There’s space for guys like Gridin, Farabee, Honzek, Frost, etc, but no space for Zary? Maybe it’s because, like Sharangovich, he’s been playing terribly. His opportunity reflects his performance. Farabee on the other hand can take 4th line shifts and actually play well.
I don't believe Zary is being penalized with limited ice time. His underlying numbers have been fine and he looks good. In fact, part of the reason I don't think he has been moved up consistently is that the Lomberg-Zary-Klapka line has been one of the better lines for the team and Kirkland hasn't been great as the 4C. This also isn't a new issue. Last season following the Frost/Farabee pick up Zary couldn't find a regular shift. He finished that season fifth in PPG.
The issue is where do you put him?
It is unlikely he is going to pass Kadri, Frost, or Backlund from the fourth line
Coronato, Huberdeau, and Coleman aren't being moved from the top nine regardless of how Zary plays
Farabee is finally looking decent so he isn't going anywhere in the immediate future
He could replace Honzek on the Backlund line, but to the detriment of both Honzek and the fourth line
He could replace Sharangovich on the Frost line, but that would be temporary fix given Sharangovich's contract. And again, it leaves the fourth line exposed.
Its easy to say "play yourself up the line-up" but that isn't practical when there is no room above you and limited options to replace you on your current line. Conroy need to trim the fat last off season following the Frost/Farabee acquisitions and he didn't.
But again, none of this has anything to do with Sharangovich working hard enough.
Important context added. I use and support analytics as much as anyone, provided they are used appropriately. In proper sample sizes, they are extremely telling however a 14-minute sample size is not relevant.
If using Natural Stat Trick's 5-on-5 score-and-venue-adjusted numbers, Sharangovich was on the ice for 0.35 xGF and 0.26 xGA however to illustrate the fragility of single-game sample sizes, Mark Stone's goal - shown below at the moment of release - is graded as 0.09 xG. I reckon the nine time 20-goal scorer finishes that at a much higher rate than 9%. Because Sharangovich's night was so low event, his xG is prone to extremely high variance. Give Stone an arbitrary finishing percentage of 25 and all of sudden Sharangovich is no longer a standout - by stats. 50% and he's even further down.
That is just one play for sure, which is why proper samples are compulsory: allow outlier events to be offset on both ends of the spectrum for all players.
Agree for the most part but probably better to just reply then alter my quote.
Confusing for everyone.
Last night a lot of players gave up a lot ... Sharangovich was on the ice for less damage against than 90% of the team.
Since being acquired from the Flyers, Morgan Frost has five points in 38 games at 5v5 to go along with some of the worst underlying metrics on the team. But he's a centre, Canadian, a "young player," and plays on the top PP. Didn't get singled out on Hockey Night.
The team is chock full of passengers, Bieksa could have named 3/4 of the roster and it would have fit.
Outside of a few guys, the team looks uninspired, bored, definitely not playing for each other. Looks like the team everyone had them pegged to be last year, but they rode a hot goalie and had some luck.
Fact remains, this team needs more star power, more buy-in from the leadership group not only talking the talk but walking the walk out there which isn’t happening. Team has to let the few offensively gifted guys to play to their strengths if we’re going to see any sort of goal differential improvement.
Otherwise this is what we are, which isn’t bad for our draft chances, but we need to show the young guys how to be proper pros and that starts with showing up every night and giving 110%.
The Following User Says Thank You to Royle9 For This Useful Post:
Yeah, fans are disagreeing with him being singled out for the reasons stated.
When people single him out but then say things like he’s been bad for 90 games or argue that worse players should get promotions and better ones should get the same demotions, it shouldn’t be surprising when people point out the inconsistencies and false information being used to support singling him out.
Like when people say “Player X isn’t producing!” and it turns out he’s the third most productive player on the team, maybe it might be smart to consider the context before levelling that particular criticism if the intent is to have it taken seriously?
"I think Sharangovich does work hard and here is why" is a defense. I may not agree with you, but its a defense. Other players struggling to start the season is not a defense. Neither is him having a period of production in what was an overall unproductive season.
Maybe next week Frost will get called out for his 5v5 play and we can debate his 5v5 play. Of course somebody will probably find a way to talk about Weegars drop in play or the nutritional value of white bread as a defense for his 5v5 play.
Like when people say “Player X isn’t producing!” and it turns out he’s the third most productive player on the team, maybe it might be smart to consider the context before levelling that particular criticism if the intent is to have it taken seriously?
Ok, let's dig a little deeper and consider the context.
In the final 41 games last season,
- His 5 on 5 xGF/60 was 2.32, which ranked 15th on the team.
