[News] Backlund line at top of the league in possession

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

What narrative is that? That the numbers suggest over the last year and a half that Backlund doesn't really need Frolik as Badly as a kid like Monahan or Bennett might, but that Tkachuk gives Backlund a profound boost that we haven't seen since Cammalleri?

Right.

More like "If you conjecture anything that make me angry, and base them off of evidence, then I hate you and your evidence!"



Okay so... why does Frolik need Backlund? Would he not be more successful helping Monahan or Bennett if another player can play with Tkachuk / Backlund (like, Gaudreau/Brouwer/Ferland) without experiencing a significant dropoff.

This isn't some "narrative" about Frolik being bad. This is simply pointing out that he and Backlund, while a good pair, as not as good a pair as Backlund and Tkachuk who are both elite possession drivers in the entire NHL. Tkachuk was posting these insane numbers with Brouwer, whom I dislike, and Bennett. There goes your narrative about my narrative.

The Tkachuk-Backlund-Frolik line is awesome. But if it can be even slightly improved, or better yet if one of the players on it can give us a second or third line without a significant dropoff, it should be considered. I am not saying they NEED to be broken up.

Remember when I asked you to post the advanced stats for Engelland after you spent the first 10-15 games bashing him and saying he wasn't very good, and then you refused and said advanced stats don't always tell the whole story?

For you it's clear they're the whole story as long as they fit your narrative. 27 games in, it can't possibly be that Frolik is helping that line be elite, nope, it's all Backlund and Tkachuk and Ferland will make it even more elite. Yep, that's your logic.

The numbers being all over the place can't possibly be the Flames adjusting to the new coach and finally learning how to play the system.

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Remember when I asked you to post the advanced stats for Engelland after you spent the first 10-15 games bashing him and saying he wasn't very good, and then you refused and said advanced stats don't always tell the whole story?

For you it's clear they're the whole story as long as they fit your narrative. 27 games in, it can't possibly be that Frolik is helping that line be elite, nope, it's all Backlund and Tkachuk and Ferland will make it even more elite. Yep, that's your logic.

The numbers being all over the place can't possibly be the Flames adjusting to the new coach and finally learning how to play the system.

Pfffttt...that's all context. What good is context in order to understand the numbers you're gathering, when you have even more numbers!

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

I agree with EV. If you can spread the wealth and improve another line, why not?

I don't disagree with this sentiment and even suggested they do this myself. But He also said Ferland would make that line better which is laughable.

Spread the wealth around just don't pretend Ferland would make that line better and more elite possession wise.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Remember when I asked you to post the advanced stats for Engelland after you spent the first 10-15 games bashing him and saying he wasn't very good, and then you refused and said advanced stats don't always tell the whole story?

No, because I never said that. Here though, I looked up that thread for you by googling calgaryblood+Engelland+GranteedEV+Advanced+Stats


Here is what I got:

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Gulutzan's pairings are a nightmare. Giordano-Wideman might be a decent pair if it were necessary - but it is not. Dougie Hamilton is a better NHL defenseman than Dennis Wideman. Brett Kulak is the perfect partner for Dennis Wideman. Deryk Engelland has never, is not, and will never be a top four defenseman.

WAs I wrong? Engelland is back to being a staple in our bottom pair, and Hamilton is Giordano's partner now that we're finally seeing success. Advanced stats predicted this weeks before Gulutzan.

And then you told me Engelland's +/- justified is usage on Brodie's pair, which meant he was doing everything right:

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

That is what he is doing right. Getting saves.

Also you do realize his +/- is immensely skewed by the three games where Kulak was playing and dominating against bottom pair competition, right? Outside of that, he's been a drag on Brodie shift after shift in an actual difficult role. We've got Dennis friggin Wideman playing a shutdown role for us so Brodie can babysit Engelland.

NExt was your juvenile response:

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Haha that video you posted was clearly Brodie's fault but since you're such an advanced stats guy and have used it in several arguments why don't you post some advanced stats for Engelland. I'd love to see how he's fairing in that department.

and I told you:

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

I use information where it is relevant. Here, common ****ing sense is more relevant than advanced stats - Engelland is not a top 4D and having a +/- on the right side of 0 does not change that. But if you think the advanced stats say anything different from what I was saying, we have three seasons worth of data that we can look at:

Brodie-Engelland
439:28 TOI together (before last night)
38.5% Corsi For (for some comparision, the only NHL team since the stat's been recorded, to finish with corsi this bad were the 2015 Sabres, who were tanking for Connor McDavid)
44.4% Goals For (driven heavily by the best goaltending Hiller and Ramo ever gave us in Feb/March 2015)

This is a pairing that has no business being together. It is a pairing that makes me miss Kris Russell.

