Nuge Still in Calder Conversation

I think most of us felt that RNH’s games lost meant his chances  of winning the Calder were dashed: after all, there’s a rookie in NJ (Henrique), another in Philly (Read) and the best forward of the bunch this year is in Colorado (Landeskog). However, the Nuge keeps adding points to his resume and is still in the conversation.

That’s a nice looking list of rookies, it really is. Landeskog is the guy who’ll win the Calder, but Henrique is right there too and the Nuge is posting tremendous PP numbers  to stay in the race. His 22 PP points tower over Craig Smith’s 13–defender Justin Faulk has 11 and should get lots of Calder consideration–and RNH has all kinds of skills that will allow him to impact the game.

The Oilers have never had a rookie of the year, although a conspiracy tale about that fact would read like a Stephen King novel. RNH–despite missing 20 games–is still worth considering for the rookie award. A strong finish might improve his standing, but  I think Landeskog will carry the day.

written by

The author didn‘t add any Information to his profile yet.
Related Posts

90 Responses to "Nuge Still in Calder Conversation"

  1. Wolfie says:

    There wouldn’t even be a discussion had RNH been able to avoid injury. I like Landeskog but nobody in the conversation has impacted their club quite like the Nuge.

  2. pboy says:

    I agree Landeskog is going to get the Calder but only becuase of RNH’s missed games. I’m guessing there would have been a 15+ point differential if RNH was healthy the whole season. I was at the game yesterday and I was blown away at how hard the Motor City Madmen can wrist the puck. The goal he scored was behind the goalie before he even thought of reacting.

  3. Bar_Qu says:

    The thing which will justify the vote for Landeskog in many minds is the truculence he brings to the game. RNH is a better player, easily, but Landeskog getting into a dust-up with Regehr will stick in a lot of voter’s heads.

  4. tubes says:

    Holy homers. Landeskog is +19 and plays against tough competition. Better all around player right now too imo. RNH plays with great teammates and they get eaten alive by good comp. Did you guys not see Landeskog’s slapshot shelf overtime winner the other night? Unreal. Don’t get me wrong – RNH will put up more points in the league but that power forward who can score will win the Calder unless RNH can put up 2 pts/game the rest of the way.

  5. knighttown says:

    A few comments:

    - Schultz with #4 D minutes so a little more reasonable. Played over 19 minutes and Potter and Peckham were in the 16′s. What I really liked was reducing Whitney’s minutes down to 20 and change. Only Petry played over 23.
    -Obviously clean slates for everybody on the D but the white hats (58, 5, 15, 25) posted another +3. Black hats were at +1 thanks to a +1 for 6 and clean slates from Peckham and Potter. New tally, white hats +9/black hats -14 since the Calgary blow out. The big three seem to be able to stay above water againt anyone and Sutton can hold his own as the #6. I think I really would consider opening the vault for Suter.
    -Columbus is fucking terrible.
    -I think Tom Renney only has one lineup card and just scratches players in and out as needed. If you play 1LW you play 19 minutes in all situations no matter your name. What else could explain Ryan Jones playing the 2nd most minutes of any forward in all situations including obviously PK but also inexplicably, PP and 4-on-4?
    -Columbus is fucking terrible.

  6. Wolfie says:

    Tubes it’s not homerism. I’m willing to bet Colorado would trade Landeskog straight up for Nugent-Hopkins but the Oilers would not.

  7. pboy says:

    knighttown: A few comments:- Schultz with #4 D minutes so a little more reasonable. Played over 19 minutes and Potter and Peckham were in the 16′s. What I really liked was reducing Whitney’s minutes down to 20 and change. Only Petry played over 23.-Obviously clean slates for everybody on the D but the white hats (58, 5, 15, 25) posted another +3. Black hats were at +1 thanks to a +1 for 6 and clean slates from Peckham and Potter. New tally, white hats +9/black hats -14 since the Calgary blow out. The big three seem to be able to stay above water againt anyone and Sutton can hold his own as the #6. I think I really would consider opening the vault for Suter.-Columbus is fucking terrible.-I think Tom Renney only has one lineup card and just scratches players in and out as needed. If you play 1LW you play 19 minutes in all situations no matter your name. What else could explain Ryan Jones playing the 2nd most minutes of any forward in all situations including obviously PK but also inexplicably, PP and 4-on-4?-Columbus is fucking terrible.

    I was at the game last night and I paid alot of attention to Schultz’s game. You almost don’t notice the guy very much becuase his game is very calm and he doesn’t make things any harder than they need to be. Very steady, exactly what we needed back there. V.035 needs to find 2 more like this guy.

    I thought Peckham was terrible again. He just has no idea what to do with the puck at all and when he has the puck, it’s like he’s stickhandling a grenade. I know that defenceman take alot longer to develop but I don’t think Peckham has the hockey IQ to stick in the NHL for a long career.

    Columbus is fucking terrible. Nash was completely disinterested the whole game and no one on their team looked like they wanted anything other than the game to be over as quickly as possible. I’ll be amazed if Howson retains his job there.

  8. BlacqueJacque says:

    No posts about how Renney’s reaching the end of his rope today, LT?

    Thought not.

