Game 66: Bruins @ Leafs 7:00PM SNET-0

[bustaheims]

I love kessels offensive game but his defensive game is atrocious. Unless he has the puck he is a liability out there. This last year he has improved his passing game quite a bit. But it seems hes just not getting any better defensively. I know +\- isn't the best stat but sequins +35 is pretty darn impressive.

It is, but, swap them out for each other and Kessel's +/- would take a huge leap, while Seguin's would take a massive drop.

 

[Capn_Crunch]

I love kessels offensive game but his defensive game is atrocious. Unless he has the puck he is a liability out there. This last year he has improved his passing game quite a bit. But it seems hes just not getting any better defensively. I know +\- isn't the best stat but sequins +35 is pretty darn impressive.

It is, but, swap them out for each other and Kessel's +/- would take a huge leap, while Seguin's would take a massive drop.

Exactly, comparing them almost isn't fair. Seguin plays on a team not just with a mvp goalie and one hell of a backup/1b then you throw in a pretty damn solid d corps and a hell of a lot more talent up front then the leafs offensively let alone the 2 way players they have, then trow in chara to boot.

Then look at what phil has to play with, a collection of second and third line c's, inconsistent linemates beyond lupal and a scary defensive corps ( scary bad most nights ) and laughable goalies at best.

When the almighty seguin hits 80-90 pts and strings together at least. 4 30 goal seasons give me a call. I'll still take phil anyday. 4eguon could always end up being another patrick stephan, stranger things have happened.

 

[ZBBM]

Before this year I had doubts that Kessel's conditioning could see him through a consistent season, i.e., one without long cold streaks.  He came to camp in good shape and has been far more consistent in scoring.  His passing has really gotten better too.  He has proved me wrong on a couple of counts.

But as Lebo said, he's atrocious defensively -- really bad.  That cannot be overlooked and it offsets all or at least most of his offense.  One of the reasons we're going to miss the playoffs again is that line's terrible defensive play. 

And, as pnjunction said:

He might be the best periphery player in the league, but he's still peripheral player.  That means he struggles defensively and when the going gets tough.

Re the bolded, see under Bruins, Boston.

If he could ever become at least adequate defensively, then he'd be bidding for superstar status.  Until then, he's a deeply flawed player.

 

[princedpw]

And, as pnjunction said:

He might be the best periphery player in the league, but he's still peripheral player.  That means he struggles defensively and when the going gets tough.

Re the bolded, see under Bruins, Boston.

Normally people say that the playoffs are one of those times "when the going gets tough".  Do you agree?  In 07-08 and 08-09 Kessel scored 97 points in 150 regular season games.  In 15 playoff games during those two years he scored 15 points. It is a small sample size and doesn't mean that much but at the very least it does not appear that he has played worse when the going gets the toughest. 

So I'll definitely agree that Kessel's defense is terrible, but I don't think we should pile on by suggesting he does not play well when the stress gets high or when the opponents are "trying their hardest".  At least, I just haven't seen any evidence that is true.

By the way, I think one of the biggest problems with the first line is that both Kessel and Lupul are terrible defensively.  When the puck comes up the boards to them on the wing, neither can get the puck out.  So there's no where for the defensemen to go with it.  It may be that despite the offensive sense of the pair, we need to rejigger the lines (or the team) so that Kessel plays with a stronger defensive winger on the other side (yes, I'll take Parise if necessary).

 

[dappleganger]

I love kessels offensive game but his defensive game is atrocious. Unless he has the puck he is a liability out there. This last year he has improved his passing game quite a bit. But it seems hes just not getting any better defensively. I know +\- isn't the best stat but sequins +35 is pretty darn impressive.

It is, but, swap them out for each other and Kessel's +/- would take a huge leap, while Seguin's would take a massive drop.

Exactly, comparing them almost isn't fair. Seguin plays on a team not just with a mvp goalie and one hell of a backup/1b then you throw in a pretty damn solid d corps and a hell of a lot more talent up front then the leafs offensively let alone the 2 way players they have, then trow in chara to boot.

Then look at what phil has to play with, a collection of second and third line c's, inconsistent linemates beyond lupal and a scary defensive corps ( scary bad most nights ) and laughable goalies at best.

When the almighty seguin hits 80-90 pts and strings together at least. 4 30 goal seasons give me a call. I'll still take phil anyday. 4eguon could always end up being another patrick stephan, stranger things have happened.

Phil's last season in Boston he was a +23. I'd also like to point out that Phil has 15 points in 15 games in the playoffs.

