| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Guest5744 |
Posted - 02/03/2012 : 06:41:15
With Sam Gagner having a stellar night (4 goals, 4 assists) against the blackhawks do you think he is safe from trade or simply heightened his value? |
| 40 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Guest6896 |
Posted - 05/04/2013 : 02:58:28
Don't try to talk common sense with a Leaf fan. You are wasting your time. |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 05/03/2013 : 16:10:15
quote:
Originally posted by Guest4178
I thought we were going to check back in 2-3 years, not 2-3 hours! :)
Lol...too funny! 
BTW, Guest4178, you make me sick! How can you continue to stay so level headed and reasonable in another debate! I'd have lost it by now, be steaming mad, prob warned by a mod or admin, etc to calm the heck down!  You? Nope, just calm, reasonable, respectful, etc. Kudos bro. 
As for the argument, i see both sides, though while it's not fair to judge Kadri after his first full season, it's equally unfair to not respect the age that Gagner came into the league. |
| Guest4178 |
Posted - 05/03/2013 : 14:07:24
I thought we were going to check back in 2-3 years, not 2-3 hours! :)
Agreed, Gagner has not produced much in the last 2-3 hours, and he probably won't produce much in the next 2-3 months! I will give you that! :)
In another site (one which asked which Oiler would get the most points this season), I made the (bold) prediction that Gagner would jump .20 ppg in production. Becoming a 65-70 point player in an 82 game season. I made this prediction before the season started.
And the facts prove this to be an accurate prediction. Not gloating, but who else predicted Gagner to make such a jump in production, especially (as you repeatedly state) five previous flat seasons of points production?
And my prediction continues, that he will continue to improve in years to come. (And why shouldn't he? Gagner is only 23 years old.)
If you cannot see that NHL players often get better after their early 20's (even after providing multiple examples), I can't help you with that.
Once again, I have no problem at all with having a difference of opinion, but I would never suggest that "facts" prove Gagner will be a ppg player in the NHL in the next 2-3 seasons, the very years most NHL players peak in production. Nor would I dismiss the "facts" you use to support your opinion.
We have a difference of opinion – that's all. Your "facts" are not going to change my mind about a player I've watched for six seasons, I suspect way more games than you have seen him play.
And once again, my prediction is for the future, so we will have to wait 2-3 years to see who's right. (Or maybe after next season at the earliest, to get a better idea.)
I can wait. :) |
| JOSHUACANADA |
Posted - 05/03/2013 : 11:29:04
I have to ask Slozo, outside of a 2nd year uptick in production Lecavelier didn't see a spike until his 6th year and his 7th was a monster season he will likely never reproduce. His pace of points were similar to Gagner, except Gagner is peaking earlier in his career than Lecavelier. I don't know why you picked this player of all the players on the guests list to use as an example as this only proves Gagners potential and value more. To be honest if we look at players with stats similar to Gagner at this point in there careers who are seeing increased playing times and linemates why are you arguing against what fans who regularly watch his game think his potential is.
"I now realise that the Toronto Maple Leafs, Canada's finest hockey team, is better than the Ottawa Senators - and always will be. PS - LOVE that Dion Phaneuf! " |
| slozo |
Posted - 05/03/2013 : 11:08:52
Ok, I couldn't let it go. 
quote:
Gagner averaged .60 points per game prior to this season, and the fact is Gagner averaged .80 points per game this season. (Well 79.16 actually, but still a .20 jump.)
Unh hunh . . . and? he average .80 for this 48 game season . . . and at something like 34 games, he was at 1.00. So what's your point again?
quote:
To repeat what was pointed out earlier, there are many examples of players who played 4-5 seasons before increasing their points production.
Vincent Lecavalier went from .59 ppg to .95 ppg
Shane Doan went from .34 ppg to .77 ppg
Andrew Ladd went from .46 ppg to .71 ppg
Ray Whitney went from .59 ppg to .86 ppg
Shame on me for taking for granted your example. But I first looked at Lecavalier, and you'll have to show me this "gagner jump" (5 years of very similar production, then a .20 pts per game jump or more) you speak of for the former 1st overall draft pick.
Lecavalier 1st 6 years
82gp 13g 15a 28pts
80 25 42 67
68 23 28 51
76 20 17 37
80 33 45 78
Ok . . . that's the first 5 seasons . . .
81 32 34 66
(his 52 goal, 108 point season comes 2 seasons later)
And the situation is completely different. Chosen first overall, made the youngest captain ever at the time, captaincy taken away, his play plunges after that, then he starts to come into his own very, very late.
An anamoly, one that is not very close whatsoever to Gagner in his first 5 and a half seasons. At all.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| JOSHUACANADA |
Posted - 05/03/2013 : 10:56:03
Ok, Slozo, if your judging Gagner by his first 3-4 years of developing in a 3rd and 4th line role, but aren't taking into his 1st opportunity of 1st and 2nd line play, toi and linemates, why wouldn't we take into account Kadri had a hard time breaking into the NHL for the last 2-3 years. I don't see Gagner or Kadri being 1 hit wonders for this seasons stats, but that's what you contend Gagner has done. Next year we can check back and see.
"I now realise that the Toronto Maple Leafs, Canada's finest hockey team, is better than the Ottawa Senators - and always will be. PS - LOVE that Dion Phaneuf! " |
| slozo |
Posted - 05/03/2013 : 10:46:21
Then I guess you just don't get it.