  9. "Steve Smith" says:

    tubes,

    I agree. I have nothing bad to say about Nugent-Hopkins, but there are precious few arguments for him to win the Calder over Landeskog. I’m not ready to say that we picked the wrong player, but the Swede’s had the better rookie season, even if you adjust for injury.

  10. "Steve Smith" says:

    BlacqueJacque,

    Oh, good Lord.

  11. Lowetide says:

    BJ: Sure, everything’s fine with Renney. No contract, 12 games left. Hunky freaking Dory. I don’t think he should be gassed, but also believe there’s enough evidence that they could justify a change.

    The problem for the Oilers is that they keep firing coaches. Not good.

  12. TheOtherJohn says:

    Wolfie

    Expect if you were GM of Colorado with Dechene and Stasny, you would not think of trading Landeskog for RNH. I like the Nuge alot but if you already had good centers GL is a very nice piece of the puzzle. +19, physical, etc

    To have a balanced roster the Oil should have a good sized 2C to balance RNH out on top 6

    Blacque do you actually think beating CBJ has anything to do with Renney job security? at all?

  13. danny says:

    Points per game
    RNH – 0.86
    LDK – 0.63

    Points per 60
    RNH – 2.95
    LDK – 2.07

    Landeskog has played 156 mins of PP time.
    Hopkins has played 158 mins.

    Landeskog has been an ES force, but RNH has been a PP wizard.

    Two great players doing amazing things at a young age, and regardless of who wins the Calder (they both deserve it) MacGregor made the correct pick by a mile.

  14. pboy says:

    Organizations in any sport never let the coaches get this deep into a season without an extension. They don’t do this with the General Manager either. I think it’s fair to say there are going to be big changes at HQ’s this season. At least one change but I think we will have a new GM and a new Head Coach at the draft.

  15. cabbiesmacker says:

    The scouts had it pretty close predraft when they said GL was probably the most NHL ready but RNH had more elite upside. Time will tell of course but hey, good on the Av’s for taking their kid #2 when a lot of lists had him at 4 and lower. He fits their needs perfectly.

    It’ll be interesting to see how Huberdeau and Strome fare the next couple of years in comparison.

    The most pleasant surprise for me re RNH’s game is his D awareness and willingness to go into traffic and fight for possession along the boards. Even throws the odd bodycheck to separate the opponent from the puck.

    It’ll be a pleasure watching him the next few years.

  16. Clay says:

    I also agree that Landeskog wins the Calder, but when an 18 year old kid is the direct cause for the second worst team in the league to have the #1 ranked PP, that’s an amazing accomplishment.

    He was scoring at a .921 PPG clip when he was injured. I don’t care what Landeskog’s +/- is or the amount of truculence he brings – had RNH stayed healthy, it would’ve been a one-horse Calder race this year, and it wouldn’t have been close.

  17. Captain Obvious says:

    I like how people quote Hopkins power play production as if that were a positive. In the overall context of evaluating a player power play production is a pretty large negative because given a fixed quantity of production the converse of being good at the power play is being bad at even strength.

    At even strength, and considering only this year, Landeskog has been a far superior player to Hopkins. This is undeniable. Now, what the future holds, I have no idea. And, obviously, Hopkins has had a good year for an 18 year old player, but right now Landeskog is the better hockey player.

    The hype surrounding Hopkins is interesting. A while back the TSN panel ranked Stamkos, Tavares, Hall, and Hopkins in terms of which you would rather have (or something like that) and Hopkins was near the top for everyone while Hall was near the bottom. I think that is crazy. Stamkos, Tavares, and Hall are stars in the league right now. Hopkins isn’t in their league but your average Edmonton fan doesn’t know that. My fearless prediction is that Hall is the one that ends up being run out of town. It came up in my beer league dressing room. The guys were criticizing Hall, talking about his big stick, and how he shoot more. I had the temerity to suggest that Hall was a much better player than Eberle and that it wasn’t even close. They looked at me in shock and said, “you’re right, it isn’t even close.”

  18. Captain Obvious says:

    Oh yeah, Columbus is fucking terrible. The consolation for Oilers fans is that despite the bungling there is a lot of talent on the Oilers. Columbus has nothing. What a wasteland. So that makes two teams that are so bad and run so horribly that the Oilers won’t be worse than them for a long time (Montreal is the other).

  19. cabbiesmacker says:

    Captain Obvious:

    At even strength, and considering only this year, Landeskog has been a far superior player to Hopkins.This is undeniable.

    Oh for sure. Landeskog running that 1/100th point better per 60 mins of 5×5 clearly makes him superior at even strength. Case closed

  20. FastOil says:

    i have to agree with Tubes, SS and CO. Landeskog’s season has been amazing, to hit the level of complete game he has in his first year. I think they should trade Jones for him.

  21. Captain Obvious says:

    cabbiesmacker: Oh for sure. Landeskog running that 1/100th point better per 60 mins of 5×5 clearly makes him superior at even strength. Case closed

    Do you believe these words? It seems impossible.

  22. gogliano says:

    Landeskog is the more conventional player right now but I think you need an irrational bias against PP production (yes, most of the game is EV, but PP points still count) to not recognize that what RNH has done on the PP has been historic. The EDM powerplay has suffered for decades and an 18-year old fixed it. Let that sink in.

