2009-10 Rink Wrap: Jeff Schultz
by J.P. on Jun 3, 2010 11:00 AM EDT
in Rink Wraps
Email
PrintFrom Alzner to Varlamov, we're taking a look at and grading (please read the criteria below) the 2009-10 season for every player who laced 'em up for the Caps for a significant number of games during the campaign, with an eye towards 2010-11. Next up, Jeff Schultz.
Jeff Schultz
#55 / Defenseman / Washington Capitals
6-6
221
Feb 25, 1986
4
$715,000 cap hit in 2009-10; Restricted Free Agent
4.93
6.32
Key Stats: Schultz tied with teammate Mike Green for the best plus-minus in hockey over the past two seasons, and trailed only Nicklas Lidstrom and Duncan Keith among blueliners over the past three campaigns.
Interesting Stat: Schultz is the first defenseman to finish a season with a plus-50 rating or better since Chris Pronger in 1999-2000.
The Good: Sarge, a healthy scratch on Opening Night, responded to an increased role (that of first-pairing rearguard, partnered with the game's most dynamic offensive defenseman) by shattering personal bests nearly across the board, punctuated by a franchise-record plus-50 rating. He had two plus-five games (the only player in the League with that distinction), three plus-fours (only Eric Staal could join Schultz in making that claim), and even had five multi-point games (entering the season he'd had one in 174 games played). Schultz, who won't turn 25 until next February, led the team in blocked shots, was second among defensemen in even-strength assists and points, and committed just one minor penalty per 90.6 minutes of ice time (a better rate than all Caps blueliners who played twenty games with the team). His Defensive GVT was tops on the team and his five-on-five +-ON/60 was the best among all NHL defensemen (his GAON/60 was fourth-best and his GFON/60 second-best), all while playing against the second-toughest competition among the Caps' regular defensemen. He was also arguably the Caps' best penalty-killing blueliner (perhaps damning by faint praise), facing the second-hardest competition and sporting a better GAON/60 at four-on-five than anyone else in the D-corps not currently fighting for a second-consecutive Calder Cup.
All of that, and he scored this beauty of a goal:
The Bad: Schultz's giveaway-to-takeaway ratio was bad (though Milan Jurcina, John Erskine and Tyler Sloan were worse), his offense still limited, and his footwork downright awkward at times. There are also a handful of stats that temper some of the more impressive numbers above and imply that there was a fair amount of "right place, right time" going on for Sarge in 2009-10. Specifically, he had an absurdly high PDO (which basically means that the Caps shot and save percentages were exceptionally high with him on the ice), a lot of offensive-zone starts, and had some of the highest-quality teammates around (of course, it's unfair to discount entirely Schultz's contributions to these numbers).
Then came the playoffs, where Schultz and his partner struggled mightily at the outset - Sarge was on the ice for five of the first eight goals the Caps allowed - and hardly recovered. But hey, he had a better playoffs in 2009-10 than he had a year earlier, so that's something.
The Vote: Rate Schultz below on a scale of 1-10 (10 being the best) based on his performance relative to his potential and your expectations for the season - if he had the best year you could have imagined him having, give him a 10; if he more or less played as you expected he would, give him a 5 or a 6; if he had the worst year you could have imagined him having, give him a 1.
The Discussion: With Schultz due a new contract, should the team look to lock him up long-term, or go with a one- or two-year deal? What's a fair price for Double Nickel? What would you like to see him improve upon in his game? What will it take for him to earn a 10 next season?
229 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
7
Was better than I expected going into the season, a lot more solid looking. Not sure you can give him a “long term” deal though, I believe GMGM has said that in the salary cap era, you can only risk giving a few guys the 5+ year deals, maybe a 2 year deal around the Juice level?
"Yes, but Rimmer Directive 271 states just as clearly, 'No chance you metal ba****d.'"
7. I’ve been avoiding almost all of these so far. Pain is still just beneath the surface. However, Sarge deserves some love for the season he had. Positioning and decision making continued to improve. He looked much more relaxed on the ice. He did very well with increased playing time.
As mentioned above, his skating/footwork still needs work. He could probably working on his shooting a bit more too. he’s never going to be an offensive stud to put it mildly, but a slight improvement in his shot could add up to a key goal at some point.
"You ever use smelling salts, every time you type a bad blog?" Brooks Laich
8
He so far exceeded everything I would have imagined for him in the regular season that I gave him a nine, but his play in the postseason knocked him down to an eight. To get to a 10 he needs to increase his offensive production to around 8 goals and 40 points, commit far fewer giveaways, use his size to get in the way of more shots and help lead the team to a Cup. Oh, he could hit a little more too.
9
He exceeded every expectation I had in the regular season and he would have gotten a 10 if not for a so-so playoffs. Even then, setting the franchise plus/minus record is pretty damn impressive when you think about some of the top quality defensemen who have played for the Caps (Langway, Stevens, etc.)
One thing in the “Bad” section I kind of take issue with:
There are also a handful of stats that temper some of the more impressive numbers above and imply that there was a fair amount of “right place, right time” going on for Sarge in 2009-10.
One of the keys to being a defenseman is being in the right place at the right time as often as possible. Schultz is never going to be a great skater, and is probably in the bottom 25% in the NHL in terms of actual skating ability, and I am sure he works hard to get better. Even then he isn’t going to be in the top half anytime soon. So instead of just hoping to get to the right place, you can see he is anticipating on the ice. He’s a very smart player and he knows where the right place is, and when to be there. The guy, once he retires (if not before he retires) will be a great coach, I suspect.
I think the best thing about him is how he knows what his strengths and weaknesses are, he knows how to play within them, so that you don’t see the weaknesses and the strengths come to the forefront. He’s never going to be an All-star, but he is always going to get the most from his abilities every night. He knows how to keep the weaknesses in his game hidden and how to get himself into a position of strength.
Also, the 32 PIM for a defensive defenseman is pretty damn good too.
I really think the reason his playoff wasn’t particularly good was because the Habs are a team that has enough speed and quickness to perhaps uncover some of Sarge’s weaknesses better than others. I don’t think he played badly, but he certainly wasn’t up to the regular season standards, hence the 9 and not a 10.
To get to 10 next year… I would love to see him work to leverage his size to get more on his shot. His shot is pretty accurate and he’s smart enough to know when to use it, but someone with his arms and body size should be able to bring the stick around harder and get off a 95 mph slapper. If he learns to leverage his size to do this (I think he can), he’d be an added weapon in the Caps arsenal. I wouldn’t expect him to be Mike Green and score 20+, but if he were to pop in 6-10 goals along with his defensive play, he’d be more than a statistical anomaly among the plus/minus leaders in the league…
Washington Capitals 2009-10 = Quebec Nordiques 1994-95
--- D'ohboy
6
I guess I just had higher expectations for him. He was good last year, I expected him to be better. And he was. The strides he took in his game were what I expected from a 23-24 year old. He may have been marginally better than my expectations, but that playoff series is what keeps him from getting a 7. It shouldn’t be a shock, after all, he missed the vast majority of the previous two playoff runs so he never got to learn his playoff lessons, but it was still a disappointment. We needed more from him.
Unlike a lot of other guys, numbers aren’t going to determine if Schultz gets a 10. Obviously +100 would probably be a 10, but I’m not looking for goals and assists from Sarge. To get a 10 next season he’ll have to keep progressing, but also turn a major corner. It looked like the switch started to flip regarding his ability to use his imposing frame. Part of that surely has to do with his newfound ability to keep on muscle, but I’m sure part of it is mental and part of the normal development process. I’m not saying he needs to hit everything that moves, but I’d like to see him be more aggressive/assertive taking ice away from opposing players sometimes. Don’t just poke your stick out there, move your feet a little bit and take that ice and rub the guy into the corner. I’d also like to see him be a little more smart and poised with the puck. He doesn’t need to have a ton of points, but I’d like to see him hit quick and simple breakout passes with more regularity. I guess the best way to express a “Jeff Schultz 10” would be to say that the end-of-season narrative would go something like this: “Mike Green was awful lucky that Jeff Schultz was out there with him because Schultz is one of the best stay at home D in the league and it really allows Green to do what he does best” as opposed to “Schultz is steady but he’s lucky that he got to play so much with Green and pad his plus/minus.”
I think we are past the point of one year contracts for Schultz. We know he’s good, we know he’s developing, let’s keep him in the fold. The ultimate number depends on the term. If his agent negotiates a 2 year deal it shouldn’t go above 2 mill. But if GMGM can get him to sign a longer deal (into the UFA years) then going up to 2.5 or even 3 is reasonable. Schultz is exactly the kind of D we need to keep in the fold, and it would be nice to know what we’ll be paying him when we go into negotiations with Alzner, Green, Carlson in the next two off-seasons.
I waited all year for this?
by Rob Parker on Jun 3, 2010 11:34 AM EDT reply actions 3 recs
I agree… I’d love to see a long term contract for Sarge. He’s earned it.
Washington Capitals 2009-10 = Quebec Nordiques 1994-95
--- D'ohboy
by MikeL-Pivonka on Jun 3, 2010 12:31 PM EDT up reply actions
5
I had high expectations after the playoff collapse without him. He met them, and exceeded them at times. Still, he has a long way to go before he is someone like Hal Gill out there. If he isn’t going to use his frame to punish people, he needs to make sure he uses his frame to keep the puck from coming anywhere near our goal.
10 next year? Be a legitimate candidate for a Norris. Doesn’t have to win it, just has to get more than a few pity votes.. He’s never going to be a clear cut candidate because of his limited offensive acumen but there’s no reason he can’t be mentioned with hopefully an improved defensive game.
All the king's horses and all the king's men
Couldn't put Humpty together again
Got to thinking a bit — no 10 next year unless he looks like a normal human being out there skating. I’m tired of the knock-kneed look and I can’t imagine that is going to help his durability. Hit the gym, follow Laich up to bumfleisch Canada and learn to skate better.
All the king's horses and all the king's men
Couldn't put Humpty together again
He’s never going to be a great skater so you have to build the poor skating into his expectations, IMO. Saying Schultz needs to be a graceful skater to get a 10 is like saying Perreault needs to be 6’ tall to get a 10.
I waited all year for this?
by Rob Parker on Jun 3, 2010 11:42 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Probably. But we can all cross our fingers he goes Chara with his skating and vastly improves it over a couple of summers (and scales a big mountain while he’s at it).
Cидни Kросби: Александр Oвечкин, он твой папа теперь
Red Line Station: for Capitals fans who can bear reading something less intelligent than a story at Japers' Rink
(note name change)
by red army line on Jun 3, 2010 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions
But Chara still isn’t a great skater and he was even worse than Schultz when he came into the NHL.
I waited all year for this?
