Zach Smith - 3 mil per on Waivers??
- Colbyboy

No thank you.

Ejdsell, Fortin, and Highmore to Rockford.

Keith and Seabrook are no longer an elite top pairing. What surprises is the poor decision making of Keith as he tries to do too much which again led to goals against last night. He has no business trying to spin out of the corner on his backhand in the D zone and also no business going to the boards on the 2 on 1, instead of staying home and playing the passing lane. The guy is not dangerous on the boards if you are back in good position. I have said this before and I will say it again, in the past he was awesome at holding the two blue lines with a good skating ability, active stick, and hockey instincts which included "cheating" which he got by with. That was his defense not a take the body, physical guy. Last year and presently that same cheating is ending up in the back of the Hawks net. However, Keith is still a very good player and now given the team make-up of forwards, d's, and goalies, Keith has to make the concerted decision to pull back and make the "right" (%-wise) and simple play. That is not to take away from his aggressiveness to gamble BUT he just have to pick his spots better. The board has spoken enough about Seabrook.

I've never been a big Ward fan.
Ward didn't have a good night.
He won't be an All-Star.
I think Forsberg might outplay him overall.

That said, it wasn't like the team helped him out much either and some credit goes to the quality of the shots.

Goal 1 was kind of a broken play where Seabrook/DeBrincat were there but failed to naild own the bouncing puck in front. It would have be great if Ward could have stopped it, but I wouldn't fault him on that one specifically.

Goal 2 didn't look good beating him on the glove, but it also went off Boqvist's stick on release and seems it changed direction. That one looked stoppable but more difficult that it probably looked in real time. Didn't help that the whole play was caused by a Saad turnover.

Goal 3 Kane/Boqvist combined to give the Wings a 3-1 rush. Ward made the initial stop, but this one wasn't on him at all.

Goal 4 was kind of bad coverage by AA line. Schmaltz went in support of Keith on the half boards and AA followed his man kind of deep which basically meant Kane was left trying to cover 2-3 guys up high. Ward should have probably had that one but similar to goal 2, there was Seabrook's stick in there right on the shot release. I'm not sure that Seabrook got much of it, but it seemed to waffle a bit on the way to the net. I still think Ward should have had this one.

Goal 5 was the one that was a rush to the net and batted out of the air by Witkowski. Boqvist couldn't really him slow down or tie him up in front and Kahun's man also drove the net. Kinda like the first one, not really Ward's fault. Would have been nice for him to grab that one, but it did deflect off two players before being batted out of the air and in.

Goal 6 was the pass Seabrook flubbed that hit the back of the net and caused the turnover and scramble in front. Davidson and AA got to the front, couldn't do much and everyone was fooled by Vanek's pass. This one was on Seabrook 110% and I don't think Ward had much chance.

It was a preseaon game and hopefully we get a better outing in the next one.

*NEW* blog up: https://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog.php?post_id=94953

Ejdsell, Fortin, and Highmore to Rockford.
- TommyHawk

They played well last night.

It would be nice to keep Highmore in the middle and have that be a potential line for Colliton in RFD.

These stats are not secondary - they're underlying, typically task/result based. Was there a shot on goal (location, type, situation), was there a pass (where did it come from, where did it go), was there zone entry/exit (carry in, pass, dump), was their a puck battle (location, success, situation), when and where a player is deployed, etc etc. They're "advanced" in that they're more than just counting stats, that's all. I typically shy away from that term as well - just stats and micro (passing, transition, etc).

But either way, they're literally just putting numbers to the events that naturally happen in hockey. Coaches have been breakdown plays for decades, how is it weird someone would want to quantify that? Lots of people on this board do this naturally in a more descriptive, qualitative way. They can tell you some of the what and why, give you a look at what happened, if you put them altogether and in addition to watching the game. No one should base their entire analysis off them, which no one (myself include) claims, but ignoring them completely is silly since you're leaving out a big chuck of usable info. Analysis of the stats can differ the same way opinions of just watching can differ.

Also disagree with your conclusion on Keith (and McDavid) but that's a debate I don't care to get into. You're allowed your opinion and I'm allowed mine, after all, and I've written enough novels for a bit.
- L_B_R

Sure they are secondary stats. “Underlying” stats are by definition secondary stats. That is why they are “underlying.” The only reason anyone called them “advanced” was to give them credibility that they did not inherently deserve. It was self-serving - a name created by people benefitting. It is like “capology” that requires a “capologist.” The “cap” is less challenging than balancing a monthly house budget.

Also I never said to ignore these stats. I said they can SOMETIMES give additional information on a certain player but only when such analysis is tied to common-sense.

Regarding Keith and McDavid I am simply right. Keith babysitted for the first time and it ate him alive. Now as a by-product of that he had secondary stats unseen before. +/- itself is actually an interesting stat. A D-Man can actually play well and be dragged into a poor +/- by the poor play of his partner. In the same way a D-Man may have a great +/- due in large part to the exemplary play of his partner. Players have even lead the NHL in +/- while not being truly deserving. Regarding McDavid I don’t have to read into his stats at all. He scored the vast majority of his points in meaningless games. Whatever deficiencies or positives the Oilers had as a team existed throughout the season. The issue that changed was the meaningfulness of the games. The great McDavid may find his superman status questioned sooner than later as he was not impactful for Canada at the 2018 Worlds’ either. He was certainly not Canada’s best player.