Roster speculation XVIII - We're getting closer to things happening!

[Ace]

Who is the fifth player?

 

[Husko]

Eh, has Ward ever shown the ability to fill in at multiple forward positions, namely center? He's always seemed like a RW in my memory.

Perhaps it is time to swing back around to the comments made by members of the personnel dept. when Zemgus was drafted, that some see him more as a pro style winger. In a middle-6 role? Sure. Focus him on that, work on what they want from him in those situations and let others deal with playing in the middle now that they have a couple more options.

Or trade him. Whichever path, I'm fine with it.

My short-list of "do not moves" is five players at the moment. Everything else could be in play.

Who is the fifth?

 

[Jame]

Eh, has Ward ever shown the ability to fill in at multiple forward positions, namely center? He's always seemed like a RW in my memory.

To me versatility is more about being able to play 1st line scoring with elite talent, and being able to play bottom 6, dzone starts, with lesser talent. So yes, he's been able to play multiple forward positions, but that doesn't mean center.

Has Ward been a center, I don't think so. I know he can take faceoffs though...

Perhaps it is time to swing back around to the comments made by members of the personnel dept. when Zemgus was drafted, that some see him more as a pro style winger. In a middle-6 role? Sure. Focus him on that, work on what they want from him in those situations and let others deal with playing in the middle now that they have a couple more options.

Agreed. And I think that decision has been made.

Or trade him. Whichever path, I'm fine with it.

My short-list of "do not moves" is five players at the moment. Everything else could be in play.

Who is your 5th?

 

[Chainshot]

Who is the fifth player?

Who is the fifth?

Typo while making lunch. I have O'Reilly, Eichel, Reinhart and Ristolainen. That's all. Now back to making the kids some sandwiches.

 

[N.Y. Orangeman]

#5 is the LHD we acquire/draft with the #8 this year...

 

[RhinoFan]

Sorry if already brought up but saw on another board some articles about Pegula's knowing Chychrun (and vice versa) since he grew up 3 miles away in Boca Raton. Seems as though we may be leaning towards him based on that and Murray mentioning him as well in interviews. Anyone think that their prior relationship will shape our decision? AKA do you folks think Pegula's would have a say, more than the typical suggestion regarding young Jacob? He is dropping out of the top 10 in a lot of mocks...is this smart if so?

 

[OkimLom]

Sorry if already brought up but saw on another board some articles about Pegula's knowing Chychrun (and vice versa) since he grew up 3 miles away in Boca Raton. Seems as though we may be leaning towards him based on that and Murray mentioning him as well in interviews. Anyone think that their prior relationship will shape our decision? AKA do you folks think Pegula's would have a say, more than the typical suggestion regarding young Jacob? He is dropping out of the top 10 in a lot of mocks...is this smart if so?

What legitimate mocks is Chychrun dropping out of the top 10?

Only way it helps is that it gives the Sabres an insight to the type of character Chychrun is off the ice. It most likely will have the same impact as having Luke Richardson as his uncle.

 

[flashsabre]

Sorry if already brought up but saw on another board some articles about Pegula's knowing Chychrun (and vice versa) since he grew up 3 miles away in Boca Raton. Seems as though we may be leaning towards him based on that and Murray mentioning him as well in interviews. Anyone think that their prior relationship will shape our decision? AKA do you folks think Pegula's would have a say, more than the typical suggestion regarding young Jacob? He is dropping out of the top 10 in a lot of mocks...is this smart if so?

Owners always have a say and usually the final say if they want it. I think Chychrun is high on Murray's list anyways so there is no big deal there.

 

[Husko]

Sorry if already brought up but saw on another board some articles about Pegula's knowing Chychrun (and vice versa) since he grew up 3 miles away in Boca Raton. Seems as though we may be leaning towards him based on that and Murray mentioning him as well in interviews. Anyone think that their prior relationship will shape our decision? AKA do you folks think Pegula's would have a say, more than the typical suggestion regarding young Jacob? He is dropping out of the top 10 in a lot of mocks...is this smart if so?

No .

 

[Heraldic]

And this is where we need to differentiate between getting in on the forecheck via speed (Strength for Girgs), and sustaining possession through that forecheck (not a strength of his). As well as, the speed to backcheck, and the IQ to take the correct line, player, lane (dubious choices throughout the season).

Then we truly have different perspective here. I absolutely think that Girgs did a lot more good decisions and defensive plays than the opposite. And I'm really surprised, that if a player plays 900 minutes, makes as much mistakes and errors as indicated, and still all the relevant metrics shows he had a clearly positive impact.

I mean, at the moment we really cannot dig up into actual in-game material (or at least I'm not that obsessed with this topic )

Probably because you just invented it as a straw man argument

It's because pretty much every time I see you talking about defense, it's the positioning. While defensive game is a sum of many aspects, positioning being only one of those. Josh Gorges is really sound positionally, but that only gets him so far.

And he was 8th out of 10 forwards with 40 games in QOC.

You actually think that QOC here is the right metric and not Rel QOC?

You might remember when we had this same conversation where Stokes stood exactly where you are now...

Larsson was 7th and Girgs 8th Rel QoC.

a wide variety of usage/roles/QOC muddy the overall picture, especially within a small sample size.

So you think 900 minutes is a small sample size? I hope that in the future you remember that when you try to back up your claims using these stats...

And you do notice that Girgs GA60 number was lower with Eichel than without him? And you do notice that Girgs played his most minutes without Eichel as the shutdown center? Like it has been demonstrated, Girgs had better impact on pretty much every player he played compared to stats.

Larsson is significantly better defensively. That hasn't changed. It's been validated.

You have now kept saying that a whole season. But I have failed to see a single attempt from you to actually validate it. Now it's your chance to actually back it with some meat. I'm guessing you're just going to dismiss it by referring to some past conversations rather than actually doing the leg work (like you have done so far).

Did he show improvement? Something materially more than not playing in a non existent Nolan system? We talked about his speed to get in on the forecheck, I wouldn't call that an improvement, that's his game. We've talked about his effort/motor/backcheck... improvement? No, those are attributes and abilities we knew he had. Did his playmaking improve? Nope. Did his ability as a center improve? Nope, he lost that spot. Did his scoring improve? Nope. Did his work around the net and below the goalline imprve? Nope.