Edit: beat me to it Prince.

 

[Kin]

Normally people say that the playoffs are one of those times "when the going gets tough".  Do you agree?  In 07-08 and 08-09 Kessel scored 97 points in 150 regular season games.  In 15 playoff games during those two years he scored 15 points. It is a small sample size and doesn't mean that much but at the very least it does not appear that he has played worse when the going gets the toughest. 

I ordinarily don't like to bring this up because it happened when he was so young but if Kessel's playoff record is being used to make a point then I think it does sort of frame the entire debate about Kessel nicely.

In the 07-08 playoffs Kessel scored three goals and added an assist in 4 games. At a glance those are great numbers. But they also landed Kessel on the bench for three games of that series(I'm fairly sure it's the last three but I could be wrong about that)

So I think the issue of the way Kessel affects the game when he's not scoring is still pretty central to his evaluation. It needs to be put in the proper context. It's not saying he sucks, it's saying that nobody would have built a team around Jari Kurri.

 

[Kin]

Exactly, comparing them almost isn't fair. Seguin plays on a team not just with a mvp goalie and one hell of a backup/1b then you throw in a pretty damn solid d corps and a hell of a lot more talent up front then the leafs offensively let alone the 2 way players they have, then trow in chara to boot.

I've never been one for taking anything concrete away from +/- but if you are then you do at least have to account for how numbers look in a team context. Not everyone in Boston has a +35. In fact Seguin's +5 higher than anyone else on the team. Everyone else on that team plays in front of Thomas and Rask, so why is Seguin a +35 and Krejci a -4?

I'll still take phil anyday. 4eguon could always end up being another patrick stephan, stranger things have happened.

I'm sorry but that is flat out nonsense. Patrik Stefan was a player who never found his legs and was never a good NHL player. Tyler Seguin was an NHL All-Star this year.

 

[drummond]

According to NHL scouts yes he does.  Kessel is seen as a guy who is complimentary, not a game breaker in this league.  Seguin has the potential to be a superstar.   

I'm sorry, but that's absolute BS. Kessel already is a game breaker in the NHL. Right now, he's the only player in the league to have scored 30+ goals in each of the last 4 seasons, and, when it's all said and done, there will be maybe half a dozen other guys who will be able to make that claim.

People seem to cream their shorts about potential, but aren't that enthused about a guy top 5 in points in the whole league.

Some people do that.  Those people aren't worth debating anything with.  It's just a ridiculous point of view that isn't worth your time.

I know, but I just can't fathom it. I mean, for me it's like we're content with these exaggerated expectations of players when we draft them and if they don't meet that either they aren't developing fast enough, the coach screwed up or something or the other, but when we have a player we're never satisfied. I just have to look at Sundin as a parallel.

Sundin: Oh, he didn't win a cup, can't lead, isn't Canadian, wasn't as good as his contemporaries.

Knock on Kessel: He's like Mogilny.

What is wrong with that. Mogs was damn fine player, after Sundin second best player Leafs have had in last decade. If Kessel manages to duplicate Mogilny in his prime I would be more than pleased.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

Exactly, comparing them almost isn't fair. Seguin plays on a team not just with a mvp goalie and one hell of a backup/1b then you throw in a pretty damn solid d corps and a hell of a lot more talent up front then the leafs offensively let alone the 2 way players they have, then trow in chara to boot.

I've never been one for taking anything concrete away from +/- but if you are then you do at least have to account for how numbers look in a team context. Not everyone in Boston has a +35. In fact Seguin's +5 higher than anyone else on the team. Everyone else on that team plays in front of Thomas and Rask, so why is Seguin a +35 and Krejci a -4?

Pretty much why there's not much to take from +/-.

The team context though is that basically everyone on that team has a great +/-: only 3 regulars are a minus on the season, and only 7 players are below a +10.  3 of the top 4 spots in the league are Bruins, and 6 of the top 12.  Being +5 more than the next player isn't really statistically significant because we all agree how problematic +/- is.  Pretty much the whole team has good-to-great +/-.

I'm sure there are other factors.  I think he was playing with Bergeron (one of the top 2-way players in the league) a good portion of the season (and may still be)?  Seguin also has one of the most favourable offensive zone starts % on one of the best defensive teams in the league (55.8%, compared with Bergeron for example, who is at 47.5%).  Only Pouliot and Horton are started more in the offensive zone. 

Seguin plays no PK time either (obviously not that surprising for a young player, but also not suggestive of strong defensive play).

