Secondary scorers: analysis by microstat
by Bruce McCurdy on Mar 10, 2010 5:30 PM PST
in Statistical Analysis
15 comments
66 games into this sorry, lost season, the Edmonton Oilers stand, er, lie in 30th place overall, 6 points in arrears of dismal Toronto and fully a dozen points back of the 28th place Islanders. It's a standing they've earned on merit, given the Oilers also rank 30th in Goals Against and 29th in Goals For (shootout "goals" included cuz I'm too lazy to weed 'em out until season's end). This latter "achievement" took some time after a hot start which saw the Oil in the top ten offensive teams for quite a while. Today they rank (barely) ahead of Boston, and based on recent evidence such as 4 goals during the just-completed 3-game homestand it's easy to imagine the Oil hitting bottom in this dept. too when all is said and done.
The injury to Ales Hemsky is obviously a major contributing factor, as is the crash and burn of the Oilers' defensive corps which generated a lot of offence last year. Front-line scoring has been poor with only Dustin Penner having scored even 15 goals to date, while scoring depth has been spotty at best. Let's look at that scoring depth, in depth.
Up front, the expectations for scoring could crudely be divided into these groups:
Primary scoring: (Hemsky), Horcoff, Penner, Gagner
Secondary scoring: O'Sullivan, Nilsson, Cogliano, Brule, Potulny, (Comrie), (Pouliot)
Checkers, plumbers and grunts: Moreau, Jacques, Stortini, (Pisani), (Stone), Jones
I've included Ryan Jones just because he appears on the Behind the Net data which is my primary source for this study. In all 17 Oiler forwards have played 19+ GP in 2009-10, with the five in brackets all having played fewer than 30.
Today I am going to focus on just the middle group, the guys who should be expected to provide secondary scoring. Comrie and Pouliot are excluded due to having played fewer than half the games, which leaves us with five players: Patrick O'Sullivan, Robert Nilsson, Andrew Cogliano, Gilbert Brule and Ryan Potulny. Apples and apples to at least some degree: each is 22-25 years old; each is between 5'10 and 6'0 and 180-190 lbs; each has a background of being a scorer. Some numbers on this quintet after the jump:
For this study we'll focus on even strength performance only, primarily using data from Gabe Desjardins' behindthenet.ca supplemented by nhl.com. I have chosen 12 categories, with both Quality of Competition and of Teammate calculated as an average of three different measures. Figures in brackets are the ranking among the 12 Oiler forwards with 30+ GP, other than faceoffs where only 9 players with 100+ draws are considered.
EV TOI/G
--------------
13:16 O'Sullivan (4 of 12)
12:50 Brule (5)
12:34 Nilsson (6)
12:19 Cogliano (7)
12:18 Potulny (8)
Not much to choose here, just a minute per game difference among the five.
GOALS/60
----------------
1.14 Brule (1 of 12)
0.72 Potulny (3)
0.44 O'Sullivan (8)
0.40 Nilsson (9)
0.30 Cogliano (11)
PTS/60
--------------
2.28 Brule (1 of 12)
1.54 Potulny(4)
1.41 Nilsson (5)
1.31 O'Sullivan (6)
0.91 Cogliano (11)
Brule has surprisingly pulled ahead of Dustin Penner and is now the most productive scorer on the team per minute of ice time, in both goals and points (Hemsky excluded, of course). He is well clear of his "peers", with only Potulny even in the ballpark as a finisher.
GF ON/60
---------
2.63 Brule (2 of 12)
2.05 Cogliano (7)
1.82 Nilsson (8)
1.75 O'Sullivan (10)
1.64 Potulny (11)
GA ON/60
----------
2.74 Cogliano (5 of 12)
2.81 Brule (7)
3.08 Potulny (8)
3.33 Nilsson (9)
3.71 O'Sullivan (12)
Brule again is far superior to his peer group, with only Cogliano in the conversation. The others are bleeding minus 1.5 to 2.0 goals per 60 minutes they play.
