VeGor
Datsyuk
- Dec 12, 2009
- 182
- 0
I think my confusion comes from the fact that I do not completely understand the phrase "playing out" - I thought it meant that you are a Red Wing throughout your whole career in the NHL.
I think my confusion comes from the fact that I do not completely understand the phrase "playing out" - I thought it meant that you are a Red Wing throughout your whole career in the NHL.
red kelly, syd howe and ebbie goodfellow are other exceptions.
there does not seem to have been any consistent standard for jersey retirements.
red kelly was captain, is a HHOFer, would have won 4 norris (was voted top d-man unanimously 3 times before winning the very first norris in '54), should have won '54 hart, was voted player of the year in '54 by several organizations (even though gordie howe was at his peak and easily won the art ross again), and was probably the 2nd most important member of the dynasty after howe, but did not get his #4 retired.
syd howe, #8, retired as the NHL's all time leading scorer, was captain, played multiple positions (LW, C, D), was a hart finalist, and was a complete player who won 3 cups here.
ebbie goodfellow played his entire career here, was captain, won 2 cups here, won '40 hart trophy (for most valuable to his team, not best player), was a star and is in HHOF, but his #5 was not retired.
jack stewart, #2, and bill quackenbush, #3, were two of the best d-men of their era, both probably would have won norris, are in HHOF, and were teammates of gordie howe, ted lindsay and sid abel before the dynasty. stewart won 2 cups, but quackenbush won 0.
norm ullman, #7 and #16, played a complete game, retired 4th all time in scoring (after howe, delvecchio, mikita), probably would have won '65 hart if the voting were done at end of the season instead of in 2 parts, and unlike delvecchio, ullman usually did not play with howe. but ullman won 0 cups.
red kelly and norm ullman are the only DRW players who played during howe's prime that ever finished ahead of him in hart voting.
i am not entirely sure why larry aurie had his number 6 retired for a while. he was a star, though not a big star, and is not a HHOFer.
i think the reason those players did not have their jerseys retired is that the entire subject was ignored for a long time.
Last edited:
sepster
Gerard Gallant is my Spirit Animal
Delvecchio, Yzerman and Lidstrom played their entire pro careers with the Wings. Howe, Abel, Lindsay and Sawchuck all moved on to other teams after playing for the Wings.
icKx
Vanek 4 Prez
It's not fair to say Lindsay "moved on". He was traded and smeared by the organization in an attempt to undermine the player's union.
Does anyone have any idea how many minutes per game players played in the different eras?
I know that in the late 70s, there were games where Lafleur played 30 minutes.
I know that in the late 70s, there were games where Lafleur played 30 minutes.
very hard to say
when NHL started, players usually played 60 minutes.
in '20s some coaches started using 2 lines so players would be able to play at a higher speed, and it quickly became common. but top players were probably still playing large majority of each game.
i think 3 lines only became common in late '30s. but stars of '30s and '40s were probably playing more than half of many or most games.
it is easy to find references to elite F's like howe, bobby hull, mikita, etc, playing 40 minutes. phil esposito apparently took very long shifts of several minutes even in '70s. those high numbers are probably exaggerated, but i think it is reasonable to think they were playing about 30 minutes.
i think shifts only became short in mid/late '80s. players like gretzky, lemieux, yzerman, etc, sometimes played about 30 minutes.
each team's depth would be a very important factor. in '60s, DRW and chicago had significantly less depth than habs and TML, so howe and hull were probably playing quite a bit more than beliveau and mahovlich.
this thread of scoring during '60s shows that several depth players of habs and TML were scoring as much at ES as some 1st and 2nd liners from weaker teams.
there is also a way of estimating TOI from a player's GF and GA. GF and GA have been recorded since expansion in 1967, and can be seen on hockey-reference.com.
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=58269715&postcount=41
1. Plus minus is a useless statistic in determining anything related to individual performance. Whether comparing individuals on different teams or on the same team. Unless you think Brian Rafalski's +11 while Nicklas Lidstrom was -2 is indicative of something.
