Ryan Lambert article on sending Monahan down

[Poe969]

well it's giving us something to talk about. I won't view this tool's crap but I'll read what the people in here have to say. I find the people on CP to be more informed than most of the writers out there anyway.

And by the way, happy Thanksgiving everyone.

Monahan is awesome. Discuss.

[Huntingwhale]

Stopped reading when he said Monahan doesn't make the team better. What a joke.

[the2bears]

Originally Posted by gargamel

I vaguely remember Feaster mentioning in a post-trade press conference that retaining salary was never an option and there were a lot of rumors about few teams being interested in Bouwmeester due to his salary (Detroit is one that I specifically remember being interested but unwilling to give up much unless we retained salary). Even if I'm misremembering the Feaster quote and there was nothing to the rumors, common sense would indicate that a team that's well under the cap could get a better return for a good but overpriced player when trying to trade him to teams that are against the cap if they were willing to eat some salary.

That's all to say that this team, like all others, considers the financial implications of hockey decisions all the time. Financial implications will be a consideration in determining whether or not to send Monahan down, but I'm confident that they won't be the primary factor.

So, not so "obvious" and not so "not sure if serious" worthy?

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by Inglewood Jack

For those who still want to claim that Lambert is a Flames fan just because he writes for Flames Nation, now is the time to do it. And be sure to post links to the dozens of other positive Calgary related articles he has posted recently.

Here you go:

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-pu...5124--nhl.html

A good example cropped up late last week when the Calgary Flames' training camp opened and some wise person had the audacity ask the players what their expectations were for this year, given that they are dreadful at just about every position and any reasonable human being thinks they're going to get creamed in significantly more than half of their games this season. The Flames, as you might expect, thought that was a load of garbage, because what else are they going to say?

Here's newly-acquired TJ Galiardi on the subject:

"Since I’ve been here, to be honest, it kinda pisses me off when I hear people say all these negative things, 'Oh yeah, have fun finishing last,' stuff like that, even from people from Calgary. People like that should just not bother talking."

While he's certainly not going to have fun, finishing last, whether it's in the division or the entire league, seems a rather likely outcome after 82 games that are sure to be brutally boring.

oh, wait....

[Savvy27]

As for the argument that a year of his ELC is being burned, aren't the Oilers the only team that is actually handing out huge second contracts these days? I know the Flames did it with Phaneuf, but it seems like the GMs of the league have figured out that they do, in fact, have leverage and can keep things reasonable until they start to eat into UFA years.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Terrible article. Is the point Monahan isn't good enough for the flames or too good? He seems to be arguing both points. Does not actually address where he would actually improve as a player, but of course Lambert wouldn't know. Hack

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by edslunch

Advanced stats are interesting and I'm willing to believe there's something to them. But the advanced stats crowd seems to always ignore the other side of the equation, which is results. Monahan is getting results, regardless of his advanced stats. His shooting percentage may be high but that's going to happen when you put yourself in a position to redirect a pass into a wide open net.

Just to address this point. The problem with results is that they're so heavily based on luck that if you focus on them you'll get a very skewed view of a player/team.

Advanced stats try to remove the luck factor as much as possible and focus on things that are in the players control.

As per Monahan's 30% shooting percentage, it's not high, it's simply very fortunate. The highest shooting percentages year in year out are only over 10%. Monahan WILL regress to the mean on his shooting percentage. What that percentage indicates is that in these first five games the bounces have been going his way. Like Baertschi's pass landing right on his blade instead of it the puck skipping on some bad Saddledome ice.

Now Monahan is making his own luck, he's finding open places, he's being productive. The puck isn't bouncing off his ass and into the net. But why you'd look at advanced stats is to understand just how much Monahan is influencing the play of the team.

[Freeway]

Kent Wilson's latest on FN (http://flamesnation.ca/2013/10/11/se...d-with-caution) is a pretty realistic assessment of Monahan. He's not as good as his numbers appear, because he's getting the bounces. Does that mean he's not good? No. It's just that his numbers are bound to regress a bit over a longer stretch (such as an 82 game season).

So just don't expect a 90-100 point pace to continue is all.

[edslunch]

While we're on the subject of advanced stats and Monahan, here's another analysis from Flames Nation:

http://flamesnation.ca/2013/10/11/se...d-with-caution

Monahan may actually become that player at some point. But the journey to there from here is a long one with many twists and bumps in the road.....