His ability as a center certainly improved. As a center he did better job defensively than any other player on this team. Also possession wise. His defensive and possession game was leaps ahead last season in terms of consistency. He also showed to be able to clearly support his center as a winger. On his rookie season he didn't have as clear overall impact on his linemates. It was more about him using his attributes "alone".

His offense didn't improve too much. I think there is a clear consensus on that. But I think we have addressed this topic. And when we did, Stokes was standing there where you're, and you were standing the other side. Funny how it goes.

Do I think that's the final word? No. I expect development from young players. And a lack of particular development at his age in a new system is concerning, but not the end of the story by any means.

I'm not dealing in back and white, that's a track that homers/haters take...

Nice dodge.

I am saying that his development was impacted by moving to a structured system from an unstructured system.

I am saying he didn't do enough to lock down one of the many open roster spots that he was given a chance to lock down (3C, RORWing, EICHWing PK, PP).

Interesting you see it that way...

I see it that Girgs was doing a really good job as the shutdown center. The problem was that Eichel didn't work with Kane and Larsson was simply ineffective as a winger. Girgs was switched as a winger for Eichel, and they worked well. Larsson worked well with Foligno and Gionta. Why would you remove Larsson from the only position and role he has shown to be effective? Larsson "having a defined role", is simply saying that Larsson isn't effective on any other role. The difference between Larsson and Girgs as a winger is far more greater than it is as a winger. That is positive for Girgs, not a negative (like you indicate it).

And he will be under the same microscope next year. I'd like to see him lock down a spot on Eichel's line. That's where he was far and away at his best.

As a shutdown center he was the best player goal prevention and possession wise. As Eichel's winger he had bigger impact offensively AND defensively than any other player on the team. Actually, his impact was better than Reinhart (Eichel allowed more goals against and generated less with Reinhart than with Girgs). Yeah, small sample size or some nonsense like that, right?

He's a winger, not a center.
He's a starter, not a finisher.

He has shown to be effective on both positions. Unlike Larsson for example. He's a center or winger, it depends.

The remaining question is whether with the experience he gained this year, and the right opportunity next year (Eichel Wing), will he show enough development that will convince the objective observers that he's something more than a Darren Helm.

With his size and reach alone he brings more than Helm. And I haven't noticed Helm being able to support his linemates offensively same way as Girgs. But in terms of defensive game and versatility, there is a point.

There's nothing wrong with Darren Helm (I'd like to sign him). But he's a 4th liner who can step up the lineup in short windows. However, if Girgs is going to be closer to Darren Helm than a key top 9 forward, than cashing in on his perceived trade value (if it exists) would be a move of foresight.

So you see Girgs as a 4th liner who can step up for short windows?

And you question Girgs having trade value?

I want Girgs to play with Eichel. I want him to use his speed to the forecheck and continually generate possession and scoring opportunities for his significantly more talented linemates. I want him to be the defensive consciousness of his line, which will require a significant improvement in his offensive zone awareness. Because the speed to get to the backcheck is one thing, but on ice awareness is another. I want him to pot 20 goals... I want most of them to be dirty, net front, 2nd chance opportunities.

Larsson cannot play effectively on any other position or role than as a shutdown center. His offense is not enough for a top-6 role and he's too small and slow to be a winger in NHL. And Reinhart as well might be a center next year.

So I see Girgs being presumably a winger. But in case of injuries or needing to match the shutdown duty against a bigger center, I see Girgs being used as a shutdown center time to time. To have a player like that is absolutely an asset. You cannot use Larsson as a supportive player for Eichel bringing speed and physicality.

I think he can get there. But he's not close based on this year.

So you basically need him to improve his individual offense? I mean, you don't actually think he did a bad job by supporting Eichel's offense?

I want him to be a 40ish point power/speed/motor element for the more talented guys he should be surrounded with. I want him to be a top 6 pain in the ass.

...and being able to have shutdown center duties if needed.

Me too. And outside of his individual offense and certain anecdotal mistakes (which surround basically every player on this league), he did a pretty good job there.

Maybe one can see that the root of Nolan's system is "effort". Girgs is without a doubt a hard worker and provides that effort. However, some people on the boards confused good defensive play and effort as one in the same, which is not 100% true.

So just by coincidence he happened to have the team's best GA/60 number, and he happened to improve pretty much every player's number he played with?

Under Bylsma's system, Girgensons had to stick to skating lanes, learning how to "funnel" guys toward one side of the ice or the other to force a pass where they want him to, or if he wasn't the first one in, learn how to read where the puck was going.

Now that he had some direction of where to go with and without the puck he faltered consistently trying to understand that, as was evidenced by the multiple times he ran into either his own guys or covered the same ice as some of his teammates even though as a winger he needed to be somewhere else. He was showing signs of a player who was very slow in NHL standards in THINKING the game and decision making. He performed very well with Eichel because Eichel is more of a "off the cuff" type of player. Girgensons was able to get to play a more "reaction" to the play kind of game that effort was the key to the play.

I simply cannot agree to statements like "faltered consistently". This is sounding like you're confusing Cody Hodgson's defensive play with Girgs.

I saw him several times breaking the possession and starting a rush by his ability to shield the puck with his reach, and give an outlet pass to the player. His line didn't really generate too much quality scoring chances, but his possession numbers are a result of him being able to push the game towards opponents end.

And like it has been demonstrated, Girgs was the team's best forward shot suppression wise. I really don't know how a player who, allegedly, consistently falters, makes poor reads etc. is able to do that. Small sample size?

When he had a role that called for him to stick to the system and make decisions whether it was skating lanes or staying with this man in an area of the ice , he faltered. When he could "just play hockey" and didn't worry about making decisions based on the system, he thrived.

You mean that he faltered as shutdown-center? You realize he had the teams best goal prevention and possession numbers on that role? And he had crappy linemates to do that.

Different systems. Different questions about IQ.

Care to elaborate a bit? How did you saw his IQ compared to last year?

And yes, Girgs was overrated going in to this year. You can dig the threads up yourself projecting his 50 and 60 point seasons to come.

Yeah, many were too high on his offense. But it was about his defense, specifically.

Yes, Larsson is significantly better defensively. I think that is plain obvious at this point. But I understand there are some data points uncontextualized for role variation, time of season, etc that support the opposite argument. I'll play the long game on this one. Larsson will continue to grow as an already fantastic defensive/checking line center. Girgs will either make it as a top 6 glue/chem guy... or top out as a Helm-ish bottom 6 forward.

