Tanner Glass

[Thirty One]

But I don't understand the point in already starting this discussion when he hasn't even played 1 regular season for us.

If this is the standard, why does the board even exist in the off-season?

 

[aufheben]

We want to live in the present...you want to dwell on the past.

What present? A few Pre-season games? Sorry, that does not outweigh 400+ NHL games.

 

[Puckinright]

If this is the standard, why does the board even exist in the off-season?

because, you're saying something he doesn't like.

 

[eco's bones]

Go read the responses after Glass looked fine in his second preseason game. Tell me that's moderation.

I recognize that the possibility that Glass performs well exists. There will always be players who improve dramatically at non-typical points in their career. The fact that Zdeno Chara became what he is now from what he is makes little sense.

But does the existence of pattern-breaking samples mean looking for patterns is useless and the past can tell us nothing of the future?


Somewhat off-topic, but this reminded me of this Ken Hitchcock quote:



It mirrors the views of many who start out on this topic (myself included).

A Ken Hitchcock team last won a cup in 1998-99. It's his only Stanley Cup winning team.

He is a good coach but there are plenty of good coaches. His St. Louis Blues team have underachieved in the playoffs since he's been there. Making it into the second round his first year and getting knocked out in the first round the last two years. He's well respected without a doubt but even so.

What's more his team at least until this season anyway employed one Ryan Reaves as a 4th line enforcer--who really is not a good NHL player and definitely not as good a player as Tanner Glass. Glass at least has had some responsibilities apart from fighting--like being a penalty killer. But it's interesting nonetheless that Hitchcock says that he believes in all the advanced stats but at the same time regularly dressed a guy such as Reaves--and I think there are numerous coaches such as Hitchcock who put a lot of stock in such stats but at the same time they want a player such as a Reaves (despite as in Reaves case--lack of hockey ability) who will keep other teams from taking liberties with their players. It is what it is I suppose but I'm not all that impressed by this argument of yours.

 

[Thirty One]

Stop criticizing Reaves, he hasn't even played a game for the Rangers yet! #HFNYRrules

 

[Zil]

It mirrors the views of many who start out on this topic (myself included).

Yep. I made a litany of posts a few years back insisting that the numbers were meaningless, but the data is too compelling at this point. Now if somebody would just replace extraskater with another site with easy to find corsi rel percentages I'd be all set.

 

[nyr2k2]

Yep. I made a litany of posts a few years back insisting that the numbers were meaningless, but the data is too compelling at this point. Now if somebody would just replace extraskater with another site with easy to find corsi rel percentages I'd be all set.

These stats won't gain widespread acceptance until hockey gets its own (true) equivalent of baseballreference.com, and eventually, Fan Graphs. Those places compile a ton of information, explain the information well and present it in an easy to understand format.

 

[Beacon]

So the Rangers management and scouts believe Glass is a good player. He did well in preseason. But we must believe he sucks because some people saw him on other teams, probably not paying attention to him because he's not one of their top players?

 

[eco's bones]

So the Rangers management and scouts believe Glass is a good player. He did well in preseason. But we must believe he sucks because some people saw him on other teams, probably not paying attention to him because he's not one of their top players?

I have very little doubt that the Rangers management team, their pro scouts knew full well about Tanner Glass's possession stats and probably AV and his coaching staff as well...and yet they signed him anyway to an outrageous contract--about 2% of the team's total cap.

Knew full well he was a horrible player. MORONS! FIRE THEM ALL!

We'll replace them with some HF posters who know better how to parse advanced stats and read graphs. Just need someone to run the practices and change the lines and defense pairings. Maybe one of us can multitask and is up for it. All those interested--just send your applications to 4 Penn Plaza.

 

[nyr2k2]

So the Rangers management and scouts believe Glass is a good player. He did well in preseason. But we must believe he sucks because some people saw him on other teams, probably not paying attention to him because he's not one of their top players?

LOL, Mr. "Player X won't amount to much because his point per game rates don't add up!" is talking down to someone analyzing a player with advanced statistics? Get the **** out of here.

 

[nyr2k2]

I have very little doubt that the Rangers management team, their pro scouts knew full well about Tanner Glass's possession stats and probably AV and his coaching staff as well...and yet they signed him anyway to an outrageous contract--about 2% of the team's total cap.

Knew full well he was a horrible player. MORONS! FIRE THEM ALL!

We'll replace them with some HF posters who know better how to parse advanced stats and read graphs. Just need someone to run the practices and change the lines and defense pairings. Maybe one of us can multitask and is up for it. All those interested--just send your applications to 4 Penn Plaza.

No one has said that AV or any scout is a moron that deserves to be fired. You're resorting to hyperbole and building a straw man, and it's not helping the discussion.

I understand the "coaches/scouts/GMs know what's best for the team" point. However, when people complained about Brashear, Boogaard, John Scott and so on, were they right? They were right. They were right and the team was wrong. I defended those acquisitions because I had an idea of what they'd bring to the table and thought it was valuable. You know what? It wasn't/isn't valuable.

