Leafs Defence Discussion: The Rietsev Duo

[TBLeafer]

If you can talk about Hunlak, you can talk about Rietsev.

I think they are really starting to put it together as a top pairing.

No the Leafs haven't been scoring at the breakneck pace they were in the early goings of the season, but the have also been MUCH stingier in the goals they give up too.

Alot of that can be attributed to this young pair that sees top minutes on a nightly basis, against the best that the NHL can throw at them.

WELL DONE BOYS!

 

[Kin]

I think the problem there is that real top pairings tend to drive things offensively as well as defensively. Neither of them has really shown much there and, as a result, their GF% is pretty bad for the two of them even within the context of the team.

 

[TBLeafer]

I think the problem there is that real top pairings tend to drive things offensively as well as defensively. Neither of them has really shown much there and, as a result, their GF% is pretty bad for the two of them even within the context of the team.

You've got a 1st year NHL'er and a 22 year old. This is what development looks like.

 

[Andy007]

I think the problem there is that real top pairings tend to drive things offensively as well as defensively. Neither of them has really shown much there and, as a result, their GF% is pretty bad for the two of them even within the context of the team.

You've got a 1st year NHL'er and a 22 year old. This is what development looks like.

Yes, which is probably why it's way to early to suggest that they're staring to look like a top pairing.

 

[TBLeafer]

I think the problem there is that real top pairings tend to drive things offensively as well as defensively. Neither of them has really shown much there and, as a result, their GF% is pretty bad for the two of them even within the context of the team.

You've got a 1st year NHL'er and a 22 year old. This is what development looks like.

Yes, which is probably why it's way to early to suggest that they're staring to look like a top pairing.

Their minutes suggest they are a top pairing.

 

[Kin]

You've got a 1st year NHL'er and a 22 year old. This is what development looks like.

22 isn't really that young for a legitimate #1 defenseman to actually be playing like one.

Regardless, I'm not disputing that they both have promise. But there's quite a ways for them to go before we start talking about them as a legit #1 pairing that can be a strength of the team.

 

[TBLeafer]

22 isn't really that young for a legitimate #1 defenseman to actually be playing like one.

Regardless, I'm not disputing that they both have promise. But there's quite a ways for them to go before we start talking about them as a legit #1 pairing that can be a strength of the team.

Most of the time, when D that young enter the NHL, they usually have more vet support.

 

[Kin]

Most of the time, when D that young enter the NHL, they usually have more vet support.

What are you basing that on?

 

[TBLeafer]

Most of the time, when D that young enter the NHL, they usually have more vet support.

What are you basing that on?

What's the average age of Florida with Ekblad?

How about when Larsson was getting his feet wet and developing on the Devils?

The 'Yotes are close to the same average age as the Leafs.  How's OEL doing, thought he was a young dynamo?

They are young, they are learning.  They will be good for the Leafs as they continue to develop together.

Very good.

 

[Kin]

What's the average age of Florida with Ekblad?

How about when Larsson was getting his feet wet and developing on the Devils?

The 'Yotes are close to the same average age as the Leafs.  How's OEL doing, thought he was a young dynamo?

Leaving aside that you don't seem to be making a coherent point here, do you understand the difference between three isolated examples and what NHL teams usually do?

 

[TBLeafer]

Leaving aside that you don't seem to be making a coherent point here, do you understand the difference between three isolated examples and what NHL teams usually do?

Oh I'm making a coherent point just fine. It isn't limited to the NHL or just D. Take Connor Brown and his presumed defensive deficiency in his draft year in the O, despite his noted offensive ability. Looked a lot better when the Otters got better, didn't he?

NHL teams don't usually roll 7-8 rookies in one season, now do they? 

 

[Kin]

So this is just one of those things where you make claims by asking what you think are rhetorical questions and never actually produce a quantifiable fact.

Good to know.

 

[Andy007]

Too Many Coherent Points!

 

[Coco-puffs]

I think the problem there is that real top pairings tend to drive things offensively as well as defensively. Neither of them has really shown much there and, as a result, their GF% is pretty bad for the two of them even within the context of the team.

Time together:  372 minutes
CF% together (score adjusted):  52.5%
CF/60 together:  61.8   
CA/60 together:  56.7

All those numbers are slightly better than the team averages (51.4%, 61.5, 58.9)  (All stats via datarink)

They both sport awfully unlucky PDO's:  Rielly 96.1, Zaitsev 97.4.  (puckalytics) Hence the poor GF%.  Considering they face the best players from the opposition, I think they are doing ok- especially for such a young pair.

 

[TBLeafer]

They're usage is quantifiable.  Pretty sure Babcock knows how to coach.

