Peter Tessier: We've been talking Analytics for years- here's how! Analytics and traditionalist hockey thinking are not that different really. In fact they go back a long ways together so we should really all just get along as both sides are saying the same thing.

Good article Pete,

I am a traditionalist, I know this cause I used to laugh at the people who talked like analytics camp in gym class, and they used to laugh at me in Math class.

Its the Old Jocks vs Nerds rivalry.

interesting take. data slaves often act as though no one understood the importance of controlling and shooting the puck until they came along and introduced everyone to Microsoft Excel.

interesting take. data slaves often act as though no one understood the importance of controlling and shooting the puck until they came along and introduced everyone to Microsoft Excel.
- DoubleDown

While true, one of the things I've often wondered is why there are so many front office hockey people who are so contrarian on these things. Why are there so many players in the league who do none of these things well?

While true, one of the things I've often wondered is why there are so many front office hockey people who are so contrarian on these things. Why are there so many players in the league who do none of these things well?
- BINGO!

i don't think it's so widespread as that personally. i think these stats in more cases than others are reflective of the overall team rather than the player. so i think you've got guys with terrible posession numbers who could put up decent numbers in a different atmosphere. then again, yeah you've got some poopty players (relatively) in the league. like David Desharnais.
i also think that most GMs, while they reflect on these stats and use them, don't give a poop about having a 51.3 corsi relative as opposed to a 52.6 mark whereas stat guys will blow their (frank)ing loads over that difference.

A traditionalist might say… “Finish your checks”
Analytics might say…”Why use players who cant gain possession”

Okay I lied, another contrarian term. Finishing the check has long been held as a valuable trait for players because it means they play a hard game but think about it for a second. The purpose of checking is to separate your opponent from the puck so that you can gain posession of it. If you have to ‘finish’ your check it’s likely you got their too late, and the puck is already gone, but hey crash into the guy and take yourself out of the play too instead of getting into position. Hits are the one thing in hockey that look great but really only have distinct value when the hitter gains puck possession. Everyone loves big hits, that’s entertainment value for sure but it should not be at expense of acquiring possession.

Finishing a check possibly takes you out of the play. But your taking someone with you. That player your hitting, sure already passed the puck, but hitting him can still be effective. Next time you have that guy lined up maybe he panics and moves the puck early, or makes the wrong decision as he thinks about you coming hard. Sure checking is about separating the player from the puck, but it also sets a tone and can be effective in other ways. Saying hits only have value if you directly gain the puck is pansy talk. TRUCULENCE.

Peter Tessier: We've been talking Analytics for years- here's how!
Analytics and traditionalist hockey thinking are not that different really. In fact they go back a long ways together so we should really all just get along as both sides are saying the same thing.
- Peter.Tessier

i don't think it's so widespread as that personally. i think these stats in more cases than others are reflective of the overall team rather than the player. so i think you've got guys with terrible posession numbers who could put up decent numbers in a different atmosphere. then again, yeah you've got some poopty players (relatively) in the league. like David Desharnais.
i also think that most GMs, while they reflect on these stats and use them, don't give a poop about having a 51.3 corsi relative as opposed to a 52.6 mark whereas stat guys will blow their (frank)ing loads over that difference.
- DoubleDown