    Landeskog should win it for sustaining really splendid play over a full season but if we play that draft over I don’t think there is any doubt that RNH comes out on top no matter who is drafting first. And sure, Hall is the better player; that doesn’t discount RNH’s accomplishments.

  23. DSF says:

    P/60 5V5 Rookies (MIN 40 games)

    Hagelin – 2.45

    Read – 2.25

    Couturier – 2.03

    Henrique 2.00

    Landeskog – 1.81

    Adam – 1.84

    Hopkins – 1.80

    Hodgson – 1.74

    Smith – 1.50

    Greening – 1.46

    PTS. Home/Road

    Hopkins – 30H/13R

    Landeskog – 21H/25R

    Pretty obvious that Hopkins is a PP specialist who benefits from extreme sheltering at home and is very average on the road.

    That Landeskog can put up a +19 while playing the toughest competition amongst all Colorado forwards on a team with a goal differential of -2 is nothing short of amazing.

    Landeskog is the full meal deal.

  24. cabbiesmacker says:

    Captain Obvious: Do you believe these words?It seems impossible.

    I’m after BTN to change things up as we speak.

    Shall we review things in 2 years?

    The only aspect of the game I see GL clearly ahead in is the physical side and that was never in question.

    BTW I like GL just fine too. I was onside with the Oilers taking him with the #1 OV 5 months before the draft.

    Apples and oranges dude.

  25. speeds says:

    I’ll be the first to say Pitlick was the guy I’d have taken 31st OV at the time, in the 2010 draft, but Faulk (selected 37th OV) would be a nice player for the Oilers to have.

    Do you remember what you thought of Faulk at the time, LT?

  26. Captain Obvious says:

    cabbiesmacker,

    He’s massively ahead in the whole scoring more goals than you give up thing. In short, winning. As to the future, I make no claims but right now he is a better hockey player than Hopkins. That’s a fact. In hockey there is no apples and oranges there is only winning and losing.

    Also, Carl Hagelin is having an unbelievable year.

  27. cabbiesmacker says:

    cabbiesmacker:

    Landeskog is the full meal deal.

    And Hopkins is a slug. Got it.

    Maybe if he was on the Van PP the last few games the ol record wouldn’t be 2-4? Henrik, ( sorry, Mary-Kate) has not had a good March by his standards

  28. DSF says:

    cabbiesmacker: And Hopkins is a slug. Got it.

    Maybe if he was on the Van PP the last few games the ol record wouldn’t be 2-4? Henrik, ( sorry, Mary-Kate) has not had a good March by his standards

    There are other options.

    Hopkins is a sublime player but Landeskog is the type of player who wins hockey games.

  29. Traktor says:

    My fearless prediction is that Hall is the one that ends up being run out of town.It came up in my beer league dressing room.The guys were criticizing Hall, talking about his big stick, and how he shoot more.I had the temerity to suggest that Hall was a much better player than Eberle and that it wasn’t even close.They looked at me in shock and said, “you’re right, it isn’t even close.”

    cool story bro

  30. cabbiesmacker says:

    Captain Obvious:
    cabbiesmacker,

    He’s massively ahead in the whole scoring more goals than you give up thing.In short, winning.As to the future, I make no claims but right now he is a better hockey player than Hopkins.That’s a fact.In hockey there is no apples and oranges there is only winning and losing.
    Also, Carl Hagelin is having an unbelievable year.

    I hear ya dude but Landeskog also gets to play on a team with a superior defence to RNH’s and much better depth overall.

    O’Reilly and Hejduk as #1 linemates hasn’t hurt his numbers either.

    Agreed on Hagelin. If he’d played more games he might be the Calder favorite.

    It means very little Calder wise but Couturier’s performance on the PK over the course of the year is pretty nice too. Thats a kid being brought along slowly.

  31. cabbiesmacker says:

    DSF: There are other options.

    Hopkins is a sublime player but Landeskog is the type of player who wins hockey games.

    No big arguments DSF but lets revisit the whole who’s better in a year or three ok? If I was betting on which of the two was more likely to post 80 per season on a consistent basis I’d go with RNH. That might win you a few games as well. The whole “on-ice situations” is moot to a degree. If a player is making the most of his opps who really gives a rats patoot?

    Oh and BTW..you’re talking to a fan of the Blackhawks on a par with the Oilers. If we’re talking anything but Jonny Toews I’m not really listening that hard. Hope to see a rematch of our teams this playoffs.

  32. gogliano says:

    Interesting that RNH and Landeskog have the same P/60 5X5, I hadn’t noticed that; he is doing better 5×5 than I thought. Can’t wait until he fills out a little and has a full season.

  33. Ducey says:

    I like how people quote Hopkins power play production as if that were a positive. In the overall context of evaluating a player power play production is a pretty large negative because given a fixed quantity of production the converse of being good at the power play is being bad at even strength.

    At even strength, and considering only this year, Landeskog has been a far superior player to Hopkins. This is undeniable. Now, what the future holds, I have no idea. And, obviously, Hopkins has had a good year for an 18 year old player, but right now Landeskog is the better hockey player.

    What?

    RHN and Landeskog are at the same rate of production at evens.

    Overall, RNH has 43 pts in 50 games (.86 ppg) and Landy has 46 pts in 72 games (.638 ppg).

    I am having some trouble understanding how Landeskog is so much better at production when he doesn’t produce as much.

