yes, my numbers accounted for everything you asked for - ice time, games played - and added in quality of competition on top of that.
unlike what you claimed, Matthews' offensive numbers look even MORE impressive when we account for ice time. So you're obviously wrong from the get go.
And the advantage only grows with every layer of context we add - possession, competition, primary scoring.
It's an absolute wipeout, and goes against everything you are arguing - because the truth is the opposite of what you claimed - in fact it's only the most superficial numbers that can even put Laine and Matthews in the same conversation....but when we add all the context you say we have to add in, we do end up seeing the huge advantage that Matthews has over Laine.
and none of the numbers are from hockey reference.
This will be my last retort.
QOC—> 97.53% corr. 50 - (CF* - [CF(CF*.5) - 50]
QOL —> 98% corr. FF|FF*/G/60
QOC|QOL/CF(obs) = 50 - (CF* - CF) - .5(CF* - 50) ~ TOI/GP/60|45|30:
(FF/TOI/GP/60~FF*/ATOI/GP/60)ES
{(FF/TOI/GP/60~FF*/ATOI/GP/60)PP}
(CF/TOI/GP/60~CF*/ATOI/GP/60)ES
(CF/TOI/GP/60~CF*/ATOI/GP/60)PP
PPM/G|ES|PP:
Matthews:
{ [(61*.25) + 61] + [(37*.2) + 37)] + 34} * (.9 + PPM/G|ES|PP)} <QOC(T)> = 293.835
{ [(61*.25) + 61] + [(37*.2) + 37] + 34} * (.81 + PPM/G|ES|PP)} <QOC(L)> = 279.9165
Matthew TPPM/G|ES|PP = 573.75/1000
Laine:
{[(51*.25) + 51) + [(38*.2) + 38)] + 45} * (.85 + PPM/G|ES|PP)} <QOC(T)> = 285.5475
{[(51*.25) + 51) + [(38*.2) + 38)] + 45} * (.87 + PPM/G|ES|PP)} <QOC(L)> = 288.6345
Laine TPPM/G|ES|PP = 574.182/1000
Diff(P/60,CF,QOC/T):
Laine = +.432
Matthews= -.432
QOC: (432/1000)*.5–> 2.16 error when discussing effect of play. I literally said 2.2.
If you don’t understand this, but say your stats are what I’m saying, then we cannot continue, although I’m kinda done after this lol. While my math is going to check my earlier remarks; I stand by them. Laine is the more effective player offensively. He may not be the all around player, but like the Ovechkin argument I said earlier— his prowess in the Ozone is just too good.
My last standing notes:
- your stats are standardized... not equalized which is where that 2.16 came from.
- my regression is equalized and Laine is a +.432 in offensive stature as an all situation player.
- NZ play can be implicated in this by taking the derivative of PPM (dPPM/TPPM/G|ES|PP). That would cause the .432 to shift downwards of ~.301. Laine still being a very effective player in 2 zones.
- Dzone play would incorporate so much more math which isn’t fun right now lol. That +.432 when incorporating Dzon and NZ would change to a -.
Again... your stats, wherever you get them from, aren’t equalized in comparison.