He seems pretty decent now, at least in terms of straight-line skating.
Cидни Kросби: Александр Oвечкин, он твой папа теперь
Red Line Station: for Capitals fans who can bear reading something less intelligent than a story at Japers' Rink
(note name change)
by red army line on Jun 3, 2010 2:20 PM EDT up reply actions
Straight line is rarely the concern for NHL players. It’s lateral movement and pivoting.
I waited all year for this?
I remember one instance where Chara chased down a guy on a breakaway with some acceleration and a diving pokecheck. Of course then they showed replays and commented on how hard Chara worked on his skating.
Silly Versus.
Cидни Kросби: Александр Oвечкин, он твой папа теперь
Red Line Station: for Capitals fans who can bear reading something less intelligent than a story at Japers' Rink
(note name change)
by red army line on Jun 3, 2010 2:43 PM EDT up reply actions
I suspect he did work on his skating, as he was much better at it in 2009-10 from 2008-09. He skated somewhat better, but he also skated smarter. I have no doubt he is working on it.
That said, he’s never going to be in the top half of the league in skating, but he doesn’t have to be. You mentioned Gill… he’s not a particularly good skater either, but he, like Schultz, knows where to be and is efficient at getting there. I have no reason to believe Schultz can’t become a less-physical version of Gill or Mark Tinordi.
Washington Capitals 2009-10 = Quebec Nordiques 1994-95
--- D'ohboy
by MikeL-Pivonka on Jun 3, 2010 12:21 PM EDT up reply actions
He should watch film of Pronger. The SCF is the first time I’ve had a chance to really watch him at length. Knows how to pick his spots, for sure.
I am sure Schultz watches tons of video of other defensemen and players. You can see so much improvement from 2 years ago. He knows where to be and what to do when he gets there. That comes less from instinct and more from study.
Washington Capitals 2009-10 = Quebec Nordiques 1994-95
--- D'ohboy
by MikeL-Pivonka on Jun 4, 2010 9:26 AM EDT up reply actions
Gill to me is the Mendoza line for tall skating. He’s easily embarrassed, but it doesn’t happen often enough that it becomes problematic. He knows his limitations and he knows his strengths and plays to them. Schultz certainly does too — that’s primarily the reason in my mind that he doesn’t throw himself around. Hitting is great and all, but he’s never going to have the quickness to get back into the play if he’s putting people into the boards.
My issue is just improving his skating enough that he isn’t putting so much pressure on his knees. When you’re putting 230+ lbs of pressure on your legs like that you have to give your joints the best possible position to hold that. Otherwise he’s going to have tons of issues with arthritis years and years before he would normally.
All the king's horses and all the king's men
Couldn't put Humpty together again
Just a thought that occurred to me right now
If he’s not a good skater, he can hit in the corner.
That means his partner has to cover the front of the net.
I’d rather Schultz in front of the net and Green using his skill to force the puck out in the corner.
Cидни Kросби: Александр Oвечкин, он твой папа теперь
Red Line Station: for Capitals fans who can bear reading something less intelligent than a story at Japers' Rink
(note name change)
by red army line on Jun 3, 2010 3:17 PM EDT up reply actions
Gill has realized that he can’t chase smaller, faster guys, and instead has to play positionally and predict where players are going to go.
Schultz needs to do that a little better. He can’t chase guys around the ice, because he’ll get beat 75% of the time (and he was a lot better at that last season than in his previous).
Agreed. Schultz can get better at this, but he is very effective right now. It is possible he could become as effective as Gill or Volchenkov in this.
Washington Capitals 2009-10 = Quebec Nordiques 1994-95
--- D'ohboy
by MikeL-Pivonka on Jun 4, 2010 9:27 AM EDT up reply actions
Ouch to the haters!
So your expectations were 20 assists and +50? Sure maybe some of that was good fortune, but good fortune pays the bills just as much as hard work.
Understand he does have room for improvement in some areas. But would you not take that regular season for the next 10 years?
And of course standard 1 point deduction for not hitting anything. ;-)
Choking since 1985.
Stats were so skewed because the Caps scored at will.
I use my own +/-, if I say yeah Schultz, it’s a +. If I say Schultz, it’s a . He was in the black for my ratings, but not with the absurdly high normal +/. Plus, I compare him against the SecDef since there are obvious parallels. With that in mind he had a very respectable year that I had hoped he would. He became the minute eating defender the Caps needed to skate with Green. There’s still the circumference of the Earth to go for him in terms of development, but he’s well on his way.
All the king's horses and all the king's men
Couldn't put Humpty together again
Two more
Great argument.
I waited all year for this?
by Rob Parker on Jun 3, 2010 11:49 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Go look at the +/- stat leaders and you will see it is largely a stat indicative of team success. 10 of the top 11 players in that stat are Capitals or Canucks. Scroll down the stat when isolating just defensemen and when you get to around the 100th ranked defensemen in the league in that stat you will find the names of Anton Volchenkov +2, Robyn Regher +2, and Erik Johnson +1. Does that give you an idea of what that stat means.
Twice in the past two years in crucial moments in playoffs games he has blown a tire. Against the Rangers Schultz did that and it led to a crucial goal. He did it again against the Habs, but no goal was scored.
Jeff Schultz offers nothing on the offensive side of the puck and his +/- stat, like Tom Poti’s is inflated because he gets to play with the likes of Alex Ovechkin, Alex Semin, Nicklas Backstrom etc.
How about he actually contribute something offensively. Now I know that isn’t fair since that isn’t his job description, but if we are going to tout the guy for a great +/- figure then shouldn’t he contribute to the actual scoring of the goals rather than just being a regular passenger when the goals are scored.
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 12:00 PM EDT up reply actions
He’s a big reason there aren’t a bunch of minuses off-setting the pluses. Scoring goals isn’t the only way to help your team out. I wouldn’t rely solely on plus/minus when evaluating Schultz, and I haven’t seen anyone do that. There’s quite a bit more to like about Sarge beyond the +50.
I waited all year for this?
I just don’t buy that Jeff Schultz is preventing a bunch of off-setting minuses. Aren’t you basically saying that he is a shut down d-man? I just can’t put him into that category. If he was that force than why would the team be interested in any upgrade at the defensive position? If he was that force you would think someone other than Caps fans (I don’t mean that in a derogatory sense, just showing the bias of fans have for players on their team) would recognize it. Not one media member, or one opposing coach looks at the Caps defense and game plans for Jeff Schultz. I don’t think I have ever heard anyone say they want to get player X away from Jeff Schultz.
IMO he is just another in the long line of NHL caliber but mediocre defensemen the team has been relying on for the better part of the last four or five years. He is absolutely replaceable and that is my biggest issue with Jeff Schultz. It isn’t him personally, but almost the entire defensive corp on this team over the past few years. Last year GMGM basically re-signed that entire corp for another run. How much playoff success has that corp had?
If Jeff Schultz were traded tomorrow is the defense of the Capitals that much worse? He is another cog, but a replaceable one.
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 12:18 PM EDT up reply actions
Aren’t you basically saying that he is a shut down d-man? I just can’t put him into that category.
Depends how you define your terms. I’m not concerned with putting a label on Schultz; suffice it to say that he’s very good in his own and was a huge part we were able to keep pucks out of our own net. And even under the “shutdown” definition, he does an extremely good job against guys like Malkin. Nobody game plans for him, but that’s a straw man. Nobody called him a stud, or said he is the key cog or any of that. And in honesty, how many guys in the league do teams actually game plan for? I’d bet it’s under 50.
Jeff Schultz is replaceable, but so is basically every player. The guys that are “irreplaceable” can be counted on one hand. How many 24 year olds with 200+ NHL games still have a lot of upside, are on very affordable contracts, and are as accomplished as Sarge in their own end? Not a whole lot.
And yeah, if we lost Schultz we would be significantly worse. Obviously the return is important, but he’s not a marginal NHL player and his defensive contributions are not negligible.
I waited all year for this?
Sorry, not sure how to pull the quotes out and highlight them, so bare with me.
“he’s very good in his own and was a huge part we were able to keep pucks out of our own net.”
The Caps were 7th in the East in GA and tied for 17th in the league in GA. That is mediocre at best.
“Nobody called him a stud, or said he is the key cog or any of that.”
People are giving him ratings of 8 or higher. I know that may be based on expectations and not actual value, but at best he met my expectations for him, he didn’t exceed them.
“How many 24 year olds with 200+ NHL games still have a lot of upside,”
There is where the difference may be. I don’t see the upside. I think he has maxed out at his capabilities.
“but he’s not a marginal NHL player and his defensive contributions are not negligible”
I never said he was a marginal NHLer. I said he was a mediocre NHL defensemen. Put it this way. I firmly believe Jeff Schultz’s statistical success is a function of being on the Washington Capitals. I think if he were to be put on another NHL team his statistical success would tank. His success is a function of the team and I think any number of defensemen could step in and have similar success…if you want me to name names, well I can’t off the top of my head. My goodness, Jeff Schultz is on the top pairing on the Washington Capitals, that there says more than enough.
I think Pepper and I are going to be touching on this Saturday morning on the radio show. So call in and yell at me if you like. :)
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 12:35 PM EDT up reply actions
People are giving him ratings of 8 or higher. I know that may be based on expectations and not actual value, but at best he met my expectations for him, he didn’t exceed them.
The ratings are not related to “stud” or not. A lot of people voted AO ~6 but I’m sure we agree he’s a stud.
I’d be shocked if he’s maxed out. But only time will tell, so whatever.
I waited all year for this?
The Caps were 7th in the East in GA and tied for 17th in the league in GA. That is mediocre at best.
Yeah, but that’s mostly because of their terrible penalty kill. At 5-on-5 the only team that allowed goals less often was New Jersey.
I never said he was a marginal NHLer. I said he was a mediocre NHL defensemen. Put it this way. I firmly believe Jeff Schultz’s statistical success is a function of being on the Washington Capitals.
That doesn’t account for his statistical success in relation to his teammates.
by David Getz on Jun 3, 2010 12:40 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
The Caps were 7th in the East in GA and tied for 17th in the league in GA. That is mediocre at best.
And his GAOff/60 at 5-on-5 was tops on the team (and against tough opposition) and the same is true 4-on-5, meaning the team’s D was at its best with him on the ice. If the team’s D was “mediocre at best” overall, it was much, much better than that when Jeff Schultz was on the ice.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Fair enough. But, couldn’t I look at that same stat and say that it is like comparing the growth in GDP of Sri Lanka to the growth in GDP of the United States? (I’m making up these numbers and the countries to make a point…so please don’t check the facts :) ). Sri Lanka could have a GDP growth at 10% compared to the US at 1.5%. Problem is that Sri Lanka’s starting point was horrible.
