Sportsnet's top 20 left wingers

[Bjornar Moxnes]

The definitive ranking of the NHL’s top 20 left wingers over three seasons - Sportsnet.ca

No surprise that Hall is number 1. Hall is also super underrated defensively.

Click to read more...

 

[Zamuz]

Stopped reading at Ovechkin being 9th best LW

 

[The Note]

Ovechkin at 9 behind guys like Forsberg and Rakell. Rough.

 

[trick9]

Filip Forsberg ahead of Alex Ovechkin?

Who knows, maybe this is finally the year he gets to the dreaded 65-point mark.

 

[Corto]

Ovechkin at 9. Okay.

What's next, Crosby at 15 for centers?

 

[Kevs Security]

Brandon Saad at 18.
JVR at 16.
Kreider at 10.
Ovechkin at 9.
Rakell at 7.

Seriously. The whole list is a steaming pile of Tom Wilson.

 

[Siignal]

TIL Chris Kreider is a small step below Alex Ovechkin...

 

[1OApick]

This is purely statistical analysis. Hips and stats dont lie. Change my mind.

 

[Pestilence]

Stopped reading at Ovechkin being 9th best LW

It's statistical ranking, so top 20 is based on some parameters and formula. Which you would know if you read even until Ovechkin being 9th best LW.

 

[WesMcCauley]

Marchessault should be much higher. The guy is an unreal player

 

[Schenn]

Huberdeau and Ovechkin should be higher. Probably the whole list should be rejiggered tbh.

 

[Critical13]

Guys, no one should be higher. You keep saying that, but it's statistical not subjective. You could argue the parameters but there isn't some dude at TSN going "you know, I should put Ovechkin at 9". It's just sorted top down.

If I am being honest, I don't have too many issues with these lists so far.

 

[Devil Dancer]

This is purely statistical analysis. Hips and stats dont lie. Change my mind.

Yes, a useless statistical analysis.

You can tweak a ranking formula to say anything, but it doesn't have any value if the rankings (for something like best player at a position) are clearly wrong.

 

[1865]

2nd top scorer in the league, but only the 4th best at his particular position. I give up.

 

[KaseMeOutside]

Brandon Saad at 18.
JVR at 16.
Kreider at 10.
Ovechkin at 9.
Rakell at 7.

Seriously. The whole list is a steaming pile of Tom Wilson.

Rakell is properly rated

 

[canuckslover10]

This is why you cant soley rely on analytics

 

[Critical13]

Yes, a useless statistical analysis.

You can tweak a ranking formula to say anything, but it doesn't have any value if the rankings (for something like best player at a position) are clearly wrong.

Well then go ahead and make your own ranking. No one is begging you to read theirs.

I would rather have hockey content to talk about than to have nothing except the "Who looks better in a dress: Matthews or McDavid?" polls that otherwise seem to always be at the top of the forum.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

Any ‘statistical analysis’ that has Ovechkin at 9 should probably go back to the drawing board and use a different statistical formula. Stats aren’t biased but they also can’t be taken as godoel and shouldn’t be assumed to yield the correct result.
Too many people put blind faith in something just because it’s based on stats. Any statistician will tell you that formulas should always be questioned and can often be improved on.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

Well then go ahead and make your own ranking. No one is begging you to read theirs.

I would rather have hockey content to talk about than to have nothing except the "Who looks better in a dress: Matthews or McDavid?" polls that otherwise seem to always be at the top of the forum.

Try not to be so sensitive. This is a hockey discussion board and people are here to discuss things like this.

 

[Duke749]

The only reason Ovi is so low is because his Defense and Transition game in their scenario is so weak. His offense is rated like 3rd highest. I mean it’s obvious Ovi isn’t as strong as some of these guys outside of the offensive zone. Makes sense when you look at the information.

 

[Murky]

I will have a vote: I vote that Ovechkin is far better LW than the ninth best. I will also vote that the statistical analysis behind this list is crap.

Next, I am drawing some conclusions. Every single one of the parameters in this statistical study seem to be 100% aligned. Clearly the statistics indicate that this is a crap list.

The number of people that get all religious when statistics are mentioned, is frighteningly high, by the way.

 

[Static]

It wasn't long ago, as in before he won the cup, that ovechkin was routinely bagged on for everything but his goal scoring. This statistical analysis backs that up even if the narrative of the player has changed.

Capitals fans would agree with this if they were being honest with themselves; most were not happy with him the last few seasons before they won.

 

[Static]

It's also nice to see some Anaheim players get some objective props since nobody in the country (probably justified) seems to pay attention.

Also makes the subjective lists all the more frustrating to read for fans of teams who aren't media darlings.

 

[SympathyForTheDevils]

Yes, a useless statistical analysis.

You can tweak a ranking formula to say anything, but it doesn't have any value if the rankings (for something like best player at a position) are clearly wrong.

So stats are only useful when they confirm what we already believe, and they're useless when they show something different?

Instead of dismissing it as garbage because it doesn't give expected results, why not look into why? It's not some opaque mystery why Ovy is down in this ranking:
A) It takes into account the last 3 seasons; for Ovechkin, this includes 2 of his worst seasons
B) Even though the list is biased towards offence, it takes defence and transition into account and Ovechkin is below-average in both of these areas. You could argue stats have trouble evaluating defensive play, and that's true, but it's not like he ever had a reputation as a good defensive player to begin with.

Honestly, this list is far from perfect, and I'd put Ovy higher myself, but it's still more interesting than 99% of rankings out there (and more interesting than 99.9% of the content Sportsnet generally puts out). It had some actual work put into it and it's backed up by a consistent methodology. It's better than putting out another list that has players basically ranked by PPG.

 

[Aladyyn]

I will have a vote: I vote that Ovechkin is far better LW than the ninth best. I will also vote that the statistical analysis behind this list is crap.

Next, I am drawing some conclusions. Every single one of the parameters in this statistical study seem to be 100% aligned. Clearly the statistics indicate that this is a crap list.

The number of people that get all religious when statistics are mentioned, is frighteningly high, by the way.

So you call the whole thing crap because you disagree with the ranking of one player? Wild.