So it's plain obvious but you don't have any data to support that? And the opposite data can be dismissed for the reasons you mentioned?

You have also advocated giving Larsson 8 year deal with 3,5 cap hit... When he actually got a one year deal worth less than a million. You also said that Larsson is already a better player than Marcus Krüger. While Larsson has now gotten two contracts less than Krüger got at the same time (with inflated cap), and Krüger, by the way, was selected to the Team Sweden WC team, while Larsson wasn't. Larsson wasn't either invited to the World Championship team this spring.

And to the bolded. So Girgs might top out as a 4th liner being able to play upper on the lineup for short windows? What that makes him at the moment, then?

I'm not sold on those statements... yet.

Meaning exactly what?

I would disagree with the bolded. Post possession, cycle were not good this year. his ability to win the boards and gain possession is definitely a strong suit.

Yeah, his confidence was clearly down, and he didn't have the same kind of calmness with the puck than the previous season. You think that it will stay like that?

but probably not

Probably. But he is a good (not great) passer enough and has speed and hands good enough to drive the game. He just doesn't have the creativity or playmaking ability.

 

[RhinoFan]

What legitimate mocks is Chychrun dropping out of the top 10?

Only way it helps is that it gives the Sabres an insight to the type of character Chychrun is off the ice. It most likely will have the same impact as having Luke Richardson as his uncle.

Depends what you consider to be legitimate. I just go by what I see as average. Chychrun's average was much higher at the start of the year than now for sure. Just my examples below, not saying that they are all like this. A lot of them have Chychrun now at 7-9 but have been seeing more 10-12.

http://www.csnchicago.com/chicago-b...-nhl-mock-draft-early-first-round-predictions

http://www.csnne.com/gallery/boston-bruins/Haggerty-2016-NHL-Mock-Draft-2-0

Edit: May have more to do with Jost and Brown moving up than Chychrun falling at this point.

 

[RhinoFan]

Thanks for the responses folks, back to lurking.

 

[Yatzhee]

Both players have versatility and plus skating ability. Result vs. style -- I'm not big on direct player comparisons because it gets into this sort of thing.

If Murray decides to trade him, fine. If not, then they need to figure out what sort of player they want him to be and work with him to fill that role.

A lot of what Jame posted is where I'm at. I don't dislike Girgs and yes,I fully see his skill sets, raw as they are. I'm looking at it from a better the team overall view. I know it's not popular opinion, but one thing is generally understood, Girgs has value. I don't see any reason he wouldn't fetch a nice D piece, in a package or stand alone to a degree.

We'll see what happens over this off season, if he's still here, no biggy, if not, also no biggy.

 

[Zman5778]

I think Chychrun is high on Murray's list anyways so there is no big deal there.

Murray is aggressive. Murray likes to get what he wants.

I wonder........you hear rumblings about Buffalo being interested in Edmonton's 4th overall pick...................most assume it's Tkachuk we're after.

Murray said at the end of the year that he has prospects 4 thru 12 rated equally.

There's rumblings of Murray and Bylsma not being big Pysyk fans.

I wonder...........would Murray trade up to #4 not for Tkachuk but for Chychrun?

NOTE: this isn't some "fantasy" of mine.....this isn't me advocating for it. This is simply me saying that I wouldn't be shocked.

 

[Heraldic]

Murray is aggressive. Murray likes to get what he wants.

I wonder........you hear rumblings about Buffalo being interested in Edmonton's 4th overall pick...................most assume it's Tkachuk we're after.

Murray said at the end of the year that he has prospects 4 thru 12 rated equally.

There's rumblings of Murray and Bylsma not being big Pysyk fans.

I wonder...........would Murray trade up to #4 not for Tkachuk but for Chychrun?

NOTE: this isn't some "fantasy" of mine.....this isn't me advocating for it. This is simply me saying that I wouldn't be shocked.

If they're actually giving an asset like Pysyk to move up, they certainly see difference between players 4-12. You don't trade up for the sake of being able to pick between equal pieces.

 

[Zman5778]

If they're actually giving an asset like Pysyk to move up, they certainly see difference between players 4-12. You don't trade up for the sake of being able to pick between equal pieces.

Maybe it's changed? I dunno. Yay offseason brain.

 

[sabrebuild]

Then we truly have different perspective here. I absolutely think that Girgs did a lot more good decisions and defensive plays than the opposite. And I'm really surprised, that if a player plays 900 minutes, makes as much mistakes and errors as indicated, and still all the relevant metrics shows he had a clearly positive impact.

I mean, at the moment we really cannot dig up into actual in-game material (or at least I'm not that obsessed with this topic )



It's because pretty much every time I see you talking about defense, it's the positioning. While defensive game is a sum of many aspects, positioning being only one of those. Josh Gorges is really sound positionally, but that only gets him so far.



You actually think that QOC here is the right metric and not Rel QOC?

You might remember when we had this same conversation where Stokes stood exactly where you are now...

Larsson was 7th and Girgs 8th Rel QoC.



So you think 900 minutes is a small sample size? I hope that in the future you remember that when you try to back up your claims using these stats...

And you do notice that Girgs GA60 number was lower with Eichel than without him? And you do notice that Girgs played his most minutes without Eichel as the shutdown center? Like it has been demonstrated, Girgs had better impact on pretty much every player he played compared to stats.



You have now kept saying that a whole season. But I have failed to see a single attempt from you to actually validate it. Now it's your chance to actually back it with some meat. I'm guessing you're just going to dismiss it by referring to some past conversations rather than actually doing the leg work (like you have done so far).



His ability as a center certainly improved. As a center he did better job defensively than any other player on this team. Also possession wise. His defensive and possession game was leaps ahead last season in terms of consistency. He also showed to be able to clearly support his center as a winger. On his rookie season he didn't have as clear overall impact on his linemates. It was more about him using his attributes "alone".

His offense didn't improve too much. I think there is a clear consensus on that. But I think we have addressed this topic. And when we did, Stokes was standing there where you're, and you were standing the other side. Funny how it goes.

Do I think that's the final word? No. I expect development from young players. And a lack of particular development at his age in a new system is concerning, but not the end of the story by any means.



Nice dodge.





Interesting you see it that way...

