What's Byfuglien worth to you?

[winterpeg]

How hilarious would it be if we traded him for Eberle and their 2015 1st rounder, and then they sucked again next year and we got 1st overall (presumably McDavid)?

Oh god yes!

I really want EDM's 1st next year...

Not sure that's the deal I do to get it, but if they want to put that 1st in a deal and I was GM, I'd be listening, haha.

 

[jetkarma*]

Maurice probably will want to evaluate Buff for himself and he may tell Chevy to hold off on a trade for the time being. Every player responds differently to different coaching styles. The Jets have nothing to lose to see how Buff plays under Maurice in the next few weeks !

Chevy may ask, and Maurice is a confident hockey person but he is only hired till the end of the season ,that may change but he won't "tell" Chevy to hold off on a trade.

A new coach , as I have mentioned will help evaluate and separate players better though.

 

[Hobby Bull]

In small bursts he can be a dominant forward, particularly if he's with great linemates who can control the play to make him useful and take advantage of his ability to bash defencemen on the forecheck, guys who can get possession and keep it, like Patrick Kane and Toews.

He's a slightly more skilled Dustin Penner basically. Certainly not a $5+ million player as a forward. I'd prefer if we could find a way to coach him into being a better defenceman, that's where he can make the biggest impact. Up front or on the back end his tendency towards laziness will always limit his tremendous talent.

I like Dustin Penner.

I wouldn't trade Byfuglien for 5 Dustin Penners.

 

[BigZ65]

I like Dustin Penner.

I wouldn't trade Byfuglien for 5 Dustin Penners.

Exactly, but that's how we're devaluing Byfuglien by using him as a winger.

 

[truck]

I like Dustin Penner.

I wouldn't trade Byfuglien for 5 Dustin Penners.

That would be a lot of pancakes!

 

[ps241]

Exactly, but that's how we're devaluing Byfuglien by using him as a winger.

Devaluing or polishing up and showing off his versatility to market him?

 

[King Woodballs]

Devaluing or polishing up and showing off his versatility to market him?

I am not quite sold on this reasoning yet.
Everyone in the league knows what Dustin can and cannot do.

 

[ps241]

I am not quite sold on this reasoning yet.
Everyone in the league knows what Dustin can and cannot do.

Yea I was having fun. GM's have a better than good idea of Buff's strengths and weaknesses.

 

[Johnny HFBOARDS]

I'm keeping /thread

 

[King Woodballs]

Yea I was having fun. GM's have a better than good idea of Buff's strengths and weaknesses.

I wasn't really referring to you specifically. I have read that in a few spots.

 

[winterpeg]

Yea I was having fun. GM's have a better than good idea of Buff's strengths and weaknesses.

For the most part. He's a better player than he was last time he played forward. If we're trying to market him, showing he can be a dominating top 6 kind of minutes forward isn't a bad call.

Then they know he can still do what he did then, and perhaps do it better.

I agree that they have 90% certainty of what he can and will bring, however, but it never hurts to flash the last 10%

 

[knorthern knight]

He also has an .875 on-ice save percentage, far and away the worst on the team. And before you say it, no, players can't control their on-ice save percentage.

Let's just say I strongly disagree on that one. IT IS A DEFENSEMAN'S JOB to favourably influence his team's SV%...

• prevent breakaways by opponents
• clear opponents away from in front of his net
• block shooting lanes in his D zone
• force incoming forwards off to the side to take bad-angle shots
• hustle your rear end back to the D zone to turn an opposition 2-on-1 into a 2-on-2
• generally make things easier for your goalie so the goalie faces easier shots

He gets paid to do stuff like that. A defenseman's on-ice SV% is a useful advanced stat for judging how well he's doing his job.

 

[garret9]

I'm having a little trouble with the idea of just using just "score close" minutes. I believe you are using within 1 goal, but as we all know 2 or 3 goal games are both winable and losable. I'd prefer not to negate how a player defends in a 2 or 3 goal game or what they do to generate offense under the same circumstances. Just my thoughts.

It's not the winnable/notwinnable that causes what we see. It's that's the point most teams tend to go into "defensive shells". On average, most NHL teams change systems once they are up 2 goals which screws with the effects.

The point though is +/- is pretty much useless no matter how you mold it.

