Having the Right Tools for the Job
by David M. Getz on Jul 28, 2010 11:03 AM EDT
309 comments
A week or so ago an old issue MLB Magazine that was laying around caught my eye. Why? The cover story on the apocryphal five-tool player, one of the most cherished prizes (theoretically, at least) in all of baseball, a player who has the ability to beat an opponent in any facet of the game and who puts his team at an advantage whatever the situation - the truly complete player.
For those who aren't familiar with the term, the five tools are categories baseball talent evaluators use to rate players (in current and/or projected ability), on a scale of 20-80. The five tools are: ability to hit for average, ability to hit for power, defensive skill (especially in terms of range), arm strength, and speed. As a whole, it's a pretty comprehensive way of evaluating a player's game given space and time constraints.
But can this scale be adjusted and adopted for use in the hockey? Corey Pronman from Puck Prospectus took a hack at doing just that, and explains:
The tools that baseball used this system for included hitting, power, fielding, running etc. Transferring this over to hockey we are going to stick to these tools:
- Skating (Acceleration, stride, top speed, turning/edge control)
- Puck Skills (Passing, stick-handling etc.)
- Shot (Accuracy, velocity, release)
- Physical Game(Size, strength, able to handle physicality)
- Hockey Sense (Decision-making, awareness, smarts)
That's a great starting off point, we'd like to tweak it slightly. Under "hockey sense", we would include anticipation and vision. We'd also consider passing not specifically a subset of puck skills, but rather the result of the utilization of puck skills (threading the puck through legs and sticks, being able to make a saucer pass lay flat on your teammate's stick, etc.) and hockey sense (vision and anticipation, as noted above). Those minor revisions aside, we love the system.
The scale's aforementioned 20-80 system is as much a strength as the way it categorizes ability. But what does it mean in practice? Pronman's got you covered there, too:
- 20: Can barely perform this skill, there are 13 and 14 year old amateur players who can do this skill better. Think Derek Boogaard’s hockey sense for example.
- 30: Significantly below average (minus minus), isn’t beer league quality but it’s nowhere near the NHL level. Think Georges Laraque’s puck skills or Hall Gill’s skating.
- 40: Below NHL average (minus), this skill isn’t completely out of the league but it’s still a good notch below. Examples are Marc Andre Fleury’s rebound control or Jack Johnson’s hockey sense.
- 50: NHL average, think Marco Sturm’s puck skills, Justin William’s shot.
- 60: Above NHL average (plus), this is an all-star level skill. Examples are Jonathan Toews’ skating, Mike Richard’s physical game, David Booth’s shot.
- 70: Significantly above average (plus plus), this skill is one of the best in the game and is in an elite class. This is a grade rarely given out. Steve Stamkos’ shot, Chris Prongers’ [sic], physical game, Nicklas Lidstrom’s hockey sense, and Alex Ovechkin’s skating are examples.
- 80: Generational talent, an extremely rare grade to be given out for any skill. Examples of what an 80 grade is include Bobby Orr’s skating, Al MacInnis’ shot, Wayne Gretzky’s hockey sense.
Pronman also provides the rationale behind the 20-80 system:
You may read this and wonder why the scale goes from 20 to 80 and not from 0 to 100. Well, simply put, it's because of standard deviation. To those mathematically deprived, it means that according to a normal distribution of talent 2/3rds of the players should fall between 40 and 60, with the overwhelming majority falling between 30 and 70. It’s a proven way to make sure the average players and varying notches are spread out well enough but not too much. While the theory stems from standard deviation, not all the tools have a perfectly normal distribution. Many more players have an 80 physical game, and very few have an 80 skating or an 80 shot.
With all of that out of the way, we figured we'd give it a whirl with Capitals' players. Make the jump to figure out how we rate the Young Guns, some Rink favorites, and who's at the top (and bottom) of each category.
To start off, let's take a look at the Capitals highest profile and most skilled players: the Young Guns. Here's how we rate Alex Ovechkin, Alexander Semin, Nicklas Backstrom, and Mike Green:
This seems like as good a time as any to draw the crucial distinction between tools and production, or even between tools and ability. Tools are just that - tools. They're the skills and abilities players posses, but they are not production in and of themselves. That's why a guy like Alexander Semin can be so close to someone like Ovechkin (even ahead of him in some categories), yet clearly be the inferior player. It's not that he doesn't posses the same level of talent, it's that he doesn't use it as effectively.
To further illustrate that point, consider hockey's most coveted talent - goal-scoring. Goal-scoring is not itself a tool. Rather it is the end result of several of these tools, most directly shooting skill and hockey sense. Ovechkin's greatest asset when it comes to goal scoring is his shot, Sidney Crosby's is his hockey sense, and Todd Bertuzzi's was his physicality. Ergo, each player has a talent for goal-scoring is to focus solely on production, rather than skill set.
That's not to say production isn't more important, because, of course, it is. It's more important because it's the total number of goals for and against that determine who wins games - and style doesn't count. Ideally a team would be able to determine a player's value solely based on his production, but the reality is the data to do so isn't necessarily available in junior or overseas leagues, a player's production may be as much a function of his teammates and his coach as his ability, and uncertainty levels are high under any set of circumstances. Evaluating a player based on his tools thus offers a succinct, standardized way to come up with an idea of how he might fit in with a team, either in its current instantiation or down the road. These ratings, then, are just another arrow in the quiver of overall talent evaluation.
That having been said, let's take a look at some other fan favorites, many of whom, incidentally, are guys who are quite productive, although they don't score all that high on the tools assessment:
The takeaway from this list should probably be that tools aren't everything. While none of these players excels in any one aspect, they've all managed to do well for themselves by being willing to work hard, commit to mitigating their weaknesses, and using their hockey sense to the best of their advantage. These types of players can be especially important to a team looking for a deep playoff run because they generally offer good value since they don't wow people in any one particular aspect of the game and because they can be counted on to help the team every night, as opposed to a player who might excel in one area and be useless if that part of his game is contained.
Lastly, we thought it'd be interesting to look at who we thought are the best and worst Capitals players were in each category:
Perhaps there's nothing totally surprising here: the team's most important players are the ones who show up in the "best" column the most often, while the guys who show up more than once in the "worst" column are depth players. But there are several players who stand out. Under the "best" you have the inclusion of Jason Chimera (for his skating and physicality) and Bradley (for his physical game); under the "worst" you have Jeff Schultz (several times, in fact), as well as Tomas Fleischmann and Alexander Semin, all of whom are productive players.
This fact underscores the tenuous relationship between how a player is rated in terms of tools and how productive they are in practice - heart and desire, after all, are not tools for the sake of this exercise. It's possible for a player to not score particularly well in one or more area and still be an excellent NHLer, and by the same token it's possible that a player is significantly above average in a category or two but a depth player, which brings us to our final question.
If you were a scout, coach, or general manager, what kind of players would you look for? Would you favor players who excel in one or two areas and come up short in others, or would you be looking for guys who aren't great in any one category, but don't have any glaring weaknesses as well? Does your answer change depending on what role you expect out of the player, how much ice time he's going to get, or what position he plays?
For another look at hockey's five tools, check out this older article from Larry Wigge.
15 recs |
309 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
You presuppose the existence of a document that may or may not exist.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Hey, it could extend to a larger discussion, perhaps something as compelling as MVC.
/a hoor for hits
And I thought Tom Soehn was a shitty coach.
by Bald Pollack on Jul 28, 2010 11:44 AM EDT up reply actions
Not sure I could stomach Steckel’s cross-the-board 70’s.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Jul 28, 2010 11:45 AM EDT up reply actions 5 recs
Or Semin’s cross-the-board 80’s that no one will own up to in the comments.
"Do not be afraid to ask for credit, for our way of refusing is very polite."
by Laich It Or Lump It on Jul 28, 2010 11:52 AM EDT up reply actions 5 recs
I like the premise...not so much the execution.
Can’t agree with your rankings here….they came from a subjective opinion right? Chimera is by far the best skater on the team. Mike Green is up there with Ovie in terms of physicality – some of those counter hits are wicked. Both Brooks and Schultz have more hockey sense then you give them credit for – especially Schultz. Classifying Ovie’s physical game (when looking at it on it’s own – not the fact that he’s physical and a superstar) as a once in this generation player is a joke. Last nitpick I’ll make – Flash is as good a puck handeler as Ovie…if not slightly better.
Chimera’s not the best skater on the team. The fastest, at full speed? Maybe. But he doesn’t have Ovechkin’s acceleration or the agility to match several guys.
Physicality goes way beyond hitting, and encompasses how difficult someone is to play against as a whole. Ovechkin’s the total package – he hits hard, he hits frequently, he has a low center of gravity, he has the size, he’s hard to move in front of the net or in the corner, he’s hard to lay in to, etc. You can’t say the same about Green, although he handles the physical game pretty well.
Generational talent starts at 80, so we don’t have Ovechkin at that level. Nonetheless, who in the game offers that kind of physicality?
Schultz I can see at 60, but I think Brooks is fine. How does his hockey sense manifest itself? He’s not a great defensive player, and he doesn’t read plays in the offensive zone at a high level – he does his thing, which is go to the net.
Fleischmann may be able to match Ovechkin in the stick-handling department, but there’s more to puck skills than that. Does he have the same kind of touch Ovechkin has? Can he corral pucks as well, or take a difficult pass?
by David M. Getz on Jul 28, 2010 12:46 PM EDT up reply actions
I thought the ratings were pretty dead on. Couple of nits sure but scouting is subjective. The only major beef I would have would be Sarge’s hockey sense I would up him to 60. It’s the most subjective and malleable “tool” in this scouting scenario, so reasonable minds can differ, but this year that guy was always in position. Its very important for a guy without the skills to develop that sense. Also he’s a totally average puck handler, I would go 50 on that.
Well done all around. My immediate question (which is probably obvious to most) but would it be fair to assume that as a player’s career progresses (or regresses) that the associated numbers would also?
For example…I know that when Carlos Beltran came to the Mets he was touted as a five-tool player. Obviously today that would be a generous assessment yet even last season he was still called a five-tool player by analysts even though some of his skills had dropped off.
I feel the need to note that just because someone is a five-tool guy at 17-18-19, that’s no predictor of future success. Billy Beane was a highly touted as a five-tool player in high school and he never got past the minors.
#savethekittens!
Donation info for SAVES FOR KIDS 2010!! Make a difference.