2. Skating, you say? Pavel Bure, Alexander Mogilny, Russ Courtnall, Paul Coffey, Mike Gartner, and Paul Kariya were all amazing skaters. How many of them can you say were even GOOD defensively, let alone GREAT.
3. Takeaways. This is a subjective stat to start, so using it in any argument already has a margin of error. Scott Gomez would have a great case for the Selke if takeaways were the only criterion.
4. By your selection of subjective criteria, Mike Fisher is a pretty clear-cut winner for the 2008 Selke. Nobody else comes close. How did everyone get that vote so wrong?
Datsyuk has also typically been better than Z at both not taking penalties as well as drawing penalties.
People tend to laugh off the Lady Byng trophies Datsyuk has won, but it's remarkable that he can play the defensive game he does without taking penalties. The way stick infractions are called post lockout, it's tough to stick check anymore. But he does it so quickly and cleanly that it's never illegal.
Datsyuk is also better in the dot.
People tend to laugh off the Lady Byng trophies Datsyuk has won, but it's remarkable that he can play the defensive game he does without taking penalties. The way stick infractions are called post lockout, it's tough to stick check anymore. But he does it so quickly and cleanly that it's never illegal.
Datsyuk is also better in the dot.
Actually, I do think Lidstrom's -2 was indicative of something. Like I think Kronwall's minus was indicative of something last year.
I'm sure you'd agree that whatever defensive abilities they did have were enhanced by their speed.
Datsyuk makes plays that Zetterberg can't because Zetterberg can't catch guys.
Takeaways are a pretty good stats. By no means are they the be all and end all
But if you watched a lot Red Wings games and thought "Wow, Datsyuk sure does steal a lot of pucks -- more than anyone else" well, these stats back that up.
These are the the only easy to find defensive-ish stats there are.
I agree. It was indicative that Brad Stuart was their partner and was a terrible drain on them.
My point is that the stats themselves are flaws in their collection; it's not "yep, that's definitely a goal". It's subjective in the same way a scorekeeper must decide whether a 95mph fastball that hits the backstop is a wild pitch or a passed ball; there's a margin for error in that not everyone will always make the same decision.
Given that the compiled stat is already flawed, using it to find a conclusion in the manner you suggest is even more flawed.
Hahaha.
Except in both cases, Stuart was a plus player.
Try again Eva
Which is why I included 6 stats over 7 years. One stat by itself is pretty meaningless. With lots of stats, you can start to see trends and greater definition in a picture.
No offense, but you're just doing the old internet arguer bit. Not interested.
Have a great night.
Brick Top
LANA!!!!!
Not the point of your conversation, but you can't pin Kronwall's struggles this year on Stuart. If anything, he covered Kronwall's shortcomings for a few seasons.
based on GA per minute, corsi (which is shot differential, so similar to +/- but with a much, much larger sample size), % starting in offensive zone, quality of competition, and other stats kept by sites like behindthenet.ca and stats.hockeyanalysis.com, datsyuk's main advantage over zetterberg is that datsyuk is a better possession player.
when datsyuk is on the ice, opponents have the puck less. zetterberg is not as good a possession player, so he spends more time in the defensive zone. that is also the main reason datsyuk has usually had better +/-.
less time of possession=more time in defensive zone=more opportunities for defensive errors and more GA=look worse defensively
zetterberg's GA increased after '08, probably b/c of injuries and b/c his lines have not been as good in possession.
zetterberg's GA per 60 minutes (5 on 5)
'08: 1.89
'09: 2.57
'10: 2.78
'11: 2.89
'12: 2.64
datsyuk's GA per 60 minutes (5 on 5)
'08: 1.84
'09: 2.30
'10: 2.03
'11: 2.51
'12: 1.77
i thought '09 would be higher for both. goaltending was a problem in '09 and '11. i am very surprised zetterberg's '10 is higher than '11.