  34. nathan says:

    Deceptive Statistic Feed,

    Uniquely for you, you actually cherry-picked statistics to undercut your point.

    EV/60

    Landeskog – 1.81
    Hopkins – 1.80

    Huge difference there. Any chance we can break that virtual tie with all world Powerplay results?

    But I don’t need to get my jollies by knocking talent. Quite happy to say Landeskog is a full meal deal. I’d be happy to see him or 93 with the Calder at this point. And beyond the Calder as well, these guys looks heads above the other forwards in their class.

    But a full meal deal isn’t always the best meal. A full season at a ppg clip? Near worst power play into best? 93 almost ran away with the Calder.

  35. DSF says:

    cabbiesmacker: No big arguments DSF but lets revisit the whole who’s better in a year or three ok? If I was betting on which of the two was more likely to post 80 per season on a consistent basis I’d go with RNH. That might win you a few games as well.

    Oh and BTW..you’re talking to a fan of the Blackhawks on a par with the Oilers. If we’re talking anything but Jonny Toews I’m not really listening that hard. Hope to see a rematch of our teams this playoffs.

    If you put up 80 points and give up 85 you’re spinning your wheels.

    Don’t think either Chicago or Vancouver will be able to handle STL in the playoffs.

  36. danny says:

    People didnt even expect RNH to be able to play in the NHL this year. He’s ahead of the curve. He’s a ‘full meal deal’ so to speak.

    RNH was picked based on his potential more than his ability to win the calder this year. The fact that Landeskog is having a monster season and RNH is even in the picture says enough about a 165 pound wunderkind. The guy was 7th overall in NHL scoring before he injured his shoulder.

    Watching the guy play is a treat. He is of rare ilk, like a Pavel Datsyuk. Hes probably going to be the kinda guy his peers look at and tip their hat to, the best of the best.

    No slight to Landeskog whatsoever, wonderful player in his own right. Amazing season to date. I still draft RNH six ways to sunday though.

  37. Dominoiler says:

    I dont see why a pro-skog post has to necessitate a hopkins bash..
    Landeskog, to my eye, has become the leader of that colorado team, which plays in the ‘same league’ as the oilers, and posts a +19.. to go along with decent offensive numbers..

    I also believe that if Hopkins also had a full season at a consistent scoring pace, then he would have been the run away ROY.. like someone said, if RNH posts 2pts/g the rest of the way then its worth revisiting..

  38. UndisclosedPersonalReasons says:

    Did anyone catch the interview between Gregor and Smytty on 1260 yesterday? Gregor asked Smytty a few questions about the contract talks but Smytty didn’t reveal much. however, right after he played the interview, Gregor said that he spoke to Smytty off the air and it sounded like the deal was going to be two years 5-5.5 mil.

    Any word on this?

    If that’s the deal or close to it, I’m not a fan.

  39. Dominoiler says:

    Who would trade horcoff for landeskog?!.. haha..
    (Just kidding around, contrasting the captains)

  40. ASkoreyko says:

    DSF: If you put up 80 points and give up 85 you’re spinning your wheels.

    Don’t think either Chicago or Vancouver will be able to handle STL in the playoffs.

    This from the guy who just yesterday said the following:

    DSF: Or maybe he scored a lot on the PP and it doesn’t count in +-

    Oh, wait…he did.

    You can’t have it both ways sir.

  41. DSF says:

    nathan:
    Deceptive Statistic Feed,

    Uniquely for you, you actually cherry-picked statistics to undercut your point.

    EV/60

    Landeskog – 1.81
    Hopkins – 1.80

    Huge difference there. Any chance we can break that virtual tie with all world Powerplay results?

    But I don’t need to get my jollies by knocking talent. Quite happy to say Landeskog is a full meal deal.I’d be happy to see him or 93 with the Calder at this point. And beyond the Calder as well, these guys looks heads above the other forwards in their class.

    But a full meal deal isn’t always the best meal. A full season at a ppg clip? Near worst power play into best?93 almost ran away with the Calder.

    As you can see, I didn’t cherry pick anything although I can see you chose to ignore that Hopkins can’t score much on the road.

    Thing is, even with easy competition and 64.6% Off Zone starts, (Landeskog 55%) Hopkins is giving up more than he’s scoring at evens.

    Hopkins:
    GFON/60 5V5 – 2.70
    GAON/60 5V5 – 2.79

    Landeskog:
    GFON/60 5V5 – 2.90
    GAON/60 5V5 – 1.99

    No doubt Hopkins is superior on the PP at home but that’s a pretty limited skill set.

    It should also be noted that Landeskog is second among forwards on the Avalanche in shorthanded TOI/G while Hopkins doesn’t PK at all.

    Landeskog also doesn’t get anywhere near the PP time that Hopkins does. He ranks 6th among Colorado forwards at 2:09/G while Hopkins is first among Oiler forwards at 3:09/G.

  42. bookje says:

    Lowetide:
    BJ: Sure, everything’s fine with Renney. No contract, 12 games left. Hunky freaking Dory. I don’t think he should be gassed, but also believe there’s enough evidence that they could justify a change.

    The problem for the Oilers is that they keep firing coaches. Not good.

    I think you are missing BJ’s point, he is making the logical argument that the reason Renney will be fired is because of your post. YOU have caused Renney to be fired. I hope you feel good next year when you see Renney outside playing his plastic pails for money!!

