Speculation: What to do about Toby?

[Channelcat]

Tobi-Buff faces top lines three seasons in a row.

When together the Jets out score their opponents for 5v5 minutes by about a 3:2 ratio.

For all the other minutes Jets are out scored by slightly less than 3:2 (more like 6:4.5).

Whatever. They are ******. It's those guys faults.

I agree. Seems like so many fans don't notice all the good things Toby does. Even with his smaller size he is very effective at draping all over guys in a defensive role, not to mention the offensive upside. I think the bigger problem for us is the next tier of defenders, Clitsome, Stuart, Ellerby, Pardy, etc.

 

[ps241]

No one is untouchable. Oiler fans should know this. You traded Gretzky!

I know I have used this reference as well but the more i think about it the more i think Peter Puck was in financial troubles back then and he ended up getting $15 million in this deal (that was allot of cash in the late 80's).

Gretz + for $15 million + (the pluses being secondary components)

Really sad day for hockey in small market Canada.

 

[garret9]

I agree. Seems like so many fans don't notice all the good things Toby does. Even with his smaller size he is very effective at draping all over guys in a defensive role, not to mention the offensive upside. I think the bigger problem for us is the next tier of defenders, Clitsome, Stuart, Ellerby, Pardy, etc.

Analytics agree with you.

Analytics point out that the problems are:

(major)
*Jets 3rd line is offensively good enough, but defensively hurting more than they help
*Jets can't form a strong second pair, 3rd pair wouldn't be a big issue if the 2nd pair was up to par <= your point

(medium)
*Jets PP sucks

(minor)
*Jets 2nd line is getting killed with Thorburn on it (but we know that won't last forever... right?)
*Sv% barely below avg and worries that Pavelec will return to sub par form

 

[VictoriaJetsFan]

Advanced stats are all good, but I think they lack a sense of qualitative analysis.

So the jets outscore teams 3 to 2 when Buff and Toby are together. That's fine. No arguing that.

But when you see Buff getting walked around like a pylon the other night, I would argue its irrelevant how much offense he provides when his mistakes are backbreaking. Scoring a goal in a tie game with 5 minutes to go in the third should be measured differently than a goal when your behind by three or ahead by three.

I guess what I am asking is there any way to measure timing? Probably not.

Another example, 2011 Cup final, Canucks vs Bruins...Bergeron owns the Canucks in game 7. I don't see any way how Henrik Sedin's advanced stats are worse than Bergeron. Especially this year.

That said, who in their right mind would you prefer in a 7th game? Sedin's or Bergeron? I would say 99 times out of a hundred you pick Bergeron.

Buff's inconsistent garbage efforts sometimes hurt far more than advanced stats would tell you.

 

[Duke749]

About 45% of Enstrom's career points are on the PP. Skews his ppt and +/- way up. I would love to see his raw (non PP) stats.

I don't mean to single you out bro, but this is why I always struggle to take people seriously. They literally don't know what they're talking about or completely misinterpret something. You don't get a + while scoring on the PP just like you don't get a - while being on the PK. You do however get a - while being scored against on the PP just like you get a + for scoring while shorthanded(this does not apply when the goalie is pulled). Other wise +/- is strictly for ES situations.

 

[garret9]

Advanced stats are all good, but I think they lack a sense of qualitative analysis.

So the jets outscore teams 3 to 2 when Buff and Toby are together. That's fine. No arguing that.

But when you see Buff getting walked around like a pylon the other night, I would argue its irrelevant how much offense he provides when his mistakes are backbreaking. Scoring a goal in a tie game with 5 minutes to go in the third should be measured differently than a goal when your behind by three or ahead by three.

I guess what I am asking is there any way to measure timing? Probably not.

Another example, 2011 Cup final, Canucks vs Bruins...Bergeron owns the Canucks in game 7. I don't see any way how Henrik Sedin's advanced stats are worse than Bergeron. Especially this year.

That said, who in their right mind would you prefer in a 7th game? Sedin's or Bergeron? I would say 99 times out of a hundred you pick Bergeron.

Buff's inconsistent garbage efforts sometimes hurt far more than advanced stats would tell you.

I do agree with you qualitative analysis is always needed. I also never create opinions purely from analytics but rather refine my opinions with them.

However I disagree with your qualitative analysis on this point. I believe the weakneses of Byfuglien you speak of are true; however, I think you perhaps may be suffering from confirmation bias in their end effect.

