Salary Cap: Might not Rise as much as First Projected

[JmanWingsFan]

And you can keep pumping Matt Greene's tires, maybe find another guy who has played all of half the season getting minimal minutes and tell us how fantastic he is.

Your argument is that he is bad. My counterargument is that his statistics say he is actually very good. Even if he's used as a third pairing defenseman for 15 minutes, that doesn't mean he's bad. My statistics refute your intuition.

 

[Winger98]

Your argument is that he is bad. My counterargument is that his statistics say he is actually very good. Even if he's used as a third pairing defenseman for 15 minutes, that doesn't mean he's bad. My statistics refute your intuition.

I'm saying your stats don't mean anything when the guy gets minimal minutes in half a season's games. That his contribution to the Kings' blueline has been minimalized over the past five years, and his minutes thrown at nearly any other D they can find to put on the ice. Of course, they must just be wrong about what he's capable of, since they have so little experience with him over the past five years. They just don't understand how well he actually plays. Unlike that bum Willie Mitchell. If only the Kings knew what they were doing.

 

[JmanWingsFan]

smith often deserves to be in the doghouse. though i don't agree with how he's used.

Smith's our best defenseman. The poor guy gets paired with Jakub Kindl and Kyle Quincey one too many times.

bozak seems to be doing pretty well. 37 points in 40 games. #1C on one of the best teams in the east. man i hoped they'd realized that they should fall becayse their corsi sucks

His Fenwick and Corsi absolutely suck. Playing with Phil Kessel and James Van Riemsdyk are why he has decent box score statistics. Phil Kessel and James Van Riemsdy are amazing players.


You can look good playing with fabulous players. In baseball, Brandon Phillips of the Reds looked good with his 102 RBIs, but everyone knows that Phillips sucks and that those RBIs happened because Joey Votto and Shin-Soo Choo were ridiculously good hitters.

go ask kings fans whether they feel more comfortable with mitchell or greene on the ice. mitchell played top pairing when they won the cup too, iirc.

Oh please. Fan sentiment is so fickle and subjective. As a member of this board, you should know this full well.

 

[SoupNazi]

Oh please. Fan sentiment is so fickle and subjective. As a member of this board, you should know this full well.

Stats can be fickle too when a guy gets minimal minutes every night.

 

[TCNorthstars]

Yeah? The Toronto Maple Leafs gave a lot of money to Tyler Freaking Bozak and sent Mikhail Grabovski packing.
.

That move seems to be working out pretty well for them. Bozak has more points in 10 less games and he is 3 years younger.

 

[InjuredChoker]

Smith's our best defenseman. The poor guy gets paired with Jakub Kindl and Kyle Quincey one too many times.

yeah, no.

he's not even close to kronwall or ericsson. yeah, tad better corsi but he doesn't face near the load they do.

maybe i'm missing some sarcasm here. but that is just insane claim.

His Fenwick and Corsi absolutely suck. Playing with Phil Kessel and James Van Riemsdyk are why he has decent box score statistics. Phil Kessel and James Van Riemsdy are amazing players.

JVR's and kessel's corsi and fenwick suck too. and both didn't play nearly as well when bozak was out. everyone's corsi and fenwick on the leafs suck.

You can look good playing with fabulous players. In baseball, Brandon Phillips of the Reds looked good with his 102 RBIs, but everyone knows that Phillips sucks and that those RBIs happened because Joey Votto and Shin-Soo Choo were ridiculously good hitters.

don't know anything about baseball. i think in baseball stats can be used more accurately than in hockey.

i guess maple leafs run since 2013 doesn't happen in baseball.

Oh please. Fan sentiment is so fickle and subjective. As a member of this board, you should know this full well.

i think in cases like this, general fanbase opinion is pretty accurate. and kings management seems to think so too. or most knowledgeable posters that i've seen posting here.

 

[JmanWingsFan]

Stats can be fickle too when a guy gets minimal minutes every night.