QoC rankings (QualComp, Corsi QoC, Rel Corsi QoC = average)
----------------
O'Sullivan (2, 4, 2 = 2.7 of 12)
Brule (8, 2, 3 = 4.3)
Potulny (4, 6, 6 = 5.3)
Cogliano (7, 10, 11 = 9.3)
Nilsson (10, 11, 10 = 10.3)
QoT rankings (QualTeam, Corsi QoT, Rel Corsi QoT = average)
----------------
Potulny (1, 3, 3 = 2.3 of 12)
Cogliano (8, 2, 2 = 4.0)
Brule (4, 5, 6 = 5.0)
O'Sullivan (2, 6, 7 = 5.0)
Nilsson (11, 10, 11 = 10.7)
O'Sullivan has faced slightly tougher competitiion than Brule in two of the three metrics. Potulny on the other hand has played with the weakest teammates (QoT is listed in order of difficulty). Nilsson has faced the softest of minutes with the best of teammates.
Relative Corsi
------------------
+3.7 Nilsson (3 of 12)
+2.1 Brule (4)
-2.1 Potulny (6)
-3.7 Cogliano (7)
-4.4 O'Sullivan (8)
Nilsson's cherry minutes show up on the Corsi metric, not that he has the production to show for it. But at least Oilers outshoot with him out there.
PDO# (Sh% + Sv%)
---------
1.001 (9.2% + .909) Brule (4 of 12)
.996 (7.1% +.924) Cogliano (5)
.956 (6.2% + .894) Nilsson (9)
.956 (5.4% + .902) Potulny (10)
.953 (6.2 + .891) O'Sullivan (11)
Brule and Cogliano are around the median 1.000 for different reasons, a good Sv% for Cogliano and a solid on-ice Sh% for Brule. The other three are all hurting by this metric. I'll leave it to the reader's opinion to determine whether that is a measure of their own performance or simply a case of percentages which are likely to snap back in their favour.
ZoneStart
---------------
47.7% Brule (4 of 12)
48.2% Potulny (5)
49.0% Cogliano (7)
49.7% O'Sullivan (10)
50.2% Nilsson (11)
Cherries on top for Nilsson.
Hits/GP
----------
1.80 Brule (3 of 12)
0.85 Cogliano (6)
0.76 Potulny (7)
0.52 Nilsson (9)
0.46 O'Sullivan (10)
I included one stat that measures physical play because to me it has value. Certainly Brule is far and away the most physical of this fivesome.
Faceoffs (100 or more draws)
--------------
Brule 52.6% (1 of 9)
Potulny 47.6% (6 of 9)
Cogliano 42.5% (8 of 9)
O'Sullivan 36.0% (9 of 9)
Nilsson --- (unranked)
Again Brule is free and clear with a solid percentage well above break even. The rest are increasing degrees of suck, with the exception of Nilsson who doesn't take draws at all.
GVT
------
+6.2 Brule (2 of 12)
+3.1 Potulny (4)
+1.2 Nilsson (5)
+0.4 O'Sullivan (8)
-0.9 Cogliano (11)
Tom Awad's metric confirms Brule is well clear of his peer group. For some reason Cogliano is hammered more than Nilsson and O'Sullivan.
Finally, let's rank this peer group among themselves in each of these 12 diverse categories:
| Stat | Brule | Potulny | Cogliano | Nilsson | O'Sullivan |
| G/60 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 4 | 3 |
| P/60 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 4 | 3 |
| GF ON/60 | 1 | 5 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
| GA ON/60 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 4 | 5 |
| QoC | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 1 |
| QoT | 3.5 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 3.5 |
| REL Corsi | 2 | 3 | 4 | 1 | 5 |
| PDO# | 1 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 5 |
| ZoneStart | 1 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 4 |
| Hits/GP | 1 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 5 |
| FO% | 1 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 4 |
| GVT | 1 | 2 | 5 | 3 | 4 |
| (total) | 17.5 | 32 | 38 | 46 | 46.5 |
Wow, Gilbert Brule is ranked #1 in 8 of the 12, with the other four guys topping a single category each. Considering that he is both the second youngest and second cheapest of the group, my own conclusion is that he's developing nicely, or at least, nicer than those other guys. For some reason opinion has been pretty sharply divided on this guy, including within our own Copper & Blue top 5 under 25, in which two of us ranked him in the top 6 and the other three outside the top 12. "Sell high" has been the mantra in some quarters. My own opinion is that this is one guy who's made real positive steps, and while he still has a considerable way to go, we'd be nuts to let him go at this point. He's one of the most positive stories of this dismal season.
