|
|
eichiefs9
New York Islanders |
|
|
Location: NY Joined: 11.03.2008
|
|
|
|
|
COME ON! - eichiefs9
|
|
|
|
You have Burmi figured out perfectly !
He is not anything close to a goal scorer and his linemates always find him difficult to play with. |
|
Feds91Stammer
Detroit Red Wings |
|
|
Location: "China was as proactive as possible" - Rinosaur, SC Joined: 02.01.2012
|
|
|
He wears 91 so he is fine by me |
|
jcragcrumple
Buffalo Sabres |
|
|
Location: Reluctant bridge jumper; 6th round OHL draft pick, YT Joined: 04.04.2016
|
|
|
Chychrun and a top-3 protected pick for Duchene and a second? |
|
Tonybere
New York Rangers |
|
|
Location: ON Joined: 02.04.2016
|
|
|
I Don't Like Mondays is a really terrible song. I recently tried to give it another, open-minded listen as one of my band members proposed doing it. Nope, still sucks. |
|
|
|
I Don't Like Mondays is a really terrible song. I recently tried to give it another, open-minded listen as one of my band members proposed doing it. Nope, still sucks. - Tonybere
I love it |
|
|
|
Chychrun and a top-3 protected pick for Duchene and a second? - jcragcrumple
No way |
|
sbroads24
Buffalo Sabres |
|
Location: We are in 30th place. It's 2017 , NY Joined: 02.12.2012
|
|
|
Tanner, saw your tweet on Eichel, and Marner being better.
You do know Eichel is basically performing at a 40 goal pace and leading the league in shots per game, right? |
|
jimbro83
New York Rangers |
|
|
Location: Lets Go Rangers!, NY Joined: 12.25.2009
|
|
|
he drives possession though |
|
sbroads24
Buffalo Sabres |
|
Location: We are in 30th place. It's 2017 , NY Joined: 02.12.2012
|
|
|
Andrew Berkshire @AndrewBerkshire · 1h1 hour ago
Top 4 players in 5-vs-5 scoring chance creation per minute this season: Crosby, McDavid, Eichel, and Matthews. Those young kids!
-- Don't see Marner here |
|
jcragcrumple
Buffalo Sabres |
|
|
Location: Reluctant bridge jumper; 6th round OHL draft pick, YT Joined: 04.04.2016
|
|
|
Tanner, saw your tweet on Eichel, and Marner being better.
You do know Eichel is basically performing at a 40 goal pace and leading the league in shots per game, right? - sbroads24
The Laine part is what boggles my mind. Hot takes sell, I guess.
Anyway. We Like Eich |
|
sbroads24
Buffalo Sabres |
|
Location: We are in 30th place. It's 2017 , NY Joined: 02.12.2012
|
|
|
The Laine part is what boggles my mind. Hot takes sell, I guess.
Anyway. We Like Eich - jcragcrumple
Eichel is already a top 10 player right now, playing on a bum ankle |
|
jcragcrumple
Buffalo Sabres |
|
|
Location: Reluctant bridge jumper; 6th round OHL draft pick, YT Joined: 04.04.2016
|
|
|
Eichel is already a top 10 player right now, playing on a bum ankle - sbroads24
He's damn good, no doubt. But Tanner saying marner is "a trillion miles better than Laine" is utterly preposterous. I mean that's not even within the realm of reason |
|
Girouxsalem90
Philadelphia Flyers |
|
|
Location: Upstate, NY Joined: 05.28.2013
|
|
|
Tanner, saw your tweet on Eichel, and Marner being better.
You do know Eichel is basically performing at a 40 goal pace and leading the league in shots per game, right?
-sbroads24
Never trust anyone with a minion avatar. |
|
Beergu
Edmonton Oilers |
|
|
Location: AB Joined: 08.15.2008
|
|
|
Never trust anyone with a minion avatar. - Girouxsalem90
Despicable. |
|
SRam19
Vancouver Canucks |
|
|
Location: Messier the Greatest Canucks Captain Joined: 02.12.2015
|
|
|
He's damn good, no doubt. But Tanner saying marner is "a trillion miles better than Laine" is utterly preposterous. I mean that's not even within the realm of reason - jcragcrumple
They're both in their first season. Too soon to tell. |
|
|
|
Tanner, saw your tweet on Eichel, and Marner being better.
