Grading the 2011 Flyers: James van Riemsdyk
by Geoff Detweiler on Sep 1, 2011 5:10 PM EDT
in Philadelphia Flyers Season Grades
Email
PrintWe continue our not-completed, not-gonna-be-completed Grading The Flyers series today with a look at James van Riemsdyk. Ironically, this was written last weekend before JvR signed a massive contract extension, but of course, that also provides some unique context here.
If the stats lines on this post looks funny to you, try signing up for a BSH account and opting for the "Wide" view. It'll brighten your day, we promise. - Travis
James van Riemsdyk
#21 / Left Wing / Philadelphia Flyers
6-3
200
May 04, 1989
10/11 Salary: $875k
11/12 Salary: $875k
11/12 Cap Hit: $1.654 million
Linemates: Mike Richards, Andreas Nodl (20.57%)
Depth Chart Ranking: No. 2 LW
Expectations: Entering his sophomore season, expectations for James van Riemsdyk weren't actually that high. Sure, he was expected to improve upon his first season, but he was still slotted to be the third-line winger with a performance equal to that.
The season didn't start out very well for van Riemsdyk, as he went scoreless through the first twenty one games of the year. It didn't help that he was scratched for four of those games, but that's what happens when you go through a drought like van Riemsdyk did.
What doesn't usually happen, however, is that a former number two overall pick is shopped to the League after only 115 games played. Many don't believe the Flyers shopped van Riemsdyk (although, after shopping Jeff Carter and Mike Richards this summer, maybe they've changed their minds) despite two different sources reporting on it. It doesn't matter, though, since van Riemsdyk would reel off a three-game goal streak at the end of November.
While that's all well and good, I don't think anybody really cares about van Riemsdyk's regular season. He improved in every advanced stats category except CorsiRel, which is understandable with his drop in offensive zone starts and spike in the quality of his competition. Across the board, van Riemsdyk improved dramatically during the regular season.
But it was his performance in the playoffs that caught everybody's attention. Seven goals on seventy shots in eleven playoff games, with over nineteen minutes per game. And he did this:
The superb year van Riemsdyk had may not have jumped out at people who followed his counting stats, but his playoff performance sure did. And while he wasn't the reason the Flyers traded Jeff Carter and Mike Richards, the Flyers surely noticed how well van Riemsdyk played from Thanksgiving on.
So while van Riemsdyk showed marked improvement in the regular season and was one of the very few bright spots in the playoffs, the expectations next year are only going to go higher while the weight placed on him will only get heavier. After last year, it seems like a good bet to make.
Grading criteria: We assign grades on a 1 to 10 scale, with 10 being the best. We base our grades on expectations, execution on those expectations and a player's overall potential. A 10 means that the player had a fantastic, expectation-surpassing season, a 5 means the player met expectations, and a 1 means that he was horrible and needs to go. Like, yesterday.
The grade: Based purely on the regular season van Riemsdyk would have gotten a 6, but the playoff performance bumps him up to a 7. A six may seem harsh, but it's hard to ignore the terrible start to the year and the under-whelming counting stats. Still, a seven is nothing to sneeze at.
82 comments
|
Add comment
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
FYI, this was written about two weeks ago. Just wasn’t published until today.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
I think it’s funny that you finally picked the series back up on September 1st, since you told me back in June that if they weren’t finished by September I could start harassing you about them not being finished yet. Even though I know you’re not even planning to finish them, the timing has me kind of amused.
I think a 7 is fair. There were parts of the season that he was probably flirting with a 4 (maybe even a 3, on bad days); so a 6 at the end of the regular season would be “a little bit above expectations”, which isn’t exactly harsh.
Warning: Arguing the NHL CBA with me could be hazardous to your mental health. Proceed at your own risk.
I phrased it that way assuming most people would put so much weight on the playoffs.
