Value of: Esa Lindell for a forward

[AveryStar4Eva]

Okay again we're dancing around the fact that I don't think he's a top pairing defenceman. I wouldn't want him for 4 million let alone 5.8.

That’s okay you don’t have to like him, I’m just trying to explain my point of view as a Stars fan that is all. I get why he’s a polarizing player, he’s trash at moving the puck there is no way you can argue that. Having players like Heiskanen and Klingberg take away the need for him to be that guy and focus on being the safety net. But the reason why I and many other Stars fans want to keep him is his simple game and not having anyone else that can step into his role.

These last couple years he’s been good at not allowing zone entries, not allowing a ton of high danger chances, he puts up a decent amount of points (70th in defenceman points this season, 48th last year), plays a ton on the PK, and can play physical when needed.

Nobody should say that he’s an all around beast, but when you’re the most trusted defenseman on a team that’s been top three in goals against you’ve gotta be doing something’s right.

 

[stl76]

The full explanation is here if you want to read it: Woodblog: WoodMoney: A new way to figure out quality of competition in order to analyze NHL data

But to summarize it determines Elite/Middle/Bottom 6 through a combination of ice time, points, and CF% rel. So the players that are good in all 3 metrics are "elite", the ones that are either not getting ice time, not getting points, or are terrible play drivers are "gritensity".

As for the quality of competition argument not mattering, Daniel Wagner wrote a great piece about it here: Why Quality of Competition doesn’t matter to analytics experts anymore

But to summarize that: the distribution for the "toughest competition" guys and the "easiest competition" guys is pretty tight and there isn't a huge difference in terms of just the competition faced between the top and the bottom, at least on a macro level.

As for the "how did they make the adjustments", they have a pretty long write-up on RAPM that will do a much better job explaining how it works than I ever could, so I'll link that here: Reviving Regularized Adjusted Plus-Minus for Hockey

As for your Yandle vs Suter exercise:
View attachment 342201
But I'll also post the prior 3 seasons because Suter had a rough year due to injuries.
View attachment 342204

As you can see, Suter had much better adjusted numbers than Yandle did, even though Yandle played easier minutes and Suter faced really tough ones. Just because Suter played tough minutes doesn't automatically make his numbers bad, in fact it's the opposite! Even though his minutes were among the toughest in the league, and he'd likely have better numbers in easier minutes, the model recognizes that Suter's deployment impacts his results, and adjusts accordingly. Just like it adjusts Yandle's results due to his easier minutes. It's not impossible to do well in tough minutes, and most of the top players according to RAPM do actually face tough competition and are pretty much universally recognized as great players. Basically, getting tough minutes doesn't excuse shitty results, as there are plenty of players who get similarly tough minutes to Lindell but don't get caved in.

Just to further illustrate that there's not much of a difference between Lindell's and Klingberg's minutes, I'll just post their overall splits against each tier of competition.

	TOI% vs Elites	TOI% vs Middle	TOI% vs Bottom 6
Lindell	39	35	26
Klingberg	35	35	29

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

So to summarize:

1. Lindell and Klingberg play similar minutes, and when apart their minutes aren't that radically different. Klingberg does better without Lindell, and Lindell tanks without Klingberg. Both things happen to such a large degree that the slight change in competition can't be the only reason.

2. Competition doesn't matter too much, because at the end of the day, everyone sort of just plays against everyone. Yes there are differences in how difficult the competition is, but the differences aren't super large.

3. Using adjusted metrics, Lindell looks terrible, meaning that his poor results can't just be explained away by his usage.

4. It's not impossible to have good adjusted results with hard minutes (as demonstrated by Ryan Suter) and it's also not impossible to have shitty results despite easy usage (as demonstrated by Keith Yandle). That leads me to believe that the model is doing something right. If all the players with tough minutes had shitty results and all the players with easy minutes had terrific results, then there'd be a problem. To me, this passes the sniff test.

5. Given all of the above, it's fair to say that Lindell is not a very good defenseman, and his shitty results can't just be waived away because of the minutes he plays.

Thank you for taking the time to break some of this down for me! There is a lot of information in the links you've posted, and I won't have time tonight to sift through it all.

I still have some issues with the criteria for separating players into elite vs "gritensity" (seriously, they have to come up with a better name FFS), particularly relCorsi and TOI%. Trying to break down such a fluid and dynamic game as hockey into discrete sections like this is problematic for me. Not saying it can't be done, but I am suspicious of evolving hockey's attempts - in part because I have seen some of their charts that did not pass the smell test. In particular, I cannot tell you how many times I have seen someone post a chart of some bottom pairing defenseman playing extremely sheltered minutes and say they are a better player than a top pairing guy on a struggling team because their chart has more blue.

I guess the fundamental issue I have here with QoC comes down to a micro vs macro lens. The evolving hockey folks claim to regress away the need for QoC metrics in their RAPM calculations, saying that over a large sample, the effects of QoC are not really statistically significant. Obviously there is truth and value in statistics, but I can't help but look at this through a micro lens: in a given game on a given shift, QoC 100% matters (even if regression can attempt to control for this over a large enough sample). And while the difference in tough QoC and easy QoC might seem small in a macro view, that small disparity can result in HUGE differences in a small sample. Individual data points matter, and while you can smooth some things out with regression, outliers (in this case defensive dmen who play extremely tough minutes) still exist.

 

[Kcb12345]

Stars would trade Klingberg and the rest of the defense before they would even consider moving Lindell. He's not going anywhere and is far too important to this team, especially if they continue this defense first style going forward.