On the other hand, the foregoing continues to cast Patrick O'Sullivan and Robert Nilsson in a bad light that becomes even harsher when you realize they are by far the two highest-paid members of the group. Nilsson especially has feeble production, given his cherry minutes with excellent teammates against softish opposition. If he can't score (or defend, or hit) under those circumstances, what more do we need to know about the guy? In this fan's opinion it's time to cut bait on both of these guys.
0 recs |
15 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
I posted this in another thread but it seems more relevant here (especially with this post closer to the top of the page):
Brule’s “individual point percentage” is higher than what’s sustainable for almost all players of his talent level, his shooting percentage is higher than his career average by a few points, his on-ice shooting is also pretty high and he doesn’t have the offence in the AHL in his previous seasons to support what he’s done this year. Even his big offensive totals in junior aren’t that impressive (they are good but they’re not overwhelming or anything). 30 ES points in the NHL is quite a lot, top 150 in the NHL for EV offence, 35 points would likely be top 100. I don’t think he’s at that level on talent even with measured imrpovements over the next few seasons. Add to that the “Penner effect” wherein most of his good offence is earned with Dustin and I come to the conclusion that sell high is the way to go. There was, after all, a time when Robert Nilsson rode this train and as we all know, cutting bait after that season would have made us look foolish given what Nilsson has done since.
by Scott Reynolds on Mar 10, 2010 10:30 PM PST reply actions
The key difference is that Brule does other things whereas Nilsson does not. The thing that impressed me in completing the above exercise was the breadth of this player. Not only does he outscore those other guys by a very wide margin, he’s way more involved in the game; he hits, he can win a draw, and he doesn’t need to be sheltered. At least that’s how I read it …
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 Mar 10, 2010 10:51 PM PST up reply actions
I’d suggest that to regularly outscore he will actually need to be sheltered since he’s actually getting outscored now despite not taking on the vaunt. The faceoff number is impressive but it’s only in 230 draws. He’s taken 411 draws in other seasons and his FO% is 47.0%. Now, a lot of those were (obviously) taken when he was very young so it’s quite possible that he’s improved substantially but I don’t think it’s close to a lock that he’s a reliable faceoff guy. I will happily concede that he hits more than the other players on the list and while that can be a good thing (and is with him at times) he also has a tendency to put himself out of position to make a hit (though he’s improved at this over the course of the season) and it’s really his positioning that makes me most nervous about having him play center. All in all, I’m not nearly as impressed with his “breadth” but am admittedly more concerned with the expected drop in his offence.
Two questions I think are significant: where would you put Brule in the lineup of a winning team? How much are you willing to pay for that role (generally) and do you think Brule’s salary expectations fit that payment scheme? For me, the answer is “fourth line” and “no” which is another reason I think selling is a good idea.
by Scott Reynolds on Mar 11, 2010 6:59 AM PST up reply actions
I’d suggest that to regularly outscore he will actually need to be sheltered since he’s actually getting outscored now despite not taking on the vaunt.
Well the whole freaking team is being outscored, by 50 goals at evens to this point. Brule at least is in the single digits on the minus side of the equation. In fact his – 5 is fourth best among those 12 forwards with 30+ GP (Penner and Stortini are both miraculously + 3 as is Jones), while Cogliano is sixth at – 9, Potulny ninth at – 16, Nilsson tenth at – 19, and O’Sullivan twelfth at – 32. If you did Relative +/- in a similar manner as Relative Corsi, Brule would look pretty alright. Also, while Brule may not be facing “the vaunt” he’s not exactly sheltered either, judging by those QualComp and ZoneStart numbers.