"By the way, I'm still interested in your response to my question about Nazem Kadri. Do you (or other Leafs fans for that matter) think his last 12 regular season games, where he tallied only 5 points take away from his success this season? If you believe this is a significant weakness to Gagner's season, do you believe the same of Kadri?"
No, I don't think Nazem Kadri, playing in his first "full" season of 48 games can be judged or downgraded too much on the last 12 games. Why would he?
Are you trying to compare Gagner to Kadri based on age? Because other than that, and perhaps position where they were drafted / expectation level . . . I don't see the similarity whatsoever to even remotely try and guess what Nazem Kadri's statistical season average might be. What we have right now for Kadri is a good look at what promise he might bring - he could be a point per game player in the future. He could also settle into a third liner with scoring touch, who knows? My guess is that he becomes a very solid first line centre who falls a bit below a point a game, a 25 goal, 35 assist type guy. But who knows . . .
. . . hell, I'll tell you what though: I definitely WILL know what Nazem Kadri will be after another three or four seasons, in all probability (barring major injuries, etc).
Just like I am very sure of what Gagner is now, after 5 and a half seasons.
slozo out!
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| JOSHUACANADA |
Posted - 05/03/2013 : 10:22:17
I think the guest has some points. 34th in the League in points with 2nd line minutes and the 2nd best line of forward to play with in Edmonton. Any reason to think that a guy who is putting legit 1st line points over the course of a abbreviated season will not sustain or improve on it as he is coming into his prime. As has been said before his quality of linemates and toi have improved as the coaches have increased there confidence in his play. I didn't see any reason why the Oiler would have lost confidence in him late in the season and if an Oiler next year will be given the same opportunity.
"I now realise that the Toronto Maple Leafs, Canada's finest hockey team, is better than the Ottawa Senators - and always will be. PS - LOVE that Dion Phaneuf! " |
| Guest4178 |
Posted - 05/03/2013 : 09:03:06
Slozo – with respect, I really don't think you get it.
Every player goes on tears (not just Sam Gagner), maybe with the exception of the top players in the game.
Take a look at Joe Thornton's game log this season, or Alex Ovechkin's. Most NHL players have streaks, and that's why you try to look at the biggest samplings possible.
I can't do anything with how many games Gagner has played this season, but 48 games is the biggest sampling we have for how he did this year, where he tallied 38 points in 48 games. That's 34th in the NHL, and as previously stated, ahead of a lot of very good players in the league. There's no doubt Gagner took his game up a level this season – I don't think you can dispute this.
Gagner averaged .60 points per game prior to this season, and the fact is Gagner averaged .80 points per game this season. (Well 79.16 actually, but still a .20 jump.)
To repeat what was pointed out earlier, there are many examples of players who played 4-5 seasons before increasing their points production.
Vincent Lecavalier went from .59 ppg to .95 ppg
Shane Doan went from .34 ppg to .77 ppg
Andrew Ladd went from .46 ppg to .71 ppg
Ray Whitney went from .59 ppg to .86 ppg
And there are many others. And granted, you could find many players who dipped (or peaked) after their first 4-5 years in the NHL.
Now here's the opinion part. I think Sam Gagner's performance this season is not a blip. You do. That's okay with me, and to restate what I've expressed many times, let's check back in 2-3 years, not every 2-3 weeks. (Or 2-3 days.)
By the way, I'm still interested in your response to my question about Nazem Kadri. Do you (or other Leafs fans for that matter) think his last 12 regular season games, where he tallied only 5 points take away from his success this season? If you believe this is a significant weakness to Gagner's season, do you believe the same of Kadri?
|
| slozo |
Posted - 05/03/2013 : 07:16:25
Do you guys REALLY not get it?!?
Goodness.
A guy plays 5 seasons of 68 games or more each . . . a statistically significant sample . . . and despite his very streaky nature, each year has an extremely consistent point total at the end of it.
Then we play a half season, where he once again goes on one of his tears, and begins to slide down to his statistical norm . . . and you guys pile on the hot streak as a sign of things to come, and deride me as pointing to a 12 game slide as insignificant.
2007–08 79gp - 13g 36a 49 pts
2008–09 76gp - 16g 25a 41 pts
2009–10 68gp - 15g 26a 41 pts
2010–11 68gp - 15g 27a 42 pts
2011–12 75gp - 18g 29a 47 pts
2012–13 48gp - 14g 24a 38 pts
Do you guys think he hasn't gone through these hot and cold streaks before?
2011/12
First 23 games of the season: 3 goals 8 assists
(a projected pace of 39 pts over an 82 game season)
A 5 game stetch in the middle, which included that 4goals 4 assists performance we all remember: 8 goals, 7 assists
(a projected pace of 246 pts in an 82 game season)
last 13 games of the season: 2 assists
(a projected pace of 13 points in an 82 game season)
But at the end of the year, what are we left with, despite everyone getting all excited about a big breakout after his 8 pt performance?
We are left with his usual statistical average, 47 pts in 75 games played.
If you only look at a 38 game sample - or in everyone's case here, what you are really looking at is his worth suddenly in a 26 game sample, since you are arbitrarily throwing away that last 12 games as insignificant - you won't get a true picture. That 26 or 38 game sample may have his hot streak included, or it may not.
Last year, if we judged San Gagner on his last 38 games played - the same amount as he has played this year - he'd have had 13 goals, 14 assists, 27 points.
If it was the first 38 games played last year, he'd have 5 goals, 15 assists, 20 pts.
