James Tanner: The Best and Worst 3rd-Line Centres: CONCLUSION
Who is the best? Who is the worst? Find out today on the View.

[edited because I didn't read carefully enough]

Go habs go!!

Yes, Arizona (Dvorak) and New Jersey (Zacha).


Can't rate a rookie!

Yes, Arizona (Dvorak) and New Jersey (Zacha).


Can't rate a rookie!
- James_Tanner

You got in before I could edit myself for not reading carefully enough!

Sure, get rid of Hayes, who had great rookie season, and tough/typical sophmore season. Kid is 6ft 3 w/ ton of skill. Why bother giving him a chance to grow and mature into true NHL player

James,

You should pass your analysis on Marcus Kruger on to Joel Quenneville, Scotty Bowman and the Swedish Ice Hockey association—which placed Kruger on the national team that won a silver in the 2014 Olympics and this year's WC team.

It will be very illuminating to them.

Sure, get rid of Hayes, who had great rookie season, and tough/typical sophmore season. Kid is 6ft 3 w/ ton of skill. Why bother giving him a chance to grow and mature into true NHL player
- rrentz

I do think that some guys can get a bad rap in a rating system like this - no one is perfect and there are probably better ways to evaluate a group of players.

That being said, at worst, an exercise like this is still valuable because a) you get to explore and learn about the world of depth players b) you get to get a sense of which teams have a lot of depth c) you get a sense of which teams need to improve their depth to win a Cup.

I think that since Hayes is 24, what you see is probably what you get. It is entirely possible that Hayes is an anomaly and somehow gets better as he ages Jose Bautista style.

However, if the Rangers think of themselves as Contenderse, which I am sure they do, they clearly need an upgrade at that position because, even in a best-case scenario, Hayes isn't moving into the Hertl/Bonino realm.

That being said, maybe he could be an elite 4th-line C and give his team a huge depth advantage by moving down the lineup.

Q, Bowman and Sweden are innumerate and idiots and won't understand why James is right.

Not sure how this works. Nelson played very little at center last season and it is not set in stone that he will play center this year

I do think that some guys can get a bad rap in a rating system like this - no one is perfect and there are probably better ways to evaluate a group of players.

That being said, at worst, an exercise like this is still valuable because a) you get to explore and learn about the world of depth players b) you get to get a sense of which teams have a lot of depth c) you get a sense of which teams need to improve their depth to win a Cup.

I think that since Hayes is 24, what you see is probably what you get. It is entirely possible that Hayes is an anomaly and somehow gets better as he ages Jose Bautista style.

However, if the Rangers think of themselves as Contenderse, which I am sure they do, they clearly need an upgrade at that position because, even in a best-case scenario, Hayes isn't moving into the Hertl/Bonino realm.

That being said, maybe he could be an elite 4th-line C and give his team a huge depth advantage by moving down the lineup.
- James_Tanner

Where would Hayes rank if you used his numbers from just his rookie season?

He was absolutely miserable last year. No doubt about that. But he was a special player his rookie year so I'm hoping it's just a sophomore slump.

James,

You should pass your analysis on Marcus Kruger on to Joel Quenneville, Scotty Bowman and the Swedish Ice Hockey association—which placed Kruger on the national team that won a silver in the 2014 Olympics and this year's WC team.

It will be very illuminating to them.
- John Jaeckel

He doesn't score and he allows a ton of scoring against. What exactly is there to recommend about this player?

He had four points last season. Four. And his defense is not good either. Even at $3 million his cap-hit is horrible.

Not sure how this works. Nelson played very little at center last season and it is not set in stone that he will play center this year
- Dan Petriw

I tried to crowd-source for the best option for each team, where were you Friday?

Either way, the project shows Nelson is not a great fit there. Tavares-Strome-Grabovski down the middle?

James,

You should pass your analysis on Marcus Kruger on to Joel Quenneville, Scotty Bowman and the Swedish Ice Hockey association—which placed Kruger on the national team that won a silver in the 2014 Olympics and this year's WC team.

