Bergeron vs Getzlaf

[Gurglesons]

Soo.. you’re using a one game sample to show who’s the better player?

Love how the goalposts consider to move.

“Id like to see a reference for your international 2C claim, as Toews led team canada forwards in both 5v5 and all-sit ice-time in 2014, and Im pretty sure Crosby, not Getzlaf was behind him as far as centers.”

I’m providing data that Getzlaf was a top dog on those Olympic teams. Maybe you guys are too young to remember.

Maybe you didn’t follow the West which is odd because you are a wings fan.

The fact is analytic bullshit has made Bergeron seem like a god, when in reality Getzlaf was a top tier center arguably the best in the West outside of Sedin during his Hart year for nearly a decade.

 

[DrDorrian MD]

Very close, but I'd take getz on my team from start to finish.

 

[JaegerDice]

Love how the goalposts consider to move.

“Id like to see a reference for your international 2C claim, as Toews led team canada forwards in both 5v5 and all-sit ice-time in 2014, and Im pretty sure Crosby, not Getzlaf was behind him as far as centers.”

I’m providing data that Getzlaf was a top dog on those Olympic teams. Maybe you guys are too young to remember.

Maybe you didn’t follow the West which is odd because you are a wings fan.

The fact is analytic bullshit has made Bergeron seem like a god, when in reality Getzlaf was a top tier center arguably the best in the West outside of Sedin during his Hart year for nearly a decade.

He played on Crosby’s wing. Crosby line was the 3rd most used that game, and Crosby got an extra 2 minutes on the PP.

What was the deployment throughout the tournament? Was Crosby and his line the 3rd line every game?

 

[Gurglesons]

He played on Crosby’s wing. Crosby line was the 3rd most used that game, and Crosby got an extra 2 minutes on the PP.

What was the deployment throughout the tournament? Was Crosby and his line the 3rd line every game?

If you want to make an argument against what is already been established as true you can make the argument.

Or parrot some chart guy on Twitter about how Bergeron is actually the best center in the league.

The reality is Getzlaf is better.

 

[JaegerDice]

If you want to make an argument against what is already been established as true you can make the argument.

Or parrot some chart guy on Twitter about how Bergeron is actually the best center in the league.

The reality is Getzlaf is better.

Repeating ‘Getzlaf is better’ in the face of multitudes of measured evidence to the contrary on the grounds of ‘lol nerds’ is not a particularly compelling arguement.

Nobody is this thread is arguing Getzlaf wasnt an elite center for much of his career. Simply that he had measurably less on-ice impact than Bergeron who is even more elite.

I was asking for the full tournament deployment, because I do not recall Crosby and his line deployed as the 3rd line in the 2014 tournament.

 

[Gurglesons]

Repeating ‘Getzlaf is better’ in the face of multitudes of measured evidence to the contrary on the grounds of ‘lol nerds’ is not a particularly compelling arguement.

Nobody is this thread is arguing Getzlaf wasnt an elite center for much of his career. Simply that he had measurably less on-ice impact than Bergeron.

I was asking for the full tournament deployment, because I do not recall Crosby and his line deployed as the 3rd line in 2014.

What are the grounds?

Getzlaf..

Top ten point producer in the league 3x
Top ten assist producer in the league 7x
Hart finalist
Played above Bergeron in international competition.
Was the actual # 1 C on his cup winning team

Bergeron..

Won Selkes.
Was good as an overager in a WJC.

What is the “on ice impact”?

He was never a top ten producer in the league. He was never acknowledged for anything but defensive play by a bunch of media guys who typically just sort by face off %.

 

[JaegerDice]

What are the grounds?

Getzlaf..

Top ten point producer in the league 3x
Top ten assist producer in the league 7x
Hart finalist
Played above Bergeron in international competition.
Was the actual # 1 C on his cup winning team

Bergeron..

Won Selkes.
Was good as an overager in a WJC.

What is the “on ice impact”?

He was never a top ten producer in the league. He was never acknowledged for anything but defensive play by a bunch of media guys who typically just sort by face off %.

On-ice impact is the ability to control play and create goal differential. This is done through offense and defense, maintaining and advantage in possession, shots, chances and ultimately goals through both creation and suppression - not just individually but for all the players on the ice.

