Ekman-Larsson

[fungchen3]

And frankly, I'm very glad people continue to be optimistic about players because of feelings and assessments of talent - it's a large reason why I'm the only one in my main league who's finished in the money each of the last 6 full seasons. But what I'm trying to do in being a writer here at Dobber is help give a more detached perspective that also happens to be grounded in real data.

I appreciate your writing and perspective. I really do - thank you for it! What you said ^ is certainly true. You are offering a very valuable perspective that is backed by some data. Emotionally though, is where I struggle to fully wrap my head around your stance. And that leads me back to the whole advanced stats VS. eye test thing that is futile right now, as I'm not looking to discard analytics in general here.

The three things though, that I can't justify - even though you paint a great (and well-researched) picture - are:

1. It seems like your stance is absolute with no wiggle room. Even if your perspective is based on existing and recorded data, how do you (or anyone) know that OEL's role isn't going to shift at all? I think what OEL is showing to the world, this year especially, is that he is among the most purely-skilled, offensive defensemen on earth. Based on this, could his role eventually adjust to maximize his offensive weapons?

2. As I alluded to a little ^ ... I think comparing OZ% and SH TOI could be measured among peers, but what if a certain member just has more "offensive talent" than the rest? How is that measured with pure situational stats? Because when I watch OEL, I see a player who has FAR better offensive chops than Suter, Carlson and Weber - if we're just talking about skill. I also agree that OEL's offensive talent is superior to Pietrangelo. And the one thing that all of those players have in common is - they are lucky to be surrounded by more team talent than OEL. What I don't understand is - even if we measure your stats - how do they account for the following scenarios...

Ekman-Larsson joins the rush on a 3-on-2 and the puck controller flubs a pass across the defender and the play is broken up and there's not even a SOG.

vs.

Ekman-Larsson joins the rush on a 3-on-2 and the puck controller sees him creeping, lays a perfect pass on his tape, and OEL riffles a wrister top-shelf. Goal.

When you look at the ^ scenarios, OEL's OZ% and SH TOI wasn't altered one bit. The difference being, the puck carrier was able to execute a better play and it resulted in a goal for OEL. This leads me to...

3. I just can't fathom the notion that a great offensively-gifted player who suddenly gets the opportunity to play with better, offensively-gifted talent won't benefit on the scoreboard. Assuming OEL's OZ% and SH TOI remains status quo, isn't it logical to think that being surrounded by better talent will net better production in the same situations? I mean, let's just say, "Player X" averages 6 minutes per game on the PP each year. One season, "PX" plays the PP with Ovechkin, Backstrom and Green. The next season he plays the PP with Moulson, Ennis and Ristolainen. Don't you think "Player X" would produce more with the Ovechkin, Backstrom, Green trio even though he still logged the same exact PP TOI in the same amount of GP?

I guess I'm trying to challenge myself into fully understanding your POV more.

[Chunkys_Choice]

Cool - let me go back in time and grab Sheldon Souray based on his nearly 30% chunk rate for Edmonton in 2008-09, or Brian Campbell in view of his similar rate for Florida in 2011-12.

You pushing this "chunk rate" concept in the face of IPP reminds me of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pubd-spHN-0

I don't think you're understanding what I mean by Chunk Rate... either that or you're using the term "nearly" pretty loosely.
Souray had 53 points in 08-09, on 234 total Edmonton goals for. 53/234 = a chunk rate of 22.6%.
Campbell had 53 points in 2011-12, on 203 total Florida goals for. 53/203 = a chunk rate of 26.1%.
OEL's CR since the trade deadline is nearly double those guys, so I don't quite see the comparison??? You could've found many other players around the 20-30% range.

The point is, if Arizona scores a goal right now, it's basically a cointoss whether or not OEL gets a point. That seems pretty unusual, especially for a defenceman. It speaks just as much to Arizona's offensive ineptitude as it does to Ekman-Larsson's greatness, but either way, there's no denying he is hugely important to his team's offensive success right now.
I know I'm cherry-picking by looking only at stats since the trade deadline... the argument is that the Yandle trade helped OEL immensely by making him the undisputed top-dog of the desert dogs. I wasn't even aware of your comparison articles (though I'd take him over Muzzin in a heartbeat) - if anything I was suggesting that Dobber's article on the Yandle trade under-estimated the extent to which moving Yandle would help OEL.

[Chunkys_Choice]

Fine - Marek Zidlick in 2003-04 (age 26, chunk rate of roughly 25% for the season) and Dion Phaneuf 2007-08 (age 22, chunk rate of nearly 27%), to mention just a few more spring chickens.

OEL's Chunk Rate since the trade deadline is 45%, so again I don't know why you're bringing these guys up?

