John Frickin Gaudreau!

[Canada 02]

Hayes was quoted recently saying he's signing with the Hawks when the season is over

[GreenLantern]

So what is the "magic number" for BC to clinch home and advance directly to the QF's?

From my google searching it seems this happened in about mid Feb. last year..

[djsFlames]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Like every other college player who is either not offered or does not sign his ELC upon graduation, in theory, yes. However, it should be noted that first-round picks virtually never make it to free agency from college. I think it is probably close to a foregone conclusion that Hayes will be signed by the Blackhawks this summer.

But furthermore, that line about Flames fans wishing we could pick up Hayes is not so much interesting as it is irritating. I have seen it mentioned by a handful of posters on this board, but it has also been countered by the correct observation that drafting and development should not (in almost every instance) proceed from line combinations in Juniour. I hope that the Flames would not consider paying the price that would be required to acquire Hayes. There are already a couple of prospects in the organisation (Poirier and Ferland) who are essentially close to the same kinds of pieces, and the team is likely better served developing their current assets and drafting more.

This is a bad idea.


Not to this team, he is not. Baertschi is younger than Hayes, and has already played NHL games in two seasons. This is Hayes' first season in four years of NCAA hockey in which he has produced above a point/game pace, which is not especially impressive, and likely has as much to do with his good fortune of playing with Gaudreau as it does his own level of skill. From his sophomore to his junior season, he improved by a factor of 0.28 points/game, which is a fraction of his 0.87 improvement ratio this year.

Coversely, Arnold improved 0.06 from his sophomore to junior season, and then 0.52 from last year to this year. Gaudreau improved 0.45 points/game from his freshman to sophomore seasons, and 0.54 from last year to this year.

Gaudreau is the common denominator here. It is a huge factor.


Yes, it is going too far, and no, I certainly hope that Burke's interest in acquiring Hayes is entirely limited to how he, individually, contributes to rebuilding the Flames, balanced against the cost to acquire him from the Blackhawks. As near as I can tell, there aren't any scouts or GMs in the NHL who put any stock at all into "retaining proven chemistry" at the juniour level, so it is really a moot point to begin with. As mentioned above, Hayes absolutely benefits from the chance to play with Gaudreau, as does Arnold. The Flames already have a player or two (and I believe Poirier will be a better player in the long run) who could probably reproduce what Hayes is doing given the same opportunity.

Just trying to shake up the ol' trade talk.

I'm not really that enticed by what Hayes can bring, and do believe that the straw stirring the drink on the best line in college hockey is Gaudreau, and Hayes has been made to look stronger in his final year because of Johnny. I think Poirier will be a better player in the future for sure. I'm also in support of allowing Baertschi time to develop and figure his game out, no need to rush him out. It's just fun to suggest these things.

[jg13]

Moved from the Jankowski thread..

Originally Posted by RyZ

Unless he is NHL ready in all 3 zones, he wont be on the Flames while Hartley is around. I don't watch any BC games, but I am betting he isn't forced to play much defence in college.

Gaudreau is +31 leads all College players in this category (the entire BC team is +45 combined)
Arnold is +29 (2nd amongst all college players)
and they've only played 25 games..

You can't have numbers like that if you're not at least half decent in your own zone.

I stand by it. Gaudreau is NHL ready especially on a team like the flames right now.

[djsFlames]

Damn, that's some kinda +/-.

I think Johnny would tear it up like a rookie Patty Kane if he were in the NHL now.

[dammage79]

Ryan Pinder ‏@Fan960Pinder 26m
Johnny Gaudreau expected to win Hobey & 'go pro' this Spring with Flames. THN's Brian Costello - http://www.thehockeynews.com/blog/jo...Kq4uGB.twitter …

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by jg13

Moved from the Jankowski thread..



Gaudreau is +31 leads all College players in this category (the entire BC team is +45 combined)
Arnold is +29 (2nd amongst all college players)
and they've only played 25 games..

You can't have numbers like that if you're not at least half decent in your own zone.

I stand by it. Gaudreau is NHL ready especially on a team like the flames right now.

+/- really doesn't mean much at all. Especially when the team has outscored their opponents by a 2:1 margin on the year (ok, a fraction less they have outscored them 112-58 )

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

[jg13]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

+/- really doesn't mean much at all. Especially when the team has outscored their opponents by a 2:1 margin on the year (ok, a fraction less they have outscored them 112-58 )

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

I'm not sure if this is a serious post, so i'll assume it isn't.

