Jump to content

Robert Ethan

Member
  • Posts

    107
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by Robert Ethan

  1. Subban continues to clean up on the annual Pre Season Internet Fanboy Awards.
  2. Well, there you go, the ultimate "analytics geeks" have spoken. I guess we can safely conclude that the Habs won the trade and close this thread.
  3. Things that can't be quantified numerically may be classed as "intangible" but they are still real. Psychology is a recognized field of science. Not to mention that all the "numerical evidence" being brought up to support Subban's case cover an extremely narrow spectrum of the hockey performance chart. I'd venture to say that Weber has as many numerical advantages as disadvantages if you get into it. BUT I certainly don't want to "get into it". The deal is done, and I think it will work out well for all parties involved. That is the purpose of a sports trade. Not to "win" or "lose".
  4. Just to be fair, can someone put up some Subban Yaps and Turtles videos to answer the Weber Fights videos?
  5. But I think your prospect rankings would probably undermine the usefulness of analytics in comparing players. Take the case of Scherbak and McCarron last season. Pretty sure most or all of the analytics would show McCarron to be the better player in the AHL as a rookie. But those who think Sherbak is the better prospect would counter by saying, "Well, he's younger, not as physically developed, played with less talented linemates, has better hands" etc. The McCarron fans would counter counter by saying "Ya, but Mike is much bigger, plays a better all round game, is good on faceoffs, brings a physical presence" etc. There is truth in all of those statements, but whatever side you take, analytics would have virtually nothing to do with your choice between them. Why should it be different comparing Weber and Subban? Subban (presumably) comes out ahead on some set of analytics, but probably less so than McCarron compared to Scherbak. So again the argument devolves into comparing "intangibles". Presuming that one guy or the other is better for team chemistry, or provides more toughness, or is a better leader, or is more likely to be healthy going forward, or is a better style fit... yada yada. Statistical analysis would (and should) have very little impact on the choice between the two. I'm not sure how far these models go back in time, but I'd venture to say the numbers of both players varied over the years and one wasn't always ahead of the other.
  6. @dlbair - Sorry if I seem too aggressive, when I comment on anything I assume that everyone realizes it's an opinion. I don't try to make it seem otherwise.
  7. "..the team that won the Cup had a top 5 Corsi". (I can't quote on this comp for some reason). I really don't know what Corsi entails, and when I tried to read the post above my eyelids drooped shut, but I take it a "high" score is good. But IF the team won the Cup, logic says their analytic scores would be high, right? It means they had a season good enough to make the playoffs and a lineup talented enough to take them through those playoffs. It just underlines my point - THE PLAY ON THE ICE DETERMINES THE ANALYTIC SCORES. Not vice versa. You could just as well say every player who won the Art Ross Trophy had the highest point total in the league that year. True, but it proves absolutely nothing in terms of who will win the next Art Ross Trophy or the one after that, etc.
  8. To me the analytics crowd puts the cart before the horse. The numbers are deriven from the way the players perform on ice, and change constantly from day to day, game to game, year to year. It's not Madden where the player performs indefinitely within the parameters of the numbers alloted to him. Once things get "real" on the ice, the numbers are instantly out dated and redundant. It's a straightforward concept and I can't fathom the difficulty many seem to have in grasping it.
  9. Nate Beaulieau not big on analytics or the Subban whiners I see.
  10. .. and you're like SOOO 11 year old school girl... "OMG! OMG! OMG!... I just can't..."
  11. If everyone keeps their nose jammed up the ass of the sheep in front of them, prospect rankings would never change. Every player would perform exactly in accordance with his draft position for the rest of his career. I don't know about 9/11, but I can tell you that won't happen based on previous examples. But hey, if you enjoy the ambiance of the sheep in front of you, and get a bit of a thrill from the attention of the sheep behind you......
  12. Someone brought up statistics, Sherbak had the same # of points over that stretch and was -4. So, yeah, at the end of March of last year I'd say Lernout was definitely "ahead" of Scherbak if you want to use stats.
  13. The last 10 games Lernout played in the AHL prior to his callup he scored 5 points and was +4, so he earned the promotion. Extrapolated over a season that's 40 points and +30 or so.
  14. I'd bet my house (if I had one) that Lernout plays more NHL games than Hudon or Lekhonen in his career. Although that bet would take some time to settle. In terms of progression, at the time of the draft Sherbak was well ahead of Lernout, obviously, drafted much higher, rated higher by all scouts. One year later I think they're seasons were relatively even. Sherbak, as an offensive forward scored twice as many points as Lernout the shutdown defenseman. That is what you would expect, in terms of offense. But Brett was averaging just under 30 minutes per game for S.C. that year, so he was just as valuable to his team as Scherbak in Everett. Last year in S.J. I think Lernout had the better overall season, he established himself as a trustworthy defensive presence in the AHL at barely 20 years old. Once again Scherbak had double the point total, but I'd bet Sylvain Lebefvre regarded Brett as a more valuable component of his team. I see those trends continuing, although Lernout's knee injury and rehab will throw a hiccup into his progression this coming season.