And if you want to write a couple, go right ahead. :)
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Sep 1, 2011 6:00 PM EDT up reply actions
No thank you, I’m working on Chapters 6, 7, 8, and 9 simultaneously at the moment. Besides, I don’t write actual articles around here, that’s your job :P
Warning: Arguing the NHL CBA with me could be hazardous to your mental health. Proceed at your own risk.
by DragonGirl0583 on Sep 1, 2011 6:10 PM EDT up reply actions
After JvR’s role in getting MarioD banned in ’09-10, I had very high hopes for him in ’10-11.
Unfortunately, it took until after the ’11-12 league year officially started for him to really provoke another good argument. Disappointing.
I find it uncomfortable that I was on different sides in each argument. Everyone needs to stop having strong, extreme opinions about hockey players.
Keeping alive the old Vaudeville joke, "I'd rather be dead than play Philadelphia."
You’re wrong, you’re wrong, YOU’RE WRONG!!!
Wait – what was your point again? :)
Maxime Talbot - in the Orange and Black ... better than chocolate and peanut butter!
by MaximumTalbot on Sep 2, 2011 3:50 PM EDT up reply actions
Can you guys include team rank for all these categories when you’re making the tables?
Keeping alive the old Vaudeville joke, "I'd rather be dead than play Philadelphia."
UGGGGGH
If you want us to keep doing them, you will shut your mouth.
Kidding. That’s a good idea, and it isn’t the first time it’s been brought up. I simply forgot, since I haven’t done a grade in 3 months.
Will do.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Sep 1, 2011 6:04 PM EDT up reply actions
Geoff I went back and looked at Carter’s numbers and compared them to JvR’s numbers in their first two years and they are very close. I would say they are almost identical so I would think JvR could raise his play as much as Carter did making him worth the investment.
Are you talking just traditional goals/assists etc, as BtN doesn’t go back to 2006/2007
Mourning Gagne forever.
Even looking at Carter’s 07-08 numbers, the numbers are pretty similar. The main difference is Carter was doing it with <40% OZS and his RelCor was much better. Interestingly, his raw CorRelQoC or CorRelQoT is about the same—he had to play a tough role for a crappy team—but he did it very, very well, leading the team in both those categories.
Keeping alive the old Vaudeville joke, "I'd rather be dead than play Philadelphia."
But where he ranked on the team was substantially different. He was put in arguably the toughest positions of anyone in 07/08 and still was a CorsiRel beast. Just because raw numbers were somewhat close, I don’t think they are close at all.
You sir are a gentleman of four outs!
That was included in the post you read and replied to.
Keeping alive the old Vaudeville joke, "I'd rather be dead than play Philadelphia."
I think everyone agrees that JvR can raise his play a lot and be a star.
I tried to make it clear that when I said I wasn’t crazy about this contract, it wasn’t because I hate JvR; it was just because I think the Flyers should’ve been able to get him for less.
Yea I understand Eric, Geoff and I had an ongoing disscusion about JvR and Carter. Geoff was saying how it would be hard for JvR to put up Carter type numbers. Due to his low shooting % and not taking that many shots.
Right. Carter increased his shooting from year one to year two, which JVR didn’t do, and Carter had more shots per game his rookie year than JVR had in either year.
Carter also had 0.28 goals/game his rookie year, declined to 0.23 G/G his sophomore, while JVR went from 0.19 to 0.28.
The problem is, in addition to what was shown above, that Carter’s shooting percentage fell to 6.5% his sophomore year. Carter took more shots, but scored on a ridiculously low amount of them.
Rather than sign Carter after his second year of ELC – the one where he had a 6.5% shooting and only 14 goals – they waited a year and signed him after he scored 29 goals.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Sep 1, 2011 9:15 PM EDT up reply actions
No, he returned his shooting percentage back to year 1 levels.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Sep 1, 2011 9:42 PM EDT up reply actions
Yes. If you want to pretend that 6.5% is sustainable, you can look at it that way.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Sep 1, 2011 9:45 PM EDT up reply actions
that should read: it’s called an outlier. anyway, the easiest explanation is if you graphed it, it would look out of place.
