Windy River
Registered User
- Jan 31, 2013
- 1,636
- 665
I’d be interested to find a way of measuring the relative effect of a player on those they play with. Well beyond G/A/Pts or +/- of course. Perhaps even beyond line-mates.
The thread idea comes from thinking about Crosby vs McDavid.. while most people today believe that McDavid is clearly the better player, I have always believed that Crosby in his earlier career certainly had a more ‘positive’ impact on players around him that he played and practiced with - and even today I think Crosby may still hold the edge in this regard.
What I’d like to find is a relatively objective measure of this, both to see if my ‘instinct’ could be objectively argued as correct, and to look back over a broader set of players past and present to see what is there, if there are any hidden gems to uncover- perhaps even put some data behind the elusive ‘intangibles’ that apparently is so key to successful playoff runs.
I’m not sure what the ‘limits’ of analysis would be. While naturally observing direct impact on guys he’s on ice with, is there a way to look at the longer-term cumulative affect as well? Like how it elevates players on other lines, or line-mates later on when they don’t play on the same line or even team anymore? How opponents may be elevated with enough play being matched up against them??!
I ask because in my personal experience and observational experience of sports (boxing in particular interestingly enough...) I see that lesser players are often elevated simply by being in the presence of greater players. After a game/match I’ve even seen guys on the losing end look to have enhanced their skillset, or found another gear in future matches after gaining that experience.
A difficult, complex question, I know.. but one I’d hope to gain insight into
Thoughts?
The thread idea comes from thinking about Crosby vs McDavid.. while most people today believe that McDavid is clearly the better player, I have always believed that Crosby in his earlier career certainly had a more ‘positive’ impact on players around him that he played and practiced with - and even today I think Crosby may still hold the edge in this regard.
What I’d like to find is a relatively objective measure of this, both to see if my ‘instinct’ could be objectively argued as correct, and to look back over a broader set of players past and present to see what is there, if there are any hidden gems to uncover- perhaps even put some data behind the elusive ‘intangibles’ that apparently is so key to successful playoff runs.
I’m not sure what the ‘limits’ of analysis would be. While naturally observing direct impact on guys he’s on ice with, is there a way to look at the longer-term cumulative affect as well? Like how it elevates players on other lines, or line-mates later on when they don’t play on the same line or even team anymore? How opponents may be elevated with enough play being matched up against them??!
I ask because in my personal experience and observational experience of sports (boxing in particular interestingly enough...) I see that lesser players are often elevated simply by being in the presence of greater players. After a game/match I’ve even seen guys on the losing end look to have enhanced their skillset, or found another gear in future matches after gaining that experience.
A difficult, complex question, I know.. but one I’d hope to gain insight into
Thoughts?