Star Power and SC Champions

Welcome to the main forum of our site. Anything and everything to do with the Vancouver Canucks is dicussed and debated here.

Moderator: Referees

User avatar
2Fingers
MVP
MVP
Posts: 7672
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 7:47 am

Star Power and SC Champions

Post by 2Fingers »

Interesting write up and something Skyo probably loves (its all about analytics)

http://www.thehockeynews.com/news/artic ... in-the-cup

Since I am not a numbers guy I do not agree with everything written here but I do agree at this moment the Nucks have 0 super stars. This is something the team will need to win a SC (IMO).

So Doc you still think the Nucks are 1 - 2 years away or do you want to make that more realistic and say 3 - 4 years away from making the playoffs even.

PS - 1 edit - I do think Horvat should of made Tier 5, he is better than someone like Iginla at this point in time.
User avatar
Cornuck
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 14967
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 11:39 am
Location: Everywhere

Re: Star Power and SC Champions

Post by Cornuck »

Interesting from a numbers standpoint, I guess - and looks like a way to justify saying "You need superstars to win the Cup" - which is mostly true.

But I think it leaves out the other three factors I think are just as important:

Roster Depth
Goaltending
Lack of injuries

If some could throw together an analysis of those 4 factors, I think you might see a true Cup winning formula.

As for the Canucks, I don't see any "Tier 1" (or 2) players on the roster or coming up. Does that mean we can't compete? Can't reach the Conference Finals?

Will we need a couple of Tier 1 players at different positions? One forward, one D (or goaltender)? One at D for sure, right Skyo?

So if we were to take this theory as gospel, then we'll need some high end talent before we win the Cup and we'll need to draft them. With the lottery in place, we could end up never drafting that high end talent the article implies that we need.

So - as a GM - do you build a competitive team that is entertaining to watch, or do you try to build a Cup winner?
Doc: "BTW, Donny was right, you're smug."
Ronning's Ghost
MVP
MVP
Posts: 1389
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 5:25 pm
Location: New Westminster

Re: Star Power and SC Champions

Post by Ronning's Ghost »

Cornuck wrote:Interesting from a numbers standpoint, I guess - and looks like a way to justify saying "You need superstars to win the Cup" - which is mostly true.

But I think it leaves out the other three factors I think are just as important:

Roster Depth
Goaltending
Lack of injuries
I don't think anyone will deny that a team needs (at least) solid goaltending to win a Cup, but it seems to me that the difference in quality between the best goaltenders in the league and the least capable has been shrinking in recent years, and that now almost any NHL goalie is capable of going on the kind of in-the-zone hot streak that can carry a team through the playoffs. This is probably down to advances in coaching and technique.

Injuries have a large stochastic component, but some are more resistant, or more vulnerable, than others, and I think that when building a roster, it is important to remember that 'resistance to injury' is an important part of a player's talent profile. (An under-appreciated feature of the Sedins' game, it seems to me.) This relates in some degree to the 'does size matter ?' question.
Cornuck wrote:So if we were to take this theory as gospel, then we'll need some high end talent before we win the Cup and we'll need to draft them. With the lottery in place, we could end up never drafting that high end talent the article implies that we need.
Just in case Canucks fans weren't depressed enough. :(

Remember, though, that there is also a large component of luck in identifying and selecting the best player available at any draft position. Not to say that every GM who picked ahead of him was stupid, but it remains at least possible that Benning drafted the most talented player the 2017 draft class.
Cornuck wrote:So - as a GM - do you build a competitive team that is entertaining to watch, or do you try to build a Cup winner?
I think that becomes a business decision based on the franchise's assessment of the buying preferences of the local fanbase.

My own solution (as proposed on this board) is to build a team that will be satisfying to watch lose hockey games, while still trying to draft the level of talent needed to win a championship.
User avatar
Mickey107
MVP
MVP
Posts: 18820
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 5:27 am
Location: Richmond, B.C.

