Peat
Registered User
- Jun 14, 2016
- 29,590
- 25,416
I'll be honest, I didn't see a lick of difference between Toronto's Ceci and our Ceci. Living in the Toronto viewing area, I've caught maybe 90% of their games. He looked pretty much the same player in those viewings as he did in my viewings of the Pens last season. Same "strengths" and same flaws in his game.
I think if the analytics point to him doing things better/worse as a Leaf than he did as a Pen, that seems to be a case of looking at the charts and then trying to draw conclusions after the fact as to why his analytics looked the way they did for either team, rather than basing it on what he actually did on the ice for either team.
I also think the same applies to Seth Jones. Not to hide behind an appeal to authority, but I just don't think he'd be as well thought of by coaches/GMs/hockey analysts if his fatal flaw was as bad as the analytics suggest he is. I get that coaches/GMs aren't infallible. We've seen enough of it with Pittsburgh and some of their decisions for me not to make that argument. But at the same time, I don't think they're *that* dumb that if he's as bad as his analytics suggest, they'd still keep playing him like a 1D.
Instead, I'd say there's a middle ground where if anyone thinks he's an ELITE #1D, the analytics probably point out that he's got flaws that probably knock him down to closer to a low-end #1D instead. If a player "looks" like a top line player, but has iffy analytics, then maybe he's not quite AS good as you think. But I don't think analytics should be used to say that a player that the eye test says is a top line/top pairing player is actually a 4th liner/#6 defenseman.
Well if you didn't see anything between Toronto's Ceci and ours, then fair enough. Maybe he was propped up.
But on Jones... I am mostly of the opinion that NHL pro talent evaluators aren't dumb, barring the very obvious exceptions. However, if there is a collective flaw in their evaluations, it's their tendency to fall in love with big athletic skillful guys regardless of whether they actually work. JJ. Ristolainen. Seth Jones? I mean, he's getting paid like an elite 1D. Even if we go with your middle ground, there's clearly still some overrating in some quarters. We'll see how he goes next season because last season had abnormally bad results. But it's quite possible that pretty soon he's a sheltered 2nd pairing guy.
The replacement player stuff needs to be able to better measure what quality of competition means. But, well, it's still a canary down the coalmine. It's saying something is badly wrong with Jones' game, and people have found it.