News Article: The Top 10 Worst NHL Contracts ( two Leafs)

[glue]

Interesting. So at point do you say someone is not a good leader? Is it one bad game? 5 games? 10 games? 20 games? Where does that arbitrary line go that divides those that are good leaders from those who aren't?

To me its not necessarily the number of games, but rather which games that a player steps up that point out 'leadership'. Eg. If your play is horrible during the home stretch (consistently), this to me hurts your credibility as a good leader. I'm not devaluing games earlier in the season...but there's no question that the pressure is more when you're near the end of the season and your team has not yet clinched a playoff spot. During this time, generally a teams 'leaders' or 'star' players are the guys that are expected to be very good. Same thing in the playoffs. Fair or not, thats the reality. When those guys don't step up and play well, they tend to get criticized. Joe Thornton got absolutely chewed up for his poor play during the playoffs in the earlier part of his career. He was always considered a great regular season performer, but a terrible pressure/playoff performer. When a team chokes/plays poorly in pressure situations..star players are the ones who are criticized if they too play poorly. Case in point about JT - he just got his captaincy revoked in an epic collapse by SJ and I would say he actually wasn't one of their worst players..but he failed to step up when his team needed him! hence they are re-evaluating whether he is the right leader for the team.

Is Phaneuf a bad leader if no one listens to him?
Is Carlyle a bad coach if no one listens to him?
Hard to say since we're not there.

Yeah, that may be true..but a coach does eventually get canned if his team is not listening to him, similarly if the captain is not getting the attention of his teammates, he likely won't be the captain for too much longer. That being said, I don't think we're talking about whether Phaneuf's teammates are listening to him, we're taking about his play on the ice when the game is on the line. Leading by example.

 

[ALEXJD93]

No. I'm just saying that while +- has it's flaws, it's certainly better than just looking at offence. Preventing goals is as important as scoring them.

Sure, but I think Phaneuf did a pretty terrible job of preventing goals last year. For most of the year he was on the ice allowing a horrid amount of shots but getting great goaltending. At the end of the year, he didn't and it made him look awful, I don't think he changed that much. I'm not sure what the whole debate was about but if it was who was more efficient at 5v5, it's Subban no doubt.

 

[Gary Nylund]

To me its not necessarily the number of games, but rather which games that a player steps up that point out 'leadership'. Eg. If your play is horrible during the home stretch (consistently), this to me hurts your credibility as a good leader. I'm not devaluing games earlier in the season...but there's no question that the pressure is more when you're near the end of the season and your team has not yet clinched a playoff spot. During this time, generally a teams 'leaders' or 'star' players are the guys that are expected to be very good. Same thing in the playoffs. Fair or not, thats the reality. When those guys don't step up and play well, they tend to get criticized. Joe Thornton got absolutely chewed up for his poor play during the playoffs in the earlier part of his career he was always considered a great regular season performer, but a terrible pressure/playoff performer. Case in point, he's had his captaincy revoked not once...but twice! When a team chokes/plays poorly in pressure situations..star players are the ones who are criticized if they too play poorly.

Yeah I don't really disagree. I just think this whole captain thing is overdone somewhat. Dion was offered the captaincy because there was nobody better. Overall he's done a pretty good job. The last two seasons up until the tail end of last year he was pretty awesome. There has been speculation that he was injured. I have no idea, maybe he was, maybe he wasn't. It sure would explain a lot though. If the Leafs turn it around, Dion plays well and we win a playoff round I guess everyone will think he's a great captain again.

Bottom line - I don't think who wears the 'C' has much of an impact, it's more of a symbolic thing. Someone posted a while ago that the whole captain thing is romanticized in North America, I would tend to agree.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Sure, but I think Phaneuf did a pretty terrible job of preventing goals last year. For most of the year he was on the ice allowing a horrid amount of shots but getting great goaltending. At the end of the year, he didn't and it made him look awful, I don't think he changed that much. I'm not sure what the whole debate was about but if it was who was more efficient at 5v5, it's Subban no doubt.

No doubt at all? Phaneuf was a + player on a really bad team, Subban was a - player on a much better team playing sheltered minutes (at least compared to Phaneuf). That's not conclusive but it is something to think about.

 

[ALEXJD93]

No doubt at all? Phaneuf was a + player on a really bad team, Subban was a - player on a much better team playing sheltered minutes (at least compared to Phaneuf). That's not conclusive but it is something to think about.

Yes, but I'd argue he was getting lucky due to great goaltending. He was leading the league in PDO until after the break. I just didn't see a major change in his game, it wasn't good all year.