You do know Eichel is basically performing at a 40 goal pace and leading the league in shots per game, right? - sbroads24
That was after poker last night. I was pretty loaded. |
|
|
|
He's damn good, no doubt. But Tanner saying marner is "a trillion miles better than Laine" is utterly preposterous. I mean that's not even within the realm of reason - jcragcrumple
I stand by that quote. Laine is pretty horrible without the puck. |
|
jcragcrumple
Buffalo Sabres |
|
|
Location: Reluctant bridge jumper; 6th round OHL draft pick, YT Joined: 04.04.2016
|
|
|
I stand by that quote. Laine is pretty horrible without the puck. - James_Tanner
Picking a favorite is understandable, but the hyperbole is ridiculous |
|
Wetbandit1
Vegas Golden Knights |
|
|
Location: Unpopular opinion (i think): The best Die Hard movie is the 4th one- Live free or Die Hard -jdfitz7, NY Joined: 10.07.2010
|
|
|
Red Flag #1: Burnistrov has no goals, only assists. One of which is on the PP and two of which are second assists. So really, he has an OK two assists in five games. - James Tanner
I'm sorry, that's ridiculous on a broad level. Sometimes a guy doesn't even get an assist, but the goal wouldn't have happened without him. Be it a pinching defenseman, a goalie with a quick pass up ice to catch the other team changing, a player stealing the puck in the O-zone, or just a good cycle where a guy makes a great pass to set everything up. PP goals count just the same as all the other ones. To just completely write them off is absurd. I know, I know, 80% of the game is played 5v5, but PP goals count as 1 not 1/5.
Now, as far as this specific example goes, maybe he really is not good. I don't know, I haven't seen the goals he's been in on. That's not the issue I take, it's the fact that you just erase production to fit a narrative. Analytics should be inclusionary not exclusionary. You want more numbers, not less. No (good) scientist in the history of science has excluded relevant data. |
|
Wetbandit1
Vegas Golden Knights |
|
|
Location: Unpopular opinion (i think): The best Die Hard movie is the 4th one- Live free or Die Hard -jdfitz7, NY Joined: 10.07.2010
|
|
|
And I don't think Arizona has a shot at catching Colorado. That doesn't mean they won't win the lottery, but the sell off should commence pretty soon in Colorado and then they will be even worse. |
|
|
|
I'm sorry, that's ridiculous on a broad level. Sometimes a guy doesn't even get an assist, but the goal wouldn't have happened without him. Be it a pinching defenseman, a goalie with a quick pass up ice to catch the other team changing, a player stealing the puck in the O-zone, or just a good cycle where a guy makes a great pass to set everything up. PP goals count just the same as all the other ones. To just completely write them off is absurd. I know, I know, 80% of the game is played 5v5, but PP goals count as 1 not 1/5.
Now, as far as this specific example goes, maybe he really is not good. I don't know, I haven't seen the goals he's been in on. That's not the issue I take, it's the fact that you just erase production to fit a narrative. Analytics should be inclusionary not exclusionary. You want more numbers, not less. No (good) scientist in the history of science has excluded relevant data. - Wetbandit1
Everyone excludes data. What are you even talking about? I believe the statistical term for it is "noise" as in it's information that is irrelevant.
The reason you exclude PP points and second assists in player evaluations is because they are like false positives. The whole point is to find out what's repeatable and whether or not you should get excited about a production surge.
He does have four 5v5 points in five games - that is good. I am only tempering expectations here, because if people think they got a point per game player, they are wrong.
Even with this small sample size, you can see how what I'm doing is effective because two 5v5 primary points in 5 games is a lot better expectation for this player than that he'll be a point per gamer.
If you think I'm just working backwards to fit my narrative, that's ridiculous. I mean, what is my narrative? "bad player is still bad"?
All I have done is give put the players good looking streak into a perspective that is very very likely to be more indicative of what we can expect going forward. |
|
|
|
I'm sorry, that's ridiculous on a broad level. Sometimes a guy doesn't even get an assist, but the goal wouldn't have happened without him. Be it a pinching defenseman, a goalie with a quick pass up ice to catch the other team changing, a player stealing the puck in the O-zone, or just a good cycle where a guy makes a great pass to set everything up. PP goals count just the same as all the other ones. To just completely write them off is absurd. I know, I know, 80% of the game is played 5v5, but PP goals count as 1 not 1/5.
Now, as far as this specific example goes, maybe he really is not good. I don't know, I haven't seen the goals he's been in on. That's not the issue I take, it's the fact that you just erase production to fit a narrative. Analytics should be inclusionary not exclusionary. You want more numbers, not less. No (good) scientist in the history of science has excluded relevant data. - Wetbandit1
The other thing here is the idea that PP points don't matter.
They matter, they just aren't useful for evaluations and predicting the future. If you get PP time, you'll get PP points - it's a given. (barring bad luck, you're going to score on 15-20% of your PPs)
If you want to be able to predict how a player will do in the future, it's essential to ignore PP points because they could easily mislead you.
Say you want to re-sign a player, and he got 50 points, 20 on the PP. Say your team is healthy and you don't plan on using him on the PP anymore. You better think of him as a 30 point player in this case. |
|