Jeff Schultz looks great among these defensemen, but that doesn’t mean he was great.
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 1:18 PM EDT up reply actions
I don’t think anyone has called him “great,” so we can take that straw man down.
The point is that you’re claiming he’s only good because of his teammates, when the stats irrefutably confirm that he’s good relative to his supposedly great teammates.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Jun 3, 2010 1:21 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I actually never claimed that Jeff Schultz was good. I said he was mediocre. I said he looked good as compared to his defensive teammates and that his numbers were inflated because of this teams offensive talent.
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 5:17 PM EDT up reply actions
Right. Let me amend my statement – sorry for putting words in your mouth.
The point is that you’re claiming he’s only even mediocre because of his teammates, when the stats irrefutably confirm that he’s actually quite good relative to his supposedly great teammates.
Better?
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
No.
I think Jeff Schultz is mediocre and that has nothing to do with the abilities of his teammates.
I also don’t quite understand what you mean by “great teammates” at the end. I wouldn’t put any of his d-man teammates as great (except perhaps Green). In fact, I would say most of his d-man teammates were mediocre too.
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 5:25 PM EDT up reply actions
But he out-performed most of his teammates on a Presidents’ Trophy winning team that was 5th in ES goals against. Someone in there had to be pretty good, and Schultz was the best defensive D on the team.
I waited all year for this?
Yep. The bad part about the D is the PK.
Cидни Kросби: Александр Oвечкин, он твой папа теперь
Red Line Station: for Capitals fans who can bear reading something less intelligent than a story at Japers' Rink
(note name change)
by red army line on Jun 3, 2010 11:56 PM EDT up reply actions
And that’s not just on the D, either. A failed PK is as much a fault of the guys up front as it is from the D.
Washington Capitals 2009-10 = Quebec Nordiques 1994-95
--- D'ohboy
by MikeL-Pivonka on Jun 4, 2010 9:28 AM EDT up reply actions
By “great teammates,” I was referring to Green, Ovechkin, Backstrom and so on, not just the blueliners.
But in your eyes, Jeff Schultz is a mediocre defenseman who posted incredibly good defensive numbers by just about any measure. How’d he do it? Not by his own skill, of course – we’ve established that he’s mediocre. Not by being lucky enough to skate with “great teammates” – we’ve established that they’re all mediocre, too. One of the great mysteries of life, I suppose.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
I’ve been on the defensive for all of this. So let’s flip the question. Around the league who do you think is a Jeff Schultz comparable?
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 5:33 PM EDT up reply actions
Not. The. Question.
I waited all year for this?
by Rob Parker on Jun 3, 2010 5:34 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Hadn’t ever really given it much thought, to be honest, as it’s wholly irrelevant here.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Here's enough info
Around here Schultz is the runaway Norris nomination winner…
Cидни Kросби: Александр Oвечкин, он твой папа теперь
Red Line Station: for Capitals fans who can bear reading something less intelligent than a story at Japers' Rink
(note name change)
by red army line on Jun 3, 2010 11:57 PM EDT up reply actions
What number is inflated by offense? Plus Minus?
Shenanigans is called on that.
Caps gave up 137 GA 5-on-5. Good for 5th best in the league. The ES defense was good all year.
Caps gave up 137 GA 5-on-5. Good for 5th best in the league. The ES defense was good all year.
And markedly better when Sarge was on the ice. But it’s just a coincidence.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
A puck control offense that out scored opponents by 85 goals this season. Sorry, but in my opinion the offensive statistics of all Caps are going to inflated. That isn’t an insult it is a fact.
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 5:30 PM EDT up reply actions
They are interrelated to be sure, but it seems like the only way to please you is to play like MTL, give up a ton of shots and only score a little bit. Is that good D?
Cидни Kросби: Александр Oвечкин, он твой папа теперь
Red Line Station: for Capitals fans who can bear reading something less intelligent than a story at Japers' Rink
(note name change)
by red army line on Jun 3, 2010 11:59 PM EDT up reply actions
“the Gross National Product measures neither our wit nor our courage, neither our wisdom nor our learning, neither our compassion nor our devotion to our country. It measures everything, in short, except that which makes life worthwhile, and it can tell us everything about America — except whether we are proud to be Americans.”
—Robert Kennedy, 3/18/68
More norrissey, less morrissey
I just don’t buy that Jeff Schultz is preventing a bunch of off-setting minuses. Aren’t you basically saying that he is a shut down d-man? I just can’t put him into that category. If he was that force than why would the team be interested in any upgrade at the defensive position?
I don’t think Schultz is a shutdown guy, but I don’t think that’s a very strong case. You look to upgrade based on who your worst player is. The Caps want a new center; that’s not because Backstrom’s no good, it’s because no one after Backstrom is very good.
If he was that force you would think someone other than Caps fans (I don’t mean that in a derogatory sense, just showing the bias of fans have for players on their team) would recognize it.
He did have at least one write-up on NHL.com and was on the shortlist in the Fanhouse Defensive Defenseman of the year voting. Plus Pierre Maguire loves him.
Not one media member, or one opposing coach looks at the Caps defense and game plans for Jeff Schultz. I don’t think I have ever heard anyone say they want to get player X away from Jeff Schultz.
I think that’s true but you can be a pretty good player and not be the focal point of a team’s game plan, especially if you play for a team like the Caps.
I think he’s far, far above mediocre or (easily) replaceable. Honestly, how many guys in the world would you take over Schultz?
by David Getz on Jun 3, 2010 12:25 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
Admittedly, being +50 is something that has to be taken in context with the team, but still, to lead this team despite having a team full of talented two-way players (Backstrom comes to mind immediately) says something. That Sarge was on ice for 50 more goals scored by the Caps while even and shorthanded than against says a lot, not just about the Caps, but also about Schultz. The guy works hard to maximize his strengths, keep his weaknesses from being a factor, and at the same time he doesn’t take penalties. He just quietly and efficiently does his job, and does it better than most players in the league.
It’s a joy to watch him play every night…
Washington Capitals 2009-10 = Quebec Nordiques 1994-95
--- D'ohboy
by MikeL-Pivonka on Jun 3, 2010 12:15 PM EDT up reply actions
“It’s a joy to watch him play every night…”
HUH? This is a joke, right?
bigonetimer, I rated him as a 4. Probably a little low, but more of a reaction to the unmitigated Schultz love that is going on. He is a middle of the road defensemen and to think that he is an 8, 9 or 10 is laughable.
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 12:21 PM EDT up reply actions
Not at all. I love watching players who get the most out of their talent… Schultz is not someone with a lot of natural talent, but he certainly gets the most out of what he has.
The rating is supposed to be relative to your expectations, not overall ability. Everyone here went in with an expectation for Sarge, and based on that, evaluate his season. I gave him a 9, because in no way did I expect him to lead the NHL in any category (plus/minus or otherwise), and while I expected progress from 2008-09, I didn’t expect him to step into a role as top 4 defenseman, and certainly didn’t expect him to be on the top pairing.
Washington Capitals 2009-10 = Quebec Nordiques 1994-95
--- D'ohboy
by MikeL-Pivonka on Jun 3, 2010 12:25 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
I think you summed it up pretty well, “Schultz is not someone with a lot of natural talent.” I agree. I think he has maxed his abilities out.
I understand that the ratings are based partly on an individuals expectations, but that shouldn’t be the only gauge. If I expected Schultz to be an absolute stud than a vote of 1 under that scenario is fair. If I expected him to be a dud than a 10 is fair.
Simple fact, he is on the top pair of the Washington Capitals. Shouldn’t that be factored in when assessing him? Where does he fit in around the league for being a player on the top pair? Fairly low.
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 12:42 PM EDT up reply actions
I understand that the ratings are based partly on an individuals expectations, but that shouldn’t be the only gauge.
I don’t understand. We’re being asked to vote on performance relative to expectations. Given that, shouldn’t performance relative to expectations be measure people use?
Then the poll is basically worthless from any objective point of view, because ever persons expectations could be different.
If I expected him to be no better than Sean Collins than a vote of a 10 would be completely justified. If I expected him to be Duncan Keith than a vote of a 0 is completely justified.
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 12:55 PM EDT up reply actions
Right. But no one ever said it was supposed to have objective merit (though no poll solely based on performance would have objective merit either).
by David Getz on Jun 3, 2010 12:58 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
What merit does the poll have then? That most people feel he exceeded their expectations of him? What does that even mean if there is no standard to base that on.
I understand there isn’t some pre-defined standard, but there has to be some expectation that people are basing it on a somewhat similar analysis.
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 1:02 PM EDT up reply actions
The merit, to me, is that it’s interesting and sparks discussion. When you put all the polls side by side you can see who outperformed or underperformed people’s expectations, and when people talk about why they rated a guy they way they did it gives rise to debate over what factors are most important, what success should be considered with caveats, how expectations for a player have changed over the course of the year, what those expectations mean for the team’s organization going down the road, etc.
I understand there isn’t some pre-defined standard, but there has to be some expectation that people are basing it on a somewhat similar analysis.
Why?
This discussion seems more academic than anything else.
You are right, it is to spark conversation and it clearly has done that. I guess my point was that whether I rated him a 4 or an 8 is completely irrelevant if it is solely based on my expectations of him and how I determine my expectations isn’t based on anything other than what I want it to be based on.
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 1:13 PM EDT up reply actions
I think it’s a fair system, especially since over time expectations for a guy become somewhat agreed upon, as I believe is/was the case with a guy like Schultz.
The alternative is “how good was he” and Alex Ovechkin gets 9’s, David Steckel gets 2’s and we all go home knowing what we already knew.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Jun 3, 2010 1:18 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Steckel gets 2s? You don’t know your readers very well, do you?
I waited all year for this?
by Rob Parker on Jun 3, 2010 1:20 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Hahaha. I don’t disagree.
I’m just saying that my expectations from a guy playing on the top pair gets factored into my voting and it isn’t based purely on what my expectations for Jeff Schultz were coming into the season.
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions
Huh. Not sure why a guy’s position on the depth chart is really relevant here – it basically penalizes a guy who is good enough to earn big minutes and lets a guy off the hook who has struggled and been demoted.
Flash gets bumped from the 2nd line to the 4th – is he suddenly worth more because he’s produced good numbers for a fourth-liner?
Schultz started the season as a healthy scratch. He ended it in the top pair on the Presidents’ Trophy-winning team and with the best plus-minus for a blueliner in a decade. Not sure what else a guy’s got to do to impress.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Jun 3, 2010 2:55 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Does Semin get a break with lower expectations because he’s “only” the 2LW? Stay tuned…
I waited all year for this?
