Rasmus Andersson watch — Will he stay or will he go?

[InternationalVillager]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

I'm always puzzled when someone has such a massive axe to grind with a specific player. Whether or not he had a bad season, this is a player who has been a good Flame. I can't stand how some fans treat players on their way out.

Except Mike Smith. F that guy.

I haven't had an axe to grind with him his entire career as a Flames player. I have an axe to grind with him this year. Because he had a #### year. It's OK to be critical of players.

I wish him all the best in his future endeavors. Thanks for your services.

No one will even remember the dude much after he's gone for 4-5 years. He's not a franchise icon or something.

BTW: The dude is on his way out. He made his comments because he knows that he is on his way out anyway. I disagree with the fans that wanted the team to lose down the stretch- by then it didn't matter anyway- might as well have tried to win. BUT they have a right to their opinion. AND don't deserve to be called out by the worst player on the roster relative to expectations.

Andersson thinks he's a superstar. He is not. He will find out. Lindholm had the same hubris. He thought he was a super star. He is finding out. Markstrom thought he was a consistent, all world goalie. He is finding out.

Must be the water over in Sweden. Good riddance.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

I'm always puzzled when someone has such a massive axe to grind with a specific player. Whether or not he had a bad season, this is a player who has been a good Flame. I can't stand how some fans treat players on their way out.

Except Mike Smith. F that guy.

entitlement

and outrage

I am entitled to feel whatever I want, and when things don't go as I want them, I will be outraged

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by InternationalVillager

I haven't had an axe to grind with him his entire career as a Flames player. I have an axe to grind with him this year. Because he had a #### year. It's OK to be critical of players.

I wish him all the best in his future endeavors. Thanks for your services.

No one will even remember the dude much after he's gone for 4-5 years. He's not a franchise icon or something.

BTW: The dude is on his way out. He made his comments because he knows that he is on his way out anyway. I disagree with the fans that wanted the team to lose down the stretch- by then it didn't matter anyway- might as well have tried to win. BUT they have a right to their opinion. AND don't deserve to be called out by the worst player on the roster relative to expectations.

Andersson thinks he's a superstar. He is not. He will find out. Lindholm had the same hubris. He thought he was a super star. He is finding out. Markstrom thought he was a consistent, all world goalie. He is finding out.

Must be the water over in Sweden. Good riddance.

Plenty of posters have been critical of him.
Your posts are over the top.
Why you heff to be mad?

[InternationalVillager]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

entitlement

and outrage

I am entitled to feel whatever I want, and when things don't go as I want them, I will be outraged

You're describing Rasmus with that statement. Well done.

[Erick Estrada]

I'm confused. After years of people saying +/- is a useless stat, are we now supposed to care about it again?

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by InternationalVillager

You're describing Rasmus with that statement. Well done.

No, he’s describing you. Rasmus took a pretty calm shot at something he didn’t like, and otherwise praised the franchise, the city, the team, and the vast majority of fans.

You responded by throwing a temper tantrum because you felt attacked.

Nobody respects it. Nobody cares.

[iggyloob12]

Originally Posted by InternationalVillager

A player calling out fans for OPINIONS is offside considering they pay his salary but is extremely offside after you performed terribly at your job.

That's your opinion. I think it's totally fine for a player to share opinions on a range of subjects when asked. Interviews and opinions aren't limited to players who had career years (if they were, there'd be a lot fewer interviews during a season).

[Calgary4LIfe]

I think +/- is still a useful stat. Being -38 on a team is bad, and it being much worse than anyone else tells you... what exactly?



It should tell you that you need to look and dig deeper as there is something happening here. That's it. Maybe the story is that Rasmus is terrible defensively? Or that he was put into a difficult role? Or that his playing through injuries dramatically added to the totals. Whatever the real story is, the +/- just alerts you that there is probably a big story here. It definitely tells you that Andersson had a poor season, but it doesn't say WHY.


I doubt very much anyone on here is going to say that Andersson had a great year. You would be in the minority. However, equally true is anyone saying that Andersson is a bad defencemen.



For me, these were growing pains. This is probably the first time that he had to be 'the guy' on his pairing, plus he had to take on the role that opened up after the team traded Hanifin and Tanev away. Those were two very good defencemen at being high minute munchers against top opposition. That's a new role for Andersson - two new roles, actually. Being the leader on his pairing, as well as becoming a shutdown guy.


I would say that he started this season off really well, but then mostly treaded water interspersed with some games in which he was underwater. Definitely drowned a lot near the end of the season with his broken bone.


