Kunitz for Toews

[lucifer316]

What I see here is a guy who can create for himself and others playing with great players, versus a guy who is a complementary player to a really great player.

Toews is being his typical consistent self, scoring at just under point per game. He still has upside, but nothing is out of the ordinary for him, might as well call him Captain Consistent while we're at it. You don't have to worry about him dipping too far because he hovers around a steady number.

Kunitz on the other hand, as many have mentioned, is on pace to set career highs at the age of 33. He's shooting a ridiculous percentage of .300. There is no way he's going to maintain this scoring pace.

How many people bought high on Patrick Marleau 7 or 8 games into the season? I get that 27 games into the season is significantly different from 7 or 8 games in, but history isn't in Kunitz's favour.

I don't know about you guys, but I've found buying low and selling high to be the best way to winning pools. More often than not down the road it usually ends up coming up millhouse.

here is the problem i have

you are telling everyone that what has happened is irrelevant that what will happen is all that matters

yet here your entire post about why one will and the other will not is based entirely on what has happened just a different time frame

i dont necessarily disagree with your your assessment about the likelihood based on the past

but i do take issue with a cherrypicking of time frames when we want to make a determination about the future

you cant say that the past is irrelevant but only mean the recent past

either all the past is irrelevant or it is all relevant

also i take issue with the concept that the recent past has less to do with the future than further in the past does

that obviously make zero sense given as players develop we expect more from them going forward based on the fact that they have done more recently than they did further back in time

not that kunitz is a developing player obviously but the concept of the recent past being more relevant still stands

[bondon]

here is the problem i have

you are telling everyone that what has happened is irrelevant that what will happen is all that matters

yet here your entire post about why one will and the other will not is based entirely on what has happened just a different time frame

i dont necessarily disagree with your your assessment about the likelihood based on the past

but i do take issue with a cherrypicking of time frames when we want to make a determination about the future

you cant say that the past is irrelevant but only mean the recent past

either all the past is irrelevant or it is all relevant

also i take issue with the concept that the recent past has less to do with the future than further in the past does

that obviously make zero sense given as players develop we expect more from them going forward based on the fact that they have done more recently than they did further back in time

not that kunitz is a developing player obviously but the concept of the recent past being more relevant still stands

Is this simple enough for you then?

Toews is the better player on an equally strong offensive team.

And I don't understand your cherry picking of time frame either. With your logic, we should have all traded Tyler Seguin for Daniel Winnik at the beginning of the year, as the last part of your statement says "but the concept of the recent past being more relevant still stands"

I don't see how you're not cherrypicking now.

[lucifer316]

Is this simple enough for you then?

Toews is the better player on an equally strong offensive team.

i dont need simple i understand complicated just fine

and i dont disagree with this statement at all but just because toews is the better player on an equally strong offensive team doesnt mean he will produce better for the rest of the season than kunitz will

after all if it was as simple as toews is better well kunitz wouldnt be outproducing him right now would he

[lucifer316]

And I don't understand your cherry picking of time frame either. With your logic, we should have all traded Tyler Seguin for Daniel Winnik at the beginning of the year, as the last part of your statement says "but the concept of the recent past being more relevant still stands"

I don't see how you're not cherrypicking now.

absolutely not

more relevant doesnt mean only relevant

it is all part of the picture but the recent obviously has a larger bearing than 3 or 4 years ago does thats simple common sense

i am not cherrypicking at all i think all of it is relevant just differ with how relevant

you apparently believe that the far past is much more relevant than the recent past i just dont agree with that

again all of it is relevant imo but to different degrees

i never said to throw out any parts of the past (which would be cherrypicking)

you were the one who wants to ignore the start of this season and all of the time kunitz and crosby played together last season and only focus on numbers that dont contradict your assertion

again i dont disagree that toews is the better player i also dont disagree that the best odds likely lie with toews over kunitz based on everything involved

i just take issue with you saying to ignore what has happened but then go and use what has happened just at a different time to determine what will happen going forward

[bondon]

i dont need simple i understand complicated just fine

and i dont disagree with this statement at all but just because toews is the better player on an equally strong offensive team doesnt mean he will produce better for the rest of the season than kunitz will

after all if it was as simple as toews is better well kunitz wouldnt be outproducing him right now would he

There are things called outliers. Which is exactly what I believe Kunitz is experiencing right now.