 

[garret9]

Let's just say I strongly disagree on that one. IT IS A DEFENSEMAN'S JOB to favourably influence his team's SV%...

• prevent breakaways by opponents
• clear opponents away from in front of his net
• block shooting lanes in his D zone
• force incoming forwards off to the side to take bad-angle shots
• hustle your rear end back to the D zone to turn an opposition 2-on-1 into a 2-on-2
• generally make things easier for your goalie so the goalie faces easier shots

He gets paid to do stuff like that. A defenseman's on-ice SV% is a useful advanced stat for judging how well he's doing his job.

Well if it's a defensemen's job then remove the whole NHL because basically no defensemen has been able to consistently do what you are asking in controlling save percentage:

Don't forget, there are not many ****** defensemen who have been around in the league long enough to fit in the sample for this data... these are not depth guys in this evaluation


Probably not a good idea to damn Byfuglien for something that no one really can do

This graph is exactly why +/- is ****. It's why players who are top in +/- have equal chance in being bottom the next year as someone who was in the bottom the year prior. It's why GF% has a R2 of **** but CF is in the 70-80 region.

Judge a defensemen by the statistics he controls better, his inputs... not the ones he doesn't, his outputs.

 

[JetsFan815]

Let's just say I strongly disagree on that one. IT IS A DEFENSEMAN'S JOB to favourably influence his team's SV%...

• prevent breakaways by opponents
• clear opponents away from in front of his net
• block shooting lanes in his D zone
• force incoming forwards off to the side to take bad-angle shots
• hustle your rear end back to the D zone to turn an opposition 2-on-1 into a 2-on-2
• generally make things easier for your goalie so the goalie faces easier shots

He gets paid to do stuff like that. A defenseman's on-ice SV% is a useful advanced stat for judging how well he's doing his job.

How do you explain the fact that last season Buff had an above team average 91.3 sv%? Did Buff suddenly get that much worse this season? That doesn't even make sense and most people agree that Buff was worse last season due to his poor conditioning and weight issues. By your logic, an out of shape, 300 lb Buff is a significantly more effective NHL player than an in shape, better conditioned and doing better on the eyetest version we are seeing this season. It flies in the face of logic.

 

[roccerfeller]

For me, and I know not everyone shares this opinion, he makes the Jets a better team. Regardless of his flaws, outside of the Jets bubble I don't think getting rid of him will aid this team much. He's getting older now and he'll eventually be on his way out (playing wise). I don't know what will happen then; I am not adverse to trading him.

However In my mind, he would retire a Jet. That would be pretty cool. He does a lot of good things that don't get credited enough, though he does cripple us at times.

But I just can't see him being traded for anything we need on an essential level. And no Buff will just make this team weaker overall.

 

[JetsFan815]

Buff is on pace for 64 points this season. Any return for him must be significant otherwise I'd rather keep seeing him in a Jets jersey for the rest of his career. Buff is not a player you trade for peanuts or for the sake of trading. If I was Chevy I'd be asking for a top prospect + a 1st round pick + 2nd or a roster a player, anything less than that is not worth trading Buff.

 

[theamazingchris]

In case garret's example was a little too mathy for you, (it can be for me, as I'm not well-versed in statistics) I find it helpful to give some practical examples for myself. By doing that, I am more than convinced that a player can't control his on-ice sv%. Not even a defenceman.

Pick any player that's been a regular NHLer since 2007-2008. Then look at their onice sv% per year, not including playoffs. (I left out years where there were very few GP)

Rene Bourque: .926 .927 .905 .911 .907 .941 .940
Francois Beauchemin: .921 .905 .913 .902 .904 .941 .910
Hal Gill: .909 .923 .933 .916 .908 .927
Barrett Jackman: .902 .898 .918 .906 .948 .913 .910

I could go on. But do any of these players look like they're controlling this? If they are, why is it so wildly inconsistent from year-to-year?

 

[knorthern knight]

Well if it's a defensemen's job then remove the whole NHL because basically no defensemen has been able to consistently do what you are asking in controlling save percentage:

[...snip image...]

Probably not a good idea to damn Byfuglien for something that no one really can do

This graph is exactly why +/- is ****. It's why players who are top in +/- have equal chance in being bottom the next year as someone who was in the bottom the year prior. It's why GF% has a R2 of **** but CF is in the 70-80 region.