Amazing evaluation. I love seeing 55 in 3 of the 5 “worsts” but still be a Rink favorite. It just proves to me that he knows his role, and excels at it.
"It's good to be compared to great players, great teams. But we're not Oilers, we're Capitals."
~Alex Ovechkin
Also proves that production <> skills. See also Semin, Alexander.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Jul 28, 2010 11:21 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Just looking at your Caps’ ratings raises the question – is there any player-skill combination in the league now that gets an 80?
If OV is the league’s best player (not opening that argument here), but doesn’t receive an 80 on any of the five, what does get an 80?
Every bursted bubble has a glory! Each abysmal failure makes a point! Every glowing path that goes astray,shows you how to find a better way. So every time you stumble never grumble. Next time you'll bumble even less!
An 80 does seem easier to award retrospectively.
(Yes, I know about the avatar hounding - just pretend mine is invisible.)
by oldemystix on Jul 28, 2010 11:56 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
very abstute observation
It's The Wait for Red October. Except rather than Sean Connery, Alex Baldwin, and Sam Neill, it's George McPhee, Bruce Boudreau, and Alex Ovechkin.
Not Tom Clancy, but Gary Bettman. Not the Soviet Kremlin, but. . .well. . . .yeah, the Soviet Kremlin
hmm i was thinking astute and went for abtuse. .. thus abstute
It's The Wait for Red October. Except rather than Sean Connery, Alex Baldwin, and Sam Neill, it's George McPhee, Bruce Boudreau, and Alex Ovechkin.
Not Tom Clancy, but Gary Bettman. Not the Soviet Kremlin, but. . .well. . . .yeah, the Soviet Kremlin
Possibly Lidstrom in skating and hockey sense. Fedorov in hockey sense also.
Cидни Kросби: Александр Oвечкин, он твой папа теперь
матовая Клими, Михал нуивирт ваш папа теперь
Red Line Station: for Capitals fans who can bear reading something less intelligent than a story at Japers' Rink
Follow me on Twitter!
by red army line on Jul 28, 2010 7:49 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Ovechkin’s hockey sense seems awfully low. Same hockey sense as Bradley, Fehr, and Schultz? Really? I’d put hockey sense at 65 or 70, and probably up his puck skills to 65.
Green’s puck skills are low too. His stickhandling and outlet passes are absolutely top notch. I’d have him at 65-70 for that.
Interesting analysis.
Ovechkin’s hockey sense is good – above average, for sure – but all-star level? I don’t know. I think of the way he barrels in to the zone without his teammates or some of the pass/shoot decision he makes.
65-70 seems high in puck skills for Green. At 70 we’re talking about Ovechkin’s shot, Pronger’s physicality, and Lidstrom’s hockey sense, and I don’t think Green’s hands are at that level.
by David M. Getz on Jul 28, 2010 11:26 AM EDT up reply actions
Ovechkin’s hockey sense is good – above average, for sure – but all-star level? I don’t know. I think of the way he barrels in to the zone without his teammates or some of the pass/shoot decision he makes.
I would think hockey sense has to be evaluated based on the player’s role. A scoring winger’s hockey sense is going to manifest itself in how well he finds open ice to get a quality shot, how often he can get behind the defense, how he can find open teammates when he is drawing coverage, how he anticipates where the puck is going to go….all things that OV does at an all-star level. Think of that Montreal goal he passed to himself along the boards. That took exceptional hockey sense. On the other hand, his role is not that of a defensive center, so his (overblown) lack of coverage in his own end is not indicative of a lack of hockey sense imo.
Conversely, a purely defensive forward could also have a high hockey sense even though his strengths are in completely different areas.
In general I think Ovi’s hockey sense is rated too low. IMO it really improved this past season, especially when that first line was clicking. Many of his assists were bona-fide difficult passes to Knubes and Backs instead of the expected shot. I thought he did a much better job of choosing when to shoot.
"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 Jul 28, 2010 12:08 PM EDT up reply actions
Is that enough to put him significantly ahead of the average NHLer, even considering some of the things he does that do not reflect that well on his hockey sense?
by David M. Getz on Jul 28, 2010 12:15 PM EDT up reply actions
Still mulling. Just my initial reaction. It’s a great piece that requires careful thought.
"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 Jul 28, 2010 12:27 PM EDT up reply actions
I have to disagree here. After watching the Montreal series, I don’t see how someone could rate his hockey sense very highly. Montreal put all their effort into preventing him from entering the zone, then cutting across the ice from left-to-right.
Ovie’s response was to keep trying to cut across the ice from left-to-right. A player with a smidge more hockey sense might have figured out that it wasn’t working and tried something new.
'Cause the end of what it was is what it is right now...
Disagree. AO and Baxter cycled the shit out of MON and basically dominated the course of play. You can, and I have, criticize AO for his choices on the rush but that’s a relatively limited part of the game and I fundamentally don’t see how you can have the same success as AO if you don’t have exceptional hockey sense. I’m having a hard time thinking of a first ballot HOFer with elite goal scoring that didn’t also have elite hockey sense.
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 28, 2010 11:40 PM EDT up reply actions
I have a hard time watching this play and swallowing an argument that the guy has less than incredible hockey sense.
It requires an awareness of everything that is going on around you, your physical limits, and the limits of your opponent, while making constant adjustments on the fly.
Then there is the Goal of the Decade which also takes a highlighter to his situational awareness. Its almost as if he has the ability to slow the play down in his mind to see if from a few more angles.
I’d add his 500th point as evidence, but I can’t convince myself he actually knew what he was doing there. The first two are clearly a result of knowing where you are on the ice and what’s going on around you. The 500th point is just too ridiculous to be attributable to much more than chance.
In any case, in terms of seeing the ice, and seeing the play, he’s damn impressive. Combine that with the fact that he actually has the ability to execute on his vision… that’s stunning.
I am a hockey fan first, and a Caps fan second.
by iwearstripes on Jul 29, 2010 1:56 PM EDT up reply actions
On Ovie’s 500th point, he knew exactly what he was doing. Earlier in the game, he’d tried to go inside from the same position, and got blocked out. The next time, he faked inside and went outside and around. The shot going in involved a huge amount of luck, but the move was pure skill and smarts.
Never underrate the power of the hissy-cow.
Ooooooh, me likey this one.
I would downgrade Flash and Semin on the Physical Game metric. I’d put Flash at 20 (if there’s one guy in the league that can be outperformed by a 14 year old in one metric, if’s Flash and the Physical game). I’d give Semin a 30 or 35.
I’d upgrade Backstrom in the same ranking – he can take a pounding and he’s not afraid to dish out a hit if you try to track him down. Maybe give him a 55, because he’s not an all-star in the metric, but I think above average.
Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?
Really cool, and open to a wide interpretation. I would submit for starters, Ovie definitely has a “generational” type of shot at an 81 (The Spinal Tap equivalent of 11) , and I would rank Schultz’s hockey sense and Nicky’s skating much higher.
The AO shot score depends entirely on how you define the shot. Is it pure power? Or pure accuracy? Or pure just getting past the goalie. If the latter, he sure as shit goes to eleven.
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 28, 2010 11:41 PM EDT up reply actions
I’d also question how much one should divorce production from the tools. If these metrics don’t predict or describe results, then how much value can they really have?
Perhaps results that seem higher than expected from the aggregate scores can be attributed to the scores themselves being incorrect.
A lot more goes into production, though, than merely a player’s skillset. Plenty of mediocre players produce great numbers by virtue of great teammates, prime ice time, etc., and plenty of talented players don’t produce commensurate with that talent because they lack linemates or drive or whatever.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Plenty of mediocre players produce great numbers by virtue of great teammates, prime ice time, etc.
Did someone mention Rob Brown?
Then should drive be its own metric? One could argue that if it isn’t, then it should be an aspect of hockey sense.
It’s most definitely something to consider in evaluating any player, but I don’t think it’s a “tool,” per se.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
when I think of tools, I think of strictly physical things that can be measured. You can be a five-tool guy with zero motivation. It’s what you do with the tools you have that really matters.
#savethekittens!
Donation info for SAVES FOR KIDS 2010!! Make a difference.
Well sure, I agree that’s how this has been set up. I just question the value of looking at it in that manner. If one unmeasurable intangible factor can completely skew the results, then what do these scores really tell you?
And no I’m not pooping on all the work that’s been done by DMG here. I just think that a player’s “drive” should be wrapped up into hockey sense. Ovie scores higher; Daigle scores lower.
I don’t think the “tools” can tell you a whole lot about how someone will perform next week, let alone accurately project (see my Billy Beane example above) future success. They’re useful for getting a baseline measurement, though. We have a program to measure “gymnastics tools” and I find it useful in some ways and extremely limiting in others. But it does provide a way to verify who needs to work on what physical aspects.
#savethekittens!
Donation info for SAVES FOR KIDS 2010!! Make a difference.
But it does provide a way to verify who needs to work on what physical aspects.
Funny enough in baseball I’ve seen it more so used to discount someone’s abilities. Most frequently speed, defense, and arm. I once overheard an old crusty baseball scout, talking about someone at a cattle call, say “You can’t teach speed, and that fucker runs like a deer! Someone will try to teach him to hit a curve.” Sure as can be he was drafted in the late rounds (by a different team) despite being never really hitting for average or making a name in the upper amateur ranks.
do keep in mind our “tools” are mostly to identify young (7-11 years old) talents and measure them through those years. Baseball uses it’s “tools” to evaluate guys 16-23 (or older) years old. it’s not quite apples to apples.
#savethekittens!
Donation info for SAVES FOR KIDS 2010!! Make a difference.
I’d love to see the complete roster evaluated. Given his position, I’d put Chimera’s hands right around Erskine, and Schultz. I love his speed, intensity, and grittiness, but the guy has hands of stone.
I am a hockey fan first, and a Caps fan second.
I’d put Chimera’s hands right around Erskine, and Schultz. I love his speed, intensity, and grittiness, but the guy has hands of stone.
This isn’t the first time I’ve read this on the Rink and I have to say I’m a bit confused. Chimera’s no Alex Semin, but neither is he a Sean Donovan clone. We are talking about a guy with a lifetime shooting % of around 10, who has cracked double-digits in goals five times in his career while skating 3rd/4th line minutes and getting virtually no PP time.