It will be very illuminating to them.
- John Jaeckel

Now, now JJ. Tanner clearly stated he discounted "things like face-offs, quality of competition and zone starts.". Just happens to be exactly what Kruger excels at and what Quenville, Bowman, and elite hockey minds of the Swedish Ice Hockey Association all value. So, truthfully Kruger DOES suck at the handpicked qualifications of Tanner. It is the small minded other Hockey Experts who see the value of a guy like Kruger.

Actually, just another example of how analytics and statistics can be manipulated and crafted to suit arguments that just watching some good ol' hockey doesn't support. Kruger is good at what Kruger does.....great hockey minds see that. Tanner, not surprisingly, does not.

Where would Hayes rank if you used his numbers from just his rookie season?

He was absolutely miserable last year. No doubt about that. But he was a special player his rookie year so I'm hoping it's just a sophomore slump.
- rangerdanger94

Maybe a few spots higher, but even then you're saying "OK he had a good rookie season, how's it go from here?"

How come "stat junkies" always have selective choices?

Pierre-Edouard Bellemare has never played 3rd line minutes...always been on the 4th (spare) line for the 2 years he has been in the league while being used on the PK.

Christian Dvorak...interesting choice since he has 0 NHL games, but I guess your selections are based off "what you expect".

Maybe a few spots higher, but even then you're saying "OK he had a good rookie season, how's it go from here?"
- James_Tanner

Yea, no idea where he will end up. His rookie year, the way he would take over a game with his offensive ability had us thinking he could end up being our #1 center within 2-3 years. After last year's slump, it's tough to see that happen. But I think he still has the upside to be a 55 point player if he gets his game back in form.

The problem I see with this list is that the majority of players are young players that are only 1, 2 maybe 3 years into the league. The sample size is not large at the moment. It's an interesting analysis though nonetheless, and anyone will have a difficult time arguing that Hertl, Bonino, Draisatl, Trocheck, and Perreault aren't 5 of the best 3rd line center in the league whether they lean more towards analytics or the "eye test". All 5 of those players are really, really good.

Now, now JJ. Tanner clearly stated he discounted "things like face-offs, quality of competition and zone starts.". Just happens to be exactly what Kruger excels at and what Quenville, Bowman, and elite hockey minds of the Swedish Ice Hockey Association all value. So, truthfully Kruger DOES suck at the handpicked qualifications of Tanner. It is the small minded other Hockey Experts who see the value of a guy like Kruger.

Actually, just another example of how analytics and statistics can be manipulated and crafted to suit arguments that just watching some good ol' hockey doesn't support. Kruger is good at what Kruger does.....great hockey minds see that. Tanner, not surprisingly, does not.







- hawk35

I think the argument that because the Hawks use him and because he was chosen for the Swedish National team that he is somehow above criticism is pretty ridiculous.

As someone who has taught people how to argue for an actual job, I can tell you that blindly appealing to the experts is #1 on the list of terrible arguments.

This doesn't discount expert testimony of course, it just isn't a good argument because experts are also never 100% correct.

I can destroy your argument in 1 sentence: Phil Kessel was left of team USA.

Anyways, if you think Kruger is good, please tell me why. I see a guy who got 4 points and is bad at defense. For the record, there are players who get tons of bad zone starts and are actually effective. Kruger is not one of them.

There are players who play unusually hard QOC and have good stats. Kruger is not one of them.

To pay him $3 million and play him higher than the 4th line is a mistake.And if you factor who they gave to Carolina just to get out of a different bad contract, you can say its a pretty big mistake.

I think the argument that because the Hawks use him and because he was chosen for the Swedish National team that he is somehow above criticism is pretty ridiculous.

As someone who has taught people how to argue for an actual job, I can tell you that blindly appealing to the experts is #1 on the list of terrible arguments.

This doesn't discount expert testimony of course, it just isn't a good argument because experts are also never 100% correct.

I can destroy your argument in 1 sentence: Phil Kessel was left of team USA.

Anyways, if you think Kruger is good, please tell me why. I see a guy who got 4 points and is bad at defense. For the record, there are players who get tons of bad zone starts and are actually effective. Kruger is not one of them.

There are players who play unusually hard QOC and have good stats. Kruger is not one of them.