Right. He gets a 10 b/c he out-produced what anyone could reasonably expect from a second-liner.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
That is never what I said. I said his position and roster spot has to be taken into consideration in making an analysis. In making my analysis I won’t look at people in a vacuum.
Alexander Semin is not a 2LW even though he is on this team. So he doesn’t get graded as a 2LW.
Jeff Schultz isn’t a top pairing defensemen, but he is being played as one. I have said repeatedly he is not a good top pairing d-man, but I won’t kill him for that because the team has him playing beyond where he should be.
There are shades of grey in this world.
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 4:56 PM EDT up reply actions
Alexander Semin is not a 2LW even though he is on this team. So he doesn’t get graded as a 2LW.
Jeff Schultz isn’t a top pairing defensemen, but he is being played as one.
You don’t see the contradiction?
I waited all year for this?
by Rob Parker on Jun 3, 2010 4:57 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
You have taken what I said about how I graded Schultz out of context. I have repeatedly said that my grade of Schultz was mitigated by the fact that he was miscast in the top pairing and that I didn’t kill him for that.
At the same time, if you view him as a top pairing d-man, expect him to be paid as a top pairing d-man in arbitration this summer.
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 5:13 PM EDT up reply actions
At the same time, if you view him as a top pairing d-man, expect him to be paid as a top pairing d-man in arbitration this summer.
Even this loses sight of the realities. Drew Doughty isn’t being paid as a 1D, and won’t for a couple years, but he definitely is. RFA changes the compensation relationship, obviously.
I waited all year for this?
Wow. Just wow. Semin isn’t a 2LW, so he doesn’t graded as a 2LW.
Schultz isn’t a 1/2D, but it’s fair to grade him as a 1/2D.
The mind boggles a bit.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
I can keep repeating myself if it helps. I have said repeatedly, that I did not kill him in my personal ratings for being a top pair d-man, because he was miscast by this team. That goes on BB and GMGM to varying degrees.
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 5:21 PM EDT up reply actions
But you still put him at a 4. A 3rd pair D played top pair minutes and was better than most of his teammates, despite only being a 3rd pair D. Seems like something higher than a 4.
I waited all year for this?
“A 3rd pair D” might be generous – he started the season as a healthy scratch.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
That to me says more about the job GMGM has done in putting together the d corp of this team than it does about Jeff Schultz.
In any event, from what I understand from the ratings a 5 is that he gave me what I expected. He fell slightly below what I would have expected from a player who managed to earn top pair minutes.
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 5:27 PM EDT up reply actions
He fell slightly below what I would have expected from a player who managed to earn top pair minutes.
I know we’re going around in circles, but I can’t get past “managed to earn top pair minutes” and “below what I would have expected” when talking about Schultz.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
I don’t think he deserved top pair minutes and I think he is probably one of the worst top pairing d-men in the league and most certainly the worst for a team considered to be a contender.
Managed was said with a bit of derision.
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 5:35 PM EDT up reply actions
Who on the Caps is eating those minutes if not Schultz?
Only YOU can prevent idiots from commenting!
by Knee high to a duck on Jun 3, 2010 5:36 PM EDT up reply actions
I’d love to see a single stat supporting your opinion. You are, of course, entitled to it, but the evidence just doesn’t back it up. At all.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Jun 3, 2010 5:37 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
My own lying eyes, I guess.
What is the measure of comparison then, beyond stats? There has to be one. I can’t compare expectations for Jeff Schultz 3rd pair to expectations of Jeff Schultz 1st pair. I can’t compare Jeff Schultz to other top pair defensemen, because I was told that was unfair.
Is the comparison 3rd pair d-men that are playing first pair minutes? I guess if that is the standard he did fabulous, but is that really the analysis you want?
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 5:41 PM EDT up reply actions
I can’t compare expectations for Jeff Schultz 3rd pair to expectations of Jeff Schultz 1st pair.
Expectations of Jeff Schultz to performance of Jeff Schultz.
Is the comparison 3rd pair d-men that are playing first pair minutes?
Third pair defenseman? Really? There are 120+ guys better at playing defense in the NHL than Jeff Schultz?
There are certainly more than 60 d-men better than Jeff Schultz.
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 5:46 PM EDT up reply actions
There are certainly more than 60 d-men better than Jeff Schultz.
So, then, Jeff Schultz is a third paring defenseman in an NHL with 15 or fewer teams?
That was more in reaction to your comment that about there being 120+ better d-men (presumably top 2 pairs). I was just saying there were certainly more than 60 (top pairing) d-men in the NHL better than Schultz.
Schultz probably falls in the 5 range for me, perhaps 4 on some weaker defensive teams.
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 5:52 PM EDT up reply actions
If he’s a 5 in the NHL, there are 120+ guys in the NHL that are better than he is. 60 puts him solidly in the upper end of the second pair. If we assume that not all bluelines were created equal, is it that unreasonable to assume that Schultz plays on the top pair of some of those bluelines?
Only YOU can prevent idiots from commenting!
by Knee high to a duck on Jun 3, 2010 5:59 PM EDT up reply actions
Top pairs of Stanley Cup contending teams, or top pairs of teams in the NHL?
Two very different questions.
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 6:04 PM EDT up reply actions
And the first one is irrelevant to what I wrote. I’m questioning your assertion that 55 is a 5D by laying it out in simple numbers, it has nothing to do with whether the team is a Cup contender or a lottery squad.
Only YOU can prevent idiots from commenting!
by Knee high to a duck on Jun 3, 2010 6:08 PM EDT up reply actions
It’s unfair because the comparisons you are using are future hall of famers, all stars, and Olympians. You hand picked some of the best veterans and young talents. Not all top pairing D are created equal. Just because Schultz isn’t the next coming of Pronger doesn’t mean he’s not a top pair D. Also, we’re not holding him up to standards set by them. We are holding Jeff Schultz to the standards Jeff Schultz set for himself with his play last year.
The play of Lidstrom, Keith, Weber, or Pronger is completely irrelevant when judging how well Schultz lived up to the expectations he set for himself. We shouldn’t even be discussing the other players for this. It’s not “is Schultz as good/better than these players?”, because that’s not even a question.
I'm gonna pain you dearly Woodhouse, when I peel all your skin off with a flensing knife, sew it into Woodhouse pajamas, and then set those pajamas on fire.
by Steckel Me Elmo on Jun 3, 2010 5:47 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
I was taking an extreme position by naming the players I did, but it was to make a larger point.
Beyond that though, what do the stats mean without being done in comparison to other players? What does +50 mean standing alone? What do the other stats mean without discussing them in relation to other players? They mean nothing.
What if I told Jeff Schultz’s +50 were the worst on the team? Does that change the value of that number when looking at Jeff Schultz? Of course it does. So the analysis of Jeff Schultz and his performance is based completely on what other players did.
So to me looking at other top pairing d-men around the league is a factor (not a deciding factor, but a factor) in analyzing Jeff Schultz.
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 6:03 PM EDT up reply actions
The players you mentioned were all indisputably the best D on their teams (except for maybe Weber, but only because Suter is so goddamn good). That’s a different distinction from ‘top-pair’, a pair meaning two players.
Only YOU can prevent idiots from commenting!
by Knee high to a duck on Jun 3, 2010 6:10 PM EDT up reply actions
Then comparing his +/- means nothing across teams. And you note what if it were the worst on the team, while completely ignoring that it was the best fucking +/- on the team with the best record in the league.
And you’ve already said you don’t see him as, and didn’t expect him to be a top pairing D. So how is it fair to use other players (the best of the best, as you were doing to make a point) that were already in a position you didn’t expect him to be in as comparables when analyzing how he lived up to his expectations prior to the season.
Plus as has been ripped apart already, a player’s pace on the depth chart doesn’t determine how they will perform or should perform. Their skill does. Seriously, what about that aren’t you getting? As I said before, putting Gordon in the 2C spot doesn’t make him a 60pt producer and a legitimate 2C; he’s still the same 4th liner and PK specialist, and one shouldn’t expect him to be an adequate fill in just because the coach is dumb enough to play him in such a role.
I'm gonna pain you dearly Woodhouse, when I peel all your skin off with a flensing knife, sew it into Woodhouse pajamas, and then set those pajamas on fire.
by Steckel Me Elmo on Jun 3, 2010 6:12 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
But the basis of comparison is not “a player who managed to earn top pair minutes”. It’s Jeff Schultz.
This is an honest question. How do you make an analysis of a player without looking beyond that player? Unless you simply are asking is he better than the season before and I didn’t take that as the discussion.
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 5:45 PM EDT up reply actions
I think that a reasonable debate can be had about whether or not a team could win a Cup with Jeff Schultz v.2009-10 in its top pairing. But that’s neither here nor there when we’re essentially debating a 24-year-old defenseman’s development.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Simple fact, he is on the top pair of the Washington Capitals. Shouldn’t that be factored in when assessing him?
Funny you should ask…
The Vote: Rate Schultz below on a scale of 1-10 (10 being the best) based on his performance relative to his potential and your expectations for the season – if he had the best year you could have imagined him having, give him a 10; if he more or less played as you expected he would, give him a 5 or a 6; if he had the worst year you could have imagined him having, give him a 1.
Nothing about where he actually played, just what you expected. And given your view of Schultz, you should have him pretty high.
Talent isn’t the only thing that goes into being a good hockey player, just ask Semin. Again, it would be extremely odd for a 24 year old with fewer than 300 games experience to have maxed out. Normally NHL D don’t even learn how to play their game until 300 games. If healthy, he’ll finally hit that this coming season.
I waited all year for this?
by Rob Parker on Jun 3, 2010 12:47 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Under your reasoning, I did vote incorrectly. I should have given him a 2, because he seriously failed to meet my expectations for a guy on a top pair. I also understand that the Caps have him completely mis-used. I don’t hold that against him.
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 12:58 PM EDT up reply actions
That doesn’t make sense. You rate the player based on the player, not based on his role. Francois Beauchemin, Mike Green, Chris Pronger, Nicklas Lidstrom, and Kyle Quincey were all number one defensemen this year. Does that mean you have the same expectations for all of them? Martin Brodeur, John Quick, Chris Mason, Steve Mason, and Ryan Miller were all number one goalies this year. Do you have the same expectations for them going in to next season?
bigonetimer – I’d have blown up this defense a while ago. If it were up to me there would be four new d-men on the roster next season. Alzner, Carlson, and two trades/FAs. The only hold overs would be Poti (because of contract) and Green.
David – Of course I have different expectations for different players. But do you have different expectations for the list of number one defensemen you provided as compared to guys who are on a second pair or third pair?
You develop expectations for an individual player based on what they can and cannot do, but I also have expectations for a player based on the position they are filling on the team. Now sometimes that isn’t the players fault, but it is a fact.