a post from NHL section from a thread about zetterberg before the season started:
a very negative and shocking post from same thread:
when datsyuk is on the ice, opponents have the puck less. zetterberg is not as good a possession player, so he spends more time in the defensive zone. that is also the main reason datsyuk has usually had better +/-.
less time of possession=more time in defensive zone=more opportunities for defensive errors and more GA=look worse defensively
zetterberg's GA increased after '08, probably b/c of injuries and b/c his lines have not been as good in possession.
zetterberg's GA per 60 minutes (5 on 5)
'08: 1.89
'09: 2.57
'10: 2.78
'11: 2.89
'12: 2.64
datsyuk's GA per 60 minutes (5 on 5)
'08: 1.84
'09: 2.30
'10: 2.03
'11: 2.51
'12: 1.77
i thought '09 would be higher for both. goaltending was a problem in '09 and '11. i am very surprised zetterberg's '10 is higher than '11.
a post from NHL section from a thread about zetterberg before the season started:
a very negative and shocking post from same thread:
that poster seems to be relying only on numbers.
Last edited:
These numbers jive with the general perception many of us have noted-in different ways.
The other day, I said I worried about taking Flip of Z's line because Z relied on Flip for his defense more than anything else. I've seen many people agree or make similar assessments.
Yet, at the same time, they get a little put out if you suggest that Z's defense isn't as good as the reputation suggests.
I don't think he's poor. I think he's above average and he's a workhorse. But I think his faceoff ability, inability to play physical, and mostly, his lack of speed, are things that are difficult to overcome
I also think that puck possession and sheer fear of Datsyuk helps Datsyuk.
We see so many Datsyuk shifts where you never even notice the big-name forwards on the ice from the other team. The defense sits back. Everyone is worried about the stickcheck from behind, so many they rush it a little bit.
Datsyuk is probably among the best players in the league at winning board battles too. I don't think people understand how important that it is to a team.
I'm going to reiterate what Ive always stated before regarding comparing who is the better defender between D and Z.
First off, I do think D is the better defender and totally deserved the 3 selkes he won, I even thought he deserved to win it the year before, and some guy published this PDF book factoring in all the advanced stats, and even he came to the conclusion that Datsyuk deserved to win the selke the year before he won 3 in a row. I wish I could find that link for everyone to read.
Regardless, in comparing D and Z and the way they play defense, their styles are completely different, what makes Zetterberg so useful is that he is an awesome 1 on 1 defender due to his shadowing/puckhound ability, and that is why Babcock will still for most part continually use him if he needs to shut down one specific player (ie. Crosby) and in critical PK situations.
Datsyuk on the other hand, is not really a one on one shut down defender, his defense is so unique with the way he stick checks from behind and his ability to knock pucks out of the air, that he basically is a 3-zone defender, which I think is extremely unique for a hockey player.
if you pay careful attention, whenever Datsyuk is on the ice, if the opposition has the puck in their zone and is trying to break out, so often you can see a player hesitate, either because he knows datsyuk is trailing behind him, or if datsyuk is approaching them from the front, because of his ability to knock the puck out of the air a lot of times the player just gets rid of the puck in a horrible manner and the other wings forwards can usually regain possession or at least fight for possession that the opposing team can't really mount an offensive possession and bring it into our zone successfully. That may not seem like defense to some people, but any type of hockey that prevents the other team from bringing the puck into your offensive zone is defense in my opinion.
An easier way to describe it I think is that Datsyuk's defense takes place primarily in the opposings teams zone and the neutral zone, whereas Zetterberg's defense takes place in the defensive zone and on the PK (though I think in the past 2 years Datsyuk is starting to play better than Z in these areas of defense as well). So when you see Zetterberg make a play in our own zone when we are hemmed its really easy to immediately say "oh man what a defensive play by zetterberg, he really stopped a good scoring chance", whereas with Datsyuk when he makes a stop in the other teams zone to regain offensive possession you don't say "man what a defensive play!" because we as fans get immediately excited by the transition back to offense that is what we focus on.