Four games is a tiny sample size. And weird things happen in small numbers. Monahan's personal shooting percentage right now is 25%, or about double what you'd expect a competent goal scorer in the NHL to manage. His one-ice SH% (that rate at which all pucks have gone in the net) at even strength this year is a mind-boggling 22% - about 300% higher than the league average (8%) and about 100% higher than Sidney Crosby or a competent PP would manage.....

I'd suggest Flames fans also need to temper their expectations a bit, because the kid isn't going to score 102 points as a 19 year old rookie and there are going to be rough patches at some point, be it this year if he stays up, or next year when he makes the team full time for sure.....

Some good points here - he's not going to maintain his 64 goal pace, who knew? Let's say he's merely average, according to these stats he still gets 21-32 goals, hello Calder. Maybe he only gets 15 - still pretty solid.

The last line kills me - does anyone here really think he's going to even break 50 points?

I respect the analysis but can do without the 'only we know the truth and the rest of are deluding yourselves' attitude.

[gargamel]

Originally Posted by the2bears

So, not so "obvious" and not so "not sure if serious" worthy?

Fair enough. That came across as harsher than I meant it to be, but it is pretty well established that every team in every sport considers financial aspects of sports decisions. That's not a bad thing unless taken to the extreme.

Like I said, I don't think the Flames will send Monahan down strictly to delay him becoming a RFA, but I could see that being the tiebreaker if all of the other factors come out even. As it should be, if not for the sake of the owner's wallets, for the sake of the Flames' salary cap.

But more on topic, Ryan Lambert is a hack.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Freeway

Kent Wilson's latest on FN (http://flamesnation.ca/2013/10/11/se...d-with-caution) is a pretty realistic assessment of Monahan. He's not as good as his numbers appear, because he's getting the bounces. Does that mean he's not good? No. It's just that his numbers are bound to regress a bit over a longer stretch (such as an 82 game season).

So just don't expect a 90-100 point pace to continue is all.

No crap, Kent Wilson.

I'd suggest Flames fans also need to temper their expectations a bit, because the kid isn't going to score 102 points as a 19 year old rookie and there are going to be rough patches at some point,

[Day Tripper]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

As per Monahan's 30% shooting percentage, it's not high, it's simply very fortunate. The highest shooting percentages year in year out are only over 10%. Monahan WILL regress to the mean on his shooting percentage. What that percentage indicates is that in these first five games the bounces have been going his way. Like Baertschi's pass landing right on his blade instead of it the puck skipping on some bad Saddledome ice.

Well, Monahan's on pace for 66 goals, and I don't think anyone expects that to actually happen. The median S% for forwards last season was 9.1%, and if that's what it is for the rest of the season and he's still getting the same number of shots, that still translates to over 20 goals, which is certainly more than I expected.

[Savvy27]

Originally Posted by Freeway

So just don't expect a 90-100 point pace to continue is all.

hahah advanced stats disciples are so desperate for vindication they are just going to start predicting obvious things now?

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Just to address this point. The problem with results is that they're so heavily based on luck that if you focus on them you'll get a very skewed view of a player/team.

Advanced stats try to remove the luck factor as much as possible and focus on things that are in the players control.

As per Monahan's 30% shooting percentage, it's not high, it's simply very fortunate. The highest shooting percentages year in year out are only over 10%. Monahan WILL regress to the mean on his shooting percentage. What that percentage indicates is that in these first five games the bounces have been going his way. Like Baertschi's pass landing right on his blade instead of it the puck skipping on some bad Saddledome ice.

Now Monahan is making his own luck, he's finding open places, he's being productive. The puck isn't bouncing off his ass and into the net. But why you'd look at advanced stats is to understand just how much Monahan is influencing the play of the team.

I get that, and I find the stats around quality of competition and the like quite compelling. But I equally believe that if you focus too heavily on stats you miss the fact that players have different levels of skill and hockey IQ - something that gets sloughed off as 'making their own luck'. Otherwise you'd have to believe that every player has the same average chance to score on the average shot and that all shot opportunities are equal, something that is patently false.

More to the point, relax and enjoy the ride while it lasts.

[puckluck2]

Originally Posted by edslunch

While we're on the subject of advanced stats and Monahan, here's another analysis from Flames Nation:

http://flamesnation.ca/2013/10/11/se...d-with-caution



Some good points here - he's not going to maintain his 64 goal pace, who knew? Let's say he's merely average, according to these stats he still gets 21-32 goals, hello Calder. Maybe he only gets 15 - still pretty solid.

The last line kills me - does anyone here really think he's going to even break 50 points?