My assessment of Flash, for example, is different if I look at him as a third line winger than it is when I look at him as a first liner. Same goes for Jeff Schultz. What I expect from him on the third defensive pair is different than what I expect from him if he is on the top pair.
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 1:10 PM EDT up reply actions
I understand the logic in expecting different results based on role in the sense that a guy who gets more powerplay time will probably have more points. But my evaluation of a player’s talent is going to be based on what he does, not where the coach thinks he fits on the depth chart.
I think Boyd Gordon is essentially a right-handed Blair Betts – a good defensive player who could be anything from a third liner to a 12th/13th forward depending on the team. If Boudreau decided to make him the 2C next year, yeah, I’d expect more points as a result of his circumstances but it wouldn’t change the fact that I think he’s a right-handed Blair Betts.
Very true. But at the same time, if Boyd Gordon is in the 2C slot and provides only a slight uptick in his offensive stats would that be considered a success to you? Maybe it does.
To me he failed to accomplish what I would expect from a 2C and he gets graded down for that. At the same time, I understand that he was miscast by the team and I can’t kill him for that.
That is why Schultz didn’t get a 1 from me and why he didn’t get an 8 or a 9.
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 1:22 PM EDT up reply actions
That doesn’t make sense. Boyd Gordon is Boyd Gordon. That doesn’t change when his position on the depth chart does.
That’s like having the same expectations for Alex Ovechkin and Dustin Brown because they’re both first line left wings.
No, it isn’t the same thing. Ovechkin and Brown are two different people, who have two different skill sets. Boyd Gordon is the same person.
Where you are on the depth chart matters. If you are a 4C my expectations of what you bring to the team are far different than if you are a 2C. If Boyd Gordon has the season he just had at 4C my grade for him is far different than if I were grading him as a 2C.
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 1:44 PM EDT up reply actions
But you’re grading how you would expect x player to do in y role. Not how well that role was filled.
It’s unreasonable to say “Gordon couldn’t put up 60 pts so he gets a 1” because it’s unreasonable to expect Gordon to get 60 pts. The skill set is always the same for the player, so whether Gordon is on 2C or 4C, he will always be suited for 4C, and his expectations should remain as such.
I'm gonna pain you dearly Woodhouse, when I peel all your skin off with a flensing knife, sew it into Woodhouse pajamas, and then set those pajamas on fire.
by Steckel Me Elmo on Jun 3, 2010 1:49 PM EDT up reply actions
Why is it unreasonable? As was quoted to me earlier the ratings are “based on his performance relative to his potential and your expectations for the season.”
My rating takes into consideration my expectations for a player who should fill that role on the depth chart.
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 1:53 PM EDT up reply actions
It’s not unreasonable to expect ~60 pts from a second line center. It’s unreasonable to expect 60 pts from Gordon, because up to this point in his career he has not shown any glimmer of a skill set that would allow him to do that in the NHL. It’s not like he’s some new hot prospect that just got his feet wet. He’s an established 4th liner. Just because he gets moved to 2C by the coach doesn’t mean he has the ability to perform as such, it just means he has a terrible coach. A player’s skill sets don’t change when he gets put into a different role.
I'm gonna pain you dearly Woodhouse, when I peel all your skin off with a flensing knife, sew it into Woodhouse pajamas, and then set those pajamas on fire.
by Steckel Me Elmo on Jun 3, 2010 1:56 PM EDT up reply actions
No, it isn’t the same thing. Ovechkin and Brown are two different people, who have two different skill sets
Right – that’s exactly my point. You say “these are my expectations of Brown” and “these are my expectations of Ovechkin” not “I have the same expectations for each because they’re at the same spot on the depth chart”.
But you aren’t asking me to compare two different people. You are asking me to say what my opinion on Jeff Schultz is. Jeff Schultz as a third liner was satisfactory. Jeff Schultz as a top pair was deficient in my opinion.
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 4:51 PM EDT up reply actions
But you aren’t asking me to compare two different people.
That’s not the point. The point was you evaluate the player, not the depth chart position.
That is how I made my evaluation of the player.
If David Steckel was playing on the first line would your grade for him be different than being on the fourth line?
Perhaps yours wouldn’t and that is fine. I take that factor into consideration in evaluating a player, why is that not fine?
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 5:01 PM EDT up reply actions
It doesn’t make sense to base expectations on depth chart position over who the player is. To do so implies that expectations are based on depth chart position and not talent.
Dustin Brown and Alex Ovechkin are both 1Ls. Alex Semin and Cory Stillman are both 2Ls. Chris Pronger and Kyle Quincy are both top-minute getting defensemen. Yet, in all of those cases, you should clearly have higher expectations for one guy than the other, because expectations are built on who the player is and what their talent and productivity is, not just their place on the depth chart.
But once again you are comparing two different players playing the same roster spot. Of course different players are graded differently. I don’t expect Mike Green to be as physical as Chris Pronger and it would be foolish to have that expectation.
Take it out of hockey for a minute. Do you have different expectations from a back-up QB to the starting QB? I would think so. If the back-up becomes the teams starter and is going to presumably maintain that spot do you not change your expectations of that player?
In baseball do you have a different expectation for the 5th starter as compared to the #1 starter. If that number 5 becomes a number 1 do your expectations change?
Basketball. Do you have different expectations for a bench player from a starter? If that bench player becomes a starter do your expectations change?
How is it any different in hockey. If you are a 5/6 d-man and take over a spot on the top pair why is it unfair for my expectations and my evaluation point to change?
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 5:10 PM EDT up reply actions
If that number 5 becomes a number 1 do your expectations change?
For the team yes, for the player no. Same with Sarge. If you think he is really a 3rd pair guy then you should expect him to do that no matter the minutes; you would just expect the Caps to get fucked in their own end.
I waited all year for this?
But once again you are comparing two different players playing the same roster spot. Of course different players are graded differently.
You’re being inconsistent.
To say that you rate Schultz effectively as a depth player but not as a top line player means you’re rating based on the depth chart spot.
To rate on the depth chart spot means you expect a 1L to perform a certain way, a 2C to play a certain way, etc.
To expect production based on depth chart means you expect the same out of Ovechkin and Brown.
To say “I expect this out of a top pairing defenseman simply because he’s a top pairing defenseman” but to acknowledge the difference between two different players who are at the same spot on a team’s depth chart is inconsistent.
Regardless, it’s silly to rate a player based on expectations after the fact. If Braden Holtby had come in, won the starting role, and posted a .910 save percentage for the Caps this year would you be saying “Holy crap! I thought he’d be in the ECHL this year and he’s a legit NHL starter! That exceeds my expectations!” Or do you say “Well, now he’s an NHL goalie, and he’s only average by that standard, so he doesn’t exceed my expectations”?
It just doesn’t make sense. They can’t be expectations after the fact. Then what you’re doing is not rating him relative to expectations but to his performance as compared to other players in his role. But that’s not the question we’re asking.
Do you have different expectations from a back-up QB to the starting QB? I would think so.
Yes. Because they’re different people. But if there’s a QB battle going on in camp and the number two wins the role, I don’t automatically assume he’ll perform better as a starter just because he’s now the starter.
That’d be like being asked “What do you think Jim Jones would do as the starter?”
“Hmm, 55% completion rate, 1:1; TD:INT ratio”
“Well guess what? He is the starter now!”
“Oh! In that case, 60% completion percentage, and a 2:1 TD:INT ratio!”
It doesn’t make sense. It’s the same guy.
In baseball do you have a different expectation for the 5th starter as compared to the #1 starter. If that number 5 becomes a number 1 do your expectations change?
No, I wouldn’t. Right now Kyle Lohse is St. Louis’ fifth starter. If La Russa decided one day, "My last name starts with “L”, so I’m gonna make the guy who’s last name starts with “L” the number one starter!" I wouldn’t assume Lohse is better than Brad Penny, Chris Carpenter, and Adam Wainwright. Because he’s not, and being put in that role doesn’t change that.
How is it any different in hockey. If you are a 5/6 d-man and take over a spot on the top pair why is it unfair for my expectations and my evaluation point to change?
For one thing it’s after the fact in this context. But just as much for the same reason we don’t have the same expectations of Ovechkin and Brown: expectations are based on the player, not the depth chart spot.
by David Getz on Jun 3, 2010 5:29 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
I see it now.
freakinandpeakin is kind of right. But what you have to do is dilate those expectations based on role. Like Green on the 3rd pair = 50 points instead of 70, or something.
If you think Schultz is a 3rd pair D, and he got top line minutes while showing better defensive stats than anyone on the team, then you should give him a high score.
Also consider that it’s not his job nor in his skill set to put up points. There are other top pairing D like that. I think Volchenkov is one (with Philips).
Cидни Kросби: Александр Oвечкин, он твой папа теперь
Red Line Station: for Capitals fans who can bear reading something less intelligent than a story at Japers' Rink
(note name change)
by red army line on Jun 4, 2010 12:11 AM EDT up reply actions
You develop expectations for an individual player based on what they can and cannot do, but I also have expectations for a player based on the position they are filling on the team.
That I feel is reflective of ability, right? Schultz was a 4/5 defenseman coming into camp, I felt. Then he ended up most of the season as the #2 or #3. That seems to be more of him playing well rather than being thrust into a role, though that did help.
Cидни Kросби: Александр Oвечкин, он твой папа теперь
Red Line Station: for Capitals fans who can bear reading something less intelligent than a story at Japers' Rink
(note name change)
by red army line on Jun 3, 2010 2:12 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree, he is getting the most of his natural talent, but performance in sports is composed of three things:
- Natural Talent (You’re born with this)
- Skill/Experience (What you learn)
- Motivation
Schultz plays each night with 2 of these max’ed out: Talent and Motivation. The experience will come with time, and when he reaches his peak years ( the next 3-5 years) he will be regarded as one of the better defensive defensemen in the league.
Washington Capitals 2009-10 = Quebec Nordiques 1994-95
--- D'ohboy
by MikeL-Pivonka on Jun 4, 2010 9:31 AM EDT up reply actions
Go look at the +/- stat leaders and you will see it is largely a stat indicative of team success. 10 of the top 11 players in that stat are Capitals or Canucks. Scroll down the stat when isolating just defensemen and when you get to around the 100th ranked defensemen in the league in that stat you will find the names of Anton Volchenkov +2, Robyn Regher +2, and Erik Johnson +1. Does that give you an idea of what that stat means.
Okay, plus-minus is a stat that has a lot to do with correlation and not necessarily causation, and playing on a great team made Shultz’s number better than it otherwise would have been.
But, all of his other numbers are still pretty good, and he’s been first or second among Caps defense in plus-minus every year.
Twice in the past two years in crucial moments in playoffs games he has blown a tire. Against the Rangers Schultz did that and it led to a crucial goal.