  43. DSF says:

    ASkoreyko: This from the guy who just yesterday said the following:

    You can’t have it both ways sir.

    Sure I can.

    You need to look at all aspects of a player’s game when assessing his success/failure.

    See above.

  44. danny says:

    DSF:
    Landeskog also doesn’t get anywhere near the PP time that Hopkins does. He ranks 6th among Colorado forwards at 2:09/G while Hopkins is first among Oiler forwards at 3:09/G.

    Landeskog has played 153 mins on the PP this season, Hopkins has played 156 mins. The only thing that stat reveals, is that one player is considered a better powerplay guy than the other.

  45. bookje says:

    DSF: There are other options.

    Hopkins is a sublime player but Landeskog is the type of player who wins hockey games.

    Hey, why don’t you and woodguy make a bet about who gets more points over thier career. I look forward to 20 or so years of daily updates.

  46. DSF says:

    bookje: Hey, why don’t you and woodguy make a bet about who gets more points over thier career.I look forward to 20 or so years of daily updates.

    Hahaha…

    Brown-10 Hemsky-2

    Thanks for asking.

    I would think Hopkins will score more points than Landeskog in his career (if he stays healthy, which will be a concern) but as all prudent readers of LT’s site will attest, counting numbers don’t tell the whole story.

  47. cabbiesmacker says:

    DSF: If you put up 80 points and give up 85 you’re spinning your wheels.
    Don’t think either Chicago or Vancouver will be able to handle STL in the playoffs.

    He’s a kid DSF. Playing with kids, in front of mediocre goaltending, a shite defence, and little depth for forwards. Do you really believe with his already decent defensive acumen that he’ll be giving up more than he puts up in the future? Cmon dude. Your’e reaching.

    My biggest problem with the whole +- stat is a good player can take his lumps because he happens to be on the ice with 5 shitty ones at the time. If we’re talking tennis or golf I have no problems with stats being the beat all and end all. When you use them to wholly define a player when there are 11 other players on a playing surface at the same time who can cause variances, in a game as fast as hockey with a constant ebb and flow of individuals during the course of play, things can go awry.

    Thats not a stats slam by any means. They are useful taken within context. Some very good hockey players have never won Stanley Cups. Some very shitty ones have won multiples. Can’t say that in golf or tennis.

  48. cabbiesmacker says:

    bookje: Hey, why don’t you and woodguy make a bet about who gets more points over thier career.

    On a per games played basis or just totals? Cough….

  49. cabbiesmacker says:

    Sorry. That should have read 11 other “event contributors” at the same time……

  50. cabbiesmacker says:

    Ducey

    I wasn’t really getting the denial either. 1/100th difference????

  51. pboy says:

    cabbiesmacker: He’s a kid DSF. Playing with kids, in front of mediocre goaltending, a shite defence, and little depth for forwards. Do you really believe with his already decent defensive acumen that he’ll be giving up more than he puts up in the future? Cmon dude. Your’e reaching.My biggest problem with the whole +- stat is a good player can take his lumps because he happens to be on the ice with 5 shitty ones at the time. If we’re talking tennis or golf I have no problems with stats being the beat all and end all. When you use them to wholly define a player when there are 11 other players on a playing surface at the same time who can cause variances, in a game as fast as hockey with a constant ebb and flow of individuals during the course of play, things can go awry. Thats not a stats slam by any means. They are useful taken within context. Some very good hockey players have never won Stanley Cups. Some very shitty ones have won multiples. Can’t say that in golf or tennis.

    Well done.

  52. oilersfan says:

    The deal Gregor was talking about with Smyth was 5.5 over two years, so 2.75 per. I think that would be good for the Oilers.

    As for Landeskog, last year Gregor had the head scout from Colorado on and Gregor asked him who they were picking second overall. The head scout laughed and said “i won’t tell you that but I will tell you that if RNH is available we will pick him”. They both laughed but i remember it because I was surprised that RNH had become the consensus pick despite quite a bit of bickering about it locally.

    Despite Landsekog playing well lately I don’t think there is any doubt that RNH has the higher ceiling, and that he produces more offence when he plays, because despite what total pricks like DSF don’t mention, power play goals count towards winning hockey games.

  53. DSF says:

    cabbiesmacker: He’s a kid DSF. Playing with kids, in front of mediocre goaltending, a shite defence, and little depth for forwards. Do you really believe with his already decent defensive acumen that he’ll be giving up more than he puts up in the future? Cmon dude. Your’e reaching.

    My biggest problem with the whole +- stat is a good player can take his lumps because he happens to be on the ice with 5 shitty ones at the time. If we’re talking tennis or golf I have no problems with stats being the beat all and end all. When you use them to wholly define a player when there are 11 other players on a playing surface at the same time who can cause variances, in a game as fast as hockey with a constant ebb and flow of individuals during the course of play, things can go awry.

    Thats not a stats slam by any means. They are useful taken within context. Some very good hockey players have never won Stanley Cups. Some very shitty ones have won multiples. Can’t say that in golf or tennis.

    Oh, I think he’ll be a fine player but I think you’re selling Landeskog short when you make excuses for Hopkins.