- His 5 on 5 xGF% was 48.45, also 15th on the team.
- His 5 on 5 shooting % was 13.64, the highest on the team.
On the 5 on 4 PP, his xGF/60 was 5.11, ranked last on the team among those with at least 50 PP minutes. GF/60 was also last on the team at 4.3.
If you do the same analysis for his final 21 games,
- 5 on 5 xGF/60 was 2.72, ranking 7th on the team.
- 5 on 5 xGF% was 53.44, ranking 3rd on the team.
- 5 on 5 shooting % was 17.24, the highest on the team.
On the 5 on 4 PP, his xGF/60 was 4.53, ranked 8th out of 9 skaters with at least 25 PP minutes. GF/60 was 3.37, 7th out of 9 skaters.
So the stronger case comes from the final 21 games. Though even in that case, his PP numbers are not good, and his 5 on 5 production appears to mostly born out of an unsustainably high shooting percentage. For context, his shooting % this season is 0% (0 of his 9 shots have gone in).
Let's run the numbers one more time, this time for the final 8 games where he produced 8 points...
- 5 on 5 xGF/60 was 3.91, ranking 1st on the team.
- 5 on 5 xGF% was 64.95, ranking 2nd on the team.
- 5 on 5 shooting % was 21.43, ranking 3rd on the team.
On the 5 on 4 PP, his xGF/60 was 3.51, ranked 6th out of 10 qualifying skaters. GF/60 was 4.12, 10th of 10 skaters.
So what this is really about is an 8 game stretch to close out the season where he played excellent 5 on 5 hockey. And his best games in that stretch were vs Anaheim x2, vs SJ x2, and vs a Kings team phoning it in on the last day of the season.
Prior to that 8 game stretch, he was struggling mightily. The numbers clearly bear that out, and I remember us quite often talking about how bad he was playing.
__________________
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Mathgod For This Useful Post:
Since being acquired from the Flyers, Morgan Frost has five points in 38 games at 5v5 to go along with some of the worst underlying metrics on the team. But he's a centre, Canadian, a "young player," and plays on the top PP. Didn't get singled out on Hockey Night.
lol come on, it's not that big of a deal. Bieska called out Sharangovich because it was something that happened late in the game and it stuck with him as they went to panel. To suggest its anything beyond that is looking for drama.
Bieska has called out numerous guys during the his relatively short time on HNIC, including Canadian players like Nik Cousins and Travis Hamonic.
The Following User Says Thank You to BigThief For This Useful Post:
Bieksa doesn't have an hour to go through the whole team and show where they were all failing. So he used one forward as an example of "not good enough". That shouldn't be news to anyone that's the way broadcasts and panels and post game breakdowns work. And many fans have thought that for while about Sharky's ineffectiveness. The idea that its an invalid take to be a meanie to one player because they were were all not lined up for a blast is frankly a little much.
__________________
Canuck insulter and proud of it.
Reason:
-------
Insulted Other Member(s)
Don't insult other members; even if they are Canuck fans.
Some people are clamoring to see more Gridin, Parekh, and any other kids under 25. But frankly, I don't want the kids anywhere near this. I would rather see them all playing together with the Wranglers, gaining chemistry, and starting to have success there, while the veterans face the music with this #### show.
And I wish we could get Parekh out of there too. But the CHL is useless, so here we are.
Losing breads losing. Keep the kids away, and in positive environments. Let the current group suffer through this.
Losing does not bread losing.
If that was the case, how did MacKinnon and Landeskog win a Cup? How did Stamkos? Etc etc etc.
When you look at the cases that people use for that narrative, you’re just looking at horrifically managed organizations. It’s not some voodoo in the water, it’s bad management and bad coaching.
The Following User Says Thank You to ComixZone For This Useful Post:
We’ll run the numbers to compare Sharangovich’s performance last year to other players to prove his production was actually bad but if you run the numbers to compare him to players this season you’re talking about things as irrelevant as white bread, apparently.
Some people are so funny.
The Following User Says Thank You to PepsiFree For This Useful Post:
We’ll run the numbers to compare Sharangovich’s performance last year to other players to prove his production was actually bad but if you run the numbers to compare him to players this season you’re talking about things as irrelevant as white bread, apparently.
If that was the case, how did MacKinnon and Landeskog win a Cup? How did Stamkos? Etc etc etc.
When you look at the cases that people use for that narrative, you’re just looking at horrifically managed organizations. It’s not some voodoo in the water, it’s bad management and bad coaching.