Broken rib.
You’re alive? And yet you didn’t do the Schultz Rink Wrap? What is going on here?
I waited all year for this?
I am fully willing to admit that my “dislike” for Schultz is more of a reaction to the entire defense of the team as a whole and not him imparticular. He is one of bunch of average defensemen that GMGM put together and a bunch of average defensemen that he re-signed/extended in the past year.
How does a broken rib explain blowing a tire? How does it explain him doing the same thing this year in the playoffs?
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 12:25 PM EDT up reply actions
Have you ever had a broken rib? I have (playing catcher in baseball and softball from age 8 to about age 35 will get you at least one of those…)
It hurts with every breath, every time you move our waist, and if you roll over onto it while you are asleep, you’re awake due to the pain. And there is nothing they can do to set it or keep it from hurting. It has to heal on its own.
Ok, take all that and try to play NHL hockey…. It’d affect anyone. Schultz gave it a go, and it didn’t work. Not a surprise to me and to anyone who has had to deal with that sort of injury.
Washington Capitals 2009-10 = Quebec Nordiques 1994-95
--- D'ohboy
by MikeL-Pivonka on Jun 3, 2010 12:30 PM EDT up reply actions
Nearly every player has played with injuries in the playoffs. Heck Eric Belanger had oral surgery during a game and came back. Steve Yzerman played on one knee. Backstrom played with a bum shoulder. Green got killed last offseason while playing with an injury. Under that scenario you can’t blame anyone in the playoffs for anything because of an injury.
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 12:50 PM EDT up reply actions
Yep. Injuring your big toe versus your second toe, for example, in basketball, is a huge difference. One is no big deal, the other makes it tough to jump and move. Playing hockey requires quite a bit out of your abdominal area, I’d think, more than maybe moving your mouth.
Cидни Kросби: Александр Oвечкин, он твой папа теперь
Red Line Station: for Capitals fans who can bear reading something less intelligent than a story at Japers' Rink
(note name change)
by red army line on Jun 3, 2010 2:15 PM EDT up reply actions
Exactly. Breaking a pinkie finger on your bottom hand can cause you to miss 5-10 games (Right Mr. Knuble?). That finger is the fulcrum of the stick and the pain is unbearable.
Playing hockey with a broken rib… I can’t even imagine how that can be done…
Washington Capitals 2009-10 = Quebec Nordiques 1994-95
--- D'ohboy
by MikeL-Pivonka on Jun 4, 2010 9:35 AM EDT up reply actions
I am fully willing to admit that my "dislike" for Schultz is more of a reaction to the entire defense of the team as a whole and not him imparticular.
So if you were a Flames fan you’d blame Iginla for their offense?
I waited all year for this?
Did you just compare Jeff Schultz to Jarome Iginla?
Come on, that is ridiculous. I know you are only making an analogy, but put the analogy in some context. Unless you honestly think Jeff Schultz has the same skill set and brings to the Caps what Iginla brings to the Flames. But that would be a different conversation.
I wrote somewhere else. Jeff Schultz is on the Caps top pair and that has to be taken into consideration. If Jeff Schultz is on the third pair…well nevermind that his +/- would be significantly lower…I would have different expectations than for a guy who is on the top pairing.
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 12:48 PM EDT up reply actions
I can see how you’d be slightly disappointed in 55—and rate him a 4— if your expectations going into this past season included 55 on the top pair. Is that the case? I’ll just say it wasn’t exactly clear to me that he’d displace SMo as Green’s partner.
More norrissey, less morrissey
bigonetimer – I can’t sit here and say I thought Schultz was going to displace ShaMo. But he did, so the expectations I had go up. Maybe my analysis is more free flowing, but it is what it is.
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 1:27 PM EDT up reply actions
bigonetimer – I can’t sit here and say I thought Schultz was going to displace ShaMo.
So…doesn’t that mean he exceeded your expectations?
But he did, so the expectations I had go up. Maybe my analysis is more free flowing, but it is what it is.
If we do it like that – i.e. someone outperforms expectations, so we readjust expectations immediately – doesn’t everyone get a ‘5’?
No, I don’t think Jeff Schultz was successful as a top pair defensemen.
Where did I say that Jeff Schultz out performed my expectations? I think Jeff Schultz gave me about what I expected from him this season, that would be a 5. He underperformed for what I would expect from a player on the top pair. So he gets knocked down significantly in my personal rating. That gets mitigated by the fact that I don’t think he should ever have been in that position and was only there because of the lack of high quality defensemen on the team. And I arrived at a 4.
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 1:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Honestly, I think Schultz was fine with Green, but it says here that Alzner would make a great partner for 52, with Schultz and Carlson another well balanced pair of experience and skill. But whatevs—good problems to have.
Do yourself a favor and give it another 2-3 years before you close your book on Mr. Nasty, is all. No way he has maxed out yet.
More norrissey, less morrissey
Where did I say that Jeff Schultz out performed my expectations?
I can’t sit here and say I thought Schultz was going to displace ShaMo. But he did
I waited all year for this?
by Rob Parker on Jun 3, 2010 2:08 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
No, I don’t think Jeff Schultz was successful as a top pair defensemen.
Just about every relevant number imaginable disagrees with you. Care to bring any, y’know, stats of your own to the discussion?
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Who doesn’t fit: Chris Pronger, Nicklas Lidstrom, Duncan Keith, Drew Doughty, Zdeno Chara, Shea Weber, Jeff Schultz.
You want me to go on listing top pair defensemen in the NHL? Listen, it is an opinion and my opinion disagrees with yours. But I guess that is what the internet is for, huh?
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 4:49 PM EDT up reply actions
I said I could go on listing players I thought were better than Jeff Schultz.
Two teams are still playing. Where does Jeff Schultz fit in the depth chart of the Flyers and Blackhawks?
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 4:52 PM EDT up reply actions
Is Jeff Schultz a top pairing defensemen? I thought that was the discussion.
We can go through all 30 teams, but I chose the two that are still playing.
Off the top of my head I can’t think of one other team in the NHL where he would be on the top pair, although I admittedly don’t have depth charts in front of me and could be off. I can think of a handful where he would be a third pair.
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 4:59 PM EDT up reply actions
Is Jeff Schultz a top pairing defensemen? I thought that was the discussion.
No. The discussion, as you framed it, was about whether Schultz was successful this season as a top pairing defenseman. And everything indicates he was.
Does that mean he’s a top pairing guy on every team in the league, a shoe-in for a top two role next year, or a guy the team should expect to be their number two for years down the road? Not necessarily. But those are different discussions.
by David Getz on Jun 3, 2010 5:06 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Well you’re clearly missing the analogy. You are saying the reaction to Schultz is based on bad team D. Well, if he’s the best D on a team with bad team D it doesn’t make sense to blame him. Iginla is the best O on a team with no O, so why would you put the brunt of the blame on him, as opposed to the guys that are actually the reason for the problem?
I waited all year for this?
I understand the analogy, but you are missing my point. Jarome Iginla is a one-time league MVP and goal scoring champ and using him as a basis for the discussion changes the tone of that discussion.
I made a similar point earlier in response to something JP wrote. Jeff Schultz may be the best on the Caps, but the Caps D is seriously lacking in my opinion. It is like being the best bobsledder from Jamaica. What does that really mean? And using Jarome Iginla as to comparison would be like using the best bobsledding team from Germany when discussing the Jamaican team. Yeah, I understand the analogy, but discussing it in relation to one of the best in the league/world seems sorta misplaced.
by freakinandpeakin on Jun 3, 2010 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions
IIRC, Iginla’s a two time finalist, but not an MVP. Pretty sure a tie for Ross or Richard is in there too.
It seems like you’re docking Schultz because he hasn’t had his best years already like Iginla has.
Cидни Kросби: Александр Oвечкин, он твой папа теперь
Red Line Station: for Capitals fans who can bear reading something less intelligent than a story at Japers' Rink
(note name change)
by red army line on Jun 3, 2010 2:17 PM EDT up reply actions
Right, he won the Pearson, but not the Hart.
Only YOU can prevent idiots from commenting!
by Knee high to a duck on Jun 3, 2010 4:06 PM EDT up reply actions
6
I’m in the Schultz camp, and kind of expected him to become a key d-man for this team. The reason he gets bumped from a 5 to a 6 is the +/-. I’m not a huge +/- guy, but a +50 is pretty damn impressive. I would definitely like to see him be more agile and comfortable out there, but he may be one of those awkward defensmen that never really becomes a fluid skater, but in the end gets the job done.
Looking forward to the Caps re-signing him for a modest raise, and I like the fact that we can plug him in as a top-tier guy for us. There’s lots of teams out there that would love to have a steady guy like Schultz for the money he’s going to get.
There are 29 teams that would be calling George if he said he was looking to move Schultz. Hopefully the Caps can get him signed long term… I would love to have him on the backline for a decade or so.
Washington Capitals 2009-10 = Quebec Nordiques 1994-95
--- D'ohboy
by MikeL-Pivonka on Jun 3, 2010 12:17 PM EDT up reply actions
7
His regular season was a fair bit above expectations, his post-season below expecations, overall a 7. Didn’t expect the offensive contributions, quite honestly, even though the totals weren’t quite eye-popping. That 4th-best GAON/60, especially when factoring in that the caps were middle of the pack in goals allowed, is stellar.
The Discussion: With Schultz due a new contract, should the team look to lock him up long-term, or go with a one- or two-year deal? What’s a fair price for Double Nickel? What would you like to see him improve upon in his game? What will it take for him to earn a 10 next season?
I’d like to see more than a 1 year deal for sure. Don’t really want to see anything longer than 4 though. I think he’s in line to earn somewhere in the vicinity of 1.9 – 2.3 per year. I think a very fair deal for both sides would be a 3 year, 6.5 type deal.
Needs to improve his skating and physicality. As others have noted, he doesn’t need to become a hitting machine, just take the body a little more and go for the poke-check / sweep-check a little less.
To earn a 10, he needs to be recognized as a shut-down, top defenseman around the league (not just by the local media), and live up to that billing in the post season.
Ocho for Nasty
I’ll set aside a pedestrian playoffs and point to probably the quietest +50 in league history. Haters Critics will point to foot speed, but ignore the better positioning; they’ll scoff at the lack of hitting but overlook the blocks and absence of penalties against stiff competition; they’ll attribute any shred of offensive production to his more luminary partners. But the fact is this guy is 24, is progressing along the path to solid top 4 status, and is as important as anyone we have on the blueline to get signed and sealed. I wouldn’t blanch at 4yr/8M, and I don’t think George will either. Do it and get it done.