This is not one of those times, however. I'm using 6 year data. That's an excellent sample size.

yeah, no.

he's not even close to kronwall or ericsson. yeah, tad better corsi but he doesn't face near the load they do.

maybe i'm missing some sarcasm here. but that is just insane claim.

Work load probably doesn't matter nearly as much as you're giving weight to. In fact, the opposite is true, and quality of teammates matter more, of which Brendan Smith receives noticeably inferior teammates as opposed to Jonathan Ericsson and Niklas Kronwall. Adjusting for Zone Starts, Smith ranks third in GF20, GF% (splitting Kronwall and Ericsson together). Smith ranks 1st on the team in FA20 and FF%. Ditto for CA20 and FF%. All of this in spite of the fact his PDO is below 100. Go back the same year, and Smith is still sitting atop the ranks of Wing Defensemen in the same categories.

He's the best Red Wings defenseman on that 6 year data for SDI.

Don't insult me with your bold accusations of insanity. Smith is clearly the Wings's best defenseman by that definition. He's clearly not used correctly, but he still puts up great numbers.

JVR's and kessel's corsi and fenwick suck too. and both didn't play nearly as well when bozak was out. everyone's corsi and fenwick on the leafs suck.

Actually, Kessel plays better away from Bozak. Kessel really drives that line.

don't know anything about baseball. i think in baseball stats can be used more accurately than in hockey. i guess maple leafs run since 2013 doesn't happen in baseball.

The point still stands, you can look good because someone great really moves the piano on a line. And yes, statistically improbable events do happen in baseball (see 2012 Baltimore Orioles). Probability is probability. An 80% chance means there's a 20% chance of the opposite occurring, so things like the Maple Leafs playing out of their friggin minds being severely outplayed happens. Mind you, they didn't have much success in the previous years either and had drafted Morgan Reilly the year before they made the playoffs.

i think in cases like this, general fanbase opinion is pretty accurate. and kings management seems to think so too. or most knowledgeable posters that i've seen posting here.

Statistics, the ultimate record of the eye test, disagree.

 

[Zetterberg4Captain]

when did advanced stats become more important that watching hockey, playing hockey and knowing hockey?

 

[JmanWingsFan]

I'm saying your stats don't mean anything when the guy gets minimal minutes in half a season's games. That his contribution to the Kings' blueline has been minimalized over the past five years, and his minutes thrown at nearly any other D they can find to put on the ice. Of course, they must just be wrong about what he's capable of, since they have so little experience with him over the past five years. They just don't understand how well he actually plays. Unlike that bum Willie Mitchell. If only the Kings knew what they were doing.

I'm using six years of data to make this point. Six. Years. Over 5000 minutes of TOI. That's more ice time than some random chump I picked off the very same list named P.K. Subban (who?).

 

[InjuredChoker]

This is not one of those times, however. I'm using 6 year data. That's an excellent sample size.



Work load probably doesn't matter nearly as much as you're giving weight to.

i'm aware of those articles. that's why i rarely refer to QOC numbers. and wasn't referring in this case as they can be misleading.

i also think that in general, players that are not good, are used accordingly and vice versa with good players. not on every player but mostly and it evens out. and it shows up on those articles. and also in corsi, sh% and pdo etc.

i really don't think smith could handle the same load as kronwall or ericsson. and considering he doesn't dominate and struggles at times against the lines he faces now.

In fact, the opposite is true, and quality of teammates matter more, of which Brendan Smith receives noticeably inferior teammates as opposed to Jonathan Ericsson and Niklas Kronwall. Adjusting for Zone Starts, Smith ranks third in GF20, GF% (splitting Kronwall and Ericsson together). Smith ranks 1st on the team in FA20 and FF%. Ditto for CA20 and FF%. All of this in spite of the fact his PDO is below 100. Go back the same year, and Smith is still sitting atop the ranks of Wing Defensemen in the same categories.

fine example of why stats don't tell everything.

i find the claim of smith being wings best dman, still insane.

there seems to be more to hockey than fenwick and corsi as leafs, NJ and LA indicate, more or less. same with boston, columbus and vancouver who did it even longer.

very useful tool but don't tell nearly everything.

smith's PDO was way below 100 as he was brutal defensively to start the year. that's what corsi doesn't tell, it doesn't tell what kind of shots those are. long-term, that evens out, as those players either learn or get used in a lesser role. little bit of both with smitty. since then it has evened out as he's been given less responsibility and he has played better.