Would it be awesome if he had hands that matched his speed? Of course, but then he’d be Teemu Selanne and not Jason Chimera. For his role, I’d actually say Chimera has pretty decent hands. If he plays a full year next year, I think we can pencil him in for around 15-17 goals and perhaps a couple of shorties if BB sees fit to give him some PK time.
'Cause the end of what it was is what it is right now...
well, he probably keeps his shooting percentage around 10% because when his (lack of) hands manifests itself, it’s in the sense that he misses the net or fumbles the pass…hence, no shot on goal.
I think part of it has to do with the fact that he seems like he’s getting a lot of good chances because of his speed and grit, but doesn’t bury many, and people remember the misses.
by David M. Getz on Jul 28, 2010 1:37 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
That’s sort of a back-assward way of assessing a guy’s talent though. It’s not Chimera’s fault that he creates more chances than other guys.
Among the forwards, I’d say that Chimera’s hands are better than Steckel’s and Gordo’s and not far behind Laich’s.
'Cause the end of what it was is what it is right now...
I think what he’s getting at is that:
We are talking about a guy with a lifetime shooting % of around 10, who has cracked double-digits in goals five times in his career while skating 3rd/4th line minutes and getting virtually no PP time.
doesn’t necessarily imply puck skills or shooting skills. Those numbers can just as easily be produced by hockey sense, physicality and speed, if we’re sticking to our 5 tools.
It’s not Chimmer’s fault that he gets more chances, but it is his fault that he can’t convert them. I honestly believe that Chimera would score 25+ with even average hands.
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 28, 2010 11:47 PM EDT up reply actions
Maybe my brain was contaminated by a buddy who used to work for the Jackets telling me the guy missed the net an outrageous amount of the time. As I’ve observed him playing, I just seem to pick up on him either fumbling an opportunity, or ripping a shot wide.
One in particular that sticks out in my head from late this season involved Chimera on a break (or partial break) putting a great move on the goaltender, and either getting no shot off, or failing to put the puck in a vast expanse of open net.
I do think he gets a bad shake on the shot in the closing minutes of Game 7. He missed a wide open net, but the puck took a bad hop just as it got to him, no doubt due to the terrible VC ice. If that puck stays flat, he’s the hero that scored the game tying goal.
I am a hockey fan first, and a Caps fan second.
by iwearstripes on Jul 28, 2010 2:01 PM EDT up reply actions
Another interesting Chimera tidbit – It wasn’t on my radar when Chimera and Belanger were signed, but Chimera wasn’t a big fan of Belanger after this little incident:
http://blog.dispatch.com/cbj/2009/09/chimera_it_was_a_cheap_hit.shtml
I am a hockey fan first, and a Caps fan second.
by iwearstripes on Jul 28, 2010 2:05 PM EDT up reply actions
Is Semin’s shot significantly above average, as in there are maybe only a handful of players in the league today with that level? To me, maybe I’d split the difference and say 65. I’d also give Ovie the benefit of the doubt for the pure volume of shots he takes and give him a 75. He should score above average on Hockey Sense in the very least, and get a 60. Backstrom would get a 70 for me in that category.
People should realize that 50 is an average player, so although Brooks Laich’s numbers look low, he’s still considered a slightly above average NHL skill set. Matt Bradley is listed as the league average, Eric Fehr just a slight notch below.
Mike Green’s hockey sense at a 50… that’s a tough one to pin down for sure. I’m sure there would be a lot of people that would peg it even lower just out of disgust at the whole Norris hype. For me, I’m okay with that rating.
80 is an incredible number. It’d be interesting to see one of these on Pavel Datsyuk… to me, his puck skills AND his hockey sense have to be bordering on 80.
Puck Worlds: Chasing Pucks from here to Turku.
For Twitter Updates on Puck Worlds, follow @puckworlds. For updates plus additional witty banter from yours truly, follow @saskhab.
Puck skills maybe, but that hockey sense would put him into Gretzky territory, Datsyuk doesn’t have generational hockey sense. You could make an argument that Lidstrom does, I think.
"Now wait a minute. This is just purely a social call. You know, just two adults getting a stew on, man."
by The Ghost of Bebop on Jul 28, 2010 11:42 AM EDT up reply actions
He’s the best forechecker I’ve seen in a generation. That’s what I’m looking at for hockey sense.
Puck Worlds: Chasing Pucks from here to Turku.
For Twitter Updates on Puck Worlds, follow @puckworlds. For updates plus additional witty banter from yours truly, follow @saskhab.
by Bruce Peter on Jul 28, 2010 11:44 AM EDT up reply actions
You could make an argument that Lidstrom does, I think.
If there’s anyone playing today that deserves that score, it’s Lidstrom.
The only reason Lidstrom doesn’t walk away with the Norris every year is that it’d be boring. The guy is a generational talent in terms of defense because of his hockey sense. He’s several seconds ahead of the play every single game.
All the king's horses and all the king's men
Couldn't put Humpty together again
Ya after I did that, I reconsidered saying Lidstrom’s HS was a 70. He’s a 75 at least.
I’m always very wary about giving 80’s. Giving an 80 means you are one of the greatest in that areas of all-time. The tool is perfect or just about near it, there is no room for improvement.
I’d say Chara’s Physical Game is an 80. After that I’m hard-pressed to find many 80’s, and some that can easily be debated between 75 and 80.
by Corey Pronman on Jul 28, 2010 11:47 PM EDT up reply actions
I’d say Lidstrom’s HS qualifies as one of the greatest of all time. It was his primary tool in dominating the Norris Trophy like no one since Bobby Orr.
Release the Mackan!
by Killer_Carlson on Jul 28, 2010 11:51 PM EDT up reply actions
And if the Canadian media wasn’t biased jerks then Lidstrom would have matched or surpassed Orr.
/kidding… sorta
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 28, 2010 11:52 PM EDT up reply actions
The lockout didn’t do him any favors either.
Release the Mackan!
by Killer_Carlson on Jul 28, 2010 11:53 PM EDT up reply actions
None at all. He should have a minimum of one more Norris, and possibly even 3 more if the lockout never happened.
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 28, 2010 11:54 PM EDT up reply actions
Ya I can see Lidstrom getting an 80, just like I said I’m very wary of handing out 80’s. Even something like Chara’s Physical Game, it can easily be argued down like Fehr and Balanced did (although I wouldn’t use a small number of games to judge that).
He’s right, Physical Game goes beyond size, being able to battle well amongst many things goes into it.
by Corey Pronman on Jul 28, 2010 11:59 PM EDT up reply actions
Well the Olympics was just used because a) a lot of people saw it and b) the dominance was epic, but AO has handled Chara pretty well throughout his career and I think Chara’s lack of skating ability is a significant impediment to his ability to effectively use his physical strength.
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 29, 2010 12:02 AM EDT up reply actions
Well his skating shouldn’t hamper his PG rating. He’s a unique creature and that’s a large portion of what goes into it. 80 also doesn’t means that he wins every battle too. Regardless I don’t think we’re arguing between an 80 and a 65 here.
by Corey Pronman on Jul 29, 2010 12:05 AM EDT up reply actions
No, definitely not arguing for a 65. I just don’t think he’s an 80 if we are going by that elite generational standard.
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 29, 2010 12:08 AM EDT up reply actions
I can see your side of the argument, I think otherwise, however the obvious flaw of the scoring system, and scouting in general is the subjectivity.
by Corey Pronman on Jul 29, 2010 12:12 AM EDT up reply actions
Which is why it’s fun to argue and a great topic generated on your part. If there was no room for debate it would be one post and a bunch of head nodding.
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 29, 2010 12:15 AM EDT up reply actions
We’re likely going to open comments and chats at Puck Prospectus in the near future, so I imagine this topic doesn’t end here.
by Corey Pronman on Jul 29, 2010 12:18 AM EDT up reply actions
That will be interesting indeed. I imagine that will also help to refine the criteria for evaluation as more people weigh in.
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 29, 2010 12:20 AM EDT up reply actions
Scott Stevens was an 80 in physical.
Chara’s not that good.
Atta dinnin stick a who!
by Gould Old Days on Jul 29, 2010 9:12 AM EDT up reply actions
Well Stevens strength meters were off the charts as well as how good he was at engaging contact. Chara IMO doesn’t have that overwhelming strength, but he can overpower someone just from the build of his frame.
by Corey Pronman on Jul 29, 2010 10:11 AM EDT up reply actions
For me a lot of it is that Stevens was such a good skater that he was in a position to use his strength much more often than Chara is.
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 29, 2010 10:52 AM EDT up reply actions
I think Chara’s physical game is overrated. I just don’t think he’s an 80. He’s better than most, but after he got manhandled by AO at the Olympics I don’t see how he can be generational, unless you are going to give that 80 to AO as well. Being big and strong isn’t the same thing as having generational physicality IMO.
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 28, 2010 11:51 PM EDT up reply actions
Or you could argue that Gretzky is the guy that goes above 80.
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 28, 2010 11:50 PM EDT up reply actions
Gretzky was beyond generational.
Atta dinnin stick a who!
by Gould Old Days on Jul 29, 2010 9:13 AM EDT up reply actions
Right. There are certain guys that changed the way people played the game and Gretzky goes in that very limited category.
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 29, 2010 10:06 AM EDT up reply actions
And it’s tough to tell what is the game changing and what is attributable to the player. If you judge from the performance standards from 1965-1985, the NHL picked up three goaltenders who were 80s in the1990s: Roy, Hasek and Brodeur.
So did the game change to permit Gretzky and Lemieux or is it just coincidence that the two most skilled centers in hockey history started up within just a few years of one another. I lean toward “coincidence” for Gretzky and Lemieux and “the game changed” for Roy, Hasek and Brodeur, but it’s hard to say.
Atta dinnin stick a who!
by Gould Old Days on Jul 29, 2010 6:21 PM EDT up reply actions
I think Gretzky and Lemieux were unbelievable talents playing during a period perfectly suited to their style of play. Despite big changes in the game during their careers, both continued to excel.
Roy, Hasek, and Brodeur may also be 80s, but their case is a bit more difficult to judge because they were among the first to excel in a new era of goaltending.
Gretzky and Lemieux are oddly similar to Ovechkin and Crosby. Two unbelievable talents, who play a totally different style. Oddly, Crosby reminds me much more of Gretzky (not physically dominant, great passer, clean cut) whereas Ovechkin reminds me more of Lemieux (physically imposing, great goal scorer, rougher around the edges).
