Recalled/Assigned: Evgeny Svechnikov
- Thread starter Heaton
- Start date
lhsgolf19
Registered User
theD86
Winging it
Emerz
#1 PLD Fanboy
Heaton
Moderator
Heaton
Moderator
NickLidstrom
Ottawa & Detroit fan
Pavels Dog
Registered User
Svechnikov's 2016 stats:
13 points in 31 games = 0,42 P/GP
-2
32 PIM =1,03 PIM/GP
71 SOG = 2,29 S/GP
Svechnikov's 2017 stats:
31 points in 37 games = 0,84 P/GP
+1
24 PIM = 0,65 PIM/GP
94 SOG = 2,54 S/GP
Solid improvement in all areas as the season has gone on.
13 points in 31 games = 0,42 P/GP
-2
32 PIM =1,03 PIM/GP
71 SOG = 2,29 S/GP
Svechnikov's 2017 stats:
31 points in 37 games = 0,84 P/GP
+1
24 PIM = 0,65 PIM/GP
94 SOG = 2,54 S/GP
Solid improvement in all areas as the season has gone on.
Hammettf2b
oldmanyellsatcloud.jpg
Unfriendly Ghost
Kasper
The ultimate take away is that Svechnikov is 4th in a niche stat that inherently favors him vs his competition.
I really like Prashanth but that dude has an unhealthy relationship with per 60 stats.
jkutswings
hot piss hockey
- Jul 10, 2014
- 10,960
- 8,712
Yeah, I really only take any meaning out of 'per 60' data for two reasons:
* When comparing two players with similar production, but in a different number of games (two guys scored 55 points, but one did so in 79 games, while the other was injured for 2 months, but still scored 55 points in 52 games)
* As leverage to consider giving a player more ice time (a guy is killing it with 8-10 minutes per game, so maybe he deserves another few shifts)
I dunno. If Svech ends up as yet another Tatar, then that's a good complimentary piece, but I can't say I'm too excited about complimentary pieces in general anymore.
obey86
Registered User
- Jun 9, 2009
- 8,013
- 1,274
Looking just at rate stats doesn't give the whole picture, but neither does looking at just totals. Both are relevant and need to be considered. If a player gets more ice time he will likely get more total points. At the same rate? Most likely not, but his totals will likely increase more often than not.
The fans who look just at point totals and completely ignore rate stats are the same ones who consider RBIs as the best way to judge hitters.
The fans who look just at point totals and completely ignore rate stats are the same ones who consider RBIs as the best way to judge hitters.
jkutswings
hot piss hockey
- Jul 10, 2014
- 10,960
- 8,712
Often, but not always. It also depends on what minutes those points are coming from, and the type of player.
If a guy has a great PP60 from 5 ES minutes against 4th liners and a shift or two on the power play, that's a very different scenario than if it's from 10-12 ES minutes against 2nd/3rd line opposition and some PK time.
Sometimes more ice time will lead to substantially more production...and sometimes it leads to a sheltered guy getting a few more points, but also getting exposed in the process. And how a given player handles the other end of the rink plays a role as well.
If a guy has a great PP60 from 5 ES minutes against 4th liners and a shift or two on the power play, that's a very different scenario than if it's from 10-12 ES minutes against 2nd/3rd line opposition and some PK time.
Sometimes more ice time will lead to substantially more production...and sometimes it leads to a sheltered guy getting a few more points, but also getting exposed in the process. And how a given player handles the other end of the rink plays a role as well.
obey86
Registered User
- Jun 9, 2009
- 8,013
- 1,274
I know you're trying to prove me wrong, but that's exactly what i'm saying. In a case like that, I truly believe that the majority of fans will think the 20 min/night forward who puts up 50 points is better offensively than the 14 min/night forward who puts up 40 points when IMO the exact opposite would most likely be true.
Someone like Tatar over the last few seasons is a great example IMO. Last year he put up 45 points in 81 games. This year he is on pace to put up 44 points in 82 games. Looking just on the surface at the total points, that's basically the same exact season. And I think that's how most people, maybe non Red Wings fans...but most people, would evaluate the last two seasons for Tatar. But when you bring time on ice into the equation you see that this year it took him roughly 243 more minutes on the ice to put up the same amount of points this year as it did last year. I don't think I need to explain how significant a 243 minute difference in ice time is. But most people like to completely ignore time on ice in any sort of player evaluation and I think it's silly.
I stand by my statement that much more often than not give the player A 20 min of ice time vs giving him 14 min of ice time and he's score more TOTAL points with the 20 min of ice time. His scoring RATE will likely decline, but his TOTAL points will increase more often than not. Not to mention, people always bring up the fact that a player with less minutes is putting up points against lesser players/lower opposing lines. Maybe true, but he's also playing with worse players on his line. Yeah, if random 3rd line player went from playing top line minutes he would likely face tougher competition. BUT, he would also go from having Sheahan as his center to having Zetterberg as his center. Worse linemates and worse competition vs. better linemates and better competition. Evens itself out for the most part IMO.
AA is scoring more points per game this year than he did last year....despite playing more minutes against better competition. That's more or less a function of his ice time....despite his scoring rate dropping. So, in conclusion, in most cases I never buy the "Player X is only putting up points because he's playing low minutes against low competition. If he played more minutes his scoring would drop." His RATE would likely drop, not his total scoring. Anyways.
Last edited:
Let's give Miller lots of rest and chicken soup, served somewhere far away.
Let's make sure No Goals doesn't get sick too, by sending him with Miller.
