Edmonton's Top 25 Under 25: #13 Peckham, #12 Hartikainen, #11 Stone
by Scott Reynolds on Feb 22, 2010 5:30 AM PST
in Prospects
28 comments
The top 25 rolls toward the top ten with Theo Peckham, Teemu Hartikainen and Ryan Stone. Stone will be turning 25 in about a month and has 35 games in the NHL. And he's injured. But - and it's an important one - he's shown signs of being able to help a good team win games in the NHL, a nifty trick for a member of the Oilers' organization. If a prospect is below Ryan Stone on this list then at this point it's more likely than not that the player never helps a good team win games (note: this does not mean the player couldn't be a member of a good team; Raitis Ivanans is a member of the L.A. Kings, but he sure doesn't help them win games). As individuals we all have different guys ahead and below Stone but, at this point, he seems like the best guy to use for a cut-off.
So what does that say about the other two guys being profiled. Well, Theo Peckham was ranked above Stone on everybody's list but mine where he was ranked... lower. Hartikainen bested Stone for three of us, this time with Jonathan and I acting as unbelievers. The best proof that this methodology works? Zack Stortini was ranked above Stone by only one of us. Bruce thinks Stortini will help his team win games and everyone else remains skeptical. Sounds about right, eh Bruce?
So read the profiles and decide for yourself! Is this guy better than even money to ever be a useful player in the NHL?
by: Benjamin Massey
Theo Peckham ought to have been better this year.
I'm getting that out in the open right up front. Peckham is big, strong, smart, and quicker than you probably think, but in his NHL callup he was exposed badly. His AHL numbers haven't blown the barn doors off, and he's twenty-two years old. The clock is ticking. At some point, a prospect has to put up or shut up.
So why in god's name did I rank this aging, fading light fourth?
Okay. First off, the Springfield Falcons. You know that abominable clusterfuck of a hockey team whose backup goalies are a combined 7-24-1, whose leading scorers are both 27-year-olds who've never played an NHL game, where the team lead for plus/minus among regulars is -4? Theo Peckham has been their best defenseman by miles. Bear with me, I know this is like praising the best golf course in Nunavut, but this makes sense.
The statistics, which are limited, suggest that Peckham plays the toughest ice time of any Falcons defender. He also plays more at even strength than any Falcons defender, which on this team just means more time in the jaws of the wolf. His power play production, traditionally the source of his offense, has stalled and reports are that he's getting less time as a power play option with the offensive presenses of Taylor Chorney and veteran Chris Armstrong.
After all that, Peckham is only a -7, which is a lot better than it sounds given that the only regular blue-liner ahead of him is Johan Motin, who is -4 with less ice time against easier opposition.
Again, Theo Peckham is 22. We expect a top prospect to be rocking the AHL at 22. But, in the third year of his professional career, this is the only one where Peckham hasn't taken a visible, statistical leap forward. Anecdotally, he remains an effective shutdown man whose numbers are hurt by situations and by his teammates. Like young Alex Plante, ranked below him, Peckham has brains and poise, but unlike Plante he has the body to back it up. Theo Peckham might not be able to own the NHL right now, but on a team that's mid-Fall for Hall he could certainly do better than Jason Strudwick.
It's not his fault that the Oilers don't see that. If I could bet on any Oiler prospect who would definitely have an NHL career, Peckham would be worth laying money on.
by: Benjamin Massey
Through some bizarre, tragic failing of the human psyche, I rated Teemu Hartikainen four sports higher than Derek, and as a result I find myself in the position of reviewing his adopted hockey son. Wow. Awkward. Lot of pressure here, I don't mind telling you. What if I slip up and say something a little too negative? I'm going to be out on the streets of blogville begging for comment sections to drop my miserable little quips in.
I should be able to survive this one, though, because I think that Teemu Hartikainen is pretty much the balls.
"Well, yeah," say you the reader. "You ranked him seventh. Give us some of that penetrating Ben analysis."
Fine, then. Hartikainen is nineteen; he turns twenty in May. He plays in one of the five best leagues in the world, the Finnish SM-liiga. He plays well: he's currently sixth on his strong KaiPa team in points and has scored double digit goals for two years running. Unlike so many late-drafted European scorers he has respectable size, checking in at 6'1". Defensively he's not fantastic but for a nineteen-year-old Finnish scoring centre he's better than average. He can win faceoffs. He works hard and has the right sort of attitude. He's pantsing the paces of former Finnish failures like Jani Rita and Jesse Niinimaki.