Out scoring is out scoring. To me, Byfuglien's numbers here don't change if you change from close-score situations or all, which is indicative that it is his overall play. You do see his "attributes" in the number. Shots against and goals against do rise when Buff is on the ice (although not when Enstrom is with him), but his elite offense still causes the Jets to score more than the opponent. And more is is more.

 

[Jet]

Yeah, yeah, yeah....also take into account that Enstrom isn't physical due to his small stature, is easily manhandled by large forwards (the myth about body position is all but dispelled this season when he has been blown up by large Western Conf. forwards), rarely comes up with the puck in one on one battles, isn't really that great at moving the puck out of his own end....shall I go on?

Everyone raved about Enstrom even before he played a game for the Jets, guess I'm still waiting to see what all the hype was about. IMO

Did you even read my post? You just trumpeted the same nonsense over again.

Enstrom plays against the best on the other team EVERY night. He hasn't been great in about a week, but before that he was playing exceptionally well.

I guess for some people putting points up is all that matters in hockey.

 

[Jet]

So anything of value is untouchable?

I wouldn't be against trading Enstrom, if the return was good. Because of his attachment to Winnipeg and having him under contract for longer term, I'd rather trade his partner, but if it made the Jets better, then yeah, I wouldn't be totally against it.

I am just tired of the Enstrom size meme that is plain incorrect if you are watching with an unbiased eye. I am not an Enstrom cheerleader -- I had serious doubts about him especially last year, but this season he has been consistently excellent defensively (outside of the very odd game and this past week)

 

[VictoriaJetsFan]

I do agree with you qualitative analysis is always needed. I also never create opinions purely from analytics but rather refine my opinions with them.

However I disagree with your qualitative analysis on this point. I believe the weakneses of Byfuglien you speak of are true; however, I think you perhaps may be suffering from confirmation bias in their end effect.

Out scoring is out scoring. To me, Byfuglien's numbers here don't change if you change from close-score situations or all, which is indicative that it is his overall play. You do see his "attributes" in the number. Shots against and goals against do rise when Buff is on the ice (although not when Enstrom is with him), but his elite offense still causes the Jets to score more than the opponent. And more is is more.

I think more is not necessarily more in my example, are close score situation stats kept? How would that be defined?

I would also argue that, in the case of goalies, one can have a great game, but if they let in a softie on overtime they rightly wear the goat horns. It is somewhat similar to d-men. Buff can go out and get three assists but then throw a blind pass up the middle and cost us the game.

I read somewhere once that pain is more impactful than pleasure, humans tend to remember pain longer.

The same goes for bad goals and bad turnovers.

Remember Tommy Salo? great goalie until that Belorus game...what do people remember about him?

Is it fair? no...is it life? yes....

 

[scelaton]

I think more is not necessarily more in my example, are close score situation stats kept? How would that be defined?
I would also argue that, in the case of goalies, one can have a great game, but if they let in a softie on overtime they rightly wear the goat horns. It is somewhat similar to d-men. Buff can go out and get three assists but then throw a blind pass up the middle and cost us the game.
I read somewhere once that pain is more impactful than pleasure, humans tend to remember pain longer.
The same goes for bad goals and bad turnovers.
Remember Tommy Salo? great goalie until that Belorus game...what do people remember about him?
Is it fair? no...is it life? yes....

Garret subtly suggested that you may be suffering from confirmation bias, and you…confirmed it.
Fans tend to remember the pain of an egregious Buff giveaway, while dismissing the dominance that precedes it. They then overreact to every mistake, as if suffering from PTSD. The same has occurred here with Pavelec's soft goals, except that Pavs overall play has never been at the same level as Buff's. Statistical analysis clearly differentiates between the two in their respective positions, though some may be tempted to lump them together. That is the essence of how stats help temper basic human nature.
To your final point…it (the taint of a bad play) may not be fair, but --except for the most egregious of errors in the biggest of games--it is not life. Life, in hockey, is about winning. And, over time, more net shots/goals means more wins, and more wins means a legacy of success. The same goes for goalies with a high Sv%. A few bad goals over a career are quickly forgotten in the wake of a winning record.

 

[ps241]

Analytics agree with you.