I see it that Girgs was doing a really good job as the shutdown center. The problem was that Eichel didn't work with Kane and Larsson was simply ineffective as a winger. Girgs was switched as a winger for Eichel, and they worked well. Larsson worked well with Foligno and Gionta. Why would you remove Larsson from the only position and role he has shown to be effective? Larsson "having a defined role", is simply saying that Larsson isn't effective on any other role. The difference between Larsson and Girgs as a winger is far more greater than it is as a winger. That is positive for Girgs, not a negative (like you indicate it).



As a shutdown center he was the best player goal prevention and possession wise. As Eichel's winger he had bigger impact offensively AND defensively than any other player on the team. Actually, his impact was better than Reinhart (Eichel allowed more goals against and generated less with Reinhart than with Girgs). Yeah, small sample size or some nonsense like that, right?



He has shown to be effective on both positions. Unlike Larsson for example. He's a center or winger, it depends.



With his size and reach alone he brings more than Helm. And I haven't noticed Helm being able to support his linemates offensively same way as Girgs. But in terms of defensive game and versatility, there is a point.



So you see Girgs as a 4th liner who can step up for short windows?

And you question Girgs having trade value?



Larsson cannot play effectively on any other position or role than as a shutdown center. His offense is not enough for a top-6 role and he's too small and slow to be a winger in NHL. And Reinhart as well might be a center next year.

So I see Girgs being presumably a winger. But in case of injuries or needing to match the shutdown duty against a bigger center, I see Girgs being used as a shutdown center time to time. To have a player like that is absolutely an asset. You cannot use Larsson as a supportive player for Eichel bringing speed and physicality.



So you basically need him to improve his individual offense? I mean, you don't actually think he did a bad job by supporting Eichel's offense?



...and being able to have shutdown center duties if needed.

Me too. And outside of his individual offense and certain anecdotal mistakes (which surround basically every player on this league), he did a pretty good job there.



So just by coincidence he happened to have the team's best GA/60 number, and he happened to improve pretty much every player's number he played with?



I simply cannot agree to statements like "faltered consistently". This is sounding like you're confusing Cody Hodgson's defensive play with Girgs.

I saw him several times breaking the possession and starting a rush by his ability to shield the puck with his reach, and give an outlet pass to the player. His line didn't really generate too much quality scoring chances, but his possession numbers are a result of him being able to push the game towards opponents end.

And like it has been demonstrated, Girgs was the team's best forward shot suppression wise. I really don't know how a player who, allegedly, consistently falters, makes poor reads etc. is able to do that. Small sample size?



You mean that he faltered as shutdown-center? You realize he had the teams best goal prevention and possession numbers on that role? And he had crappy linemates to do that.



Care to elaborate a bit? How did you saw his IQ compared to last year?



Yeah, many were too high on his offense. But it was about his defense, specifically.



So it's plain obvious but you don't have any data to support that? And the opposite data can be dismissed for the reasons you mentioned?

You have also advocated giving Larsson 8 year deal with 3,5 cap hit... When he actually got a one year deal worth less than a million. You also said that Larsson is already a better player than Marcus Krüger. While Larsson has now gotten two contracts less than Krüger got at the same time (with inflated cap), and Krüger, by the way, was selected to the Team Sweden WC team, while Larsson wasn't. Larsson wasn't either invited to the World Championship team this spring.

And to the bolded. So Girgs might top out as a 4th liner being able to play upper on the lineup for short windows? What that makes him at the moment, then?



Meaning exactly what?



Yeah, his confidence was clearly down, and he didn't have the same kind of calmness with the puck than the previous season. You think that it will stay like that?



Probably. But he is a good (not great) passer enough and has speed and hands good enough to drive the game. He just doesn't have the creativity or playmaking ability.

Agree with a lot of this. I saw a fair amount of improvement in girgs d game this season. I still saw offensive flashes and his output was limited by injuries and bylsma.

I find it disingenuous to claim that bylsma is an idiot for player usage all season, and then use a player's lack of holding down a specific position or role as an indictment against that player.

Girgs has plenty of issues to work on, as all players his age do. But even this version of girgs is a very useful player on a championship team.

With minor improvement he will be a legit driver on a top 9 line. Not an elite player, but forceful depth stud. He certainly is not someone whose development is in danger.

If he gets traded for an lhd, that better not be a miss. Because girgs is someone i want on my team in the playoffs.

Larsson is good too.

 

[joshjull]

Maybe one can see that the root of Nolan's system is "effort". Girgs is without a doubt a hard worker and provides that effort. However, some people on the boards confused good defensive play and effort as one in the same, which is not 100% true.

Under Bylsma's system, Girgensons had to stick to skating lanes, learning how to "funnel" guys toward one side of the ice or the other to force a pass where they want him to, or if he wasn't the first one in, learn how to read where the puck was going.

As someone who is a coach and has implemented various systems. I get a kick out of the pseudo coaches who explain why we don't understand something but are wrong in their own understanding.

Systems don't have "skating lanes". So no, Girgs was not told to stick to "skating lanes" by Disco. Angles and lanes to the puck are how players attack a particular situation based on their reading of it. Its a fluid thing and not some set in stone stone path that a system dictates and a coach tells a player to stick to.

Also the whole "funneling" thing is a head scratcher. Every coach from youth hockey on up teaches players to keep the opposition to the outside and take away the middle when defending. They also teach them to then close the gap once the opposing player is taken to the outside. Its not something a NHL coach needs to tell any NHL player to do.

You may want to learn about these topics a bit more before lecturing posters that they're confusing hustling with good defense.

Now that he had some direction of where to go with and without the puck he faltered consistently trying to understand that, as was evidenced by the multiple times he ran into either his own guys or covered the same ice as some of his teammates even though as a winger he needed to be somewhere else. He was showing signs of a player who was very slow in NHL standards in THINKING the game and decision making.

What nonsense.

He performed very well with Eichel because Eichel is more of a "off the cuff" type of player. Girgensons was able to get to play a more "reaction" to the play kind of game that effort was the key to the play.

Another flawed understanding of a situation. In order to play off player like Eichel you have to be able to READ the play and then react. Its not simply running around with effort after something happens. Its actually harder, not easier, to play with a guy like Eichel. who is as creatively unpredictable as he is. Because if playing with Eichel is as you described, simply running around with effort, then Kane would have been fantastic with him.

When he had a role that called for him to stick to the system and make decisions whether it was skating lanes or staying with this man in an area of the ice , he faltered. When he could "just play hockey" and didn't worry about making decisions based on the system, he thrived.