There's not a lot in Hartikainen to get excited about. We can't pencil him in as the next franchise player, and we can't even pencil him into an NHL lineup. His scoring touch is good, but is it NHL good? He falls into the "tweener" trap which I dread so much: he has decent hands and decent playmaking ability and decent footspeed but hasn't got that one remarkable skill to lean on. On the bright side, his overall package combines to make him a pretty effective even strength scorer, which is a tremendously good sign.
The best part of Hartikainen isn't his potential. He's not going to be Teemu Selanne. What should get our motor running with Hartikainen is his consistency and the near-certainty that he's going to have a shot at the show someday. He does a lot of little things well, and coaches always have room for someone like that in their lineup. To put it another way, you don't think that even a teenage Hartikainen would have been welcome when we were calling the lines of Ryan O'Marra and Colin McDonald from hockey Siberia this season?
The risks for Hartikainen are the usual things: injury, motivation, that he might take a short-term payday from the KHL rather than a two-way contract in Oklahoma City. But the odds are in his favour, and in a system packed with feast-or-famine prospects like Eberle and Paarjavi-Svensson, you can't underestimate that.
by: Scott Reynolds
It's hard not to judge Ryan Stone exclusively by his NHL performance this past season. He's been limited to 27 games but he's performed admirably. His Corsi number is the best on the team for guys who have played more than five games (+1.6/15). He's outscored at the second best rate on the club, miles behind Hemsky but just a touch in front of everybody else (+0.11/15). Stylistically, he's exactly what this team needs: hard on the puck and willing to be physical but positionally sound. What a great player!
Now let's look at the boxcars: 27 GP 0-6-6. Yeah. I know. Not so good. And his PDO number is right around 100 despite a very poor save percentage. That's right, save percentage. He's had 6 points this season with an on-ice shooting percentage of 11.8% at EV. Granted that individual 0% should come back to the mean. He's also put up his strong numbers in a pretty good situation. He hasn't been systematically sheltered but he has had more OZ draws (77) than he has DZ draws (69). So offence isn't his strong suit so far in his NHL career.
Who is he playing? Strange opponents. Not tough, not soft. Strange. If you measure his Qualcomp using goal differential as the standard he's way down in 10th among Oiler forwards. If you measure it using Corsi, he's up in 1st. Curious. He seems to be playing snake-bitten folks who aren't so snake-bitten against the Oilers. Regardless, he's outshooting the outshooters. He may not have a bevy of offence, but at least he's got the puck moving the right way.
So there you go, 27 games of Ryan Stone and the guy looks to be pretty decent. But it's not like the guy never played hockey before this season. His junior career is a distant bell at this point, but his AHL career is not so long ago and should give us some additional clues about what to expect. First, the boxcars. Through 258 AHL regular season games, Stone has scored 49 goals and 116 assists for a total of 165 points. In the post-season his scoring improved to 11-22-33 in 44 games... and a +5... with - and I shit you not - 66 penalty minutes.... would anyone like to keep going? At any rate, his best season as a scorer was likely last season, split between Wilkes-Barre and Hell where he scored 17-40-57 in 77 games. Those are not the numbers of a scorer. So, poor offence. Check.
What about the outscoring thing? Well, he was a + player every season and was a + player in two of three post-season trips ending his AHL career with a +27 total. Not a bad track record. Looking at the AHL QC from last season, we can see that Stone was in among the leaders, fifth among forwards. Fortunately, Gabriel Dejardins also provided me with this data for the seasons from 2005-06 to 2008-09 for all teams. And with Stone, the numbers tell a story. 2005-06 was Stone's first year in the AHL and he ranked 10th of 12 forwards (min. 20 GP) in QC. In 2006-07, he started seeing much tougher competition, ranking 2nd out of 16 forwards on the Penguins, behind only J.F. Jacques (aside: I've got to believe that this guy's back problems cost him something because he was a superior player in the AHL at this time and it can't be the same level of talent we're seeing in the NHL today) but ahead of other guys like Marc Pouliot, Kyle Brodziak and Tyler Kennedy. It was more of the same over the last two years in Wilkes-Barre before he was traded to Springfield. So, aside from his first year, he was able to outscore against solid competition in the AHL and was used ahead of some other players that have made good careers for themselves.
What else is there to know about Stone? Well, in April of 2008 he was charged with public drunkenness along with Wilkes-Barre captain Nathan Smith. Smith left the organization after the incident in the off-season and Stone was traded the next season. While that's an unfortunate thing to have on your record, it may provide some insight into why Stone may have been traded if he was a pretty good player.
