Bio not provided
Looking at the statistics and data above I think player E would be a good fit. He can provide some secondary scoring, play on the power play, and play on the penalty kill. Also he is 27 years old which would lead me to believe he can keep up with the ever increasing pace of the game. I would put him on the third line, the PP (2nd unit), and the PK (1st unit) least. He looks to me like he could play some 2nd line minutes if needed (injuries).
While I'm at it, I would like tho thank you for all your articles. I read you every day and always find them enlightening. I usually agree with most of your analysis, only on a few occasions do I have different opinions. My only complaint (if you want to call it that) is that you sometimes downgrade players who don't have great size based upon their size. I mention this and then you go and write an article about the little Russian player in this year's development camp urging the Canes to sign him. Guess that did my complaint in.
Thanks again for all your effort. Off season would be a b_____ without your work.
1 year, 8 months ago on Choose the free agent, 2013 edition
Just my perception...The Canes are suffering because beyond Pitkanen they have no (as in none) defenseman who can or will skate the puck out of danger or up the ice. When the Canes other defensemen get the puck in our defensive zone and are pressed at all, they fumble it and/or turn it over, etc. On almost every occasion in this circumstance they stand, hesitate and look up the ice to make a long pass to a forward. Because of their ineptness, we have no offense as the forwards spend so much time getting the puck to start with, or are guarded so easily and closely up the ice because the defense of the opponent does not even have to defend against our defensemen and defend our three forwards on the ice. In a nutshell, we have defensemen who are classified as "puck movers" who cannot control the puck or move it when pressed. They are pressed easily since they are hesitant and do not skate with the puck.
Personally, other than Pitkanen it is my observation that we are playing with defensemen who are performing like bottom six defensemen with no exception. Maybe Faulk would be considered above bottom six, but this year he has been slow. This might be because of all the minutes he plays in the game, but never the less he has been slow in my estimation.
Understand, this is my perception and I hope the players make me look silly. But right now I believe any "objective" appraisal of our team would include this conclusion.
2 years ago on Carolina lays another egg in 4-1 loss to Devils
One thing I have noticed in the last two games (especially in the Washington game) is the defensemen when they recover the puck in our defensive zone did not start to skate the puck up ice. They stood flat footed and tried to make mostly unsuccessful long passes up ice. When the Canes are playing their best hockey the defensemen skate the puck up ice drawing defenders to them and then pass it off to free forwards.
2 years ago on Tampa Bay overpowers Carolina in 4-1 win
Read you every day. Really appreciate your in depth analysis. Today I want to note in particular your comments about Ryan Murphy which I agree with you. What I want to say is I was disturbed last night after the game coming home listening to "The Aftermath" on the radio. What disturbed me was comments made by John Forslund about Murphy. He commented about Ryan Murphy's lack of size. What disturbs me about this is why don't we just grade him on performance. Murphy is of essentially the same build as Karlsson of Ottawa and Karlsson was the Norris Cup winner last year. Karlsson came into the NHL at the age of 20 and no one has commented on his size. We harped on Boychuk's lack of size instead of just evaluating his efforts. No one comments on Marty St. Louis' size. I am a Forslund fan, but I find it discouraging for him to evaluate another one of our No. 1 draft picks because of size when I believe he should just evaluate him on his on-ice performance. The Murphy I saw last night was the best player on the ice. Not because he was small, but because over 60 minutes he played better than any of our other players.
2 years, 1 month ago on Terrible third period leads to Carolina's third straight loss
To me the only effective "enforcer" is a player who is a good hockey player who includes hard tenacious checking as part of his game. Players such as Neal, Ott, Lucic and the little devil Marchand. Lucic is effective when he plays tough checking hockey. When he goes into "goon" (enforcer) mode he actually is less effective as he usually does it when Boston is losing and really can't afford the penalties he takes.
2 years, 7 months ago on Do the Hurricanes really need an enforcer? | Articles/News
Good analysis. There is not much that I can add that would not just be repeating what you have already said. I think all of your points and summations are right on.