The best measures are xGF% and GAR.

Individual production is obviously one way to impact goal-differential, but it is far from the only way. Exceptional producers can have great on-ice impact (like Crosby) or very weak on-ice impact (like Patrick Kane). Exceptional defense (suppression), possession, chance creation for the team can ensure high goal differential even if individual production is lower.

I cant speak to the motivation for any writers to rank Bergeron highly, but his defensive impact certainly extends beyond faceoffs. His shot suppression and shot generation are both elite. He very simply always has the puck… and since you need the puck to shoot and score, that makes him very effective defensively.

 

[Gurglesons]

On-ice impact is the ability to control play and create goal differential. This is done through offense and defense, maintaining and advantage in possession, shots, chances and ultimately goals through both creation and suppression - not just individually but for all the players on the ice.

The best measures are xGF% and GAR.

Individual production is obviously one way to impact goal-differential, but it is far from the only way. Exceptional producers can have great on-ice impact (like Crosby) or very weak on-ice impact (like Patrick Kane). Exceptional defense (suppression), possession, chance creation for the team can ensure high goal differential even if individual production is lower.

xGF% has predicted jack shit over the past ten years. One team that lead the league in xGF% in the last ten years has won a cup.

Try again.

How a Hawks fan can watch Patrick Kane and think he’s a negative player on the ice because of where shots are taken on him when he is on the ice is insanity.

 

[Rengorlex]

What is the “on ice impact”?

He was never a top ten producer in the league. He was never acknowledged for anything but defensive play by a bunch of media guys who typically just sort by face off %.

The on ice impact is preventing goals against. Something one would think an eleven-times-in-a-row Selke finalist is quite good at. But apparently it's all just a sham based on faceoff%, which is a poor stat. But also all advanced stats that don't care about faceoffs are just too complex to be useful. Just rate every player based on their points and be done with it. Defensive play by centers is just a myth

 

[JaegerDice]

xGF% has predicted jack shit over the past ten years. One team that lead the league in xGF% in the last ten years has won a cup.

Try again.

No stat has a 1:1 correlation with cup wins.

There's very clearly a correlation between xGF% and playoff wins, however. This is a nice summary, there are more in depth summaries out there if you want to really get into the nitty gritty math.

JMPing into the Stanley Cup Playoffs - 'CATS STATS



xGF% is already proven to have a stronger correlation to future GF% than any other stat, including current GF%.

 

[JaegerDice]

How a Hawks fan can watch Patrick Kane and think he’s a negative player on the ice because of where shots are taken on him when he is on the ice is insanity.

It's actually pretty obvious to anybody paying attention. There's a reason why Kane was heavily sheltered with Ozone starts against primarily 3rd and 4th lines. And even with such sheltering the team typically only breaks even in possession, shot share, chance share and goal differential when he's on the ice. Kane will always produce individually, but he does not drive play particularly well and therefore has a relatively weak on-ice impact.

 

[Gurglesons]

No stat has a 1:1 correlation with cup wins.

xGF% is already proven to have a stronger correlation to future GF% than any other stat, including current GF%.

Yet xGF% is enough to prove that Bergeron's individual lack of production is somehow remarkable enough to outweigh finishing top ten in the league in production three times and assists seven?

It's actually pretty obvious to anybody paying attention. There's a reason why Kane was heavily sheltered with Ozone starts against primarily 3rd and 4th lines. And even with such sheltering the team typically only breaks even in possession, shot share, chance share and goal differential when he's on the ice. Kane will always produce individually, but he does not drive play particularly well and therefore has a relatively weak on-ice impact.

Anyone that watches Patrick Kane knows he does not have a relatively weak on-ice impact.

This is why teams that think they can simply win a cup with smart choices have yet to do anything in the NHL and the teams that embrace stats but also understand elite gamebreaking talent wins cup have won the last three.

 

[JaegerDice]

Yet xGF% is enough to prove that Bergeron's individual lack of production is somehow remarkable enough to outweigh finishing top ten in the league in production three times and assists seven?



Anyone that watches Patrick Kane knows he does not have a relatively weak on-ice impact.