I think this sets him up nicely for next season. This is experienced gained in my mind. Maybe he will never be the shutdown guy like Tanev, but I bet he has grown that aspect of his game. You can see this from two angles - one is that the Flames needed to lean on Andersson a lot, and it broke him sometimes (figuratively and literally!). You can also look at it as investing in Andersson as well - Andersson learned through trial by fire in some respects.


I still, however, think that he gets traded, and it probably happens this off-season. In my mind, the odds are 25% he re-signs, and 75% he doesn't. What I think won't happen is Conroy walking him to free agency. He had a front-row seat to Treliving doing that with Gaudreau, and Conroy spoke at length about how he felt that was a mistake. I don't think he takes him to the deadline, because he knows all too well that it makes it tough to trade a player out when your team is hanging around the playoffs.


I anticipate Andersson gets traded before the season starts. Conroy didn't sound like a GM that was about to spend to the cap this off-season either in his season-ending interviews. That alone may get Andersson to simply not want to sign an extension yet, nevermind the relatively difficult season he just had.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

The story of the day was his future with the club and the injury that was revealed. That was the stuff that the media rightly focused on.

"Rasmus you were pathetic this season and I think you owe the fans an apology. Your thoughts?"

Yeah that would have gone over well.

The media isn't there to serve your bitterness.

What? They're not? Since when?!? I need to have words with someone who sold me a lie!! I was told that the media had to do my bitter bidding! I had to rub a lamp and everything!

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

I'm always puzzled when someone has such a massive axe to grind with a specific player. Whether or not he had a bad season, this is a player who has been a good Flame. I can't stand how some fans treat players on their way out.

Except Mike Smith. F that guy.

Also Yes.

[Calgary4LIfe]

+ James Neal.
+ Chris Drury
+ anyone else with poor character issues and/or talked poorly of the Flames.

I haven't ever really understood why you would hate a player that played poorly, but was trying. Lots of those around over the years from the likes of Hulse and Kotalik. I have always blamed the coach and/or GM for either bringing them in without creating better depth, or misusing them.

[GioforPM]

Amdersson obviously had a sub par season. I think C4F is correct that he was thrust into Tanev's shutdown role, and he's obviously not Tanev. That, plus his broken leg among other injuries hindered his offence and probably his defence.

Three years ago he was playing with Hanifin in an offensive role. Last season he was with Weegar or Kylington in an offensive role, at least until Tanev left. I don't think defensive specialist is really his role, he's more of a general minutes guy.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Macho0978

Why is it always assumed that low shooting percent is all luck and nothing to do with the player? Why is low on ice save percent always on the goalie and not the defender?

I didn't compare Rasmus to Weegar...I used Bahl as Bahl was on the ice with Rasmus for 75% of Rasmus ES minutes. Can I assume that Bahl also played against elite players?

Because of the generation aspect of expected stats.

It's hard to split that atom. How do you have enough talent to create chances (expected goals) or prevent them (expected goals against), but still manage to thwart the finish and/or the save?

Doesn't make sense.

There are plenty of player that aren't on the ice for many goals for, but their expected totals usually support that.

Bahl was on the ice for about 40 minutes less than Andersson against elite talent.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

Don't dig to deep or they will tell you that players have a NTC because of you, and you are 10% nutbar.

Or I'll just answer the question as stated and ignore this having to be about you?

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Macho0978

What about the breakdown of quality of teammate and who is on the ice when you play against elite talent. Just using ice time and plus minus here is another story.

Weegar & Rasmus both had 1575 ES Ice:

Backlund with Weegar - 410 mins with +8 702 mins without -3
Backlund with Rasmus - 531 mins with -8 581 mins without +13

Kadri & Weegar - 561 mins with +4 780 mins without -18
Kadri & Rasmus - 492 mins with -26 849 mins without +12

Frost & Weegar - 150 mins with -3 287 mins without -3
Frost & Rasmus - 154 mins with -4 282 mins without -2

Rooney & Weegar - 189 mins with -2 332 mins without -5
Rooney & Rasmus - 159 mins with -5 363 mins without -2

Weegar's #1 D partner was Hanley at 629 mins & #2 was Miromanov at 567 mins

Hanley with 629 mins +13
Hanley without 281 mins -2

Miromanov with 567 mins +6
Miromanov without 186 mins -4

So Weegar gets 2 waiver guys as a d partner and plays big mins with Backlund which more than likley is when he faced elite talent and they play much better together than Rasmus and Bahl did with Backlund. Bahl is a much better dman than the waiver guys?

So much for a useless stat

Still useless in my mind.

I think it's great that Weegar can play with a guy like Hanley and get it done. Huge asset.

I'm not saying he's inferior to Andersson in any way.

Just pointed out

1) Most of the plus/minus five on five is due to a lack of finishing and not the defensive side of the game.
2) That Andersson plays more against elite players than Weegar.

