Stafford vs. Frolik

[garret9]

Okee dokee. Personally, I've made my thoughts known, and have done so for the past 8 months - you can even read them in this thread. I don't know that anyone who hasn't already been convinced will be convinced at this point, but knock yourself out.



I think letting Frolik walk was a mistake, but I don't think it was Stafford vs. Frolik. Personally, I had hoped that both were signed, for different reasons (and reasons you've brought up in the past regarding Stafford's plusses).

And good luck changing people's minds on this. I commend you for trying though.

The team may not have looked at it as Stafford or Frolik, but the truth is ALL choices are actually player vs alternative.

It's basic economics. There is a limited number of resources: quality players, roster spaces, cap space, team money to spend, etc.

Just because the team didn't consciously choose one player over the other, they do actually. It's an opportunity cost. Resources that go to Peluso, Stafford, Thorburn, Byfuglien, Ladd, Scheifele, Trouba, Myers, Burmistrov, etc. cannot be used elsewhere.

 

[YWGinYYZ]

You aren't telling me anything I don't already know, garret. I wasn't discussing other poor roster decisions - just this one.

 

[garret9]

You aren't telling me anything I don't already know, garret. I wasn't discussing other poor roster decisions - just this one.

Ya. I guess with the Jets struggling to find success this year and being successful last year, it makes it hard on us not to dwell on the past.

 

[rehf]

Frolik AINEC.


Similar goal scoring.
Frolik better primary assist production.
Frolik better primary point production.
Frolik improves linemates shot production more.
Frolik improves linemates shot suppression more.
Frolik improves linemates shot differentials more.

Stafford is an okay PP2 option, which he gets over Frolik, but Frolik is a FAR better penalty killer, more so than Stafford is better PP option.

There is a huuuuuuge gap in performance between the two.

Fancy stats match eye test

 

[Daximus]

The only area where Stafford seems to do better than Frolik is in PP situations. 5v5 Fro has him beat in pretty much every category but when you add in powerplays all the Sudden Stafford becomes a bit more valuable but that doesn't offset the value.
Stafford has contributed on 29.62% of our Powerplay goals. He's also contributed on 37.5% of our Shorthanded goals. Take that for what it's worth.

 

[Derfel*]

The only area where Stafford seems to do better than Frolik is in PP situations. 5v5 Fro has him beat in pretty much every category but when you add in powerplays all the Sudden Stafford becomes a bit more valuable but that doesn't offset the value.
Stafford has contributed on 29.62% of our Powerplay goals. He's also contributed on 37.5% of our Shorthanded goals. Take that for what it's worth.

You'd have to keep usage into account for that last stat, of course...

 

[Daximus]

You'd have to keep usage into account for that last stat, of course...

Definitely.

 

[Derfel*]

Definitely.

Certainly. I guess for both stats, now that I think of it.

 

[Bartho]

Is it ok to like Stafford as a player and all the goals he's scored for the Jets, or is he still hot garbage?

 

[rehf]

Is it ok to like Stafford as a player and all the goals he's scored for the Jets, or is he still hot garbage?

Nobody thinks Stafford is terrible, in comparison to Frolik though, Frolik is the better player for what we could have gotten him for.

Regardless, Stafford offensively has been comparable to Frolik, still missing Frolik's PK and defensive prowess though.

 

[garret9]

I always like to say Stafford is a flawed but useful player.

I think that explains him well.

 

[Puckatron 3000]

The reason I figured I'd "drag up the past" here, is that we now have approximately a full season of having Stafford on the team. Obviously he had a great game last night. Any excitement expressed for Stafford, since his arrival, has almost always been met with his lackluster stats. Kinda like, "don't get too excited folks, Stafford isn't really that good. His shot percentage is through the roof. He sucks in all these other ways."

Of course, that should be the case! Any non-trivial evaluation of a player should absolutely include a statistical analysis. I really appreciate having Garret and others who can present this side of the story. I learn a lot from it.

But when Stafford pulled into the Jets scoring lead position last night, it occurred to me that perhaps he has maintained an offensive touch that the statistical prediction would have got wrong. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the gist of all the stats certainly didn't predict "best scorer on the Jets".

Let me say that again.
Drew Stafford has been the best Jet at scoring goals since he got here.

He's done that for a year now. That's gotta count for something, right?