As far as the knee injury goes, it must be pretty serious. He's listed on the Oilers injury report as out indefinitely and the Oilers have been pretty tight-lipped about a possible return. I hope that the injury isn't chronic and that he's able to return to the lineup so that he can try his absolute best to swat down some of these prospects who are going to be coming hard after his job. He had surgery on that knee once already this season and came back for 19 games before going on the shelf a second time. He had an MRI and... that's all I can find. Has he had surgery? Did they amputate his leg? When is the last time this man has been seen alive?
0 recs |
28 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Zack Stortini was ranked above Stone by only one of us. Bruce thinks Stortini will help his team win games and everyone else remains skeptical. Sounds about right, eh Bruce?
Ryan Stone:
6’2, 207, age 24 years, 339 days
35 GP, 0-7-7, +2, 55 PiM
Zack Stortini:
6’3, 228, age 24 years, 164 days
204 GP, 13-21-34, -5, 592 PiM
Besides being younger, bigger, more experienced and more accomplished, Stortini also has two healthy legs. So yeah, I’ll bet on him going forward.
PS: I like Stone just fine.
Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries
"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg
I. Am. Shocked. I’m not too concerned about most of Zack’s “advantages.” What do you mean by “more accomplished” that is different from “more experienced”? The experience and age things are pretty much nil. They both have about the same amount of pro experience and the age gap is meaningless at 24. The thing is – and maybe you disagree – Stone seems superior in his ability to play hockey. He gets the puck moving the right way, he’s good positionally. They’re both probably fourth line guys, but I think Stone helps that fourth line outscore. I doubt Stortini will. The major concern in this race for Stone supporters is the injury situation. You can’t help a team win with only one healthy leg.
by Scott Reynolds on Feb 22, 2010 12:48 PM PST up reply actions
What do you mean by "more accomplished" that is different from "more experienced"?
13 goals to Zero is “more accomplished”. Despite being older by a few months, despite a higher draft pedigree and the opportunity that normally goes with it, Stone is only now just beginning to crack the league, and he has shown essentially no offensive aptitude in doing so. Even less than Stortini.
They’re both probably fourth line guys, but I think Stone helps that fourth line outscore. I doubt Stortini will.
Stortini can and has helped a good fourth line outscore. He was part of a very good 4th line when he teamed with Glencross and Brodziak for a couple dozen games late in the 2007-08 season, and the trio was dynamite. Last year there was a revolving door at LW, and this year there’s been a revolving door at C as well, with Stortini himself stepping into that role from time to time. Cogs (meh) and thecaptain (yergh!) were there for a while, but the only constant on the fourth line has been Zack himself, who practically defines the fourth unit. As I mentioned in that write-up way down at #18, Zack has posted a +2 rating on a team that has been outscored by 58 goals this year. I don’t call that outscoring, but anything close to holding your own on a team as bad as this one is no mean feat. Yet after going on three years now of being a regular player who is breaking even on a non-playoff team, you’re still going “I doubt Stortini will.” Whereas Stone is seen as a fourth line outscorer after 28 games in which he has neither scored, nor played (much) on the fourth line.
(Actually, my favourite fourth line combo of the season BY FAR was when Stone and Nilsson came back from IR and joined Stortini. The Oilers immediately went on that 5-game winning streak, at which point Quinn immediately broke up that successful unit for reasons which continue to escape me today.)
The major concern in this race for Stone supporters is the injury situation. You can’t help a team win with only one healthy leg.
I consider myself a Stone supporter, very much so in fact. I like a whole lot of what I’ve seen of Stoner. Do I have to choose one in a “race”? If I do – and I guess I did in a sense when we did the rankings – I’ll take the four-year veteran over the rookie myself, especially if he’s the younger of the two. Even if he’s not younger by much, usually the more-experienced guys are older, sometimes a few years older. That’s when it gets tougher to rank them IMO. I probably shoulda ranked Stone a little higher, but as mentioned above, the leg situation is not good. He’s missed two stretches this season that were each longer than Zack Stortini has spent on IR his entire career. Played a role in my ranking, for sure.
Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries
"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg
by Bruce McCurdy on Feb 22, 2010 2:16 PM PST up reply actions
Using “goals scored in the NHL” as the criterion for “more accomplished” is pretty odd for players like Stone and Stortini. Offensively, I’m very confident that Stone is the better player. He’s had better offence all down the line through junior and in the minors. His PPG in the big leagues is very bad and is still ahead of Stortini, despite the 0 in the shooting percentage column. If you’re going to argue that Zorg > Stone I don’t think offence is the place to look.