In reality that is defense though by Datsyuk because he is preventing a scoring chance from even taking place in his own zone. I bet if there was a stat for scoring chances taking place against while on the ice, the difference would greatly favor Datsyuk.
First off, I do think D is the better defender and totally deserved the 3 selkes he won, I even thought he deserved to win it the year before, and some guy published this PDF book factoring in all the advanced stats, and even he came to the conclusion that Datsyuk deserved to win the selke the year before he won 3 in a row. I wish I could find that link for everyone to read.
Regardless, in comparing D and Z and the way they play defense, their styles are completely different, what makes Zetterberg so useful is that he is an awesome 1 on 1 defender due to his shadowing/puckhound ability, and that is why Babcock will still for most part continually use him if he needs to shut down one specific player (ie. Crosby) and in critical PK situations.
Datsyuk on the other hand, is not really a one on one shut down defender, his defense is so unique with the way he stick checks from behind and his ability to knock pucks out of the air, that he basically is a 3-zone defender, which I think is extremely unique for a hockey player.
if you pay careful attention, whenever Datsyuk is on the ice, if the opposition has the puck in their zone and is trying to break out, so often you can see a player hesitate, either because he knows datsyuk is trailing behind him, or if datsyuk is approaching them from the front, because of his ability to knock the puck out of the air a lot of times the player just gets rid of the puck in a horrible manner and the other wings forwards can usually regain possession or at least fight for possession that the opposing team can't really mount an offensive possession and bring it into our zone successfully. That may not seem like defense to some people, but any type of hockey that prevents the other team from bringing the puck into your offensive zone is defense in my opinion.
An easier way to describe it I think is that Datsyuk's defense takes place primarily in the opposings teams zone and the neutral zone, whereas Zetterberg's defense takes place in the defensive zone and on the PK (though I think in the past 2 years Datsyuk is starting to play better than Z in these areas of defense as well). So when you see Zetterberg make a play in our own zone when we are hemmed its really easy to immediately say "oh man what a defensive play by zetterberg, he really stopped a good scoring chance", whereas with Datsyuk when he makes a stop in the other teams zone to regain offensive possession you don't say "man what a defensive play!" because we as fans get immediately excited by the transition back to offense that is what we focus on.
In reality that is defense though by Datsyuk because he is preventing a scoring chance from even taking place in his own zone. I bet if there was a stat for scoring chances taking place against while on the ice, the difference would greatly favor Datsyuk.
You see it all the time. He's on the boards, outnumbered, he'll come away with the puck somehow. You are dumbfounded at how consistently he does that. Or when it's a big scrum, he seems to just always know where to be to squirt that puck free and make a play.
The guy just has that *sense* that you can't teach. He knows what the puck is thinking.
These are fine and dandy numbers. But at the same time, we have all established that Z was serving in a shut-down role the past few years while Dats was not. Does it not then follow that Z would likely be on the ice for more goals against as he would be playing against the opposition's best offensive players, while Datsyuk would be playing against the opposition's checking line? And this is also a problem for CORSI and why I have never liked that stat; it lacks context.
Of course one thing that makes pretty obvious why CORSI is an issue is looking at last year's numbers. Filppula was the second-worst regular Red Wing forward in RelCORSI, and Hudler was the 6th-best. Rounding out the top two lines? Datsyuk was first, Zetterberg was third, Franzen was second, and Bertuzzi was fifth. So who was in fourth? Darren Helm, with a 10.6 gap above Filppula (Datsyuk had a 10.1 gap above Helm).
Alexander Steen was second among all forwards with 40+ games, and was 8.4 points ahead of Datsyuk.
Yay for advanced sabremetrics. They've taught use that statistics can be used to reach the conclusions we want to reach, unless it doesn't suit our purpose. I'd like to thank everyone who worked on this project, the fans, the players, and most of all I'd like to reiterate that plus-minus is the most useless statistic in the history of sport, and team-based CORSI for assessing individuals is not far behind because it works on the same premise!
