Please fill-in the blank

So if the Penguins go into the playoffs this year without Letang, Maata, Pouliot, a dried-up Perron, and a banged-up Malkin, they will have ___ playoff success than last year because they are more analytically sound.

Please choose from: more/less/the same
- jmatchett383

More. Because if they win just 2 games in the playoffs, they will automatically have more playoff success than last year.

Penguins better hope they get the Rangers in the playoffs with our below average defense

More. Because if they win just 2 games in the playoffs, they will automatically have more playoff success than last year.

Penguins better hope they get the Rangers in the playoffs with our below average defense
- rangerdanger94

Are Dan Boyle/Keith Yandle your top shutdown pair this year? They are defensive stalwarts.

Says the Flyers fan whose best defenseman is...I don't even know who.

Are Dan Boyle/Keith Yandle your top shutdown pair this year? They are defensive stalwarts.

Says the Flyers fan whose best defenseman is...I don't even know who.
- jmatchett383

Boyle is brutal. Yandle isn't as bad as the rep he gets. I think that I was more impressed with Yandle's defensive ability than his offensive ability when he first got here. The thing with Yandle is his skating makes him good defensively similar to EK and Letang. It's just that when Yandle screws up...he REALLY screws up.

Please fill-in the blank

If the Penguins go into the playoffs this year without Letang, Maata, Pouliot, a dried-up Perron, and a banged-up Malkin, they will have ___ playoff success than last year because they are more analytically sound.

Please choose from: more/less/the same
- jmatchett383

I see what you're doing here and you are totally missing the point. Yes, a team cannot win without half its main cast at peak level. You're right. That's step 1. But as the Penguins have proven this past decade, you also can't win by runnin off the assumption that your super stars are so dominant that you can surround them with whoever and expect success. It doesn't work that way and you need every piece of the puzzle.

The analytical approach to building this team won't have much of an impact in us winning most of our games and making the playoffs. However, if we win the Met, or the East, or the presidents trophie and make a deep run in the playoffs or win the cup, I will atrinute that in large part to our deep team that was constructed to be analytically sound.

Boyle is brutal. Yandle isn't as bad as the rep he gets. I think that I was more impressed with Yandle's defensive ability than his offensive ability when he first got here. The thing with Yandle is his skating makes him good defensively similar to EK and Letang. It's just that when Yandle screws up...he REALLY screws up.
- rangerdanger94

Boyle looked like he'd get knocked off of the puck by a stiff wind.

And yeah, Yandle is very aggressive. It seems like it works out about 80% of the time, but when it doesn't, it's ending up in the back of the net.

I don't care if he's 50. The fact is that there were no free agents that could have replaced Kunitz for that price. What player could the pens have gotten at less than 3.8 mil who can handle top 6 minutes effectively?
- drummer829

I'm not saying replace him now. I'm saying that I he can easily be replaced in the future. So between him and duper he's out in my opinion.

I think analytics are very valuable, but the analytics I'm talking about are similar to the data this website provides:
http://somekindofninja.co...=Regulation&search=Search

I think this tool provides a lot of information on a players offensive ability. Things like Corsi...I'm just not sold on.
- rangerdanger94

The only unique thing I can see about that is the simultaneous WOWY and shot hextally in one chart. But as it only provides one season at a time, so I can see it being useful in matchups, but not of much use in player assessments because the samples are going to be insufficient. Supposedly the passing viz looks promising but the guy still needs a lot of work to finish it.
http://public.tableau.com/profile/spencer.mann#!/vizhome/PassingDataDefense/Compare

More. Because if they win just 2 games in the playoffs, they will automatically have more playoff success than last year.

Penguins better hope they get the Rangers in the playoffs with our below average defense
- rangerdanger94

I'm not sure how you've interpreted our being unimpressed with Girardi as us thinking you guys have a below average defense but ok...

I see what you're doing here and you are totally missing the point. Yes, a team cannot win without half its main cast at peak level. You're right. That's step 1. But as the Penguins have proven this past decade, you also can't win by runnin off the assumption that your super stars are so dominant that you can surround them with whoever and expect success. It doesn't work that way and you need every piece of the puzzle.

The analytical approach to building this team won't have much of an impact in us winning most of our games and making the playoffs. However, if we win the Met, or the East, or the presidents trophie and make a deep run in the playoffs or win the cup, I will atrinute that in large part to our deep team that was constructed to be analytically sound.
- Victoro311

I agree. But like you said (implied, more so), that's more of a supplemental reason. If their best players don't produce and/or are injured, then you can throw the analytics out of the window. It doesn't mean they were used correctly/poorly, just that the players didn't perform as expected.

Again, I understand your point. However, on a team that was absolutely decimated by injuries to key players, I think it would be unfair to attribute the team's success to analytics assuming those injuries do not repeat en masse.

I'm not sure how you've interpreted our being unimpressed with Girardi as us thinking you guys have a below average defense but ok...
- Victoro311

Don't you know? The Rangers have the best 6 defensemen in the game and Cam Talbot got robbed of the Vezina last year.

And I know it's VERY unpopular here, but as much as I hate the Rangers, I'd take McDonagh over Letang even if you take cap hits and injuries out of the equation.

I'm not sure how you've interpreted our being unimpressed with Girardi as us thinking you guys have a below average defense but ok...
- Victoro311

I was referencing the James Tanner blog.

Don't you know? The Rangers have the best 6 defensemen in the game and Cam Talbot got robbed of the Vezina last year.

And I know it's VERY unpopular here, but as much as I hate the Rangers, I'd take McDonagh over Letang even if you take cap hits and injuries out of the equation.
- jmatchett383

I know you're being sarcastic but in the real world you can't take cap hits and injuries out of the equation so McDonagh > Letang

I was referencing the James Tanner blog.
- rangerdanger94

Then you're wrong.