Players who have a Chunk Rate higher than 40% over an entire season include:
- Ovechkin 2007-08: 112/238 = 47%
- Malkin 2008-09: 113/258 = 44%
- Crosby 2009-10: 109/249 = 44%
- St Louis 2012-13: 60/147 = 41%
- Crosby 2013-14: 104/242 = 43%

SO there you go. OEL is clearly winning the art ross next year

[Chunkys_Choice]

Wayne Gretzky 1985-86: 215 points on 426 oilers goals, for a chunk rate of 50.4%

[Fast Tony DeNiro]

I love the cage matches Rizzee, but one thing stats and numbers can't always determine is the talent and playing style of a player. OEL and Suter receive similar minutes and usage, so the comp makes sense based on numbers. But it doesn't factor in how different those players are.... Suter was drafted as an elite two-way defender with a good first pass but not someone who's going to join or lead the rush. OEL has that extra gear offensively that Suter doesn't.

Suter has done great to reach his upside which was always around 45 points. But he just doesn't have the skill and mindset to become a 55+ scorer. OEL very much has that skill and mindset. A better comp for OEL would be Doughty. Hard minutes, and a system that holds their scoring down. But in a different situation, we've seen Doughty is capable of 60 points. I don't have all of the data in front of me to check that comp out 100%, but I think it's much better than Suter.

[Wrist_Shot]

I love the cage matches Rizzee, but one thing stats and numbers can't always determine is the talent and playing style of a player. OEL and Suter receive similar minutes and usage, so the comp makes sense based on numbers. But it doesn't factor in how different those players are.... Suter was drafted as an elite two-way defender with a good first pass but not someone who's going to join or lead the rush. OEL has that extra gear offensively that Suter doesn't.

Suter has done great to reach his upside which was always around 45 points. But he just doesn't have the skill and mindset to become a 55+ scorer. OEL very much has that skill and mindset. A better comp for OEL would be Doughty. Hard minutes, and a system that holds their scoring down. But in a different situation, we've seen Doughty is capable of 60 points. I don't have all of the data in front of me to check that comp out 100%, but I think it's much better than Suter.

Probably shouldn't bother with these points Fast Tony, Rizzee will continue to push OEL as "Suter 2.0" and recommend that we all value Jake Muzzin higher than him as well. I love stats and certainly value their potential to offer insight on the game, but overall talent, ability, upside, and place on team are equally important.

Oh and I'm digging this Chunk Rate stat.

[RizzeeDizzee]

I don't think you're understanding what I mean by Chunk Rate... either that or you're using the term "nearly" pretty loosely.
Souray had 53 points in 08-09, on 234 total Edmonton goals for. 53/234 = a chunk rate of 22.6%.
Campbell had 53 points in 2011-12, on 203 total Florida goals for. 53/203 = a chunk rate of 26.1%.
OEL's CR since the trade deadline is nearly double those guys, so I don't quite see the comparison??? You could've found many other players around the 20-30% range.

The point is, if Arizona scores a goal right now, it's basically a cointoss whether or not OEL gets a point. That seems pretty unusual, especially for a defenceman. It speaks just as much to Arizona's offensive ineptitude as it does to Ekman-Larsson's greatness, but either way, there's no denying he is hugely important to his team's offensive success right now.
I know I'm cherry-picking by looking only at stats since the trade deadline... the argument is that the Yandle trade helped OEL immensely by making him the undisputed top-dog of the desert dogs. I wasn't even aware of your comparison articles (though I'd take him over Muzzin in a heartbeat) - if anything I was suggesting that Dobber's article on the Yandle trade under-estimated the extent to which moving Yandle would help OEL.

What was his chunk rate before the trade deadline? Pretty small sample size if you ask me. And as I explained in the comments re: Muzzin, it's not a question of taking Muzzin over OEL. The issue is whether I'd want to draft or trade for Muzzin knowing what to expect from him and what he'd cost me, versus drafting or trading for OEL given the much larger cost. I said Muzzing and still think he's the better value.

[RizzeeDizzee]

I love the cage matches Rizzee, but one thing stats and numbers can't always determine is the talent and playing style of a player. OEL and Suter receive similar minutes and usage, so the comp makes sense based on numbers. But it doesn't factor in how different those players are.... Suter was drafted as an elite two-way defender with a good first pass but not someone who's going to join or lead the rush. OEL has that extra gear offensively that Suter doesn't.

Suter has done great to reach his upside which was always around 45 points. But he just doesn't have the skill and mindset to become a 55+ scorer. OEL very much has that skill and mindset. A better comp for OEL would be Doughty. Hard minutes, and a system that holds their scoring down. But in a different situation, we've seen Doughty is capable of 60 points. I don't have all of the data in front of me to check that comp out 100%, but I think it's much better than Suter.