I respect the analysis but can do without the 'only we know the truth and the rest of are deluding yourselves' attitude.

Articles like this irritate me and I know Kent Wilson reads this board so STOP writing your articles like your audience is a bunch of first year hockey fans.

He isn't going to remain on a 102 point pace? Color me shocked.

[Day Tripper]

Originally Posted by edslunch

Otherwise you'd have to believe that every player has the same average chance to score on the average shot and that all shot opportunities are equal, something that is patently false.

Another thing is that some players won't shoot except as a last resort. For instance, look at Alex Tanguay's S% over the last decade:

03-04: 21.4%
05-06: 23.2%
06-07: 20.6%
07-08: 14.9%
08-09: 21.1%
09-10: 11.1%
10-11: 18.3%
11-12: 15.5%
12-13: 25.0%

[Lanny_McDonald]

Another example why the basement blogger set (BBS) is a dangerous thing. These guys have limited knowledge/experience and they write what they think they know rather than deal in the facts. The whole made up stats BS is what drives me crazy. But those things sound reasonable, even though there are no longitudinal studies to test their validity or reliability. But they sound good and a lot of readers will buy that nonsense without consideration. The sad thing is that these online interests are now reaching out the the BBS and giving them a national audience for their garbage. The narrow minded narrative then receives a boost in credibility and a fallacy becomes truth. Whether it be Kent Wilson or Ryan Lambert (didn't he lose on American Idol or something like that) these guys with no real expertise or experience are granted a stage they do not deserve and do damage to the knowledge base of the average fan. These guys make Eric Francis and Bruce Garrioch look like Woodward and Bernstein.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Forget that the guy is a clear hater, forget the fact that he's using advance stats after 5 games which pretty much makes the margin of error statistically invalid, his argument is completely flawed for one huge reason. He's approaching the problem entirely from a "business" perspective, and an extremely narrow viewed one at that.

Let's just assume for a second he's correct, the Flames will hit a wall, they will finish last. Let's just assume for a second that the a Flames won't continue to slowly increase the ways and the amount they use Monahan (even though they already have, seen by the fact his ice time has risen from around 11 mins to 16 mins) and assume 16 sheltered minutes is all he'd get. Even if all the above is true, he makes zero logical arguments for why that experience in the NHL is worse for Monahans development versus going back to junior.

And that is 100% what the Flames goal with the kid should be. Not what makes the Flames the best team this year, and not what makes Monahan cheaper for longer. The goal should be to make him the best player he can be as quickly as possible, and this article doesn't touch on that. A brief sentence in there that literally says sending him to junior "might" be better due to the extra ice time, but completely ignores that the ice time comes against competition far less challenging for the kid.

I won't pretend to know what is actually best for his development, but I'll trust that the Flames and Monahan have a feel for that, and I sure as hell hope the Flames aren't basing the decision off of what is best for the team this year, or how to maximize years on Monahans entry level deal or Corsi stats. I hope they are making the decision based on what is best for Sean's development.

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by edslunch

I get that, and I find the stats around quality of competition and the like quite compelling. But I equally believe that if you focus too heavily on stats you miss the fact that players have different levels of skill and hockey IQ - something that gets sloughed off as 'making their own luck'. Otherwise you'd have to believe that every player has the same average chance to score on the average shot and that all shot opportunities are equal, something that is patently false.

More to the point, relax and enjoy the ride while it lasts.

Actually advanced stats would start revealing which players had higher hockey IQs by demonstrating which players are controlling possession and creating scoring chances.

Again because goals are so rare and so dependent on luck you could easily overlook "unlucky" players and conclude that they had low hockey IQs because they weren't getting "results." Where there would be much more probably explanations such as the coach relying on that player with high hockey IQ to start in his own zone more, to cover for a linemate that was especially bad at possession, to play against the best forwards or simply because his linemates or his goalie weren't cutting the mustard.

This is why I'm continually bewildered by the almost unanimous dismal of basically a whole new set of tools removed of bias to evaluate the game. This helps fans, it doesn't hurt them only insofar as they're so mentally rigid or mindless followers of their own personal orthodoxies that they see stats as a threat to their preferred story of players and teams.

[Freeway]

I think the best approach regarding Monahan is cautious optimism. Is he doing better than people feared he would? Yes. Is he going to win the Art Ross this year? No. Will his season be somewhere in the giant canyon between those two results? Yes.

Considering how well he's done so far, I'm very curious to see how he adjusts over a long schedule.