Yes. Because goal-differential, not individual production, wins hockey games. The gap in production between the two is not large enough to mitigate the impact on goal differential and winning games.

Getzlaf was a great player. Probably an HHOF player, albeit not a first-ballot guy.

Bergeron is simply more elite, and a dead to rights first ballot HHOFer.


I've watched Patrick Kane since his first year in the NHL. I assure you, while he has always been an elite individual producer, he is not a driver of play and indeed, requires sheltering for maximum efficacy to mitigate his weaknesses.

 

[Gurglesons]

I've watched Patrick Kane since his first year in the NHL. I assure you, while he has always been an elite individual producer, he is not a driver of play and indeed, requires sheltering for maximum efficacy to mitigate his weaknesses.

In 2013 which was his Smythe year deserved or not Kane's most common opposing centers in each series were..

Brodziak
Datsyuk
Kopitar
Bergeron

People put way too much faith in match up / possession / defensive numbers for an 82 game season meaning things in the NHL. Also, the defensive metrics that analytics minds use in the NHL just reflect poorly. Zach Aston Reese was viewed as a Selke candidate by them.

The 2017 Penguins and 2018 Capitals are on the record book saying they specifically passed up certain shot types which influenced the public models to make them look like shit. They won cups. Pray at the altar of the faulty stats though.

 

[JaegerDice]

In 2013 which was his Smythe year deserved or not Kane's most common opposing centers in each series were..

Brodziak
Datsyuk
Kopitar
Bergeron

People put way too much faith in match up / possession / defensive numbers for an 82 game season meaning things in the NHL. Also, the defensive metrics that analytics minds use in the NHL just reflect poorly. Zach Aston Reese was viewed as a Selke candidate by them.

The bolded explains pretty well why Kane went 7 games without a point between the Detroit and Kings series. Kane had a rough time with those matchups. It wasn't until Game 4 of the Kings series when he was put on a line with Toews (who had been matched against Kopitar on home ice to great effect, so Sutter used him against Kane when the Kings had home ice) that the points started flowing.

Same deal in the final. Kane was basically invisible 5v5 against Bergeron and Toews was battling to a standstill against Chara and the HuLK line. In Game 4, they put Kane and Toews together, Julien decides to use Chara against them and save Bergeron for Sharp/Hossa. The in Game 5, Bergeron gets injured... so even if Julien wanted to add Bergeron to Chara against Toews and Kane, he really couldn't.

That's a big reason why the Conn Smythe was so undeserved. Kane went quiet for extended periods. And while he's a gifted producer, he's a weak play-driver, so if he's not producing, he's not delivering any positive impact.

 

[JaegerDice]

The 2017 Penguins and 2018 Capitals are on the record book saying they specifically passed up certain shot types which influenced the public models to make them look like shit. They won cups. Pray at the altar of the faulty stats though.

Those are two of the weakest cup winners of the cap era. They get turned to mulch by any of the dominant possession and xGF% teams like Detroit 2008, Chicago 2010 and 2013, Pittsburgh 2016, etc.

Just because a team managed to get hot at the right time or get some good luck doesn't mean that's an example of how a team should play or be built. That's an insane position.

You're much better off being a dominant team and having to rely less on luck than being a one-off like the Washington Capitals or a last gasp like the 2017 Penguins.

What Penguins fan in their right mind looks at the 2016 Pens and the 2017 Pens and says, 'you know what, I like what the 2017 Pens are doing, if I had a say in the matter, I'd make the team play like that instead of how the 2016 Pens play'

Madness.

 

[JaegerDice]

 

[bambamcam4ever]

The on ice impact is preventing goals against. Something one would think an eleven-times-in-a-row Selke finalist is quite good at. But apparently it's all just a sham based on faceoff%, which is a poor stat. But also all advanced stats that don't care about faceoffs are just too complex to be useful. Just rate every player based on their points and be done with it. Defensive play by centers is just a myth

View attachment 584699

I mean it's pretty simple why Bergeron would look so good last year in particular when comparing him to the rest of his team. The Bruins had good winger and D depth, but their other centers sucked aside from Bergeron. So they did much better when he was on the ice obviously.

