ESPN: "Byfuglien trade a big Hawks mistake"
by Hawerchuk on Feb 7, 2011 8:00 AM EST
Email
Print
This story has been sitting on my ESPN sidebar all week:
"Byfuglien stands as an All-Star defenseman and a top candidate for the Norris Trophy."
"Big Mistake"? Norris Trophy candidate? Hyperbole? Let's go to the numbers:
| Name | Age | GP | TOI/60 | QoC | Ozone% | Corsi | Salary | Events F | Events A |
| Bogosian | 20 | 43 | 17.49 | 1 | 43.5 | -15.5 | 0.9 | 48.1 | 63.6 |
| Oduya | 29 | 54 | 17.13 | 2 | 41.6 | -16.3 | 3.5 | 46.7 | 63.0 |
| Byfuglien | 25 | 54 | 18.31 | 3 | 52.8 | 1.7 | 3.0 | 59.6 | 58.0 |
| Enstrom | 26 | 50 | 17.89 | 4 | 54.3 | -1.4 | 3.5 | 59.1 | 60.4 |
| Hainsey | 29 | 54 | 14.21 | 5 | 47.1 | -13.4 | 5.0 | 48.5 | 61.9 |
| Sopel | 34 | 53 | 12.90 | 6 | 48.3 | -14.4 | 2.0 | 48.5 | 62.9 |
Atlanta's #1 pairing is Bogosian/Oduya - they face slightly tougher competition than Byfuglien/Enstrom, except they get defensive zone draws, while Buf goes out in the offensive zone. Is Dustin Byfuglien worth significantly more than the $3.5M he's being paid?
| CorsiRelQoC | Ozone% | Corsi-50 | Adj Corsi | 5v5 TOI | 5v4 TOI | 4v5 TOI | Salary | |
| 25 Comps | 0.27 | 51.9 | 2.51 | 4.26 | 16.50 | 1.99 | 2.30 | 4.22 |
| Buf | 0.26 | 52.8 | 1.70 | 4.25 | 18.31 | 3.68 | 0.09 | 3.50 |
Byfuglien's comps are made up of 25 D who faced roughly the same quality of competition and had roughly the same faceoff zone percentage in 2009-10. The comps were all age 27 or older - hence paid at UFA levels - and made $0.72M more than Byfuglien this season. Adjusting for small differences in QoC and Zone%, Buf and this group were indistinguishable in shot differential. Buf plays the PP but is 16th on the PK depth chart in Atlanta, so special teams are a wash; Buf plays slightly more 5v5 ice time, so let's say he's underpaid by $1M this season.
Let's look back at the trade that brought him to Atlanta:
Atlanta gets: Buf, Ben Eager, Brent Sopel and Akim Aliu
Chicago gets: Marty Reasoner, Jeremy Morin, Joey Crabb and the #24 and #54 picks in the 2010 draft
Other than Buf, Atlanta got nothing out of this deal: Sopel is paid roughly his true value as a #6 D; Aliu can't cut it in the AHL; and Eager was dealt to San Jose for a 5th-round draft pick. On Chicago's end, the established players brought nothing to the table: Reasoner was traded to Florida for a minor-leaguer; and Crabb was a UFA and signed with Toronto. But Chicago picked up three young players - Jeremy Morin, Justin Holl and Kevin Hayes - who will, on average, produce one solid professional player between them. I'd estimate Chicago got $3M in excess value here.
It looks like Atlanta sent $3M in future value to Chicago in exchange for $1M of value in 2010-11. How is that a win for a team whose upside in 2010-11 is four-and-gone in the first round of the playoffs?
The answer is pretty simple: Dustin Byfuglien is tied for the league lead in PP points by a defenseman, and he leads the league in goals by a defenseman. If that's all we look at, then he's a Norris candidate and an All-Star. In reality, he's nowhere near that class - off the top of my head, in the East alone, Zdeno Chara, Tyler Myers and Kris Letang are all demonstrably better players in virtually every category, and at least another two dozen D would be better if we looked closely at their numbers. Hell, Buf isn't even the best defenseman on his own team (Bogosian.) It would be great if ESPN moved beyond who wins hockey pools when they evaluate players.