If it was his best stretch of the season statistically last year in 38 straight games (Nov 25-Feb 21), it'd be 14 goals, 24 assists, 38 points . . . a point a game, an even better pace than this year's 38 game sample.
Why do you guys think this year's 38 game sample is any more or less of a statistical sample than the three 38 game samples from last year?
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| JOSHUACANADA |
Posted - 05/02/2013 : 09:06:05
Hockey is a game of up and downs my friend, the last 12 games were just that, a small sample of ups and downs. If you are picking him for 55 points in a full season, just to be safe, that would statistically be close yet lower than this years average, but higher than his career average. So what your saying is your confident he has seen growth this year and with support could obtain higher than his career average. I think that was all most people were saying about Gagner, that he is starting to come into his game and the Oilers should lock him up. I dont believe either him or Kadri have peaked yet. I expect similar or greater PPG averages than this year next year for both players, should they maintain the quality of linemates and playing time, as both teams are realizing there strengths and where they fit in the lineup.
quote:
Originally posted by slozo
quote:
If 33 games was not a measuring stick, then why suddenly do 12 games make a big difference?
Because those 33 games are an outlier to 5 seasons, and those 12 games AFTER those hot 33 are bringing him right back to his statistical average. (and likely, he doesn't get all three points in thos last two meaningless games).
My point is, it is an indicator to me that if it HADN'T been a 48 game season and they continued on for 82 . . . his numbers would have continued to fall back in line with what for him would be a good year, but not statistically aberrant - something in the 20 goal, 50-55 point range.
Btw, I'd make a bet on 55 points, not 50 . . . just to give myself some statistical leeway for a slightly better year that isn't outside the statistical norm.
Name your terms . . . you'll have to sign up, however. Faceless guests cannot trade avatars!
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug
"I now realise that the Toronto Maple Leafs, Canada's finest hockey team, is better than the Ottawa Senators - and always will be. PS - LOVE that Dion Phaneuf! " |
| Guest4178 |
Posted - 05/02/2013 : 08:31:32
If you still think Gagner registering 5 points in his last 12 games is meaningful (and indicative), then what do you have to say about Nazem Kadri?
You're a Leaf fan, so you probably know that Kadri ALSO tallied 5 points in his last 12 regular season games. (And 0 points in his first playoff game.)
Does this take away from his great breakout season? A season where he was tied for 21st in points, with 44 points in 48 games.
As for the bet, I would take the bet with the change you described (55 points instead of 50 points). As for signing up, I've tried a few times before, but despite sending 2-3 e-mail notes to the PUH administrator, I did not hear back. I need some reassurances about privacy, etc. before signing up. (If the PUH administrator is paying attention, can you please provide me with an e-mail address where you can be reached.)
|
| slozo |
Posted - 05/02/2013 : 04:34:11
quote:
If 33 games was not a measuring stick, then why suddenly do 12 games make a big difference?
Because those 33 games are an outlier to 5 seasons, and those 12 games AFTER those hot 33 are bringing him right back to his statistical average. (and likely, he doesn't get all three points in thos last two meaningless games).
My point is, it is an indicator to me that if it HADN'T been a 48 game season and they continued on for 82 . . . his numbers would have continued to fall back in line with what for him would be a good year, but not statistically aberrant - something in the 20 goal, 50-55 point range.
Btw, I'd make a bet on 55 points, not 50 . . . just to give myself some statistical leeway for a slightly better year that isn't outside the statistical norm.
Name your terms . . . you'll have to sign up, however. Faceless guests cannot trade avatars!
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| Guest4178 |
Posted - 05/01/2013 : 13:20:37
It's guest 4377 here, and responding to Slozo's "I told you so."
I would love to register a bet with you, and for a significant sum! I think Gagner is very likely to tally 60-70 points next season (with the usual caveat, that he plays a full or near full season). And once again, I see a continued incline in his production, where he will be a point a game player for a number of seasons to come, when he gets closer to an NHL player's peak production years, 24, 25, 26 and 27 years of age.
So to take your bet (prediction) that "Gagner doesn't get over 50 points next year," I would take that bet. I know it was a shortened season, but Gagner's extrapolated points (over 82 games) works out to 65 points. You think he's going to revert back to being a 50 point (or less) player at the time and age players usually get better. (Gagner turns 24 this summer.)
As for "barely acknowledging" his tail off in production in finishing up the season, it was you who earlier stated that smaller sampling sizes are less significant. ("31 pts in 33 games tells you he's a point a game player now. It's a shortened "half" a season. It's 33 games. Get a grip.")
If 33 games was not a measuring stick, then why suddenly do 12 games make a big difference?
Once again, my prediction on Gagner's future success is not limited to this year or next year. Let's check back in 2-3 years.
But here are a few more facts on how well he did this season. In finishing tied for 34th position in points, Gagner had more points than the highest point player on ten teams, including the Bruins (Marchand, Krejci, Bergeron, Seguin), Blues (Stewart, Backes, Steen, Perron), and the Senators.
There are only 13 teams for which Gagner would NOT be one of the top two point getters on this team. That's pretty good, and I believe he's still improving!
As for who his linemates are next season, a better question may be who he plays for? He's an RFA, so the Oilers still need to sign him. I think they will though, and regardless, my prediction is not significantly predicated on who he plays with or who he plays for. He proved himself this past season, so he will get a full opportunity with playing minutes, quality linemates, power play time, etc.
I'm okay to put this debate on hold (it's the playoffs after all), and I will gladly check back with you in 2-3 years! (Or the end of next season to see how Gagner is doing by then.)
|
| nuxfan |
Posted - 05/01/2013 : 12:55:30
quote:
Originally posted by slozo
Why do you think he'll have top talent surrounding him?