I know you're being sarcastic but in the real world you can't take cap hits and injuries out of the equation so McDonagh > Letang
- rangerdanger94

I'm not being sarcastic (in the second part). Taking them out of the equation, I'd take McDonagh. When you factor in cap hits/injuries, it just slides the scale even further towards him.

I don't know why you would have an issue with that.

I agree. But like you said (implied, more so), that's more of a supplemental reason. If their best players don't produce and/or are injured, then you can throw the analytics out of the window. It doesn't mean they were used correctly/poorly, just that the players didn't perform as expected.

Again, I understand your point. However, on a team that was absolutely decimated by injuries to key players, I think it would be unfair to attribute the team's success to analytics assuming those injuries do not repeat en masse.
- jmatchett383

I guess this is all revisionist history at this point so the argument probably stops here, but assuming health I don't think last year's team coulda gone toe to toe with the Lightning unless Geno decided to just absolutely eat Bishop like he sometimes does. Last year's team at full health I saw as slightly inferior to the Rangers and nothing much more this year's team I see Met champs and if the defense makes strides a team that can go toe to toe with anyone.

But like I said it's all revisionist history. How far would we have gone last year in the playoffs if everyone had been healthy? Who knows. If you want to use that as reason for not crediting analytics then I really can't argue with you.

I was referencing the James Tanner blog.
- rangerdanger94

My apologies. I do not venture into the dark side of Hockeybuzz often so I didn't get the reference. I guess any team that doesn't have OEL is pretty bellow average defensively though.

Don't you know? The Rangers have the best 6 defensemen in the game and Cam Talbot got robbed of the Vezina last year.

And I know it's VERY unpopular here, but as much as I hate the Rangers, I'd take McDonagh over Letang even if you take cap hits and injuries out of the equation.
- jmatchett383

What? That's ludicrous. McDonagh's bargain contract and durability is his argument over Letang and you're taking it out of the equation?

I'm not being sarcastic (in the second part). Taking them out of the equation, I'd take McDonagh. When you factor in cap hits/injuries, it just slides the scale even further towards him.

I don't know why you would have an issue with that.
- jmatchett383

You should know that I don't often agree with a Flyers fan but when I do (frank) the rangers

My apologies. I do not venture into the dark side of Hockeybuzz often so I didn't get the reference. I guess any team that doesn't have OEL is pretty bellow average defensively though.
- Victoro311

Tanner's new thing is the Rangers defense isn't better than the Oilers because corsi.

I guess this is all revisionist history at this point so the argument probably stops here, but assuming health I don't think last year's team coulda gone toe to toe with the Lightning unless Geno decided to just absolutely eat Bishop like he sometimes does. Last year's team at full health I saw as slightly inferior to the Rangers and nothing much more this year's team I see Met champs and if the defense makes strides a team that can go toe to toe with anyone.

But like I said it's all revisionist history. How far would we have gone last year in the playoffs if everyone had been healthy? Who knows. If you want to use that as reason for not crediting analytics then I really can't argue with you.
- Victoro311

It's not crediting/discrediting them. I'm more saying that it's not a valid barometer this particular season since so many things (aside from MAF) went wrong for them last year that, even if they had entered last year with this year's roster, it wouldn't have made a difference. That's my point.

Do I think that the roster this year is better than last year's? Absolutely. Is that based purely on analytical analysis? Not one bit. I don't need analytics to tell me that another year older Maata/Pouliot will make them better. I don't need analytics to tell me that Bonino and Fehr will each bring more than Sutter. I don't need analytics to tell me that Phil Kessel is a great offensive player.

What? That's ludicrous. McDonagh's bargain contract and durability is his argument over Letang and you're taking it out of the equation?
- Victoro311

okay

Tanner's new thing is the Rangers defense isn't better than the Oilers because corsi.
- rangerdanger94

Also that his man crush got traded to them.

He and OEL should have shared the Norris.

But really, OEL should have been nominated.

It's not crediting/discrediting them. I'm more saying that it's not a valid barometer this particular season since so many things (aside from MAF) went wrong for them last year that, even if they had entered last year with this year's roster, it wouldn't have made a difference. That's my point.

Do I think that the roster this year is better than last year's? Absolutely. Is that based purely on analytical analysis? Not one bit. I don't need analytics to tell me that another year older Maata/Pouliot will make them better. I don't need analytics to tell me that Bonino and Fehr will each bring more than Sutter. I don't need analytics to tell me that Phil Kessel is a great offensive player.
- jmatchett383

I'd like to see the analytics on Kessel's body fat %. That boy is chunky.

Also that his man crush got traded to them.

He and OEL should have shared the Norris.

But really, OEL should have been nominated.
- jmatchett383

The Yandle thing is funny. Top 5 defenseman in the league when on the Yotes. Imagine all the good things he would do a talented contender where he plays with all world players is what Tanner used to say. Well yea he came to a contender with better players than the Yotes and his production got worse in every single way.

It's not crediting/discrediting them. I'm more saying that it's not a valid barometer this particular season since so many things (aside from MAF) went wrong for them last year that, even if they had entered last year with this year's roster, it wouldn't have made a difference. That's my point.

Do I think that the roster this year is better than last year's? Absolutely. Is that based purely on analytical analysis? Not one bit. I don't need analytics to tell me that another year older Maata/Pouliot will make them better. I don't need analytics to tell me that Bonino and Fehr will each bring more than Sutter. I don't need analytics to tell me that Phil Kessel is a great offensive player.
- jmatchett383

Using analytics for one season isn't valid to judge in the first place. Also not sure where the idea comes from that Pittsburgh is the first team, or even the most reliant, on the underlying numbers for roster construction. Plenty of other GMs use them too.