Race for the Rocket Richard 2021 - Part II

[Sypher04]

I'm talking about actual raw stats. You're talking about hypothetical scenarios where Babcock suddenly played Matthews differently.

Crosby finished with 4 more goals while playing 7 games less. If he hadn't missed those 7 games, he likely would have increased the gap because Sullivan would have continued to play him as much as he did in those 75 games.

We're not talking about a hypothetical scenario in which both Babcock and Sullivan would have played both guys the exact same minutes so we could see who would score more. We're talking about a scenario that *did* happen and how that would have affected the raw totals if Crosby hadn't missed 7 games.

That's completely asinine.

You talking about Crosby having 7 games less played and inferring the gap should be considered larger is no less of a matter of projection than me saying Matthews played less total time in his 7 more games and if he'd played more, and more on the powerplay he likely would have scored more.

What did happen is Crosby played 7 less games but more minutes than Matthews. Anything beyond that supposes projection on either side.

It's dishonest to suggest otherwise. You don't get it both ways. If you wanna make it about raw stats, the it was 44 to 40 for Crosby; that's it. If you wanna drag in other factors/context, expect others to do the same

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

That's completely asinine.

You talking about Crosby having 7 games less played and inferring the gap should be considered larger is no less of a matter of projection than me saying Matthews played less total time in his 7 more games and if he'd played more, and more on the powerplay he likely would have scored more.

What did happen is Crosby played 7 less games but more minutes than Matthews. Anything beyond that supposes projection on either side

It's dishonest to suggest otherwise.

Why are you factoring in ice time and usage? We're talking about the Rocket and how close the race for it was, which only actual raw totals matter for. So the discussion is how close the gap was in terms of actual raw totals.

If one player scores 50 goals getting 20 minutes per night and another player scores 40 goals getting 16 minutes per night, the gap isn't close with regards to the Rocket race because it's a 10 goal gap, even if one argues that the 40 goal guy didn't get the same opportunities the 50 goal guy did. For the purposes of winning the Rocket, it wasn't close and how much ice time either got was irrelevant.

 

[CantLoseWithMatthews]

Why are you factoring in ice time and usage? We're talking about the Rocket and how close the race for it was, which only actual raw totals matter for. So the discussion is how close the gap was in terms of actual raw totals.

If one player scores 50 goals getting 20 minutes per night and another player scores 40 goals getting 16 minutes per night, the gap isn't close with regards to the Rocket race because it's a 10 goal gap, even if one argues that the 40 goal guy didn't get the same opportunities the 50 goal guy did. For the purposes of winning the Rocket, it wasn't close and how much ice time either got was irrelevant.

You don't get to bring up Crosby's missed games and still get to claim that you're only looking at raw totals

 

[authentic]

That's completely asinine.

You talking about Crosby having 7 games less played and inferring the gap should be considered larger is no less of a matter of projection than me saying Matthews played less total time in his 7 more games and if he'd played more, and more on the powerplay he likely would have scored more.

What did happen is Crosby played 7 less games but more minutes than Matthews. Anything beyond that supposes projection on either side.

It's dishonest to suggest otherwise. You don't get it both ways. If you wanna make it about raw stats, the it was 44 to 40 for Crosby; that's it. If you wanna drag in other factors/context, expect others to do the same

Lol just save yourself the time trust me.

 

[Sypher04]

Why are you factoring in ice time and usage? We're talking about the Rocket and how close the race for it was, which only actual raw totals matter for. So the discussion is how close the gap was in terms of actual raw totals.

If one player scores 50 goals getting 20 minutes per night and another player scores 40 goals getting 16 minutes per night, the gap isn't close with regards to the Rocket race because it's a 10 goal gap, even if one argues that the 40 goal guy didn't get the same opportunities the 50 goal guy did. For the purposes of winning the Rocket, it wasn't close and how much ice time either got was irrelevant.

I agree, in terms of raw totals that'd be true. You were the one who threw that out the window when you suggested the gap should be considered larger because Crosby played 7 less games. Crosby played less games, but more time, so it's irrelevant. If you want that angle considered, then yeah, icetime and lack of 1st powerplay minutes become relevant because we are not arguing raw totals anymore, per your doing.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

You don't get to bring up Crosby's missed games and still get to claim that you're only looking at raw totals

Context?

I mean every single time someone says "Matthews can't be called a 50 goal scorer, he didn't score 50 goals" you have a parade of Leaf fans saying "he scored 47 goals in 70 games last year. You honestly think he's not scoring 3 more if they played all 82 games?".

The point about Crosby is that realistically he'd likely have scored more if he hadn't missed 7 games. There is nothing to adjust for in Matthews' season because he didn't miss games and Babcock wasn't going to use him differently.