I mean, you guys understand that professional sporting leagues are usually incredibly slow to react to advances in statistical analysis, right? Look at baseball. People were talking range factor and WAR for a decade before it truly caught on in the game. John Hollinger was developing true shooting percentage and usage rate for years while half of the GMs in the NBA were focused on point and rebounds numbers. And you know what else? When informed internet commenters complained that baseball player X wasn't that good because he had limited range and didn't get on base, they were told, "You can't ignore 30 home runs, that's what the team needs!"

You can argue all you want that the team's braintrust knows best, but when there's mounds of statistical evidence to the contrary, it's not particularly compelling.

 

[Beacon]

LOL, Mr. "Player X won't amount to much because his point per game rates don't add up!" is talking down to someone analyzing a player with advanced statistics? Get the **** out of here.

Like I said before, a lot of the arguments here come down to people proving that they are smart. "I'm not a novice fan, they pay attention to stats, so I pay no attention to them!" Followed by, "I know advanced stats, so there!"

When I analyze a prospect, I use all the attributes, with how he's valued by the coaches and management to be #1 since they've seen him more and they understand things better. Then come stats (advanced and basic), size, scouting reports, my own viewing of them, etc. All of those go into the pot. But good job claiming that I ever said that basic stats are dispositive.

 

[Garv23]

You guys will all huff and puff, but stats don't tell you a player's worth in the locker room and how much sticking up for a teammate can boost a teams confidence. That does mean something wether anyone wants to admit it or not. It's cliché, but having a guy like him out there, knowing he has your back, will make a team play bigger. Not to mention I think he's held his own pretty well so far in terms of skating and not being behind the play.

The contract is what it is. It had me scratching my head also, but it's done. Glass is here, the season hasn't even started yet and I'd like to see a few games before I pull out my torch and pitchfork.

 

[Badko]

Past performance is the best predictor of future performance. You get that, right?

You've basically come into the tail end of the thread and made no effort to address any of the actual arguments other than to say "nuh-uh!"

Yes, I understand. Do you understand that Glass has been an NHL player for several seasons now? He may not be the most prolific puck possessor or goal scorer, but he does fit into a team concept. I lilke Glass and I'm rooting for him and the Rangers.

I think some of the individuals supporting the use of statistics as a tool have adopted Tanner Glass as their poster child. There is a place for statistics in hockey, but there is much more to this game.

I apologize for my late entry into the discussion. My bad.

 

[TheTakedown]

You guys will all huff and puff, but stats don't tell you a player's worth in the locker room and how much sticking up for a teammate can boost a teams confidence. That does mean something wether anyone wants to admit it or not. It's cliché, but having a guy like him out there, knowing he has your back, will make a team play bigger. Not to mention I think he's held his own pretty well so far in terms of skating and not being behind the play.

The contract is what it is. It had me scratching my head also, but it's done. Glass is here, the season hasn't even started yet and I'd like to see a few games before I pull out my torch and pitchfork.

and yet, he was still $200k cheaper than Dorsett, who got us a very good prospect.

Any time you have the chance to turn straight money into assets, especially if they are replaceable players, you do it...

 

[Badko]

What present? A few Pre-season games? Sorry, that does not outweigh 400+ NHL games.

400+ NHL games is not a bad resume. He obviously serves a purpose. Why bother with tomorrow if we're only going to see what we did yesterday?

 

[Thirty One]

and I'm rooting for him and the Rangers.

Stop saying this. Everyone is.

 

[BarbaraAlphanse]

If this is the standard, why does the board even exist in the off-season?

For constructive conversation? When did cynical berating become the acceptable norm? Why set the bar so low in terms of standards?

 

[Zil]

For constructive conversation? When did cynical berating become the acceptable norm? Why set the bar so low in terms of standards?

So when a pro-stats person says that guy sucks we should've gotten this guy instead it's cynical, but when an anti-stats person does the same thing it's constructive. Good to know.

 

[BarbaraAlphanse]

So when a pro-stats person says that guy sucks we should've gotten this guy instead it's cynical, but when an anti-stats person does the same thing it's constructive. Good to know.

Nope. Still not grasping my point. It has nothing to do with stats vs. anti stats (at least the essence of what i'm trying to say doesn't).

 

[Wolfy*]

I guess a lot of HF folks are eating crow these days. Enjoy your meal

 

[Thirty One]

I guess a lot of HF folks are eating crow these days. Enjoy your meal

Wat.

 

[BobMarleyNYR]

Put down the pipe, Bob. It's not that hard to follow. I prefer the team to which I have fanatical devotion sign good players.

I get that... but it almost seems as though he's hurt you or deserves to be condemned with the phrase you said.

He didn't look bad in camp, as most expected he would. That IS a positive.

 

[BobMarleyNYR]

I guess I'm unclear on why a player shouldn't be judged by their past performance.

Because it's a fallacy of logic... thought you'd be the first guy to know that

 

[BobMarleyNYR]

I guess a lot of HF folks are eating crow these days. Enjoy your meal

He hasn't been THAT good... but he hasn't been bad for what he is... to me, that's a positive.