The age thing doesn’t seem important. With both guys approaching 25 how much difference in development do you think there is in a six-month gap?
As for Stortini’s role. The fourth line is good when Stortini is the third best player on the line. He can’t drive results in a fourth line role which is what I meant by “helps.” If you put Stone with Brodziak and Glencorss, I think they’re a better group than with Stortini. The line with Stone and Nilsson was the same thing IMO: third best guy on the line. The line is having good things happen but they’d be better off with someone else in Zorg’s spot.
We’ve had the discussion about his possession numbers before so I’ll just say that he’s consistently terrible and his percentages are inconsistently consistently good if you know what I mean. Big percentages on both sides of the puck this year, huge shooting but bad save and big save and shooting two years back. An 11.6% career shooting percentage on top of that. Maybe he’s driving those numbers but I don’t believe it. Bottom four out of the regular forwards in Corsi all three years and top four in PDO out of the regular forwards all three years. I think his “success” at the NHL level is an illusion.
by Scott Reynolds on Feb 22, 2010 2:59 PM PST up reply actions
Using "goals scored in the NHL" as the criterion for "more accomplished" is pretty odd for players like Stone and Stortini.
As with any career, the first – not always best, but first – measure of value in my book is Games Played. So that is “more accomplished” (although as you allude is indistinguishable from “more experienced”). Some goals vs. No goals is “more accomplished”. I expect you and I may differ on this point, but 68 NHL fights v. 5 fights is “more accomplished”.
I have not dwelled on that aspect of Stortini’s role but perhaps I should for a moment, distasteful as it may be to the more genteel amongst us. Stortini was called up in the first place to have his teammates’ backs, and has done that to the level best of his ability. He has taken a few for the team in the process, but he has also dished out a few for the team, and is constantly improving in that venue as well.
If Stone were to replace Stortini, the Oilers would still need to replace Stortini, if you follow me. Maybe with a MacIntyre or a Boulerice. It is hard to visualize the team being improved.
As for Stortini’s role. The fourth line is good when Stortini is the third best player on the line.
There are a lot of teams that waste the position of “third-best player on the fourth-best line” on a full-fledged goon. Because Stortini fills that role for the Oilers, that is the guy he needs to be outscoring.
Bottom four out of the regular forwards in Corsi all three years and top four in PDO out of the regular forwards all three years.
Let’s leave aside the notion that a good PDO is somehow a bad thing and talk about the bottom four regular forwards in Corsi. First of all, let’s look at the bottom of the Oilers’ 2009-10 Corsi results (I’ll use Relative Corsi, min. 20 GP):
10. Stortini -3.3 (-3.161)
11. Cogliano -4.3 (-1.663)
12. O’Sullivan -4.9 (0.489)
13. Pisani -6.6 (-1.721)
14. Moreau -13.9 (-0.832)
15. Jacques -14.9 (0.656)
So, bottom 6, not bottom 4, at least so far this year. Both of his most regular linemates are worse, thecaptain Much worse. I would argue that Stortini hasn’t been the third best player on that line.
The number in brackets is Corsi Rel QoT, showing Stortini’s linemates on average are right around where he is. Whereas all the other guys on the list are getting outshot worse than their linemates. Jacques and O’Sullivan have played with guys who are above team average and still their own Rel Corsi is way into the negative.
Moreover, it is to be expected that fourth line players will have poor Corsi and relative Corsi numbers. Let’s look at the bottom 4 Rel Corsi forwards on each of our divisional rivals:
Calgary
-———-
13. Moss -4.1 (-0.349)
14. Boyd -5.7 (-0.560)
15. Nystrom -11.2 (-0.273)
16. Mayers -28.5 (-5.240)
Vancouver
-—————-
10. Glass -21.0 (-6.813)
11. Rypien -27.0 (-9.542)
12. Hordichuk -29.7 (-9.874)
13. Johnson -38.1 (-8.777)
Minnesota
-—————-
11. Sheppard -5.4 (-0.818)
12. Clutterbuck -5.6 (-1.121)
13. Boogaard -8.7 (-2.003)
14. Kobasew -17.5 (-0.960)
Colorado
-—————-
12. O’Reilly -4.6 (-0.528)
13. Yip -5.9 (-0.576)
14. Galiardi -9.4 (-0.422)
15. Koci -11.3 (-2.700)
Fourth liners everywhere. Colorado, which you will likely confirm Scott is something of an outlier when it comes to Corsi, is loaded with rookies and one goon at the bottom; the lists of the other teams are populated with bottom 6-ers (or bottom 8-ers if you prefer). To a man the division rivals have negative QoT, the only exceptions being O’Sullivan and Jacques on the Oilers.