Great - so Doughty is capable of 60 points. And maybe OEL could be as well. But reality is reality. OEL - like Doughty and Suter - have too much "real hockey" value to be likely to be placed into a situation where they can even be counted upon to produce at that kind of point level. There's a reason why guys like Nicklas Lidstrom, Chris Pronger, and Scott Niedermeyer are so rare.

[RizzeeDizzee]

I appreciate your writing and perspective. I really do - thank you for it! What you said ^ is certainly true. You are offering a very valuable perspective that is backed by some data. Emotionally though, is where I struggle to fully wrap my head around your stance. And that leads me back to the whole advanced stats VS. eye test thing that is futile right now, as I'm not looking to discard analytics in general here.

The three things though, that I can't justify - even though you paint a great (and well-researched) picture - are:

1. It seems like your stance is absolute with no wiggle room. Even if your perspective is based on existing and recorded data, how do you (or anyone) know that OEL's role isn't going to shift at all? I think what OEL is showing to the world, this year especially, is that he is among the most purely-skilled, offensive defensemen on earth. Based on this, could his role eventually adjust to maximize his offensive weapons?

2. As I alluded to a little ^ ... I think comparing OZ% and SH TOI could be measured among peers, but what if a certain member just has more "offensive talent" than the rest? How is that measured with pure situational stats? Because when I watch OEL, I see a player who has FAR better offensive chops than Suter, Carlson and Weber - if we're just talking about skill. I also agree that OEL's offensive talent is superior to Pietrangelo. And the one thing that all of those players have in common is - they are lucky to be surrounded by more team talent than OEL. What I don't understand is - even if we measure your stats - how do they account for the following scenarios...



vs.



When you look at the ^ scenarios, OEL's OZ% and SH TOI wasn't altered one bit. The difference being, the puck carrier was able to execute a better play and it resulted in a goal for OEL. This leads me to...

3. I just can't fathom the notion that a great offensively-gifted player who suddenly gets the opportunity to play with better, offensively-gifted talent won't benefit on the scoreboard. Assuming OEL's OZ% and SH TOI remains status quo, isn't it logical to think that being surrounded by better talent will net better production in the same situations? I mean, let's just say, "Player X" averages 6 minutes per game on the PP each year. One season, "PX" plays the PP with Ovechkin, Backstrom and Green. The next season he plays the PP with Moulson, Ennis and Ristolainen. Don't you think "Player X" would produce more with the Ovechkin, Backstrom, Green trio even though he still logged the same exact PP TOI in the same amount of GP?

I guess I'm trying to challenge myself into fully understanding your POV more.

You make the same points as others have, which is about what they see and feel and how the numbers are incomplete or fluid. Cage Match is about hard data, and the hard data doesn't forecast a breakout. I've been wrong before and will be again. But the numbers keep us in check more often than not, and if one were to listen to them 10 times out of 10 versus gut instinct 10 times out of 10 then I'd wager that the numbers would be right more often than not. Do I expect people to listen to the numbers 10 times out of 10? Of course not - that's for DFS players with algorithms trying to eke out a 2.5% win rate while wagering on thousands of contests per day. Fantasy hockey can - and should - have room for people to go with hunches. But the reason I'm digging my heels a bit here is the expectations regarding OEL seem not only to be unrealistic, but quite unrealistic, and at minimum I'm trying to throw the numbers back at folks as a reminder to temper expectations.

[Chunkys_Choice]

Pretty small sample size if you ask me.

First good point you've made regarding OEL's chunk rate. Thank you.

[Canucks_fan18]

I don't know how you can compare O.E.L and Ryan Suter beyond the way they are utilized by their respective teams. If you have watched O.E.L you should understand what kind of special offensive talent he is, and certainly a better comparison to Doughty then Suter. Now as far as fantasy is concerned on a multi cat level, there is no comparison because O.E.L brings such rare D stats in abundance like goals, shots...

O.E.L- G: 21 A: 19 P: 40 +/-: -18 PIM:36 PPP:18 SOG:244 HIT:156

Suter - G: 2 A:34 P:36 +/-:10 PIM:42 PPP:10 SOG:140 HIT:66

OEL ranks first in goals and second in shots out of all dmen. Those are rare stats for a D to put up, if you want Muzzin like stats HITS/PIMS you can grab a number of depth guys on WW or late in the draft but to get that kind of elite production like OEL from a D man is staggering and deserves the recognition it receives.

