Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Potvin29

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 675
1
Going into the offseason the Jays needed help up the middle in the infield, some bench depth, another late innings reliever and at least another #3 starter if not a #1 or #2.  After the non-waiver deadline the Jays need some more help in the middle of the infield, some more bench depth, a late innings reliever and another starter.  Job well done Alex.

Since Stroman was not on the opening day roster, does his addition not function as adding another starter without having to do so through trade?

2
Non-Hockey Chatter / Re: The Official Complaint Thread!
« on: Yesterday at 04:49:38 PM »
Remind me, which movie is it where the hero shoots through a baby to get to the bad guys?

Baby Shields 2

3
All Sports But Hockey / Re: The 2014 Toronto Blue Jays Thread
« on: Yesterday at 03:59:56 PM »
Scherzer - Verlander - Sanchez - Price
vs
Lester - Samardzija - Gray - Kazmir

I hope that happens in the playoffs.  7 game series, 7 runs total.

EDIT:

The deal is:

Quote
@jonmorosi 

Four-player deal confirmed: David Price to Tigers, Austin Jackson to Mariners, Nick Franklin and Drew Smyly to Rays. No other prospects.

4
All Sports But Hockey / Re: The 2014 Toronto Blue Jays Thread
« on: Yesterday at 03:51:15 PM »
Tigers have apparently traded for Price.

5
All Sports But Hockey / Re: The 2014 Toronto Blue Jays Thread
« on: Yesterday at 09:59:11 AM »
Lester, Gray, Kazmir, Samardzija

What a ridiculous rotation the A's will have for the playoffs.

6
All Sports But Hockey / Re: The 2014 Toronto Blue Jays Thread
« on: Yesterday at 09:53:24 AM »
That's a trade alright.

7
And with Gardiner, he's great at moving the puck out of the zone with possession and gaining the opposition's zone with possession - and getting shots on net.

He's Kaberle-esque at his ability to skate the puck out of trouble.  It's borderline amazing, sometimes, how he moves.  I'm psych'd we have this guy locked up for 5 years.  I just hope he doesn't get got-my-contract-already-don't-need-to-try syndrome.

Hopefully he gets got-my-contract-want-bigger-contract-when-upcoming-UFA syndrome.

8
EDIT: Actually I'm going to change that to the 'Kaberle-syndrome' wherein an offensively gifted defenseman is criticized their entire career for being incapable defensively.

This. A millions times this. He doesn't play the way people traditionally perceive as being good defensively, but, he's much better than he gets credit for.

The criticism of Gardiner was kind of 2 fold...Firstly, he had trouble defending players from making plays in the defensive zone when he didn't have the puck.  Secondly, he would sometimes make some very risky plays that backfired on him.

I would argue that he's very good when he's got the puck on his stick, risky plays notwithstanding, but he's not good enough and the defensive side of the game (positionally) when without the puck.

I like the guy, and he got a fair deal given his contributions.  But let's be realistic here...he's not positionally strong without the puck....yet.

Exactly.  Puck possession and Dave Tippett's comments notwithstanding, d-men need to be able to play defense. 

I think the argument is that what he does well IS a form of playing defense.

I understand and agree.  What I argue is that he (and all dmen) need to also be able to play their position without the puck.

I think he can - is he great? No, but few players are and even fewer are great while having his ability with the puck.  So I think his play without the puck is made into a bigger issue than it is, because his play with the puck makes it less of an issue.  I feel like I hear more criticism of Gardiner defensively on the whole than I heard about someone like Gleason, who I'd argue is far and away worse at all facets other than being physical.

Basically IMO I think he's great with the puck and that his play with the puck overcomes any perceived deficiencies without it.

So all he need too do is have the puck more then. Problems solved. The team as a whole needs to have the puck more.

He already does have the puck a lot, arguably as much or more than anyone on the roster.  He's not the problem.

9
EDIT: Actually I'm going to change that to the 'Kaberle-syndrome' wherein an offensively gifted defenseman is criticized their entire career for being incapable defensively.

This. A millions times this. He doesn't play the way people traditionally perceive as being good defensively, but, he's much better than he gets credit for.

The criticism of Gardiner was kind of 2 fold...Firstly, he had trouble defending players from making plays in the defensive zone when he didn't have the puck.  Secondly, he would sometimes make some very risky plays that backfired on him.

I would argue that he's very good when he's got the puck on his stick, risky plays notwithstanding, but he's not good enough and the defensive side of the game (positionally) when without the puck.

I like the guy, and he got a fair deal given his contributions.  But let's be realistic here...he's not positionally strong without the puck....yet.

Exactly.  Puck possession and Dave Tippett's comments notwithstanding, d-men need to be able to play defense. 

I think the argument is that what he does well IS a form of playing defense.

I understand and agree.  What I argue is that he (and all dmen) need to also be able to play their position without the puck.

I think he can - is he great? No, but few players are and even fewer are great while having his ability with the puck.  So I think his play without the puck is made into a bigger issue than it is, because his play with the puck makes it less of an issue.  I feel like I hear more criticism of Gardiner defensively on the whole than I heard about someone like Gleason, who I'd argue is far and away worse at all facets other than being physical.

Basically IMO I think he's great with the puck and that his play with the puck overcomes any perceived deficiencies without it.

10
Main Leafs Hockey Talk / Re: Managing the Cap
« on: July 30, 2014, 11:36:48 AM »
Here's Mirtle's "projected roster" - with a 22 man roster, just over $1 million in cap space, barring any trades.

http://www.capgeek.com/armchair-gm/roster/38899

11
EDIT: Actually I'm going to change that to the 'Kaberle-syndrome' wherein an offensively gifted defenseman is criticized their entire career for being incapable defensively.

