You're right. He's the single most impactful defensive forward in the NHL... or there's more to the story.
Yeah, that's what this has been all about...
But it's good you finally understood how silly assumption you're making there.
And half that time he was with Larsson or ROR.
If Girgs 9 games out of 11 without ROR, and his QOC numbers were comparable to ROR, then how the hell did he actually got clearly lesser match-ups like you say? I really want you to explain this puzzle to me.
Let's take a closer look at the games.
Games:
1,2 (winger with Larsson)
3,4 (winger and center with ROR)
5-16 (3c with varying wingers)
17-21 (injured)
22-29 (3c EVERY game with varying wingers)
30-36 (Larsson center, Girgs winger)
37 -> Girgs with Eichel
So from games 1 to 29 Girgs played as the third-line center in every game except the 4 first games and the games he was injured. Larsson didn't really start playing at center until game 30.
Girgs played as a shutdown center to the 29 game mark. More than you previously said.
At least we are in agreement on one aspect of the context of his metrics.
Speaking of metrics, you ignored my question about why you though that QoC was the better metric instead of Rel QoC? Or you being silent just means you have no idea?
How the hell is that silly? He played to the 30 game mark on that role and his numbers were extremely good (as a center). Sure his numbers got inflated by about 8 games with Larsson as a winger. But considering the sample difference, he sure as hell had a lot better numbers as a 3rd line center than with Eichel (because you can do only so much as a winger to help defensively weak center).
And how do you explain that Girgs impact on Larsson's number was clearly stronger than the opposite? And Girgs impact was clearly stronger to Gionta than Larsson's was. Or can you tell me when Girgs/Larsson played with Gionta and they weren't having shutdown role?
My Larsson claim was validated. He's a shutdown center.
You just said that you're not going to validate your claim about Larsson being significantly better player defensively than Girgs. No-one has said that Larsson did a bad job as a shutdown center.
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.
For you this is all about being able to say "I told you so". When you create narratives enough, you will eventually hit.
Like I said before, this is not about Larsson or Girgs in the future, it's about them right now. Right now the best sample is the season we had. Both had really similar roles and similar linemates. You're simply inept to admit that it was a weak attempt of you to create that narrative that you cannot simply back with anything. Now your only chance is to just go silent and hope that next season brings something else and you can then tell how right you were - and you most likely actually believe yourself.
I'm more than happy to say next season that Larsson is better defensively, if my eye-test and metrics support it. I'm not going to create silly narratives just in order to have some people actually buying into those and after that hoping I can proclaim myself as some kind of seer. Doing something like that would be pretty sad, to be honest.
We're talking about hockey players.
Exactly.
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.
Most of his season he played in a checking line role. Out of his +1000 minutes he played about 750 minutes with either Larsson or Girgs... Or do you show me when he played with them in any other role than as a checking line role? Sure, he played in other roles as well, and my statement as "pretty much the whole season" might have been a bit stretch.
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.
Of course it's not. Girgs also played with Foligno for example and his impact was same (better than Larsson's). It was positive with basically everyone he played until that 30 game mark...
Girgs' number inflated with Larsson like I said, but it was more the opposite. And Girgs impact on Larsson was better than the opposite.
It's a terrible representation. Nice try though.
I'm not surprised you're not willing to explain it in a more detailed manner.
I gave the proper answer plenty of times. It's clear as day what my position is.
Then you can give it easily again, or at least point where that is.
No. You thought you did. He actually played with ROR during that time
.
He had a whopping two games with ROR. I'm waiting for you to explain how their numbers were similar despite that.
yea, totally... COR never played wing before
except for when he played with Legwand...
You think putting Legwand as a center would have made more sense?
You put the players on positions where they are most familiar. If Leggy is score 4 player as a winger and score 6 player as a center, you don't put him as a winger if COR numbers are 5 (wing) and 6 (center).
This is not rockey science. Really.
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
Those numbers show exactly that players bounced around. Without ROR's injury those numbers would have been a lot more similar.
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
You can chance Foligno/Moulson or whoever there as well if it makes you feel better.
And it's now been debunked.
No it's not.
And you can chance Foligno there if you want to dismiss his time with Gionta by your sample size narrative.
No. Just the correlation you're trying to make.
That makes no sense or you simply didn't understand what I said.
It's a great question. Maybe you should dig deeper in to the answer. Since you don't seem to have one.
I wanted to have your opinion about it. Because you have been one of the most vocal posters about a certain matter...
No, you presented a ****** Gionta argument that's not factually accurate.
It is, but you can keep ignoring it with this sample size nonsense.
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.
You're then doing a pretty louzy job then. I mean, you shouldn't have too much trouble to just back your claim about Larsson being significantly better defensive player.
I think overrating 100 minutes with Eichel early in Eichel's career is lazy.
So you do think that Larsson is a competent top-6 winger?
playing a large portion of the season on the easiest line with the franchise offensive talent... amazing. how did he do it?!?!
You mean how did he do a better job with franchise offensive talent than any other player on this team? You tell me.
He's a winger... get used to it.
Presumably yes.
It's been validated. In the real world.
You mean in the Jame's world?
And yet, your understanding of markets still lags behind reality.
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.
So you throw dung pies out there but you actually don't have spine enough to stand behind those?
I thinking explaining away a season's worth of offense as a confidence issue is a dodge.
He didn't play the whole season with Eichel. That's where his offense should be evaluated. You yourself participated to the conversation where the topic was that how silly it was to make too strong conclusions from his offense on a shut-down role. Then, you happened to stand the other side of the table than right know... Funny how it goes, again.
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.
I think we don't have clear answers on many of our young players. Even the sample Larsson gave us was way too small with his constant linemates. He needs to have the same success with varying linemates and with bigger sample. And I'm hopeful he does.
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.
You do remember that it wasn't me who started those narratives? So it's extremely funny you're the person who says something like that.
I let the play on the ice continue to speak and inform
Yeah, and stay silent and forget the topic if things don't evolve on your "favor".
***
Regarding Teräväinen/Bickell.
I'm not that high on Teräväinen (atlhough he is a Finn), but I would take one year garbage contract for him. It's not like we most likely need that 4 millions, and you can basically dump Bickell to Roch.
Just seems crazy. Bickel's not that bad, is he? I can't see his negative value being more than a 3rd...
He is. He was waived last year and spent playing 47 games in AHL....
