Confirmed with Link: PIT (Sheary & Rodrigues) | BUF (Kahun)

[Gurglesons]

The problem is that most of these discussions change the defining stat based on where the argument's heading.

ES production? Corsi/Fenwick? GF/60? xGF%? McCurdy's rainbow charts?

My argument has been that Sheary drives play in a similar manner both analytically and production wise in a less advantageous situation than Kahun has had the last two years.

Your argument has been 17-18 proves Sheary sucks because you think he sucks.

The only time I’ve brought up production is when someone else infers Sheary’s production is reflective of his worth.

 

[Gurglesons]

@Peat wasn’t using it as a predictor though, was he?

It was to compare what line mates did with Sid in that season for context. He was using P/60 in his other posts. In which Sheary was identical 2/3 years in Pitt and his 2 seasons in Buffalo were .02 apart from each other so pretty consistent.

cc: @Jesse

Per 60 is inherently predictive as you are using a sample to predict how a player would produce over a large sample.

 

[Tom Hanks]

Per 60 is inherently predictive as you are using a sample to predict how a player would produce over a large sample.

per 60 in every stat? I’m not sure that’s accurate. Individual would make sense on the same team but the more players you add wouldn’t it become more skewed as a predictor (ie most adv stats).

You always have to use context because there maybe stuff that happened that a number can’t see.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

Which is your issue. You hate the player based on a short sample size and you are trying to build an argument around that via statistics.

It's not a short sample size. It's a huge sample size of mediocre production across multiple teams.

And it's huge both in absolute terms and relative to the sample size of Sheary producing well.

My argument has been that Sheary drives play in a similar manner both analytically and production wise in a less advantageous situation than Kahun has had the last two years.

Your argument has been 17-18 proves Sheary sucks because you think he sucks.

The only time I’ve brought up production is when someone else infers Sheary’s production is reflective of his worth.

Is that so?

The real problem is that Sheary underachieved on three bad teams while Kahun produced with elite talent in Chicago and was brought in to do the same here which he hasn’t done.

This was prior to the revelation that Kahun was actually more productive with Malkin than Sheary's ever been in the top 6, outside of his aberrant '16-'17. Then it came time to dig in the advanced stat vault to see where Sheary could be rationalized.

 

[Gallatin]

I’m curious what this board would look like if you jags could just have normal conversations.

As someone with well over 2 dozen on the I-list, it's the top board in any sport that I know of.

 

[Gallatin]

We all recognize that Crosby had a down year in '17-'18, and Buffalo sucks. What we disagree on is whether Sheary was a victim of those circumstances or a contributor to them.



Thanks for calculating those, much appreciated.

These numbers do undermine one of the main arguments for Sheary though, that he produced in the top 6 and Kahun didn't. It's true that Kahun was much more productive in the bottom 6 than he was with Malkin...but he was still more productive with Malkin this year (1.89 P/60) than Sheary was with Crosby in '17-'18 (1.59 P/60).



I dunno man, these justifications only seem to get more wobbly.

People should be nervous about Sid liking Sheary, and Sheary being put on the 1st line during his initial line rushes. This is in all likelihood going to be a regular thing, with an exceptionally long leash, like the last time he was here. That's why he was so frustrating and that's why I was happy to see him go the first time.

Best post I've seen from you on this debate. I don't like Sheary either, but after the deep dive - I support the move.

 

[StaalForOne]

My argument has been that Sheary drives play in a similar manner both analytically and production wise in a less advantageous situation than Kahun has had the last two years.

Your argument has been 17-18 proves Sheary sucks because you think he sucks.

The only time I’ve brought up production is when someone else infers Sheary’s production is reflective of his worth.

Sheary is a proven commodity and has gotten significant playing time with Crosby in the past. We know his ceiling, we know his floor, and I'm just worried his floor is closer to his actual norm given his tenure in Buffalo (yea yea quality of teammates, whatever). We know that Sheary needs to play with elite players to do anything productive, whereas we didn't have a large sample size with Kahun in that regard.

The "Kahun has played with top 6 talent" is really only relative to Chicago where he still put up 37 points in 82 GP, with a mixed bag of linemates. He played like...10 games with Malkin , but his most common linemates were McCann and Hornqvist/Simon. His icetime was also a little lower at that point(w/McCann. A quick look at the game log shows me he had about 6pts in the last 12 games (in which he was playing with Malkin) which leaves 21 points in 38 games w/McCann. He seems to have done better with McCann, which I doubt we will be able to say about Sheary should he and Sid not work out.