Of course, no stats guy will say the stats are 100% predictive. Sometimes players will surprise you. Sometimes it's just a statistical anomaly. Or maybe there are other factors, and the player actually improves or changes into an environment that allows him to flourish.

I've always felt he's gotten a raw deal around here. It may absolutely be a case of failed eye test on my part, at least to some degree. But I figured it was an interesting conversation to have. Thanks to everybody for sharing your thoughts.

 

[JetsFan815]

Because we posters are signing or not signing the deals?

I get why we'd want to remind management of their mistakes, but I believe that we're all fairly clear on the issues that have been presented at this point.

You vastly underestimate the impact fan/public-opinion has on roster decisions. A fanbase that is aware of the facts, is well educated about them can hold the management to account and have them make smarter decisions as opposed to a fanbase that has been force-fed a false narrative by the media like "Pavelec is the Jets MVP" which leads to things such as the Pavelec contract.

 

[Say What]

You vastly underestimate the impact fan/public-opinion has on roster decisions. A fanbase that is aware of the facts, is well educated about them can hold the management to account and have them make smarter decisions as opposed to a fanbase that has been force-fed a false narrative by the media like "Pavelec is the Jets MVP" which leads to things such as the Pavelec contract.

You forgot this:

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

The reason I figured I'd "drag up the past" here, is that we now have approximately a full season of having Stafford on the team. Obviously he had a great game last night. Any excitement expressed for Stafford, since his arrival, has almost always been met with his lackluster stats. Kinda like, "don't get too excited folks, Stafford isn't really that good. His shot percentage is through the roof. He sucks in all these other ways."

Of course, that should be the case! Any non-trivial evaluation of a player should absolutely include a statistical analysis. I really appreciate having Garret and others who can present this side of the story. I learn a lot from it.

But when Stafford pulled into the Jets scoring lead position last night, it occurred to me that perhaps he has maintained an offensive touch that the statistical prediction would have got wrong. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the gist of all the stats certainly didn't predict "best scorer on the Jets".

Let me say that again.
Drew Stafford has been the best Jet at scoring goals since he got here.

He's done that for a year now. That's gotta count for something, right?

Of course, no stats guy will say the stats are 100% predictive. Sometimes players will surprise you. Sometimes it's just a statistical anomaly. Or maybe there are other factors, and the player actually improves or changes into an environment that allows him to flourish.

I've always felt he's gotten a raw deal around here. It may absolutely be a case of failed eye test on my part, at least to some degree. But I figured it was an interesting conversation to have. Thanks to everybody for sharing your thoughts.

I prefer to talk about Stafford without bringing in a comparison to Frolik. It may well be that by July '15 it could be only one of them but that should never have been allowed to develop that way. They are different players with different strengths and weaknesses and different roles.

I was less than thrilled to get Stafford. Not against it but not thrilled. His play was somewhat anomalous last season with a 16.1 SH%. This year he was pretty close to his career avg of 11.2 until last nights 2 pushed him up a bit. He can return to 12 or so in a few games but he will still have 16 goals. I have been very happy with his play this year. Much better than I expected. His play is a little weak in the D zone but he compensates by playing very well in the O zone.

 

[Puckatron 3000]

I prefer to talk about Stafford without bringing in a comparison to Frolik. It may well be that by July '15 it could be only one of them but that should never have been allowed to develop that way. They are different players with different strengths and weaknesses and different roles.

Yeah, I get that.
So I'll respond by talking about Stafford and Frolik.

Here's how I look at it.
1. In the offseason, we had one slot in the top 6. Ladd, Little, Wheeler, Scheifele, Perreault, X.

2. Fro and Stafford are both paid like top 6 guys.

3. We had impending cap issues with the potential resigning of Buff and Ladd, plus the upcoming RFAs like Scheif & Trouba.

4. Add in Frolik and Stafford, and it is probably not feasible to sign every single one of these players, at least to the ideal contract (non-bridge for the RFAs), especially considering the Jets internal cap. I would also advocate heavily for resigning Perreault when his contract is up. Maybe Stafford's 2 year contract, vs. Frolik's longer one, is the difference in making that happen.

5. So yes, the signing of Stafford does directly impact who else we did or didn't, do or don't sign. Since Frolik was not signed, and Stafford was, and these were quite arguably the two most major moves last off-season, a comparison to me is inevitable.

