Minor Ex-Leaf News

[Bates]

There are no stats, traditional or analytic, by which Gardiner was bad his last three years as a Leaf.

Game 7 stats.

I appreciate that reading is tough for you but give it another go.

That wasn't in last 3 years Professor?

"It's snowing today" != "it has snowed every day for the last 3 years"

Are you making the case that Gardiner is great? Many, including nhl GM's don't agree.

 

[Kin]

That wasn't in last 3 years Professor?

I said stats by which he was bad over those three years. Not a few cherry picked games.

Again, I get that "Durrrr, Gardiner bad game 7" is the sort of thing you say but if you're going to claim that "year after year" the stats showed Gardiner to be an "average at best" defenseman, you actually have to have something behind that which correlates to his performance OVER THE YEARS when what the actual traditional stats have over those three years is that he was 25th among all defensemen in scoring and 9th among all defensemen in +/-.

 

[Bates]

That wasn't in last 3 years Professor?

I said stats by which he was bad over those three years. Not a few cherry picked games.

Again, I get that "Durrrr, Gardiner bad game 7" is the sort of thing you say but if you're going to claim that "year after year" the stats showed Gardiner to be an "average at best" defenseman, you actually have to have something behind that which correlates to his performance OVER THE YEARS when what the actual traditional stats have over those three years is that he was 25th among all defensemen in scoring and 9th among all defensemen in +/-.

He was bad like Kadri,  you just knew when it came crunch time he couldn't be depended upon and that was unlikely to improve. Therefore you move on.

 

[Hobbes]

There are no stats, traditional or analytic, by which Gardiner was bad his last three years as a Leaf.

Game 7 stats.

I appreciate that reading is tough for you but give it another go.

That wasn't in last 3 years Professor?

"It's snowing today" != "it has snowed every day for the last 3 years"

Are you making the case that Gardiner is great? Many, including nhl GM's don't agree.

Seriously?

Let me make this "case": your last post was f***ing stupid. It does not follow that every single post you've ever made was stupid, nor that you're a certifiable genius.

 

[Bates]

There are no stats, traditional or analytic, by which Gardiner was bad his last three years as a Leaf.

Game 7 stats.

I appreciate that reading is tough for you but give it another go.

That wasn't in last 3 years Professor?

"It's snowing today" != "it has snowed every day for the last 3 years"

Are you making the case that Gardiner is great? Many, including nhl GM's don't agree.

Seriously?

Let me make this "case": your last post was f***ing stupid. It does not follow that every single post you've ever made was stupid, nor that you're a certifiable genius.

Gardiner is average at best. Most who watch and GM know it, but analytics and apologists here disagree. 

 

[Kin]

He was bad like Kadri,  you just knew when it came crunch time he couldn't be depended upon and that was unlikely to improve. Therefore you move on.

Jesus, you can't even keep to your nonsense for longer than a post once it's been debunked.

Seriously, what is your compulsion to come along and derail the actual intelligent conversation that happens on this board like a five year old screaming I HAVE OPINIONS!!!!

 

[Bates]

He was bad like Kadri,  you just knew when it came crunch time he couldn't be depended upon and that was unlikely to improve. Therefore you move on.

Jesus, you can't even keep to your nonsense for longer than a post once it's been debunked.

Seriously, what is your compulsion to come along and derail the actual intelligent conversation that happens on this board like a five year old screaming I HAVE OPINIONS!!!!

Very rich from the guy who has pretty much turned the league's largest fanbase forum into a place where only a dozen or so people post.

 

[Bender]

He was bad like Kadri,  you just knew when it came crunch time he couldn't be depended upon and that was unlikely to improve. Therefore you move on.

Jesus, you can't even keep to your nonsense for longer than a post once it's been debunked.

Seriously, what is your compulsion to come along and derail the actual intelligent conversation that happens on this board like a five year old screaming I HAVE OPINIONS!!!!

Very rich from the guy who has pretty much turned the league's largest fanbase forum into a place where only a dozen or so people post.

This is between the two of you but I'd argue LC9s been taking care of that.

 

[Guilt Trip]

There are no stats, traditional or analytic, by which Gardiner was bad his last three years as a Leaf.

Game 7 stats.

I appreciate that reading is tough for you but give it another go.

That wasn't in last 3 years Professor?

"It's snowing today" != "it has snowed every day for the last 3 years"

Are you making the case that Gardiner is great? Many, including nhl GM's don't agree.

Seriously?

Let me make this "case": your last post was f***ing stupid. It does not follow that every single post you've ever made was stupid, nor that you're a certifiable genius.

Gardiner is average at best. Most who watch and GM know it, but analytics and apologists here disagree. 

I agree with you. He's an average D man at best.

 

[Bender]

There are no stats, traditional or analytic, by which Gardiner was bad his last three years as a Leaf.

Game 7 stats.

I appreciate that reading is tough for you but give it another go.

That wasn't in last 3 years Professor?

"It's snowing today" != "it has snowed every day for the last 3 years"

Are you making the case that Gardiner is great? Many, including nhl GM's don't agree.

Seriously?

Let me make this "case": your last post was f***ing stupid. It does not follow that every single post you've ever made was stupid, nor that you're a certifiable genius.

Gardiner is average at best. Most who watch and GM know it, but analytics and apologists here disagree.

You don't have to be an apologist to disagree.

 

[Kin]

Very rich from the guy who has pretty much turned the league's largest fanbase forum into a place where only a dozen or so people post.

Trust me, if I had the power to make people stop posting here I'd have used it on you to great acclaim.

 

[Bates]

There are no stats, traditional or analytic, by which Gardiner was bad his last three years as a Leaf.