2 years, 8 months ago on Jay Harrison receives three year contract extension | Articles/News
I would go for the younger, age 28 player. His main attribute appears to be scoring which is a team need. Beyond the goals this player would score, his ability would open up the ice for the forwards playing with him and thus potentially enhance their scoring. While his Corsi is not as good as the other two, it still is not significantly much worse. You mention he has demonstrated he can play against top tier opponent players. A one or two year contract would serve the Canes well. One potential downside for this player would be he would work out very well and in one or two years you would be faced with replacing him if lost in free agency. That would also be true of the other two also.
Between Player B and C, Player B appears to be a very consistent 20 goal scorer and from your writeup and his stats he appears not to be showing his age as much as Player C. So Player B would be my second pick. I also like Player B over Player C because I place a premium on even strength goal scoring. Absent signing Player A, Player B would be a solid pickup IMO.
2 years, 8 months ago on Choose The Free Agent | Statistical Analysis
Another excellent analysis for us Canes fans. My comments are going to be brief because there is nothing missing from this article and I would just be paraphrasing you on a paragraph by paragraph basis. I don't know how you do it, but please keep us the excellent work. One thing you could do though. Write something outrageously wrong so I can disagree, pile on, make some equally outrageous retort, tout my own expertise, and otherwise distinguish myself as a true hockey fan.
Really, one thing you could do his explain how you pronounce your last name.
2 years, 8 months ago on Hurricanes Goal-Causing Errors | Statistical Analysis
Wonderful analysis. This is the first time I've ever read such an indepth analysis of goaltending performance. I am also amazed how the statistics seem to confirm what I (and I suppose some others) have observed by attending the games. For example, if I were skating down the ice with an open shot from any distance I would shoot high and hard to the glove hand on Ward. (This said, I would also do the same on Lundqvist and several other goalies.) I like the way you extended what Ward's statistics show to include relating that to the team performance in front of him.
Your article also causes me to surmise that hockey goal tender performance is one aspect of the sport that needs to be analyzed as you done to help get a real handle on who is really contributing to winning and losing games. Sometimes the basic goals against/60 minutes, save percentage and wins statistics used normally can be very misleading. For an example, Marty Turco every year was touted as having a great year when in fact he had off years when he was not so great. He would have a low goals/60 minutes and lots of wins, but would also have a low save percentage (less than 90%). This combination was brought about because he faced most of the time less than 20 shots per game and the team in front of him was strong offensively and defensively. (Note: This is not intended as a slam on Turco. It is intended to show 1)The interrelationship of one statistic to another and 2) that when you analyze hockey player performance how much it is affected by team performance. In many other sports it is not necessarily so.
Excellent work as usual. My question is How do you find the time to do this day after day? You don't need to answer. Just keep it up.
2 years, 8 months ago on A review of Carolina's goaltending | Goalie Analysis
Why the "Against Corey?" I'm not against you at all. You expend a great deal of effort to provide Canes fans with data, information and insights. I'm sure not against that. The environmental changes refers to new coaches, new line mates, line mates that were injured, etc. Anything that could possibly skew the players performance one way or the other.
Amongst many other positive attributes to your analysis, I agree with your surmise which you have reiterated many times in various articles and that is your correlation of shooting percentage to goals scored in predicting future performance.
Again, just keep writing and analyzing. If I find occasion to disagree with you I will do so. Sometimes I may throw out some of my ideas which might come across to you as disagreement, but I look as more opportunities to get feedback from you whether that feedback is in agreement with me or not.
2 years, 8 months ago on Charlotte Checkers Shot Translations | Statistical Analysis
Excellent analysis. Statistical analysis of hockey players performance to project future performance has its place and is helpful. What I would also like to see is when your analysis indicates a change in a player's performance level (i.e.; he does not perform in accordance with the projections) is what, if any, environmental changes occurred that might have caused or at least were a possible contributing factor in the change.
I also really like when your opinions and analysis are tied or related to the role a player is or was expected to perform.
I read you every day and you sure make the summer a little shorter. Keep up the great work.