    Colorado’s goaltending isn’t much better than the Oilers and the Avalanche (26.4) are actually a younger team than the Oilers. (27.0).

    I’m also not sure you can point to a defense that includes such luminaries as Shane O’Brien, Ryan O’Byrne, Ryan Wilson and Matt Hunwick as being much of a step up from the Oilers’ although Erik Johnson looks like a keeper.

    Remember Landeskog is “just a kid” too (5 months older than Hopkins) and give the kid his due.

  54. ASkoreyko says:

    DSF,

    So Joe Sakic was given a pass for his terrible +/- (worst +/- on the team in his rookie season) his first few years in the league while RNH will be held fully accountable and judged for his slightly below average play at evens in his rookie year?

    When +/- was brought up as a negative for Sakic you dismissed it easily. It is brought up for RNH (with numbers that are far better) and you immediately condemn him.

    It has always been clear you have a narrative to your posting, I just wonder how it doesn’t get old.

  55. Bar_Qu says:

    This discussion is being handled as well as Ryan Jones handles a puck (lately, anyways).

    Landeskog likely to win. Good for him and the Av’s.

    RNH will make it close, and we Oilers fans will be left wondering ‘what if’ at the end of the season.

    I dunno why any of you respond to that nonsense. Really.

  56. Woodguy says:

    DSF,

    I’m always hesitant to post GAON/60 without also posting SV%ON.

    The only player who can control on SV%ON is the goalie. It has been shown that all skaters have a negligible effect on it.

    RNH
    GAON/60 5V5 – 2.79
    5v5 Shots Against/60 26.8
    ONSV% .906

    Landeskog:
    GAON/60 5V5 – 1.99
    5v5 Shots Against/60 24.9
    ONSV% .926

    So the difference in what they are giving up in terms of shots is 2/60, and the difference in GA.60 is mostly ONSV% driven.

    In terms of generating shots, Landeskog comes out ahead.

    RNH

    5v5 Shot for/60 25.6

    Landeskog

    5v5 Shots for/60 32.9

    Given that Landeskog is playing much tougher comp, I think the nod thisyear goes to him as the more complete player.

    I think RNH is doing great as well. I agree with Hitchcock that he has a very Datsuykian game and glad he’s on the team I cheer for, for the next 6 years at least, hopefully more.

  57. Bos8 says:

    Ah, come n. Jones now provides comic relief in both directions. That two on one, he faked out both teams and himsel,f then did his normal was sublime.. That was a hi lite right there. Better than a Horcoff, Oops, open net, by far.

  58. Ducey says:

    cabbiesmacker: DuceyI wasn’t really getting the denial either. 1/100th difference????

    Yeah. You multiply Nuge’s ppg by 82 and you get 70 pts. Landsekog is at a 52 pts / full season pace. You have to get pretty excited about the +/- to like the guy scoring 52 over the guy who would get 70.

    Pat Kane won the Calder a few years ago with 72 pts. Nuge’s season is a bit of “what if”, but thats still a good comparison in my mind.

  59. bendelson says:

    I’m not going to debate who is going to be better in 5 years but will say that Landeskog is having a very good all round rookie campaign. That being said, I fully expect RNH to win the rookie scoring race. Whether that translates to rookie of the year or not…

  60. Ducey says:

    And to be clear, I don’t have a problem with Landeskog winning the Calder given the fact he has stayed healthy. I do think Nuge is, and will be, the better player.

  61. DSF says:

    Woodguy:
    DSF,

    I’m always hesitant to post GAON/60 without also posting SV%ON.

    The only player who can control on SV%ON is the goalie.It has been shown that all skaters have a negligible effect on it.

    RNH
    GAON/60 5V5 – 2.79
    5v5 Shots Against/60 26.8
    ONSV% .906

    Landeskog:
    GAON/60 5V5 – 1.99
    5v5 Shots Against/60 24.9
    ONSV% .926

    So the difference in what they are giving up in terms of shots is 2/60, and the difference in GA.60 is mostly ONSV% driven.

    In terms of generating shots, Landeskog comes out ahead.

    RNH

    5v5 Shot for/60 25.6

    Landeskog

    5v5 Shots for/60 32.9

    Given that Landeskog is playing much tougher comp, I think the nod thisyear goes to him as the more complete player.

    I think RNH is doing great as well. I agree with Hitchcock that he has a very Datsuykian game and glad he’s on the team I cheer for, for the next 6 years at least, hopefully more.

    No argument from me other than a player can have an affect on shots against with better defensive play.

    We’ll have to see how Hopkins fares against tougher competition and if he can score on the road before we get a more complete picture.

    On other thing I’ve noticed about Landeskog is the phenomenal number of SOG he takes.

    He has 240 SOG (13th in the NHL) compared to Hopkins 102…you Corsi boys must be impressed :)

  62. stevezie says:

    Captain Obvious,

    A wise man once reminded us all that a point goal by a little guy is worth the same as a goal from a big guy, isn’t the same true of pp/ev goals?

    Of course, this only holds once players are already in the big leagues. Being dominant on a jr PP is not the same thing as producing anything in the NHL..

  63. Woodguy says:

    DSF,

    No argument from me other than a player can have an affect on shots against with better defensive play.

    No question a player can affect shots against.

    Its ONSV% that they have no influence over.