Missed games are a factor in how much raw totals a player ends up with. Hypothetical scenarios where the coach plays a player more than he did aren't.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

I agree, in terms of raw totals that'd be true. You were the one who threw that out the window when you suggested the gap should be considered larger because Crosby played 7 less games. Crosby played less games, but more time, so it's irrelevant. If you want that angle considered, then yeah, icetime and lack of 1st powerplay minutes become relevant because we are not arguing raw totals anymore, per your doing.

Missed games affected Crosby's totals, unless you believe Crosby would have gone goalless in those 7 games.

On the other side, in order to factor in ice time you'd have to completely change how Babcock utilized Matthews that year.

Like, I don't understand why you're comparing the two things as though both are unrealistic projecting? One is literally just basing it on assuming Crosby played all 82 games instead of 75, but getting the exact same ice time he was getting. The other is basing it on completely changing the ice time Babcock gave Matthews all 82 games.

 

[Sypher04]

Context?

I mean every single time someone says "Matthews can't be called a 50 goal scorer, he didn't score 50 goals" you have a parade of Leaf fans saying "he scored 47 goals in 70 games last year. You honestly think he's not scoring 3 more if they played all 82 games?".

The point about Crosby is that realistically he'd likely have scored more if he hadn't missed 7 games. There is nothing to adjust for in Matthews' season because he didn't miss games and Babcock wasn't going to use him differently.

Missed games are a factor in how much raw totals a player ends up with. Hypothetical scenarios where the coach plays a player more than he did aren't.

Again, you don't get to have it both ways.

Hypothetical scenarios where the player was healthy enough to play more than they actually did are no more valuable than other hypothetical scenarios.

Icetime and usage are as much of a factor in how much raw totals a player ends up with.

The only difference here is including icetime/usage arguments hurt your argument.

 

[Sypher04]

Missed games affected Crosby's totals, unless you believe Crosby would have gone goalless in those 7 games.

On the other side, in order to factor in ice time you'd have to completely change how Babcock utilized Matthews that year.

Like, I don't understand why you're comparing the two things as though both are unrealistic projecting? One is literally just basing it on assuming Crosby played all 82 games instead of 75, but getting the exact same ice time he was getting. The other is basing it on completely changing the ice time Babcock gave Matthews all 82 games.

Completely changing?
We are just talking more icetime, most of which being powerplay time (which are not at all hard minutes), and with better players.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

Again, you don't get to have it both ways.

Hypothetical scenarios where the player was healthy enough to play more than they actually did are no more valuable than other hypothetical scenarios.

Icetime and usage are as much of a factor in how much raw totals a player ends up with.

The only difference here is including icetime/usage arguments hurt your argument.

So let's compare Crosby's season that year he won the Rocket to Matthews' season last year and let's pretend that they happened in the same season, so Matthews would have won the Rocket with 47 goals compared to Crosby's 44 goals.

-Matthews scored 47 goals getting 20:58 per game and playing 70 games
-Crosby scored 44 goals getting 19:53 per game and playing 75 games

Are you honestly telling me that if I said "they were extremely close if you factored in ice time", you wouldn't point out the fact Matthews played 5 less games and that if they'd played the same number of games, the gap would have been greater than 3 goals?

In that scenario, I'd be saying the same thing I am now. The gap wasn't very close because Matthews scored 3 more goals while playing 5 games less, and thus the gap would have been even larger had they both played 75 games.

 

[Sypher04]

So let's compare Crosby's season that year he won the Rocket to Matthews' season last year and let's pretend that they happened in the same season, so Matthews would have won the Rocket with 47 goals compared to Crosby's 44 goals.

-Matthews scored 47 goals getting 20:58 per game and playing 70 games
-Crosby scored 44 goals getting 19:53 per game and playing 75 games

Are you honestly telling me that if I said "they were extremely close if you factored in ice time", you wouldn't point out the fact Matthews played 5 less games and that if they'd played the same number of games, the gap would have been greater than 3 goals?

In that scenario, I'd be saying the same thing I am now. The gap wasn't very close because Matthews scored 3 more goals while playing 5 games less, and thus the gap would have been even larger had they both played 75 games.

No, I'd be fine with that. I think my position would be, same as it is here, that it's valid to say both players would likely have scored more if one stayed healthier and the other had more similar minutes (particularly when the difference is largely powerplay icetime), but that both are projections and the raw totals are what they are.

 

[Sypher04]

Fwiw however the icetime argument is less relevant to Matthews last year vs Crosby rocket year in his first because the icetime and powerplay usage were more similar between the two players in that comparison than then comparison that started all this

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

I think my position would be, same as it is here, that it's valid to say both players would likely have scored more if one stayed healthier and the other had more similar minutes (particularly when the difference is largely powerplay icetime), but that both are projections and the raw totals are what they are.