The only point I agree with you on Rizz is yes, if another GM over values OEL greatly, which you would have to provide me an example what that would look like because I treat him as a top 10 D in multi cat just below Burns but ahead of Keith, then there could be bargain bin comparison players to replace his production. However if I have him, and can't get an over payment for him, I would be holding onto him and treating his value at face value, top 10 D in the league (multicat). Points only yes probably overvalued.

[fungchen3]

You make the same points as others have, which is about what they see and feel and how the numbers are incomplete or fluid. Cage Match is about hard data, and the hard data doesn't forecast a breakout. I've been wrong before and will be again. But the numbers keep us in check more often than not, and if one were to listen to them 10 times out of 10 versus gut instinct 10 times out of 10 then I'd wager that the numbers would be right more often than not. Do I expect people to listen to the numbers 10 times out of 10? Of course not - that's for DFS players with algorithms trying to eke out a 2.5% win rate while wagering on thousands of contests per day. Fantasy hockey can - and should - have room for people to go with hunches. But the reason I'm digging my heels a bit here is the expectations regarding OEL seem not only to be unrealistic, but quite unrealistic, and at minimum I'm trying to throw the numbers back at folks as a reminder to temper expectations.

I understand tempering expectations, but you keep using Suter as a comparison. When I think of Suter, I think 40-45 points, which OEL has already proven he could reach, even on a piss poor offensive team. If people are expecting 60-65+ from OEL - then I agree - I think they are hoping and praying for the ultimate, best-case-scenario. But 50-55 (think Josi and Pietrangelo with a few more goals) should be very realistic IMO. And, how many D-Men do you actually think have a legit shot at 50-55 each year moving forward? Maybe a dozen tops? That's why I think OEL is in the upper-echelon, but a tier below the Subbans, Shattenkirks, Byfugliens, Letangs, Hedmans and 2 tiers below the demigod Karlsson.

[Jouko-Pouko]

I understand tempering expectations, but you keep using Suter as a comparison. When I think of Suter, I think 40-45 points, which OEL has already proven he could reach, even on a piss poor offensive team. If people are expecting 60-65+ from OEL - then I agree - I think they are hoping and praying for the ultimate, best-case-scenario. But 50-55 (think Josi and Pietrangelo with a few more goals) should be very realistic IMO. And, how many D-Men do you actually think have a legit shot at 50-55 each year moving forward? Maybe a dozen tops? That's why I think OEL is in the upper-echelon, but a tier below the Subbans, Shattenkirks, Byfugliens, Letangs, Hedmans and 2 tiers below the demigod Karlsson.

I completely agree with this. OEL is not going to be the next Karlsson. If someone thinks that, they have bigger issues. But OEL can be in that Josi/Pietrangelo/Carlson group points-wise; 50-55 points in his prime years (15-20 of them being goals), assuming the team around him isn't terrible during those years. In certain leagues goals are worth more than assists, so in those leagues OEL's value is much higher. But still not at the Karlsson level.

If you can trade for OEL at his current value (45-point player) and you can be patient with him, then you should trade for him. But if his owner already values him at that 50-55 point level, then you shouldn't trade for him because that's his upside and not his current production level. And vice versa; if you own him and can get a return like he was already at that 50-55 point level, then you should trade him. Otherwise hold on and wait until his value goes up.

[RizzeeDizzee]

I don't know how you can compare O.E.L and Ryan Suter beyond the way they are utilized by their respective teams. If you have watched O.E.L you should understand what kind of special offensive talent he is.

This is exactly why I continue to try and pound home my point. The way a player is utilized by his team is without doubt the most important factor in determining his fantasy output. Please, read that again and let it sink in. Just look at Ovi circa 2010-2012. Or even now - think about how "great" Toews is, yet here we are again with another season of him not reaching the point per game threshold. Or, on the flip side, think back to Jonathan Cheechoo, Devin Setoguchi, or Rob Brown for examples where a positive situation led to success despite what was later revealed to be not much talent.

Everyone here keeps telling me how special OEL's talent is. But what good is that talent if he - like Suter, or, if you prefer, Doughty - ends up playing in a role that puts a de facto ceiling on his production?!

P.S. - in before Jouko brings up my Monahan views...

[RizzeeDizzee]

Out of curiosity, I went onto hockey-reference.com to see - since 2000-01 - how many defensemen ended up posting more than 50 points at any point in their career after having not done so in their first five seasons of 40+ games.

There were four - Andrei Markov, Zdeno Chara and Kimmo Timonen, and James Wisniewski. OEL doesn't strike me as a Markov type, and among the other three you have one season of more than 50 points out of 16 seasons (Timonen), two in 17 seasons (Chara), and two in nine years (Wisniewski) with none of the three ever having score more than 55 points in a single season.

Of course past results don't forecast the future, but they're yet more food for thought.