Game 7 stats.

I appreciate that reading is tough for you but give it another go.

That wasn't in last 3 years Professor?

"It's snowing today" != "it has snowed every day for the last 3 years"

Are you making the case that Gardiner is great? Many, including nhl GM's don't agree.

Seriously?

Let me make this "case": your last post was f***ing stupid. It does not follow that every single post you've ever made was stupid, nor that you're a certifiable genius.

Gardiner is average at best. Most who watch and GM know it, but analytics and apologists here disagree.

You don't have to be an apologist to disagree.

Should I change the and to or?

 

[Bender]

There are no stats, traditional or analytic, by which Gardiner was bad his last three years as a Leaf.

Game 7 stats.

I appreciate that reading is tough for you but give it another go.

That wasn't in last 3 years Professor?

"It's snowing today" != "it has snowed every day for the last 3 years"

Are you making the case that Gardiner is great? Many, including nhl GM's don't agree.

Seriously?

Let me make this "case": your last post was f***ing stupid. It does not follow that every single post you've ever made was stupid, nor that you're a certifiable genius.

Gardiner is average at best. Most who watch and GM know it, but analytics and apologists here disagree.

You don't have to be an apologist to disagree.

Should I change the and to or?

You don't have to be huge into analytics either. Just like you don't need analytics to think Nylander is a good player.

 

[Bates]

There are no stats, traditional or analytic, by which Gardiner was bad his last three years as a Leaf.

Game 7 stats.

I appreciate that reading is tough for you but give it another go.

That wasn't in last 3 years Professor?

"It's snowing today" != "it has snowed every day for the last 3 years"

Are you making the case that Gardiner is great? Many, including nhl GM's don't agree.

Seriously?

Let me make this "case": your last post was f***ing stupid. It does not follow that every single post you've ever made was stupid, nor that you're a certifiable genius.

Gardiner is average at best. Most who watch and GM know it, but analytics and apologists here disagree.

You don't have to be an apologist to disagree.

Should I change the and to or?

You don't have to be huge into analytics either. Just like you don't need analytics to think Nylander is a good player.

I agree but there is a diffferendebetween thinking Nylander is bad, Nylander is good, and Nylander is the best. I read on here pretty much daily that Nylander is all of them depending on the poster.

 

[Kin]

You don't have to be huge into analytics either. Just like you don't need analytics to think Nylander is a good player.

Exactly. Gardiner's analytics are good. His traditional stats were good. To think Gardiner was a good player the only thing you needed was not to think that every measurable, quantifiable standard that exists was meaningless compared to your own personal judgement.

 

[Guilt Trip]

You don't have to be huge into analytics either. Just like you don't need analytics to think Nylander is a good player.

Same applies when a player isn't that good. Analytics don't always tell the whole story either.

 

[Hobbes]

I wasn't terribly upset when the Leafs elected not to re-sign Gardiner because I expected his cap hit would be too high to fit (we still had Zaitsev on the books at the time) and because I didn't have as high an opinion of him as some here do.

Most of the time he's a very decent defenceman with excellent analytics (as well as "old style" stats) but from time to time he'd make those nasty misjakes, and their likelihood of happening seemed to be directly proportional to the pressure of the situation. I've talked about this a couple of times, recently, where playing in high-pressure situations can mess with your head, and Jake always struck me as someone who didn't handle it very well. His most egregious moments seemed to happen at the most inopportune times. He would also do jaw-droppingly amazing things at times,  so I always thought of him as a "pick your poison" player and completely understood why others liked him more than I do/did.

By any objective measure he's far from being a bad defenceman and I'd happily take him at his current $2ishM cap hit over Zaitsev at $4.5 or Ceci at $4.5. I'd take him every day of the week over dozens if not hundreds of other NHL blueline regulars. There are also dozens I'd happily take ahead of him, but most (none) aren't available and most are significantly more expensive.

 

[Guilt Trip]

Haha, hundreds? 6 D per team, 31 teams.... You were good with dozens. Gardiner is a decent D man with good puck moving skills. His defensive play isn't good. His body positioning and defensive awareness are lacking. I'm not sad he's gone. Funny thing, Rielly's play reminds me of Gardiner except 44 has a more offensive game. Much of the same in the D zone.

 

[Hobbes]

Haha, hundreds? 6 D per team, 31 teams.... You were good with dozens.

How about "scores" of them. Bushels? Herds? Gaggles? Murders?  ;D

Gardiner is a decent D man with good puck moving skills. His defensive play isn't good. His body positioning and defensive awareness are lacking. I'm not sad he's gone. Funny thing, Rielly's play reminds me of Gardiner except 44 has a more offensive game. Much of the same in the D zone.

His defensive play is a bit underrated. Most of the time he did a good job of separating a player from the puck or getting his stick in there. He was/is also a great passer...except when he isn't. It's the occasional terrible decision he makes with the puck on his stick in the D zone that can be the killer. At times you could easily point to the forwards being at least partly to blame by blowing the zone early and not giving him an outlet, but his occasional problematic decisions related to when to still try to force it vs just to run it off the glass and let the forwards go chase.

 

[Bender]

You don't have to be huge into analytics either. Just like you don't need analytics to think Nylander is a good player.

Same applies when a player isn't that good. Analytics don't always tell the whole story either.

Yeah but there's gradients. Some people's definition of bad is Im going to remember all the misplays and never acknowledge the good ones. I think this swings a lot for Gardiner, like Nylander. Everyone has a right to their own opinion but, to us an analogu, as my history prof once said, some interpretations of history, like interpretations of players, are better than others.