I honestly hate the part where it starts being about "hockey knowledge" because you know its just gotten dumb at that point.

This too we see in our politics - the other person's ideas are not even worth thinking about. It's rather convenient if you don't even have to consider what someone is saying.

If you go through the history of knowledge about every single subject in the history of mankind, you will learn that literally every single person who ever put forth a theory that questioned what had always been done was called an uninformed idiot. Every single one.

Now, I'm not proving the earth round or anything, but if you don't think there's at least something to the fact that we have ways of measuring hockey players that suggest some of our assumptions are wrong, I am not sure why you'd even bother to go on the internet and discuss hockey at all.
- James_Tanner

All fair points, but you always seems to push the envelope in your statements and theories - with the result that no real discussion comes out of it. You seems to get the worst out of your readers with your style of writing.

Sure it's nice to 'shock' the reader here and there, but when it becomes your trademark it's close to impossible to interact with readers that have 'some' knowledge about the subject.

Dude, really?

Craig MacTavish killed a woman while driving drunk.

You probably don't want to open this can of worms.

Just sayin'...
- Atomic Wedgie

I think you mean Franson.
- Atomic Wedgie

i think you mean runbad

Dude, really?

Craig MacTavish killed a woman while driving drunk.

You probably don't want to open this can of worms.

Just sayin'...
- Atomic Wedgie

Ted Kennedy would have advised him to drive the car off a bridge and leave the woman there, go home and take a shower and nap.

Interesting article James.
If they could get a solid #1 for something other than McDavid or Draisaitl it might just work.

As you mentioned though, it can be hard to know who to pick. Sometimes you think you've found a real gem and they poop the bed. But getting a great goalie should definitely be a priority for any team that doesn't have one, and those that do should always be on the lookout for an up and coming goalie to eventually replace their current guy.

support tanner by adding to his comment count!

Damn. Another Meltzer ownage coming isnt it?!

Gets popcorn cause its like matrix slow train wreck watching. You just cant look away.
- Roadrunner75

It's even worse:

Meltzer rented Tanner.

support tanner by adding to his comment count!
- hawkra

Obligatory Mike Sillinger reference, you know, just to help out and check for sure.

The Oilers with McDavid, Draisaitl, RNH and Klefbom could beat a much deeper team with less star power over 50% of the time, goalies being equal.

I'm yet to see someone actually look into this and come away with a different conclusion, but of course I'd be open to it, I just haven't seen it.
- James_Tanner

https://www.hockey-refere...s/NHL_2019_standings.html

https://www.hockey-refere...s/NHL_2018_standings.html

If you go through the history of knowledge about every single subject in the history of mankind, you will learn that literally every single person who ever put forth a theory that questioned what had always been done was called an uninformed idiot. Every single one.

Now, I'm not proving the earth round or anything, but if you don't think there's at least something to the fact that we have ways of measuring hockey players that suggest some of our assumptions are wrong, I am not sure why you'd even bother to go on the internet and discuss hockey at all.
- James_Tanner

And 99.99 percent of them WERE idiots. History is far more littered with stupid ideas than it is with good ones. And the argument you are making is literally used to explain the appeal to the minority logical fallacy.
https://rationalwiki.org/...ki/Appeal_to_the_minority

If you want to determine the value of any advanced stat, there is a simple step that was taken with moneyball in baseball, before the analytics explosion in that sport. They ran the analytics on past years, and showed it was a FAR better predictor of future behavior than the traditional scouting of the time was. You don't see that being done with hockey, because most advanced stats aren't a big step forward as predictors of future success. And analytics is worthless outside of it's ability to predict future success.

You want people to buy into your off-the-wall theories of things to try, based on advanced stats? Start by being better at making predictions than anyone not using analytics.