More norrissey, less morrissey
by bigonetimer on Jun 3, 2010 12:25 PM EDT reply actions 2 recs
How did we go so long without:
The Vote: Rate Schultz below on a scale of 1-10 (10 being the best) based on his performance relative to his potential and your expectations for the season – if he had the best year you could have imagined him having, give him a 10; if he more or less played as you expected he would, give him a 5 or a 6; if he had the worst year you could have imagined him having, give him a 1.
I never travel far....without a little Big Star...
Ron and Fez 11 to 3
by YvonLabresMoustache on Jun 3, 2010 12:31 PM EDT reply actions 3 recs
1
Plus/minus is nice but to get a 10 he needs to put the purse down AND HIT SOMEBODY
/didn’t actually vote, just wanted to give F&B a coronary until he sees the user name/avatar and gets the joke.
Yer just jealous, Hooks….
Go Penzzzzzzzzz
Washington Capitals 2009-10 = Quebec Nordiques 1994-95
--- D'ohboy
by MikeL-Pivonka on Jun 4, 2010 9:37 AM EDT up reply actions
I gave shultz an 8, but that’s more because my expectations were very low going into the season. I still think he is incredibly overrated by both Caps coaches and Caps fans. I wish GMGM would trade him so that Coach BB couldn’t keep selling this illusion that the guy is top pairing defenseman.
Any time we played a team with a speedy, aggresive forecheck, his weaknesses were on clear display. He cannot make a good breakout pass underpressure, so he usually just throws the puck behind the net, or to the other corner for Green to go handle.
I don’t care what his stats say, his lack of quickness and agility had a big impact on our poor penalty killing. He’s not quick enough to beat forwards to pucks in the corners or along the boards, and he’s not strong enough to clear the crease. What does he actually bring to the penalty kill?
He’s good positionally and his size/reach lets him cover lots of space and win pucks in the corners. His big body also lets him block shots.
Nicklas Lidstrom ain’t so fast or physical either from what I see.
Cидни Kросби: Александр Oвечкин, он твой папа теперь
Red Line Station: for Capitals fans who can bear reading something less intelligent than a story at Japers' Rink
(note name change)
by red army line on Jun 3, 2010 2:20 PM EDT up reply actions
He’s good positionally because he just stands there at the side of the net and lets the other penalty killers do the work.
Just because he has a long reach and size doesn’t mean he actually covers lots of space. In fact, when I watch him play, he plays like the smallest 6’6" defenseman I’ve ever seen.
Again, just because he has a big body, it doesn’t mean he blocks a lot of shots. He might be the team leader, but I bet he’s no where near the top of the league when you look at top pairing defenseman.
Please don’t compare him to Lidstrom. You’re talking about arguably the best defenseman of the past 10 years. Lidstrom is 1,000 times better offensively and has a ton more agility and quickness.
by khatcherwasabum on Jun 3, 2010 2:28 PM EDT up reply actions
Please don’t compare him to Lidstrom. You’re talking about arguably the best defenseman of the past 10 years. Lidstrom is 1,000 times better offensively and has a ton more agility and quickness.
Just that Schultz often gets a lot of criticism for things that the best defenseman I’ve ever seen doesn’t get criticism for because OHMIGOSH!!! IT’SLIDSTROM!!!
I’m not using the Lidstrom comparison to bring fault to Lidstrom, I’m just saying the criticisms are overblown since there are more important aspects to playing D.
Anyways, you wrote this:
I don’t care what his stats say, his lack of quickness and agility had a big impact on our poor penalty killing. He’s not quick enough to beat forwards to pucks in the corners or along the boards, and he’s not strong enough to clear the crease. What does he actually bring to the penalty kill?
From what I’ve seen Lidstrom on dump ins likes to head to the front of the net and let Rafalski go into the corners when they’re playing together. He’s not a “crease clearer.” I’ll give you agility and better speed than Schultz, but still not a speedy demon like Gaborik (more like a Fedorov).
Also notice how Schultz makes skill players (Evgeni Malkin comes to mind quickly) completely disappear. That’s good enough. Defensive ability is tough to assess since it’s mainly intangibles—I think JP once made a joke in a recap saying Schultz went 0-0-0 with 18 min TOI or whatever, solid work. That’s what we want out of Schultz. When he’s invisible he’s at his best.
And Schultz was 45th in the NHL in blocked shots with 129. Ahead of him I see the following top-pair D (which do realize does involve role as well—take Campbell and Keith for example, both top-pairing good but Keith is better and Seabrook for role bumps Campbell off):
Keith Ballard (?)
Greg Zanon (?)
Chris Pronger
Stephane Robidas
Zbynek Michalek (?)
Andy Greene (?)
Brent Seabrook
Ron Hainsey (?)
Duncan Keith
Chris Philips
Tyler Myers
Ian White
Mark Streit
Dan Boyle
With the size of the NHL and the amount of players, putting Schultz around 15th is still pretty good. I also want to add that shot blocking is actually slightly negatively correlated to winning percentage on the whole.
Cидни Kросби: Александр Oвечкин, он твой папа теперь
Red Line Station: for Capitals fans who can bear reading something less intelligent than a story at Japers' Rink
(note name change)
by red army line on Jun 3, 2010 2:57 PM EDT up reply actions
He might be the team leader, but I bet he’s no where near the top of the league when you look at top pairing defenseman.
Not too far off the top of the pack.
But still number two for Schultz’s wearing 55’s.
The link is to total blocked shots for D men who played over 60 games and averaged over 15 min TOI.
Again, just because he has a big body, it doesn’t mean he blocks a lot of shots. He might be the team leader, but I bet he’s no where near the top of the league when you look at top pairing defenseman.
Of the 122 defensemen who played at least 50 games and at least 15 even strength minutes a night, Schultz was 22nd of 121 in terms of shots blocked per minute, so he does pretty well there.
by David Getz on Jun 3, 2010 3:31 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
To further that point: among defensemen who played 15 ES minutes a night, were number one or number two on their team in ES ice time per game, and played at least 50 games, only nine blocked shots more often than Schultz at 5-on-5.
by David Getz on Jun 3, 2010 3:42 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Jun 3, 2010 3:43 PM EDT up reply actions 5 recs
It’s been awhile, but CLED?
They're coming.
by Bald Pollack on Jun 3, 2010 2:25 PM EDT up reply actions 5 recs
Sorry man, I don’t know what or who CLED is
by khatcherwasabum on Jun 3, 2010 2:33 PM EDT up reply actions
What does he actually bring to the penalty kill?
More success than the other penalty killers?
by David Getz on Jun 3, 2010 3:32 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
A long reach and an active stick… Sound positioning…
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Jun 3, 2010 3:35 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Hypothetically speaking, it’s the difference between a 6’3 guy named, say, Pom Toti who averages 1.81 GAON/60 and a 6’6 player named Seff Jchultz who averages 1.61 GAON/60. Out on the PK, that height difference correlates to 40 goals against for Toti and 19 goals against Jchultz.
Now if every 5% increase in height correlates to 21 less goals against, trading for Chara will allow the Caps to completely nullify the man advantage and make a few extra shorthanded goals.
All the king's horses and all the king's men
Couldn't put Humpty together again
by sydtron on Jun 3, 2010 3:59 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
9
I gave him a 9. I was firmly planted in the kick Schultz while he’s down crowd after last year’s playoffs, and had I been asked what it would take for him to get a 10, I probably would have sarcastically said “lead the league in +/-”.
I am now convinced he is our most consistent defender, and while disappointed with his numbers in the playoffs, I also felt like he was hung out to dry several times by neutral zone turnovers, non-existent backchecking and out-of-position partners. Am completely comfortable with him on the top pairing against anyone, and considering where I stood after last year, that’s worth a 9.
by psuscott1 on Jun 3, 2010 2:45 PM EDT reply actions 2 recs
Ocho for Cinco Cinco
based upon how he finised the season last year (namely on his back) i expected that schultz would be on the outside looking in. but he was much improved this year. yeah, his skating continues to need improvement, but his body and stick position were vastly improved. that helps cover up some of his skating deficiencies. the best thing i can say is that there were many games where you hardly knew he was playing…thats good for a defensive defenseman.
for those who hate, remember that 55 just turned 24 and finished his third full season in the nhl. by any objective measure he improved this year. not sure what folks expected of him this year.
i believe the schultz hate is because he’s 6’6" but doesnt use it to put guys through the glass. true. given his skating limitations, thats probably a good thing right now. but they guy has improved significantly over the past year, which is what you want to see from a young dman. not to bring up the inevitable and unfair chara comparison, but z didnt enter the norris conversation when he was 24.
that said, there remains too many unknowns to say he should be locked up long term. maybe he has plateued and he will never be the great skater he needs to be. so a shorter term manageable contract would be appropriate. i dont see more than $2M/per being appropraite.
to earn a 10, needs to be more physical while still focusing on the defensive game. any offense is a gift, so i’m not looking for anymore 200 foot goals. he also needs to produce in the playoffs…of course.
Just trying to capture the spirit of the thing...
i believe the schultz hate is because he’s 6’6" but doesnt use it to put guys through the glass.
I certainly think it’s a major factor. It’s hard for me to believe people wouldn’t like him if he were 6’, 190.
Mr. Nasty gets an 8 from me. Admittedly though I was contemplating a 9 but I scrolled down too far and jakeshapiro convinced me an 8 was good.
I expected Schultz to be the #4 or even on the third pair, after Green, Poti, Morrisonn, and maybe Alzner. He ended up on the top-pairing, even though Green-Schultz isn’t an ideal pairing. I can’t think of any Dubinsky moments for 55 this season (I think there were a few last season), which says to me his on-ice awareness and positioning has improved, as well as chemistry with teammates. Leading the league in +/- was completely unexpected, as he outdid Ovie down the stretch even though AO held a big lead rather late in the season. The 20 helpers is really nice, and combined with his QComp and On-ice off-ice differential, I think he had a really good season.
With Schultz due a new contract, should the team look to lock him up long-term, or go with a one- or two-year deal?
I think his last deal before UFA years is a must on a longer term, say 4 years. But until he reaches that short term deals I think are okay, especially since a mid to long term deal will take him into his prime and thus possibly into a more expensive deal with regards to cap hit.
What’s a fair price for Double Nickel?
I’d say $2.2 million per season roughly, but preferably less, and I do think he can be signed for less.
What would you like to see him improve upon in his game?
Skating, passing, and a quicker release on his shot. I want him to be able to make passes like the one Mcguire was all over him for (in a good way, if there is one) in the Snovechkin game. I remember at the start of 2008 he was doing half-windups and shooting, and scored 5 goals in 30 games or something, getting shots through with screens. I’d like to see more of that.
What will it take for him to earn a 10 next season?
The Caps’ top PK guy (high in TOI, QComp 4-on-5, and GAON/60), +40 or better, and 30 helpers will do it for me.