It shows the difficulties with +/- from year to year.  Krejci was +20ish last season, and in the +30 range a few years back, and now he is one of the very few Bruins who is a minus. 

This is not at all to downplay Seguin's season - it's definitely great, and a big reason for his +/- is his great offensive play.  Clearly they haven't been giving up many goals with him on the ice either.

I don't know what my point is but whether he is +35, +15 or even, his surrounding statistics are more indicative of how good a season he is having.

 

[Bullfrog]

If he could ever become at least adequate defensively, then he'd be bidding for superstar status.  Until then, he's a deeply flawed player.

That's quite the leap from deeply flawed to superstar.

 

[Kin]

Pretty much why there's not much to take from +/-.

The team context though is that basically everyone on that team has a great +/-: only 3 regulars are a minus on the season, and only 7 players are below a +10.  3 of the top 4 spots in the league are Bruins, and 6 of the top 12.  Being +5 more than the next player isn't really statistically significant because we all agree how problematic +/- is.  Pretty much the whole team has good-to-great +/-.

I think we're mainly on the same page here with regards to the value of plus minus but I don't think this is true. Six guys on the Bruins have a very good +/-. Most of them are good. But there's no denying that Seguin's number is exceptional even for the Bruins. Likewise, Kessel's number is so-so within the context of the Leafs.

So, yeah, there's not much to take from +/- but if people are going to be kicking it around there's clearly more to it than just which teams they play for.

 

[Bender]

Normally people say that the playoffs are one of those times "when the going gets tough".  Do you agree?  In 07-08 and 08-09 Kessel scored 97 points in 150 regular season games.  In 15 playoff games during those two years he scored 15 points. It is a small sample size and doesn't mean that much but at the very least it does not appear that he has played worse when the going gets the toughest. 

I ordinarily don't like to bring this up because it happened when he was so young but if Kessel's playoff record is being used to make a point then I think it does sort of frame the entire debate about Kessel nicely.

In the 07-08 playoffs Kessel scored three goals and added an assist in 4 games. At a glance those are great numbers. But they also landed Kessel on the bench for three games of that series(I'm fairly sure it's the last three but I could be wrong about that)

So I think the issue of the way Kessel affects the game when he's not scoring is still pretty central to his evaluation. It needs to be put in the proper context. It's not saying he sucks, it's saying that nobody would have built a team around Jari Kurri.

St. Louis was built around Brett Hull for a number of years.

 

[Kin]

St. Louis was built around Brett Hull for a number of years.

How'd that work out for them?

 

[drummond]

St. Louis was built around Brett Hull for a number of years.

How'd that work out for them?

Well, if nothing else they made play-offs every single year he played for them (11 years in row) and 7 times they made it into the second round... Not that bad, if you ask me.

 

[Kin]

St. Louis was built around Brett Hull for a number of years.

How'd that work out for them?

Well, if nothing else they made play-offs every single year he played for them (11 years in row) and 7 times they made it into the second round... Not that bad, if you ask me.

Look a little deeper. A bunch of those years are years where 16 of 21 teams would make the playoffs. The 88-89 Blues team "made" the playoffs with 78 points and their first round win was over a North Stars team with 70 points.

Even still, I'm pretty confident that most people will read not getting out of the second round in 11 years as "not that well".

 

[drummond]

St. Louis was built around Brett Hull for a number of years.

How'd that work out for them?

Well, if nothing else they made play-offs every single year he played for them (11 years in row) and 7 times they made it into the second round... Not that bad, if you ask me.

Look a little deeper. A bunch of those years are years where 16 of 21 teams would make the playoffs. The 88-89 Blues team "made" the playoffs with 78 points and their first round win was over a North Stars team with 70 points.

Even still, I'm pretty confident that most people will read not getting out of the second round in 11 years as "not that well".

You are absolutely right. But given the recent Leafs record somewhat consistent appearance in the playoffs would be nice.
But I completely agree with you that a team should be built around centre, not a winger.

 

[hockeyfan1]

St. Louis was built around Brett Hull for a number of years.

How'd that work out for them?

Well, if nothing else they made play-offs every single year he played for them (11 years in row) and 7 times they made it into the second round... Not that bad, if you ask me.

Look a little deeper. A bunch of those years are years where 16 of 21 teams would make the playoffs. The 88-89 Blues team "made" the playoffs with 78 points and their first round win was over a North Stars team with 70 points.

Even still, I'm pretty confident that most people will read not getting out of the second round in 11 years as "not that well".

Well, at least it was better than nothing.  If I were a Blues fan, I wouldn't be complaining about those days too much.