Analytics point out that the problems are:

(major)
*Jets 3rd line is offensively good enough, but defensively hurting more than they help
*Jets can't form a strong second pair, 3rd pair wouldn't be a big issue if the 2nd pair was up to par <= your point

(medium)
*Jets PP sucks

(minor)
*Jets 2nd line is getting killed with Thorburn on it (but we know that won't last forever... right?)
*Sv% barely below avg and worries that Pavelec will return to sub par form

Can you give more context to this please? Are they getting out scored, out chanced, or are they getting away to sheltered.....all the above?

My eyes are telling me they have been a good line over the past few weeks but I may be seeing what I want to see.

 

[YWGinYYZ]

Can you give more context to this please? Are they getting out scored, out chanced, or are they getting away to sheltered.....all the above?

My eyes are telling me they have been a good line over the past few weeks but I may be seeing what I want to see.

It's in another thread - Halischuk isn't helping that line. Without him, Frolik and Scheif would be even Corsi players. The argument was (I think - garret?) that while Kane is out, Tangradi should be moved to either the 2nd or 3rd to improve one of those lines, then probably left on the 3rd when Kane returns.

 

[King Woodballs]

Advanced stats are all good, but I think they lack a sense of qualitative analysis.

So the jets outscore teams 3 to 2 when Buff and Toby are together. That's fine. No arguing that.

But when you see Buff getting walked around like a pylon the other night, I would argue its irrelevant how much offense he provides when his mistakes are backbreaking. Scoring a goal in a tie game with 5 minutes to go in the third should be measured differently than a goal when your behind by three or ahead by three.

I guess what I am asking is there any way to measure timing? Probably not.

Another example, 2011 Cup final, Canucks vs Bruins...Bergeron owns the Canucks in game 7. I don't see any way how Henrik Sedin's advanced stats are worse than Bergeron. Especially this year.

That said, who in their right mind would you prefer in a 7th game? Sedin's or Bergeron? I would say 99 times out of a hundred you pick Bergeron.

Buff's inconsistent garbage efforts sometimes hurt far more than advanced stats would tell you.

You missed enstrom jumping up for the puck and missing it causing that play to happen

But it wasn't buff that caused so no one paid attention to it.

 

[VictoriaJetsFan]

Garret subtly suggested that you may be suffering from confirmation bias, and you…confirmed it.
Fans tend to remember the pain of an egregious Buff giveaway, while dismissing the dominance that precedes it. They then overreact to every mistake, as if suffering from PTSD. The same has occurred here with Pavelec's soft goals, except that Pavs overall play has never been at the same level as Buff's. Statistical analysis clearly differentiates between the two in their respective positions, though some may be tempted to lump them together. That is the essence of how stats help temper basic human nature.
To your final point…it (the taint of a bad play) may not be fair, but --except for the most egregious of errors in the biggest of games--it is not life. Life, in hockey, is about winning. And, over time, more net shots/goals means more wins, and more wins means a legacy of success. The same goes for goalies with a high Sv%. A few bad goals over a career are quickly forgotten in the wake of a winning record.

I wonder what the team remembers about the bad Buff giveaways...would a reliable d-man give the team a better vibe about itself? Buff's errors also appear too originate from a lack of effort at times. That goes to the qualitative element of my argument. How can you prove Buff's dominance, as you say, whatever that is, is necessarily superior to the long term success of the team?

When he plays with Enstrom, he outscores other teams three to two. Impessive yes, dominant? not so much. The bigger problem is he doesn't always play with Enstrom. He plays with Clitsome. What are his scoring rates at that point?

 

[sipowicz]

Did you even read my post? You just trumpeted the same nonsense over again.

Enstrom plays against the best on the other team EVERY night. He hasn't been great in about a week, but before that he was playing exceptionally well.

I guess for some people putting points up is all that matters in hockey.

Yes and yes I agree that Enstrom did a few really good games early on, it's pretty debatable about how good he really is, from a physical standpoint he isn't that hard to play against and that's a pretty big detriment for a D man.

As for points a guy with his numbers who plays every PP and is the supposed QB of the PP his point totals are dismal. Do any of you agree the lack of success of the PP may be partially on Enstrom, I do. Enstrom was touted as a D man who was okay defensively and phenomenal offensively we've seen little of the later. IMO

 

[garret9]

I wonder what the team remembers about the bad Buff giveaways...would a reliable d-man give the team a better vibe about itself? Buff's errors also appear too originate from a lack of effort at times. That goes to the qualitative element of my argument. How can you prove Buff's dominance, as you say, whatever that is, is necessarily superior to the long term success of the team?

