Again, you're comparing advanced stats of a player who's been placed in a role WAY above his pay-grade. If you took Boyle on your team and put him up as a 1st line center with average wingers you'd see his metrics drop off significantly.

He put up 38 points last year where he shouldn't. It's not far-fetched to think he could put up 30+ points in a 3rd/4th line role if used properly. The fact he's been fairly consistent throughout his career in point-production should be enough to give him the benefit of the doubt.

.5 pts per game last year
.46 pts per game the season before
.54 pts per game in the 13/14 season
.43 pts per game the 12/13

He's been pretty consistent in what to expect. In a more protected role with proper usage and lesser competition he should be able to maintain just under what he's producing now, maybe closer to 30 points with less minutes.

And... AGAIN, for probably around $1M/$1.5M he's perfect for a team on a budget. He will deliver more than what an average 4th line center would give you, but for the same price. This isn't rocket-science.
- Rinosaur

What is so advanced about 16 5v5 points?

Vermette 5v5 P/60

12-13: 1.67
13-14: 1.44
14-15: 1.22
15-16: 1.07

Rinosaur you are correct, Vermette has been consistent. Consistently declining.

Is it me or should the chart probably show Cullen vs. Vermette not Vermette vs. Vermette????
- stowerkraut

You're not alone.
The chart should probably show Crosby vs. Vermette

What is so advanced about 16 5v5 points?
- Feds91Stammer

Again, you're failing to understand nuance and I'm not sure how else to simplify the information for you. You can keep repeating these advanced stats all you want, but there is a major discrepancy:

You have a 3RD LINE/4TH LINE CENTER being placed in a 1ST & 2ND LINE ROLE. Of course the numbers you are referencing will suffer.

These stats are not relative! A 3rd line player will not be as affective if placed in a prominent 1st line role. It's not even as if Vermette was an ancillary player. He was the prominent player on his lines.

I'm not sure why this concept alludes you. I guess you think all players are interchangeable and should perform the same wherever they are placed in the lineup.

Is this off of potential or currently best? Because if currently best Pouliot, Sprong, and Blueger are all too damn high.
- Victoro311

It's a combination of current status and promise for the future. Obviously if it was just based on current situation all the regulars from last years playoffs would be ahead of them but if you take a guy like Kuhnhackle, the 4th line regular role he earned last year is pretty much his ceiling but Sprong is a future first or second line winger(hopefully), Blueger is a third line 2 way centre and Pouliot is a PP QB middle pairing to even top pairing.

Again, you're failing to understand nuance and I'm not sure how else to simplify the information for you. You can keep repeating these advanced stats all you want, but there is a major discrepancy:

You have a 3RD LINE/4TH LINE CENTER being placed in a 1ST & 2ND LINE ROLE. Of course the numbers you are referencing will suffer.

These stats are not relative! A 3rd line player will not be as affective if placed in a prominent 1st line role. It's not even as if Vermette was an ancillary player. He was the prominent player on his lines.

I'm not sure why this concept alludes you. I guess you think all players are interchangeable and should perform the same wherever they are placed in the lineup.


- Rinosaur

Oh ok so even though QoC is very even over the course of the season we should expect him to produce at a higher rate with less minutes. Makes sense.

Oh ok so even though QoC is very even over the course of the season we should expect him to produce at a higher rate with less minutes. Makes sense.
- Feds91Stammer

Your reading comprehension skills are quite astonishing.

He's been pretty consistent in what to expect. In a more protected role with proper usage and lesser competition he should be able to maintain just under what he's producing now, maybe closer to 30 points with less minutes.

- Rinosaur

Hmm, the terms "just under" or closer to a lower number(30 is LESS than 38 last I checked) implies "higher rate."

Again, you're failing to understand nuance and I'm not sure how else to simplify the information for you. You can keep repeating these advanced stats all you want, but there is a major discrepancy:

You have a 3RD LINE/4TH LINE CENTER being placed in a 1ST & 2ND LINE ROLE. Of course the numbers you are referencing will suffer.

These stats are not relative! A 3rd line player will not be as affective if placed in a prominent 1st line role. It's not even as if Vermette was an ancillary player. He was the prominent player on his lines.

I'm not sure why this concept alludes you. I guess you think all players are interchangeable and should perform the same wherever they are placed in the lineup.