The funniest part about the efforts to paint Girgs as this moron that can't play well in a system is using his defensive game to make the argument. Since the exact opposite was true. He actually was very good defensively and the numbers back that up. What he struggled with was his offensive game. If that was the focus of your criticism. That he can't create offense in a structured system and he needs to be allowed to "just play hockey" to create offense. Then you'd actually make some sense.

The biggest difference (and disappointment) between Girgs last season and this season was his struggles offensively. He played roughly 4mins less minutes overall and less at ES offensive situations. It led to his offensive confidence dropping off. You saw it in shots he passed up on the PP. His shooting % went from 13% to 6.4%. If he was at 13% again he would have doubled his goals. Though its too early to say which percentage should be the norm. One thing is for certain, he needs to learn to have offensive confidence in a limited role. Or at least in one where he's not getting the minutes he got in 14-15 because thats not happening again.

 

[dotcommunism]

Maybe it's changed? I dunno. Yay offseason brain.

I would think their draft board now doesn't look the way that it did a couple of months ago, or whenever that interview was. It'll look even more different after this weekend as a result of combine testing and, probably more importantly, getting the chance to interview guys.

 

[Heraldic]

Maybe it's changed? I dunno. Yay offseason brain.

If they trade up, it certainly has changed.

Would it be a good or a bad thing? I think it depends how much fate you have in them evaluating wise.

Personally I would have very mixed feelings. It could be Murray trading up for "Karlsson" or "Perry". Or it could be a trade where we get pretty much no clear benefit but we just lose an asset.

 

[Heraldic]

I think that this narrative about there being some kind of confusion between "effort" or "high motor" and good defense is really funny.

I mean, it is usually brought up by certain posters regarding Girgs. But if there actually were so many people confusing "effort" or "high motor" for good defense, why isn't there any poster praising Deslauriers' defensive game? Or even Ennis'? McGinn's?

 

[sba]

I am waning on the Hecht compare. Hecht had elite hockey IQ, in all areas of the ice, w/puck and w/o puck, wing or center. I would say this season introduced doubt in Girgs natural Hockey IQ. Could it be the system/change etc? Yea. Could it also be that he's not naturally hockey smart? Yea. It could be that too. I don't know yet, and I expect it will be a strong topic for this coming season.

Good post...I thought he blew a lot of cycling plays with 15/23 because of not reading plays correctly. I don't think he thinks the game at a very high level, which works great in a Ted Nolan system, but not so much in a Bylsma system.

 

[Jame]

Then we truly have different perspective here. I absolutely think that Girgs did a lot more good decisions and defensive plays than the opposite. And I'm really surprised, that if a player plays 900 minutes, makes as much mistakes and errors as indicated, and still all the relevant metrics shows he had a clearly positive impact.

Yes. We do.

And yes, I think looking at the metrics as a 900 minute whole misses the mark in terms of judging defensive hockey.

Girgs was the 3rd line center from game 5-14 of the season with Moulson, Gionta, and Foligno as wingers. But at this stage of the season, they were not deployed in the defensive manner to which Larsson was used throughout the 2nd half of the season. At this stage of the year ROR line was utilized in heavy shutdown role. And the Legwand line was getting the scraps of those defensive zone draws.

from around game 15 thru game 30 Larsson and Gigs did some flip flopping at center, as a tandem, or 1 of them with Eichel... tough to judge this period as it was the most "line shuffley" of the year.

But from game 30 on Larsson was the 3rd line center. period. And Girgs practically never played center again (aside from 2 games Larsson missed with injury).

Interestingly, when ROR was injured, it was Larsson's line that moved up in shifts... and Girgensons didn't even move to 3rd line center. COR got that job, and Girgs remained on the wing, on the 3rd line.

Girgensons spent a LOT of time this year... getting easy minutes. That's the facts.

Your attempts to position the metrics differently, simply don't float.

It's because pretty much every time I see you talking about defense, it's the positioning. While defensive game is a sum of many aspects, positioning being only one of those. Josh Gorges is really sound positionally, but that only gets him so far.

look closer.

You actually think that QOC here is the right metric and not Rel QOC?

I think all QOC metrics are relevant. But I understand people like to pick and choose them as needed.

So you think 900 minutes is a small sample size? I hope that in the future you remember that when you try to back up your claims using these stats...

No i think using a 900 minute metric and pretending it represents a shutdown role when 80% of the players season was not in that role... is a poor representation of a sample.

And you do notice that Girgs GA60 number was lower with Eichel than without him? And you do notice that Girgs played his most minutes without Eichel as the shutdown center? Like it has been demonstrated, Girgs had better impact on pretty much every player he played compared to stats.

You do notice that I've strongly advocated for Girgensons to play on Eichel's wing?

You have now kept saying that a whole season. But I have failed to see a single attempt from you to actually validate it. Now it's your chance to actually back it with some meat. I'm guessing you're just going to dismiss it by referring to some past conversations rather than actually doing the leg work (like you have done so far).

I'm not attempting to validate it. Not interested in changing anyone's mind. The fact's will become clear. I'm not going to bang my head against walls.

His ability as a center certainly improved. As a center he did better job defensively than any other player on this team. Also possession wise. His defensive and possession game was leaps ahead last season in terms of consistency. He also showed to be able to clearly support his center as a winger. On his rookie season he didn't have as clear overall impact on his linemates. It was more about him using his attributes "alone".

The simply confirms that you've been staring at 900 minute metrics to convince yourself of something that didn't happen.

His offense didn't improve too much. I think there is a clear consensus on that. But I think we have addressed this topic. And when we did, Stokes was standing there where you're, and you were standing the other side. Funny how it goes.

It's not surprising that you can't differentiate the positions.

Nice dodge.

It's not a dodge.

Interesting you see it that way...

I see it that Girgs was doing a really good job as the shutdown center. The problem was that Eichel didn't work with Kane and Larsson was simply ineffective as a winger.

Of course you do... but that's not the reality. Not only was his time as a shutdown center very short, but it wasn't nearly as "shotdown-esque" as the role became after Larsson took it over.

Girgs was switched as a winger for Eichel, and they worked well. Larsson worked well with Foligno and Gionta. Why would you remove Larsson from the only position and role he has shown to be effective?

You would leave the better defensive center in the defensive center role... obviously.