45 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
But Buff will likely end up as the best player in the deal
I agree that it’s hard to justify trading him was a big mistake for Chicago—they didn’t really have much choice, and he was the most disposable player, in their opinion, on the roster.
But if we suppose one of Morin, Holl, or Hayes becomes an NHLer, it seems unlikely that he’ll be the calibre of NHLer Byfuglien is, warts and all. Maybe he’ll become a solid third-liner, maybe he’ll even play a 15-year career in that role, but Byfuglien is a dynamic player on the blue line, and he makes things happen when he’s on the ice. Atlanta paid to get him, and they’re paying him $3.5M this year, but he’s still an RFA and they’ll be able to get good value out of him by re-signing him. Even if he isn’t the best defenceman on their blue line, their blue line is still hugely more dangerous with him on it.
An Ottawa Senators fan blogging at www.silversevensens.com
by Peter Raaymakers on Feb 7, 2011 10:10 AM EST reply actions
So your argument is that even though Buf has very little surplus value, isn’t the #1D, and that the prospects Atl gave up for him have higher surplus value, Buf is dynamic? You don’t spend $4.5M a year for dynamism.
by Hawerchuk on Feb 7, 2011 11:17 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
Usually you spend a lot more than $4.5M for dynamism, to be completely honest. Kovalchuk ($6.67M) is dynamic, and expensive. Semin ($6M) is, too, and will be even more so if he ever actually hits the FA market. So are Heatley ($7.5M) and Spezza ($7M).
I’m obviously not going to convince you of anything, but I’ll leave my argument as this: Even if Chicago gets $3M in value from three players in the deal, they can’t play them all in the same position at the same time; Atlanta can play Byfuglien and take advantage of that value all at once.
That’s why I’d have no problem trading ten $0.50 hockey cards to someone for a much rarer $3 hockey card: I can find the $0.50 cards anywhere, but the more expensive one is much rarer.
An Ottawa Senators fan blogging at www.silversevensens.com
by Peter Raaymakers on Feb 7, 2011 2:23 PM EST up reply actions
I think you missed my point: one of Morin, Holl or Hayes is going to turn into a good player (this is much more likely than producing three crappy 4th liners) and he’ll be more undervalued (contract-wise) than Byfuglien during his time in Atlanta.
Kovalchuk, Spezza, Semin and Heatley are much better players than Buf, and not one of them is signed to a value contract. That they get paid a lot of money doesn’t mean that Buf is undervalued – guys with counting stats get overpaid.
A big part of me says “small sample.” Let’s see how he does after teams have had an entire offseason to plan how to expose him…because that’s what I’ve seen teams try to do, actually.
My blog and Twitter, featuring coverage of the most frustrating team in the NHL
If you don't know how to use Timeonice, read this.
Behindthenet quick link to QoC/QoT/Corsi/PDO/Zonestarts
"Numbers don't lie, they just don't agree with you"--George E. Ays
by red army line on Feb 7, 2011 12:36 PM EST up reply actions
You’re overlooking the fact that when the trade was made, the Thrashers thought they were getting a top six forward and his salary is an artifact of having been a forward for the past two years. (also CapGeek gives it as 3 mil not 3.5 mil). The switch to defense was made during training camp and was not planned at the time of the trade: here’s a quote from an interview with Dudley in July, immediately after the trade “Dudley believes the 25-year-old Byfuglien, listed at 6-foot-4 and 257 pounds, is one of the game’s elite power forwards.” It doesn’t change the analysis of how the trade has worked out to date but the suppositions and calculations that both sides made in the trade were somewhat different than the reality today.
by Big Picture Guy on Feb 7, 2011 10:59 AM EST reply actions
Couldn’t it? I think BPG has a point. We saw Buff carried, pretty much, by Toews and Kane last season in the playoffs. I’d expect it to be much tougher to carry a D partner, considering there are 3 F but only 2D on the ice for one team at once, usually.