What line do you think he'll play on?
Eberle - RNH - Hall is sure to remain the top line barring injuries. At most, Yakupov replaces someone on wing and switches with them.
I think EDM would be smart to consider breaking up that top line, and spreading the talent over 2 line while adding a veteran presence on both. Gagner will probably be playing with some talent next year. |
| slozo |
Posted - 05/01/2013 : 11:48:40
quote:
Originally posted by Alex116
Wow, 50pts seems low considering the talent he's got around him.
Why do you think he'll have top talent surrounding him?
What line do you think he'll play on?
Eberle - RNH - Hall is sure to remain the top line barring injuries. At most, Yakupov replaces someone on wing and switches with them.
So, at best, and obviously this is just my opinion . . . but at BEST, Gagner plays with Eberle and Paajarvi/Jones.
I don't think that Gagner is going to be made into a 50 point player suddenly because he had a good run in a shortened season for a stretch of games where RNH struggled mightily and was effectively replaced by him on the top line.
He is an "ok" second line centre.
Let me know when he scores 20 goals or 55 points.
Sorry . . . 50 points! 49 is his high, lol.
Breakout-shmakeout.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 05/01/2013 : 08:36:15
Wow, 50pts seems low considering the talent he's got around him. |
| slozo |
Posted - 05/01/2013 : 05:02:12
quote:
Originally posted by Guest4377
WAY too early to say I told you so!
Admittedly, Gagner's production tailed off, but 38 points in 48 games translates into 65 points in an 82 game season. 37th in the NHL for points is actually very good. (He actually finished tied at 34th in points, matching Zach Parise's production to name one player.) How many 23 year olds (or younger than Gagner) tallied more points this past season? I haven't checked, but I would guess maybe ten.
Regardless, my projections for Gagner's future success go beyond this season (for which his jump in points per game was quite significant, and trending in a positive direction), and to some extent, next season.
Let's check back in 2-3 years!
I liked how you barely acknowledged that his production tailed off dramatically in the last 12 games, but then projected his full season totals not taking into account the trend of him returning to his regular 45-50 point pace.
I'm putting it out there now as a prediction:
Gagner doesn't get over 50 points next year.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| Guest4377 |
Posted - 04/30/2013 : 21:54:44
WAY too early to say I told you so!
Admittedly, Gagner's production tailed off, but 38 points in 48 games translates into 65 points in an 82 game season. 37th in the NHL for points is actually very good. (He actually finished tied at 34th in points, matching Zach Parise's production to name one player.) How many 23 year olds (or younger than Gagner) tallied more points this past season? I haven't checked, but I would guess maybe ten.
Regardless, my projections for Gagner's future success go beyond this season (for which his jump in points per game was quite significant, and trending in a positive direction), and to some extent, next season.
Let's check back in 2-3 years! |
| slozo |
Posted - 04/30/2013 : 20:11:34
UPDATE:
Sam Gagner finished the season thus:
48 gp; 14 goals, 24 assists, 38 pts.
37th in the league in pts.
After my last post on April 4th, he played in 12 games, and got 5 assists. 3 of those in the last two blow-out victories for Edmonton that meant absolutely nothing.
Juuuuuuust a bit of a tail off.
Is it early to say . . . I told you so?
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| JOSHUACANADA |
Posted - 04/08/2013 : 08:47:53
Best part about that list of players you proposed, as alternates to Gagner is they all play 1st and 2nd line minutes and are highly sought after during the offseason or trade deadline. That alone tells me Gagner is valuable enough that the Oilers should keep him. The fact that he is producing in the top 30 point wise, more than half of the players you compared him to he is out producing so far this year, tells me he is close to what he was projected to do when the Oilers got him. Nobody said he was the next great one, just a good player with potential. |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 04/05/2013 : 13:26:00
Alex, I was speaking purely from a point production standpoint. But you kind of prove my point. Regardless of him being the last name on that list of player, he belongs on the list. How people can say Gagner is 'mediocre' is my issue. It's a short-sighted statement based on nothing factual or even an intelligent hypothesis. |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 04/05/2013 : 09:07:35
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
Why is Gagner being considered 'mediocre' when he out produced players like Mike Richards, Derek Roy, and Brandon Dubinsky and within a few points of players like Jordan Staal, Ryan Kessler, and Tomas Plekanec??
Spades are spades where you like them or not.
I believe it's just hype over his expectations really. He was drafted high and has family pedigree, though his father wasn't exactly a HOFer.
When are you comparing him to these other guys? It's difficult to compare to some of those guys when you consider some of the other intangibles and accomplishments of those guys. Mike Richards has shown he can play at a higher level than he currently is. He not only made Team Canada and won a gold, he's got a ring as well as 2 seasons of 30+ goals and 4 seasons of 60+ points, including one at 80pts. He also was a runner up for the Selke a couple years ago wasn't he?
Roy also has four 60+ point seasons under his belt as well as one with 32 goals. Keep in mind, Gagner's never even scored 20.
Dubinsky is a closer comparison as far as points to Gagner, but it's well known that Dubi brings a lot more to a team than just points.
The others are more of the same really. I think Gagner, at his current pace, is easily amongst those mentioned. But until he shows this over a full season and more, he will be considered inferior to those others.