Let’s just say I’d take Zack Stortini ahead of a bunch of guys on those lists, including a couple on his own team, whether we’re talking present or future value.
Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries
"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg
by Bruce McCurdy on Feb 22, 2010 6:20 PM PST up reply actions
There are a lot of teams that waste the position of "third-best player on the fourth-best line" on a full-fledged goon. Because Stortini fills that role for the Oilers, that is the guy he needs to be outscoring.
Stortini is absolutely better than a full-on goon. Absolutely. If my choice is between Stortini and David Koci, I’ll take Stortini every time. But there is another choice that is far superior called “neither” and that is the one I am inclined to take. If you accept that “neither” is a real option, suddenly the guy Stortini needs to outplay is a real hockey player. Stortini is just a better version of “terrible” and while I appreciate that he’s better I can’t get past the fact that he’s terrible.
I would argue that Stortini hasn’t been the third best player on that line.
I actually agree! But this line was been all kinds of rotten so even if we agree that he’s the second best player on a rotten line… well… this isn’t making the case that he’s helping a team win hockey games.
Let’s leave aside the notion that a good PDO is somehow a bad thing and talk about the bottom four regular forwards in Corsi. First of all, let’s look at the bottom of the Oilers’ 2009-10 Corsi results (I’ll use Relative Corsi, min. 20 GP)… So, bottom 6, not bottom 4, at least so far this year.
Firstly, I wasn’t trying to imply that a good PDO is a bad thing in and of itself. It can be a great thing. If we’re having a playoff series, I want my team to have the highest PDO in the world! 200 would be great! But when you’re evaluating past performance and you know that PDO tends to come back to the mean and you have Zorg with a particularly high number then unless you think that there’s a good reason to accept Stortini as having a skill that moves those numbers, you need to acknowlege that his +/- results and scoring results are probably better than they look.
Secondly, I just wanted to make clear that he is both 4th worst in Raw Corsi this season (and the two before that) and 6th worst in Rel Corsi this season (and the two before that).
To a man the division rivals have negative QoT, the only exceptions being O’Sullivan and Jacques on the Oilers.
Except that O’Sullivan and Jacques do not, whether you’re looking by goal differential or raw Corsi. They do only if you look at Rel Corsi. They’re playing with crap! But the crap is the best the Oilers have! To me that says more about the Oilers as a team than it does about either Jacques or O’Sullivan as individuals.
Moreover, it is to be expected that fourth line players will have poor Corsi and relative Corsi numbers.
I agree that it should be expected for bottom players to have an inferior Corsi to top players. If the guys at the bottom of your roster are controlling the play against the dregs they should probably get moved into a role with more playing time. If they suck, they’ll stay on the fourth line. So as the cream rises and most fourth lines will be poor relative to their teammates. That’s why they get the least amount of ice time. They’re the worst players. And that’s why I look at his raw Corsi and see a number lower than Pisani and similar to O’Sullivan and say those two are better players. Guys are usually up the roster and being given more responsibilities because they’re better players than the other options. I strongly doubt that Stortini would be a better option than either O’Sullivan or Pisani on Horcoff’s flank against the toughs. And so does the coach, so much so that he hasn’t tried it despite those other options not working so well.
Sometimes, though, coaches do have a distinct role for players taking fourth line minutes beyond hiding them. Brodziak was one for us last season IMO since MacT had him in a very specific defensive role. The same sort of thing is happening to the guys playing for the Canucks this year. A tonne of DZ faceoffs. They’re losing the battle but providing a lot of opportunities for the Sedins. I’m interested in which guys you’d take Stortini over for one game tomorrow (assuming good health). I’d take him over Jacques, Moreau, Rypien, Koci, Boogaard and Mayers of the guys you’ve listed. And since we’re talking slots 12 press-box slots here, well, Zorg ends up in the press-box for me. Are there another six guys you think Zorg should play over in the lists you provided?
by Scott Reynolds on Feb 22, 2010 9:51 PM PST up reply actions
But there is another choice that is far superior called "neither" and that is the one I am inclined to take. If you accept that "neither" is a real option, suddenly the guy Stortini needs to outplay is a real hockey player.
Yeah, baby, let’s get another smurf in there. That’ll win us a bunch more games. Geez, Scott, we need a little muscle somewhere in the GD lineup. Guys like Stortini and Stone when healthy have been providing it and not getting killed. Guys like JFJ and Moreau have been providing it While getting killed. So those are the guys to replace.
