6 years but this really isn't relevant to any discussion.
The problem with these "things that aren't measured" is that, well, you can at least imply they must trend in a certain direction when you look at the results. Like, I have a hard time believing Semin is this defensive trainwreck who just makes no attempt at playing in his own zone, when his ability to stop shots and play in the other zone is so strong. Semin also has very strong shot rates in medium danger areas, so really, he must be doing something right. Keith Yandle for example is a VERY strong shot generator, so there's something(s) he has to do right in the offensive zone. Stats are the results, you watch the games (other than for obvious entertainment purposes) to find why it came to that result.
And, not for nothing, but how much better are your eyes, my eyes, or anyone else's eyes at making truly concrete assessments on particular skills? Like I think Fast is very strong on the boards and in 1 on 1 battles, but for all intents and purposes I can be wrong and maybe only saw a few instances; and I'd welcome evidence otherwise. Video coaches, eye-in-the-sky coaches, hell ANY coach, GMs, they all feverishly study their team's performances to see what can be improved on and what shouldn't be. Their eyes aren't perfect either, but they're putting themselves in a much stronger position to be right than a fan would; and they (obviously) have much more incentive to make smart hockey observations than we do.
And I also have a very hard time believing this whole board has watched Semin in enough games to make the judgments they make on him and his character.