I am a hockey fan first, and a Caps fan second.
by iwearstripes on Jul 30, 2010 12:20 AM EDT up reply actions
Crosby is more physically dominant than Gretzky ever way, especially below the goal lines. He’s ridiculously hard to knock off the puck once he’s down there.
I think you can make a very good case for Dominik Hasek as the best ‘tender ever. I’d go so far as to say that if he was a Wing instead of a Sabre from 1995-2001, the Wings would have won 4+ in that time frame. That’s just about a stone-cold lock.
Only YOU can prevent idiots from commenting!
by Knee high to a duck on Jul 30, 2010 6:29 PM EDT up reply actions
I think Lemieux was awesome, obviously, but Gretzky changed the way teams used the dead ice and attacked inside the zone. We take it for granted that people set up behind the net and play the puck to dead ice when nothing is there, but Gretzky is the guy that made that a staple of the game. Likewise, Orr led the revolution to having D so heavily involved in the offense. Those are huge changes. I can buy Roy as changing the goaile position with the butterfly and his huge influence on French Canadian goalies. But Brodeur and Hasek are just really really good.
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 30, 2010 8:39 PM EDT up reply actions
Semin’s got the best wrist shot in the world, bar none. It’s the rest of his shots, while still above average, that bring down his average.
by DrinkingPartner on Jul 28, 2010 11:45 AM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, it’s pretty unreal. Although Kovalchuk’s wrister is right there as well. I think of one timers as a significant skill for shooting, though.
Puck Worlds: Chasing Pucks from here to Turku.
For Twitter Updates on Puck Worlds, follow @puckworlds. For updates plus additional witty banter from yours truly, follow @saskhab.
by Bruce Peter on Jul 28, 2010 11:55 AM EDT up reply actions
That is the only one I disagree with on the list — it really should be 75. It isn’t something you see every 20-30 years but we’re likely not going to see another wrist shot sometime soon that is more deadly than Semin’s.
All the king's horses and all the king's men
Couldn't put Humpty together again
Hopefully it’s not too deadly on his wrist.
You perhaps knew me better as "Your Nation's Capital." Same great commentary, now with 100% more transparency!
Sakic had the best release, but I never had the impression that his was as hard or as accurate as Semin’s.
by DrinkingPartner on Jul 28, 2010 1:41 PM EDT up reply actions
Semin also winds his up for 15 minutes before shooting it. Release is part of the shot in my opinion.
'Cause the end of what it was is what it is right now...
No argument there, but I would argue that the Semin’s successful shot on goal is harder, better, faster, stronger than Sakic’s, but there’s no doubt that Sakic’s ability to get his shots off more quickly made his shots, even if not as techinically superior, equally effective.
by DrinkingPartner on Jul 28, 2010 1:49 PM EDT up reply actions
Pull your head out of the garbage and get real. Sakic didn’t shoot his way to the HoF by tossing cupcakes at the net. His shot is renowned because of how much power and accuracy he got on it with almost no warning for the opposing goalie.
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 28, 2010 11:56 PM EDT up reply actions
Semin’s also not incredibly accurate. There are a ton of attempted shots sailing over the crossbar for every one he tucks into the corner.
Release the Mackan!
by Killer_Carlson on Jul 28, 2010 3:43 PM EDT up reply actions
… and half of the misses end up in no-touch clears for the opposition.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Ovi does that more than I would like too.
I am a hockey fan first, and a Caps fan second.
by iwearstripes on Jul 28, 2010 4:39 PM EDT up reply actions
Agreed. I would take Brad Richards’ shot over Semin’s just because of release. That Jizz release just isn’t good enough.
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 28, 2010 11:55 PM EDT up reply actions
A fun one...
Marc-Andre Bergeron: Skating (40), Puck Skills (50), Shot (70), Physical Game (30), Hockey Sense (35).
Puck Worlds: Chasing Pucks from here to Turku.
For Twitter Updates on Puck Worlds, follow @puckworlds. For updates plus additional witty banter from yours truly, follow @saskhab.
PP skills are the only reason it’s above 20. I’m probably still overrating him. :)
Puck Worlds: Chasing Pucks from here to Turku.
For Twitter Updates on Puck Worlds, follow @puckworlds. For updates plus additional witty banter from yours truly, follow @saskhab.
by Bruce Peter on Jul 28, 2010 11:52 AM EDT up reply actions
Okay, I’ll buy that ;)
Although honestly I put his PP “skills” in the same category as guys like Gonchar and Chara – he has a wicked shot from the point that he uses early and often but that’s about it. It’s notable because it often works, but he (like the other guys I mentioned and really a lot of D around the League) doesn’t have the creativity that, say, Mike Green has.
Don’t get me wrong, I wish some of our guys shot the puck as much. But in terms of hockey sense…eh. He’s able to get from one end of the rink to the other without falling down – most of the time – does that count?
Forgive me if it’s already been said, but Chimera should probably get a round 80 for his skating ability. He rivals Fedorov for prettiest stride, and he’s easily the fastest player on the team, and one of them in the league. He’s an amazing skater.
by DrinkingPartner on Jul 28, 2010 11:46 AM EDT reply actions
Again, 80 is generational talent. Giving him an 80 puts him among the best skaters in NHL history. What you’re talking about describes a 70, IMO.
"Now wait a minute. This is just purely a social call. You know, just two adults getting a stew on, man."
by The Ghost of Bebop on Jul 28, 2010 11:48 AM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, I thought about amending my thought with perhaps a 75, but, for example, I don’t think that AO is a better skater than Chimera, but I also agree that AO should probably be a 70. I mean, it’s not Chimera’s skating’s fault that he doesn’t get a whole lot of chance to show off what agility he may or may not have.
by DrinkingPartner on Jul 28, 2010 12:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Does Jason Chimera – Bobby Orr?
No.
And I think too much emphasis is being given to speed here. Scott Niedermayer might win most of his races, but a lot of NHLers would beat him in straight-away speed. There might have been five as his equal as a skater.
If you've read this far...seek help.
by ThePeerless on Jul 28, 2010 12:25 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
that ought to be an equals sign in there…
If you've read this far...seek help.
by ThePeerless on Jul 28, 2010 12:26 PM EDT up reply actions
So would you rate him as an 80 in skating?
Only YOU can prevent idiots from commenting!
by Knee high to a duck on Jul 30, 2010 10:17 PM EDT up reply actions
80 is generational. Players are getting faster and faster, so you have to judge as relative to the rest. Yvon Cournyier might have been an 80 in the 1970s, for example, but in today’s NHL probably a 60.
Matthew Lombardi is probably the fastest skater in the NHL, or at least he was two years ago. He’s definitely faster than Chimera.
Puck Worlds: Chasing Pucks from here to Turku.
For Twitter Updates on Puck Worlds, follow @puckworlds. For updates plus additional witty banter from yours truly, follow @saskhab.
by Bruce Peter on Jul 28, 2010 11:51 AM EDT up reply actions
Matthew Lombardi is probably the fastest skater in the NHL, or at least he was two years ago. He’s definitely faster than Chimera.
Music to my ears, Bruce. Hallelujah.
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
by Chris Burton on Jul 28, 2010 11:57 AM EDT up reply actions
He’s a speedy little sucker, that’s true. I used to watch the Flames when he was in Calgary and it seemed like the commentators were incapable of referencing him on the ice without referring to him as “speedy Matthew Lombardi”.
And yet I’m not sure if the two can be compared – Chimera’s bigger so his strides are longer and thus he might seem a tad slower than Lombardi, but I’m not sure I’d make that argument without seeing them go side-by-side…we should set that up.
Has either of them been picked for the fastest skater competition? If not, someone should get on that. Having seen both players extensively (Chimmer a lot in CLB), they’re amazingly fast.
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
by Chris Burton on Jul 28, 2010 12:02 PM EDT up reply actions
I really wish they would bring back the team-by-team skills competitions – or better yet open up the skills part of the ASG to everyone. Often the fastest skaters or the guys with the best or most accurate shots aren’t actually in the competition because they’re not all-around stars (or in the case of 2 years ago, don’t play for Montreal).
by Becca H on Jul 28, 2010 12:04 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
The Capitals don’t hold a team skills competition?
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
by Chris Burton on Jul 28, 2010 12:05 PM EDT up reply actions
The used to, but then a placekicker won hardest shot and that was the end of it.
[Actually, that’s not true, but it’s a funny story so I had to share.]
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Heh, nice.
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
by Chris Burton on Jul 28, 2010 12:13 PM EDT up reply actions
An article from 1993? Impressive pull, J.P.
"Do not be afraid to ask for credit, for our way of refusing is very polite."
by Laich It Or Lump It on Jul 28, 2010 12:35 PM EDT up reply actions
I’m a full-service dorkopedia.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
My dad and I went to at least 2 of those competitions. They were great. Langway skated around with a metal Caps trash can above his head celebrating his team’s win in the competition
Because now I can justify browsing and commenting during the work day with the argument that I am promoting my business.
by Sombrero Guy on Jul 28, 2010 4:46 PM EDT up reply actions
Don’t they? In 2009 Cogliano and Raymond were a part of it, and neither of them is all-star level.
by David M. Getz on Jul 28, 2010 12:07 PM EDT up reply actions
They were there as part of the Young Stars – and that was the first time they even let those guys compete.
too bad
’cause the chances of Chimera and/or Lombardi making the ASG are slim to none.
Maybe they’ll race for an icing on 10/16.
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
by Chris Burton on Jul 28, 2010 12:11 PM EDT up reply actions
Are non-All-Star guys really going to give up their five-day mid-season vacation to fly somewhere to participate in a four-minute event?
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Depends—is there a cash prize to the winner?
by bilspacecadet on Jul 28, 2010 12:11 PM EDT up reply actions
Becca, I could not agree more. I SOOOO wish the NHL skills competition were open to everyone. I want to know who REALLY has the hardest shot, and who is REALLY the fastest skater.
'Cause the end of what it was is what it is right now...
We probably have a good idea of who owns the hardest shot, already.
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
by Chris Burton on Jul 28, 2010 1:28 PM EDT up reply actions
watch out, his shot might make you say "ow"
#savethekittens!
Donation info for SAVES FOR KIDS 2010!! Make a difference.
Put it this way – do you know of any active player who can shoot harder than Chara? Weber might get there eventually and is close as it is, but after those two I don’t know of anyone.