- Rinosaur

To be honest I thought advanced stats corrected for quality of teammates/quality of opponents. I think some of them attempt to do so by running multiple regressions.

Of course wear and tear and stamina from playing longer harder minutes wouldn't be factored into the stats.

To be honest I thought advanced stats corrected for quality of teammates/quality of opponents. I think some of them attempt to do so by running multiple regressions.

Of course wear and tear and stamina from playing longer harder minutes wouldn't be factored into the stats.
- sditulli

That's the flaw of advanced stats. How can you really adjust for how a player playing a role he shouldn't be in for one he should be?

Advanced stats are still only good for comparing apples to apples or their impact on their teammates. Just like when you show solid metrics for a low-pairing player, they aren't an indicator of how they will perform in an elevated role. I'm sure if you compare Schultz's HERO chart on EDM then his HERO chart on the Pens it will be vastly different as his role and usage were vastly different.

Your reading comprehension skills are quite astonishing.



Hmm, the terms "just under" or closer to a lower number(30 is LESS than 38 last I checked) implies "higher rate."


- Rinosaur

Wow dude you fight with ANYONE. Are you just super confrontational or what? I learned a few months ago to just shake my head and move on. It's much more enjoyable now.

Wow dude you fight with ANYONE. Are you just super confrontational or what? I learned a few months ago to just shake my head and move on. It's much more enjoyable now.
- Dcoms

I've argued with two people thus far. You're probably right though. This argument is just getting annoying.

That's the flaw of advanced stats. How can you really adjust for how a player playing a role he shouldn't be in for one he should be?

Advanced stats are still only good for comparing apples to apples or their impact on their teammates. Just like when you show solid metrics for a low-pairing player, they aren't an indicator of how they will perform in an elevated role. I'm sure if you compare Schultz's HERO chart on EDM then his HERO chart on the Pens it will be vastly different as his role and usage were vastly different.
- Rinosaur

Yeah tell that to James Tanner. He bases any knowledge he has on hero charts and has zero feel or sense for the game. Shultz is a great example because if you compare teams it will tell you he was a terrible player on Edmonton and a great player on the Penguins. But he actually played tough minutes on Edmonton and was heavily sheltered on the Penguins.

I've argued with two people thus far. You're probably right though. This argument is just getting annoying.
- Rinosaur

I'm not trying to argue with you it was just an observation. It seemed like there was a drawn out battle between you and someone yesterday or the day before or last week even, who knows, every day is exactly the same.

I'm not trying to argue with you it was just an observation. It seemed like there was a drawn out battle between you and someone yesterday or the day before or last week even, who knows, every day is exactly the same.
- Dcoms

Yeah, this Stammer guy has been trolling me. I've also had one other unnecessary drawn out argument with someone which was honestly my fault because he annoyed me, so I trolled him lol.

Again, you're failing to understand nuance and I'm not sure how else to simplify the information for you. You can keep repeating these advanced stats all you want, but there is a major discrepancy:

You have a 3RD LINE/4TH LINE CENTER being placed in a 1ST & 2ND LINE ROLE. Of course the numbers you are referencing will suffer.

These stats are not relative! A 3rd line player will not be as affective if placed in a prominent 1st line role. It's not even as if Vermette was an ancillary player. He was the prominent player on his lines.

I'm not sure why this concept alludes you. I guess you think all players are interchangeable and should perform the same wherever they are placed in the lineup.


- Rinosaur

Those aren't advanced stats... dude Vermette sucks.

Wow dude you fight with ANYONE. Are you just super confrontational or what? I learned a few months ago to just shake my head and move on. It's much more enjoyable now.
- Dcoms

I guess that ban worked wonders huh?

Yeah, this Stammer guy has been trolling me. I've also had one other unnecessary drawn out argument with someone which was honestly my fault because he annoyed me, so I trolled him lol.
- Rinosaur

He seems to troll everyone, so much so that when he has a real point no one pays attention.

Those aren't advanced stats... dude Vermette sucks.
- j.boyd919

I tend to agree with you. I think signing him would be a huge mistake. Someone will sign him on reputation alone(Dim Jim in Vancouver) and he will be waived before the season ends is my prediction.

I guess that ban worked wonders huh?
- martox

The one I gave myself for my own sanity, yes it cured me completely.