There were all kinds of posts about people being worried about taking Flip off of Z's line because of defense. Anyone who actually watched their line last year or this year would know that Flip is significantly less effective defensively - whether through coaching, player choice, or happenstance - when he is playing on the wing. Some posters seem to actively disregard the idea that Flip last year was playing as an offensive winger who could play decent defense rather than a very good defensive center with some nice offensive tools. Those people wanted to attribute his "center" defense to him, even though he was playing a completely different style of game at a completely different position. Franzen is almost exactly the same story, except he was more of a night-and-day change so it's harder to ignore.
With excellent two-way forwards, people see a dip in scoring and assume that their defense is also not as good. Standard procedure. Or the alternative; a good two way forward suddenly produces 20-30 points higher than expected, and of course he wins the Selke.
Also, some interesting things I found while looking at the CORSI numbers. In 2008, Datsyuk was third in RelCORSI on his LINE. Zetterberg/Datsyuk/Holmstrom was the primary line; Datsyuk had the worst RelCORSI. Also notable; in RelCORSI QoC, Zetterberg is 0.860 while Datsyuk is 0.533 and Holmstrom is 0.502. So according to the stats, Z clearly was playing against the better players more often. Now let's go back to that GA/60 number again. Datsyuk 1.84, Zetterberg 1.89. If Zetterberg is consistently playing against significantly better opponents, that's more than enough to overcome Datsyuk's advantage of allowing one fewer goal every 1200 minutes - or basically one goal per season for a top-line forward. The largest gap using those same GA numbers and 1200 minutes is about 17 goals. The average gap from 2008-09 to present is about 11 goals.
So let's consider something. You have two centers, both of whom are excellent defensively. Over a four-year span, one of them is used in a shut-down role while the other is used as the primary scoring center and plays against offensively weaker opposition. The "shut-down" center ends up being on the ice for an average of 11 goals more per 82 game season, basically an extra goal every seven or eight games. In what universe does the "scoring center" come out as the better defensive player?
And to top it all off...
Zetterberg|2007-08|2.83
Zetterberg|2008-09|2.12
Zetterberg|2009-10|2.29
Zetterberg|2010-11|2.14
Zetterberg|2011-12|2.54
Datsyuk|2007-08|2.76
Datsyuk|2008-09|2.91
Datsyuk|2009-10|2.13
Datsyuk|2010-11|2.72
Datsyuk|2011-12|2.47
Zetterberg wins three of five seasons ahead of the offensive superstar Datsyuk. Like before, this is all ES stats, but it certainly pokes a hole in at least one of the following ideas:
1) Pavel Datsyuk is/was/will be light years ahead of Henrik Zetterberg in offense and defense.
2) CORSI stats are an excellent indication of how good a player is.
DetBigWangs
Registered User
- Dec 15, 2009
- 2,215
- 0
Screw the numbers and the captaincy. It doesn't mean anything. I'd go with:
1 - Did the team have sustained success.
2 - The most integral part(s) to that success from a player perspective.
3 - HOF
Datsyuk and Zetterberg might not be immortalized the way the Abel/Howe/Lindsay era was (but part of me thinks that we just over-romanticize the past anyways), but they fit the bill. They are also the poster children for an era where Detroit sustained success against all odds (parity driven league) by pulling a double coup of franchise players from the nether-regions of the draft. It's a situation that the old timers would never even have imagined.
1 - Did the team have sustained success.
2 - The most integral part(s) to that success from a player perspective.
3 - HOF
Datsyuk and Zetterberg might not be immortalized the way the Abel/Howe/Lindsay era was (but part of me thinks that we just over-romanticize the past anyways), but they fit the bill. They are also the poster children for an era where Detroit sustained success against all odds (parity driven league) by pulling a double coup of franchise players from the nether-regions of the draft. It's a situation that the old timers would never even have imagined.