I mean, fair enough. But for me, I think there's more validity in factoring in missed games than there is in adjusting hypothetical ice time simply because when you factor in missed games, you're projecting based on what kind of ice time and production they had in the games they played. You're not changing their current rate of production, you're just projecting it over the games they missed. The other requires literally coming up with a completely different scenario than what that player got over 82 games.

Just like in the Matthews/Crosby example above, I think Matthews' goal scoring season was a lot more impressive than Crosby's because I believe it's realistic to think Matthews would continue to score at the same pace, while also getting the exact same ice time, as he got in the 70 games he played, so the gap would be even larger. I don't think Crosby getting over 1 minute per game less ice time is relevant because I'd have to completely change how Sullivan utilized Crosby all 75 games in order to adjust for it.

 

[Sypher04]

I mean, fair enough. But for me, I think there's more validity in factoring in missed games than there is in adjusting hypothetical ice time simply because when you factor in missed games, you're projecting based on what kind of ice time and production they had in the games they played. You're not changing their current rate of production, you're just projecting it over the games they missed. The other requires literally coming up with a completely different scenario than what that player got over 82 games.

Just like in the Matthews/Crosby example above, I think Matthews' goal scoring season was a lot more impressive than Crosby's because I believe it's realistic to think Matthews would continue to score at the same pace, while also getting the exact same ice time, as he got in the 70 games he played, so the gap would be even larger. I don't think Crosby getting over 1 minute per game less ice time is relevant because I'd have to completely change how Sullivan utilized Crosby all 75 games in order to adjust for it.

I do see what you are saying, but I don't really see it as needing to completely change utilization, but I still generally do agree Matthews last season vs Crosby in his rookie season goes to Matthews. But again, this is a lot to do with the fact I feel like last year, since Keefe took over most notably, Matthews usage has come more comparable to how Crosby has been used by Pittsburgh, in regards to TOI, being #1 powerplay etc

 

[authentic]

Auston during the first 18 games: 18 goals
Auston in his last 17 games: 17 goals

That middle stretch of 12 games coincides with his wrist injury against Calgary on Feburary 24th. If he didn't hurt his wrist we could have seen a 50 goal in 56 game season

It's actually surreal having a player this good. It's hard to believe he's even a well above average defensive player on top of it.

 

[Rants Mulliniks]

I'm talking about actual raw stats that determines who wins the Rocket. You're talking about hypothetical scenarios where Babcock suddenly played Matthews differently.

Crosby finished with 4 more goals while playing 7 games less. If he hadn't missed those 7 games, he likely would have increased the gap because Sullivan would have continued to play him as much as he did in those 75 games.

We're not talking about a hypothetical scenario in which both Babcock and Sullivan would have played both guys the exact same minutes so we could see who would have won the Rocket if they played identical minutes. We're talking about a scenario that *did* happen and how that would have affected the gap in actual goal totals if Crosby hadn't missed 7 games.

No you are using lack of time (games played) to suggest Crosby was disadvantaged, when in reality he got more opportunity.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Missed games are a factor in how much raw totals a player ends up with.

So are usage and TOI. You're attempting to have it both ways and selectively applying only the rates you want, to suit your narrative.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

No you are using lack of time (games played) to suggest Crosby was disadvantaged, when in reality he got more opportunity.

That's not what my point was and I explained my issue with it above.

 

[Deadly Dogma]

"curiosity for tomorrow" is a great way of putting things.

I think life is kind of like a series of thinking "what happens next?"

I may not know everything thats going to happen next but I can say for sure that Auston winning the rocket is gonna happen.
casual fan since 93, die hard since 1998, this will be the 1st major award win(outside of calder) so its a pretty big deal to me.

 

[Dekes For Days]

That's not what my point was

Well that's what you said. Essentially, that factoring in the opportunity context you wanted was fine, but nobody else could factor in any other discrepancies in opportunity, that similarly impacted raw totals.

 

[Rants Mulliniks]

That's not what my point was and I explained my issue with it above.

You said the results weren't as close as they appeared due to time (games) played.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

You said the results weren't as close as they appeared due to time (games) played.

No, I said it was already a 4 goal gap and that the 7 less games played likely would have just made the gap even larger.

And I've explained the reasons above and don't want to repeat it 20 different times every time a new Leaf fan quotes a post of mine. So if my explanation in the previous half dozen posts to the other fan wasn't clear enough, I'm not sure what else to say.

 

[Dekes For Days]

I'm not sure what else to say.

The truth: That you were wrong, and your logic was faulty.

 

[Muston Atthews]

Crosby is a has been. Why are people talking about him in the Rocket thread? This thread is reserved for Papi and Papi only

 

[Filatov2Kovalev2Bonk]

Crosby isn't a "has been" lol, he is still an excellent player.
This does look like AM34's year for goals scored though, unless McDavid goes on a bender for the next 4-5 games.
Pretty sweet for TO fans!