And again, if you base everything off of recent developments, you'd be stuck into an endless cycle of buying high and selling low. Or failing to strike at crucial moments where you can get a good asset for a price that you would normally be unable to get it for.

I didn't want to nitpick through your entire post as a courtesy, but since you're dishing it out...

1) The time frame that I'm 'cherrypicking', is a much larger sample size. Both players have been in six seasons or longer now. As opposed to choosing to focus on the latest 26/27 games.

2) Again, like I said in my latest post, given your logic, there would have been a degree of reason to trade Tyler Seguin for Daniel Winnik. After all, Seguin had one point in his first four games, while Winnik had six points in his first four games.

3) Kunitz is STASTICALLY posting a year that is up and above anything that he's every shown in the past. He has never had a shooting percentage above .173, yet this year he's at .300. But ok, if you want to look at more recent numbers, last year he was at .113, and this year he's at .300. That's actually a bigger margin.

4) Kunitz is not a developing player, at the age of 33. If anything, the argument could be made (and rightfully so), that Toews is the one to be developing and have more upside if anything at the age of 24.


You say you understand complicated and you don't need simple but you seem to struggling heavily with simple.

[bondon]

What is it that Laidlaw calls it? A straw man argument? That's basically what I'm seeing here.

To me, the only logical explanation that one could make to me in favour of taking Kunitz over Toews (and that's using the term loosely, because it would be based on a hunch), is the fact that it's a shortened and unorthodox season, and that due to that, we could see things we normally wouldn't, like Chris Kunitz landing a spot at #3 in the Art Ross race.

[lucifer316]

There are things called outliers. Which is exactly what I believe Kunitz is experiencing right now.

completely ignoring the fact that last season he was about a point per game with crosby or is the outlier over a year in duration

And again, if you base everything off of recent developments, you'd be stuck into an endless cycle of buying high and selling low. Or failing to strike at crucial moments where you can get a good asset for a price that you would normally be unable to get it for.

please quote exactly where i said base everything off of recent developments i really want you to

you cant because i have specifically said not to base everything off of recent developments so i am not sure why you continue to argue against something i never said or did

I didn't want to nitpick through your entire post as a courtesy, but since you're dishing it out...

1) The time frame that I'm 'cherrypicking', is a much larger sample size. Both players have been in six seasons or longer now. As opposed to choosing to focus on the latest 26/27 games.

entirely not the point of my post

i specifically said you cannot go around saying that what has happened doesnt matter only what will happen does and then go and use what has happened as your reasoning for why what will happen will happen

that is intellectually dishonest

also you keep talking about focusing on 26 games and yet no where have i done that so i dont know why you insist on arguing with me about things i have not done

2) Again, like I said in my latest post, given your logic, there would have been a degree of reason to trade Tyler Seguin for Daniel Winnik. After all, Seguin had one point in his first four games, while Winnik had six points in his first four games.

nothing like completely ignoring what i am posting and arguing against what you wish i said instead of what i did say

nowhere in anything i have posted have i said or suggested that the only thing relevant is what happened at the beginning of this season

you are the one who has suggested to pick and choose which parts of the past have zero relevance and which ones dont not me

3) Kunitz is STASTICALLY posting a year that is up and above anything that he's every shown in the past. He has never had a shooting percentage above .173, yet this year he's at .300. But ok, if you want to look at more recent numbers, last year he was at .113, and this year he's at .300. That's actually a bigger margin.

of course and it is very likely to drop i never claimed it wouldnt not sure why you are arguing it like i did

4) Kunitz is not a developing player, at the age of 33. If anything, the argument could be made (and rightfully so), that Toews is the one to be developing and have more upside if anything at the age of 24.

never said he was in fact i specifically said he wasnt developing i can link to the post for you if you want

You say you understand complicated and you don't need simple but you seem to struggling heavily with simple.

i am not struggling with anything at all

i have not said most of the things you are attributing to me

you are trying to twist the argument into something that has nothing to do with the comment i made and i am not sure why that is

again i find it dishonest for someone to claim that you must ignore what has happened and then uses what has happened just from a different time frame because it suits their purposes

again as i have said multiple times and you conveniently ignore i dont disagree that the odds are in toews favor over kunitz for the rest of this season

what i dont agree with is the idea that we completely ignore what has happened during this season when making a determination about what will happen going forward

[bondon]

I don't even understand what your point is because you're completely beating around the bush. Reading your posts is hard enough already without punctuations, toss in the fact that you're saying things with about 1000 more words than necessary and it makes it even harder.

