Hero charts, Radar charts, corsica similarity calculator say they are extremely similar.
- Feds91Stammer

Then it must be true...

Gotta disagree with you there, pahtnah. I don't even think it's close.
- Rinosaur

Other than age and contracts what is vastly different?

Then it must be true...
- Rinosaur

No way the results from events that actually occurred could be true...

Other than age and contracts what is vastly different?
- Feds91Stammer

I know Shattenkirk is surrounded by better players in STL, but IMO he's better at creating offense.

EDIT: I think Green, while he rounded out his game nicely, isn't as sound defensively as Shattenkirk.

No way the results from events that actually occurred could be true...
- Feds91Stammer

Sorry, didn't mean to be a smarta$$. I think advanced stats are very good at painting a general picture of a player, but I just don't think it shows how a player thinks the game, makes decisions, etc...

I know Shattenkirk is surrounded by better players in STL, but IMO he's better at creating offense.
- Rinosaur

Based on what?

Based on what?
- Feds91Stammer

Well... points for one. Those are pretty good stats.

Well... points for one. Those are pretty good stats.
- Rinosaur

Like the ones that show Green produces at a higher 5v5 primary point rate?

Like the ones that show Green produces at a higher 5v5 primary point rate?
- Feds91Stammer

Rate is fine and definitely a solid stat to look at, but Shattenkirk will finish with more points than Green.

Rate is fine and definitely a solid stat to look at, but Shattenkirk will finish with more points than Green.
- Rinosaur

Green has more 5v5 points than Shattenkirk as of today.

Green has more 5v5 points than Shattenkirk as of today.
- Feds91Stammer

Shattenkirk = .70 points-per-game
Green = .52 points-per-game

5v5 isn't the whole story. Shattenkirk will score more than Green. Pretty simple.

Shattenkirk is on pace for 57 points
Green is on pace for 37 points

20 points is quite a significant difference.

Shattenkirk = .70 points-per-game
Green = .52 points-per-game

5v5 isn't the whole story. Shattenkirk will score more than Green. Pretty simple.
- Rinosaur

PP%

STL: 21.3%

DET: 12.3%

Specialty teams success is largely based on systems/coaching and you already said Shattenkirk is surrounded by better players. So yes you can look at point totals without any context if you choose to do so. Also Shattenkirk only has 4 more primary points than Green.

PP%

STL: 21.3%

DET: 12.3%

Specialty teams success is largely based on systems/coaching and you already said Shattenkirk is surrounded by better players. So yes you can look at point totals without any context if you choose to do so. Also Shattenkirk only has 4 more primary points than Green.
- Feds91Stammer

Now, I'm not saying Green isn't a good PP player, but do you think that MAYBE Shattenkrik is a big reason why their PP is so good?

Shattenkirk is on pace for 57 points
Green is on pace for 37 points

20 points is quite a significant difference.
- Rinosaur

Simple point per game rates come out to a 15 point difference over 82 games.

Simple point per game rates come out to a 15 point difference over 82 games.
- Feds91Stammer

Well, we can re-visit that at the end of the season, but I'm willing to bet plenty of money that Shattenkirk will still come out significantly ahead... barring a major injury of course.

PP%

STL: 21.3%

DET: 12.3%

Specialty teams success is largely based on systems/coaching and you already said Shattenkirk is surrounded by better players. So yes you can look at point totals without any context if you choose to do so. Also Shattenkirk only has 4 more primary points than Green.
- Feds91Stammer

Maybe Shattenkirk is a better passer, maybe hes just better for the power play...

He plays less minutes and churns out more points, that is why Shattenkirk is near the very top of points per 60 for dmen and Green is not. Thus Shattenkirk is not equal to Green in the eyes of most people.

Now, I'm not saying Green isn't a good PP player, but do you think that MAYBE Shattenkrik is a big reason why their PP is so good?
- Rinosaur

Nope. When you enlarge the sample size their 5v4 P160 is much closer. Shattenkirk is better still but overall they are still extremely similar players.

Nope. When you enlarge the sample size their 5v4 P160 is much closer. Shattenkirk is better still but overall they are still extremely similar players.
- Feds91Stammer

This is the point where you start adjusting all these advanced stats to tailor your argument. They definitely have similar styles, but Shattenkirk is just better.

Well, we can re-visit that at the end of the season, but I'm willing to bet plenty of money that Shattenkirk will still come out significantly ahead... barring a major injury of course.
- Rinosaur

re-visit what?

This is the point where you start adjusting all these advanced stats to tailor your argument. They definitely have similar styles, but Shattenkirk is just better.
- Rinosaur

I'm not adjusting anything.

re-visit what?
- Feds91Stammer

the final point total

the final point total
- Rinosaur

For what purpose?

For what purpose?
- Feds91Stammer

Um... are you trying to start the conversation over? lol

Um... are you trying to start the conversation over? lol
- Rinosaur

No but you are willing to bet and revisit a stat that was never argued and that is contextually unequal.