When he plays with Enstrom, he outscores other teams three to two. Impessive yes, dominant? not so much. The bigger problem is he doesn't always play with Enstrom. He plays with Clitsome. What are his scoring rates at that point?

I find we comment on these players' psyches like they are fragile little children. Ya they have emotions and there psychology to the game, but these are also pro's who have had ups and downs throughout there career and most of them have sports psychologists (and the team does too).


That's actually very dominant.

2011-13 Pair, Goal%, Corsi% (all ZS adj, Score-Close... in order of Corsi%)

Chara-Boychuk 51.6%, 58.8%
Doughty-Scuderi 44.2%, 56.1%
Garison-Hamhuis 55.6%, 55.1%
Enstrom-Byfuglien 60.0%. 54.9%
Keith-Seabrook 56.2%, 53.6%
Suter-Weber 58.3%, 47.6%
Pietrangelo-Jackman 55.6%, 44.8% <= Pietro with Bouw is way better than this but sample size

^ now think about how much better forwards and/or system most of those guys play with then Enstrom and Byfuglien


Yes Buff is not as good with Clitsome than Enstrom... but Clitsome is really a decent 3rd pairing D so what do you expect?

 

[VictoriaJetsFan]

I find we comment on these players' psyches like they are fragile little children. Ya they have emotions and there psychology to the game, but these are also pro's who have had ups and downs throughout there career and most of them have sports psychologists (and the team does too).


That's actually very dominant.

Pair, Goal%, Corsi% (all ZS adj, Score-Close... in order of Corsi%)

Chara-Boychuk 51.6%, 58.8%
Doughty-Scuderi 44.2%, 56.1%
Garison-Hamhuis 55.6%, 55.1%
Enstrom-Byfuglien 60.0%. 54.9%
Keith-Seabrook 56.2%, 53.6%
Pietrangelo-Jackman 55.6%, 44.8%
Suter-Weber 58.3%, 47.6%


Yes Buff is not as good with Clitsome than Enstrom... but Clitsome is really a decent 3rd pairing D so what do you expect?

Are you dismissing the impact of Buff's laziness in his own zone? Are you arguing his teammates don't notice that? Are you eliminating the possibility of them feeling frustration from that?

In regards to the Clitsome argument, does a truly great player not elevate the game of others paired with him? I would argue Enstrom does this when paired with Keaton Ellerby or even Bogo...Buff not so much.

So what does score-close mean in your stats list there?

 

[YWGinYYZ]

Are you dismissing the impact of Buff's laziness in his own zone? Are you arguing his teammates don't notice that? Are you eliminating the possibility of them feeling frustration from that?

In regards to the Clitsome argument, does a truly great player not elevate the game of others paired with him? I would argue Enstrom does this when paired with Keaton Ellerby or even Bogo...Buff not so much.

So what does score-close mean in your stats list there?

Buff elevates Clitsome's play. Note that Enström is weaker away from Buff, just as Buff is away from Enström.

Score close is a 1 goal or tied situation. It's considered Score Close in the third only if it's tied. Eliminates scoring effects that happen when a team has a big lead - they tend to sit back and play more defensively, and give up on maintaining possession in exchange for simply preventing goals.

 

[garret9]

Are you dismissing the impact of Buff's laziness in his own zone? Are you arguing his teammates don't notice that? Are you eliminating the possibility of them feeling frustration from that?

In regards to the Clitsome argument, does a truly great player not elevate the game of others paired with him? I would argue Enstrom does this when paired with Keaton Ellerby or even Bogo...Buff not so much.

So what does score-close mean in your stats list there?

No I'm not dismissing... I'm saying it's lesser impact than what you are making it. Buff is elite. We know this. I'm sure they do too.

Clitsome with Buff is better than Clitsome without (same with Ellerby/Bogo as you mentioned). The point is that obviously Enstrom is better than Clitsome so obviously Buff does better with a better guy. After all , look at the results in the graph.

Score-close means when the game is within 2 points in 1st + 2nd or tied in the third, because all teams significantly change strategies at that point making the results change... We want the results to match the player not the change in strategy.

^fenwick but the strategy holds true for all shots

 

[Jet]

You missed enstrom jumping up for the puck and missing it causing that play to happen

But it wasn't buff that caused so no one paid attention to it.

Yep. I just shook my head when that happened and thought 'you've been watching bad Buff too much'

 

[King Woodballs]

Yep. I just shook my head when that happened and thought 'you've been watching bad Buff too much'

Both were bad on that shift.