Player Discussion John Carlson - Vol. 1

[Raikkonen]

Carlson's play did decline over the course of the season. (13 goals in his first 41 games, 2 goals in his last 28 games). If he played the second half the way he played the first half, he'd have won the Norris.

I'm convinced that his injury in the playoffs was worse than we knew. He did not look like his normal self. What's odd about it is the points still came.

I dont think that was too odd. He didnt join the rush much like he did in the beginning of RS. He got his points from the blue line and farther mostly (by my recollection).
Defensively he was moving like an injured player with all the consequences.

 

[Hivemind]

Carlson's play did decline over the course of the season. (13 goals in his first 41 games, 2 goals in his last 28 games). If he played the second half the way he played the first half, he'd have won the Norris.

I'm convinced that his injury in the playoffs was worse than we knew. He did not look like his normal self. What's odd about it is the points still came.

Regular season Carlson (particularly early season Carlson) generated his own offense, especially at even strength.

Playoff Carlson scored four of his six points against the Islanders on the power play, with 50% of them being secondary assists.

 

[Ridley Simon]

“The man who lives in Glass House —-

Dresses in his basement”

- Ridley Simon??

 

[Calicaps]

“The man who lives in Glass House —-

Dresses in his basement”

- Ridley Simon??

 

[Midnight Judges]

Regular season Carlson (particularly early season Carlson) generated his own offense, especially at even strength.

Playoff Carlson scored four of his six points against the Islanders on the power play, with 50% of them being secondary assists.

Yeah I think you are exactly right. These points were not the same as those points.

 

[AlexBrovechkin8]

Analytics have their place but it's folly to place too much emphasis on them. Analytics in hockey are in their infancy and new models are popping up every day. Just a few years ago Corsi was the stat to determine how good a player was and now it's more or less accepted as useless at worst or very limited at best. The men and women touting their models are often times asking fans for feedback one day and the next day using those same models to make declarative statements on how good a player or team is.

There is a reason that quant funds don't win all of their trades in the stock market and that's because algorithms, machine learning, and data still need humans to piece everything to make decisions. There is a human and behavioral element to sports that analytics will never be fully able to capture, just like there's a human irrationality component to the markets that quant-only funds can't fully capture.

And I'm not one of those "if fans knew the game they'd be in it" kind of guys but I do think there's an element to it when it comes to the analytics community. I haven't come across anyone in the analytics community with any type of playing background and while that certainly doesn't preclude them from having an opinion, or an informed opinion or the right opinion, I do think that dynamic lends itself to people compensating for a lack of understanding the game by relying too heavily on spreadsheets.

And since we're on the quote train, there's always this gem, "There are three kind of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." - (widely but inaccurately attributed to) Mark Twain

 

[Calicaps]

Vol. 2