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
by Chris Burton on Jul 28, 2010 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions
I remember Kilger allegedly hitting 106 a few years ago.
by David M. Getz on Jul 28, 2010 1:34 PM EDT up reply actions
I’m doing my level best to keep homerism out of this, quit tempting me dammit!
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
by Chris Burton on Jul 28, 2010 1:39 PM EDT up reply actions
Don’t worry, it’s not homerism: you’re not Canadian.
by DrinkingPartner on Jul 28, 2010 1:42 PM EDT up reply actions
The thing is – we have no way of knowing. Most guys don’t uncork their heaviest shots during games because they take ages to get off.
'Cause the end of what it was is what it is right now...
This is true. So do you think anyone has a harder shot than the two I mentioned? Not that it matters too much, but still.
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
by Chris Burton on Jul 28, 2010 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions
Or have the teams do an elimination contest for one representative each.
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 29, 2010 12:09 AM EDT up reply actions
Saw him beat an icing call against Nick Lidstrom a couple years ago. Lidstrom had a couple strides on him at the start. I was blown away… Lidstrom is not slow even past 35, and he takes the best routes to loose pucks you’ll see. Could have been the end of the shift for him, but still.
Puck Worlds: Chasing Pucks from here to Turku.
For Twitter Updates on Puck Worlds, follow @puckworlds. For updates plus additional witty banter from yours truly, follow @saskhab.
by Bruce Peter on Jul 28, 2010 12:02 PM EDT up reply actions
Can’t wait to watch him live. Who would you call the top 5 skaters in the league today?
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
by Chris Burton on Jul 28, 2010 12:04 PM EDT up reply actions
Tyler Sloan and four chumps who wish their dad was a skating coach.
/Ovechwin’d
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Jul 28, 2010 12:05 PM EDT up reply actions 5 recs
Heh, I’m doing this off of memory. I’d have to take some more time to accurately pare down a top 5 list. I’m glad we got two of them mentioned here!
Gaborik would probably be the fastest skilled player, unless all those injuries have slowed him down a bunch. That old Minny team with him and Wes Walz was pretty insane.
Puck Worlds: Chasing Pucks from here to Turku.
For Twitter Updates on Puck Worlds, follow @puckworlds. For updates plus additional witty banter from yours truly, follow @saskhab.
by Bruce Peter on Jul 28, 2010 12:22 PM EDT up reply actions
Thanks for showing Erskine’s ratings. Just reaffirms my belief that he needs to traded. Yes, he scores well in the Physical Game catagory, but is that enough? I don’t think so.
I think it should be taken into account that he’s a warm body who is willing to fight.
by DrinkingPartner on Jul 28, 2010 11:47 AM EDT up reply actions
Not just fight – he’s a physical presence (for better or for worse) on a team that admittedly doesn’t have a ton. Some, but not a ton.
The fact that he’s got a high score in the Physical Game category just tells us what we already know – that he’s good when used sparingly, only in certain situations.
I’ve always admired Erskine’s remarkable ability to get under the skin of some of the better pests in hockey. 2009 playoffs, of course, being a rather stand out moment.
#savethekittens!
Donation info for SAVES FOR KIDS 2010!! Make a difference.
The question is… if you trade Erskine, what do you get back? I doubt any team would part with a draft pick or usable NHL player. Ersk has little to no value on the market, but as a 6th, 7th or preferably 8th defenseman, he’s adequate. If he playes 30-40 games to fill in against physical teams that are not that quick, he’s ok.
I suspect if the Caps traded him, they’d have to take an increase in salary to acquire anything usable. I’d rather they use the cap room for something else.
Washington Capitals 2009-10 = Quebec Nordiques 1994-95
--- D'ohboy
He probably has as much or more value to the Caps as he would with any team league wide. His limited skill set shows he needs to be a niche player on a team, likely a team with a lot of skill. That fits Washington. Or Chicago with John Scott, for another example.
If he can’t cut it with the Caps, it probably means he’s an AHLer league wide.
Puck Worlds: Chasing Pucks from here to Turku.
For Twitter Updates on Puck Worlds, follow @puckworlds. For updates plus additional witty banter from yours truly, follow @saskhab.
by Bruce Peter on Jul 28, 2010 12:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Physical:
- give/take a hit
- win position in scoring areas
- win battles on boards, in the corners
- fight own battles (guys who aren’t “physical” in this sense are the ones protected by guys like Donald Brashear, although there are exceptions to this rule)
If you've read this far...seek help.
by ThePeerless on Jul 28, 2010 12:28 PM EDT up reply actions
Great Stuff...
I do like the analysis, and the numbers are, for the most part, pretty close to what I would rate with one exception, and that’s Jeff Schultz’ hockey sense. While he has a good rating here of 55, I would put it much higher, probably 65. He has to have superior hockey sense as he has to overcome other issues in his game, such as his skating.
I’m not saying Schultz has hockey sense in terms of offensive ability, as in where to make a pass, when it’s time to shoot, but his sense is in knowing when to head back to the zone, when to go to the slot and when to go into the corner, who is coming down on his side on a two-on-two, who’s on the other side, and what do they do when they cross over. In his own end, I doubt there are many players on the Caps with better hockey sense. In the attacking zone.. yeah, he’s not a whiz, but that’s not really his job… although that can be learned.
Still and all, a great read! Well done!
Washington Capitals 2009-10 = Quebec Nordiques 1994-95
--- D'ohboy
“Hockey Sense”, an internal monologue by Jeff Schultz, as transcribed by fat_daddyo.
You perhaps knew me better as "Your Nation's Capital." Same great commentary, now with 100% more transparency!
you’re rink archivist skills are second only to Natty. I can’t believe you found that.
#savethekittens!
Donation info for SAVES FOR KIDS 2010!! Make a difference.
Sadly, I had the under on when the first snark at Flash would be fired: 16 minutes (I had under 12.5)
But seriously—is there any consideration given to position?—in other words, is Ovie getting bonus points for being an especially physical forward? Or do we really believe he’s that much more physical than Erskine, regardless of position?
I think it takes into account position/role – Ovechkin plays the role of physical forward at a near-generational level; Erskine plays the role of physical defenseman at an above-NHL-average level.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
I think you can make the case either way, and I tried to leave position out of it.
I absolutely believe Ovechkin’s more physical than Erskine. He’s bigger, he hits harder, he (generally) hits more, and his additional size and strength make him harder to deal with in the corners or on the boards.
by David M. Getz on Jul 28, 2010 11:53 AM EDT up reply actions
But there’s also a difference in the strength and ability to handle physicality demanded of an F and a D, so I think it factors in. For example, if you were rating D-turned-F Dustin Byfuglien, wouldn’t you rate his physicality differently depending upon which position you were considering him at?
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Yes and no. On one hand I would evaluate what I’d seen differently – for example I wouldn’t say “I’ve never seen Ovechkin clear the crease, so he gets docked there” or “Sure, Pronger’s a big,strong guy, but I’ve never seen him drive the net with power” because I wouldn’t have expected to see it. But when determining a numerical value, I wouldn’t adjust it based on their position or style of play. I think that gets way too tricky if you’re trying to do it for all the tools.
by David M. Getz on Jul 28, 2010 12:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Right, so you do account for what is required/expected of the given position. If Big Buff was ineffective at using his size as a defenseman, you’d mark him differently than if you saw him use it well as a forward.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Sadly, I had the under on when the first snark at Flash would be fired: 16 minutes (I had under 12.5)
Isn’t it a given that when we’re talking about Flash and time, that you should ALWAYS take the over?
And I thought Tom Soehn was a shitty coach.
by Bald Pollack on Jul 28, 2010 11:55 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
1 more category possibly and Mike Green
First off, I love this chart and think it is very useful. Well done in putting it together.
To address the not using his talent effectively and helps the team each night: there could be a consistency or intensity category to rate this. Here someone like Nick Bastrom would rate a 65-70 as he is going to find a way to help his team each night, where someone like Semin may be at a 35.
Also, I can’t say Mike Green has above average hockey sense on any scale. He’s gotta be at a 30-35 on that. That’s the only part of his game that’s missing. Sadly, I think it’s the most important aspect for a defender to have as well. If he even had a 40 rating on there, he’s have 2 Norris Trophies by now.
30-35 is low, in my book. You’re talking guys who are marginal NHLers when you get down there, and Green’s not that bad.
I’d score him 45 in his own end and 55 in the offensive end. He does a great job of finding open space and using it to create goal-scoring chances for himself.
by David M. Getz on Jul 28, 2010 11:57 AM EDT up reply actions
You’d give Green only a 55 (slightly above average) for his Off. zone instincts? That seems very low, considering that he’s the best OD in the game, today. I’m also not sure I’d give him below average D-zone rating, either.
by DrinkingPartner on Jul 28, 2010 12:03 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Hear, hear—Green certainly makes some defensive blunders, but I think one of the underrated aspects of his game is his ability to pick off/break up passes in the defensive zone. And that, to me, falls under “hockey sense,” rather than “puck skills.”
by bilspacecadet on Jul 28, 2010 12:08 PM EDT up reply actions
intensity in particular can’t really be measured, not like speed, shots, puck skills.
#savethekittens!
Donation info for SAVES FOR KIDS 2010!! Make a difference.
Scoring Green 30-35 on HS is ridiculous. Yes he’s not great defensively in his own end (40-45 is where I’d put him). But he’s all-star level or above (60-65) in terms of starting a rush with a stretch pass or leading it on his own. If you weighed each equally, maybe you could justify a 50. But here’s the important part: what is his role? He is not expected to be a defensive specialist. His defensive “sense” should not weigh as much as his offensive, imo.
Mike Green is better than average in his own end. Anything lower than 50 is putting frustration and hype above objective assessment.
Atta dinnin stick a who!
by Gould Old Days on Jul 28, 2010 12:55 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
I would agree. Mike Green has the tools. it’s what he does with them that leaves us scratching our heads some nights.
#savethekittens!
Donation info for SAVES FOR KIDS 2010!! Make a difference.
I have a particularly hard time where 52, hockey sense and objectivity intersect. He impresses me as a congenial guy with a room temp IQ…and that colors my assessment of his hockey sense.
He obviously does a lot of good things on the ice: start the breakout, stickhandle around a forechecker to sustain a breakout, get into soft areas for a shot, and find open guys, for example. I’m not sure how much of that is based on his other skills, and how much hockey sense plays into it.
Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?
hockey sense is the one “tool” I’m having a hard time with, because its not easily measurable like skating, puck handling, etc. (I know, I’m beating my viewpoint on what constitutes a “tool” and it’s role in evaluating an athlete to death in this post).