[Scoutski]

Originally Posted by jg13

I'm not sure if this is a serious post, so i'll assume it isn't.

+/- get's a lot more weight from the performance of the entire team as opposed to goals and assists which are pretty much individual.

I think it's fair to say that you'd expect a much higher correlation for predicting a player from their individual points and a low correlation insight into their defensive game from the +/-. Note that I'm not saying it doesn't mean anything, yes, leading the league certainly suggests that he's not bad at it but it doesn't translate directly to success.

Perhaps a pertinent example would be Iginla. In his last full season with the Flames he was a -10 and currently through 52 games with the Bruins he is a +20. It is completely unreasonable to suggest that he just got a whole lot better defensively on his own between that period, but it's also unreasonable to suggest that it has nothing to do with him either, thus a weak correlation.

I think it's very fair to have questions about his defensive game at this point, not genuine concern, but questions.

[jg13]

Originally Posted by Scoutski

+/- get's a lot more weight from the performance of the entire team as opposed to goals and assists which are pretty much individual.

I think it's fair to say that you'd expect a much higher correlation for predicting a player from their individual points and a low correlation insight into their defensive game from the +/-. Note that I'm not saying it doesn't mean anything, yes, leading the league certainly suggests that he's not bad at it but it doesn't translate directly to success.

Perhaps a pertinent example would be Iginla. In his last full season with the Flames he was a -10 and currently through 52 games with the Bruins he is a +20. It is completely unreasonable to suggest that he just got a whole lot better defensively on his own between that period, but it's also unreasonable to suggest that it has nothing to do with him either, thus a weak correlation.

I think it's very fair to have questions about his defensive game at this point, not genuine concern, but questions.

I don't think that is quite a great comparison seeing as the Boston Bruins as a team have a high powered defence and goalie.

The Bruins combined are a +213 where as Iginla is a +20 (Roughly 10%)
The Eagles combined are a +45 where as Gaudreau is +31 (Roughly 67%)

Its very apparent that the other players on BC are getting scored on 5 on 5 ALOT more than the Gaudreau line and hes playing against top players on opposing teams..

Yes +/- is not the most tell tail stat by any stretch but it definitely counts for something.

I'm not really too concerned about his 2 way game based on stats and the fact that he stated he was playing his Junior year with BC to improve on his defensive game.

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by jg13

I'm not sure if this is a serious post, so i'll assume it isn't.

I am serious.

+/- is a joke of a stat. It is a stat that those lacking in hockey knowledge cling to as if it actually means something.

[herashak]

Being a good defensive forward in the NHL is light years ahead of being one in the CHL/NCAA. Watching some of his games I don't think he is defensively ready at all and could really use a year in the AHL. He is smart and pesky defensively but needs some time to work on his positioning in the D-zone.

[Scoutski]

Originally Posted by jg13

I don't think that is quite a great comparison seeing as the Boston Bruins as a team have a high powered defence and goalie.

You pretty much just summed up what I was saying in one sentence.

[Cheese]

Easy to play Defence when your in your opponents zone all night.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

I am serious.

+/- is a joke of a stat. It is a stat that those lacking in hockey knowledge cling to as if it actually means something.

No kidding. But how do they stack up using Corsi or Fenwick.

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by New Era

No kidding. But how do they stack up using Corsi or Fenwick.

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make, advanced stats might be better than +/- but it would be ridiculous to use them as the basis for an argument too

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

[djsFlames]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

I am serious.

+/- is a joke of a stat. It is a stat that those lacking in hockey knowledge cling to as if it actually means something.

Whoa there, champ.

[You Need a Thneed]

People that completely disregard +/- are funny. Sure, merely looking at the +/- for one player doesn't tell you much, but comparing it to others on the same team and others on other teams can tell you a lot.

[T@T]

When you own the ice +/- is no joke.

Gaudreau's line is a +83

Second line is a +27

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by T@T

When you own the ice +/- is no joke.

Gaudreau's line is a +83

Second line is a +27

Sure, it tells you that the Gaudreau line is good but as Cheese says,

Easy to play Defence when your in your opponents zone all night.

it doesn't necessarily tell you that they play good defence.