Re: Star Power and SC Champions

Post by Mickey107 »

Well, he is writing for Hockey News so I guess he knows a little, very little.
Honestly I think your boy Dom there is just filling up empty summer space.
I see a ton of holes in his reasoning and as mentioned above, there are very serious other factors.
Note how many 2 time winners. Experience ? In particular with LA.
You can make stats look like almost anything you want to.
What about the teams that had at least that much, if not more, star power, that didn't win a cup during those years ?
I can think of two or three. :(
"evolution"
User avatar
Cornuck
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 14967
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 11:39 am
Location: Everywhere

Re: Star Power and SC Champions

Post by Cornuck »

Ronning's Ghost wrote:I don't think anyone will deny that a team needs (at least) solid goaltending to win a Cup, but it seems to me that the difference in quality between the best goaltenders in the league and the least capable has been shrinking in recent years, and that now almost any NHL goalie is capable of going on the kind of in-the-zone hot streak that can carry a team through the playoffs. This is probably down to advances in coaching and technique.
Agreed 100% - and by 'goaltending', I don't mean that your starter has to be a 'top tier' player - but just a guy that can string together the mental stamina to win 16 games.

I keep thinking back to WCE era Canucks and when we had some of the top players in the league, but our goaltending couldn't get it done.
Doc: "BTW, Donny was right, you're smug."
User avatar
SKYO
MVP
MVP
Posts: 14992
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:34 pm

Re: Star Power and SC Champions

Post by SKYO »

Thanks for the share reef.

It's why we hope Pettersson and Dahlen can overachieve in two/three years, they are a different breed of Swedish players vs the Sedins, much more slick with sick dangles.
If both can be tier 2, along with Horvat continuing to score 50+ points each season, if those three along with Boeser - if he can rise to star power scoring wise, we could have multiple players in the higher tiers to justify not having a tier 1 player.

A lot of IF's hanging on those 4, but if they can reach their highest potential, it's feasible to win a Cup with that writer's formula to win a championship in the NHL.

So to win a Cup, all you need is one guy from each tier and you’re set, right? Well, not really.
You don’t necessarily need one from each – no team is actually built like that – just as long as you have enough star power to split the difference.
For example, a team might not need a Tier 1 guy at all if they have multiple Tier 2 or 3 players...
The only tier one's we've had in Canucks history was Pavel Bure and the Sedins, somewhat Naslund.

Bure and the Sedins were earned/acquired by the team with due diligence, hard work and a bit of luck, by Pat Quinn and Burke respectively, no luck of the lotto draw.
Naslund was a lucky trade.

Canucks signed Igor Larionov whom later recruited sportswriter Igor Kuperman whom found the 11 games needed for Bure to be eligible for the draft.
http://www.vancouversun.com/sports/Pave ... story.html

It is also why it's WHO you have on your team which can be vital for certain rare moments like that.

Going off here, I guess it's key we keep Goldobin and let him thrive here, he has the scoring potential to be an NHL star as well with Boeser, so if we get one Russian going here scoring wise & then lock him up long term, it will help in acquiring/keeping Russians here for the future, notably a one potential top tier Tryamkin who has the toolbox to dominate the NHL if he can put it all together in 2-3 years.

This current team does has a lot of potential, but it's a wait and see if these youngsters can start to execute that potential to become NHL stars soon.

Keep on moving out vets for prospects/picks JB!
Can the Canucks just win a Cup within the next 5 years.
User avatar
Hockey Widow
CC Legend
Posts: 19129
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm

Re: Star Power and SC Champions

Post by Hockey Widow »

I think absolutely everyone on this board would agree that potential is really all we have right now. In some cases it is promising potential. In others, we just have to wait and see. But I still refuse to follow the anal guys. :mrgreen: too much effort for me to try and understand it all.
The only HW the Canucks need
Ronning's Ghost
MVP
MVP
Posts: 1389
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 5:25 pm
Location: New Westminster

Re: Star Power and SC Champions

Post by Ronning's Ghost »

