Ottawa Senators TIDBITS & QUICK HITS!

SpezDispenser wrote:I can tell you without fancy metric numbers:

Gonchar has sucked

Methot is amazing

Gryba has been excellent

Phillips has been VERY average

Benoit has been solid

Wiercioch has been just below Benoit

The end.

Yost loves his stats. LOVES them.

SpezDispenser wrote:I can tell you without fancy metric numbers:

Gonchar has sucked

Methot is amazing

Gryba has been excellent

Phillips has been VERY average

Benoit has been solid

Wiercioch has been just below Benoit

The end.

That's pretty much what Yost wrote, backed up with numbers

Hoags wrote:

NEELY wrote:
A long article of absolute BS.

What exactly is BS in there ? It's just an article on how our roster is being used and when. There's little opinion in there.

He makes a couple of good points, like about zach smith and his struggles. However, proclaiming that zibanejad has been better than silfverberg is just wrong.

Michallica wrote:
He makes a couple of good points, like about zach smith and his struggles. However, proclaiming that zibanejad has been better than silfverberg is just wrong.

Z is playing against tougher opposition and generating more chances, Silfverberg is being sheltered more against easier opposition. They both have the same numbers (6 pts) yet Mika has played less games.

Better is a strong, loaded word but Z is doing more with less.

Michallica wrote:

Hoags wrote:

NEELY wrote:
A long article of absolute BS.

What exactly is BS in there ? It's just an article on how our roster is being used and when. There's little opinion in there.

He makes a couple of good points, like about zach smith and his struggles. However, proclaiming that zibanejad has been better than silfverberg is just wrong.

That right there is exactly it.

Flo The Action wrote:plenty of english schools in Montreal.

Unless one of the parents was educated in English in a Quenec school, the children are required to go to a French school. Or at least that's what they do with immigrants. Oh, that and if you are Native American. My application to Lindsay Place HS in Pointe Claire, back in '74 or '75 stated my nationality as "Native American" and language spoken at home was "Other". True story. I think my parents still have one of the carbon copies.

Of course Cole could afford to send his kids to private school.

Hoags wrote:

NEELY wrote:
A long article of absolute BS.

What exactly is BS in there?

I don't see much BS, if any. He's just using numbers to explain what's going on.

Over the top? Sure.

Trying to sound like a know it all? Maybe.

Hoags wrote:

Michallica wrote:
He makes a couple of good points, like about zach smith and his struggles. However, proclaiming that zibanejad has been better than silfverberg is just wrong.

Z is playing against tougher opposition and generating more chances, Silfverberg is being sheltered more against easier opposition. They both have the same numbers (6 pts) yet Mika has played less games.

Better is a strong, loaded word but Z is doing more with less.

Haha it amazes me how people can determine who is "tougher" competition through stats. It's actually laughable because there is no way of determining how well or how poorly your competition plays on any given night, despite the fact(s) that some players are given very specialized roles that are impossible to determine with numbers. Also, it doesn't tell you how well or how poorly a player that you are playing with is playing.

It's a crock and anyone that actually uses these statistics for anything other than a fantasy team is on crack. That includes forming a very ignorant opinion.

shabbs wrote:

Hoags wrote:

NEELY wrote:
A long article of absolute BS.

What exactly is BS in there?

I don't see much BS, if any. He's just using numbers to explain what's going on.

Over the top? Sure.

Trying to sound like a know it all? Maybe.

Using numbers to determine how well or poorly someone is playing like these is BS. If that was the case a computer could be a GM.

LeKing wrote:I know quite a lot of people who don't speak french in here. Did they skip school?

I took French in a Montreal highschool from grade 8 through 11. Got over 85% every year. Can't speak, although I was tested to level 'C' for Reading Comprehension and Written Expression. Just goes to show how screwed up the tests are. I worked with a woman at EC who did her Master's degree at the U of Sherbrooke, and she could barely get a 'B' when she was tested.

NEELY wrote:

shabbs wrote:

Hoags wrote:

NEELY wrote:
A long article of absolute BS.

What exactly is BS in there?

I don't see much BS, if any. He's just using numbers to explain what's going on.

Over the top? Sure.

Trying to sound like a know it all? Maybe.

Using numbers to determine how well or poorly someone is playing like these is BS. If that was the case a computer could be a GM.

The numbers are looking back in history, not forward. He can't do the same thing looking into the future, which is what a GM does. The decisions made by the GM and Coach produce those stats.

I'm not big on stats, and I don't think any of us here are really either. Watch, observe, learn...

And how is Silfverberg better ? Because he is 3/3 on the shootout ?

Mika has the same amount of points in less games and less ice time I think as well.

All the article is says is when Mika is on the ice he is facing tougher oppents and we are generating more shots on goal. There's a complicated explanation out there as for how they determine quality of competition.