  15. "Upside" would favor Lernout, I'd say. He has made more significant strides in each of the seasons since he and Scherbak were drafted, he is bigger and larger players tend to reach their peak later, plus he is a defenseman who tend to take longer to mature than forwards. Statistics are difficult to compare between the two positions, but last season Brett played nearly a full season with a cumulative -4 while often playing defensive zone situations. Sherbak was -26 in two thirds of the time and he certainly wasn't playing a checking role. The "eye test" is notoriously unreliable due to bias and preconception. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
  16. So you guys are pro scouts I take it? Or comfortably well off retired folk who can afford the hobby of traveling around the country on your own dime to watch these players on an ongoing basis. If that's the case I suppose I should bow to your superior judgement.
  17. I've given my reasons why I think Lernout deserves to be ranked ahead of Scherbak, no one has offered reasons why he shouldn't. Other than the fact that Scherbak was drafted higher a couple years ago. But looking over the history of Canadiens drafts, the first player they took has turned out to be the best less than half the time, and most of those cases were when the first pick was high in the draft.
  18. Everyone has an opinion. That's what DISCUSSION boards are for. I won't abuse or ridicule you for yours.
  19. Yeah, the ONLY reason I gave over 10 or so posts about Lernout as to why I think he's a good prospect was the fact that he was called up at the end of the season. Good reading skills, great comprehension.
  20. Without the knee injury I think he might have had a shot at earning a spot in Montreal, but I don't think he's even skating yet, so he definitely won't be full go until probably half way through the coming season. But as a long term prospect I have him in the top five in the organization for sure at this point. All I was trying to say off the top.
  21. Lernout played a full season as an AHL regular before he got the callup, and was considered one of the team's most trustworthy blueliners in his own end. That is impressive in itself, given his age. Sherbak was -26 in half a season of sporadic play on the same team. The first thing a prospect has to establish is defensive responsibility before they can be expected to advance a level. To prove that at least they won't hurt the team on the ice. Lernout has done that, Sherbak has not.
  22. If a guy plays a game in the NHL he "made it to the NHL". If they had him in the stands as an eighth defenseman, or dressed him but didn't play him then I guess it would be arguable, but as far as Lernout is concerned, he made it to the NHL. He's far outperformed his draft status so far, his teammate in junior Honka was taken in the top half of the first round and has two AHL seasons already but hasn't made it to the NHL. Hayden Fleury who was drafted top 10 that year had fewer points last season in WHL than Lernout did the previous year on a poorer team, and Brett is much more physical player than Fleury.
  23. What does Shea Weber knowing Lernout have to do with anything? He probably doesn't know half the players who'll be in camp this fall, but I'm sure he will get to know them soon enough.
  24. The defensemen the Habs signed this year are all about the same age as Ellis and Dietz were. No longer prospects really, more depth guys. The defensemen they drafted were all left shooting, I believe, so they aren't in direct competition with Lernout and Juulsen. More to balance out the prospect chart. To give some perspective, Lernout is the only other defenseman beside Aaron Eckblad and a couple of overage Euros to make it to the NHL from the 2014 draft. I think he might be the only player who wasn't overage to make it of anyone drafted outside the top half of the first round.
  25. Lernout would have had a near identical rookie pro season to Jarred Tinordi if he'd stayed healthy for a few more NHL games, and he's nearly a year younger at the same career point. He has clearly developed much more than Scherbak since the 2014 draft. Nik had virtually the same numbers his post draft season in the WHL on a better team. Lernout nearly doubled his offensive numbers from his draft year. Sherbak had an awful season in the AHL, while Brett was being used in key defensive situations late in the year and got the callup to play in April. I don't think there's much question that McCarron and Lernout were the best long term prospect there last season. I don't include De La Rose and Andrighetto because I don't think either qualify as NHL rookies any longer. The fact that the Habs didn't bother to resign Ellis or Dietz shows they're pretty high on Lernout. I doubt the board "experts" here would have rated Brett higher than either of those two if they were still in the organization. I don't watch a lot of AHL hockey, but from what I've seen of Lernout he looks like an above average skater, surprisingly smooth for his size, seems to have a good selection of point shots, and has more than proven his toughness. He was outstanding in the athletic testing at the 2014 Combine, and seems like a very bright, grounded kid from the interviews I've seen. What's not to like?
×
×
  • Create New...