6. Chevy takes a lot of heat for losing Frolik. But gets very little credit for signing Stafford. A common comment I've seen regarding Stafford's signing is "to make Chevy look good in the Buffalo trade". Compare that to the huge criticism over Frolik. I'm not accusing anyone in particular here, just the general flavor of the forum, as I've seen it.

Maybe I'm off-base somewhere in my thinking. But that's what it is. I welcome you to challenge it. I do recognize there are counter arguments here. Maurice did have Stafford on the 3rd line for a chunk of the season, which maybe would have allowed Frolik to play top 6.

I have been very happy with his play this year. Much better than I expected. His play is a little weak in the D zone but he compensates by playing very well in the O zone.

Thanks!
All I ever wanted was a bit of Stafford love!

 

[YWGinYYZ]

You vastly underestimate the impact fan/public-opinion has on roster decisions. A fanbase that is aware of the facts, is well educated about them can hold the management to account and have them make smarter decisions as opposed to a fanbase that has been force-fed a false narrative by the media like "Pavelec is the Jets MVP" which leads to things such as the Pavelec contract.

The populace here probably needs less education than the general public, but I definitely get your point. Most effective would be to do what garret does in addition to posting articles and other information here: chime in on twitter with the media - THEY hold more power than any of us given their reach, and tend to be woefully under-educated when it comes to the real issues.

 

[Daximus]

Another thing Stafford seems to be good at is pure puck possession down low and cycling. Though it may not always end up in a shot attempt. I bet if we could view pure possession stats, like how long a player has the puck on his stick in the offensive zone, Staff would be right up there. Hugely important when trying to protect a lead.

 

[YWGinYYZ]

Another thing Stafford seems to be good at is pure puck possession down low and cycling. Though it may not always end up in a shot attempt. I bet if we could view pure possession stats, like how long a player has the puck on his stick in the offensive zone, Staff would be right up there. Hugely important when trying to protect a lead.

His problems aren't in the offensive zone - it's more zone exit / d-zone, IMHO. Agree that he's very good in the o-zone at maintaining possession, and other than Ladd, he's one of the few wingers that spends time in front of the net and drives the net fairly hard. I do like this about his game.

 

[garret9]

Another thing Stafford seems to be good at is pure puck possession down low and cycling. Though it may not always end up in a shot attempt. I bet if we could view pure possession stats, like how long a player has the puck on his stick in the offensive zone, Staff would be right up there. Hugely important when trying to protect a lead.

Although less important in predicting wins and goal differential.

Sorry, needing to insert in stats semantics.

 

[Daximus]

Although less important in predicting wins and goal differential.

Sorry, needing to insert in stats semantics.

This is very true.

 

[tbcwpg]

4. Add in Frolik and Stafford, and it is probably not feasible to sign every single one of these players, at least to the ideal contract (non-bridge for the RFAs), especially considering the Jets internal cap. I would also advocate heavily for resigning Perreault when his contract is up. Maybe Stafford's 2 year contract, vs. Frolik's longer one, is the difference in making that happen.

I've always maintained that it was the 5-year term this past summer that scared Chevy off of Frolik, and not the money. It's possible to disagree with him not signing him for 4 more years in summer 2014, but agree with him not signing him for 5 in summer 2015.

 

[garret9]

This is very true.

It's really only semantics though.

The difference between shot differentials that correlate to possession and predict goals/wins, and true possession, which is something more important from a coaching and strategical perspective than analytical or evaluative perspective.

 

[Daximus]

It's really only semantics though.

The difference between shot differentials that correlate to possession and predict goals/wins, and true possession, which is something more important from a coaching and strategical perspective than analytical or evaluative perspective.

Is there any way to view true possession stats or is it kind of a lost cause among analytics that serve a better purpose?

 

[garret9]

Is there any way to view true possession stats or is it kind of a lost cause among analytics that serve a better purpose?

NHL had it public for one season. After that there is no public data.

The public hockey-statistical community did do some minor tracking for testing, but the numbers were not very promising.

The reason why I know Corsi>possession in terms of correlation to future goal differentials and wins is more due to insider information I have from a few teams that have had more in-depth testing.
(Funny story. I was arguing with the "TSN stats guy" after he said true possession would eventually be public data and was saying Corsi would then become obsolete. I asked him if he wanted to take a bet on which one predicted goal differentials better. He never replied but I had two NHL employees text me and say that I should gun for as much money as possible with that bet)

If I worked for a team with a large budget, though, I would track it, as the information would be useful.