Are there another six guys you think Zorg should play over in the lists you provided?
They are only partial lists. IF you assume that a) everybody is healthy on every team and b) everybody not in the bottom 4 Rel Corsi (which actually includes Stortini himself) is ineligible for consideration from press box duty, then you’re right, most of the guys listed will end up in the press box. I think there’s a bunch more guys not listed who would be considered for PB duty … I was focussing on the bottom 4 Corsi since that was a stat you identified.
I think you’re almost completely missing the point on the QoT issue as it having a major negative effect on Corsi. Stortini’s personal Rel Corsi vs. his QoT Rel Corsi is superior to every single guy listed. I think that represents real progress.
Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries
"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg
by Bruce McCurdy on Feb 22, 2010 11:21 PM PST up reply actions
Yeah, baby, let’s get another smurf in there. That’ll win us a bunch more games. Geez, Scott, we need a little muscle somewhere in the GD lineup. Guys like Stortini and Stone when healthy have been providing it and not getting killed. Guys like JFJ and Moreau have been providing it While getting killed. So those are the guys to replace.
Yeah, like I said, I’d take Stortini over both Moreau and Jacques. He’s a better player than either at this point. Replace those guys first for sure. But that he’s better than those two still doesn’t make him any good. And nowhere do I say we need to replace Stortini with a 5’10’’ soft-scorer type so I’m not sure where you get the idea I think we need a little guy in there for him. By all means let’s add some physical players if they can play. Ryan Stone is a great example!
They are only partial lists. IF you assume that a) everybody is healthy on every team and b) everybody not in the bottom 4 Rel Corsi (which actually includes Stortini himself) is ineligible for consideration from press box duty, then you’re right, most of the guys listed will end up in the press box. I think there’s a bunch more guys not listed who would be considered for PB duty.
Since we set the criteria at min. 20 GP, can you find six guys more guys on those five rosters? I have no problem conceding Brian McGrattan and Matt Hendricks which only leaves you four more. And as much as this assumes that everyone is healthy, it also assumes guys with under 20 GP are worse options than Stortini so I’d say the format is working in his favour.
I think you’re almost completely missing the point on the QoT issue as it having a major negative effect on Corsi. Stortini’s personal Rel Corsi vs. his QoT Rel Corsi is superior to every single guy listed. I think that represents real progress.
I do want to make sure that I’m understanding you correctly so let me talk through what I think you’re saying:
1. Stortini’s Rel Corsi is consistently below average on the Oilers (-3.3/60 for sixth worst among Oiler forwards this season) but it’s better than his raw Corsi number (-11.52 for fourth worst among Oiler forwards this season).
2. Rel Corsi is a better measure than raw Corsi in this case because ???
3. Rel Corsi (and raw Corsi) is almost always poor for fourth line players, so Stortini’s poor performance comes with the territory.
4. Stortini’s most common linemates (Moreau and Cogliano in particular) are worse by this measure than Stortini (as seen in their own Rel Corsi ratings and in Stortini’s QT rating).
5. The bottom four Rel Corsi players on a given team do not usually have a superior Corsi when compared to their teammates (which should be rather obvious, talk about setting up a category!) but Stortini does since he’s played with guys below him on that chart a lot.
6. Thus Stortini is doing better than most other fourth line pluggers since he’s better than his teammates while fourth liners on other teams are not.
Is this about right?
If so, here’s my problem with it. The category is constructed to make others look worse than Stortini. Rel Corsi is a comparison between teammates so, in my opinion, doesn’t have too much value cutting across teams. Someone is going to be the worst player on a team. But that doesn’t make him an awful player. Someone on Canada’s Olympic team would have a bad Rel Corsi, but that doesn’t make him a bad player.
The Oilers have a lot of bad players. That Stortini is outperforming guys who are overwhelmed by their role (Moreau in a “toughs” checking role for instance) doesn’t leave me feeling like he’s a good player. The other teams have their worst guys near the bottom of the roster because their top lines are successful in their roles. That’s a big part of what makes them good teams.