The faceoff number is impressive but it’s only in 230 draws.
It’s a secondary skill, esp. if as I suspect Brule winds up as a winger. Still it’s nice to have a guy who can step in and take a draw, particularly on the RH dot. Gives the team a lot of flexibility, especially in an own-zone situation. I’d rather have Brule and his 52% taking the odd draw than POS and his 36%, let’s put it that way.
it’s really his positioning that makes me most nervous about having him play center
Me too. While he has improved quite a bit he still makes positioning errors of both omission and commission. On the other hand I don’t think it hurts to have a guy or two who might run around a bit and remind the bad guys not to get too comfortable out there. It worked for Raffi Torres at times and it does for Gilbert Brule at times. The key is being smart enough to pick those times.
I’m not nearly as impressed with his "breadth" but am admittedly more concerned with the expected drop in his offence.
I’m actually excited about an expected increase in his offence. He’s scored 26 of his 30 points (87%) at even strength, but hasn’t gotten any sort of bump from powerplay numbers which to me is keeping his total output artificially low. For a guy who is a solid second on the team in EV points it’s strange that he ranks 9th among forwards in PP TOI. If he had gotten PP time after Hemsky went down he’d be closer to 40 points by now and be a lot more expensive to re-up. Maybe Quinn has identified special teams as a weakness in his game but to me it’s more a lack of opportunity.
where would you put Brule in the lineup of a winning team?
I see him as a 2RW. He’s still growing into the job, though moving in the right direction which is more than you can say about the other guys in the piece. Otherwise only Potulny – the oldest of the five – can be said to have made a positive step in 2009-10.
How much are you willing to pay for that role (generally) and do you think Brule’s salary expectations fit that payment scheme?
I’m not prepared to pay much because I’m not a rich man. :) But for a 2RW generally that’s a good paying job, and Brule will probably get paid once he proves he can carry his weight. I anticipate that both sides will go slow and he may well just re-up for a year at medium dollars ($1.5 maybe?). But if the team signs him to a Nilsson type deal that’s not a bad bet based on what Brule has shown in an illness-plagued season. He’s certainly made a huge step forward at a still-young age.
For me, the answer is "fourth line"
He’s top two on the team in even strength goals and points, both outright and per 60 in both categories, and you see him as a fourth liner??! Wow, you are one tough marker.
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 Mar 11, 2010 9:17 AM PST up reply actions
I’m actually excited about an expected increase in his offence. He’s scored 26 of his 30 points (87%) at even strength, but hasn’t gotten any sort of bump from powerplay numbers…
I thought that I’d made it clear that the expected decrease is in his EV numbers and not his overall numbers. As you say, increased PP opportunities may well improve his overall numbers.
Well the whole freaking team is being outscored…
And Brule has some of the most favourable percentages on the club. We could go ’round and ’round with this one for a long time.
I’d rather have Brule and his 52% taking the odd draw than POS and his 36%, let’s put it that way.
Look, O’Sullivan sucks at faceoffs so being an improvement on O’Sullivan isn’t all that great. But this comparison rests on only what they’ve done this year which is a pretty small sample. Career-wise, Brule is 49.0% and O’Sullivan is 42.4%. Still a big gap there but less than half of what you supposed. Which sample do you think is more indicative of future faceoff performance?
He’s top two on the team in even strength goals and points, both outright and per 60 in both categories, and you see him as a fourth liner??! Wow, you are one tough marker.
I’ve gone over the reasons for this several times and you’ve consistently chosen to ignore them. That’s your prerogative, but don’t act surprised. Or are you actively not listening?
But if the team signs him to a Nilsson type deal that’s not a bad bet based on what Brule has shown in an illness-plagued season. He’s certainly made a huge step forward at a still-young age.