    I’ve actually been talking to Gabe Desjardin about Shots Against/60.

    I bribed him into making a spread sheet that shows Expected Shots Against vs Actual Shots against.

    The Expected shots against takes the aggregate of all your competitors SH/60 and then usings TOI against, comes up with ExpSA/60.

    He had to do this only for the road games, since NJD shot counter is way lower than the rest of the league and it throws all the info out of whack.

    Players in the Central Division who play a lot against DET and CHI come out near the top of this measure since they face a lot more shots than the average NHLer.

    The results of whose ExpSA/60 are higher than actual correlate very well with the QC numbers, according to Gabe.

    He has 240 SOG (13th in the NHL) compared to Hopkins 102…you Corsi boys must be impressed

    Toughest Comp, Best Help, comes out waaaay ahead with a RelCo +15

    The guy’s a fancy stat wet dream for a rookie. Great player.

    A lot like Hall actually.

  64. DSF says:

    ASkoreyko:
    DSF,

    So Joe Sakic was given a pass for his terrible +/- (worst +/- on the team in his rookie season) his first few years in the league while RNH will be held fully accountable and judged for his slightly below average play at evens in his rookie year?

    No one was giving Sakic a “pass” for his +- on that terrible team. (-73 goal differential)

    Worth noting that in 1989/90 Sakic was -40 and some guy named Peter Statsny was -45.

    Also worth noting is that the Nordiques’ top goaltender that season was Ron Tuggnut who finished the season with a sparkling .859 SV%.

    That was a really bad hockey team.

    When +/- was brought up as a negative for Sakic you dismissed it easily. It is brought up for RNH (with numbers that are far better) and you immediately condemn him.

    It has always been clear you have a narrative to your posting, I just wonder how it doesn’t get old.

  65. cabbiesmacker says:

    DSF:

    Colorado’s goaltending isn’t much better than the Oilers and the Avalanche (26.4) are actually a younger team than the Oilers. (27.0).

    Stop knitting grandma. We both know Colorado has more talent and depth than the Oilers today and last I looked Ryan Nugent Hopkins wasn’t putting in big minutes on a line with Smyth, Khabibulin, Horcoff, Sutton, and Belanger. Sheesh.

    There are days when heading down to Rona, slapping my head in a paint can shaker and turning the switch on high would result in less discombobulation

  66. nathan says:

    Just leave Granny to knit nuck blankeys since she’s not interested in the reality based community where great players can play anywhere.

  67. Captain Obvious says:

    stevezie:
    Captain Obvious,

    A wise man once reminded us all that a point goal by a little guy is worth the same as a goal from a big guy, isn’t the same true of pp/ev goals?

    Of course, this only holds once players are already in the big leagues. Being dominant on a jr PP is not the same thing as producing anything in the NHL..

    My two arguments are exactly the same. Giving credit to Nugent-Hopkins for his powerplay abilities in the context of him being almost a ppg player is doublecounting because he’s almost a ppg player precisely because of his power play abilities.

    I’m pretty surprised by the fanboy treatment of Hopkins here. I don’t think Landoskog is a better player right now than Hopkins because his +/- is better. I think he is better because he crushes (and I mean crushes) Hopkins on the underlying numbers. If you think the underlying numbers are meaningful the only rational conclusion is that Landoskog is the better player right now. If you don’t think the underlying numbers are meaningful then either you are Traktor or DSF or you are being blinded by your love.

    Now I wouldn’t trade Hopkins for Landoskog because I think there is more room for improvement but on the basis of one year’s performance the choice is as obvious as choices get.

  68. nathan says:

    Captain Obvious,

    Here’s something obvious.

    EV/60 just about tied.
    One player has a better +/-
    One player is .22 ppg better mostly due to taking his team from nearly worst to best in PP (not measured by +/-)
    Both teams improved goal differentials are currently in the 50s.

    It’s close enough even now that if either of them is points leader they could be the Calder winner.

  69. rickithebear says:

    Nathan: one is 18 and one is 19:
    The facts that follow says that it matters.

    RNH: .86PPG pace is 8th best 18 year old start in modern era.
    it is the 24th best when compared to 19 year olds right around Roenick, Sakic, Kane.
    landeskogs start is 53rd best for 19 year olds in modern era. right around Spezza, gagner, iginla

    Against historical peers. Selecting Landeskog?
    Why yes the the 8th best start is not as good as the 53rd best start.
    Christ!

  70. cabbiesmacker says:

    Captain Obvious,

    What is it about the two players being separated by 1/100th of a point per 60 minutes of 5 on 5 icetime but RNH posting twice the rate GL does per 60 on the PP leads you to assume GL is infinitely better?

    If RNH had stayed healthy and was outscoring GL by 20 pts right now would we even be having this conversation?

    Can a person commit suicide via palm sander?

  71. nathan says:

    rickithebear,

    RNH tied in Evens before we even look at his powerplay goals. That would have made your draft call easy last year. ; )

    Gotta give Landeskog credit for defensive and PK contributions. I think RNH gets the Calder if he leads points. I have RNH ahead right now.

  72. Captain Obvious says:

    nathan,

    cabbiesmacker,

    I’m not sure what you’ve said that you think is responsive to my posts. Either you think zone starts, quality of competition, and shots produced matter or you don’t. If you don’t think they matter than just say so. Right now you are behaving like DSF.