What the Oilers need to become a good team is to add some juice at the top of the lineup. Take Pisani for instance. It would be great if the team replaced him with another winger, say, Jamie Langenbrunner. Put him with Horcoff and suddenly this team has a much better line. But that’s not going to bump Pisani out of the lineup because Pisani, despite his struggles taking on the toughs and his inferior Rel Corsi remains a better player than Stortini. That’s why he’s getting those opportunities in the first place (and I’d argue the same for a guy like O’Sullivan). So Pisani moves down and takes Stortini’s spot and Stortini is in the press-box. When the team gets better players, someone is going to get cut. And that someone on the Oilers should be Jacques, then Moreau, then Stortini. And with 15 guys already on the list, assuming everyone is healthy, with one addition Stortini is down to 14F. And I’d argue that this team needs more than one addition up front which would mean Stortini off the roster.
by Scott Reynolds on Feb 23, 2010 2:04 AM PST up reply actions
2. Rel Corsi is a better measure than raw Corsi in this case because ???
Because I am comparing across teams. The guys who do poorly compared to their teammates are consistently the third and fourth liners, which either proves they are worse players or are put in roles which are less likely to succeed by the Corsi metric. It holds whether the team is a high or low Corsi producer overall that the bottom guys are in the negative numbers relatively speaking. Maybe it’s not the best method, I’m still getting used to the various QoC/QoT options that Gabe has provided, but it’s what I chose in this case.
So Pisani moves down and takes Stortini’s spot and Stortini is in the press-box.
Except Pisani brings an entirely different skill set. Sure he’s superior to Stortini in many ways, but he’s not going to do the same things that Zack does for a team. So unless “Langenbrunner” and Pisani are prepared to get their noses dirty, the Oilers are still going to have to get somebody else.
Same on all the other teams. They got “better” players too, but you’re still going to see the likes of Koci, Rypien, Hordichuk, Clutterbuck and Boogaard playing semi-regularly no matter what. If you think you can reduce the game to cold hard numbers and your first objective is to maximize your Corsi, you’re likely to get run out of the rink in the process.
I’m a numbers guy too, but there’s way more to the game than can be defined by them.
Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries
"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg
by Bruce McCurdy on Feb 23, 2010 3:05 PM PST up reply actions
I don’t think you can reduce the game to Corsi numbers but there are physical players who also do well territorially. The two aren’t mutually exclusive. Stone, for instance, is a physical fourth line player who also has some success in other areas. Josh Green was another IMO.
That said, I’m very confident that if the Oilers added a RW and had to choose between sitting Pisani and Stortini the team that chose to dress Pisani is the better club despite losing Stortini’s toughness. I’ll take the better overall player ten times out of ten.
by Scott Reynolds on Feb 23, 2010 4:32 PM PST up reply actions
… and I’ll take the tougher player at 12F if that is what the team is deficient in. Very dependent on what role needs to be filled, whether you need a good glove man more than you need a guy with a little pop in his bat.
Don’t forget we’ve already dumped JFJ and Moreau from this theoretical healthy Oiler squad, and the team’s TQ* is already down a couple of quarts.
(*Truculence Quotient)
FWIW, Quinn has already made this choice a few times in recent weeks. Four times he sat Stortini, and the Oilers lost all four games, by a combined score of 17-5 I might add. Twice he sat Pisani, and the Oilers won both. Minuscule sample size, granted, but still … the Zorgless Oil got pushed around to my eye, and nothing Pisani brought could make up for that. What they needed on at least 3 of those nights was somebody who could push back.
Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries
"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg
by Bruce McCurdy on Feb 23, 2010 7:16 PM PST up reply actions
The team’s “truculence” might be down. It depends who you’ve got to replace them. I do want to emphasize that I’ll almost always prefer a bigger and tougher player if his other skills are up to snuff. That said, I will almost never prefer a bigger and tougher player if his other skills are sub-par.
As for the six-game thing, I think it’s far more likely coincidence than anything Stortini did that Pisani wasn’t (how were the goalies in those games Bruce?).
I suspect the whole discussion boils down to a difference in philosophy between us. I notice that you didn’t pick out the four more guys and probably for good reason, if you know what I mean. Presumably, you think Zorg’s “truculence” makes the sacrifice in other areas worthwhile. I think you greatly overvalue “truculence” and you likely think that I greatly undervalue it.
by Scott Reynolds on Feb 23, 2010 7:44 PM PST up reply actions
Yes I’m sure you do think that, and yes I most certainly do.
I didn’t pick out a bunch more guys cuz I didn’t have time to go back and look at the full lists. Maybe another day … I don’t suppose this conversation is over yet. But it’s unlikely to be resolved either, due to the difference in philosophy you have identified.
Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries
"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg
by Bruce McCurdy on Feb 23, 2010 10:05 PM PST up reply actions
I’m not sure why Hartikainen gets so much love. If everything goes right for him he may get to where Stone is now: a utility player with a bit of grit but nothing that promises a sustained career in the NHL beyond a cheap option for 4th line / PB with maybe a glimpse of third line action on a crappy team like the current Oil. Zorg will have a better career than the two of them put together.
