Lol! Just admit you didn’t even read the article. The stats aren’t predicting anything. They’re saying that Matthews is the fifth best center now. He clearly isn’t. That’s the beauty about actual production. It can’t be easily fudged. Every top center has produced.
Well that's not true. I don't think Krejci is that good, I don't think Seguin is outside the top 20 etc. But I'm going to think about it, do some of my own research, maybe ask Andrew some questions on Twitter etc. I don't see these lists as gospel or anything, but they can challenge us on the way we think about hockey. And since they're not just opinions we might even get decent answers to our questions!
That’s not an answer.
Because this ranking is consistent within itself. Every player is ranked by the exact same criteria. That's what makes it superior.
So if I ranked the best wingers based on face off percentages (but only for the playoffs)...
And you know nothing about how statistics are being accounted for in this.
Noting the list’s failure to reflect reality is indeed a critique of the model’s legitimacy
Yeah but if the argument is that "I think player a is better than player b" I trust the model more in that case.
Why? You know nothing about the model’s methodology.
And no rookie has scored as many points as Barzal since Malkin in his rookie year. Still doesn’t make him a top 5 center.
I edited my post. Just seen some weird logic from particularly North American fans. But yeah maybe it doesnt have to do with anything
Of course. But every single superstar center has put up points. If you don’t put up points you’re not a superstar. It’s not a complicated concept. Maybe you can make an exception for a Selke level center. But that’s not where Matthews is at this point.