Just because its out of place does not mean it did not or cannot take place. Carter did play in I think 80 games that year.
I have no idea why you are clinging to this idea that anybody said it cannot take place.
Stop fighting a strawman.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Sep 1, 2011 10:04 PM EDT up reply actions
Relax man the other night we where using Carter as an example and I did not have the stats know I see the stats and I am just saying that his shots and % can go up not fighting anyone wow
You keep repeating that it’s possible. Nobody has denied that, but you keep saying it.
It’s not about possible, it’s about likely, which you haven’t addressed while you are arguing that it is possible.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Sep 1, 2011 10:12 PM EDT up reply actions
07-08 08-09 09-10 10-11
Briere 7.79 % 12.12% 7.73% 10.79
Hartnell 8.58% 10.47% 7.39% 10.69
Richards 10.44 10.20 7.44 8.47
Giroux 9.19 6.92 9.42
all numbers from behind the net
Let’s look at Briere’s, since his jumps around a lot.
05-06: 17%, 147 shots
06-07: 13.7%, 234 shots
07-08: 17%, 182 shots
08-09: 20.4%, 54 shots
09-10: 13.5%, 193 shots
10-11: 13.8%, 246 shots
Do you notice a trend? When Briere shoots more often, his shooting percentage drops.
In all seasons since 2000-01, plot Briere’s shot totals and shooting percentages. The r^2 value is 0.74569, meaning the two are really, really highly correlated.
Just since 07-08, the r^2 value jumps to 0.82943, going even higher.
How about we get rid of the years where he had less than 100 shots? The r^2 is 0.47608, still statistically significant.
Shooting percentage is volatile, which we’ve all agreed to. In fact, studies have been done to show that even the best shooters are wildly inconsistent. Such is life when you only make ~14% of your shots.
But when you shoot more often, your shooting percentage goes down. It’s what happens. James van Riemsdyk would need to either suddenly have a spike in shooting percentage – i.e. get lucky – or start taking many, many more shots a year – i.e. get better – in order to suddenly become a 35 goal guy.
Since no player has gone from 160-180 shots at age 21 to anything more than a 0.68 shots/game increase since the lockout, JVR would need to get really lucky on his shooting percentage while also getting better at scoring goals.
So he needs to 1) get better at scoring; 2) get better at shooting; and 3) get lucky. Maybe he can do it with only two of the three criteria, but saying he’ll both a) do something only one player in the last six seasons has done; and b) see his shooting percentage increase, rather than decrease, upon taking more shots.
Of course it’s possible. But JVR pulling a Carter and shooting 6.5% on 200 shots (13 goals) is also possible, and probably more likely than JVR shooting 14.5% on 240 shots (35 goals).
Since JVR is a 10.4% shooter for his career, a decrease of 3.9% v. increase of 4.1%? I’m going to bank on the smaller variance, rather than the record-tying increase in shots per game while also increasing by more than 4%.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Sep 1, 2011 10:52 PM EDT up reply actions
I am not banking on 35 goals for JvR this season if it happens that would be great but 25-30 I think is more the area I was thinking and I think it is very possible almost likely
It’s not only about this season. JVR took 173 shots back to back years. He scored on 10.4% of his 346 shots. In order to hit 35 goals in the future, he’d have to have a 20% shooting percentage on 173 shots, or he’d have to take 336 shots at 10.4% shooting.
Or, he’d have to find a happy medium. Which would still require a large jump in shots taken – which is rare for someone at his age – while also increasing his shooting percentage.
In 5 years, who knows. But right now, nothing JVR has done as an NHL player even remotely points towards a 35 goal player.
As for this upcoming year, JVR would still need to either shoot 14.4% on 173 shots, or take 67 additional shots next year while shooting his career 10.4% just to hit 25.