Not sure if you understand how writing works (if you did, it'd be a first) but you basically do make it up as you type. It's sort of like walking - just one foot in front of the other.
While I agree is counter-intuitive - depth in the NHL is perhaps the most overrated concept. Outside of elite players, all other players are practically interchangable.

you've got the internet, go read about this stuff man, it's not like I make it up.
- James_Tanner

Having the "right" role players at the right time is if the utmost importance to winning. Simply interchanging the bottom six is no where as simple as you make it out to be.

All fair points, but you always seems to push the envelope in your statements and theories - with the result that no real discussion comes out of it. You seems to get the worst out of your readers with your style of writing.

Sure it's nice to 'shock' the reader here and there, but when it becomes your trademark it's close to impossible to interact with readers that have 'some' knowledge about the subject.
- 21peter

Well said!

I honestly hate the part where it starts being about "hockey knowledge" because you know its just gotten dumb at that point.

This too we see in our politics - the other person's ideas are not even worth thinking about. It's rather convenient if you don't even have to consider what someone is saying.

If you go through the history of knowledge about every single subject in the history of mankind, you will learn that literally every single person who ever put forth a theory that questioned what had always been done was called an uninformed idiot. Every single one.

Now, I'm not proving the earth round or anything, but if you don't think there's at least something to the fact that we have ways of measuring hockey players that suggest some of our assumptions are wrong, I am not sure why you'd even bother to go on the internet and discuss hockey at all.
- James_Tanner

"Hockey knowledge" is only dumb to someone who doesn't understand the game. If you did, you would be able to sit down and watch a game and see the major differences between 2nd line and 4th line players. It's really not hard to notice.

Hey Jimmie! After you boinked the bowwow on that last post, I noticed you changed you logo from the Coyotes to the Oilers. I bet the Oilers' blogger must be thrilled to have you throw up all over his team.
The answer to your "dense" question of why was Canada not given a delay of game penalty when they hit the camera in the Gold Medal game at the WJC is
- IIHF Rule 135: v. A player who lifts the puck from the defending zone and hits the scoreclock or any structural object above the ice surface, causing a stoppage of play, will not be assessed a penalty.

You really shouldn't call someone dense just because they disagree with you; especially when they're right.

Hey Jimmie! After you boinked the bowwow on that last post, I noticed you changed you logo from the Coyotes to the Oilers. I bet the Oilers' blogger must be thrilled to have you throw up all over his team.
The answer to your "dense" question of why was Canada not given a delay of game penalty when they hit the camera in the Gold Medal game at the WJC is
- IIHF Rule 135: v. A player who lifts the puck from the defending zone and hits the scoreclock or any structural object above the ice surface, causing a stoppage of play, will not be assessed a penalty.

You really shouldn't call someone dense just because they disagree with you; especially when they're right.
- buster29

Not bad for an Islanders fan.
But, don’t waste your time. Being open to learning things from other people is for everyone but Jimmie. He’s the one who tells you when you’re wrong.
The fact that you cite the actual rules means nothing. He’s still right.

Having the "right" role players at the right time is if the utmost importance to winning. Simply interchanging the bottom six is no where as simple as you make it out to be.
- rrentz

1000% This!

With this flawed logic that all bottom 6 players are interchangeable could any two players replaced Hagelin and Bonino on the HBK line for the Pens and would've it had been as successful or would Kessel of had the same chemistry?
Anything is possible but not likely.

1000% This!

With this flawed logic that all bottom 6 players are interchangeable could any two players replaced Hagelin and Bonino on the HBK line for the Pens and would've it had been as successful or would Kessel of had the same chemistry?
Anything is possible but not likely.
- JetFuel

Salary cap restraints make this even more so.

Being a Ranger fan, I can remember being upset when Gartner, Amonte, etc. were traded away for Mattau and Noonen, Anderson, and McTavish at '94 trade deadline. Management didn't want to make those trade, but they allowed Keenen to get who he wanted b/c they wanted to WIN at any cost.

Getting the right support players with the experience and other intangibles are why they won the cup. Same "superstars" (Messier, Leetch) were there all season, along w/ great goaltending, but w/out those support players NYR wouldn't have won the cup!