Jan 4 Practice - Jiri Hudler out vs Tampa. Raymond in.

[calumniate]

A healthy Hudler and Frolik would sure be useful right now!

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Colborne is better than a lot of guys in getting the puck and keeping it down low. But he doesn't generate a lot of shots, which in advanced stats apparently = possession. All four guys mentioned by Street shoot a lot, except maybe Jooris. Raymond has 4 less shots but 10 less games. I don't know who generates more shots for their lines but I'm betting its the same.

Best way to test that assertion is to only look at how many shot (attempts) you're "preventing". Shooting more doesn't influence how much you're being shot at, after all...

Line / Total Minutes Together / Corsi Against Per 60 Minutes
Gaudreau-Monahan-Jooris / 21:24 / 47.66
Gaudreau-Monahan-Ferland / 7:56 / 45.38
Gaudreau-Monahan-Raymond / 45:28 / 43.55
Gaudreau-Monahan-Bennett / 15:13 / 63.09
Gaudreau-Monahan-Colborne / 31:32 / 68.50

(data from Puckalytics)


Please explain to me how Colborne who is supposedly great at possession is getting absolutely shelled while three of the others have respectable suppression stats and the fourth was a 19 year old rookie playing his off-wing for the first time ever?
Small Sample Sizes? Okay, Let's compare the individuals' shot attempt suppression the last two seasons, zone start adjusted:

Jooris - 58.38
Ferland - 59.40
Raymond - 66.66
Bennett - 58.11
Colborne - 62.92


Remember, this is a stat that is unaffected by how much you're yourself are electing to shoot. The only guy getting shelled more often than Colborne, is Raymond. Except he's getting shelled less often than Colborne when with Gaudreau and Monahan,

I just don't understand how a guy who gets shelled with or without Gaudreau and Monahan, is good at possession. You would think that if you have the puck, you're not going to be getting shelled.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Please explain to me how Colborne who is supposedly great at possession is getting absolutely shelled while three of the others have respectable suppression stats and the fourth was a 19 year old rookie playing his off-wing for the first time ever?

I can't. But then, I never did say he was great at possession.

I did say he seemed to be matched against big offensive lines a bit more, which might explain some of the shelling.

[Loudog]

Anyone have an idea on Frolik's timeline?

Is he a week away? Weeks? Months?

[sureLoss]

Hartley said weeks back on December 18.

Don't think there has been further timeline given since.

[Hockeyguy15]

Probably won't be until late January at the earliest, based on the Hartley comment.

[dammage79]

Probably end of the month for Frolik.

[Loudog]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Hartley said weeks back on December 18.

Don't think there has been further timeline given since.

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

Probably won't be until late January at the earliest, based on the Hartley comment.

Originally Posted by dammage79

Probably end of the month for Frolik.

Quoted to thanks. I'm fast and loose with the thanks button and run out when I need them most, lol.

[AcGold]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Best way to test that assertion is to only look at how many shot (attempts) you're "preventing". Shooting more doesn't influence how much you're being shot at, after all...

Line / Total Minutes Together / Corsi Against Per 60 Minutes
Gaudreau-Monahan-Jooris / 21:24 / 47.66
Gaudreau-Monahan-Ferland / 7:56 / 45.38
Gaudreau-Monahan-Raymond / 45:28 / 43.55
Gaudreau-Monahan-Bennett / 15:13 / 63.09
Gaudreau-Monahan-Colborne / 31:32 / 68.50

(data from Puckalytics)


Please explain to me how Colborne who is supposedly great at possession is getting absolutely shelled while three of the others have respectable suppression stats and the fourth was a 19 year old rookie playing his off-wing for the first time ever?
Small Sample Sizes? Okay, Let's compare the individuals' shot attempt suppression the last two seasons, zone start adjusted:

Jooris - 58.38
Ferland - 59.40
Raymond - 66.66
Bennett - 58.11
Colborne - 62.92


Remember, this is a stat that is unaffected by how much you're yourself are electing to shoot. The only guy getting shelled more often than Colborne, is Raymond. Except he's getting shelled less often than Colborne when with Gaudreau and Monahan,

I just don't understand how a guy who gets shelled with or without Gaudreau and Monahan, is good at possession. You would think that if you have the puck, you're not going to be getting shelled.

Because he's good at gaining possession, not keeping it. His benefits are obvious. In the corners he's hard to push around, something that pretty much the rest of the roster can't do, save maybe Dougie and Engelland.

[CsInMyBlood]

Not sure which is worse, Jiri Hudler being hurt or Mason Raymond in the lineup again.

[Locke]

[LanceUppercut]

Originally Posted by CsInMyBlood

Not sure which is worse, Jiri Hudler being hurt or Mason Raymond in the lineup again.

Or the fact that it is possible Raymond might actually play better than Hudler has been?

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

How the hell does Colborne keep moving up in the lineup. It's truly baffling

Yeah he really needs to drop (pass) down the lineup. All he does is lose the puck when he enters the zone after deking 3 players in the neutral zone or makes one of his dumb drop passes no one but the other team expects.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by AcGold

Because he's good at gaining possession, not keeping it. His benefits are obvious. In the corners he's hard to push around, something that pretty much the rest of the roster can't do, save maybe Dougie and Engelland.

You keep saying it like it's true, but it's really not. Not a great forechecker, poor at creating offense, and generally poor at defense.

He's a bottom 6 at best. Jooris is better I in every area IMO

[calgaryblood]

Colborne has a great game every 5-10 games and in between is average to below average.

The rumours of him not wanting it enough before he was drafted seem to be ringing true. He honestly isn't engaged or seems like he cares enough consistently. When he's on he is a great player but he's rarely ever on.

[IliketoPuck]

Originally Posted by heep223

When Colborne gets mad (ie. emotional intensity), he's awesome - the problem is that only happens like once every 20 games. I hope the coaching staff are working on that with him.

He is just so uninspiring for a guy with such a great tool box. He could be totally dominant, but plays such a soft game. The only place he is remotely effective on the ice is below the other team's goal line, but he only gets there once or twice a game because his possession game is a gigantic air brake on the rest of the team.

[PugnaciousIntern]

Hope Hudler is OK. Glad he's taking the time off, it's been painful watching him the last handful of games. Just not his normal self. Obviously something wrong, and sounds like it's chronic. His presence likely hindered the team in the last few games, but you've got to admire the drive of these players who are willing to play through injury.

[PugnaciousIntern]

And because everybody is chipping in on Colborne - he's just one of those guys that frustrate you because he should be something more. Other players in the league with the same skill set are more effective, and I assume that's why people believe that the issue might be between the ears.

He is a supporting cast player at this point. He doesn't carry his line through a shift now and then, let alone drag the entire team through a game. At least the good news is that his value has increased since the price that we acquired him, and if he were to be traded, would have been a net asset gain.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by LanceUppercut

Or the fact that it is possible Raymond might actually play better than Hudler has been?

The last 5 games they both played I liked Raymond more. Now it seems Hudler may actually have an excuse.

[CsInMyBlood]

Originally Posted by LanceUppercut

Or the fact that it is possible Raymond might actually play better than Hudler has been?

It is a sad statement because it could be true.