At worst Kahaun can produce without Crosby or Malkin. Can we say that about Sheary who has only ever produced with Crosby? That is my biggest gripe. Are they close players overall, maybe, but I think it's clear Sheary is a passenger. The jury is still out on Kahun.



Having said all that I just saw this, so maybe JR knew something we didn't:

 

[HandshakeLine]

Maybe this whole injury curse thing can work in our favor after all?

 

[Gurglesons]

Sheary is a proven commodity and has gotten significant playing time with Crosby in the past. We know his ceiling, we know his floor, and I'm just worried his floor is closer to his actual norm given his tenure in Buffalo (yea yea quality of teammates, whatever). We know that Sheary needs to play with elite players to do anything productive, whereas we didn't have a large sample size with Kahun in that regard.

The "Kahun has played with top 6 talent" is really only relative to Chicago where he still put up 37 points in 82 GP, with a mixed bag of linemates. He played like...10 games with Malkin , but his most common linemates were McCann and Hornqvist/Simon. His icetime was also a little lower at that point(w/McCann. A quick look at the game log shows me he had about 6pts in the last 12 games (in which he was playing with Malkin) which leaves 21 points in 38 games w/McCann. He seems to have done better with McCann, which I doubt we will be able to say about Sheary should he and Sid not work out.

At worst Kahaun can produce without Crosby or Malkin. Can we say that about Sheary who has only ever produced with Crosby? That is my biggest gripe. Are they close players overall, maybe, but I think it's clear Sheary is a passenger. The jury is still out on Kahun.



Having said all that I just saw this, so maybe JR knew something we didn't:

But as I’ve been saying.. we acquired Marleau and Rodrigues to fill out the bottom six. Sheary was acquired to help with our top six which Sullivan didn’t believe Kahun could do. Also the majority of production with McCann came when he was playing on L2.

 

[Empoleon8771]

I think it's 100% factual to say that Kahun can produce more away from elite talent than Sheary. I think this overall makes Kahun a better player than Sheary. But is that really what the Penguins want out of a player in Kahun's role? I feel like that was a knock against Kessel when he was here, where he could produce on his own but he just didn't work well with Crosby or Malkin. Kahun generates offense on his own better than Sheary, but Kahun also wants the puck too much for Sid's and Geno's liking. Being able to generate offense if Crosby and Malkin are being shut down is a positive, but if Crosby and Malkin are thriving, they're going to get pissed if an inferior player is hogging the puck. I don't think Kahun meshed with Malkin and Crosby didn't want to play with him for that reason.

That's not a problem with Sheary, he's a pure complementary winger that goes as Crosby/Malkin do. If the star centers are in the dumps, like Crosby was for a lot of the 2017-2018 season, Sheary is going to do nothing. But if the star center is playing great, like Crosby was for a lot of the 2016-2017 season, Sheary can put up a ton of points. That's why I think it's nonsensical to judge Sheary based solely on his 17-18 and act like his 16-17 season never happened. Those are the highs and lows of him as a player, he either produces a shitload with a clicking line or he produces at 3rd line levels with a dysfunctional line.

Basically, which is more important to this team: someone who can mesh with Crosby/Malkin and produce well with them, or someone who doesn't mesh with Crosby/Malkin but can produce just as well away from them as with them? Based on how the team is structured, I see arguments for both but a stronger one for the first player. Especially considering:

1. Kahun would have cost a lot of money to be a line driver on their 3rd line going into the future
2. There's no guarantee the Kahun-McCann duo would have done as well with 3rd line usage as they did with 2nd line usage.
3. The Penguins added Marleau and Rodrigues as bottom-6 players who can at least drive offense analytically.

 

[66-30-33]

Wait...Kahun got injured with Buffalo?

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

That's not a problem with Sheary, he's a pure complementary winger that goes as Crosby/Malkin do. If the star centers are in the dumps, like Crosby was for a lot of the 2017-2018 season, Sheary is going to do nothing. But if the star center is playing great, like Crosby was for a lot of the 2016-2017 season, Sheary can put up a ton of points. That's why I think it's nonsensical to judge Sheary based solely on his 17-18 and act like his 16-17 season never happened. Those are the highs and lows of him as a player, he either produces a shitload with a clicking line or he produces at 3rd line levels with a dysfunctional line.

I don't think anyone's judging Sheary solely on '17-'18. It just happens to be the last time he played here, and exactly in line with how he produced in Buffalo for 2 years since.

Should his '16-'17 season - 3 years ago - be given anything close to the same weight as what he's done for 3 years straight? If we're being honest with ourselves, would we use that standard for any other player?