He's the best Red Wings defenseman on that 6 year data for SDI

smith's sample size is ridiculously small on that one. and one can highly question it validity as smith was anything but stellar d-wise.

lidström ranks below greg zanon on that one. if he wasn't better than lidström i guess that statistic shouldn't be used as an end to all stat and needs some context at least.

smith ranks there way ahead of lidström too.

Actually, Kessel plays better away from Bozak. Kessel really drives that line.

not this year, so far.

Statistics, the ultimate record of the eye test, disagree.

they don't tell everything that happens on the ice.

 

[Cyborg Yzerberg]

when did advanced stats become more important that watching hockey, playing hockey and knowing hockey?

I find that the two aren't really mutually exclusive. Advanced stats OFTEN times just reinforces what we already see.(Not always) Like Andrew Macdonald having the 9th worst CORSI in the league? Makes a lot of sense.

 

[InjuredChoker]

I find that the two aren't really mutually exclusive. Advanced stats OFTEN times just reinforces what we already see.(Not always) Like Andrew Macdonald having the 9th worst CORSI in the league? Makes a lot of sense.

good example.

amaz isn't really totally awful, like one who shouldn't be in the league but he's having bad year and has been way, way overused.

 

[Chance on Chance]

when did advanced stats become more important that watching hockey, playing hockey and knowing hockey?

There's not enough time to watch every player enough to judge them just by watching so advance stats help out.

 

[Zetterberg4Captain]

There's not enough time to watch every player enough to judge them just by watching so advance stats help out.

five years ago people would just talk about what they see based on their knowledge and experience, it seems now, advanced stats are being used as the basis of the opinion so as to be able to fall back on "the stats dont lie" preposition.

 

[InjuredChoker]

also those differences between kronner's and smith corsi is pretty small. basically one or two meh games and kronwall has better. and kronwall had few bad games corsi-wise after olympics that basically explains the difference.

 

[JmanWingsFan]

i'm aware of those articles. that's why i rarely refer to QOC numbers. and wasn't referring in this case as they can be misleading.

i also think that in general, players that are not good, are used accordingly and vice versa with good players. not on every player but mostly and it evens out. and it shows up on those articles. and also in corsi, sh% and pdo etc.

i really don't think smith could handle the same load as kronwall or ericsson. and considering he doesn't dominate and struggles at times against the lines he faces now.

If you stay away from QOC, then why are you making statements such as the one I bolded? You're basically contradicting yourself. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Either QOC is overstated, or Brendan Smith can't handle playing with higher quality of teammates against higher quality of opposition.

You. Can't. Have. Both.

fine example of why stats don't tell everything.

i find the claim of smith being wings best dman, still insane.

Your words are baseless. Your argument holds no water.

there seems to be more to hockey than fenwick and corsi as leafs, NJ and LA indicate, more or less. same with boston, columbus and vancouver who did it even longer.

One of these is not like the other. Very so much not like the other. NJ, LA, Boston, Vancouver (before Gillis ran roughshod over the team and gutted it), all run positive Fenwick differentials and have been making the playoffs consistently. New Jersey is 2 points out of a spot.

very useful tool but don't tell nearly everything.

Goals, Assists, Face-off percentage, Shot differential, Quality of teammates, GAA/20, zone starts, hits, blocked shots, missed shots, ect... Yeah, you're right, it's not like these statistics capture EVERY FACET OF THE GAME OF HOCKEY. Totally, you're right.

smith's PDO was way below 100 as he was brutal defensively to start the year. that's what corsi doesn't tell, it doesn't tell what kind of shots those are. long-term, that evens out, as those players either learn or get used in a lesser role. little bit of both with smitty. since then it has evened out as he's been given less responsibility and he has played better.

