Kings @ Leafs - Dec. 11th, 7:30pm - TSN, TSN 1050

[freer]

I thought Gardiner and Rielly looked great together. Hopefully they can continue this play and dispel the notion that you always have to have a big, slow, physical defenceman in the lineup. I mean we played a strong, physical and fast LA team and the worst defencemen were Ranger and Fraser, the big bruisers. I strongly prefer a back end that includes Liles over either of those two stiffs.

IMO. I think Liles would of been out of the game within the first 5 mins, IMO again cant take a hit anymore. Watch the BOS game for my example of that.

 

[Bullfrog]

Wow, that was not the game I expected.  Just the result I expected.

More or less how I feel. I was expecting a loss, but also expecting it to be much uglier.

 

[Corn Flake]

I thought Gardiner and Rielly looked great together. Hopefully they can continue this play and dispel the notion that you always have to have a big, slow, physical defenceman in the lineup. I mean we played a strong, physical and fast LA team and the worst defencemen were Ranger and Fraser, the big bruisers. I strongly prefer a back end that includes Liles over either of those two stiffs.

I'm sorry but Fraser overall played well last night. If we get *that* Fraser - much more like the one from last year - then he can play any time (in a #6 role).

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

I thought Gardiner and Rielly looked great together. Hopefully they can continue this play and dispel the notion that you always have to have a big, slow, physical defenceman in the lineup. I mean we played a strong, physical and fast LA team and the worst defencemen were Ranger and Fraser, the big bruisers. I strongly prefer a back end that includes Liles over either of those two stiffs.

I'm sorry but Fraser overall played well last night. If we get *that* Fraser - much more like the one from last year - then he can play any time (in a #6 role).

This guy on Twitter was tracking zone entries during the game and while I'm not sure what time of the game this was at, it's not exactly stellar for a defensive first player:

@TLNdc
The Kings have entered the zone with possession 8 times. 6 of those times they've been skating directly at Mark Fraser. Throw a check?

DownGoesBrown/Sean McIndoe on Grantland.com did a piece last week (I think) about how zone entries with possession, which basically concludes:

It turns out that crossing the blue line with possession is worth more than a dump-in.

How much more? Quite a bit, according to this paper presented at the 2013 MIT Sloan Sports Analytics Conference.10 After tracking more than 300 games from the 2011-12 season, the authors found that, even when accounting for the higher failure rate of carry attempts, that approach still generated roughly twice as many shots, scoring chances, and goals as dumping in the puck and trying to retrieve it.

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/10083164/zone-entry-nhl

I don't know how it compares to the other players last night, only that at that point of 8 controlled entries, 6 were on Fraser.  If that is something that teams have been/are able to do consistently, it could be pretty troubling.

And I think it goes back to the criticism of him - players can attack on his side of the ice with the puck because he's not quick enough to react to a good portion of the league.  They can drive wide on him.

 

[TML fan]

The Leafs were giving up the line all night. It wasn't just Fraser.

 

[Corn Flake]

And I think it goes back to the criticism of him - players can attack on his side of the ice with the puck because he's not quick enough to react to a good portion of the league.  They can drive wide on him.

Let's get some perspective on what Fraser is and is supposed to be, because from a lot of what I'm reading it sounds like you expect the guy to be a top flight shutdown d-men.  The problem is there truly are very few of them in the league and Fraser is certainly not one of them, nor should he expected to be one.

There are numerous bottom pairing d-men who are have that same limitations as Fraser and can be effective d-men, assuming they are not expected to close out attacking forwards along the boards by using speed.  Even if they have to approach it differently, they can be effective d-men as long as their positioning remains sound and they don't let guys drive to the net and get past them.  Fraser did that well last night.

If a guy enters the zone but is forced to drive wide and is eventually neutralized, then the d-man has done his job.  You can't expect everything to be prevented at the blueline. This zone entry stuff is interesting but it's not the be-all end-all to determining whether a guy can play defense. 

Crossing the line with the puck is better than a dump in?  Trust me, it didn't take this statistical analysis to come to that conclusion.  Entering the zone with the puck on your stick vs. shooting it in and having maybe a 50% chance of getting it back?  Yeah that's not exactly a revelation.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

The Leafs were giving up the line all night. It wasn't just Fraser.

If they were it didn't result in many shots against.  But I didn't track that, so I can't comment it other than relaying the comments of those who did.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Crossing the line with the puck is better than a dump in?  Trust me, it didn't take this statistical analysis to come to that conclusion.  Entering the zone with the puck on your stick vs. shooting it in and having maybe a 50% chance of getting it back?  Yeah that's not exactly a revelation.

Tell that to Carlye. Or plenty of other coaches in the NHL.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

If a guy enters the zone but is forced to drive wide and is eventually neutralized, then the d-man has done his job.  You can't expect everything to be prevented at the blueline. This zone entry stuff is interesting but it's not the be-all end-all to determining whether a guy can play defense.