Mike’s the classic “he’s got all the tools, but WTF is going on in the head of his?” guy, another topic we’ve all pretty well beaten into the ground around here. (he is not, however, “he’s got all the tools but no drive/motivation/inner fire” guy.)
#savethekittens!
Donation info for SAVES FOR KIDS 2010!! Make a difference.
I don’t see how those “good things” you just mentioned don’t directly speak to hockey sense, as all of those things are judgment calls. The fact that they’re successful means that he had the ability to follow through with his assessment. For example, Schultz doesn’t do a lot of these things, nor does he have the tools to do them. If he attempted these things, then I’d argue that his hockey sense is what’s lacking.
by DrinkingPartner on Jul 28, 2010 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions
Well stated. Knowing your ability and limits is a huge part of HS. The ability of Green to sense a forecheck and throw a counter-hit is also something I haven’t seen mentioned but requires a good degree of HS. Sometimes you need to turn on the jets and leave the guy behind; sometimes you need to plant your feet and plant him on his ass. Those decisions are HS.
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 29, 2010 12:19 AM EDT up reply actions
Consistency/intensity hops over the line between tools and production. Consistency and intensity are the reason that Semin isn’t as productive as Ovi or Backstrom even though on a tools basis, he is basically an equal. They described the difference and the limits of this tools approach pretty well in the last couple paragraphs.
Even if Green has zero defensive sense, which isn’t the case, his offensive hockey sense is so great that he has to at least be average.
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 29, 2010 12:16 AM EDT up reply actions
That’s fair to split the offensive and defensive end, and I’d agree with the attacking aspect of his game. I can agree with a 45 defensive end. I was probably a little low. I am on edge whenever he’s back though. Also, I would weight the defensive instincts more for a Dman, thus lowering his overall instincts in my book.
so how much does OV’s low (IMO) hockey sense have to do with the fact that he scores highly in other categories? in other words, does the afct that he’s high on other offensive tools result a perception that he’s got average hockey sense because he doesnt have to employ that sense to blast one timers from the circles or run a guy over on the way to the net?
Just trying to capture the spirit of the thing...
So what would goalie tools be? (if this way of evaluating players can be modified for them)
(Yes, I know about the avatar hounding - just pretend mine is invisible.)
Puck Prospectus has them as:
Reflexes (How quick the limbs are, natural reactions)
Athleticism (How well the goalie moves, natural athletic ability)
Hockey Sense (Depth in the crease, proper hands and legs placement, stance choice, how well he reads the game)
Size (Self-explanatory)
Rebound Control (Self-explanatory again)
and I think that’s pretty fair.
by David M. Getz on Jul 28, 2010 12:11 PM EDT up reply actions
Saw a lot of “puck handling” in the Olympics where they didn’t have the trapezoid. I thought it wasn’t an improvement and even led to some bad play.
You perhaps knew me better as "Your Nation's Capital." Same great commentary, now with 100% more transparency!
There was definitely a lot of bad puck handling in the Olympics which is why the one or two with good skills stood out.
On this board the puck handing skills (or lack thereof) of our goalies and prospects has been a source for comment.
(Yes, I know about the avatar hounding - just pretend mine is invisible.)
Good to know. I was wondering why he used Marc Andre Fleury’s rebound control as an example of a thirty when this exercise is about skaters’ tools.
My only critique would be using size as a tool. Size is more of a player attribute, not an action or skill. If the scale is meant to categorize ability, I do not see how that applies to the size of the player. Is the goalie skilled at being large? If a player scores an 80 in size, does that mean the goalie is the largest of his generation?
That aside, it would be interesting to assess our young goalies’ tools as well.
"Do not be afraid to ask for credit, for our way of refusing is very polite."
by Laich It Or Lump It on Jul 28, 2010 12:33 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I think “size” encompasses utilization of size. There are big goalies who leave gaping holes to shoot at and big goalies who cover the whole damn net; small goalies who “play big” and small goalies who don’t, etc.
My guess is that’s the rationale.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Ah, I didn’t think of that, but you could be right. Not exactly “self-explanatory” is it?
"Do not be afraid to ask for credit, for our way of refusing is very polite."
by Laich It Or Lump It on Jul 28, 2010 12:37 PM EDT up reply actions
That was my initial reaction, but a lot of what would be considered “utilization of size” falls under the “hockey sense” umbrella, as defined.
by David M. Getz on Jul 28, 2010 12:38 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree with “playing big” or “playing small” but it doesn’t look like that is in the criteria.
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 29, 2010 12:25 AM EDT up reply actions
Ken Dryden would be an 80 because of his height. Ben Bishop would be an 80 because of his height.
Is that useful? Not at all. If you count it as a corollary to athleticism, it becomes useful. Ken Dryden was good because he was goofily tall but had superb coordination. Ben Bishop won’t necessarily be an NHL level goalie because his coordination/control is somewhat suspect.
Dryden still remains an 80, Bishop is something more like a 40 or 45. One was able to be dominant with help because of his height, Bishop is limited because of his height. Size becomes something more like ability to use what you got. Marty Turco or Jose Theodore are much smaller than either of the aforementioned two, but they’re able to play beyond their size (at times).
Still, I don’t think it is a useful metric. It is like height in soccer — there’s no ideal height, you just want to be as tall as possible while still being able to cover the net.
All the king's horses and all the king's men
Couldn't put Humpty together again
and also on that note, I’m unbelievably impressed when anyone of any height is playing goalie. I played a bit in lacrosse and if you’re shooting and I am set, you’re not scoring. Get me moving, there’s too much mass and I am too slow to square up.
The amount of work someone like Varlamov or anyone else that is on the taller side of the bell curve is absolutely phenomenal.
All the king's horses and all the king's men
Couldn't put Humpty together again
But its still a tool, its a physical gift, you can’t teach speed and you can’t teach size, I don’t think one is that much different than the other.
Aim for the head baby Jesus
I would disagree with that to an extent. There is a component to speed that is derived from having legs that are long enough to provide a long stride, but short enough where a player can get up to speed quickly. That said, a player can train to make his stride more powerful and more efficient under the direction of a good instructor. It wouldn’t be unreasonable to expect a player who is at a 50 on the speed scale to improve to a 55 or 60 if he dedicated himself to optimizing his stride.
Brooksie will tell you all about it.
I’m sure its less of an issue at the pro level, but many younger players and beer leaguers would benefit (speed wise) from getting their skates sharpened to the proper hollow. Excessive hollow = slow.
I am a hockey fan first, and a Caps fan second.
by iwearstripes on Jul 28, 2010 4:52 PM EDT up reply actions
I would not include “size” in this suite of tools. Size is not something one can improve upon; it can be compensated for (with other tools), and it can be augmented (the “Garth Snow” look). I would substitute puck handling for size, and in “athleticism” I would also include “durability” as a descriptive element. Elite goaltenders have to: a) play strong for 60 minutes, and b) be workhorses (a good 60-60 guy, you might say).
If you've read this far...seek help.
by ThePeerless on Jul 28, 2010 12:34 PM EDT up reply actions
Pretty fair, my one complaint I guess would be size because it’s not directly related to production or under the player’s control, but at the same time it does make a big difference if a player knows how to use it (which goes to HS) so it should be a factor.
If I had to break it down to have 5 categories and eliminate size I’d probably break HS into HS and Technique because I do think on some level they are different skills.
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 29, 2010 12:24 AM EDT up reply actions
Wins, Hart Trophies, Vezina Trophies, French-Canadian Heritage, Hair
Signed,
Jose Theodore’s Agent
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Splits.
Signed,
Michal Neuvirth’s agent
You perhaps knew me better as "Your Nation's Capital." Same great commentary, now with 100% more transparency!
The ability to buy beer without being carded.
Signed,
The other teams in the league
by bilspacecadet on Jul 28, 2010 12:18 PM EDT up reply actions
Being a number 2 to start regular season, replace number 1 goalie after he loses his shit, then get smoking hot in the playoffs.
Signed,
A Niemi, M Leighton, S Varlamov, T Rask, et al
by S h a g g y on Jul 28, 2010 12:39 PM EDT up reply actions
Sarge’s shot got jobbed. How many of those other fancy-dan wrist shooters can score from the length of the ice?
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Jul 28, 2010 12:33 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Hey!
Signed,
Ivan Majesky (alumnus)
If you've read this far...seek help.
by ThePeerless on Jul 28, 2010 12:35 PM EDT up reply actions
The physicality thing I think is a little low for Backstrom. 50 is supposed to be dead average, but the guy is really really hard to move off of the puck. Perhaps his lack of ‘offensive physicality’ (e.g., proactive hitting) takes him down a notch. But splitting a few hairs, his ‘defensive physicality’ is pretty damned good. I think something in the range of 54 to 57 would be pretty reasonable for him.
↑ ↑ ↓ ↓ ← → ← → b a (select) start
Excellent point.
"Now wait a minute. This is just purely a social call. You know, just two adults getting a stew on, man."
by The Ghost of Bebop on Jul 28, 2010 1:05 PM EDT up reply actions
I considered that fact, but I counted that more towards skating ability.
by David M. Getz on Jul 28, 2010 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions
I can buy that.
It is really too difficult to make stats and ratings in hockey in an equivalent manner as they are made in baseball. Everything in baseball is just so discrete, the only exception might be the hitting for average and hitting for power. In hockey, skating and strength are tied together (at least for some guys). Hockey sense overlaps all of the tools, as hockey sense is what tells a player when to use his strength, skating, puck handling, etc.
Fun exercise though.
↑ ↑ ↓ ↓ ← → ← → b a (select) start
Jeremy Roenick is 80-80-80-80-80!!!!
/NHL 94’d
Atta dinnin stick a who!
by Gould Old Days on Jul 28, 2010 12:55 PM EDT reply actions 2 recs
Rec’d for the joke, but honestly I had been thinking about it and I think if there was ever a player that was close to JR-94 it is the real life AO. Can you imagine how dominant he’d be in NHL 94?
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 29, 2010 12:31 AM EDT up reply actions
Speed was everything in that game, so he wouldn’t be as good as Fedorov
Atta dinnin stick a who!
by Gould Old Days on Jul 29, 2010 9:15 AM EDT up reply actions
Speed was big but it was Roenick’s physicality that made him impossible to knock off the puck. AO has enough speed that he would still be able to threaten with the puck and he’d be damn near impossible to take the puck from. Add in a shot that would have to be in the high 90s and I could see him being ridiculous in that game.