I also think Klingberg would bring in a nicer return anyways and is less valuable to the Stars currently, however I don't see either getting moved anytime soon

 

[mynamejeff420]

Stars would trade Klingberg and the rest of the defense before they would even consider moving Lindell. He's not going anywhere and is far too important to this team, especially if they continue this defense first style going forward.

I also think Klingberg would bring in a nicer return anyways and is less valuable to the Stars currently, however I don't see either getting moved anytime soon

What is it about Lindell that makes him so important? Is it his ability to eat tough minutes? I'd understand the sentiment of him being "far too important to the Stars to ever let him go" if he was crushing those minutes, or even breaking even, because those are tough to do given the minutes he plays. The problem is he gets killed right now. Yes his deployment is tough, but it's very clear that he can't handle it. Plus, Klingberg plays similarly tough minutes, but is actually good in them. If there's one person on the Stars defense who's far too valuable to lose, it's Klingberg. He gets fed tough minutes but actually succeeds in them, unlike Lindell. Nobody is going to mistake Klingberg for a defensive stalwart, but at least he can play manageable defense and bring along elite level offense. Lindell is just Klingberg without the offense. He bleeds shots against, both in terms of quantity and quality.

If one of them had to be traded it should definitely be Lindell. Yes Klingberg would likely return more, but that's because he's actually a terrific player. Lindell could probably bring in a solid package as if he's a really good defenseman, without actually being a really good defenseman. If Lindell was traded, not only would you be getting a package back as if you traded a good player, but you'd also get that contract off your books, before the rest of the league catches on to how bad Lindell is. You'd be adding the value of a great defenseman without actually having to give up one! It's win-win: you get Lindell's deal off your books and a nice trade package in return.


No offense, but suggesting Klingberg should be the one to go over Lindell due to how important they are is just one of the most insane things I've ever heard.

 

[Unspecified]

Uh because he's not one of the 29th best defencemen in the NHL? I specifically think his contract is not warrented based on his play.

Well it is a good thing you are not a decision-maker now is it.

 

[Kcb12345]

What is it about Lindell that makes him so important? Is it his ability to eat tough minutes? I'd understand the sentiment of him being "far too important to the Stars to ever let him go" if he was crushing those minutes, or even breaking even, because those are tough to do given the minutes he plays. The problem is he gets killed right now. Yes his deployment is tough, but it's very clear that he can't handle it. Plus, Klingberg plays similarly tough minutes, but is actually good in them. If there's one person on the Stars defense who's far too valuable to lose, it's Klingberg. He gets fed tough minutes but actually succeeds in them, unlike Lindell. Nobody is going to mistake Klingberg for a defensive stalwart, but at least he can play manageable defense and bring along elite level offense. Lindell is just Klingberg without the offense. He bleeds shots against, both in terms of quantity and quality.

If one of them had to be traded it should definitely be Lindell. Yes Klingberg would likely return more, but that's because he's actually a terrific player. Lindell could probably bring in a solid package as if he's a really good defenseman, without actually being a really good defenseman. If Lindell was traded, not only would you be getting a package back as if you traded a good player, but you'd also get that contract off your books, before the rest of the league catches on to how bad Lindell is. You'd be adding the value of a great defenseman without actually having to give up one! It's win-win: you get Lindell's deal off your books and a nice trade package in return.


No offense, but suggesting Klingberg should be the one to go over Lindell due to how important they are is just one of the most insane things I've ever heard.

As expected, non-Stars fans don't know how good Lindell is and think they know best. Lot of stat watching goes on and yall think you know everything just like that but he's clearly the best player on the team defensively. Anyone who argues Klingberg is better needs to watch even just 1 game. Klingberg's transition game is better but I'd take Lindell in the D zone 10/10 times. These guys are D partners too and have been for a while. Only time they aren't is when Lindell gets put with Polak (a guy who is notorious for killing your stats in the D zone) or Heiskanen for the last 5 minutes of a game to hold the lead, in which he never ends up leaving the ice because he's trusted that much. He also plays nearly every minute of PK time we face and excels in it. He's not gonna win a Norris obviously but he's a top 3 dman on the team (and best defensively) and getting paid like one so there's not a problem with that at all.

Like I said though, there's no argument to be made here. What matters is most Stars fans are perfectly happy with him, his play, and his contract. There's a reason for that

 

[Baksfamous112]

I was about to propose this. He is the kind of D, with Brodin, that Habs need on the left side.

If Domi is moved for one or another I would much prefer a Brodin coming in with a new deal prior to the trade. I like him better as a player than Lindell

 

[Vachon23]

As expected, non-Stars fans don't know how good Lindell is and think they know best. Lot of stat watching goes on and yall think you know everything just like that but he's clearly the best player on the team defensively. Anyone who argues Klingberg is better needs to watch even just 1 game. Klingberg's transition game is better but I'd take Lindell in the D zone 10/10 times. These guys are D partners too and have been for a while. Only time they aren't is when Lindell gets put with Polak (a guy who is notorious for killing your stats in the D zone) or Heiskanen for the last 5 minutes of a game to hold the lead, in which he never ends up leaving the ice because he's trusted that much. He also plays nearly every minute of PK time we face and excels in it. He's not gonna win a Norris obviously but he's a top 3 dman on the team (and best defensively) and getting paid like one so there's not a problem with that at all.

Like I said though, there's no argument to be made here. What matters is most Stars fans are perfectly happy with him, his play, and his contract. There's a reason for that

He did the same thing on the Habs board trying to convince us with his graphic and fancy stats that Mete was good 1st pair LD and Kulak was a good top 4. I truly understand how you feel ..