Quote:
Originally Posted by Groot
He played the majority of his time with Bahl, 1140 mins to a 48.7 xGF%
So Bahl also played essentially the same minutes against elite opposition.
Andersson didn’t have a positive xGF% on any defensive pairing all season. When paired with Hanley they had 47.4 xGF% but Weegar and Hanley had an xGF% of 57%.
Very small sample size, but Bahl and Weegar had a ridiculous 64.9 xGF%.
In short
Bahl with Andersson = negative xGF%
Bahl without Andersson = positive xGF%
Andersson without Bahl = negative xGF%
I genuinely think a top pair of Bahl - Weegar will be a decent improvement over Bahl - Andersson last year. What happens in the 2nd and 3rd pair is anyone's guess. But last year rookie Lane Hutson played phenomenally with Matheson or Struble, hardly well-known defensive stalwarts, and I expect Parekh to be able to hold his own in a similar fashion.
|
This is what drives me a little bit crazy with the Ras talk. Not pointed at you specifically, Groot.
ALL the teams CC is talking to have access to this same information that shows his performance over the past 1.5 seasons (coincidentally when he lost Hanifin as a partner) has suffered.
We're calling him a top pairing D when it's favorable to command that in a trade (see Wyatt Johnston talk) but also claim that Pachal can cover his minutes defensively and do a better job.
Which is it?