Worst thing for Gagner right now is that he's seeing less and less playing time with Hall and Eberle, now that RNH is playing better and lining up with those guys more. From what i understand, he's playing with Paarjarvi/Yakupov/Hemsky for the most part which is a step down from the talents of Eb's and Hall. |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 04/05/2013 : 08:35:04
quote:
Originally posted by Alex116
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
What are you guys trying to say?? I like getting in arguments with people???
Beans, in fairness, when i re-read the post i made about Guest4377, it sounds like i'm slagging you and i apologize for that. I did not mean it in a negative way towards you whatsoever. I don't think you actually took it that way, but just want to be clear! You, for the most part, keep calm, make well thought out posts, etc as well. The guest just seems to be ultra calm when it comes to a debate!
I took no offense to your comments. I have a very combative personality and was making light of it.
We are cool.
I just have one more thing to say until this is put to bed until next year when Gagner keeps proving people wrong (including me!).
Why is a 2nd line centre who produces 40-49 points a season considered mediocre?? Speaking purely from an point production standpoint, 40-50 points will normally be in the top 30-40 centres in the NHL. Does that not put the player (production wise) near the bottom of top tier centres and near the top of the next level of centres in the NHL??
Why is Gagner being considered 'mediocre' when he out produced players like Mike Richards, Derek Roy, and Brandon Dubinsky and within a few points of players like Jordan Staal, Ryan Kessler, and Tomas Plekanec??
Spades are spades where you like them or not. |
| slozo |
Posted - 04/04/2013 : 04:50:47
quote:
Originally posted by Guest4377
Nope, I'm not Beans, but I'm Guest4178 sometimes. (Can't help having two monikers. One shows up from home postings, and the other from postings when at work.)
Really enjoyed exchanging points of view with Slozo. BTW, if Gagner registers 75-80 points next season, my prediction turns out to be accurate, but if Gagner slips back to 45-50 points, Slozo is right.
Who's more right if Gagner registers around 60-65 points next season?
You would be much more correct of Gagner gets 60 points or more sir - with the caveat of his stats not being skewed in some dramatic way by playing with Crosby or Malkin or Stamkos (after a trade) - but even then, anything over 65, 68ish I'd still have to give it to you.
I think anything below 60 points means, Gagner "is what he is", and his half season sample was an outlier (technical term was "blip")
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 04/03/2013 : 20:41:59
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
What are you guys trying to say?? I like getting in arguments with people???
Beans, in fairness, when i re-read the post i made about Guest4377, it sounds like i'm slagging you and i apologize for that. I did not mean it in a negative way towards you whatsoever. I don't think you actually took it that way, but just want to be clear! You, for the most part, keep calm, make well thought out posts, etc as well. The guest just seems to be ultra calm when it comes to a debate! |
| JOSHUACANADA |
Posted - 04/03/2013 : 18:56:33
Seemed like a reasonable arguement which I also left alone, because points made by him were valid. Glad the Oilers kept Gagner and sent a message to the team that they were comfortable with current roster, but wish they had added veteran players or more toughness. Hate watching the smaller skilled players get pushed around in edmonton. Smyth, Habby and Horcoff are the greybeards in Edmonton.
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
What are you guys trying to say?? I like getting in arguments with people???
I have stayed out of this, for the most part, as guest #### has done a wonderful job of stating a similar argument to mine. No point in repeating the obvious.
I would like to add, however, that Gagner and Kadri are very similar players with the only different being that Gagner has developed in the NHL while Kadri developed in the AHL. I don't reasonably see how someone can say one having an improved season is a blip where the other one is breaking out.
I see the two players very similarly and they could both be blips or both be breakout seasons. They are not 'totally different dude' as Slozo posted early. At least that is my opinion.
|
| Guest4377 |
Posted - 04/03/2013 : 17:54:00
And thanks Alex for the kind and flattering comments. The level of respect is mutual. |
| Guest4377 |
Posted - 04/03/2013 : 17:38:23
Nope, I'm not Beans, but I'm Guest4178 sometimes. (Can't help having two monikers. One shows up from home postings, and the other from postings when at work.)
Really enjoyed exchanging points of view with Slozo. BTW, if Gagner registers 75-80 points next season, my prediction turns out to be accurate, but if Gagner slips back to 45-50 points, Slozo is right.
Who's more right if Gagner registers around 60-65 points next season? |
| Alex116 |
Posted - 04/03/2013 : 15:30:45
You sure you're not 4377 Beans? You sure popped up quickly when the topic came up!
You must just be floating around here and not commenting as much as in the past. |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 04/03/2013 : 15:01:39
What are you guys trying to say?? I like getting in arguments with people???
I have stayed out of this, for the most part, as guest #### has done a wonderful job of stating a similar argument to mine. No point in repeating the obvious.
I would like to add, however, that Gagner and Kadri are very similar players with the only different being that Gagner has developed in the NHL while Kadri developed in the AHL. I don't reasonably see how someone can say one having an improved season is a blip where the other one is breaking out.
I see the two players very similarly and they could both be blips or both be breakout seasons. They are not 'totally different dude' as Slozo posted early. At least that is my opinion.
|
| Alex116 |
Posted - 04/03/2013 : 14:46:10
If it's Beans incognito, his alter ego has taken on a completely different persona than the real Beans!
Guest4377 has to be the most level headed, "i won't get into a pissing match" poster ever! Well thought out posts, keeps calm, explain his/her side of debates in detail, etc..... |
| JOSHUACANADA |
Posted - 04/03/2013 : 13:21:41
I was assuming guest 4377 was Bean's incognito. And I agree with points he mentioned, btw. I think linemates, Line placement, TOI, when he is being relied upon during a game and the fact he put on some size this past year also helped his improved production. I expect similar production next year if given the same opportunity as this year. |
| slozo |
Posted - 04/03/2013 : 04:53:02
That's all fair enough Guest 4377.