 

[diceman934]

Here, I'll copy and paste those facts in this post, which has no insults in it, so it is to your liking.....

After you pointed out the goals against difference for Dion and Gunnar, I pointed out that Gunnar played 330 less minutes. I standardized those goals against to a per-minute ratio:
And Gunnar still came out ahead using the ratio you created.


I then made reference to the fact that Gunnarsson did not play on the PP, where Phaneuf was on the ice for more than a half-dozen short-handed goals. You could use this as a slight against Phaneuf if you wish but you can't tell me Carl "can't-keep-the-puck-in-at-the-line" Gunnarsson would have fared much better.

Really so Dion is better Defensively because he allowed short handed goals against? That sure is a funny way at looking at things.



So then I tackled your assertion that Gunnarsson, who played "more" PK minutes had two less PPGA than Phaneuf. Of course, the "more" was a leading statement in an attempt to strengthen your argument, but we found out that "more" was actually...

The more was two more goals, but you seem to have dismissed that he did so while Dion was in the box himself for many of those minutes that Gunnar killed with his partner being Franson.



Then you made some reference to Phaneuf possession numbers being "far inferior" to Gardiner's, to which I openly questioned:




You know diceman, I may come off strong sometimes, and while I may occasionally deliver my posts in a snarky tone, it is the result of my frustration with distorted facts being thrown around. I may be a dick sometimes, but at least I'm providing the full picture.

My facts are simply data, you can disagree with the data all you want but do so as an adult...

I am a black and white type of an individual and do not see a lot of grey. When I state that Gunnar was better then Dion and support it with data.....I feel that my opinion is correct. They played most of the year together and Dion had a high plus minus and better advance stats when they played together, Gunnars numbers did not change when they went to a 7 man rotation...context is there, same team, same pairing together Dion played better, separated he played terribly.

You calling my facts distorted is only your opinion. What is distorted in this thread is comparing two player from two different teams using plus/minus etc. That lacks context....comparing two players from the same team is context.

 

[Gary Nylund]

I do not care for name calling as it got me into trouble on here, so now I just ignore those types of replies....

My facts are simply data, you can disagree with the data all you want but do so as an adult...

I am a black and white type of an individual and do not see a lot of grey. When I state that Gunnar was better then Dion and support it with data.....I feel that my opinion is correct. They played most of the year together and Dion had a high plus minus and better advance stats when they played together, Gunnars numbers did not change when they went to a 7 man rotation...context is there, same team, same pairing together Dion played better, separated he played terribly.

You calling my facts distorted is only your opinion. What is distorted in this thread is comparing two player from two different teams using plus/minus etc. That lacks context....comparing two players from the same team is context.

These facts are full of holes which has been pointed out to you before. I'd bet a lot that 30 out of 30 GM's would pick Dion over Gunnarson. Also, I have yet to see one other person on this forum agree with you.

At least we finally have you on record saying Gunnarson is better. I asked you that simple question about 8 times and never did get a simple, "black and white" answer from you.

 

[paulster2626]

Sure, but I think Phaneuf did a pretty terrible job of preventing goals last year. For most of the year he was on the ice allowing a horrid amount of shots but getting great goaltending. At the end of the year, he didn't and it made him look awful, I don't think he changed that much. I'm not sure what the whole debate was about but if it was who was more efficient at 5v5, it's Subban no doubt.

Phaneuf is excellent at preventing goals. His positioning and decision making (no, he's not dumb like everyone thinks) limits quality chances, and he forces attacking forwards to take shots from exactly where the goalie wants. He did this for most of last season, up until the Great Collapse - but only the team knows why that sudden nosedive happened. A lot of people think Phaneuf was playing injured, perhaps that was it, who knows.

Yes, Phaneuf has a brain fart every now and then. So does Chara, so does Weber, and so does Subban. Hockey is played at such a high speed, and is hard enough that making the perfect play 100% of the time is impossible.

The thing with PK though is that he's only 25 and is already a bona-fide star. Is he excellent at those little defensive things? Maybe not, but what he does excel at is being a real threat at the opposition's blue line, moving the puck, and having the abillity and energy to change the momentum of the game. He doesn't have to be great at the defensive stuff because he's paired up with players who are.

A PK/Phaneuf pairing woudl be absolutely lethal - but given a choice between two of them I'd have to take the Subbanator. He's truly a special player. And I'm as pro-Phaneuf as they come!

 

[hatterson]

Since we all seem to agree that Clarkson's contract is brutal and this thread is now only about Phaneuf, lets move the discussion over to the Phaneuf discussion thread.

And leave the insults and attacks behind. If you can't handle civil and calm debate, you won't be a part of it.

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1719049