Member Since
Jun 21, 2016
Favourite Team
Toronto Maple Leafs
Forum Posts
Posts per Day
Forum Threads
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 14, 2019 at 12:40
Forum: Armchair-GMDec 12, 2018 at 4:32
Forum: Armchair-GMSep 5, 2018 at 3:35
Forum: Armchair-GMAug 9, 2018 at 6:02
ok, so lots of good points and some I will never, and I'm not alone, agree with.

First, these metrics some love to reference are only good in addition to traditional evaluation. Not as the core decision making factor. Since phillyja's reply only stating these metrics then its not wrong to assume this. Based on previous years of watching both players and based on traditional stats, Polak, to the leafs, has just as much value as gudas to philly. Yes Gudas is a better player, i can admit that. But at 3.3mil would he add that much more value to torontos line up. no chance!

As for advanced metrics, sure they can be valuable, but they can't be relied on. All the stats you state, with sanhiem, with carrick etc. These are variables. Theses stats are based on way to many variables to be completely relied upon and will change team to team. No stat can say some one like gudas will succeed on the leafs. Who's in net? whos gudas passing to? who's coaching him on what to do. So, no I don't believe these metrics are so valuable they should be the base of an argument, respect can only be lost if you ignore traditional evaluations. When you compare Gudas to DeHaan you also devalue advance metrics, its just ridiculous. Any GM valuing them the same would not have a job long.

Facts are facts, Polak is not as good as Gudas but he performed better than Gudas last year for the leafs than Gudas did for Philly, granted Polaks on a better team. Also, the leafs don't need Gudas, or Polak. Their propects and style of play prove this. Thats what i was implying with my first comment, if we need a player like gudas, we may as well stick with polak and keep the cap room.
Forum: Armchair-GMAug 9, 2018 at 5:14
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>buds16</b></div><div>You replied with advanced stats as proof? first pdo is luck, so your reply has no credibility. Real stats make your reply even less relevant.

Polak. 54 GP, 2G, 10A +5 46PIMS 0.22PPG 1 MILLION
Gudas . 70GP, 2G, 14A, 0+/- 83PIMS 0.23PPG 3,350,000 MILLION


yeah thats the point lol. PDO is luck and his was way below league average. That's why they always say never sell low on someone because of their PDO. Gudas is twice the player Polak is. It doesn't take advanced stats or "counting" stats to see it. We can use a method that both sides use in the eye test. Gudas is better easily. He comes with more baggage because of the suspensions, but he's a good payer that as of right now means too much to the team to move for a 2nd round pick. If it was for a player on TOR sure, but the draft picks have little value at this point for Philly, imo. Part of the reason he had a down year is because he's usually paired with a decent puck mover. He's had the best success being with Sanheim, Streit, Del Zotto, and Medvedev. For some reason Hak like to put Manning with him for extended periods of time and it never works out great.

w/ Manning: CF% 51.52, CF%rel +1.87, xGF% 50.22 , xGF%rel -0.33
w/ Sanheim: CF% 57.11, CF%rel +7.48 , xGF% 56.87, xGF%rel +7.81

... so depending on how TOR utilizes him he'd be very effective. Pair him with a true puck mover and he could play on any pair and provide value. He didn't all of a sudden just turn bad. He makes his money by being one of the better dmen at preventing controlled entries into the zone. Last year he just stopped stepping up to people at the blue line after the suspensions which caused him to look worse than he was. it also doesn't help when he is paired with another guy like Manning.
Forum: Armchair-GMAug 9, 2018 at 5:00
Forum: Armchair-GMAug 8, 2018 at 2:11
Forum: Armchair-GMJul 4, 2018 at 1:10
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 16, 2018 at 9:48