Filthy Dangles
Registered User*
- Oct 23, 2014
- 28,635
- 40,252
Easily Klingberg
As a Stars fan I like Klingberg, but I don't see how it's easily one or the other. They are both dominant in the offensive roles they play for their team, and the difference in their advanced stats over last season are razor thin.
Not an advanced stats guy but....
Kling: 53.7% CF and 4.0%Rel
Carl: 49.2% CF and 1.7% Rel
As a Stars fan I like Klingberg, but I don't see how it's easily one or the other. They are both dominant in the offensive roles they play for their team, and the difference in their advanced stats over last season are razor thin.
Not an advanced stats guy but....
Kling: 53.7% CF and 4.0%Rel
Carl: 49.2% CF and 1.7% Rel
48.39 xGF% for Carlson (+1.6 rel) vs 56.05% (+4.93 rel) for Klingberg.
it takes into account shot qualityxGF% is just another permutation of Corsi.
it takes into account shot quality
Expected goals numbers should look very good for them then since it takes into account where the shot was from.Shot-based metrics aren't useful for analyzing 17-18 Caps players. They used an offensive system that deemphasized shot volume in favor of creating scoring chances.
Shot suppression or blocks could still be relevant.
Tom Wilson > McDavid confirmedI'd take the Stanley Cup winner.