Oh and by the way, if you want the numbers for this season, now that there's a bigger sample size than the one or two games you wanted to exploit,

Brodie-Engelland Under Gulutzan:

117:03 TOI together
44.8% Corsi For
37.5% Goals For

They are, lo and behold, still a terrible pair.

[calgaryblood]

Brodie has the worst +/- in the entire NHL while Engelland has the best on the Flames. Clearly it's Engelland who was anchoring that pairing.

[CsInMyBlood]

Why ever break up Backlund and Frolik? Their chemistry is the best I've seen on the Flames since pairings like Conroy-Iginla or Nieuwendyk-Roberts.

It's a thing of beauty to watch and Tkachuk compliments them perfectly.

We already saw Gulutzan break them up earlier this season and it was a bad experiment.

When you have a line that is matching or beating out the best in the league, why would you ever mess with it?

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Tkachuk's possession nunbers are that of a 27 year old star in his prime. With or without Backlund. It may actually be Frolik who is the replaceable part on the line. I actually think replacing Frolik with Ferland could improve that line, while allowing Frolik to improve Bennett's line if we get him back to his actual position.

Your complete lack of comprehension with respect to the value of Frolik, Brouwer, and Engelland is astounding.

Anyway...

As for Tkachuk on that line, not only is he actually helping the line possession-wise, but I would argue that his physical play, and his edge, is creating room for the other two.

Teams always tried to play physically against Backlund (and Frolik). This year, the line is not being intimidated at all. And that is allowing them to be more dominant offensively.

Backlund AND Frolik have been fantastic this year. But I don't think we should under-estimate just how much of an impact Tkachuk has had as well. The kid is 18 and is already one of the most important forwards on the team.

Just a fricking beauty!

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Brodie has the worst +/- in the entire NHL while Engelland has the best on the Flames. Clearly it's Engelland who was anchoring that pairing.

Hey Cali, I'm the one who doesn't understand context?

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Hey Cali, I'm the one who doesn't understand context?

You clearly don't. If Brodie and Engelland are on the same team, played a significant amount of time together and one has played great with whoever he's played with while the other has struggled with literally every single other d-man he's played with, who's struggling?

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by CsInMyBlood

Why ever break up Backlund and Frolik? Their chemistry is the best I've seen on the Flames since pairings like Conroy-Iginla or Nieuwendyk-Roberts.

It's a thing of beauty to watch and Tkachuk compliments them perfectly.

We already saw Gulutzan break them up earlier this season and it was a bad experiment.

When you have a line that is matching or beating out the best in the league, why would you ever mess with it?

Completely agree with this.

The one thing that is working well every night is the Backlund line - leave it alone.

Well okay, the 4th line is playing well also.

What the organization should be focused on is getting a RW for Gaudreau and Monahan. Get that line going, and now you have two fantastic lines.

Then from there, you work to build out a 3rd line around Bennett.

[Flash Walken]

Can someone compare the possession stats of the backlund line to the rest of the team.

It would be interesting to see which line is getting scored on the most 5 on 5 if the backlund line is being so dominant.

[Enoch Root]

Gaudreau - Monahan - Versteeg?
Tkachuk - Backlund - Frolik
Bennett - Jankowski - Brouwer
Ferland - Stajan - Hathaway
Bouma, Chiasson

[Cali Panthers Fan]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Hey Cali, I'm the one who doesn't understand context?

Yes, absolutely you have difficulty with it sometimes.

You like certain players and hate certain players. Often, you intensely dislike lower-skilled physical players even when there's no good reason to dislike them, and then you try and use stats to justify your narrative.

In the case of a Brodie-Engelland pair, I can tell you without a doubt that THIS SEASON Brodie has been one of our worst defensemen at both ends of the ice. I don't expect that to continue, and he's given us reason in the past to see that he CAN be an elite defenseman, but he's playing nowhere close to that this year.