Larsson "having a defined role", is simply saying that Larsson isn't effective on any other role.

No. It's a simple fact that Larsson has locked down an NHL role. Girgensons floated around the lineup for the remainder of the year... because he hasn't

The difference between Larsson and Girgs as a winger is far more greater than it is as a winger. That is positive for Girgs, not a negative (like you indicate it).

No. I think the are relatively the same. Larsson is a better center, Girgs is a better winger. Which is why you will continue to see them in those roles... and you'll continue to make up nonsense to explain it away.

As a shutdown center he was the best player goal prevention and possession wise.

Nope. But untill you separate the metrics by role, time of year, competition, and linemates better, don't waste my time.

As Eichel's winger he had bigger impact offensively AND defensively than any other player on the team. Actually, his impact was better than Reinhart (Eichel allowed more goals against and generated less with Reinhart than with Girgs). Yeah, small sample size or some nonsense like that, right?

How many times do I need to say "Girgensons should be stapled to Eichel's wing" ?

He has shown to be effective on both positions. Unlike Larsson for example. He's a center or winger, it depends.

No. Girgs has not shown that. You can keep saying it. And you can keep presenting metrics largely accrued while playing wing. Makes no difference to me.

With his size and reach alone he brings more than Helm. And I haven't noticed Helm being able to support his linemates offensively same way as Girgs. But in terms of defensive game and versatility, there is a point.S o you see Girgs as a 4th liner who can step up for short windows?

I think I've been pretty clear. If you want to try to pin my position into one easier for you to criticize, that's on you. I don't care.

Larsson cannot play effectively on any other position or role than as a shutdown center.

I don't mind that this narrative exists. It's understandable. I think it's empty.

His offense is not enough for a top-6 role and he's too small and slow to be a winger in NHL. And Reinhart as well might be a center next year.

1.51 v 1.73 that's the career difference in Larsson/Girgensons ES production... Given that it is undeniable that Girgensons has had more offensive opportunity and better offensive linemates overall, i find the narrative utterly hilarious.

So I see Girgs being presumably a winger. But in case of injuries or needing to match the shutdown duty against a bigger center, I see Girgs being used as a shutdown center time to time. To have a player like that is absolutely an asset. You cannot use Larsson as a supportive player for Eichel bringing speed and physicality.

Girgs will be primarily a winger, because that's what his skill set dictates.

So you basically need him to improve his individual offense? I mean, you don't actually think he did a bad job by supporting Eichel's offense?

I need him to improve everywhere. And that's what I expect next year, in a defined role that fits his skills.

...and being able to have shutdown center duties if needed.

Well, when it was needed later in the year... they didn't go to Girgs. Which would speak volumes to you... if you were listening.

Care to elaborate a bit? How did you saw his IQ compared to last year?Yeah, many were too high on his offense. But it was about his defense, specifically.

His defense isn't as good as Larsson's and it's why he's playing wing.

You have also advocated giving Larsson 8 year deal with 3,5 cap hit... When he actually got a one year deal worth less than a million. You also said that Larsson is already a better player than Marcus Krüger. While Larsson has now gotten two contracts less than Krüger got at the same time (with inflated cap), and Krüger, by the way, was selected to the Team Sweden WC team, while Larsson wasn't. Larsson wasn't either invited to the World Championship team this spring.

And we just saw Cizikas get a 3.35 per deal.

As usual, your foresight on contracts is generally terrible.

And to the bolded. So Girgs might top out as a 4th liner being able to play upper on the lineup for short windows? What that makes him at the moment, then?

It makes him a young player who hasn't fully defined himself yet.
It makes him a player we should put in the best possible situation to maximize his skills (winger, eichel line).

Meaning exactly what?

It's a turn of phrase... you can google it.

Yeah, his confidence was clearly down, and he didn't have the same kind of calmness with the puck than the previous season. You think that it will stay like that?

Yea, i chuckled the first time you wrote off his performance as "you could see his confidence was down"....

I think we will learn what we need to know about Girgensons this coming season...

Probably. But he is a good (not great) passer enough and has speed and hands good enough to drive the game. He just doesn't have the creativity or playmaking ability.

Yea, I think you overrate nearly every aspect of his game. We agree on his speed, his ability to get in on a forecheck, his power game, is motor and backchecking effort... but in the details of his game, we disagree.

 

[Heraldic]

Yes. We do.

And yes, I think looking at the metrics as a 900 minute whole misses the mark in terms of judging defensive hockey.

You do understand what you're saying here? You're basically saying here that Girgs, with all his 900 minutes, just happened, by a mere luck, impact every players GA number positively. You do understand how utterly stupid that kind of assumption is? Every player had worse GA number without Girgs than with him.

Girgs was the 3rd line center from game 5-14 of the season with Moulson, Gionta, and Foligno as wingers. But at this stage of the season, they were not deployed in the defensive manner to which Larsson was used throughout the 2nd half of the season. At this stage of the year ROR line was utilized in heavy shutdown role. And the Legwand line was getting the scraps of those defensive zone draws.

from around game 15 thru game 30 Larsson and Gigs did some flip flopping at center, as a tandem, or 1 of them with Eichel... tough to judge this period as it was the most "line shuffley" of the year.

But from game 30 on Larsson was the 3rd line center. period. And Girgs practically never played center again (aside from 2 games Larsson missed with injury).

So you took the road of offering false narrative...

Luckily I can easily show you're talking nonsense:

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=108932529&postcount=66

I posted this post on 3rd October. We had played 11 games so far. Like you can see, Girgs' QoC numbers were on par with ROR - he had took the tough match-ups with ROR until then, and after that.

You're either offering dung pies or you're just having a poor collection of your memory. I think both options are viable here.

Interestingly, when ROR was injured, it was Larsson's line that moved up in shifts... and Girgensons didn't even move to 3rd line center. COR got that job, and Girgs remained on the wing, on the 3rd line.

Because Eichel started to take tougher match-ups. It was the right move by Bylsma and he even said that he wanted to see Eichel-Reinhart to step up. There wasn't any reason to ice other shutdown-line in addition of Larsson. COR is a center, not a winger. Of course you put the player who is more familiar with center position to the center. The line wasn't having shutdown minutes, so the defensive side of things didn't need to be emphasized.

Girgensons spent a LOT of time this year... getting easy minutes. That's the facts.

Because he played with Eichel, yeah.