  73. nathan says:

    Captain Obvious,

    Unlike you and DSF I’m saying it’s not a obvious choice. Let’s try one more time. After that hand sanders are on the house.

    EV/60 just about tied.
    One player has a better +/- and is leading uphill (per QOC, ZS, PK)
    One player is .22 ppg better mostly due to taking his team from nearly worst to best in PP (not measured by +/-)
    Both teams improved goal differentials are currently in the 50s.
    Both players have had big roles in the goal differential improvements.

    (Shots factor in more at contract time than at awards night, sorry)

  74. Captain Obvious says:

    nathan,

    The issue is that you’ve made no attempt to weigh or distinguish these things from each other. Of these only the first three are relevant, and given the similar pts/60 numbers in an absolute sense the context of those numbers is so vastly different that it swamps the relevance of all the other data.

    It really is that simple. There is no weighing of different data here. At even strength Hopkins has been comparable to someone like Tim Connolly while Landeskog is better version of Shane Doan. No one is such a powerplay wizard that they can make up the difference between Tim Connolly and Shane Doan.

  75. BlacqueJacque says:

    Lowetide,

    Ah, my mistake. I apologize for the snark in my original post.

    I fully agree with you that the Oilers change coaches too frequently, and the signs are worrying w.r.t. Renney’s contract.

  76. gogliano says:

    On the powerplay, Hopkins has been like Gretzky and Landeskog has been like Dustin Penner. At evens, Hopkins has been comparable to whatever and Landeskog is cross between Eric Lindros and Shirokov. But no one can make up the difference between player X and WAYNE GRETZKY!!!!111ONE!

    I.e., I think your method of reasoning is suspect.

  77. nathan says:

    gogliano,

    Warn me to put the hand sander in a safe place before you cut up so good ; )

    Captain Obvious,

    Goal differential above replacement for PP, EV, and PK would be interesting if any one seriously wants to add up unlike things. In the meantime you’re offering an unproved thesis and not seriously looking beyond evens (Look at the Sedins weak zone starts and pp contributions recently?). We used to call that the RTB fallacy, but he’s smarter than the average bear when he sees tied at evens alongside the unlikes of two beautiful players with a big hand in goal differential improvements.

  78. cabbiesmacker says:

    Captain Obvious,

    Could someone call me an ambulance please. Oh and let the cat in?

  79. cabbiesmacker says:

    Captain Obvious,

    Lets revisit your original statement then let it lie for the sake of others.

    btw..I’m not quite sure what other years we could consider.

    At even strength, and considering only this year, Landeskog has been a far superior player to Hopkins. This is undeniable.

  80. nathan says:

    cabbiesmacker,

    the line that I responded to was:

    “the overall context of evaluating a player power play production is a pretty large negative because given a fixed quantity of production the converse of being good at the power play is being bad at even strength”

    Except of course when production at evens is already equal.

    It’s not obvious how to drag qoc and zone starts into that when they only apply to one side of the equation.

    And as much as I’d love to wave that one at the Sedins… you can’t draw that conclusion from their downhill zone starts and pp production.

    On the other sentence, far superior and undeniable don’t quite mean what he thinks (GL>RNH at evens is fine). Suddenly the whole context is AWOL.

  81. hockeyguy10 says:

    cabbiesmacker: Captain Obvious, What is it about the two players being separated by 1/100th of a point per 60 minutes of 5 on 5 icetime but RNH posting twice the rate GL does per 60 on the PP leads you to assume GL is infinitely better? If RNH had stayed healthy and was outscoring GL by 20 pts right now would we even be having this conversation? Can a person commit suicide via palm sander?

    You can,but you need a good supply of sandpaper.I would try a 50 grit.You can get it at Rona in the aisle next to the paint mixer :-)

  82. Captain Oblivious says:

    uhhh….woozle wuzzle?

  83. nathan says:

    Captain Oblivious,

    “Ladies and Gentlemen, the Klown Show has been put on hiatus for retooling.”

  84. cabbiesmacker says:

    hockeyguy10: You can,but you need a good supply of sandpaper.I would try a 50 grit.You can get it at Rona in the aisle next to the paint mixer

    I may be a tad too dizzy to get there. Might just grab 58 packs of Wrigley’s on the way out the door and try to OD on sucrose.

  85. sliderule says:

    Both RNH and Landeskog are going to be great players.

    If Landeskog hadn’t been injured last year we might have picked him.

    RNH is like Francis,Landeskog Iggy.

    Who knows who will have the better carreer.

    My vote is barring injury the center will have the best .

  86. Woodguy says:

    I, For one, am suprised that eyeglow/60 hasn’t been discussed.

  87. ebs backhand says:

    I am pretty sure DSF brought up won games/60 earlier in the day.

  88. Lowetide says:

    CACTUS!

  89. Ontarioil says:

    I think the Oilers real plan is to have RNH competing for the Calder in 2-3 years.

  90. nathan says:

    Ontarioil,

    Don’t tell anyone, but the actual plan is to collect the 1st overall forwards every year and rotate them through every position.

    The guys will really appreciate playing with real G and D annually from other non-playoff teams when Katz buys the IIHF World Championship and puts it in the new arena during NHL playoffs.

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

© Copyright - Lowetide.ca