NightmanCometh
Registered User
"Puck Daddy"
I didn't even start reading.
Greg Wyshynski isn't so bad. At the very least he's a lot less snarky than Lambert.
"Puck Daddy"
I didn't even start reading.
I don't learn anything new when I read his articles, though. It's too much opinion and too little information for my liking. Totally okay because it's a blog but just not my cup of coffee. However, I still do listen to MvsW once in a while.Greg Wyshynski isn't so bad. At the very least he's a lot less snarky than Lambert.
Tyler Bozak's career shooting percentage is 16.2% in 378 games, it makes zero sense to 'normalize' his shooting percentage to 9%.I just don't see Bozak doing that well. I mean, he has NEVER broken 50 points, and that's with Kessel and JVR to leech off of. Even 13-14 when he was on pace to have a great year, it's covered up by an ungodly shooting % of 21.1%. In no way is that sustainable. Hell, even a 14.9% shooting % he had last year when he broke 20G for the first time is unsustainable too. Even if he is extremely selective, which he is, those kinds of numbers aren't sustainable. Plus, without Kessel to generate offense, he can't be as selective anymore. The league average is 9%, so he would normalize to 14 goals, which would make him a 40 point player on the nose. And that's just with everything from last year being equal, like still playing with JVR and Kessel and getting top line minutes and top PP minutes. Problem is, he is completely incapable of driving possession or driving the offense. He just can't.
Canucks will give horvat and a 5th
According to these boards Bozak was an elite #1 center just a few months ago.
I remember people saying he's not a true 1C, but a good #2 miscast in a top line role.
In reality he's a 3rd liner at best, can't generate any sort of offense on his own.
He's never played any substantial amount of time on his own to justify this conclusion.
Something I always find funny:
"Small sample size" is very commonly used as a counter argument to "look at this guy's awesome production".....it's widely accepted that a small sample size isn't enough to come to conclusions regarding someone's play.
EXCEPT, if you're talking about someone that's been unproductive in a small sample size. Ex: Bozak isn't productive away from Kessel, although the sample size is small, Kessel made him look good.
I'll wait to see how he actually does. I mean afterall, a small sample size isn't enough to make a conclusion right HFboards?