I think all QOC metrics are relevant. But I understand people like to pick and choose them as needed.

Then I'm sure you can tell me why you thought that QoC metric was more viable here compared to Rel QoC? If you can't I can give you a lesson of the importance of finding the right metric and the reason for it. But I first let you to explain yourself...

No i think using a 900 minute metric and pretending it represents a shutdown role when 80% of the players season was not in that role... is a poor representation of a sample.

That 900 minutes was in no situation used to evaluate him as a shutdown center. It was to evaluate him as a defensive player.

You do notice that I've strongly advocated for Girgensons to play on Eichel's wing?

You didn't get it. Girgs played basically most of the year with Eichel and in a shutdown-role. Every other role was pretty much non-existent. If he had played in a shutdown-role, his numbers would have been better (of coursed presumed, there wouldn't be a big drop for some reason).

I'm not attempting to validate it. Not interested in changing anyone's mind. The fact's will become clear. I'm not going to bang my head against walls.

Of course you're not. Because you cannot. You have driven yourself in to the corner before the season started with your silly claims. You know you cannot validate your silly claim, so you keep ignoring your burden of proof and keep repeating your own narrative and hope there will be enough ignorant people to buy into that.

But it seems that's the road you have chosen.

And what the hell you mean by that the "facts will become clear"? You think that the facts are just going to pop up here without your effort?

Or you mean that you wait the next season, and start to say "I told you so"? But we're not talking about next season. We're talking about this season. Larsson very well might be a better player defensively next year, but it's another matter.

The simply confirms that you've been staring at 900 minute metrics to convince yourself of something that didn't happen.

Brian Gionta played his whole season pretty much in a shutdown role. He didn't play with Girgs or Larsson in any other role. His Rel QoC was highest among the forwards.

Gionta's GA number with Girgs was 1.04 and with Larsson it was 1.51. So, when playing in a similar role (shutdown role) with Girgs, Gionta allowed clearly less goals than he did with Larsson. He also had better possession numbers (not significantly, though). Girgs GA numbers with Gionta really well represent the numbers he had in that shutdown role, because he didn't play with Gionta in any other role.

It's not surprising that you can't differentiate the positions.

Then I'm sure you can easily explain the difference.

It's not a dodge.

Of course it is, because you didn't give any proper answer.

Of course you do... but that's not the reality. Not only was his time as a shutdown center very short, but it wasn't nearly as "shotdown-esque" as the role became after Larsson took it over.

I have already debunked this. Girgs role was the exact same at the start of the season. His matchups were equal to ROR's.

You would leave the better defensive center in the defensive center role... obviously.

Or you leave the player who is not familiar as a winger as a center. That line wasn't matched against tough competition, there wasn't any need to emphasize defense.

No. It's a simple fact that Larsson has locked down an NHL role. Girgensons floated around the lineup for the remainder of the year... because he hasn't

You mean in a similar manner than Reinhart, Kane and McGinn did? Or pretty much every player outside of ROR and FLG line when it was established?

No. I think the are relatively the same. Larsson is a better center, Girgs is a better winger. Which is why you will continue to see them in those roles... and you'll continue to make up nonsense to explain it away.

And you haven't really validated this stance in any meaningful way.

Nope. But untill you separate the metrics by role, time of year, competition, and linemates better, don't waste my time.

I already gave you a good separation - Girgs with Gionta.

But I hope that when next season starts, you start collecting the numbers up after every single game. Or do you attempt to be as foolish as using any metrics if you cannot separate them between every single measure you described?

You're on an extremely thin ice here, you're basically starting to question the very essence of these metrics, because every metric is a combination of the totality.

How many times do I need to say "Girgensons should be stapled to Eichel's wing" ?

How the hell did he have better impact defensively on Eichel than Reinhart, if Reinhart is clearly the superior player defensively? Or you think that Girgs is better?

No. Girgs has not shown that. You can keep saying it. And you can keep presenting metrics largely accrued while playing wing. Makes no difference to me.

I have already shown that your attempt to create another weak narrative was a futile one.

I think I've been pretty clear. If you want to try to pin my position into one easier for you to criticize, that's on you. I don't care.

So you back off from your comparison of Girgs to a "4th liner"?

I don't mind that this narrative exists. It's understandable. I think it's empty.

So you think he was effective as a winger?

1.51 v 1.73 that's the career difference in Larsson/Girgensons ES production... Given that it is undeniable that Girgensons has had more offensive opportunity and better offensive linemates overall, i find the narrative utterly hilarious.

I don't think we should use any metric outside this season. Larsson nor Girgs will never again play first line center role. Girgs impact on GF was clearly bigger than Larsson's this year on top-6 role.

Girgs will be primarily a winger, because that's what his skill set dictates.

His skillset enables him being a winger as well.

I need him to improve everywhere. And that's what I expect next year, in a defined role that fits his skills.

Of course. This is true for pretty much every player on this team outside of ROR.

Well, when it was needed later in the year... they didn't go to Girgs. Which would speak volumes to you... if you were listening.

It wasn't needed. You clearly didn't pay attention. Bylsma wanted to have a chance for Eichel and Reinhart to step up, and they did it. There wasn't a need for (another) shutdown line.

His defense isn't as good as Larsson's and it's why he's playing wing.

Yet we're still waiting for you to validate this.

And we just saw Cizikas get a 3.35 per deal.

We have also seen Islanders giving +4 millions to Kulemin and 6 millions to Boychuk.

It makes him a young player who hasn't fully defined himself yet.
It makes him a player we should put in the best possible situation to maximize his skills (winger, eichel line).

You didn't answer my question about you think that Girgs is comparable to Helm in terms of being 4th liner who can play upper for a short window. Nor you did answer to the question that you actually think that Girgs having trade value is actually questionable? You heavily indicated thinking that way. I give you an opportunity to clear yourself.

Yea, i chuckled the first time you wrote off his performance as "you could see his confidence was down"....

You didn't see any difference in Girgs between this and last year offensively? About his confidence?

I think we will learn what we need to know about Girgensons this coming season...

You mean that you can start to create post-narratives about something?

Yea, I think you overrate nearly every aspect of his game. We agree on his speed, his ability to get in on a forecheck, his power game, is motor and backchecking effort... but in the details of his game, we disagree.

