming as a center. Grabovski had a poor year, while Kulemin had a very good one. Kulemin gets paid less than half Grabo's salary as well.
Different role. Shut down lines are supposed to produce against top lines. It's an offensive line. The PK unit is a defensive unit and is supposed to neutralize the top line's offence. In that regard, yes, Kulemin is superior within the defensive zone. However, when it comes to killing power plays and attacking the opposition zone, Grabovski is superior.
Weird because I see that superior defensive zone play carried right on over to the opponent's end with forechecking and a cycle game. Kulemin has much more versatility to offer the Leafs than Grabovski.
By that same logic, we can argue that Darren Helm is better against top lines than Datsyuk and Zetterberg because he spends significantly more time on the PK. Heck, throw in Cory Emmerton as well. However, it's pretty clear when watching the game that Dats and Zett perform a lot better against top lines. Yes, offensively better.
If Darren Helm was producing more points while playing a better all-round game than Datsyuk and Zetterberg (not possible), then he would be deemed to be superior.
The same logic is applied to Kulemin-Grabovski in which case Kulemin comes out on top quite easily in my opinion.
When the hell did I suggest otherwise? Its his hockey sense and stick handling that lets him maintain possession in the opposition zone. Seeing that Grabovski is a smallish forward, he isn't going to be that effective on the boards.
A huge part of being a center is the ability to play in all areas of the ice. With Kadri, Bozak, and possibly another top 6 center in the fold, that is by default the role Grabovski will have to take on. And since he isn't suited to it as well as say Jay McClement, I'd say it's time to pull the plug on this junk contract we got suckered into taking on last year.
Now assuming Kulemin gifts wraps him the puck when taking defensive zone draws, Grabovski seems to be the only player working in the offensive zone. If he was just a mere passenger, taking stupid shots, we'd be expecting a much higher shooting % from Kulemin's side.
I never stated Kulemin is more dangerous offensively...he's actually scored 30 goals before...and produced better than Grabo this year while being a more versatile player...but I guess it is a toss up.
Point is Kulemin is better all-round and had himself a good season after his bad one last year.
As I said, the team is more possession positive when Grabovski joins the ice. We all notice that when he's playing, and thus many attack him for not doing much with the puck. However that is expected when starting in the defensive zone against the top producers.
If he can't find ways to penetrate "offensive specialists" defence and if he can't find ways to prevent them from scoring on us, he should be removed immediately in favor of a center who can do either of these better.