This, to me, is a classic case of not learning from one’s mistakes. The Nilsson contract was an error and signing Brule to that same deal would be the very same error.
by Scott Reynolds on Mar 11, 2010 10:54 AM PST up reply actions
I’ve gone over the reasons for this several times and you’ve consistently chosen to ignore them. That’s your prerogative, but don’t act surprised. Or are you actively not listening?
Maybe neither of us is listening. Even though optimism is out of season for Oiler fans, I choose to see this particular glass as at least 60% full. Brule just turned 23, he’s already among the leaders of his team in several important scoring categories, and I think he’s going to get better. He’s sure a lot better this year than he was last year. I will grant you he may be riding the percentages to a degree, but there’s meat on those statistical bones. I don’t think his scoring is a fluke that will disappear in a probablility cloud, but I’ve been wrong before. On Robert Nilsson, for one. :)
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 Mar 11, 2010 11:53 AM PST up reply actions
Maybe neither of us is listening.
If this is sincere, I’m surprised that you don’t think I’m addressing the points you’ve made with specific counter-arguments. Perhaps I’ll try another tack. For this exercise I will assume the number of EV shots for was earned on merit. Maybe this is a good assumption, maybe not, but it’s where I’ll start from. I’ll also be using the data from Vic’s site.
Now let’s say that Brule’s shot is a bit better than average, that, on talent he’s a 9% to 9.5% shooter at EV. Let’s also assume that, on merit, he probably should probably be getting points on about 70% of all goals scored while he’s on the ice at EV or about average for a forward and that the on-ice shooting percentage should hum along at a (slightly above-average?) 8% given Brule’s talent.
Well, let’s look and see. The personal shooting percentage knocks his EV goal total from 13 down to 8. The on-ice shooting percentage implies that there should be only 26 goals scored while he’s out there instead of 30 and that IPP knocks his point total from 26 down to 18. So then there he sits at 8-10-18 in 53 games instead of 13-13-26 and by gum that’s a big difference, and we’ve assumed that he has a plus shot in this scenario. This is why I’m not really swayed by, “he has lots of goals” and “he has a high EV points/60” and “his GFON/60 is really high” and so forth. They all share the same basic problem which is, IMO, one that you’ve yet to address as more than a throw-away.
by Scott Reynolds on Mar 11, 2010 2:06 PM PST up reply actions
If this is sincere, I’m surprised that you don’t think I’m addressing the points you’ve made with specific counter-arguments.
Of course I’m sincere. :) I thought I was acknowledging your counter-arguments when I said “I will grant you he may be riding the percentages to a degree, but there’s meat on those statistical bones.” Se let’s go there, as indeed you already have. I’m going to accept all of your assumptions and see where it takes us.
For this exercise I will assume the number of EV shots for was earned on merit.
EV Shots%
—————
0.482 Brule
0.480 Potulny
0.469 Nilsson
0.447 O’Sullivan
0.445 Cogliano
So far, so good.
So then there he sits at 8-10-18 in 53 games instead of 13-13-26 and by gum that’s a big difference, and we’ve assumed that he has a plus shot in this scenario.
So let’s accept that despite his greater success in real life, he’s really a 8-10-18 player. So where does that put him?
ESP/G
-———
0.481 Brule reality
0.333 Brule projected
0.306 Potulny reality
0.292 Nilsson reality
0.292 O’Sullivan reality
0.182 Cogliano reality
ESP/60
———
2.28 Brule reality
1.58 Brule projected
1.54 Potulny reality
1.41 Nilsson reality
1.31 O’Sullivan reality
0.91 Cogliano reality
Hey lookit! Even with his numbers reined in by judicious application of sensible, conservative percentages, there’s Brule still atop the lists for scoring. That’s what I meant by “meat on those statistical bones” … the percentages are helping him, but it’s not just percentages. He’s not far ahead of Potulny, Nilsson and O’Sullivan, mind, but he’s still ahead.