And to be honest . . . you have taken the time to answer, often thoughtfully here, so we'll just have to agree to disagree.
Meet you here (in this thread) next year!
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| Guest4377 |
Posted - 04/02/2013 : 16:16:44
There are many examples of players who had ordinary starts in first 4-5 seasons of their NHL career, and went on to improve afterwards. As for your comment "Well over 80% (maybe more like 90-95%) of players, you are what you are by the third, and certainly 4th, full season played," I can agree that some players "are what they are" by their third season, but I don't think it's anyone near as high as the percentages you provided.
But you "are what you are" CERTAINLY "by your 4th full season played? How about the Sedin twins? In their first four NHL seasons, the twins averaged about .47 points per game, but since then, they have performed at a point per game level. Not saying that Gagner is equal to a Sedin twin, but if you think a player cannot continue to improve after 4-5 seasons in the NHL, we will have to agree to disagree.
Since the Sedins example may not be enough, I took an extra ten minutes, and easily found a few other players who jumped in points production after your "third NHL season" criteria, all who played a fourth or fifth season before jumping up in points production:
Vincent Lecavalier:
First 306 games: 183 points (.59 ppg)
Next 718 games: 681 points (.95 ppg)
Shane Doan:
First 330 games: 113 points (.34 ppg)
Next 903 games: 696 points (.77 ppg)
Andrew Ladd:
First 321 games: 149 points (.46 ppg)
Next 200 games: 141 points (.71 ppg)
Ray Whitney:
First 209 games: 125 points (.59 ppg)
Next 1039 games: 894 points (.86 ppg)
Ray Whitney was in his 5th NHL season (albeit not all full seasons), and 25 years old when the Oilers put him on waivers. Florida picked him up, and he flourished thereafter.
If you were a GM and believed that a player's value was CERTAINLY known by their 4th NHL season, you would most CERTAINLY be out of a job!
And how about some current players entering their 4th or 5th season, who are showing improvement this season. Players who were/are not "what they are" by their third NHL season.
Matt Moulson:
First 275 games: 180 points (.65 ppg)
2013 season: 35 points (.97 ppg)
Blake Wheeler:
First 324 games: 191 points (.59 ppg)
2013 season: 28 points (.76 ppg)
Jakub Voracek:
First 319 games: 183 points (.65 ppg)
2013 season: 35 points (1.00 ppg)
And while some may believe these are exceptions (or "blips"), the fact is that most players do show improvement well past their first 4-5 seasons in the NHL. (And especially past their 22nd or 23rd birthdays.) Sure, some players have their best season by their 3rd or 4th season, but that's in the minority of examples.
We're getting off topic a bit, but NHL players do NOT peak at 21-22 years of age. (Or by their 3rd NHL season.) They peak, on average, in their mid (and sometimes) late 20's. Yes, there are some superstar exceptions, but most players do not hit their prime until well after their 22nd birthday.
Getting back on topic (Gagner being traded), I think the Oilers would get more this season for Gagner than they would have at the same time last season. And of course so, and it's due to his upswing in play/production this shortened season.
And I don't believe this is a "blip." (And to repeat again - NOT solely based on his performance this season, but to other factors rpreviously and repeatedly noted.) I don't think you're a fool if you think otherwise though. I just don't agree.
I still maintain the Oilers (or whoever signs Gagner) will lock him up long-term. And by "long-term", a contract which is 4 years minimum, and I suspect in the $4.5 million a year neighbourhood. And whatever contract he gets, it will be significantly more than he would have received this time last year!
|
| slozo |
Posted - 04/02/2013 : 10:38:37
quote:
How "dare I compare" Kadri to Gagner? I'm not comparing Gagner to Kadri. I commented that Kadri is playing very well. (Even though it's only 2/3 of a shortened season, which suddenly has significance in your point of view.)
ACTUALLY, what I said was:
"Nazem Kadri just played in his 36th game this year, which is 7 more games than his career high in the NHL 2 years ago. Not by any stretch of anyone's imagination have we any kind of decent sample size to determine what we should expect from Kadri going forward, but I'll tell you this much ..."
So, nice try, but massive fail.
quote:
You think Gagner's performance this season is an "upward blip." I'm curious to see what you think his points production will be over the next 4-5 seasons? Back down to 41-48 points for Gagner?
That is correct. I expect him to tail off this year, from what in a normal season would be a "great start to the season"; and then go back down to normal Gagner middling numbers. I think that his numbers have been inflated because of who he is playing with, and the forwards who have underperformed so far this year for the Oil (already starting to shift, IMHO).
quote:
In listing the various criteria I used to determine Gagner's future production, age was one of those factors. (Amongst may things.) Most people would be surprised to know that Gagner is only a year older than Nazem Kadri (once again, I'm NOT comparing Gagner to the "superstar potential" Kadri – I'm just providing context), and while one can say that Gagner has more NHL experience than most other 23 year old players, this does not necessarily change when he will peak as an NHL player. Whether a player plays 100 games or 400 games (like Gagner has) by the age of 23 does not change a player's peak ascension. (Except in examples of superstar players, who show peak performance earlier, and more sustained, than average or good NHL players.)
This is a more reasonable argument, but still false to a degree.