But it’s completely possible – and rather likely – that he shoots 12.5% on 200 shots – a modest increase in shooting percentage and a mere 27 additional shots (factor in ice time, and it’s only one additional shot every five games) to reach 25 goals.
I never denied he can hit 25 goals though, so I have no idea what you’re argument is.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Sep 1, 2011 11:21 PM EDT up reply actions
We’ve already established that there’s variance from year to year, though. In 3 out of those 4 examples the player’s percentage got worse in the 3rd year instead of better, how does that help your position? You’re hoping JVR increases his shooting percentage from year 2 to year 3, and he’s already increased it from year 1 to year 2. None of those examples have the steady upward trend, so I’m confused by your rationale in using them to support your argument. Obviously it’s possible, but you still haven’t addressed the issue of likelihood. If anything, those examples only illustrate that his shooting percentage could drop next year just as easily as it could go up.
Warning: Arguing the NHL CBA with me could be hazardous to your mental health. Proceed at your own risk.
by DragonGirl0583 on Sep 1, 2011 10:52 PM EDT up reply actions
Getting worse in third year means nothing because its not each players third year in the league. I am just showing that % can go up or down by a lot over the course of a carrer. Players obviously can have 5 or 6% difference from year to year. I am saying that % might not be the best measurement to determine wheather a player can get more or less goals in a season.
I am saying that % might not be the best measurement to determine wheather a player can get more or less goals in a season.
I hope you realize that’s not what you’ve actually said in every comment in this thread. Here, all you’ve argued is that a shooting percentage increase for JVR combined with an increase in shots taken is theoretically possible; rather than critiquing whether or not it’s the right stat to use.
Warning: Arguing the NHL CBA with me could be hazardous to your mental health. Proceed at your own risk.
by DragonGirl0583 on Sep 1, 2011 11:21 PM EDT up reply actions
What I so badly before was trying to say is past shooting % is not a good measure for future scoring because it can go up or down in significant numbers.
This is true. But there’s a difference between individual seasons – small samples, lots of noise – and career numbers.
For proof of that, you just have to look at Briere’s info I posted above.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Sep 1, 2011 11:35 PM EDT up reply actions
Hey I think you are misunderstanding me I am not trying to argue with you and maybe its the way I type I don’t know I was just pointing out that JvR % could be as likely as it is unlikely to go up 6 points and give him 26-32 goals next year. If I come off like a jerk I am sorry but I am not trying to be one or maybe I don’t explain myself well through the keyboard
Maybe, and if I come off as a jerk too, I apologize. I simply wasn’t understanding you.
Especially since we agree that JVR could easily go up 6 points or down six points.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Sep 1, 2011 11:41 PM EDT up reply actions
5 whole points? That’s huge.
He would score 33 goals shooting 17.1% on 193 shots.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Sep 1, 2011 11:53 PM EDT up reply actions
okay yea that is a lot so if it was between 2 and 3 than 27 or 28 I would say is where I would put it and if more that would be great.
28 goals is completely feasible. I still wouldn’t say likely, but it would hardly be a fluke.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Sep 2, 2011 10:59 AM EDT up reply actions
I don’t think you’re trying to be a jerk, we were just confused. Not everybody can express themselves well in internet arguments, and even those that can have off days sometimes.
Warning: Arguing the NHL CBA with me could be hazardous to your mental health. Proceed at your own risk.
by DragonGirl0583 on Sep 1, 2011 11:43 PM EDT up reply actions
I don’t mean that as a slight, mind you; I was just piggybacking off what you said…. what I meant by that statement is that if you don’t feel you express yourself all that well through the keyboard, you shouldn’t worry about it or feel bad about it. We were just a little lost and needed clarification, not a big deal.