It's your opinion. I think he is technically good passer, and has decent hands. He lacks awareness and creativity, and thus isn't a good playmaker. He has hands good enough to make plays in a small space, but not frequently challenge defenders.

 

[Jame]

You do understand what you're saying here? You're basically saying here that Girgs, with all his 900 minutes, just happened, by a mere luck, impact every players GA number positively. You do understand how utterly stupid that kind of assumption is? Every player had worse GA number without Girgs than with him.

You're right. He's the single most impactful defensive forward in the NHL... or there's more to the story.


So you took the road of offering false narrative...

Luckily I can easily show you're talking nonsense:

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=108932529&postcount=66

I posted this post on 3rd October. We had played 11 games so far. Like you can see, Girgs' QoC numbers were on par with ROR - he had took the tough match-ups with ROR until then, and after that.

You're either offering dung pies or you're just having a poor collection of your memory. I think both options are viable here.

And half that time he was with Larsson or ROR.

Because he played with Eichel, yeah.

At least we are in agreement on one aspect of the context of his metrics.

You didn't get it. Girgs played basically most of the year with Eichel and in a shutdown-role. Every other role was pretty much non-existent. If he had played in a shutdown-role, his numbers would have been better (of coursed presumed, there wouldn't be a big drop for some reason).

No. That's just silly...

Of course you're not. Because you cannot. You have driven yourself in to the corner before the season started with your silly claims. You know you cannot validate your silly claim, so you keep ignoring your burden of proof and keep repeating your own narrative and hope there will be enough ignorant people to buy into that.

My Larsson claim was validated. He's a shutdown center.

And what the hell you mean by that the "facts will become clear"? You think that the facts are just going to pop up here without your effort?

Or you mean that you wait the next season, and start to say "I told you so"? But we're not talking about next season. We're talking about this season. Larsson very well might be a better player defensively next year, but it's another matter.

I think with time, the facts become obvious. I'm not going to bang my head against the wall. I'm going to say, "I told you so" when it becomes clear that Derek Roy wasn't a #1 center, even though for a period of time he was put in a position to accumulate the numbers to back up those who were silly enough to believe it.

We're talking about hockey players.

Brian Gionta played his whole season pretty much in a shutdown role. He didn't play with Girgs or Larsson in any other role. His Rel QoC was highest among the forwards.

wrong. Gionta played 7 of the first 30 games in a checking line role (it was a Moulson-Girgs-Gionta) line... and it was deployed in the manner in which you believe (Girgs QOC numbers came from his time with Larsson (girgs center) OR ROR lines. The rest of that time he spent in the top 6.

Gionta did not return to the checking line role until the FLG line was created in Game 30.

So the comparison... of 7 games to 50 games.. is basically pointless... not to mention there's a chunk of time mid season when Girgs is the winger with Larsson and Gionta. So Girgs is soaking up Larsson's shutdown performance there too.

Gionta's GA number with Girgs was 1.04 and with Larsson it was 1.51. So, when playing in a similar role (shutdown role) with Girgs, Gionta allowed clearly less goals than he did with Larsson. He also had better possession numbers (not significantly, though). Girgs GA numbers with Gionta really well represent the numbers he had in that shutdown role, because he didn't play with Gionta in any other role.

It's a terrible representation. Nice try though.

Of course it is, because you didn't give any proper answer.

I gave the proper answer plenty of times. It's clear as day what my position is.

I have already debunked this. Girgs role was the exact same at the start of the season. His matchups were equal to ROR's.

No. You thought you did. He actually played with ROR during that time.

Or you leave the player who is not familiar as a winger as a center. That line wasn't matched against tough competition, there wasn't any need to emphasize defense.

yea, totally... COR never played wing before except for when he played with Legwand...

You mean in a similar manner than Reinhart, Kane and McGinn did? Or pretty much every player outside of ROR and FLG line when it was established?

Reinhart played 45% with ROR
Kane played 40% with ROR and 40% with Eichel
Girgs played 30% with Eichel

So no, it's not the same. The only regular forward who bounced around the lineup more than Girgs, was Moulson

And you haven't really validated this stance in any meaningful way.

Aside from... their roles being exactly what I said they'd be. But hey, there's those 7 games early in the season with Gionta and they prove everything

I already gave you a good separation - Girgs with Gionta.

And it's now been debunked.

You're on an extremely thin ice here, you're basically starting to question the very essence of these metrics, because every metric is a combination of the totality.

No. Just the correlation you're trying to make.

How the hell did he have better impact defensively on Eichel than Reinhart, if Reinhart is clearly the superior player defensively? Or you think that Girgs is better?

It's a great question. Maybe you should dig deeper in to the answer. Since you don't seem to have one.

I have already shown that your attempt to create another weak narrative was a futile one.

No, you presented a ****** Gionta argument that's not factually accurate.

So you back off from your comparison of Girgs to a "4th liner"?

i completely understand your need to create these fake positions and assign them to me. You're arguments are weak, and you have to create easier ones.

So you think he was effective as a winger?

I think overrating 100 minutes with Eichel early in Eichel's career is lazy.

I don't think we should use any metric outside this season. Larsson nor Girgs will never again play first line center role. Girgs impact on GF was clearly bigger than Larsson's this year on top-6 role.

playing a large portion of the season on the easiest line with the franchise offensive talent... amazing. how did he do it?!?!

His skillset enables him being a winger as well.

He's a winger... get used to it.

Yet we're still waiting for you to validate this.

It's been validated. In the real world.

We have also seen Islanders giving +4 millions to Kulemin and 6 millions to Boychuk.

And yet, your understanding of markets still lags behind reality.

You didn't answer my question about you think that Girgs is comparable to Helm in terms of being 4th liner who can play upper for a short window. Nor you did answer to the question that you actually think that Girgs having trade value is actually questionable? You heavily indicated thinking that way. I give you an opportunity to clear yourself.

I refer to my original statements. It's very clear what I said. But it's understandable since you think not buying in to black or white narratives around 22 year olds, means your dodging.

You didn't see any difference in Girgs between this and last year offensively? About his confidence?

I thinking explaining away a season's worth of offense as a confidence issue is a dodge.

You mean that you can start to create post-narratives about something?

no, i mean that with a full season in a role that fits him, with experience in the system, and so on... what is currently gray from a development standpoint, will become more clear.

But this is a foreign concept to you. As you've put your foot down on young players and view everything through that preconceived opinion.

I let the play on the ice continue to speak and inform