If a player by the age of 23 has 5 full NHL seasons under their belt . . . with them having had a "hot start" for the first thrid of what would be a REGULAR FULL SEASON, then no - I wouldn't read into it as some sort of progression. Not even a little bit.
For well over 80% (maybe more like 90-95%) of players, you are what you are by the third, and certainly 4th, full season played.
For Gagner, this to me means nothing above 55 pts should be at all expected from him next year.
quote:
Interestingly, only one NHL player (superstar Patrick Kane) has more points than Gagner from the 2007 draft year onwards. (To be clear, I'm NOT comparing Gagner to Patrick Kane. Merely providing context.)
Interestingly, two of the players with less points than Gagner since that draft who were taken ahead of him, would presumably have a greater trade value if dealt today (Turris and VanRiemsdyk). And just as interestingly, only 8 players would have a similar or greater trade value compared to Gagner, who were picked AFTER him in the 2007 draft: Voracek (7th), Couture (9th), Shattenkirk (14th), Pacioretty (22), Perron (26th), PK Subban (43rd), Simmonds (61st), Jamie Benn (129th). [I left out Backlund at 24th and Frattin at 99 to be fair - and I may have missed others].
Merely providing context.
quote:
And aside from Kane, only two players from the 2006 draft year forward (one year prior to Gagner's draft year) have played more NHL games: Nicklas Backstrom and Phil Kessel. (Once again, context NOT comparisons between these two players.)
If that's not a comparison . . . what is it, exactly?
quote:
While one could state that more should be expected of Gagner because of his 400 NHL games played, one could make an argument that he would be in the same place today (or better) if he took the slower developmental route. If, for example, Gagner stayed with the London Knights for another junior season, and played in the AHL for 3-4 seasons), he could have conceivably flourished in those leagues, and jumped into the NHL at 21 or 22 years of age instead of 18.
Without a time machine, I doubt that you could convince me that Gagner would be any better with more minors experience. He's not a defenceman . . .
quote:
But if you believe Gagner's growth would have been stifled by "playing down," one has to recognize that he didn't light the league on fire in his first five NHL seasons.
I think his development was eventual, even if not immediate.
After 5 years of mediocrity, a 30 game sample has him developed into a PPG player. Ok, that's pretty eventual alright!
quote:
Fair enough if you think his performance this season is a "blip," but I suspect the Oilers see him differently today, than they did a year ago. (And so do other NHL teams.) Gagner will be an RFA after this season, but I wouldn't be surprised to see the Oilers lock up Gagner long term. (Unless another team offers up a significant player with a similar upside.)
I would be absolutely shocked to see the Oilers lock him up long term.
quote:
And I'm betting Gagner's next contract is reflective of his improved play, and expectations that he will continue to improve. (And predictably, arm-chair critics will comment that he's overpaid, and hasn't proven anything yet.)
Aren't you an "arm-chair critic" just as much as I am, btw?
quote:
We will soon know Gagner's "contract value," but it will be many years before we know if Gagner will be a point a game player for the next 5-7 seasons.
Apparently not - you seem to think this 30-odd game sample has shown us his "progression" into a ppg player.
But we will see, indeed.
quote:
We will probably have a better idea in the next 2-3 years, so let's check back in 2015-16!
Odds of you checking back in 2 years to admit you were foolish to get so excited about Gagner's good stretch of points: extremely low.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| Guest4377 |
Posted - 04/01/2013 : 14:31:42
Missed the point (again) Slozo.
First of all, I didn't introduce Kadri's name or stats in my original posting. Someone else did.
How "dare I compare" Kadri to Gagner? I'm not comparing Gagner to Kadri. I commented that Kadri is playing very well. (Even though it's only 2/3 of a shortened season, which suddenly has significance in your point of view.)
As for being "way ahead of expectations," my comments (as you probably know) were NOT in context to where he was drafted six years ago. My comments were in context to what people thought about Gagner a year ago, or just prior to the beginning of this season. So I'm not sure what you mean by "way ahead of schedule?"
My point is who picked Gagner to do so well this season? Especially with his mediocre performance the past five seasons. Do you seriously believe that Gagner is NOT playing AHEAD of people's expectations of him THIS season? If he only tallied 41-48 points the past five seasons, most people thought he would perform about the same, or maybe a bit better, but who thought he would go from .60 ppg to .90 ppg? That's playing AHEAD of expectations in anyone's books!
You think Gagner's performance this season is an "upward blip." I'm curious to see what you think his points production will be over the next 4-5 seasons? Back down to 41-48 points for Gagner?
In listing the various criteria I used to determine Gagner's future production, age was one of those factors. (Amongst may things.) Most people would be surprised to know that Gagner is only a year older than Nazem Kadri (once again, I'm NOT comparing Gagner to the "superstar potential" Kadri – I'm just providing context), and while one can say that Gagner has more NHL experience than most other 23 year old players, this does not necessarily change when he will peak as an NHL player. Whether a player plays 100 games or 400 games (like Gagner has) by the age of 23 does not change a player's peak ascension. (Except in examples of superstar players, who show peak performance earlier, and more sustained, than average or good NHL players.)
Interestingly, only one NHL player (superstar Patrick Kane) has more points than Gagner from the 2007 draft year onwards. (To be clear, I'm NOT comparing Gagner to Patrick Kane. Merely providing context.)
And aside from Kane, only two players from the 2006 draft year forward (one year prior to Gagner's draft year) have played more NHL games: Nicklas Backstrom and Phil Kessel. (Once again, context NOT comparisons between these two players.)