A few quick problems with your arguments:
1) Is it a surprise that Zetterberg's best offensive season was with Datsyuk? No other season has come close according to your numbers. Meanwhile, that's not the case with Datsyuk.
2) Datsyuk's overall numbers don't truly reflect his offensive play during the 10-11 and 11-12 seasons, due to his broken hand and injured knee. His numbers prior to these injuries were as good as any seasons he's had. He was tied for 4th in league scoring at the time of both injuries. Once he returned his numbers flattened out.
3) You continue to overplay the matchup argument. Look at the quality of competition. It's not as substantial as you keep portraying. Datsyuk plays many minutes against top lines. You argue like he's playing sheltered minutes.
4) I don't know who you defend more: Zetterberg over Datsyuk or Hudler over anyone.
pavel13
Registered User
No doubt Red Kelly was an amazing defenseman, but he played a third of his career as a forward. Not only that, but Eddie Shore and Doug Harvey are widely considered to be the best two defensemen not named Bobby Orr.
More on the subject of Datsyuk, I think it's conceivable that his jersey will be retired. He has enough talent. Longevity is against him. Part of that is getting a late start, developing more slowly than most players of his caliber, part of that is the TWO lockouts he has had to face, and then injuries and possibly going back to Russia after his contract is up.
I think that people using this arbitrary 1000 points benchmark is silly. Datsyuk is better than plenty of players that hit the 1000 point mark. 1000 points used to be something that only the greats accomplished. Then the 80s happened. And now, scoring is significantly lower than it was back then, and players aren't going to be getting to four figures like they used to. Especially with lockouts every six or so years. If Datsyuk were a purely offensive player, 1000 points might be an ok threshold. He's won three Selkes and was a Hart finalist.
datsyuk and zetterberg have had basically equal matchups for the last couple of seasons, and it has not really changed their numbers much. zetterberg's opposition has probably become easier, and datsyuk's more difficult.
why do you think their GA numbers have diverged so much since '08? why do you think zetterberg over last few seasons is toward the bottom of all F's in GA/60 minutes?
i don't think anyone has ever suggested point 1. they are similar players.
corsi is not a measurement of how good a player is, but it is very useful. shot differential is probably the best indicator of how good a team is. i don't think there is anything wrong with comparing corsi of players in very similar roles.
but your overall argument here seems like a double standard. you said that datsyuk faces checking lines whereas zetterberg faces top scorers (which is not really true, as i mentioned earlier. and many teams, particularly in west, use their scoring lines as checking lines). datsyuk also faces top d-men more often, which are the primary defensive players. if zetterberg's higher GA can be explained by tougher opposition, datsyuk's sometimes lower GF would also be explained by tougher opposition.
imo, zetterberg should have won in '08 and kesler should have won in '10. i think pahlsson should have won in '07. selke is a highly based on reputation, though, probably more than any other award.
analysis you are looking for is probably by alan ryder. http://hockeyanalytics.com/2007/09/2007-nhl-review/
agree
that is also why they were so effective together.
datsyuk focuses too much on the puck, probably b/c datsyuk is more offensive minded than defensive minded, and b/c he has become so good at stealing pucks (by far the best i have ever seen).
agree
puck possession is a very important part of D. i once read a newspaper report on 1935 finals, in which montreal maroons upset TML. jimmy ward, a 2 way RW, said that they checked best when they made TML play in their own end.
more time in defensive zone=more opportunities for errors and GA, but also more opportunities for good defensive plays. so a player could look really good defensively, but get scored on a lot more than someone who looks worse defensively, but spends less time in the defensive zone.
FissionFire
Registered User
You basically have to get into the HHOF to get a banner with the Wings (see Aurie). I'm not sure Datsyuk is a lock for the HHOF.
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
-
-
Series Winner Boston Bruins vs Toronto Maple LeafsWagers: 5Staked: $1,322.00Event closes
- Updated:
-