 

[TBLeafer]

Time together:  372 minutes
CF% together (score adjusted):  52.5%
CF/60 together:  61.8   
CA/60 together:  56.7

All those numbers are slightly better than the team averages (51.4%, 61.5, 58.9)  (All stats via datarink)

They both sport awfully unlucky PDO's:  Rielly 96.1, Zaitsev 97.4.  (puckalytics) Hence the poor GF%.  Considering they face the best players from the opposition, I think they are doing ok- especially for such a young pair.

Thanks for the support!  8)

 

[Andy007]

Time together:  372 minutes
CF% together (score adjusted):  52.5%
CF/60 together:  61.8   
CA/60 together:  56.7

All those numbers are slightly better than the team averages (51.4%, 61.5, 58.9)  (All stats via datarink)

They both sport awfully unlucky PDO's:  Rielly 96.1, Zaitsev 97.4.  (puckalytics) Hence the poor GF%.  Considering they face the best players from the opposition, I think they are doing ok- especially for such a young pair.

Thanks for the support!  8)

Actual factual support, imagine that

Anyway I think that shows that they are doing well as a pair but I don't see how that solidifies them as a bona fide # 1 unit.

 

[Kin]

Time together:  372 minutes
CF% together (score adjusted):  52.5%
CF/60 together:  61.8   
CA/60 together:  56.7

All those numbers are slightly better than the team averages (51.4%, 61.5, 58.9)  (All stats via datarink)

A lot of those averages are being pulled down pretty substantially by Hunlak though. Compared to Gardiner/Carrick, who aren't exactly greybeards, they're lagging in all areas(56.4%, 67.70, 52.3).

Considering they face the best players from the opposition, I think they are doing ok- especially for such a young pair.

I agree. I think they're doing ok.

 

[TBLeafer]

Actual factual support, imagine that

Anyway I think that shows that they are doing well as a pair but I don't see how that solidifies them as a bona fide # 1 unit.

No its, statistical support. 

I don't make claims blindly and revert to statistical support when common sense doesn't prevail.  Observations can actually be just as valid as numbers. Over the years, talking hockey in forums, I've learned that if you throw out a perfectly supported claim, little discussion actually comes of it and it isn't in fact a discussion.

Its a blog. 

As to them developing into a bona fide #1, only time will tell, but they're definitely headed in the right direction.

 

[Coco-puffs]

Time together:  372 minutes
CF% together (score adjusted):  52.5%
CF/60 together:  61.8   
CA/60 together:  56.7

All those numbers are slightly better than the team averages (51.4%, 61.5, 58.9)  (All stats via datarink)

A lot of those averages are being pulled down pretty substantially by Hunlak though. Compared to Gardiner/Carrick, who aren't exactly greybeards, they're lagging in all areas(56.4%, 67.70, 52.3).

Considering they face the best players from the opposition, I think they are doing ok- especially for such a young pair.

I agree. I think they're doing ok.

Some more stats that I find interesting.... you know, since you love Gardiner and Carrick so much  

I don't have time to format this nicely into a table, but... the CF% of each pair is HEAVILY influenced by which forward line they are playing with:

Rietsev with Kadri (185 mins):  51.1%  (36.5% Ozone starts) (this is against top opposition! Often starting in their own end)
Gardrick with Kadri (30 mins):  51.5%  (50% Ozone starts)(not often are G&C out with our shutdown center... huh)
Hunlack with Kadri (24 mins):  39% (44.4% Ozone starts)(woof)

Rietsev with Matthews (66 mins):  59%  (70.8% Ozone starts)
Gardrick with Matthews (94 mins):  54%  (67.9% Ozone starts)
Hunlack with Matthews (49 mins):  53.3%  (33% Ozone starts)

Rietsev with Bozak (71 mins):  56.3% (61.3% Ozone starts)
Gardrick with Bozak (87 mins):  62 %  (56.8% Ozone starts)
Hunlack with Bozak (43 mins):  39 % (51.7% Ozone starts)

Rietsev with Smith (39 mins):  38 % (25% Ozone starts)
Gardrick with Smith (33 mins):  57 % (33.3 % Ozone starts)
Hunlack with Smith (42 mins):  43.2 % (13% Ozone starts)


The difference between Gardrick and Rietsev can easily be explained by WHO they are playing with and against, as shown above.  Interestingly, last night Babcock put Matthews line on Getzlaf, mostly with Rietsev, and Rietsev had the better CF% than Gardrick.  If Rietsev were to see more minutes with Matthews, I bet their numbers start to look Gardrick good

Edit:
I figured I should add their Ozone start percentages (Offensive vs Defensive faceoffs... neutral zone faceoffs excluded from stats).  I'll comment in a reply.