He’s also ~two years younger than each of those guys, has more grit to his game than any of them, and as a bonus he can even take faceoffs! Those are little value-added things, but add up they do. What the other guys have that he doesn’t at this point, is more (apparent) value on special teams.
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 Mar 11, 2010 8:30 PM PST up reply actions
He’s not far ahead of Potulny, Nilsson and O’Sullivan, mind, but he’s still ahead.
This should be a tell that he might not really be a 2nd line player. But snark aside, I don’t really see “top six” in Brule’s future with the “good” Oilers. In what I hope is the long-term plan for the organization Horcoff, Hemsky, Penner, Gagner, Paajarvi/Eberle, Hall/Seguin are the top six guys in three years (this assumes the Oilers decide to compete for a playoff spot next season). Unless we see some flame-outs the only available spots in the long-term pay scale are the 7-8-9 holes. Since Brule is likely to want money that reflects a higher pay range, I’d suggest moving him now is prudent. The same reasons you have for optimism (good counting numbers, not bad projection, hitting, youth) are the reasons he’s marketable.
The other thing to remember – and I’m not going to run the numbers at for everyone – is we could run a projection for everybody. The guy I like best in the chart, for instance, is Andrew Cogliano, partially because I think he’ll be a talented winger (a solid third line option) and partially because I think they might be able to get him at a pretty good price long-term (I’d find out this summer for sure and if he doesn’t want to go long-term at something around 1.5M, maybe try to juice him and then move him). Because he’s “my guy” on the list (though Potulny at 4th line money seems like a nice bet if it can be done) I’ll at least run the projection for him.
Now, Cogliano has had the exact opposite situation in terms of the percentages and, I think we can agree, much less ice time with good offensive teammates. So what’s reasonable for Cogliano? Hopefully I can avoid argument by saying I’ll just give him the exact same percentages I gave Brule:
Cogliano’s goal total moves from 5 to 8 based on the shooting percentage adjustment.
Cogliano’s “goals while on ice” total moves from 28 to 31 based on the on-ice shooting percentage adjustment.
Coglaino’s point total moves from 13 to 22 based on the IPP adjustment.
So for Cogliano at EV we’ve gone from 5-8-13 to 8-14-22 in 67 games. And now we have a younger player than Brule with nice raw numbers despite worse teammates but with more EV ice time (overall, not per-game). He also has the better track record over the last four seasons. In terms of “secondary skills” Cogliano consistently (as opposed to just this year in a limited sample like Brule’s FOs) has a very good penalty differential which I’m confident helps the team win games. If I have to choose between the two (and I’m of the opinion that if we’re going to go long-term, I probably do) I would choose Cogs and hopefully slot him in long-term in that 7th-9th forward range.
by Scott Reynolds on Mar 12, 2010 9:12 AM PST up reply actions
This should be a tell that he might not really be a 2nd line player.
The key being Brule’s two years younger than those guys and he’s already at least even with them. By the time he too is 25 I expect him to be substantially better.
The other key to me is his willingness to get involved on the physical side of the game, which Oilers have very little of in our top 6 or top 9 for that matter. You don’t put as much stock in that, so we’ll have to disagree on that point. But watching last night’s game where “our” guys Cogs and Brule both lined up with Penner, I saw Brule’s hitting as real plus which created some loose pucks and chaos in the O-zone.
I like Cogliano too btw, despite his lousy numbers this year. I don’t think he was helped one bit by being saddled on Moreau’s line. He’s been much better since being moved out of there. But to play with percentages to suggest that Cogliano’s .182 P/G is somehow comparable or better than Brule’s .481 is a bit of a stretch in my view. Your point about him being younger than Brule is well taken, but the difference is less than 6 months as opposed to 2+ years v. the other comps. I have much more patience for either Brule or Cogs than I do for POS or Nilsson who are more experienced and are being paid far more for what I see as underperformance.