 

[bambamcam4ever]

Those are two of the weakest cup winners of the cap era. They get turned to mulch by any of the dominant possession and xGF% teams like Detroit 2008, Chicago 2010 and 2013, Pittsburgh 2016, etc.

Just because a team managed to get hot at the right time or get some good luck doesn't mean that's an example of how a team should play or be built. That's an insane position.

You're much better off being a dominant team and having to rely less on luck than being a one-off like the Washington Capitals or a last gasp like the 2017 Penguins.

What Penguins fan in their right mind looks at the 2016 Pens and the 2017 Pens and says, 'you know what, I like what the 2017 Pens are doing, if I had a say in the matter, I'd make the team play like that instead of how the 2016 Pens play'

Madness.

The Washington Capitals weren't lucky, they were a very, very good team who finally got past the Penguins. They f***ing slaughtered the Lightning. Of course, you'd have to actually watch and understand the sport instead of relying on outdated stats with significant degrees of entanglement. But instead you're a paragon of the Dunning-Kruger effect.

 

[bambamcam4ever]

In 2013 which was his Smythe year deserved or not Kane's most common opposing centers in each series were..

Brodziak
Datsyuk
Kopitar
Bergeron

People put way too much faith in match up / possession / defensive numbers for an 82 game season meaning things in the NHL. Also, the defensive metrics that analytics minds use in the NHL just reflect poorly. Zach Aston Reese was viewed as a Selke candidate by them.

The 2017 Penguins and 2018 Capitals are on the record book saying they specifically passed up certain shot types which influenced the public models to make them look like shit. They won cups. Pray at the altar of the faulty stats though.

They're just like the people expecting the rapture to come every year or so. It never happens, but there's always some new excuse spun up why it didn't. While everyone else correctly predicted there would be none.

 

[JaegerDice]

The Washington Capitals weren't lucky, they were a very, very good team who finally got past the Penguins. They f***ing slaughtered the Lightning. Of course, you'd have to actually watch and understand the sport instead of relying on outdated stats with significant degrees of entanglement. But instead you're a paragon of the Dunning-Kruger effect.

No, they were a mediocre team and their own GM admitted at the beginning of the year that the window had closed and they were taking a step back. They got hot and lucky and won a cup, and havent been a legitimate threat since.

Anybody who has watched the game of hockey can understand that 2018 Capitals and 2017 Penguins were nowhere near as good as the dominant possession monsters like the 2008 Red Wings, the great Blackhawks teams, the Kings teams, the 2020 Lightning, etc.

 

[bambamcam4ever]

No stat has a 1:1 correlation with cup wins.

There's very clearly a correlation between xGF% and playoff wins, however. This is a nice summary, there are more in depth summaries out there if you want to really get into the nitty gritty math.

JMPing into the Stanley Cup Playoffs - 'CATS STATS



xGF% is already proven to have a stronger correlation to future GF% than any other stat, including current GF%.

Why has Sidney Crosby's xGF% consistently and repeatedly been lower than his actual GF%? Why has Erik Karlsson's xGF% consistently and repeatedly been higher than his actual GF%?

Is this a flaw in xGF?

No, they were a mediocre team and their own GM admitted at the beginning of the year that the window had closed and they were taking a step back. They got hot and lucky and won a cup, and havent been a legitimate threat since.

They were the best team in the league the year prior and the 2nd best the year before. Doesn't seem strange to me that they win the next year, even minus a few players.

And link to the GM saying the window had closed?

 

[Rengorlex]

I mean it's pretty simple why Bergeron would look so good last year in particular when comparing him to the rest of his team. The Bruins had good winger and D depth, but their other centers sucked aside from Bergeron. So they did much better when he was on the ice obviously.

Bergeron last season had by far the highest xgf% of any player ever recorded at 5vs5.

 

[wintersej]

I’ll never understand people parroting stats guys as the Bible.

Getzlaf played 2C behind Crosby when it came to any international competition. And was actually a 1C on a cup winning team instead of hiding behind Krejci to get offensive production.

Bergeron has been on the first line with Crosby the last decade so that’s not the argument you think it is.

 

[Gliff]

You asked 4 questions all which probably have different answers lol.