Because he plays in, by reckoning, the fourth-best league in the world and is a solid core player on a superb team despite being only nineteen years old. Because he has all the tools to get somewhere in this game. He’ll probably never score thirty goals but he might score fifteen and outchance opponents for a long time, and that’s worth quite a bit.
by Benjamin Massey on Feb 22, 2010 12:19 PM PST up reply actions
I don’t know how much love he’s getting here (you could be talking about others). Other than Stortini, who is behind him in our rankings that you would bump up? I think most of us here have him as one of the better “maybe” prospects and not much more.
by Scott Reynolds on Feb 22, 2010 12:54 PM PST up reply actions
I’m not anti-Hartikainen. In fact, I have quite a soft spot for Finish players and I hope he really comes good over the next few years. However, the fact that he plays in the fourth-best league in the world isn’t saying an awful lot. My understanding is that the Finish league is some way behind the NHL, AHL, KHL and Swedish Elite league. It’s possible that he will mature into the player that, basically, Stone is now. Personally, I don’t think that gets you ranked above people like Peckham, Stortini or Nash or Plante for that matter. But that’s just my opinion.
The IIHF rated the SM-liiga above the SEL this summer.
Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.
Until I’m given reason not to, I will believe them. They’ve had the SEL above the SM-Liiga forever, so they’ve seen something change. Who knows what, but we shall see.
Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.
Either way, I think we can be pretty confident that both the SEL and the SM-Liiga are a higher level than the AHL.
by Scott Reynolds on Feb 22, 2010 3:01 PM PST up reply actions
I’m not sure why Hartikainen gets so much love.
We’ve got him ranked as the 12th best prospect in the Oilers organization. How is that "so much love"? I’ve got an upcoming comps post that should put his seasons into a better light.
Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.
I was simply making an argument that having him about Peckham, Nash, Plante, Stortini (and a few others) seems – in my humble opinion – to be undeserved. My comment wasn’t meant to be interpreted as a cheap shot of some kind. I respect and enjoy the opinions I read on these pages. However, in this case, I don’t see Hartikainen’s top end as being particularly high. Nor do I see his chances of realising that top end as being very high either. I dearly hope I’m wrong.
Nor do I see his chances of realising that top end as being very high either. I dearly hope I’m wrong.
If his ceiling was Jere Lehtinen, would you be happy?
Jussi Jokinen?
Ville Niemenen?
Editor of The Copper & Blue, and leader of The Cult Of Hartikainen.
I take it there is a new feature post coming soon. I look forward to it. Like I say, I would like to be convinced.
I hear you on this Yeti. Personally, I think there’s some chance that he ends up being a reasonable checking winger in the NHL. But as you say, there’s probably a better chance he does nothing of consequence in the NHL. But I think the “he’s nothing special” tag applies to a lot of the Oiler prospects.
I doubt Peckham ever becomes more than a 5 or 6 at the NHL level and would take the under on a “200 NHL GP” line. He’s the guy I ask the “why is everyone so high on this guy?” question about. I’m not a big believer in Stortini either (as you may have seen up above). Plante and Hartikainen are close for me. They could both end up as nothing but they could also both end up as pretty good players on an NHL regulars. Not superstars, but players. I have Nash a cut above all of these guys, a better shot at becoming a player, so maybe we see him in the same way.
by Scott Reynolds on Feb 22, 2010 5:43 PM PST up reply actions
It probably says something about me that I ranked all three of these guys in the top ten.
I doubt it’s flattering.
by Benjamin Massey on Feb 22, 2010 2:54 PM PST reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on The Copper & Blue
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Northwest Standings
Oilers Schedule
Next 5 Games
Calgary
|
Thu 10/07 | 7:00 PM PDT |
|
Florida
|
Sun 10/10 | 5:00 PM PDT |
|
@
Minnesota
|
Thu 10/14 | 5:30 PM PDT |
|
@
Calgary
|
Sat 10/16 | 7:00 PM PDT |
|
Minnesota
|
Thu 10/21 | 6:00 PM PDT |
Last 5 Games
|
@
Anaheim
|
Sun 04/11 | L 2 - 7 |
|
@
Los Angeles
|
Sat 04/10 | SO - W 4 - 3 |
|
Colorado
|
Wed 04/07 | OT - W 5 - 4 |
|
Minnesota
|
Mon 04/05 | W 4 - 1 |
|
@
Phoenix
|
Sat 04/03 | SO - L 2 - 3 |
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