Landeskog and Mackinnon’s Avs generally didn’t lose, even when they didn’t make the POs (and they were trying to make it every year after they got him, as well as two season before they did). They finished first in the division his rookie season. And were .549 his second and .500 his third. “Mushy middle”. This was a team with Mackinnon, Landeskog, Duchene, Rantanen, Iggy for a while.
TB didn’t tank after getting Stamkos. They were running with vets like MSL, Lecavalier, Tanguay, Ohlund. And they drafted their star player 58th overall in 2011 (right after Wotherspoon).
Landeskog and Mackinnon’s Avs generally didn’t lose, even when they didn’t make the POs (and they were trying to make it every year after they got him, as well as two season before they did). They finished first in the division his rookie season. And were .549 his second and .500 his third. “Mushy middle”. This was a team with Mackinnon, Landeskog, Duchene, Rantanen, Iggy for a while.
TB didn’t tank after getting Stamkos. They were running with vets like MSL, Lecavalier, Tanguay, Ohlund. And they drafted their star player 58th overall in 2011 (right after Wotherspoon).
Landeskog and MacKinnon were on the 22-56-0-4 Avalanche team. Landeskog was on the team that earned them MacKinnon.
Stamkos was on the roster that earned the Lightning Hedman.
I didn’t say “tanking”, I said “losing”.
Losing doesn’t beget more losing. Poor management without the capacity to build a team begets more losing.
The Following User Says Thank You to ComixZone For This Useful Post:
The 2017 Avalanche (Iggy's final year there) had the worst record of any team in a full season since the introduction of the shootout up to that point (the 2024 Sharks were 1 point worse and the 2020 Wings were on pace to be even worse when the season was stopped).
MacKinnon played all 82 games that season and Landeskog played 72.
They finished in last place by 21 points, lost all three draft lotteries, and ended up drafting the 2022 Conn Smythe Trophy winner 4th overall.
__________________
Turn up the good, turn down the suck!
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to getbak For This Useful Post:
I'm sorry you don't watch games and live off your stats. Or you do watch games and choose to ignore the truth. Either way it doesn't change the reality that everything comes from the perimeter.
The 2017 Avalanche (Iggy's final year there) had the worst record of any team in a full season since the introduction of the shootout up to that point (the 2024 Sharks were 1 point worse and the 2020 Wings were on pace to be even worse when the season was stopped).
MacKinnon played all 82 games that season and Landeskog played 72.
They finished in last place by 21 points, lost all three draft lotteries, and ended up drafting the 2022 Conn Smythe Trophy winner 4th overall.
But that was an outlier season among the others>. The Avs are a team that got a high pick nterpsersed between average seasons, and aced the pick every time.
But that was an outlier season among the others>. The Avs are a team that got a high pick nterpsersed between average seasons, and aced the pick every time.
No it's not.
Landeskog and MacKinnon were both on the team for these three seasons:
If losing begets losing, then how was Landeskog able to Captain a Championship? How did MacKinnon overcome three straight years of missed playoffs, including an absolutely pathetic season?
Losing does not bread more losing. Winning, in almost every situation, actually requires losing - and then a significant amount of excellent management.
Last edited by ComixZone; 10-19-2025 at 04:52 PM.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to ComixZone For This Useful Post:
"I think Sharangovich does work hard and here is why" is a defense. I may not agree with you, but its a defense. Other players struggling to start the season is not a defense. Neither is him having a period of production in what was an overall unproductive season.
Maybe next week Frost will get called out for his 5v5 play and we can debate his 5v5 play. Of course somebody will probably find a way to talk about Weegars drop in play or the nutritional value of white bread as a defense for his 5v5 play.
But that aside, I don’t think the stats do a good job of telling the whole story either, not any better or worse than actual production (especially not if you’re going to go through the effort of “running the numbers” in a few scenarios but don’t even set parameters like TOI or F vs D).
For the last 41 games out of players who played more than 9 games he was:
- 1st in GF% despite being 10th in xGF%
- 5th in GF/60
- 3rd in GA/60
There is a difference between what is expected to happen and what did happen. You might look at a player with a discrepancy one way or another and see something unsustainable, but that does not mean the production does or doesn’t exist any more than it would have otherwise.
If a player scores a lucky hat trick at the end of the day it’s a hat trick all the same as a skill one.
We’ll run the numbers to compare Sharangovich’s performance last year to other players to prove his production was actually bad but if you run the numbers to compare him to players this season you’re talking about things as irrelevant as white bread, apparently.
Some people are so funny.
Don't know if this is directed at me.. but ya some people are funny. There is nothing wrong with pointing out how awful Frost has been but suggesting Bieska only criticized Sharengovic due to some misplaced Belarusian bigotry is a little out there.