Smith wasn't brutal defensively. Quincey was brutal defensively. Apart from Smith, Quincey's CA20 shoots up from 15 all the way up to 18. It appears without statistics, you can't make a very accurate analysis of the situation.

smith's sample size is ridiculously small on that one. and one can highly question it validity as smith was anything but stellar d-wise.

Since you are taking the side of anti-stats, you have nothing to validate your claim that Brendan Smith is solid defensively.

lidström ranks below greg zanon on that one. if he wasn't better than lidström i guess that statistic shouldn't be used as an end to all stat and needs some context at least.

Because you don't understand the context of the statistic. At all. Notice, that SDI is essentially the difference between a player's expected CA20 and his actual CA20. Now, take a look at Nick Lidstrom's CA20, now take a look at Zdeno Chara's CA20, now back to Nick Lidstrom's CA20. Sadly, Zdeno Chara's CA20 and Expected CA20 is NOT Nick Lidstrom's CA20 and Expected CA20. Nick Lidstrom set the bar so friggin high for himself, that he barely missed breaking even on one of the best expected CA20 on that list. Barely. He still managed a CA20 of less than 16. That's pretty friggin impressive.

not this year, so far.

Once again, stats disagree.

they don't tell everything that happens on the ice.

They kind of do. And I will continue to say this until you actually argue otherwise.

 

[Frk It]

The conclusion that you are trying to make based on these advanced stats is that Brendan Smith is the best defenseman on the Wings currently? Is that what we're saying?

 

[Vladdy84]

The conclusion that you are trying to make based on these advanced stats is that Brendan Smith is the best defenseman on the Wings currently? Is that what we're saying?

I'm not following the conversation at all. But Brendan Smith should be the 2nd best d-man on this team by now. I blame the coaches.

 

[Frk It]

I'm not following the conversation at all. But Brendan Smith should be the 2nd best d-man on this team by now. I blame the coaches.

Offensively, yes.

Overall, maybe.

 

[InjuredChoker]

If you stay away from QOC, then why are you making statements such as the one I bolded? You're basically contradicting yourself. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Either QOC is overstated, or Brendan Smith can't handle playing with higher quality of teammates against higher quality of opposition.

You. Can't. Have. Both.

because stats like Qoc don't necessarily always measure accurately how good the other's teams players are, what kind of players he is up against, etc.

that way one can have both,

Your words are baseless. Your argument holds no water.

i'm willing to bet that majority has the same opinion as i have.

One of these is not like the other. Very so much not like the other. NJ, LA, Boston, Vancouver (before Gillis ran roughshod over the team and gutted it), all run positive Fenwick differentials and have been making the playoffs consistently. New Jersey is 2 points out of a spot.

you can add columbus to the list too (before start of last season).

and the point was that all those teams have/had much higher/lower goal differential than their corsi indicates. their pdo didn't regress to 100.

Goals, Assists, Face-off percentage, Shot differential, Quality of teammates, GAA/20, zone starts, hits, blocked shots, missed shots, ect... Yeah, you're right, it's not like these statistics capture EVERY FACET OF THE GAME OF HOCKEY. Totally, you're right.

nope, not accurately enough.

what kind of players one faced when he had this and this zone start, what this player did when he had this and this player playing against him, in this situation etc.

Smith wasn't brutal defensively. Quincey was brutal defensively. Apart from Smith, Quincey's CA20 shoots up from 15 all the way up to 18. It appears without statistics, you can't make a very accurate analysis of the situation.

there is more to d than CA/20. smith has been bad with quincey but he made numerous bad mistakes at the start of the season. without quincey data includes the time he's been playing ok so it doesn't apply here.

that data also doesn't tell what kind of usage they had, in what kind of situation, against who and with who they played.