One last comment w.r.t. faceoffs. As usual I could be dead wrong about this, but I feel it is one skill that a (good) player consistently improves throughout his career, so most recent/current stats are the most relevant in my view. Some day I’ll do a statistical study to see if the numbers back me up.
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 Mar 12, 2010 10:14 AM PST up reply actions
The key being Brule’s two years younger than those guys and he’s already at least even with them.
The problem I have with this is that it ignores the better seasons of the guys you’re comparing him to. O’Sullivan hasn’t been very good this season, but in other seasons (when he was younger) he did play well. I don’t think it’s fair to ignore those seasons and say that because Brule has been “at least even” with them this season that he’s even with them overall.
But to play with percentages to suggest that Cogliano’s .182 P/G is somehow comparable or better than Brule’s .481 is a bit of a stretch in my view.
What about the adjustments do you think is a stretch? Some guys will have very good %‘s, others will have very bad ones and so the adjustments at the extremes (Cogliano and Brule are at opposite extremes) will also be extreme. Is there a specific mistake that you think needs to be corrected, either in the basic assumptions or in the math? If not, I don’t understand why you think it’s a stretch.
The other key to me is his willingness to get involved on the physical side of the game, which Oilers have very little of in our top 6 or top 9 for that matter. You don’t put as much stock in that, so we’ll have to disagree on that point
I think this is a fair comment. You’re right that I don’t put a lot of stock in hitting for its own sake (I think, for example, Penner is much more effective physically than Brule and value that part of Penner’s game), but even if Brule’s overt physicality and potential FO ability (though I agree young players improve they don’t all develop better skills in this area and suggesting that he’s 52% of talent is a lot of faith in a small sample) are a plus, Cogliano’s superior penalty differential is, to me, a much more helpful (in terms of wins) secondary skill.
Do you (still) think Brule fits into a top six role on this team long term?
by Scott Reynolds on Mar 12, 2010 11:27 AM PST up reply actions
The problem I have with this is that it ignores the better seasons of the guys you’re comparing him to.
O’Sullivan had one good season and cashed in. Nilsson had half a good season and also cashed in. I understand your concern that this might be the exact same scenario with Brule, but I’m erring on the side of optimism in large part cuz I don’t see him as a perimeter player the way I do those guys. But what do I know?
Do you (still) think Brule fits into a top six role on this team long term?
Unless all of Eberle, MPS, and Hall are here, I think he might. I think his competition is more from below than above, the younger prospects rather than semi-established guys. For what it’s worth, Brule’s got higher draft pedigree than two of those guys, and while it has taken him time to come around he still has a few oodles of that talent left.
I also think Brule can be quite useful in a bottom six role, so he’s less of a gamble than, say, a Schremp.
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 Mar 12, 2010 6:18 PM PST up reply actions
What’s the team’s PDO number as a whole? Seems to me that would give you an idea of what those numbers mean, since I would think as a whole, the team PDO would suffer from bad goaltending.
SNN Sports - A theoretical Oilers blog (i.e. theoretically, I write stuff there). Link now 100% less broken.
Vic has the team PDO at 98.6, though his script did skip one game.
by Scott Reynolds on Mar 11, 2010 7:14 AM PST up reply actions
Said PDO comprised of a Sh% of 7.3% and a Sv% of .913. I always like to look at both sides of the equation.
In Brule’s case his Sv% ON is below team-average at .907, but he makes up ground in the Sh% dept at 9.3%. He is himself shooting at 14.0%, tied for the team lead with Penner, so it shouldn’t be too surprising when both are out together the SH% ON is an impressive 10.7% on 122 shots. Brule without Penner has a Sh% ON of 8.5% on 199 shots, still pretty good. (Penner without Brule is 7.7% on 339 shots)
Don’t know why they haven’t been playing more together. Of course it needs to be remembered that they had lots of early success as a second line playing behind Hemsky-Horcoff, whereas since Hemmer went down Penner’s line has drawn the top checkers.
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 Mar 11, 2010 9:37 AM PST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
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.