To pay him $3 million and play him higher than the 4th line is a mistake.And if you factor who they gave to Carolina just to get out of a different bad contract, you can say its a pretty big mistake.
- James_Tanner

Kruger fills a niche for the Hawks and he fills it well enough that he's a key role player when they contend for the Cup every year. Not all teams are built the same and not all coaches have the same philosophy. Q trusts Kruger to go up against the top players in the world and shut them down, frustrate them, and punish them. He does that well. He's not a world beater, but he fills a role that Q sees important.

How come "stat junkies" always have selective choices?

Pierre-Edouard Bellemare has never played 3rd line minutes...always been on the 4th (spare) line for the 2 years he has been in the league while being used on the PK.

Christian Dvorak...interesting choice since he has 0 NHL games, but I guess your selections are based off "what you expect".
- Glak18

I don't think my stats choices are cherry picking anything at all.

I did not set out to get the conclusion I wanted.

You have to leave out some stats or its going to be 1000 pages long.

I also looked at stats I didn't list.

No one is saying this is the best or the only way to evaluate a set of players.

It is simply a fun exercise while we wait for the start of the season.

I actually did literally say I make my choices off what I expect, and I asked for help in deciding the players.

Bellmare was chosen because out of the Flyers fans that chose to respond, a guy made the best argument for him there. Since he clearly sucks maybe I should have used Scott Laughton.

Yea, no idea where he will end up. His rookie year, the way he would take over a game with his offensive ability had us thinking he could end up being our #1 center within 2-3 years. After last year's slump, it's tough to see that happen. But I think he still has the upside to be a 55 point player if he gets his game back in form.

The problem I see with this list is that the majority of players are young players that are only 1, 2 maybe 3 years into the league. The sample size is not large at the moment. It's an interesting analysis though nonetheless, and anyone will have a difficult time arguing that Hertl, Bonino, Draisatl, Trocheck, and Perreault aren't 5 of the best 3rd line center in the league whether they lean more towards analytics or the "eye test". All 5 of those players are really, really good.
- rangerdanger94

For sure that is one flaw that this list has. Another is ideally I would included every possible player with a chance to be their team's 3C - but that's a TON of work.

If Hayes gets 55 points, that basically makes him a 1st line centre. Scoring being what it is, anyone over 55 points is at least microscopically close to being a first liner.

I do think the "great" players are pretty hard to argue against - but Chicago fans are less happy than usual.

Kruger fills a niche for the Hawks and he fills it well enough that he's a key role player when they contend for the Cup every year. Not all teams are built the same and not all coaches have the same philosophy. Q trusts Kruger to go up against the top players in the world and shut them down, frustrate them, and punish them. He does that well. He's not a world beater, but he fills a role that Q sees important.
- rangerdanger94

I think the argument for Hayes you've put forward is at least an argument, so that is a huge step in the right direction.

However, as reasonable as this is, I think the fact is that we can measure players's performances pretty well and a lot of players who are asked to shut-down the other team's best lines are quite a bit more effective.

I just looked up Krugers quality of competition and he isn't even top 15 on the 28 players I evaluated for this project.

How come "stat junkies" always have selective choices?

Pierre-Edouard Bellemare has never played 3rd line minutes...always been on the 4th (spare) line for the 2 years he has been in the league while being used on the PK.


- Glak18

The Flyers last season had to overplay both Bellemare and Vandevelde due to a lack of a consistent 3rd line. That's why you can't just look at Bellemare's "numbers" without the proper context. He was a 4th line center being over played and used like a 3rd line center.

well kruger had a bad season. there was some cap issues and he got off to a late start in camp and never really found his role. I think he can be the 3rd c if they line him up with hossa and panik. we will see. I think kruger deserves 1 more shot

well kruger had a bad season. there was some cap issues and he got off to a late start in camp and never really found his role. I think he can be the 3rd c if they line him up with hossa and panik. we will see. I think kruger deserves 1 more shot
- creek

For a team that wants to compete for a Cup that is a recipe for missing the Playoffs. If Hossa has to come to the rink every day and play with Panik and Kruger, he'll probably just say I'm too old for this _____ and retire like Murtaugh.