Anyone see this? http://thehockeywriters.c...ov-javelin-shootout-goal/
Very impressive, we should sign him just for shootouts.

Not to keep ripping off other sites but this is supposed to be the 10 most memorable games of the Crosby era. Even though I love the jersey I have from it I think the stadium series game against Chicago was pretty forgetable. Not only did we get our a$$es kicked in every aspect but Sid had a pretty blatant dive. http://thehockeywriters.c...-games-of-the-crosby-era/

To be honest I thought advanced stats corrected for quality of teammates/quality of opponents. I think some of them attempt to do so by running multiple regressions.

Of course wear and tear and stamina from playing longer harder minutes wouldn't be factored into the stats.
- sditulli

I'm not going to get into a discussion about analytics but they really are very raw data that are generally an average of what info they are providing. How can you formulate the same type of data using completely different types of environments & conditions???

Also, this discussion about the Pens 3rd & 4th line C time hasn't considered the more time our C's not named Crosby & Malkin got last season. Just a small detail but a detail just the same. Culldog was getting between 5 & 15 minutes per game due to Sid & Geno being 'rested' through the season. So how does analytics decipher the difference in toi when they provide their 3/4th line C stats? How much time is accounted for when saying they are 3/4th line players. Also Culldog went up against a lot of harder opposition then shuffled back in a 'normal' 4th line role??

So throw it all in a bucket & use what you think fits your argument - sample size???

The coyotes were a bad team and vermette was forced into a 1st line role constantly going up against the other teams best lines. I'm not saying go out and do whatever it takes to sign him, but if he came along at a cheap cap hit, then why not take the risk, especially if Cullen is for sure not coming back. The charts are extremely misleading. Look what happened to Schultz when he was put into the proper role. Vermette could do well on the 4th line

I'm not going to get into a discussion about analytics but they really are very raw data that are generally an average of what info they are providing. How can you formulate the same type of data using completely different types of environments & conditions???

Also, this discussion about the Pens 3rd & 4th line C time hasn't considered the more time our C's not named Crosby & Malkin got last season. Just a small detail but a detail just the same. Culldog was getting between 5 & 15 minutes per game due to Sid & Geno being 'rested' through the season. So how does analytics decipher the difference in toi when they provide their 3/4th line C stats? How much time is accounted for when saying they are 3/4th line players. Also Culldog went up against a lot of harder opposition then shuffled back in a 'normal' 4th line role??

So throw it all in a bucket & use what you think fits your argument - sample size???
- Aussiepenguin

Large enough sample sizes then yes you should be able to factor out a lot of variables and get reasonable stats to compare guys playing different roles. Maybe imperfect but things worth comparing especially if you look at multiple different measurements. You can run differences in differences and factor in a lot. Especially if a guy had a full year of data.

If ice time is drastically changed I would have a concern. A forward playing 12 min a night should be skating harder than a guy playing 18 min. Less time on ice tired, but any advance stat worth quoting should be factoring in zone starts and qoc. That really wouldn't be too hard to come up with. But I honestly don't which stats people quote factor in those things and what are more of a simple average.

There are times to get away from stats when you have a quality reason. Schultz obviously had some psychological issues coming from Edmonton. But plenty of other reasons to ignore stats such as coming off injury or maybe a guy had family issues. But some things should be showing up in quality stats.

I realize I'm old and just too stupid for fancy chart reading, but I can read these numbers...14, 14, 9, 9, 9, 17, 19, 6, and 6. Those would be Vermette's faceoff % rankings for the past 9 years. I can't seem to find that info in the charts comparing Vermette to himself(????), so I guess winning a faceoff consistently no longer has any relevance in the new NHL and just doesn't count towards driving possession. Add to that the number 37 which is his lowest point total in the past decade, aside from the season he only played 48 games.

Does everyone really believe Sundqvist will come close to 37 points or a 56% on faceoffs as a rookie? Or Fehr will who only once has surpassed 33 points and whose career faceoff % is 48.7? I see absolutely no reason to think Vermette would not be a suitable 4th line center for this season...besides the past his due date reason offered in the blog??? I never realized that hockey players came stamped with a specific best by date like a gallon of milk I think we could do far worse replacing Cullen for this year if need be.