Point out where I said it was the be all and end all of determining whether a guy can play defense.  Or are you doing the thing you usually do when possession stats are brought up and being dismissive because they can't be a magic bullet to tell you everything, even though nobody is advocating them as that.

Feel free to continue to argue against yourself if you'd like, but I never made that argument in the first place. 

Crossing the line with the puck is better than a dump in?  Trust me, it didn't take this statistical analysis to come to that conclusion.  Entering the zone with the puck on your stick vs. shooting it in and having maybe a 50% chance of getting it back?  Yeah that's not exactly a revelation.

Nobody says it's a revelation, the article even states that.  It's nice to have numbers to back up what you think.

There are forces that keep human beings from floating off the ground into space? Trust me, it didn't take this scientific analysis to come to that conclusion.  People go to the trouble of explaining the concept of gravity, even though I know I'm not floating off into space?  Yeah that's not exactly a revelation.

Jesus with the hate on for anything above goals and assists.

 

[Corn Flake]

The Leafs were giving up the line all night. It wasn't just Fraser.

If they were it didn't result in many shots against.  But I didn't track that, so I can't comment it other than relaying the comments of those who did.

They created a lot of turnovers inside their own zone last night.  Kings would gain the zone as in slip over the blueline to try and set something up but they Leafs did a great job slowing them and intercepting passes.  Happend allll night long.

At times when the Kings did get into the zone with speed, they were pushed to the outside or the Leafs covered well enough to prevent shots and scoring chances.

 

[Corn Flake]

Crossing the line with the puck is better than a dump in?  Trust me, it didn't take this statistical analysis to come to that conclusion.  Entering the zone with the puck on your stick vs. shooting it in and having maybe a 50% chance of getting it back?  Yeah that's not exactly a revelation.

Tell that to Carlye. Or plenty of other coaches in the NHL.

I don't think dump and chase is their first choice, but it's preferred to dilly dallying at the blueline and causing a turnover.  When the Leafs have gotten into trouble in many games this year, it's that exact thing that has caused them a lot of problems.

 

[Corn Flake]

If a guy enters the zone but is forced to drive wide and is eventually neutralized, then the d-man has done his job.  You can't expect everything to be prevented at the blueline. This zone entry stuff is interesting but it's not the be-all end-all to determining whether a guy can play defense.

Point out where I said it was the be all and end all of determining whether a guy can play defense.  Or are you doing the thing you usually do when possession stats are brought up and being dismissive because they can't be a magic bullet to tell you everything, even though nobody is advocating them as that.

It works both ways bud. I get adv. stats shoved down my throat the minute I suggest a player can perhaps just maybe do his job even if some adv. numbers say otherwise. EXACTLY my point is your response to me below... i said I thought Fraser played well and if we get that Fraser he's a good contributor.  You responded with a stack of advanced stats.  You shove them in my face, I respond in kind and I'm being all dismissive.. This is my point exactly here.

All I'm actually trying to do is say that they are not the be be-all end all.  I respect you can use them as a tool, which is what I try to do to be honest, but every time I turn around I've got someone dismissing anything else I say because the adv. stats suggest otherwise.

Jesus with the hate on for anything above goals and assists.

Don't forget I worship +/- too.

(Please. dude, calm down)

 

[CarltonTheBear]

i said I thought Fraser played well and if we get that Fraser he's a good contributor.  You responded with a stack of advanced stats.  You shove them in my face, I respond in kind and I'm being all dismissive.

I think you spelt "one" wrong.

 

[Highlander]

Hope we don't get stoned by Steen?nice to have Lupul back in the lineup..he gives us so many more options?and good on Holland getting more time and please coach a lot more of Rielly and Jake together at last

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

Today I learned that tracking how many times a team carries the puck over the blueline is "advanced".

 

[Rebel_1812]

THAT'S more like the Ron Wilson hockey I've been pining for.

omg ron wilson was the worse coach they have had in two decades.

Clearly, you've forgotten about Mike Murphy.

he still didn't have the bitter old man aura that wilson did.

 

[bustaheims]

THAT'S more like the Ron Wilson hockey I've been pining for.

omg ron wilson was the worse coach they have had in two decades.

Clearly, you've forgotten about Mike Murphy.

he still didn't have the bitter old man aura that wilson did.

Well, no, now you're confusing Wilson with Carlyle and Quinn (I liked Quinn, but, he definitely came off as a grumpy old man).

 

[Corn Flake]

THAT'S more like the Ron Wilson hockey I've been pining for.

omg ron wilson was the worse coach they have had in two decades.

Clearly, you've forgotten about Mike Murphy.

he still didn't have the bitter old man aura that wilson did.

Well, no, now you're confusing Wilson with Carlyle and Quinn (I liked Quinn, but, he definitely came off as a grumpy old man).

True. Wilson fits more into the condescending j@cka$$ mold.

 

[BlueWhiteBlood]

I learned today that stats are touchy subjects.

 

[Kin]

I learned today that stats are touchy subjects.

Anything's a touchy subject when it becomes dogma.