I don't think it's bunk when at least some NHL teams use the very same stats internally. Others track their own.

Like I said better is a strong word. I wouldn't use it myself. But given that Silf is getting more leeway, better linemates and more icetime, you'd thikn he should have higher numbers ?

shabbs wrote:
The numbers are looking back in history, not forward. He can't do the same thing looking into the future, which is what a GM does. The decisions made by the GM and Coach produce those stats.

I'm not big on stats, and I don't think any of us here are really either. Watch, observe, learn...

Exactly. I don't care who Yost says is "better"(totally subjective) but I am interested in how MacLean is using our roster.

It's just food for thought, I doubt anyone makes roster decisions on this stuff.

Ev wrote:English is way harder to learn if you are from some non-English speaking country that uses romance languages, since it is unlike any other for the most part.

English pronunciation is difficult, and spelling makes absolutely no sense at all (old Russian joke was that in English you spell it Manchester, but you pronounce it Liverpool). Russian is more difficult than French. Italian has got to be one of the easiest.

NEELY wrote:Anderson could steal a series no problem.

Yep. Lalime with three shutouts in that Philly series. Mind you, he was on a sweet run. Short and sweet, as it turned out.

Hoags wrote:And how is Silfverberg better ? Because he is 3/3 on the shootout ?

Mika has the same amount of points in less games and less ice time I think as well.

All the article is says is when Mika is on the ice he is facing tougher oppents and we are generating more shots on goal. There's a complicated explanation out there as for how they determine quality of competition.

I don't think it's bunk when at least some NHL teams use the very same stats internally. Others track their own.

Like I said better is a strong word. I wouldn't use it myself. But given that Silf is getting more leeway, better linemates and more icetime, you'd thikn he should have higher numbers ?

shabbs wrote:
The numbers are looking back in history, not forward. He can't do the same thing looking into the future, which is what a GM does. The decisions made by the GM and Coach produce those stats.

I'm not big on stats, and I don't think any of us here are really either. Watch, observe, learn...

Exactly. I don't care who Yost says is "better"(totally subjective) but I am interested in how MacLean is using our roster.

It's just food for thought, No one on the planet anywhere near an NHL team makes decisions based on this.

fyp

As for Silfverberg being better than Zibanejad, it's pretty obvious and probably a big reason why it hasn't even been considered to take Silfverberg out of the lineup or sent down to Bingo vs Zibanejad. Silfverberg creates more chances on his own, creates more chances for others around him, plays a much smarter and positional game, and is just a flat out better player who has performed better at this point.

Also, how are tougher opponents determined? Is Crosby a tougher opponent Zack Smith? I know which one is more likely to shut you down. Stats are so frigging subjective it's insane and not only that people actually try to use them to either prove their opinions based on them.

Hockey is and never will be a game of stats, that's why when people were ripping on Karlsson's D last year pumping out all this garbage about PK time, plus/minus from the previous year, etc, etc, etc, I called BS just like I am calling BS on all this. It's garbage.

Hoags wrote:

NEELY wrote:
Pretty sure the playoffs are all about winning 2-1, 3-2 games... which the Sens are doing. The Sens could beat anyone in the East aside from Pitt and Boston with the lineup they have now in the 1st round.

We're barely scoring goals now, a lot harder to score in the playoffs. 3 of our last wins are shootouts which don't exist in the post season. Our PP is so bad we should just decline them.

Any decent playoff team will shut us down because there is so few players which are a legit scoring threat.

But the ones we are scoring are the ones that go in in the playoffs. We're playing desperation hockey which is how you win against higher seeded teams in the post-season.

Edit: To address your second point -- because we don't have a legit scoring threat we are tougher to defend against. Many teams, you focus on one line or one player -- hold them off the scoresheet and you win. On the Sens we have three third lines and a really tough fourth. We don't score much, but what little we do can come from anywhere.

NEELY wrote:

tim1_2 wrote:We could absolutely beat Montreal in a 7 game series. Discussion over.

Haha seriously. Not sure when the Habs became some dominate force in the East.

When the schedulers decided to give Boston 4 games in hand half way through, then threw in a snowed-out game on top of that.

tim1_2 wrote:Hoags, you're telling me Ottawa would have no chance against Montreal in the playoffs. We beat them last game with an AHL roster and our backup goalie. Yeah, it was in a shootout, but there's not telling how it would've turned out if it had been continuous OT. I also remember putting up 5 goals against them earlier in the season.

By the playoffs we'll have Spezza and Michalek back in the lineup (and EK, but you didn't hear that here), and (best goalie on the planet) tending goal.

I agree that Montreal is a good team, and would have the edge right now in a playoff series, but things will be different in a couple months.

It only went to a shootout because Neil was given a penalty that should not have been called.