Warning: Arguing the NHL CBA with me could be hazardous to your mental health. Proceed at your own risk.
by DragonGirl0583 on Sep 1, 2011 11:45 PM EDT up reply actions
Samsies :)
And I have a lot more bad days than good. But I’m working on it.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Sep 1, 2011 11:48 PM EDT up reply actions
No, you didn’t really come off as rude, stubborn possibly, but not rude. And stubborn isn’t always a bad thing, Geoff and I are both guilty of that one all the time. And if I somehow came off as rude in all this, I wasn’t trying to be either.
Warning: Arguing the NHL CBA with me could be hazardous to your mental health. Proceed at your own risk.
by DragonGirl0583 on Sep 1, 2011 11:50 PM EDT up reply actions
I am not stubborn, you are stubborn.
:-p
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Sep 1, 2011 11:53 PM EDT up reply actions
Geoff, you embody stubborn.
Warning: Arguing the NHL CBA with me could be hazardous to your mental health. Proceed at your own risk.
by DragonGirl0583 on Sep 1, 2011 11:56 PM EDT up reply actions
that might be why I find myself going back and forth with Geoff the most more alike than different
By the way what happened to the rollerhockey game
I believe in the end no one could make it that day. We need to get on with scheduling another one… Maybe I should take back over, since they apparently think I did such a good job getting everybody organized last summer. I’ll go make a FanPost now.
Warning: Arguing the NHL CBA with me could be hazardous to your mental health. Proceed at your own risk.
by DragonGirl0583 on Sep 2, 2011 12:16 AM EDT up reply actions
that would be great I was looking foward to playing with everybody the only thing was that it is a hike to get to that part of Philly for me but I would really like to go and I can probably get up that way my brother lives in Collegeville I think that is the spelling of it and my little brother in Pottstown so I might be able to get one of them to join in
The thread’s up. Meeting in one place is a hike for a lot of people; some come from the shore, North Jersey, Lancaster, etc. Usually it’s not just an hour game and then drive home, they’ll play for 2 hours or so and then we’ll go hit a bar to grab lunch and hang out.
Warning: Arguing the NHL CBA with me could be hazardous to your mental health. Proceed at your own risk.
by DragonGirl0583 on Sep 2, 2011 12:43 AM EDT up reply actions
I am not saying wrong or right the other night Geoff gave me the % stat comparing Carter and JvR I am simply saying that I don’t think it is a good one
A good one for what? I honestly don’t know what your problem with shooting percentage is.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Sep 1, 2011 11:23 PM EDT up reply actions
I think this comment was connected to his first reply to the same comment of mine; this one doesn’t really make sense without it being an extension of the other.
Warning: Arguing the NHL CBA with me could be hazardous to your mental health. Proceed at your own risk.
by DragonGirl0583 on Sep 1, 2011 11:26 PM EDT up reply actions
Jeff Carter’s shooting percentages by year:
05-06: 12.2%
06-07: 6.5%
07-08: 11.2%
08-09: 13.5%
09-10: 10.3%
10-11: 10.7%
It’s not that the stat works against me, it’s that it was a fluke.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Sep 1, 2011 9:52 PM EDT up reply actions
Okay I am not positive but I am pretty sure I see over a 3% decline as well as 5% and 2% inclines so I think to say that JvR could not have a 4 to 5% increase is not out of the ?
Where did I say it was out of the question? I said it would be a fluke if JVR hit 14-15% shooting AND saw his shots increase by an amount necessary for him to hit 35 goals. He would need to show both an increase in skill he hasn’t yet shown while also having a lucky season where more go in than normal.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Sep 1, 2011 10:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Carter increased his shooting from year one to year two, which JVR didn’t do
I disagree with this. He increased his ice time from year one to year two.
In year 1, he had 0.19 shots per minute. In year 2, he had 0.18 shots per minute. In year 3, he had 0.17 shots per minute. It was only in year 4 (0.20) and year 5 (0.22) that he really improved his shot rates.