Mondi wrote:The potential we have is a long list of B/B+/A- prospects. We still need our Matthews.
Interesting. Maybe, maybe not. One superstar, or one great line, can get shut down. Maybe in a salary cap league, the structure to aim for is a first line that is the 20th best in the league, but defensively reliable, supported by second and third lines that are maybe the 34th and 40th best lines in the league. That is to say, rather than three 7 million dollar forwards, three 4 million dollar forwards, three 3 million dollar forwards, and some roster-fillers, a team is better off with three 5 million dollar forwards, three 4.5 million dollar forwards, three 3.5 million dollar forwards, and a proportionately upgraded fourth line. (All salaries approximate, and assuming players performing at their salary level. Yes, you also need young players out-performing their salaries to win it all; this was just an illustration to flesh out the idea.) Somewhere down the line-up, you get a favourable matchup. If the Sedins had shown the playing longevity for which I had hoped, the Canucks might have been in line for such a structure in the next couple of seasons.

Maybe you need that Norris-calibre stud defenceman SKYO has always wanted, or maybe you're better off with 4 defencemen who are top-two on most teams, and six who are top-four on most teams. Even if you're trying to build a durable team, injuries are all but certain. As Cornuck said, you need depth. Superstars are actually an impediment to depth.
User avatar
Island Nucklehead
MVP
MVP
Posts: 8392
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 2:27 pm
Location: Ottawa

Re: Star Power and SC Champions

Post by Island Nucklehead »

Ronning's Ghost wrote: Maybe you need that Norris-calibre stud defenceman SKYO has always wanted, or maybe you're better off with 4 defencemen who are top-two on most teams, and six who are top-four on most teams. Even if you're trying to build a durable team, injuries are all but certain. As Cornuck said, you need depth. Superstars are actually an impediment to depth.
When was the last team to win a Stanley cup without a superstar? Carolina? Ward was certainly playing like one...
Ronning's Ghost
MVP
MVP
Posts: 1389
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 5:25 pm
Location: New Westminster

Re: Star Power and SC Champions

Post by Ronning's Ghost »

Island Nucklehead wrote:
Ronning's Ghost wrote: Maybe you need that Norris-calibre stud defenceman SKYO has always wanted, or maybe you're better off with 4 defencemen who are top-two on most teams, and six who are top-four on most teams. Even if you're trying to build a durable team, injuries are all but certain. As Cornuck said, you need depth. Superstars are actually an impediment to depth.
When was the last team to win a Stanley cup without a superstar? Carolina? Ward was certainly playing like one...
That's probably the best example. Has any GM attempted to deliberately follow the model I proposed ?

There is also a bit of a chicken-and-egg phenomenon. If you captain a team to the Stanley Cup Championship, you are, by dint of that achievement, at least a star, if not a superstar, even in the absence of any other qualifying accomplishment, and will be paid like one. So, even if it worked once, it would be hard to repeat with the same roster.
bckev
CC Veteran
Posts: 190
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2013 9:53 am

Re: Star Power and SC Champions

Post by bckev »

Hockey Widow wrote:I think absolutely everyone on this board would agree that potential is really all we have right now. In some cases it is promising potential. In others, we just have to wait and see. But I still refuse to follow the anal guys. :mrgreen: too much effort for me to try and understand it all.
I don't follow the anal guys because I don't want to step in anything that might fall out.
User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 42932
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 12:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: Star Power and SC Champions

Post by Strangelove »

Reefer2 wrote: So Doc you still think the Nucks are 1 - 2 years away or do you want to make that more realistic and say 3 - 4 years away from making the playoffs even.
Did you really think one silly article would change my mind? :scowl:
____
Try to focus on someday.
User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 42932
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 12:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: Star Power and SC Champions

Post by Strangelove »

micky107 wrote: You can make stats look like almost anything you want to.
Mondi wrote:Are we talking about the same people who value shots that miss the net? :shock:
bckev wrote: I don't follow the anal guys because I don't want to step in anything that might fall out.
All of the above plus the fact the author is shamelessly adding "projections for next season". :roll:

I merely skimmed the article but he is "projecting" Jagr, Frolik, Mantha, Lee, Gallagher, etc, etc, etc

... to be better players than anyone and everyone on you Vancouver Canucks next season.