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 29, 2010 10:07 AM EDT up reply actions
I’m trying to come up with other generational “skills” we’ve seen lately.
Matt Bradley, Bleeding — 80
Sean Avery, Douchebaggery — 80
Zdeno Chara, Hulking – 80
Keith Ballard, Risk To Teammates – 80
Mats Sundin, Indecision – 80
And of course…
Chris Chelios, Age — 80
(it’s not just his score…)
Atta dinnin stick a who!
by Gould Old Days on Jul 28, 2010 1:12 PM EDT reply actions 2 recs
Alex Semin – percussions
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Jul 28, 2010 1:14 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
Mike Ricci, Ugly
Alexei Kovalev, Diving
Release the Mackan!
by Killer_Carlson on Jul 28, 2010 1:18 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
No way Kovalev gets an 80 as long as Mike Ribeiro lives and breathes (and dives).
'Cause the end of what it was is what it is right now...
I thought about Ribeiro, but Kovalev was diving when Ribeiro was in short pants. I still remember Kovalev going down like a sniper got him to nullify a Sakic tying goal in the ’95 Rags-Nordiques first round series. Ribeiro learned from the best in Montreal.
Release the Mackan!
by Killer_Carlson on Jul 28, 2010 3:52 PM EDT up reply actions
Short Pants! Amazing. We should get a beer sometime, I think I’d like you.
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 29, 2010 12:34 AM EDT up reply actions
The day Ribeiro turns a playoff series around with a dive is the day he can usurp Kovalev. He’s a generational talent for sure, but turning a playoff series around is special.
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 29, 2010 12:34 AM EDT up reply actions
Brent Sopel and David Legwand should get fair consideration as well.
"I have only space enough to add: against the assault of desperate pandas nothing can stand."
-ChicoMaki (channeling Mark Twain)
by HungryHungryPanda on Jul 28, 2010 5:33 PM EDT up reply actions
He’s actually a 1,000,000,000 in that category
Atta dinnin stick a who!
by Gould Old Days on Jul 28, 2010 1:47 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
in the officiating category:
Don Koharski, Doughnut Easting-80
#savethekittens!
Donation info for SAVES FOR KIDS 2010!! Make a difference.
Underachieving in playoffs: (many potential subcategories)
J Thornton
P Marleau
T Thomas
Z Chara
The Alexes
The Sedins
hey, what about me?!
Signed,
Roberto Luongo
#savethekittens!
Donation info for SAVES FOR KIDS 2010!! Make a difference.
Those guys are amateurs.
Signed,
Mike Gartner
"You ever use smelling salts, every time you type a bad blog?" Brooks Laich
by CP2Devil on Jul 28, 2010 3:40 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
He got robbed! Stupid fucking Rangers.
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 29, 2010 12:35 AM EDT up reply actions
I think you can take Marleau off the list and add Nabokov
"I have only space enough to add: against the assault of desperate pandas nothing can stand."
-ChicoMaki (channeling Mark Twain)
by HungryHungryPanda on Jul 28, 2010 5:34 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, Marleau has been pretty solid in the playoffs. His career numbers are right on par with Iginla but nobody trashes Iggy.
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 29, 2010 12:36 AM EDT up reply actions
The Alexes? When did Trebec make the playoffs?
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 29, 2010 12:35 AM EDT up reply actions
Mike Fisher, Marrying – 80
most likely to be followed in five years by
Mike Fisher, Divorcing – 80
Just trying to capture the spirit of the thing...
by dcsportsfan1 on Jul 28, 2010 3:22 PM EDT up reply actions
No Defense Category?
Seems to me if you are gonna create five hockey tools that defense would/should be one of them. Maybe this falls into the Hockey Sense category, but it is not mentioned. In the Baseball tools, two of the categories are defensive.
Obstreperously Avatarless
Same reason there’s no category called “offense.” They’re breaking things down finer than that. Defense is an amalgam of skating, physicality, and hockey sense.
Atta dinnin stick a who!
by Gould Old Days on Jul 28, 2010 2:02 PM EDT up reply actions
Defense is an amalgam of skating, physicality, and hockey sense.
That’s basically what it came down to – I couldn’t think of any way to look at defense that wasn’t either looking at numbers or looking at skills that were accounted for in other tools. It’s like the example we used of “goal scoring” – that’s an end result, and this method is more about how you get there.
by David M. Getz on Jul 28, 2010 2:12 PM EDT up reply actions
that’s an end result, and this method is more about how you get there.
Then it differs from the baseball tools analogy because three of the five baseball skills are directly measured by output related to offensive and defensive categories, e.g., hitting for average, hitting for power, fielding/defense. While I like your set of hockey skills, I find the baseball skills to be a bit more useful because of their more direct linkage to productivity.
I couldn’t think of any way to look at defense that wasn’t either looking at numbers or looking at skills that were accounted for in other tools.
That’s easy, moran. Defense = (Hitting + Crease clearing) x distance in the lawnmower toss.
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 29, 2010 12:37 AM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
Ugh, I had a long reply going but apple’s stupid keyboard layout ate it.
Synopsis, as discussed above with backstrom, each of the tools (except shot) can be broken into offensive and defensive tools. I think a better way to show the rating would be as a range with defensive as one bound, offensive as the other, and an overall rating (like those given in the post) somewhere in the middle. Backstrom’s ‘physicality’ might be (O,D,A) = (50,57,54) or something like that.
(I had an example with a nice text ‘plot’ but it got eaten after I’d spent a while trying to format it, not doing it again. SBN, please give us some better formatting commands in posts)
↑ ↑ ↓ ↓ ← → ← → b a (select) start
But,
A player could do well in all those five cats and still be a bit of a defensive liability. Ovechkin for instance. Ducks. Perhaps add defensive awareness to hockey sense and adjust the numbers accordingly.
Obstreperously Avatarless
Defensive awareness is considered part of the hockey sense tool.
by David M. Getz on Jul 28, 2010 2:12 PM EDT up reply actions
Or at least it was when I was considering it, I should say.
by David M. Getz on Jul 28, 2010 2:12 PM EDT up reply actions
That's kinda what I assumed
but, I think the defensive side of the game needs to be somewhat more isolated than just overall hockey sense.
Obstreperously Avatarless
You can’t isolate the defensive end of things because it certainly encompasses hockey sense, skating, and strength, and probably puck skills too (or for no reason other than avoiding blunders). You could create a “defense” category, but that would be more akin to a “goal scoring” category, which gets away from the tools and tends towards results.
by David M. Getz on Jul 28, 2010 2:27 PM EDT up reply actions
With an analogy to offense,
That’s why a guy like Alexander Semin can be so close to someone like Ovechkin (even ahead of him in some categories), yet clearly be the inferior player.
Tools are different from actual performance. “Defense” is more like their actual performance. It’s why Jeff Schultz is good at defense despite having some lousy tools
Atta dinnin stick a who!
by Gould Old Days on Jul 28, 2010 2:12 PM EDT up reply actions
Tools are used to fashion a product. Someone might have a whole garage full of tools, but could drive nail without knocking out a wall and fracturing a thumb.
If you've read this far...seek help.
’tis a poor craftsman as blames his tools.
You perhaps knew me better as "Your Nation's Capital." Same great commentary, now with 100% more transparency!
by EmilyB on Jul 28, 2010 3:13 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Rec’d for one of my favorite sayings ever.
Also thought these two quotes fitting:
“A determined soul will do more with a rusty monkey wrench than a loafer will accomplish with all the tools in a machine shop.” – Robert Hughes
“Have thy tools ready. God will find thee work.” Charles Kingsley
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Jeff Schultz did have some lousy tools, but I don’t think it’s really a full justification. He probably didn’t even spend the majority of his TOI with Flash.
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 29, 2010 12:39 AM EDT up reply actions
A player could do well in all those five cats and still be a bit of a defensive liability. Ovechkin for instance.
I know you’re partially snarking, but any player that outshoots the opposition as much as AO does is doing something right defensively. It’s not textbook defense in the sense that Mikko Koivu plays, but when the effect is that your opponent gets fewer chances, then the method doesn’t really count. The results are the same in either case.
Only YOU can prevent idiots from commenting!
by Knee high to a duck on Jul 28, 2010 3:44 PM EDT up reply actions
A little grist for that mill:
http://www.kuklaskorner.com/index.php/psh/comments/top_20_team_and_zone_adjusted_corsi_numbers1/
You perhaps knew me better as "Your Nation's Capital." Same great commentary, now with 100% more transparency!
hmm
I think I like that list.
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
by Chris Burton on Jul 28, 2010 3:57 PM EDT up reply actions
But would you put him in for a defensive draw late in the game?
I’m guessing most of the guys out there would have less “Hockey Sense” than Ovi so maybe there is something else in their box of tools that makes them excel defensively. Defensive Acumen?
Obstreperously Avatarless
yes
And BB does. That’s where the engs come from.
Cидни Kросби: Александр Oвечкин, он твой папа теперь
матовая Клими, Михал нуивирт ваш папа теперь
Red Line Station: for Capitals fans who can bear reading something less intelligent than a story at Japers' Rink
Follow me on Twitter!
by red army line on Jul 28, 2010 8:07 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Right. And if anyone watched RUS-CZE they saw AO out-battle two Czechs (not acquired by bona fide purchasers for value and thus not holders in due course… what?) to set up Datsyuk for the nail in the coffin.
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 29, 2010 12:41 AM EDT up reply actions
I’m not even sure Mikko Koivu plays textbook defense the way “Mikko Koivu” plays D. Looking at his numbers relative to his teams it appears to me he might be slightly over-hyped in his defensive prowess.
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 29, 2010 12:40 AM EDT up reply actions
Enforcer Tools?
Hand Speed
Strength
Ambidexterity
Chin
Hockey Fighting Sense
Just trying to capture the spirit of the thing...
Balance needs to be in there somewhere.
by David M. Getz on Jul 28, 2010 3:43 PM EDT up reply actions
Nice balance here, at about :44 :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_I_O1NToWWs
You perhaps knew me better as "Your Nation's Capital." Same great commentary, now with 100% more transparency!
yeah, i kind of equate that with strength but i can see it being a separate tool. maybe replacing ambidexterity.