Based on the numbers, the lows are far more likely than the highs. He's settled in the lows for some time now, in a number of different contexts.

 

[Gurglesons]

Wait...Kahun got injured with Buffalo?

No, he is still injured. Which also like I previously said played into this decision. Kahun was not a long term fit and suffered a concussion and a LBI.

 

[Peat]

@Tom Hanks is right. I am not using it predictively. Indeed, I am making pretty much no predictions. I don't trust either full season here as a sample that happened in similar conditions to now and the chasm between them as a high end and low end is about as big as it gets for a player.

I am trying to reconcile why we're using GF/60 as the defining metric here. It's the least predictive or repeatable.

Was using gf/60 as we'd been talking individual production and I was too lazy to work out individual p/60, then I realised there was a decent difference between general line stats and was too lazy to type out full details. Also, as mentioned above, wasn't doing anything predictive, simply detailing what had happened.

 

[StaalForOne]

But as I’ve been saying.. we acquired Marleau and Rodrigues to fill out the bottom six. Sheary was acquired to help with our top six which Sullivan didn’t believe Kahun could do. Also the majority of production with McCann came when he was playing on L2.

I'll agree with the first part, that's a fair point, but I still wouldn't consider McCann line a "second line" per say. Agree to disagree though, I'm sure we're all tired of this argument.

 

[Empoleon8771]

I don't think anyone's judging Sheary solely on '17-'18. It just happens to be the last time he played here, and exactly in line with how he produced in Buffalo for 2 years since.

Should his '16-'17 season - 3 years ago - be given anything close to the same weight as what he's done for 3 years straight? If we're being honest with ourselves, would we use that standard for any other player?

Based on the numbers, the lows are far more likely than the highs. He's settled in the lows for some time now, in a number of different contexts.

You are literally doing that

Saying that you're looking at his last 3 years, while refusing to point out that Sheary played with absolute dog shit players in Buffalo (relative to Crosby and Malkin), is judging him solely on his lows. His last 3 years have been on the low side because Crosby stunk at 5v5 in 2017-2018 and Buffalo stinks all of the time. I'm willing to strongly bet that Sheary on a full season with Eichel would have had him closer to 50 points than 30 points.

 

[Tender Rip]

I'm not a fan at all, but deadline came and went and we gotta see it for what it is.

For whatever reason, Kahun was not seen as a solution for either Malkin or Sid. With limited options, JR went for magic beans hoping that Sheary will fit with Sid and Rodriguez might be a player in a new situation. If it works, great. If it doesn't... well.

To me, it is at worst "somewhat poor asset management".

Ultimately, what makes or breaks us as a title contender is a combination of Dumo and Marino coming back (well) and more importantly Sid playing like Sid. He plain hasn't. That doesn't mean he cannot be effective, but 5 on 5 that line just usually hasn't been.
We can blame line mates as much as we want, and with reason given the quality of opposition he will usually see, but in the games leading up to his surgery he was just poor defensively, and for much of his time coming back, he has been just as poor.
Whenever he plays he will be leaned on, and when he isn't at his best, the result is that he is leaned on too much. I'd say that right now you should be riding Zucker Malkin Rust if you want to win, and treat Sid as the decided 2nd line center. But that just won't ever happen, right or wrong.
So for us to win when it matters, Sid has to be a lot better. Its not a critique, just a statement of fact.

If he is (alot better), it might all work out - when the D is back. Not may teams can handle being without their number 2 and 3.
But the idea that Sheary is a part of the solution on his line if Sid is played as the nr.1, with the matchups to... well... match.... that is hard to countenance.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

You are literally doing that

Saying that you're looking at his last 3 years, while refusing to point out that Sheary played with absolute dog shit players in Buffalo (relative to Crosby and Malkin), is judging him solely on his lows. His last 3 years have been on the low side because Crosby stunk at 5v5 in 2017-2018 and Buffalo stinks all of the time. I'm willing to strongly bet that Sheary on a full season with Eichel would have had him closer to 50 points than 30 points.

I'm using the last 3 years. Crosby had a down year in '17-'18...using GF/60, some feel that Crosby brought his wingers down (!), I feel that Sheary brought his line down. I also think that Sheary is very likely part of the problem in Buffalo rather than some isolated gem whose performance was brought down by Buffalo.

You've explained before, back in our ZAR discussion, why xGF% is your definitive stat. By that metric, Crosby was much better without Sheary than with him that year:

Line Stats - Natural Stat Trick

 

[HandshakeLine]

It's too soon to tell if this is bad asset management or not. But to play out a scenario:

Rodrigues - 10 G 10A
Sheary - 15G 15A

and

Kahun - 15G/20G - 25 A

seems pretty equivalent as far as production goes, No?