JvR had 0.17 shots per minute in year 1, and 0.16 shots per minute in year 2.
The differences between him and Carter so far are that he started about 10% lower in shots, he didn’t get the big boost in ice time that Carter got in year 2, and he didn’t have the big drop in shooting percentage that Carter had in year 2.
Fair enough.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Sep 1, 2011 11:46 PM EDT up reply actions
Only breaking balls, I am just trying to point out that shooting and % can go up and down drastically year to year and I think it is possible for JvR to have a much better % and to have more shots.
Yes, shooting percentages can go up and down drastically from year to year. Shots, however, do not. Which is why any season in which JVR sees his shooting percentage hit 15%, that would be a fluke. It’s entirely possible, but that’s highly unlikely to be his true talent.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Sep 1, 2011 9:54 PM EDT up reply actions
In two years Carters went up over 7% so I would say not very likely we will see that much of a bump but 4 to 5% could be very possible. I am not convinced that shots cannot drastically go up or down for all players either. I will try to dig some up but it will probably take me a while
Or just read this comment again.
A large increase/decrease in shooting percentage is a result of random variance, as a player does not have their skill improve/get worse drastically. A 4-5% boost on a 10.4% career shooter is a 50% increase. That’s HUGE.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Sep 1, 2011 10:03 PM EDT up reply actions
I think I speak for everyone here when I say...
LET’S GO FLYERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Can’t wait for the season to start already!!!!!
JvR 20-25 goals
Depending on ice time and shooting %. If I did my basic math correctly, he averaged 10.8 shots (within +/- .1 or so, I did some rounding) per 60 minutes (reg season) last year.
I assumed he’d go from 12.8 minutes to 16 mintues per game and play 80 games. I also assumed no change in shots/60. I came up with 230 shots on goal.
If he scores at 9%, that’s 20.7 goals. If he get 11%, that’s 25. I figure 9 to 11 percent is reasonable for JvR based on history.
But who knows? Let’s Go Flyers!!
I think you went too high on the 16 minutes. He was at 12.8 TOI/60, which is just even-strength. Briere led the team in TOI/60 last year at 14.65, and was the only one to top 14.
JVR may get 16 mins a game – probably closer to 18 – but that’s different than TOI/60.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999 and Matt Calvert since May 2010
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
SB Nation Philly - Associate Editor
by Geoff Detweiler on Sep 2, 2011 11:01 AM EDT up reply actions
So basically, while his season-compiled aggregate numbers may not support it, the game-by-game progression JVR showed last season, culminating in his 7-goal playoff performance, definitely supports the contract he just received (assuming the progression continues to increase at a similar rate over the course of this season, which would place him around 60+ points).
Just sayin’.
Maxime Talbot - in the Orange and Black ... better than chocolate and peanut butter!
Are you trying to tell me that two points make a line with an R^2 of 1, well no shit hahaha.
Just saying.
You sir are a gentleman of four outs!
Of course I kid with hyperbole, I just enjoy this constant supporting the contract nonsense that you are relentless with.
You sir are a gentleman of four outs!
Glad you can appreciate the mild ironic tone in my post. :)
Maxime Talbot - in the Orange and Black ... better than chocolate and peanut butter!
by MaximumTalbot on Sep 2, 2011 4:26 PM EDT up reply actions
Something to say? Choose one of these options to log in.
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Broad Street Hockey
Related FanShots on Broad Street Hockey
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
SBNation.com Recent Stories
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- Eulogy: Remembering the 2011-12 New York Rangers
- Stanley Cup Final: 5 keys for New Jersey Devils and Los Angeles Kings
- Friday’s Three Stars: Devils head to Final; Brodeur, Kovalchuk the difference in Game 6
- Devils eliminate Rangers in Game 6, ending fear of the past, setting course for the future
- Adam Henrique sends New Jersey Devils to Stanley Cup Final with OT goal vs. Rangers (VIDEO)