Frankly, the article is a load of horseshit, a complete waste of time...
____
Try to focus on someday.
User avatar
Blob Mckenzie
MVP
MVP
Posts: 31126
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Re: Star Power and SC Champions

Post by Blob Mckenzie »

The time frame has now been reduced to 1 - 2 years starting in October.

Try to focus on 1 - 2 years from now.
“I don’t care what you and some other poster were talking about”
User avatar
SKYO
MVP
MVP
Posts: 14992
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:34 pm

Re: Star Power and SC Champions

Post by SKYO »

Ronning's Ghost wrote:
Mondi wrote:The potential we have is a long list of B/B+/A- prospects. We still need our Matthews.
Interesting. Maybe, maybe not. One superstar, or one great line, can get shut down. Maybe in a salary cap league, the structure to aim for is a first line that is the 20th best in the league, but defensively reliable, supported by second and third lines that are maybe the 34th and 40th best lines in the league. That is to say, rather than three 7 million dollar forwards, three 4 million dollar forwards, three 3 million dollar forwards, and some roster-fillers, a team is better off with three 5 million dollar forwards, three 4.5 million dollar forwards, three 3.5 million dollar forwards, and a proportionately upgraded fourth line.

...or maybe you're better off with 4 defencemen who are top-two on most teams, and six who are top-four on most teams. Even if you're trying to build a durable team, injuries are all but certain.
Nashville sweeping aside the blackhawks and taking the superstar Pens to 6 games even without RyJo proves having a deep and talented defense is a new trend.

Lets take a look at their top 4.

6'1 200lbs LS Roman Josi:
Assets: Has great puck-moving skills, outstanding skating ability and a very low panic threshold. Also boasts decent size for the NHL game. Can produce big numbers at all levels and log huge amounts of ice time.

Flaws:Can be a little too loose in his defensive play from time to time, so he could stand to tighten things up a little bit more so as to become even more consistent. Injuries could be a problem, too.
http://forecaster.thehockeynews.com/player/6755
6'0 210lbs RS PK Subban:
Assets:Has outstanding skating ability and excels at rushing up ice with the puck. Can quarterback a power play and also initiate a lot of contact. Displays a flair for the dramatic. Shoots the puck with aplomb and also gets under opponents' skin. Is adept at playing a shutdown role.

Flaws:Needs to simplify his game, since he has a tendency to run around in his own end from time to time. Also tries to do too much with the puck. On-ice antics may at times annoy his own teammates and the coaching staff. Could stand to become a bit more disciplined on the ice.
http://forecaster.thehockeynews.com/player/6232
5'10 180lbs RS Ryan Ellis:
Assets:Has very good offensive instincts and great mobility. Also owns the natural ability to move the puck quickly out of danger. Owns a powerful point shot. Has developed into an excellent defender, as well.

Flaws:Can make a few too many mistakes with the puck when he is a bit too overconfident, though he has improved a lot in that area. Lacks ideal size for the blueline position in the NHL (5-10, 180 pounds).
http://forecaster.thehockeynews.com/player/7022
6'4 215lbs LS Mattias Ekholm:
Assets: Has a huge frame (6-4, 215 pounds), puck-moving ability and a big shot from the point. Usually keeps his game very simple and minimizes his mistakes. Owns all-round acumen.

Flaws:Does not have a lot of grit or toughness, so he does not always take full advantage of his big frame at the NHL level. Also, he does not shoot the puck nearly enough.
Josie and Ellis aren't all that big for dmen, but obviously got high caliber talent.


Last season those 4 scored 150 points combined. And 50 frickin' points in the playoffs combined in 22 games.

Another reason to try to keep QB's 6'2 207lbs LS Ben Hutton and 5'10 190lbs RS Troy Stecher long term over all the rest of the dmen here currently.

Plus it's great to have MDZ for scoring depth, he's scored a ton before in the league, so hopefully he can help Hutton and Stecher out with some pointers on taking their game to the next level.

In a couple years I'd like to see our top 4 be
Juolevi, Stecher, Hutton and (Guds or/Tanev).
Tryamkin is the wildcard in 2-3 years.
Can the Canucks just win a Cup within the next 5 years.
Post Reply