From what I gathered from the last two lines of your latest posts, you're basically saying "I don't disagree that the odds are in Toews favour over Kunitz for the rest of the season, but I'm going to continue to sit on the fence"

Which is pretty much what you did in your first post:

in a one year i would actually hold what i had no matter which player it was

i wouldnt want to trade away kunitz and risk that he does keep it up and i wouldnt want to trade away toews and risk that kunitz hits a wall

I'm done with this. For the record, I do enjoy a healthy debate. Not sure if this was one or not, but GL to the OP.

[bondon]

Ha, and obviously Kunitz goes out and grabs two assists while Toews gets nothing tonight.

[larrylintz]

Smart Money Toews: Nada
Dumb Money Kunitz: 2 more points

I've been at this for decades, and one thing i've learned is that the buy-low, sell-high reflex often backfires because:

1. EVERYONE is aware of that game, and if the league shark is selling high everyone is wary, so you rarely get full value. And even when it works, you create bad feelings for the guy on the other end. He looks stupid and doesn't want to trade with you again.
2. Every year players fall far short of expectations, others exceed them. If you constantly trade guys off to good starts, you will consistently miss out on career years, and likely not get full value anyway because of (1). And very often the steady veteran you acquire having the slow start is performing poorly for a reason.

I would add that everyone taking Toews side would have even more strongly advocated this position a month ago. Of course, only an idiot would have offered Toews for Kunitz then. But if they did they'd have 13 more points after tonight's games.

[bondon]

Smart Money Toews: Nada
Dumb Money Kunitz: 2 more points

I've been at this for decades, and one thing i've learned is that the buy-low, sell-high reflex often backfires because:

1. EVERYONE is aware of that game, and if the league shark is selling high everyone is wary, so you rarely get full value. And even when it works, you create bad feelings for the guy on the other end. He looks stupid and doesn't want to trade with you again.
2. Every year players fall far short of expectations, others exceed them. If you constantly trade guys off to good starts, you will consistently miss out on career years, and likely not get full value anyway because of (1). And very often the steady veteran you acquire having the slow start is performing poorly for a reason.

I would add that everyone taking Toews side would have even more strongly advocated this position a month ago. Of course, only an idiot would have offered Toews for Kunitz then. But if they did they'd have 13 more points after tonight's games.

Cuz this strategy worked out so well for David Clarkson owners...

I find it amusing how you admit that only an idiot would have done that deal at the time, and then proceed to draw your conclusion based on after-the-fact results.

[larrylintz]

Sorry you missed my point. It's really irrelevant what happened after that hypothetical trade a month ago because no one would have done that deal, but it illustrates how even the most obvious buy-low/sell-high scenario can backfire. I have no idea what you mean about Clarkson, I don't follow him, but I recall he was hot and i assume now he's not. i know no one in my league who would have paid anything significant for him when he was hot.

[bondon]

Sorry you missed my point. It's really irrelevant what happened after that hypothetical trade a month ago because no one would have done that deal, but it illustrates how even the most obvious buy-low/sell-high scenario can backfire.

No doubt it can backfire. There's no such thing as a sure thing. I can agree on that. Hell i've been burned by it too before. I mean this season alone, I traded Blake Wheeler for Loui Eriksson. Not working out so well.

But it is a move that I would make 10/10 times because the odds are in your favour more often than not.

[larrylintz]

yeah, a guy in our league traded a hot-starting Del Zotto for stone-cold Weber and that was a clear win, so for sure it can work out. I guess i'm speaking personally, as i've won my fair share and as a result folks are very wary when i peddle hot players. Steen had a nice nite, now at a point-a-game again, but i probably couldn't get Dallas Smith for him.

[habs7079]

GO BANANA!