My blog and Twitter, featuring coverage of the most frustrating team in the NHL
If you don't know how to use Timeonice, read this.
Behindthenet quick link to QoC/QoT/Corsi/PDO/Zonestarts
"Numbers don't lie, they just don't agree with you"--George E. Ays
by red army line on Feb 7, 2011 12:38 PM EST up reply actions
I meant that it doesn’t change Buf’s value positively to have moved him to D. If ATL acquired him to play F because that’s where they perceive his highest talent to be, then it’s hard to argue that they’re better off because he’s on D.
I agree with that and its doubly true because as a forward he could still play the point on the PP-Kovalchuk did it for years. But my point was ATL thought it was getting an “elite power forward”, a Bobby Ryan or a Rick Nash. I don’t know what the mean salary is for such a player and in fact there are very few of them around-the salaries of those type of players are much higher than the d-men you referenced him against so his marginal utility (in Dudley’s mind, at the time of the trade) might have been much higher and therefore he was willing to sacrifice the future value of the three prospects.
by Big Picture Guy on Feb 7, 2011 1:23 PM EST up reply actions
Look at trades differently in the salary cap era
People are still getting used to the salary cap era.
The rights to someone is worth their value minus what they’re paid. Picking up Byfuglien has definitely proven to be a good move, but giving up prospects and picks? Risky.
Spekaing of which, if you want to talk about brililant Atlanta trades, look no further than the Kovalchuk deal. That was awesome!
Whoa. Are you saying trading a 1st round pick for pending UFA free agents, whom you then overpay, but those UFAs sign for you and become solid contributors, ISN’T a great trade?
(Timonen and Hartnell for 1st round pick).
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 Feb 7, 2011 9:37 PM EST up reply actions
I’m just opposed to negotiating windows in general, but when you add in the Flyers constant trading of draft picks, even decent trades frustrate the hell out of me.
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 Feb 8, 2011 2:50 PM EST up reply actions
Bogosian is better than Byfuglien?
Also, you do know it’s not pronounced “Bufflin”?
Mariners, Senators, Trail Blazers, Seahawks fan that also covers the Ottawa Senators prospects for Silver Seven. All from Sunrise, FL. And I do for you guys! Silver Seven
by Alexander Calloway on Feb 7, 2011 11:47 AM EST reply actions
Coach thinks so.
And yes, as a guy who pronounces his own last name differently than 98% of his family, I am aware that Norwegian names might have the same issue.
by Hawerchuk on Feb 7, 2011 11:57 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
Or maybe coach puts Byfuglien out for offensive zone faceoffs because Byfuglien and Enstrom are the two most talented offensive players on the team? He’s getting them out there to provide offense?
Look, I recognize that Ramsay plays Bogosian in the D-zone a lot, but that’s not because he’s the best on the team – it’s because the offensive starts are sucked up by Buff and Toby.
Try watching a Thrashers game. It’s pretty obvious that Byfuglien is head-and-shoulders above any other current Thrashers D-man (as Toby Enstrom is out with a hand injury.)
by timmyf on Feb 8, 2011 1:00 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Did a robot write this?
1. “Just watch the game” – I went to see ATL-SJ a few years ago. Absolutely awful. Why you would inflict a Thrashers game on anyone is beyond me.
2. “It’s not that Byfuglien doesn’t play in the D-zone, it’s just that he’s so good in the O-Zone” – Doesn’t matter. But context does. And Buf, in context, hasn’t produced enough. The same was true in the playoffs when Quenneville gave him the softest starts evah!
Your entire opinion consists of “I’m right and you’re wrong!” No analysis, just your word. Why would you come to one of two analytical blogs on SBN to make comments like that?
