Defence defence defence

[truck]

Dustin Byfuglien, good defensive defenseman:

Yup and he is among the Jets best shot suppressors this year too. Jumping on a puck in the neutral zone and turning the play up ice is flat out excellent defensive play - and he does it far more than any other Jet.

 

[raideralex99]

And just think ... some people wanted Buff gone.

 

[csk]

And just think ... some people wanted Buff gone.

When the speculation was 8X8, yeah

 

[YWGinYYZ]

When the speculation was 8X8, yeah

When I heard 8x8, I was like:

When I heard it was going to be 7.5x5, I was like:

I think for most, it was a term issue, not an AAV issue. When Buff signed that deal, it was evident it was a very team friendly, hometown discount type contract. Hard to argue with picking up one of the best defensemen of his type for such a reasonable rate AND term.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

When I heard 8x8, I was like:

When I heard it was going to be 7.5x5, I was like:

I think for most, it was a term issue, not an AAV issue. When Buff signed that deal, it was evident it was a very team friendly, hometown discount type contract. Hard to argue with picking up one of the best defensemen of his type for such a reasonable rate AND term.

Yup.

But I would say the only defenseman of his type and one of the best defensemen. Period.

I've come a long way in my opinion on Buff over the last 2 years. I think Buff has also become a much better player over that time. I think it is pretty unusual for a player to peak at his age but it wasn't about physical maturity. It was learning to play a smarter game and it was mental/emotional maturation. I think it was around the time he got married that he really started to change. I've seen marriage appear to have a positive effect on athletes before. It also coincided with the arrival of Maurice so I will say that Maurice has been good for Buff. Whatever triggered it I think Buff has ended the argument (at least for most of us) about whether or not Buff is among the elite defensemen in the league.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

So basically: tiers, then need within those tiers

Yes. That has been my argument.

I think it would be foolish to ignore BPA but it would also be foolish to follow it slavishly.

 

[Jet]

1) No that is hockey. And I'm not sure you understand what I'm getting at.
The best way to predict guys who don't have goals against is guys without shots against.
That's why we care about shots, because their predictive nature to goals.

2) NHL hockey rules and relationships we observe exist in the environment that is present. You can't compare other non-NHL levels. Heck, in only as far down as CHL, Corsi is much, much weaker and goal differentials are much, much stronger due to the differences in environment.
It will be even more extreme for level like beer league.

3) Corsi isn't possession. Possession and Corsi are different, as are shots. Possession with the absence of shots and opportunity to score does not create a shot event. You can see this in the extremes, like in soccer, which has far more dead possession time. It has a relationship, but it is not the same as Corsi. What Corsi is is a goal differential predictor.

4) I bemoan +/- for more reasons than just it being about goals. I bemoan it because it sucks.
* It is a raw +/- with no context of rates or TOI, so +5/-3 is same as +305/-303
* It includes empty nets, pp -s, and pk +s
It's a ****** stat. If you want to use goals, use even strength goal% (goals for/[goals against + goals against]). It is sensitive to TOI differences, and doesn't have the stupid PP/PK/EmptyNet rules. It still requires about 3-4 years to stabalize for players, but it's better.

We will never see eye to eye on this stuff. I'm not comparing NHL to beer league directly. I am talking about the game of hockey, which is the same game for all intents and purposes no matter who is playing it (besides skill and execution).

You like the fancy stats where guys are coming up with formulas to adjust for this, that and the other. So you are taking raw data (which most science is based on) and you are relying on a bunch of suppositions from people who are applying very new and unproven formulae on them.

I'm not saying it's all bad and all wrong. I am saying a lot of stuff that smart people have created and swore was mathematically or scientifically sound turned out to be terribly, terribly wrong.

I will continue to watch the game, and use my experience in the game to give me 70% of my opinions of the game. 20% will be from people I respect in hockey, and 10% will be from statistical analysis.

That's just the way I roll.

Statistics are your career and your bread and butter so I certainly wouldn't expect you not to be screaming them from on high every opportunity you get. I also know that you are a hockey guy, not just a stats guy. That is the part about you I respect the most.

 

[Jet]

Dustin Byfuglien, good defensive defenseman:

OK now I just think you are trying to get under my skin. Good defensive defenseman?

How many times does he get caught doing that?