Just trying to capture the spirit of the thing...
by dcsportsfan1 on Jul 28, 2010 4:03 PM EDT up reply actions
Indeed. It’s an insanely underrated skill when it comes to fighting and I’d consider it more of a sub-set of the Skating category.
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 29, 2010 12:42 AM EDT up reply actions
How about five-tool GMs?
1. Drafting
2. Trading
3. Signing free agents
4. Keeping homegrown talent
5. Non-player personnel decisions
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Jul 28, 2010 3:52 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
I don’t think Darryl Sutter has any of those tools
#savethekittens!
Donation info for SAVES FOR KIDS 2010!! Make a difference.
or Glen Sather.
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
by Chris Burton on Jul 28, 2010 3:54 PM EDT up reply actions
Sather can trade. Gomez’s contract for McDonaugh and Higgins?
Release the Mackan!
by Killer_Carlson on Jul 28, 2010 3:56 PM EDT up reply actions
Right; he just doesn’t have all of those tools.
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
by Chris Burton on Jul 28, 2010 3:57 PM EDT up reply actions
Well Red Birdie said Sutter doesn’t have any of them. Sather has at least one.
Release the Mackan!
by Killer_Carlson on Jul 28, 2010 3:58 PM EDT up reply actions
Point taken. Seriously, though, it was an interesting question. Don’t know if I could tell you who the best GM in the league is. Ken Holland, maybe? IDK.
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
by Chris Burton on Jul 28, 2010 4:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Dale Tallon!
/SCH’d
"I have only space enough to add: against the assault of desperate pandas nothing can stand."
-ChicoMaki (channeling Mark Twain)
by HungryHungryPanda on Jul 28, 2010 5:38 PM EDT up reply actions
Evaluating player ability, evaluating player potential, evaluating non-player ability, contract negotiations, trade negotiations
by David M. Getz on Jul 28, 2010 4:04 PM EDT up reply actions
cap management?
i would also add a tool for playing your cards close to the vest. we all know where GMGM scores on that one but in keeping with rink policy, no terms will be disclosed.
Just trying to capture the spirit of the thing...
by dcsportsfan1 on Jul 28, 2010 4:05 PM EDT up reply actions
Love it.
The Way is riddled with deep, dark holes.
by The Jade Donkey on Jul 28, 2010 10:13 PM EDT up reply actions
How about knowing when to not keep homegrown talent…
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 29, 2010 12:44 AM EDT up reply actions
This is great, but making a “five-tool player” is much easier and more accurate in baseball, because baseball is a much more stat-heavy sport where nearly every aspect can be numerized. In hockey, you have to do a lot of subjective ranking.
A Capital Wasteland - art & hockey from Washington, D.C.
Hi Guys
Nice to see such a discussion on this topic. I didn’t read all the comments, but good things being thrown around. I’m going to address a few things from David’s article just for clarification:
1. I assumed “awareness” also went under anticipation and vision for hockey sense. There’s a lot of elements to hockey sense and I could write a whole essay just on that.
2. In terms of the Semin/Ovechkin thing, if you’re a 40 in any single tool asides from maybe shot, it hurts your production significantly. Which is why I disagree with your tools/production point.
There’s a reason why players produce. It can be context (linemates, opposition, ice time etc.) or it’s their abilities. The reason for statistical output can usually be found in those two culprits and work ethic.
Usually if a player is a 35 or a 40 in a crucial area like skating or physical game, their draft stock drops like flies because it hampers their hockey play significantly.
3. I’m not sure if anyone brought this up in the comments, but I do value work ethic. It’s just not a physical tool. I also didn’t have goalie puck handling because I don’t consider it that valuable. Both things would be aside notes in a scouting report I would write up.
4. I haven’t watched Jeff Schultz closely at all, but if he has four sub 50 tools he’s not an NHL regular unless he works his ass off like no other.
Thumbs up David! Excellent post on a topic I love discussing.
by Corey Pronman on Jul 28, 2010 9:17 PM EDT reply actions 2 recs
Usually if a player is a 35 or a 40 in a crucial area like skating or physical game, their draft stock drops like flies because it hampers their hockey play significantly.
John Tavares still got taken first overall, and I wouldn’t rate his skating higher than 40.
But this is great stuff. You did a great job on the categories considering how much more difficult it is than baseball.
Release the Mackan!
by Killer_Carlson on Jul 28, 2010 11:41 PM EDT up reply actions
Tavares is a rare exception that area because his tools like his shot, hockey sense and puck skills are all 60-70’s. Believe me though his skating was a huge topic of discussion leading up to the draft.
by Corey Pronman on Jul 28, 2010 11:51 PM EDT up reply actions
His skating was also masked by playing weaker competition in the CHL so he looked much more elite. The skating was definitely pointed out before the draft but I still think it remains to be seen whether Tavares ends up an elite ES player in the NHL. I could easily see him settling in as a PP specialist as his career progresses if he doesn’t improve his skating.
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 28, 2010 11:53 PM EDT up reply actions
I think you did a great job analogizing to a 5 tool player for hockey, but I disagree that puck handling isn’t important for goalies. It’s certainly less important with the trapezoid, but it’s a highly underrated skill in general. The very fact that the league decided to change the rules to address puck handling goalies should be a clue as to how important it can be.
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 28, 2010 11:45 PM EDT up reply actions
I don’t think it’s not important, just I don’t value it that significantly in terms of scouting goalies. It’s a subjective call on my end which is debatable and I can see the argument. I don’t see a substantial amount of output with my observer bias from goalie puck handling that differs over goalie to goalie to rank it as a tool.
I still observe it and note it, just it’s not a major aspect that could make or break a goalie for me. In terms of decisions with the puck, that would go under his hockey sense just not his raw puck skills.
by Corey Pronman on Jul 28, 2010 11:55 PM EDT up reply actions
I guess it depends on how you are analyzing goalie output. If you are looking at pure pucks in the net then it may have little impact, but the breakout pass is going to lead to more effective rushes going the other way, diffusing a forecheck, preventing your team from being pinned in your zone, and other non-quantifiable results that are extremely important over the course of the game.
I’d agree that when scouting a goalie it’s a subsidiary concern, but I don’t think that means it’s not valuable. Maybe not make or break; you won’t take Vesa Toskala just because he can pass the puck like Marty Brodeur, but it’s at the very least a strong tie breaker.
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 28, 2010 11:59 PM EDT up reply actions
DMG, kudos to you sir on finding Cory’s Puck Prospectus information and then adding to it. We could spend years talking about the post topic. If there is going to be time spent on summer hockey content let it be on stuff like this!
I haven’t posted my thoughts on the criteria or individual guys because I want to take my time assessing the criteria and toy with some all-time player lists on my own and compare them to current players around the league.
"You ever use smelling salts, every time you type a bad blog?" Brooks Laich
Does your answer change depending on what role you expect out of the player, how much ice time he’s going to get, or what position he plays?
Yup.
I have a question though: How did you come up with the actual scores for the players for each category? If they are awarded by individual observances and determined by opinion, then those numbers are approximations at most, murky at best. If Schultz’s decision is to stay back and let Ovechkin, Backstrom, Knuble and Green play offensively while he awaits the oppositions breakout or his teammates goal, then is it really a matter of good hockey sense? If his puck skills are so low, where is poke checking/stick positioning taken into account (the only way I see him climbing a hockey sense ladder)?
Its the arbitrary nature of the scoring that bothers me. Otherwise I find the system interesting, if not a little too broad.
The Way is riddled with deep, dark holes.
by The Jade Donkey on Jul 28, 2010 10:11 PM EDT reply actions
Semin’s hockey sense is way too high. OFB loves your Schultz rankings. Chimera’s skating grade is low, he might be the best skater on the team if you consider power and speed as distinct skating elements. Flash’s physicality grade is too high. AO’s hockey sense is way too low; you can’t find open areas and scoring chances like he does without an exceptional understanding of the game. I also think you can only put AO’s and Semin’s shots on the same footing if you don’t consider “finishing” as a skill. Semin has an objectively great shot, but for whatever reason AO is the guy that gets his shot past the goalie, even if you give them their shots from the same spot in the same situation. I’ve talked bout the intangible nature of scoring and I think these grades undervalue that. Backstrom deserves a higher grade in his physical game and probably in his hockey sense as well.
As a scout, I put the premium on skating and hockey sense. After that it’s basically a wash and I just look at the full picture. That said, if a guy gets the job done he gets the job done. Schultz wouldn’t be the way I describe my ideal D, but he manages to do his job so that’s fine with me.
Overall, great stuff and a wonderful summer post.
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 28, 2010 11:27 PM EDT reply actions
I think Semin has fantastic hockey sense – he seems the game and anticipates very well when he’s on/focused. When he’s not, well, that’s another story, but I see that as a separate issue.
Disagree on Chimera. His speed is fantastic, his acceleration is very good, but in terms of balance, turning, agility, etc, I don’t think he’s a 70.
On AO, he has some exceptional attribute – the ability to find space and the ability to shoot when defenders and goalies are off target, etc, but he also rushes it without regard to his teammates, make questionable pass/shoot decisions, and is too aggressive in his hitting at times. Above average? No doubt. All-star level? Maybe. Higher than that? Tough sell.
by David M. Getz on Jul 29, 2010 11:08 AM EDT up reply actions
Fair enough on all counts. I guess the eternal question is which Sasha are we evaluating? No disagreement that when he’s on he has great sense, but you can’t discount when he’s off. Just like AO is prone to a bad rush or a bad shot, Semin is prone to just not having his head in the game.
Lockout talk makes me want to go out and choke an old lady - Elliotte Friedman
by Fehr and Balanced on Jul 30, 2010 8:41 PM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
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 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Washington
|
82 | 54 | 15 | 13 | 121 |
|
Atlanta
|
82 | 35 | 34 | 13 | 83 |
|
Carolina
|
82 | 35 | 37 | 10 | 80 |
|
Tampa Bay
|
82 | 34 | 36 | 12 | 80 |
|
Florida
|
82 | 32 | 37 | 13 | 77 |
(updated 4.12.2010 at 9:21 AM EDT)
The Vault
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- In which former NHL coach Ken Hitchcock foils a shoplifter
- Montreal's Price talks new 2-year contract, expectations post-Halak
- Donald Fehr aware of Kovalchuk drama, mum on everything else
- Puck Headlines: Savard's agent rants on Bettman; Halak in Montreal
- Boudreau, Crawford placed on the coaching hot seat
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