I write plenty of analysis over on BWA which you're welcome to read
I’m at work and don’t have time to comment here line-by-line. Suffice it to say you’re missing a few pieces. Perhaps if you were less dismissive…
I went to see ATL-SJ a few years ago. Absolutely awful. Why you would inflict a Thrashers game on anyone is beyond me.
…you might have an opportunity to learn about another team.
Buf, in context, hasn’t produced enough.
Byfuglien’s rank among Atlanta D-men (5GP and up) per unit ice time at ES:
Goals: 1st
1st Assists: 5th
2nd Assists: 1st
Points: 1st
GFON: 2nd
GAON: 3rd
+/-ON: 1st
So what, exactly, is your point? He may not be producing as much as you want him to, but he’s certainly outproducing other Atlanta defensemen.
Did you even read my post?
Dustin Byfuglien gets cush offensive ice time, so of course he’s going to have positive outcomes. Your analysis doesn’t address that it in any way.
I’ve watched enough Dustin Byfuglien hockey. I know he doesn’t play defense and his coaches are well aware of that fact. Watching one more game isn’t going to help.
Two things I want to know
1) When you say a player is “the best defenseman” on the Thrashers, what metrics are you using? It seems like you’re looking at dzone% and QoC. If not, help me out here: which metric makes Zach Bogosian look like a #1 defenseman? Again, I’m coming at this from a Thrashers angle, so when you said
Hell, Buf isn’t even the best defenseman on his own team (Bogosian.)
my head nearly exploded. If your model suggests Bogosian is better than Byfuglien, I can’t accept your conclusion that “at least another two dozen D would be better if we looked closely at their numbers.”
2) What sort of performance should be expected from Dustin Byfuglien based on his ice time, QoC, and ozone%? If 17g 25a is less than he’d need to be a top defenseman (let’s say that, not Norris winner, because I don’t think he should win the Norris) – what would he need? Should he have 25g 40a right now? Help me out here.
The coach has also made Bogosian a healthy scratch on occasion this season and considered moving him to forward. He really is only in the line-up on a consistent basis lately because of Enstrom’s injury.
Bogosian was a healthy scratch for Meyer before anyone got hurt. When Enstrom was injured, Bogosian was inserted back into the line-up. Meyer is being replaced by Kulda.
These are Atlanta's pairings, top to bottom
Before Enstrom’s injury:
Byfuglien – Enstrom
Bogosian – Oduya
Hainsey – Sopel
After Enstrom’s injury:
Byfuglien – Oduya
Hainsey – Bogosian
Sopel – Meyer/Kulda
Roughly. Hope that helps. At no point this year has Bogosian been a #1 pairing guy, he’s always been the 2nd or 3rd pairings. He was a healthy scratch for a few games when he played very poorly.
Here are all pairings above 20% of a given player’s icetime:
Hainsey → 65% w/ Sopel
Sopel → 73% w/ Hainsey
Byfuglien → 78% w/ Enstrom
Enstrom → 89% w/ Byfuglien
Bogosian → 76% w/ Oduya
Oduya → 62% w/ Bogosian
Meyer → 44% w/ Oduya, 26% w/ Hainsey, 20% w/ Sopel
Kulda → 72% w/ Sopel
Welch → 48% w/ Oduya, 43% w/ Hainsey
Usually, the guys who play the toughest competition and take D-zone draws are the #1 pairing. That’s Oduya-Bogosian.
High time preference
It looks like Atlanta sent $3M in future value to Chicago in exchange for $1M of value in 2010-11. How is that a win for a team whose upside in 2010-11 is four-and-gone in the first round of the playoffs?
The Thrashers organization is clearly operating with a high time preference. $1M of value now > $3M in future value, in their estimation. Making the playoffs and going four-and-gone is viewed as a better option than missing the playoffs, yet again, and/or having $3M in future value. It’s the proverbial “future is now” for this club. Considering the fragility of the franchise, making the playoffs might be one of the few ways to help save NHL hockey in Atlanta. Why plan for a future that might not exist?