[Macho0978]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Still useless in my mind.

I think it's great that Weegar can play with a guy like Hanley and get it done. Huge asset.

I'm not saying he's inferior to Andersson in any way.

Just pointed out

1) Most of the plus/minus five on five is due to a lack of finishing and not the defensive side of the game.
2) That Andersson plays more against elite players than Weegar.

I'm not saying that Anderson doesn't deserve some slack for the season he had, but if you factor in everything it still isn't good.

Elite TOI

Rasmus - 468
Weegar - 408

Quality of teammates, PDO, DFF%, DFF%RC, OZS%, GF% when I look at it all, Rasmus deserves an adjustment on his -38 but it's enough to say he was less terrible than -38.

There is a price point that makes sense to sign Rasmus, but for me that number is much lower than he will get

[InternationalVillager]

Bingo is a Rasmus apologist. Even with stats blatantly telling an obvious story, he's impervious to them. This is what happens when you get too attached to players and their past performance that you let it cloud your judgement.

Yes- he's drafted by the organization. Yes- he's played a lot of games here. Yes- he's been a great Flames player for his tenure here.

Yes- he had a garbage season, was a main contributing factor to the team missing the playoffs.

Yes- he's likely getting traded in the offseason.

Yes- it's likely to be at a diminished value unless another team excludes the data from this season.

All of these can be true.

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

Rasmus today is a mid d-man with a bold personality.

I think he peaked early and we shouldn't let those past seasons blind us from seeing the quality of play he brings presently.

I don't think you drop a signicificant AAV or contract length on a player like that.

Try to excuse the -38 but it's a bit of an outlier. Looking at how his play sagged after the hot start I don't think you can absolve him of being an issue by deflecting blame to who he played with.

If were looking at paying him like a d-man that can carry a top 4 pairing then make sure the body of work says he can do that.

Otherwise you need to negotiate for less or trade him if he won't accept less.

I'm so done with the days of this team paying a premium just to keep guys that aren't that good due to attachment to them

[Paulie Walnuts]

How is +/- lack of finishing when your Corsi is negative and xGF is negative.

It would be bad if he was 55% and we had a poor save %.

DO you have the stats to back up that Andersson was on the ice when the Flames created some of the most high danger chances but didn't score.

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

I think +/- is still a useful stat. Being -38 on a team is bad, and it being much worse than anyone else tells you... what exactly?

It isn't that useful of a stat. It can give you a starting point to do analysis but it doesn't tell you a story or enable solid conclusions like the ones being thrown around here. If you want to prove a point you have to do a lot more lifting than to point at +/-.

Go into Anderson's game by game stats.

1. In Oct 28th game against VGK, Andersson was -3. The Flames lost 5-0. Are you really proving that Andersson was terrible when the whole team scored zero goals? No, that doesn't prove a thing.
2. How about the Nov 30th game against the Penguins where the Flames lost 6-2. Andersson was a +1.
3. Nov 29th in the 5-2 loss to CBJ. Andersson is a 0.
4. In the biggest shelling of the season, Dec 12 8-3 loss to the Lightning. Andersson has another +/- of 0.

Andersson definitely had some tough games, like against Dallas on Dec 8 and Mar 27 but when the team loses 6-2 and 5-2, it is hard for your top D to look good. But it is really hard to say anyone looks good when the team gets dummied, even if they end the game +2.

Also, look at how many games Andersson played above his average TOI.

• 28 minutes against the Sens (Nov 25)
• 27 minutes against Bruins (Nov 7), Wild (Nov 23), Islanders (Nov 19), Canes (Mar 2)
• 26 minutes against Canucks (Mar 12), Islanders (Mar 22), Sabres (Nov 9), Blues (Dec 5), Avalanche (Mar 31)
• 13 more games where he played over 25 minutes.

That is a lot of minutes for him to play in November and March and somewhere in those March games he has a broken fibula.

There are a lot of stories that can be told about Andersson's season and many of those stories are positive. Andersson played a massive role on this team this season and he is one of the main reasons they were even close to the playoffs instead of being eliminated weeks earlier.

He demonstrated that he is a warrior who plays big minutes, in tough assignments, and plays to win. Not only did he have a new partner to adjust to in Bahl replacing Hanifin (and it is absurd that the Andersson haters ignore that change to the D group) but also had to adjust to a new role as Tanev was no longer there to be the shutdown guy (another dramatic change to the D group being ignored).

Anyway, ya. +/- is a weak stat and shallow analysis doesn't prove anything.

[InternationalVillager]

Originally Posted by Wolven

There are a lot of stories that can be told about Andersson's season and many of those stories are positive.

No. He wasn't good by +/-. He wasn't good by advanced stats.

The stories about his season are mostly negative.