OT: Hockey analytics-What gives?

[ClydeLee]

I still dont know what this is saying other than I dont understand hockey numbers.

If you don't understand how to evaluate player role, usage, and competition it be rather dull I suppose. Thats why some graphic and stat creators have those accounted in ways.

The all situations accounts for PKing numbers which may affect a lot of one person and not for someone who doesn't PK. And Rundblad topic like that was a thing 4-5 years ago, but the simplicity of knowing usage clarifies that. We know Rundblad played limited 12 min icetime with a high end partner heavily in thr ozone vs weaker competition. And numbers do account. People have the ozone start stats, the teammate comparison stats, or competition range of who he most played.

 

[BobbyJet]

Again, I had already looked up the numbers before I posted that and threw it out there for the purposes of this discussion.

If all these posts are an apology for even suggesting the 2 players are close in their effectiveness, we get it. You're forgiven. Shall we move on?

 

[Kaners Bald Spot]

If all these posts are an apology for even suggesting the 2 players are close in their effectiveness, we get it. You're forgiven. Shall we move on?

Sure.

 

[Giovi]

Again, I had already looked up the numbers before I posted that and threw it out there for the purposes of this discussion.

You still really don't know when to stop digging that hole, do you?

 

[Kaners Bald Spot]

You still really don't know when to stop digging that hole, do you?

No, because you guys all think I ever thought Toews and Strome were similarly effective.
I'm trying to explain myself and everyone continues to attack me.

 

[RememberTheRoar]

No, because you guys all think I ever thought Toews and Strome were similarly effective.
I'm trying to explain myself and everyone continues to attack me.

What you posted in that other thread was different than what you’re trying to say you posted. Nobody is attacking you, you said it.

Also, in this thread, the board’s top analytics guy already told you you’re misusing the stats but yet you keep hammering away.

 

[Giovi]

No, because you guys all think I ever thought Toews and Strome were similarly effective.
I'm trying to explain myself and everyone continues to attack me.

All sentimentality aside, is Toews really any better than Strome at this point in his career? He's a much better skater but besides that?

You once again spewed another indefensible hot take and got called out on it.

And then you proceeded to dig, and dig, and dig.......

For the love of God man, stop digging.

 

[Pitter Patter]

So to clarify my thoughts from another thread:

Eye test: Toews>Strome by a lot, it's not close

Numbers: Toews is just a bit better than Strome

Evolving-Hockey.com | Standard Skater Stats

How do you use hockey analytics, when it's very contradictory from the eye test?
Do you throw out the numbers and ignore them?

I'm kind of confused. Analytics are supposed to be an objective measure of the game, so when it's contradictory like this, which side do you lean on?

I tend to like things quantified, so if hockey cannot ever be completely quantified I'm a bit confused on how to use this stuff.

You don't say...

 

[Malaka]

This is the same analytics team that argues Bonino is more effective than Kane