Judge a defensemen by the statistics he controls better, his inputs... not the ones he doesn't, his outputs.

Part of the quote I was responding to was "He also has an .875 on-ice save percentage, far and away the worst on the team". That raises a red flag.

 

[truck]

Let's just say I strongly disagree on that one. IT IS A DEFENSEMAN'S JOB to favourably influence his team's SV%...

• prevent breakaways by opponents
• clear opponents away from in front of his net
• block shooting lanes in his D zone
• force incoming forwards off to the side to take bad-angle shots
• hustle your rear end back to the D zone to turn an opposition 2-on-1 into a 2-on-2
• generally make things easier for your goalie so the goalie faces easier shots

He gets paid to do stuff like that. A defenseman's on-ice SV% is a useful advanced stat for judging how well he's doing his job.

If this is true...

Doggie Hamilton >>>>> Chara

 

[YWGinYYZ]

Part of the quote I was responding to was "He also has an .875 on-ice save percentage, far and away the worst on the team". That raises a red flag.

On-ice SV% for defensemen has been shown to be random, IE: they don't really have control over it, and you can't use it to predict on-ice SV% from year to year.

From: http://www.boysonthebus.com/2013/09/09/the-randomness-of-on-ice-save-percentages/

If something is found to be random, it follows that the player said metric is being attached to does not have control over it. If a player or team does not control something, we cannot rationally use it to value their performance.
...
I’ve recently explored shooting percentage at the individual level, and found that while it seems to be random for defencemen, it is not random at the forward level.
...
Defencemen have no control over their OISVP Differential. One year they may post an OISVP that is higher than their team average, and the next it may be lower than the team average. In the long-run, it is impossible to sustain at abnormally high or low levels.

So, the .875 on-ice SV% doesn't raise much of a red flag for me, and it's not a very useful stat to judge a defenseman by.

 

[truck]

On-ice SV% for defensemen has been shown to be random, IE: they don't really have control over it, and you can't use it to predict on-ice SV% from year to year.

From: http://www.boysonthebus.com/2013/09/09/the-randomness-of-on-ice-save-percentages/



So, the .875 on-ice SV% doesn't raise much of a red flag for me, and it's not a very useful stat to judge a defenseman by.

The only "red flag" that it raises for me is:

[redflag]Either the goalies behind him suck or he is getting unlucky - perhaps both. [/redflag]

 

[KingBogo]

It's not the winnable/notwinnable that causes what we see. It's that's the point most teams tend to go into "defensive shells". On average, most NHL teams change systems once they are up 2 goals which screws with the effects.

The point though is +/- is pretty much useless no matter how you mold it.

But that is pretty much my point. It is much easier to use stats to support an arguement if we pick and choose what subset of stats best fits what we are trying to "prove". IMO if things get messier when we include more information that is okay. In the case of Buff, if he isn't able to attapt to changing systems employed to protect a lead that should enter into any analysis of him as a defensman.

 

[GJF]

I definately wouldn't trade Buff until trade deadline. Only if someone comes along and overpays big time.

At the deadline, I would want to speak to Buff about what his mind is up top after next season. Depending on the talks I would deal or not deal him. I'd deal him for a top 6 player + project (preferably LHD, 2nd pairing upside) + 1st round pick

 

[Hunter368]

Let's just say I strongly disagree on that one. IT IS A DEFENSEMAN'S JOB to favourably influence his team's SV%...

• prevent breakaways by opponents
• clear opponents away from in front of his net
• block shooting lanes in his D zone
• force incoming forwards off to the side to take bad-angle shots
• hustle your rear end back to the D zone to turn an opposition 2-on-1 into a 2-on-2
• generally make things easier for your goalie so the goalie faces easier shots

He gets paid to do stuff like that. A defenseman's on-ice SV% is a useful advanced stat for judging how well he's doing his job.

Just to be clear, for those who disagree with the above post. Please explain your position more clearly. People who have disagreed with this post have danced around their position and posted negatives instead of saying what their position is.

The whole devil's advocate role (just saying he is wrong and conveniently choosing/posting two d-men which prove your point) is the easy way to argue, state your position instead of just posting negatives. IE: State what you see what the d-men's role is and what/how they should be able to influence. Then we can intelligently debate both positions (yours vs. KK's post).