As for Engelland, there were times in the first 15 games that he seemed like our ONLY capable defenseman. He was even jumping up on the rush down the middle of the ice and taking shots that were often our only decent shots from a defenseman during the game. Is Engelland highly skilled? Hell. No. I will never argue that he should be getting a lot of ice time per game either (well, maybe ahead of Wideman). But if you couldn't see that Engelland has been very steady all year and a positive force on the ice overall, and if you didn't see Engelland immediately pick up and implement Gulutzan's system, then you weren't paying attention.

I don't know what it is, it seems hard for you to give certain players credit if you dislike them, yet will fall all over yourself to justify the poor play of other players that you like. It's annoying. You need to get over your preconceptions and let the game tell you who to appreciate. Anything else is confirmation bias.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

I agree with EV. If you can spread the wealth and improve another line, why not?

What wealth? The idea there is any wealth to spread currently is ludicrous.

Frolik has one goal since November 3rd, Backlund has four goals total on the season. There just isn't any wealth. The entire team has been poor offensively, Frolik just had a great start. Frolik and Backlund do have great chemistry though, good possession, good in their own zone, play similar styles that compliment any winger on the left side. And no, putting Ferland on that line won't make it better. I like what Ferland is doing and hopefully he's found his role but despite all the praise he's isn't exactly shown to be a top six forward.

It is interesting to note that last game Backlund's line got very few starts in the defensive side, think only two of his faceoffs were taken in the Flames end.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

Yes, absolutely you have difficulty with it sometimes.

You like certain players and hate certain players. Often, you intensely dislike lower-skilled physical players even when there's no good reason to dislike them, and then you try and use stats to justify your narrative.

In the case of a Brodie-Engelland pair, I can tell you without a doubt that THIS SEASON Brodie has been one of our worst defensemen at both ends of the ice. I don't expect that to continue, and he's given us reason in the past to see that he CAN be an elite defenseman, but he's playing nowhere close to that this year.

As for Engelland, there were times in the first 15 games that he seemed like our ONLY capable defenseman. He was even jumping up on the rush down the middle of the ice and taking shots that were often our only decent shots from a defenseman during the game. Is Engelland highly skilled? Hell. No. I will never argue that he should be getting a lot of ice time per game either (well, maybe ahead of Wideman). But if you couldn't see that Engelland has been very steady all year and a positive force on the ice overall, and if you didn't see Engelland immediately pick up and implement Gulutzan's system, then you weren't paying attention.

I don't know what it is, it seems hard for you to give certain players credit if you dislike them, yet will fall all over yourself to justify the poor play of other players that you like. It's annoying. You need to get over your preconceptions and let the game tell you who to appreciate. Anything else is confirmation bias.

Great post.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

What wealth? The idea there is any wealth to spread currently is ludicrous.

Frolik has one goal since November 3rd, Backlund has four goals total on the season. There just isn't any wealth. The entire team has been poor offensively, Frolik just had a great start. Frolik and Backlund do have great chemistry though, good possession, good in their own zone, play similar styles that compliment any winger on the left side. And no, putting Ferland on that line won't make it better. I like what Ferland is doing and hopefully he's found his role but despite all the praise he's isn't exactly shown to be a top six forward.

It is interesting to note that last game Backlund's line got very few starts in the defensive side, think only two of his faceoffs were taken in the Flames end.

While it's not "wealth of scoring" I was using it figuratively in the sender that the Backlund line is outscoring the opposition 2 to 1, so it makes sense to pass some of that around to the lines where they're under water scoring wise

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

While it's not "wealth of scoring" I was using it figuratively in the sender that the Backlund line is outscoring the opposition 2 to 1, so it makes sense to pass some of that around to the lines where they're under water scoring wise

Frolik is +3 and Backlund is 0. Also, they have been on the ice for at least 2, if not 3, short handed goals (which gets them pluses).

So I don't understand where they would be outscoring the opposition 2 to 1.

[Hockey-and_stuff]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Frolik is +3 and Backlund is 0. Also, they have been on the ice for at least 2, if not 3, short handed goals (which gets them pluses).

So I don't understand where they would be outscoring the opposition 2 to 1.

I had to look this up. I had no idea you got a +1 for scoring while shorthanded. What a weird rule.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Frolik is +3 and Backlund is 0. Also, they have been on the ice for at least 2, if not 3, short handed goals (which gets them pluses).

So I don't understand where they would be outscoring the opposition 2 to 1.

Tkachuk/Backlund have been on the ice together for ten 5-on-5 goals for and five 5-on-5 goals against.

[IgiTang]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

I agree with EV. If you can spread the wealth and improve another line, why not?

Sure thing for magic beans!