1. Yzerman specifically said that they used their "own internal analytics" and Girardi fit what they were looking for - their internal analytics on him must be garbage, but nonetheless the team itself was judging Girardi by analytics.


- Michael_Stuart

The analytics I'm referring to are the publicly available analytics. Which are team numbers and aren't very good when compared to the information a team has.

2. Not being able to suppress shots in the defensive zone or generate shots in the offensive zone disqualifies one from being a capable defender. He just doesn't have the speed to keep up anymore.


- Michael_Stuart

That is not completely true. Teams still value players who can limit the quality of chances and shots even if that player is not a player who drives play or wins the shot attempt battle.

WOWY can be misused in certain situations, but when the conclusion is exactly the same across the entire range of players he suited up with over a significant sample size, it's more than fine to use.
- Michael_Stuart

No it's a poor stat. Far too many variables change to make it a reliable stat.

The analytics I'm referring to are the publicly available analytics. Which are team numbers and aren't very good when compared to the information a team has.



That is not completely true. Teams still value players who can limit the quality of chances and shots even if that player is not a player who drives play or wins the shot attempt battle.





No it's a poor stat. Far too many variables change to make it a reliable stat.
- MJL

I don't even need the numbers to tell me that Girardi isn't very good, though. This is one of those situations where they eye test and numbers are in complete alignment. He's just not good anymore.

Girardi doesn't limit chances. He had the worst SCA/60 on the Rangers D last season, and second worst on the team as a whole next to JT Miller (per Natural Stat Trick).

Variables even themselves out over the course of a large sample size. Which is why I said it can be misused (i.e. with a small sample), but in this case it's more than fine.

- Michael_Stuart

Mike we do our own analytics 😎😎😎👍👍👍👍yzerman 👍👍

Mike we do our own analytics 😎😎😎👍👍👍👍yzerman 👍👍
- todd1a

I don't even need the numbers to tell me that Girardi isn't very good, though. This is one of those situations where they eye test and numbers are in complete alignment. He's just not good anymore.

Girardi doesn't limit chances. He had the worst SCA/60 on the Rangers D last season, and second worst on the team as a whole next to JT Miller (per Natural Stat Trick).

Variables even themselves out over the course of a large sample size. Which is why I said it can be misused (i.e. with a small sample), but in this case it's more than fine.
- Michael_Stuart

Variables don't even themselves out over the course of a large sample size. That is one of the fallacies of the analytics community. Tell me when players who normally played with Girardi were separated from him, what was the actual sample size of that time away from him? Who were their teammates, opposition, game situation, etc? You can't answer that ,so don't try.

Why would Yzerman sign a player that just isn't any good anymore? What do you know that he and his professional staff doesn't know. Actually the better question is what does he know that you don't?

The bottom line is that Girardi is a veteran player who is still capable of filling a role at the NHL level, which is why Yzerman signed him. We'll see how he plays, but this is not the awful signing it's been made out to be.

I don't even need the numbers to tell me that Girardi isn't very good, though. This is one of those situations where they eye test and numbers are in complete alignment. He's just not good anymore.

Girardi doesn't limit chances. He had the worst SCA/60 on the Rangers D last season, and second worst on the team as a whole next to JT Miller (per Natural Stat Trick).

Variables even themselves out over the course of a large sample size. Which is why I said it can be misused (i.e. with a small sample), but in this case it's more than fine.
- Michael_Stuart

All this dude does is argue against analytics. Just ignore him.

All this dude does is argue against analytics. Just ignore him.
- Feds91Stammer

False and based on your two recent replies, you don't have much to offer in rebuttal. I use analytics all the time and they have some value. I argue against the misuse and overuse of analytics.

False and based on your two recent replies, you don't have much to offer in rebuttal. I use analytics all the time and they have some value. I argue against the misuse and overuse of analytics.
- MJL

Okay go ahead and provide analytics that show Girardi belongs in the NHL.

Okay go ahead and provide analytics that show Girardi belongs in the NHL.
- Feds91Stammer

His on ice save percentage (oiSV%) last year was better than Karlsson which obviously is part goalie doing their job but also part defenseman not giving up the best scoring chances. There is one

Okay go ahead and provide analytics that show Girardi belongs in the NHL.
- Feds91Stammer

Yea, you still have nothing.

Yea, you still have nothing.
- MJL

Yeah, you still have nothing

His on ice save percentage (oiSV%) last year was better than Karlsson which obviously is part goalie doing their job but also part defenseman not giving up the best scoring chances. There is one
- Kucherovski

5v5 HDCA60 per Natural Stat Trick

Girardi: 12.41

Karlsson: 10.13

5v5 HDCA60 per Natural Stat Trick

Girardi: 12.41

Karlsson: 10.13
- Feds91Stammer

See that is one of those, I think, crap stats. What is the definition of High Danger Chance Against? The Save % is an easy one, it was either saved or not saved but the HDCA isn't as black and white. Hank was below Anderson and Condon in Save % on the year too so that is a decent stat.