While one could state that more should be expected of Gagner because of his 400 NHL games played, one could make an argument that he would be in the same place today (or better) if he took the slower developmental route. If, for example, Gagner stayed with the London Knights for another junior season, and played in the AHL for 3-4 seasons), he could have conceivably flourished in those leagues, and jumped into the NHL at 21 or 22 years of age instead of 18.
But if you believe Gagner's growth would have been stifled by "playing down," one has to recognize that he didn't light the league on fire in his first five NHL seasons.
I think his development was eventual, even if not immediate.
Fair enough if you think his performance this season is a "blip," but I suspect the Oilers see him differently today, than they did a year ago. (And so do other NHL teams.) Gagner will be an RFA after this season, but I wouldn't be surprised to see the Oilers lock up Gagner long term. (Unless another team offers up a significant player with a similar upside.)
And I'm betting Gagner's next contract is reflective of his improved play, and expectations that he will continue to improve. (And predictably, arm-chair critics will comment that he's overpaid, and hasn't proven anything yet.)
We will soon know Gagner's "contract value," but it will be many years before we know if Gagner will be a point a game player for the next 5-7 seasons.
We will probably have a better idea in the next 2-3 years, so let's check back in 2015-16!
|
| slozo |
Posted - 04/01/2013 : 09:48:09
quote:
Originally posted by Guest4377
Slozo - you're missing my point. Perhaps deliberately?
I'm not using Gagner's success this season (alone) to make my prediction on his future success.
I stated on this forum (and prior to this season) that Sam Gagner was about to become a point a game player in the NHL.
And skipping ahead to today, he is beginning to prove so, ahead of most people's projections or expectations.
But my prediction was not just for this season. It was and is a prediction for the next number of seasons.
And while his success this season is a good indicator, my prediction is more due to other factors/reasons which I noted earlier: age, ice time, power play time, linemates, improved strength and training, etc.
Alex makes a good point. Nazem Kadri was a maligned and criticized player for the Leafs the last two seasons. Who would have predicted his success this season (35 points in 35 games thus far). For those who did, kudos to them. More importantly, good for the Leafs (and Leaf fans) to not give up on him.
But the question remains. Is this a blip for both players? I don't profess to know, but I believe Gagner will continue to improve, and be a point a game player for many future years.
As for Kadri, I don't watch him play anywhere near as much as I see Gagner play, so I will defer to others (Leaf fans in particular) to offer their opinions.
But any hockey fan will tell you that Kadri looks pretty good right now, and while 35 games is not a full season, it's not an insignificant number of games to make an assessment on a given hockey player (or team).
To claim otherwise is kinda like saying the Penguins or Hawks look very good right now, but big deal, it's only 2/3 of a shortened season! :)
Where to begin.
How Gagner can be AHEAD of anyone's expectations to become a ppg player is beyond me . . . as if it's normal for an NHL player to have between 41-49 points in 5 straight seasons, then suddenly get hot in that 6th season and score 31 pts in 34 games.
Oh wait - that's the catch, isn't it? It's just 34 games, will become a 48 game stretch (depending on if he stays healthy), not even a full season because of the circumstances.
Riiiiiiight.
So WAY ahead of expectations for a guy drafted 6th overall with supposed top end offensive talent, after having played 5 seasons in relative mediocrity save for that 1 game last year.
Oh yeah, that's way ahead of schedule!
And then you dare to compare him with a player who for the first time this season has become a starting lineup player in this shortened season? A player who is absolutely on fire and 6th in points in his breakout year?
Nazem Kadri just played in his 36th game this year, which is 7 more games than his career high in the NHL 2 years ago. Not by any stretch of anyone's imagination have we any kind of decent sample size to determine what we should expect from Kadri going forward, but I'll tell you this much - Kadri will be first on my list to get picked from the group of unprotected players in my draft pool; Gagner will be a few dozen spots down from that for sure.
Gagner's stats at this point look like an upward blip.
Kadri's is a late blooming breakout, with superstar potential / ppg player potential.
It's totally different, dude.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
| Guest4377 |
Posted - 03/30/2013 : 17:14:08
Fair point Pasty, but to answer your question, I don't think so. In tallying between 41-47 points each of the past five seasons, Gagner has averaged .60 points per game, so to do what you're suggesting would be very unlikely. His past inconsistency was that he would go hot for 4 or 5 games, then go cold the next 4-5 games.
There doesn't appear to be any long stretch (30 games for example) where Gagner averaged a point per game.
But once again, my future projections for Gagner are not soley (or significantly) based on his success this season. But his performance this season is noteworthy.
As an aside, my apologies to Nuxfan for giving credit to Alex for his comments on Kadri.
I blame the Canucks avatars! :)
Gotta go. After watching the first period of the Leafs-Sens game (Kadri continues to look good), I'm off to see the Oilers-Canucks matchup. I suspect I will get the Sedin twins mixed up! :) |
| Pasty7 |
Posted - 03/30/2013 : 16:12:08
quote:
Originally posted by slozo
31 pts in 33 games tells you he's a point a game player now.
It's a shortened "half" a season. It's 33 games. Get a grip.
Seriously.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug
I won't do the research but i wonder Gagner has been known to get hot for extended periods of time i wonder if he has ever been a PPG player in the pas for 30 games I wouldn't be suprised if the answer is yes,
Hello, 911? It's an emergency, my teddy bear's been kidnapped!
[pause] Hello? Hello?
|
|
|