 

[Jesse]

I am surprised that so many of you are so tied to Kahun's performances here. I've been trying to avoid using WoWy stats recently because I don't think they paint as detailed a picture as we think they do. Example: there's 10 players on the ice, with one-line stats, we're looking at 3 of those 10 players. Who are they with? Who are they against? Crosby, Guentzel and Simon performs differently with Letang/Dumoulin than they would Johnson/Schultz, right? The WoWY data doesn't really provide context to that in any way.

As a result, my personal shift has been more towards stats that track individual player impacts or focus on data relative to teammates. It can help us discern the true underlying details about a players' ability to drive offense or mitigate quality defensively. By doing this, we can remove all the unknowns that exist in the WoWY data. The context is much richer in these individual evaluations and they often account for mostly everything outside an individual players control.

To me, this trade is more about the impact that depth plays over anything else, but to feed the fire of the debate as I am thoroughly enjoying it, here is some stuff to chew on. These are the individual isolate's for Kahun and Sheary over the last few year's from Micah's model and website (HockeyViz.com). In these, the higher the + the better on offense, the lower the - the better on defense.

Kahun:
18/19
O Threat: +8.7%
D Threat: -5.1%

19/20
O Threat: +2.6%
D Threat: -7.2%

Sheary:
17/18
O Threat: +5.9%
D Threat: -2.5%

18/19
O Threat: +14.4%
D Threat: -5.9%

19/20
O Threat: +12.9%
D Threat: -12.3%

 

[Tender Rip]

It's too soon to tell if this is bad asset management or not. But to play out a scenario:

Rodrigues - 10 G 10A
Sheary - 15G 15A

and

Kahun - 15G/20G - 25 A

seems pretty equivalent as far as production goes, No?

Simon and McCann would be worth a really good player if that logic is sound....

 

[HandshakeLine]

Simon and McCann would be worth a really good player if that logic is sound....

I'm not really saying they're equivalent, I'm not seriously predicting that, nor that I think Rodrigues or Sheary are even really that good, just that regardless of where you think Kahun figured into the Pens' plans, I really don't see how this is a terrible overpayment.

 

[Tender Rip]

I'm not really saying they're equivalent, I'm not seriously predicting that, nor that I think Rodrigues or Sheary are even really that good, just that regardless of where you think Kahun figured into the Pens' plans, I really don't see how this is a terrible overpayment.

OK. I don't think I insinuated that either though (here supposing that you mentioned asset management in part as a response to my post).

For me Kahun is a player who could be someone; someone who despite having had relatively few opportunities with our best and on the PP has performed well and also looked defensively solid individually. He looks like a player who can become a very good player, although not a certainty.
Sheary for me is.... Sheary. A player I was tremendously happy to see leave.

My disappointment is that this is what we end up with, when we could have just taken Kovalchuk at 7ook (much, much better player... when we really needed a RH shot on the PP) for free earlier in the season and had Kahun still. What kinda irks me is how desperate it looks.

But that said, I don't think the move here and now is a bad one for our playoff chances. Its.... whatever.

 

[Peat]

Is Kovalchuk a Sid player though? The clear intent behind this move is to take guys that weren't seen as clicking with the big dogs and exchange them for those who would. And given just how much we've benefited from this hard intent to move more in line with Sully's philosophy and what suits Sid (and Geno, but he seems a bit more sorted for guys right now), I really struggle to argue with that as a philosophy. Maybe we're pursuing a faded dream in thinking Sheary is that guy, but we are at least following a plan. A guy like Kovalchuk?

One downside of this approach though is it feels like we risk having a very homogeneous and uncreative bottom 6.

 

[Gurglesons]

Is Kovalchuk a Sid player though? The clear intent behind this move is to take guys that weren't seen as clicking with the big dogs and exchange them for those who would. And given just how much we've benefited from this hard intent to move more in line with Sully's philosophy and what suits Sid (and Geno, but he seems a bit more sorted for guys right now), I really struggle to argue with that as a philosophy. Maybe we're pursuing a faded dream in thinking Sheary is that guy, but we are at least following a plan. A guy like Kovalchuk?

One downside of this approach though is it feels like we risk having a very homogeneous and uncreative bottom 6.

Much to my surprise Tanev seems like a very creative player with the puck. Rodrigues from my viewing is definitely one and then you have McCann who sucks at doing it with linemates but is creative individually. Also, Sheary on L1 should drop Simon into the bottom six.