Since you are taking the side of anti-stats, you have nothing to validate your claim that Brendan Smith is solid defensively.

lol, i'm not anti-stats. i'm against claims that stats tell everything.

Because you don't understand the context of the statistic. At all. Notice, that SDI is essentially the difference between a player's expected CA20 and his actual CA20. Now, take a look at Nick Lidstrom's CA20, now take a look at Zdeno Chara's CA20, now back to Nick Lidstrom's CA20. Sadly, Zdeno Chara's CA20 and Expected CA20 is NOT Nick Lidstrom's CA20 and Expected CA20. Nick Lidstrom set the bar so friggin high for himself, that he barely missed breaking even on one of the best expected CA20 on that list. Barely. He still managed a CA20 of less than 16. That's pretty friggin impressive.

i understand that very well. and i think that should also be applied to others.

it wasn't just lidas setting the bar high, it was also his teammates.

Once again, stats disagree.

kessel scores a lot more with bozak than without him.

 

[JmanWingsFan]

The conclusion that you are trying to make based on these advanced stats is that Brendan Smith is the best defenseman on the Wings currently? Is that what we're saying?

Defensively, yes. Offensively? Well... Give him some decent linemates to start with. Unshackle the restraints on his offensive game and let him develop. The difference isn't by much, but Smith is a very good defenseman. His defensive game is the best on the team, and that's with being handcuffed to Kyle Quincey.

 

[InjuredChoker]

The conclusion that you are trying to make based on these advanced stats is that Brendan Smith is the best defenseman on the Wings currently? Is that what we're saying?

yup.

and couple of bad games from smitty and suddenly he's not the best anymore.

 

[Frk It]

Defensively, yes. Offensively? Well... Give him some decent linemates to start with. Unshackle the restraints on his offensive game and let him develop. The difference isn't by much, but Smith is a very good defenseman. His defensive game is the best on the team, and that's with being handcuffed to Kyle Quincey.

Hmm. Other way around seems like it would make more sense.

I just wanted to clarify what it is you are trying to prove/argue with the use of the stats you were providing. Or how you view our defenseman based on the use of the stats.

 

[JmanWingsFan]

because stats like Qoc don't necessarily always measure accurately how good the other's teams players are, what kind of players he is up against, etc.

that way one can have both

It doesn't work that way. Fenwick and Corsi measure exactly what they want to measure- offensive events that lead to scoring goals. Shot differential, if you will. You've provided absolutely no evidence to the contrary that these stats are inaccurate.

i'm willing to bet that majority has the same opinion as i have.

Appeal to the masses. What great logic you have there.

you can add columbus to the list too (before start of last season).

and the point was that all those teams have/had much higher/lower goal differential than their corsi indicates. their pdo didn't regress to 100.

You mean to tell me that sometimes in probability, events don't always go the way of general trends? Do tell me of this marvelous concept of statistical outliers.

nope, not accurately enough.

Says you, failing to explain what precisely they don't measure.

what kind of players one faced when he had this and this zone start, what this player did when he had this and this player playing against him, in this situation etc.

Wait... You can measure that with Fenwick and Corsi. People do measure that with fenwick and Corsi. So you're actually contradicting your own point.

there is more to d than CA/20. smith has been bad with quincey but he made numerous bad mistakes at the start of the season. without quincey data includes the time he's been playing ok so it doesn't apply here.

Confirmation Bias: YOUR STATS DON'T COUNT BECAUSE THEY FACTUALLY CONTRADICT WHAT I SAY.

lol, i'm not anti-stats. i'm against claims that stats tell everything.

You've never once provided any evidence to your claim.

kessel scores a lot more with bozak than without him.

Except, according to the analysis provided in that article, the opposite is true.

 

[Winger98]

I'm using six years of data to make this point. Six. Years. Over 5000 minutes of TOI. That's more ice time than some random chump I picked off the very same list named P.K. Subban (who?).

Because a guy has six years of accumulated mop up minutes doesn't elevate the quality of those six years. You want to keep pimping Greene, drop an email to the Kings, let'em know your break through.