See that is one of those, I think, crap stats. What is the definition of High Danger Chance Against? The Save % is an easy one, it was either saved or not saved but the HDCA isn't as black and white. Hank was below Anderson and Condon in Save % on the year too so that is a decent stat.
- Kucherovski

Usually based on the area of ice that the shot was taken. Not all shots taken from the same area of the ice are.even remotely the same. It's another mediocre stat. Not completely without value but mediocre.

See that is one of those, I think, crap stats. What is the definition of High Danger Chance Against? The Save % is an easy one, it was either saved or not saved but the HDCA isn't as black and white. Hank was below Anderson and Condon in Save % on the year too so that is a decent stat.
- Kucherovski

- Feds91Stammer

I don't get the humor? That stat is saying all shots within a certain area are equal. Has no consideration to traffic, shot type, player taking the shot, just if a shot went on goal from that area it counts. Yes that is a stat but so what? Karlsson gave up less shots in the danger zone but the save % while he was on the ice was lower than Girardi all while both of his Ottawa goalies had better save % compared to King Hank. That would tell me, even though he was giving up less from the danger zone, those shots were much harder to stop shots, not some soft rushed back hands or flipped on net.

Girardi will have sheltered minutes, no he doesn't have a lot for foot speed anymore but he just has to be a stay at home Dman. Everyone is going crazy before they see pairings and actual play. He's had a lot of injuries and slowed considerably blocking shots for a lot of years. 3 mil is a bit high I would have been happier for about about 2. Gloom and doom in July go have a beer or joint and relax

I still can't believe they signed Girardi. I just want Yzerman and Cooper to give the young guys a chance. Let Sergachev and Koekkoek play, cause there's a very high chance that they're already better than Girardi. It just doesn't make sense
- jvar17

He was a cheap signing at RHD to compete with Sustr. Girardi is in no way blocking one of the young d you listed from playing simply b/c he is RHD.






















Yes I know he sucks

Don't @ me bro

- Feds91Stammer

You've said Karlsson is the best D man in the league. This past year his OPPGF60, so opponents goals for per 60 minutes was 0.04 lower than Girardi. Don't read that as I am comparing the two because Girardi is no where near the hockey player of Karlsson but since you say Karlsson is the best D man in the entire NHL and Girardi was close as far as giving up goals I'd say he is ok for a 6th D man.

Variables don't even themselves out over the course of a large sample size. That is one of the fallacies of the analytics community. Tell me when players who normally played with Girardi were separated from him, what was the actual sample size of that time away from him? Who were their teammates, opposition, game situation, etc? You can't answer that ,so don't try.

Why would Yzerman sign a player that just isn't any good anymore? What do you know that he and his professional staff doesn't know. Actually the better question is what does he know that you don't?

The bottom line is that Girardi is a veteran player who is still capable of filling a role at the NHL level, which is why Yzerman signed him. We'll see how he plays, but this is not the awful signing it's been made out to be.
- MJL

Easy answer. Cheap depth. Shattenkirk was #1 option so once he said no the next best was go cheap vet

Side note that nobody is talking about...If Girardi doesn't improve and Sustr continues to suck we have cap flexibility to make a trade

Girardi will have sheltered minutes, no he doesn't have a lot for foot speed anymore but he just has to be a stay at home Dman. Everyone is going crazy before they see pairings and actual play. He's had a lot of injuries and slowed considerably blocking shots for a lot of years. 3 mil is a bit high I would have been happier for about about 2. Gloom and doom in July go have a beer or joint and relax
- tpd11

Get this logic the (frank) outta here. This is (frank)ing Girardi we are discussing and he sucks.

Easy answer. Cheap depth. Shattenkirk was #1 option so once he said no the next best was go cheap vet


- uf1910

I agree but as I'm sure you know, my question was more rhetorical to prove a point.

maybe by their "own metrics" they realized that dotchin(where the (frank) did he come from) played with hedman and they still won most of their games down the stretch with that pairing. maybe yzerman realizes now that girardi can play with hedman and hedman will still be a beast after last year.

then that leaves the younger guys on the 2nd/3rd pairing getting lots of minutes against half decent opponents.

but don't ask me about the 2 years :S

hedman girardi
stralmen koekkoek//dotchin
coburn // koekkoek//dotchin
sustr (he also only got a 1 year deal, (frank) him)

Easy answer. Cheap depth. Shattenkirk was #1 option so once he said no the next best was go cheap vet

Side note that nobody is talking about...If Girardi doesn't improve and Sustr continues to suck we have cap flexibility to make a trade
- uf1910

Trade? Cody Franson is still available and will solve all our problems!

I agree but as I'm sure you know, my question was more rhetorical to prove a point.
- MJL

Good luck.

Girardi sucktitude>logic