This. A millions times this. He doesn't play the way people traditionally perceive as being good defensively, but, he's much better than he gets credit for.

The criticism of Gardiner was kind of 2 fold...Firstly, he had trouble defending players from making plays in the defensive zone when he didn't have the puck.  Secondly, he would sometimes make some very risky plays that backfired on him.

I would argue that he's very good when he's got the puck on his stick, risky plays notwithstanding, but he's not good enough and the defensive side of the game (positionally) when without the puck.

I like the guy, and he got a fair deal given his contributions.  But let's be realistic here...he's not positionally strong without the puck....yet.

Exactly.  Puck possession and Dave Tippett's comments notwithstanding, d-men need to be able to play defense. 

I think the argument is that what he does well IS a form of playing defense.

12
Then why doesn't that show up in the stats?  Gardiner played the most minutes of any D on the Leafs at 5 on 5 last season with 1,363 minutes.  4 other D on the Leafs played at least 1000 minutes at 5 on 5, and of those D Gardiner was on the ice for the least number of goals against (tied with Gunnarsson) and was on the ice for the least number of goals per 20 (or 60, or whatever metric of GA relative to TOI you want to use).

That's the thing about Gardiner - while he may not be the strongest defensive player, his ability with the puck means he's not spending as much time in his own end as other defencemen. The most effective way to play defence is to have control of the puck, and Gardiner is excellent at helping with that. Quite frankly, I don't care how he plays in the defensive zone when, as you point out, despite having the most ES TOI among defencemen, he was on the ice for the lowest number of goals against. That's not all on him, obviously, but it certainly is an indication that he's a positive influence on the team's overall defensive play.

Yeah, he could be getting unsustainably high goaltending when he's on the ice, for instance, so I don't want to put too much weight on it - but simply to say that if he really was that bad defensively I think those #'s would be worse than they are.

It's funny because I've just been reading a Q & A in The Hockey News with Kyle Dubas and his answer to a question seems really relevant to discussion about Gardiner defensively:

Quote
THN: What about things like cognitive studies, psychological biases, and other scientific approaches? Have you been examining that type of research?

Dubas: There are a lot of good books people can read. Whether its Fooled By Randomness or Thinking Fast and Slow or The Signal and the Noise, they have a lot to do with probability and data, but theyre more to do with how we think, how our mind can fool us and how what were watching may not be exactly what we believe it to be. Im fascinated by those things, not really to do with hockey, but to do with living and life in general. That stuff is of general interest to me in improving the way I think and we think.

http://www.thehockeynews.com/blog/qa-with-kyle-dubas-the-leafs-28-year-old-assistant-gm/

I think he's a good example of a player that maybe judged simply with your eyes you might undervalue him but if you marry that to the underlying statistics it can help you appreciate the player to a greater degree and tell you things about the player that maybe aren't initially obvious.  Sure his skating is obviously terrific, but the stats help show you how that helps the team both defensively and offensively.

13
EDIT: Actually I'm going to change that to the 'Kaberle-syndrome' wherein an offensively gifted defenseman is criticized their entire career for being incapable defensively.

This. A millions times this. He doesn't play the way people traditionally perceive as being good defensively, but, he's much better than he gets credit for.

The criticism of Gardiner was kind of 2 fold...Firstly, he had trouble defending players from making plays in the defensive zone when he didn't have the puck.  Secondly, he would sometimes make some very risky plays that backfired on him.

I would argue that he's very good when he's got the puck on his stick, risky plays notwithstanding, but he's not good enough and the defensive side of the game (positionally) when without the puck.

I like the guy, and he got a fair deal given his contributions.  But let's be realistic here...he's not positionally strong without the puck....yet.

Then why doesn't that show up in the stats?  Gardiner played the most minutes of any D on the Leafs at 5 on 5 last season with 1,363 minutes.  4 other D on the Leafs played at least 1000 minutes at 5 on 5, and of those D Gardiner was on the ice for the least number of goals against (tied with Gunnarsson) and was on the ice for the least number of goals per 20 (or 60, or whatever metric of GA relative to TOI you want to use).

14
EDIT: Actually I'm going to change that to the 'Kaberle-syndrome' wherein an offensively gifted defenseman is criticized their entire career for being incapable defensively.

This. A millions times this. He doesn't play the way people traditionally perceive as being good defensively, but, he's much better than he gets credit for.

Yep, the best description probably came from Dave Tippett (and I know it's been posted on this forum at least once before):

Quote
"We had a player that was supposed to be a great, shutdown defenseman. He was supposedly the be-all, end-all of defensemen. But when you did a 10-game analysis of him, you found out he was defending all the time because he can't move the puck. Then we had another guy, who supposedly couldn't defend a lick. Well, he was defending only 20 percent of the time because he's making good plays out of our end. He may not be the strongest defender, but he's only doing it 20 percent of the time. So the equation works out better the other way. I ended up trading the other defenseman."

And with Gardiner, he's great at moving the puck out of the zone with possession and gaining the opposition's zone with possession - and getting shots on net.

15
As well, dmen who take offensive chances, as his talent dictates he should, are going to get caught periodically. Because of that, it's pretty rare that dmen like that will be perceived as great defensively. Folks will remember the odd play where they got burned.

I think this is where we're at with Gardiner.  He's not great defensively but even right now he's capable in his own end, but has a bit of the 'Phaneuf-syndrome' going on where every mistake is amplified.

EDIT: Actually I'm going to change that to the 'Kaberle-syndrome' wherein an offensively gifted defenseman is criticized their entire career for being incapable defensively.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 675