Not saying they’re right, but that’s probably the thought process, anyway.
by Crass Bonanza on Feb 7, 2011 11:58 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
there’re also marketing considerations.
by Passive Voice on Feb 7, 2011 12:01 PM EST up reply actions
I’d say his future value < 0 due to him having big counting stats. The leading goal-scorer among defensemen will have to be compensated out-of-whack with his actual skills.
this is an important point
His contract with the Hawks was already a bit high given the expected value going into it, and since he has such improved counting stats, you’d have to imagine any agent worth anything will be able to get him a very, very nice contract this offseason. I miss the guy on the Hawks, but especially given how solid a prospect Jeremy Morin looks like, think this was a really solid trade.
Buff couldn’t really play D for the Hawks anyway with Keith, Seabrook, Campbell, Hjalmarsson. While he was ok as a fill-in in the playoffs when Campbell was hurt, I can’t imagine he would have been used as D in Chicago this year anyway. So even if he has somehow increased his value by playing D, that still wouldn’t make this a bad move for CHI.
Seems like trading players with mid-sized contracts for prospects is generally a great strategy in the salary cap era. Prospect surplus value has higher variance than established player surplus value, which is actually a good thing.
by Canseco's Roid Party on Feb 7, 2011 1:08 PM EST up reply actions
How did you calculate the adjusted corsi? I know o zone % needs to be taken into account, but he starts a bit more in the offensive zone than the defensive zone and I thought that would drag his total down a touch. Does facing above average competition sway things in the other direction?
Also, should Pts per 60 minutes be considered?
Just adding my few cents on the prospects dealt, I’d say it’s a pretty sure thing Morin becomes an NHL’er, maybe even a top 6 six guy and I’d say one of Holl or Hayes becomes an NHL player, but likely not one of much value/ small-role guy. So if you want to take my opinion (you don’t obviously) I’d say it’s possible they got more than $3M in future value from this deal.
Byline
It would be great if ESPN moved beyond who wins hockey pools when they evaluate players.
But the writer of the column is a former NHL GM!!!1 He’s on the TV!
Lighthouse Hockey: "I’m starting to feel like Charlie Brown and Lucy is holding our goaltender." -Hockey1919
Comparables
(Sorry to be late to the party but I’m taking a break from blogging this season.)
I like the idea of comparing Buff to comparable players as you have done above. But when you write “Buf plays the PP but is 16th on the PK depth chart in Atlanta, so special teams are a wash” I think that the focus on usage might skip over the fact that Byfuglien supplies something rare—let me see if I can explain.
It is true the Byfuglien contributes nothing to the PK which means he is not “earning” any PK Goals Prevented, his special team “value” comes only on the side of PP Goals Created. But I suspect that his PP Goals Created value is significantly better than the group of comparables. In other words, Byfuglien is a positive outlier among PP Defensemen.
My hunch is that a NHL GM can probably find a useful PK defensemen more readily than extremely productive PP triggermen—ergo while Byfuglien might only contribute to the offensive side of special teams, his contributions are harder to replace than say contributions on the PK side.
Full Disclaimer Notice: I thought Atlanta overpaid in Byfuglien trade and I didn’t like the idea of him playing defense. Having said all that he’s been very effective at generating offense and replacing Kovalchuk’s point shot on the Power Play.
All things Thrashers + stats: www.birdwatchersanonymous.com
I think that part of ESPN flashy title is not an in-depth analysis of a trade which is going to take years to be properly evaluated but an indignant cry over the fact that, yesterday, the Thrashers were in a playoff position, and the Hawks weren’t, and that Buff was a part of the winning team…
Believe me, as a Canucks fan, Buff was a problem bigger than his GVT, that guy just drove us crazy! Making e.g. Luongo perform way under his potential.
And in the long run, CHI wil probably benefits more, but if they miss the playoffs this year, all their trades are going to look doomed and gloomed, just because they wouldn’t be able to defend their title.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Arctic Ice Hockey
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