Cидни Kросби: Александр Oвечкин, он твой папа теперь
Red Line Station: for Capitals fans who can bear reading something less intelligent than a story at Japers' Rink
(note name change)
10
In August, I was expecting him to be a 5th or 6th defenseman, but he blew me away.
Mon dieu! Il y a un hache dans ma tête!
What is it about Schultz that causes such intense negative reactions from so many Caps fans?
He’s this big, goofy-eared guy who just quietly does his job. IMO he is at his best when he isn’t noticed, which is hard given his size and awkward skating. I have avoided voting but I feel compelled to comment that I think it’s hugely unfair of fans to expect him to be something he’s not—that physical, crease-clearing d-guy who would sooner hit you than look at you. Maybe even steal a puck or two while talking trash with a sneer on his face!
I think I’ve come to the conclusion that the hatred Schultz engenders really serves in effigy for hatred of how the Caps defensive corps are currently being built, that McPhee and BB aren’t finding nor developing defensive guys more in the vein of the Caps past defensive greats.
That is not Schultz’s fault. On his own merits and with his particular skill set, Schultz has had an amazing season. I like him best when he’s not being flashy—just effective and positionally sound and with few mistakes. I expect him to improve in all of his areas of strengths. I expect him to work hard on his skating, something that should improved as he matures physically. He still has a lot of body to grow into, and he should become more comfortable in his huge frame as he gets older.
"I’m very happy to hear the news," Ovechkin said when he heard about Backstrom's longterm contract---"because he’s one of the top centers in the world, one of my best friends and we want to play together for a long time. He’s a guy who wants to stay in one place and be comfortable and win, just like me. We talk all the time about playing together, and we talked after the playoffs about how we can win in Washington."
by capsyoungguns on Jun 3, 2010 3:24 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
He can be a crease clearing guy — he’s probably playing at 230 now. His frame and his age means he should be pushing up more towards playing at 240 or even 250. He does get muscled around a bit which ends up causing him to screen our own goalie. I’m not going to deduct points from him now since he’s still more or less a kid, but in the next few years he’s doing a disservice to his team by not hitting the gym and putting on 10 or 20 more pounds.
All the king's horses and all the king's men
Couldn't put Humpty together again
Oh I agree with you that he needs to improve in in his physicality. I meant it more as an unrealistic expectation for him to become Pronger-like, a big mean dude. That just doesn’t seem to be his personality. But I absolutely expect him to get better at using his body as he physically matures. He struck me as being much more comfortable in his body this season as compared to last, and that is due in large part to his age.
"I’m very happy to hear the news," Ovechkin said when he heard about Backstrom's longterm contract---"because he’s one of the top centers in the world, one of my best friends and we want to play together for a long time. He’s a guy who wants to stay in one place and be comfortable and win, just like me. We talk all the time about playing together, and we talked after the playoffs about how we can win in Washington."
by capsyoungguns on Jun 3, 2010 3:39 PM EDT up reply actions
It’s not his personality nor is it really necessary. I like big hits, but, when it comes to defense it’s usually extremely risky to pull stunts like that. I loved Kasper’s hip checks as much as the next guy but things like that can lead to odd man rushes or great scoring chances.
I just want him to be able to fight down low — it’s his weak point that can be improved upon here. I agree that he looks MUCH more coordinated out there which goes hand in hand with him being the one man answer to so many players the Caps have to face.
All the king's horses and all the king's men
Couldn't put Humpty together again
What is it about Schultz that causes such intense negative reactions from so many Caps fans?
My guess?
(1) Not very physical for his size
(2) Looks awkward
(3) People chronically underestimate how hard it is to play defense in the NHL
You forgot:
(4) Half the people in the world have below-average intelligence
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
(4) Half the people in the world have below-average-the-median intelligence
Better
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
this
"I’m very happy to hear the news," Ovechkin said when he heard about Backstrom's longterm contract---"because he’s one of the top centers in the world, one of my best friends and we want to play together for a long time. He’s a guy who wants to stay in one place and be comfortable and win, just like me. We talk all the time about playing together, and we talked after the playoffs about how we can win in Washington."
by capsyoungguns on Jun 3, 2010 3:42 PM EDT up reply actions
Oh, and:
(5) The one major newspaper in town’s hockey editor used the paper’s website to encourage such ridicule.
Shit. How’d I forget to work that into the post? #JPfail
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
9
I expected him to be sharing the 6th spot, not firmly on the top D line. Being paired with the #1 Offensive D-man in the league means there’s more ice for you to be responsible for, and his obscenely gaudy +50 shows that he handled that position quite well. His poor playoff performance kept him from achieving a 10.
As far as next year, I’d want him to give the team a much more solid playoff performance and ….. a hometown discount !
"It hit me on the pants. I had protection. It felt good. Why? I wanted to win."
A note on PDO – Schultzie had the highest rating since BtN started keeping track this season. PDO tends to regress back towards 1000, so we’re probably not going to see a +50 season from Big’n’Lanky again.
It looks like the Caps have a pretty good ES goalie in Varly and forwards who are good enough to drive on-ice shooting percentage higher than the league average (and generally, the Caps take shots from high percentage spots relative to other teams), so we’re probably not looking at a team who’s true ability sits at 1000 PDO, but I’m doubting we see another player sit 69 points above the mean again in the near future.
Only YOU can prevent idiots from commenting!
by Knee high to a duck on Jun 3, 2010 5:22 PM EDT reply actions
A note on PDO – Schultzie had the highest rating since BtN started keeping track this season. PDO tends to regress back towards 1000, so we’re probably not going to see a +50 season from Big’n’Lanky again.
That’s part of what I was getting at in the “stats that temper” line under the bad. Not really bad at all, per se, but certainly point to some measure of statistical inflation due to sheer luck that is unlikely to come his way in such a fashion in the future.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Yeah, just expanding on it a bit in the comments. I just clicked through to the mchockey79 article on the subject, excellent discussions in those comments as well.
Only YOU can prevent idiots from commenting!
by Knee high to a duck on Jun 3, 2010 5:41 PM EDT up reply actions
Another note on Schultz – the ES SV% while he was on the ice was 94.5. We’ll put it this way – that number gets you a Vezina over the course of a whole season and probably wins your coach a Jack Adams.
Only YOU can prevent idiots from commenting!
by Knee high to a duck on Jun 3, 2010 5:43 PM EDT up reply actions
Right. And was the SV% high because Schultz was keeping shots to low-percentage locations, clearing rebounds, etc. or because Neularmodore was playing really well when Sarge was on the ice? Gotta be some combination of both, no?
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Jun 3, 2010 6:14 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Vic Ferrari (I think it was Vic, I have to go find the article now) wrote an article on this very recently, but the upshoot is that even players like Pronger only drive SV% on the ice by .003 or so over the medium-long term. That’s a pretty significant difference over the course of the season, but the fluctuations from year-to-year are substantially larger than that, so it takes a few seasons to get an idea of what the player is capable of.
So Sarge may be having an effect, but what we see in his PDO is something like 20 times (just quick head math, haven’t checked exact numbers) larger than the effect we would expect from an elite defensive-defenseman and five times higher relative (again, quick head math) to team PDO. It’s probably more due to the goalies playing well when he’s on the ice than what he’s doing.
You may be on to something with keeping shots to the low percentage areas, though. I don’t have Gabe’s data in front of me (nor would I know what to do with it if I did) for expected scoring percentage when Schultz is on the ice based on how often shots from a given location have scored since the lockout.
Only YOU can prevent idiots from commenting!
by Knee high to a duck on Jun 3, 2010 6:22 PM EDT up reply actions
Right – a combination of factors. Schultz’s SV% is actually lower than Erskine’s. The Caps were simply a dominant team at 5-on-5, and at both ends of the ice. Maybe it’s… dare I say… a system at work.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Schultz’s SV% is actually lower than Erskine’s.
This, btw, indicates that we probably shouldn’t expect Erskine to be as “good” next year as he was this year.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Jun 3, 2010 6:34 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
It could be that it’s due to the system, but I’ll bet we see a decline next season. This team was both lucky and good during the regular season.
Only YOU can prevent idiots from commenting!
by Knee high to a duck on Jun 3, 2010 6:37 PM EDT up reply actions
No question at all. The S% was way high, SV% too. There’s gotta be some regression at ES.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
There will definitely be some regression in shooting %. But I think that if this team decided they wanted to own the puck and cycle teams to death they could be even scarier offensively. They love scoring on the rush way too much. I understand it’s fun, but it’s not as reliable or demoralizing and it makes us more vulnerable defensively.
I waited all year for this?
Which is why , along with playoff performance, I gave him a 7, and not a 9.
by RPI93 on Jun 3, 2010 7:28 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Pretty off topic here, but I thought it was noteworthy.
I had been semi-tracking the rink wrap results in a spreadsheet because I like to see what the standard deviations are for each player. Anyway, I had entered the info for Mike Green when there were 1,203 votes. 134 of them were 10’s at that point. Now the poll is closed with 1,611 votes, and 383 of them are 10’s. 61% of the last 400 votes came in as 10. I think someone was stuffing the ballot box.
Maybe they just got the Internet in Alberta.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Jun 3, 2010 5:31 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Japers' Rink
Related FanShots on Japers' Rink
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
Southeast Standings
| GP | W | L | OTL | PT | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Florida
|
53 | 25 | 17 | 11 | 61 |
|
Washington
|
54 | 28 | 21 | 5 | 61 |
|
Winnipeg
|
56 | 26 | 24 | 6 | 58 |
|
Tampa Bay
|
53 | 23 | 24 | 6 | 52 |
|
Carolina
|
55 | 20 | 25 | 10 | 50 |
(updated 2.10.2012 at 9:27 AM EST)
The Vault
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- Friday’s Three Stars: Blackhawks lose seventh straight; Wings win nineteenth straight at home
- Puck Previews: Blackhawks reeling; Sabres streaking; Holmstrom’s 1000th game
- Will Teemu Selanne remain with the Anaheim Ducks through the trade deadline?
- Nikolai Zherdev takes stick to crotch, elbow drop in KHL game (Video)
- Puck Headlines: Accused coach Pravilov dead; more Tim Thomas heat; Junior team goes nuts post-shootout
Latest stories and headlines from NHL.com
- Miller with a goal and two assists to lead the Warriors over the Hitmen 4-2
- NHL Capsules: Red Wings win 19th straight at home with 2-1 shootout victory
- Red Wings beat Ducks 2-1 in shootout for 19th straight home win
- Nathan Gerbe caps Buffalo Sabres' comeback in 3-2 shootout win over Dallas Stars
- QMJHL Roundup: A look at Friday's games
Certain photos copyright © 2012 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.
