A gift from me to you...
Forwards:
Defenders:
Enjoy.
This is not a rate, right Garret? So Roslovic's GAR contributions were nearly equal to Little's and Connor's even though he only played 31 games (vs. 82 and 76 for Little and Connor respectively)?
Yes. Not a rare stat. (Edit: said the opposite by accident)
Same tier of impact, but the confidence intervals on Little and Connor would be smaller. Their is less confidence in Roslovics.
Thanks. Is that just 2017/18, or does it include a longer timeframe?
Just last year. This is the EW's model. The model is meant to be more descriptive than the more predictive DTMAH model I used to show here.
Frankly speaking, the thing that really stands out is Wheeler`s under-performance EV, with overall GAR salvaged only because of the PP.
I hate to say this but I don`t think his PP GAR will be sustainable this coming year (unless he can learn to utilize all the options more fully (and less predictably) as a half wall QB. Teams will learn to better adjust to the cross ice to Laine,as we saw in the playoffs.
I agree that Wheeler's PP GAR will go down, but I would also expect his EV GAR will be better as that was a stark drop from his norm. He's aging but that was pretty low.
You know what else stands out? Myers without the PP boost. Yuck!
I've always said Myers isn't that great.
Thanks, This further supports my thoughts that Wheeler wasn't as good has point totals showed. Myers is also propped by PP time.
Agreed. Wheeler is good, but he's slowly becoming more of a points specialist with aging. This is the norm for players as they pass 30. They drive the bus less, but they can still put the puck in the net if someone drives. Now, Wheeler isn't done at EV, but he won't be what he once was.
Remember that there are multiple ways in which GAR can be calculated. It's a lot about what stats are taken into account or weighed more. Here's another one by @CMHockey66...
View attachment 132211
...and another one by @EvolvingWild.
View attachment 132213
My model is the EW model, just different visual. The model is built in an attempt to be more descriptive and less predictive of a player's individual impact, FYI, then say DTMAH's old model that COL bought.
I'm not a fan of CMHockey66's model. There are issues with how the model is constructed and some hand waiving that goes on. It's not bad... but has some areas where the weighting doesn't make sense and some stuff is being included more than once.