Discussion in 'Columbus Blue Jackets' started by Old Guy, Aug 16, 2018.
Says you !!!!
Statistics are like *******s. They're remarkably elastic and are often used to conceal dangerous things.
It should be obvious to all what EDM's comment was about. He was merely following up on my post that by adjusting the time frame by two weeks you come to an entirely different conclusion about Wennberg being better than Dubi on a current basis as Major was trying to imply.
Dubinsky starts almost exclusively in the defensive zone (79% at even strength) vs 43% defensive starts as Wennberg. Of course he's going to get scored on more often. It's called a "no brainer" when comparing goals against stats between someone is virtually always starting in the dzone compared to someone who is majority ozone starts.
Alexander Wennberg NHL Advanced Statistics (Even Strength) | Hockey-Reference.com
Brandon Dubinsky NHL Advanced Statistics (Even Strength) | Hockey-Reference.com
* * *
Grr. The lack of quoted posts makes that easy to overlook. Mea culpa.
Altho Wennberg is still over 50% in both cases, so there's still a case to be made for his not meeting the caricature standard Dubi was being compared against - less "Wennberg is sucking" and more "Dubinsky is returning to form", which I would call an overall good thing. But that's leaning more into Wennberg discussion and this is a Dubinsky thread.
Fair point. OTOH, the PK shot metrics accessible through those pages suggest that Wennberg's doing a much better job shorthanded - 22.1% corsi raw for Wennberg (3.8% relative) versus 12.5% raw for Dubinsky (-12.5% relative). That said, both have been on the ice for 4 shorthanded goals against, so the difference evidently isn't "Dubinsky is bad" but more that Wennberg isn't just defending; he's also scoring (1g 2a shorthanded, which might actually lead the team altho I can't be sure of that without checking everyone individually).
Dubinsky's still got one obvious use out there, tho - while both of those guys are pretty miserable in the faceoff circle shorthanded, Dubinsky's done much better relatively (37.5% versus 23.3%). One would prefer closer to 50%, naturally, but that's still a huge gap.
I've made the point plenty in the past that there's not much value in faceoff % unless you are talking about big differences - 58% to 42% for example. When both Wennberg and Dubi are hovering around 50 there isn't much of a value difference coming from that one way or the other. I have no idea if they'll both continue to be around that mark, but that's where most players are.
That is important to mention. I wouldn't call the goals results from that a no-brainer though, sometimes players start deep in their zone and perform really well, outscoring the opposition even. You expect a great defensive player to at least hold the opposition shots/goals down to a low level. And then there are guys who are put in those roles who just get buried with pucks in their net. That's been Brandon Dubinsky for a while now.
Go ahead and compare his results to the other players with similar zone starts, guys like Faksa, Girgensons, and Zajac. Dubinsky is at or near the bottom of the pile in corsi, corsi against and goals against. There's about 3.5 goals against per 60 minutes of Brandon Dubinsky, that's a full goal more than most of the comparison group.
The only real expectation should be: buyout..
I merely made the point that there were reasons behind the Wennberg/Dubinsky differential.
Can't you let anything go without a comment?
The first counterpoint that comes to mind is that when one sorts strictly by GA/60 on that chart, there's a lot of names nearby that are quickly recognizable - guys like Bjorkstrand, Atkinson (!), and, of course, Wennberg (3.47, 3.43, 3.31 respectively). Then again, they also all have anywhere from half again to nearly triple the GF/60 that Dubinsky does (2.68, 4.48, and 2.93 respectively versus Dubi's 1.57), so they make up for it.
Rebuttals are supposed to be an accepted and necessary thing in debate, not something to complain about and/or mock.
The last word syndrome Not even directed at you. Sad. Lame.
...so you're saying that any arguments you make should never, ever be questioned or examined, just uncritically accepted?
Its almost as if Dubinsky takes the tougher faceoffs against other teams better guys and plays the tougher defensive matchups with lesser offensive linemates.
OK. How does the shorthanded production difference fit into this theory?
Ok, you say that, but is it true?
You are ignoring the total numbers of draws and the difference in quality of opponents during the draws.
Well, explain to me this "shorthanded production difference".
You talking simply about shots against on the PK?
Are these...... high danger shots???
No, I'm talking about how Wennberg is scoring on the PK but Dubinsky isn't. There's a large Corsi differential between them on the PK, but that owes more to shots we're taking while shorthanded when Wennberg is on the ice rather than some kind of hypothetical defensive deficiency on Dubi's part. They're both PK regulars, face similar personnel for similar amounts of time and have seen the same number of shorthanded goals against when on the ice.
I love hockey reference but I wish they would change the way they figure oz and dz starts. What they do not mention real clearly is they do not include neutral zone starts in their numbers so the stats may be skewed. I have found the website below much more helpful when trying to compare where guys are being relied on to take faceoffs which can roughly be translated to zone starts with Dubi and Wennberg.
Columbus Blue Jackets- Face-off stats - 2018 - defensive zone - Puckbase
Note I'm not saying you or anyone here is right or wrong about Dubi versus Wennberg on faceoffs. All I'm pointing out is hockey reference leaves out a large chunk of data when figuring offensive and defensive zone starts.
Right, and add to that that lines are more often changed on the fly. "Starts almost exclusively in the defensive zone" is actually "starts in the defensive zone more than the offensive zone, but usually neither".
As far as I know, most sites and advanced stats types don't include neutral zone stats. In the case of Dubinsky vs. Wennberg, the difference is stark. But when people will say " so and so had 55% dzone starts and whatshimsname only had 45%, it's misleading. Because if you add in the neutral zone starts it probably goes to (I'll estimate) 42-37 which really isn't much of a difference.
There's not many "stats" or "numbers" that I'd consider less important than point production on the penalty kill.
And again, nobody is saying that Dubinsky is a better offensive player than Wennberg. The case could easily be made that he is a better "goal scorer", though.
AND YES, the difference between a Jenner/Dubinsky and a Wennberg defensively (faceoffs just a part) is much more VAST than some people want or can acknowledge. There's a reason you NEVER see Wennberg out there up a goal with a minute left taking a faceoff across from Benn, Malkin, Backstrom, etc.
The only reason I brought that up is because it showcases a situation in which Dubinsky and Wennberg are in very similar play situations facing very similar competition, and both are showing relative strengths - Dubi in the faceoff circle, Wennberg in point production - and are otherwise showing up more or less even. I'm certainly not about to suggest that Wennberg should be highly valued due to shorthanded scoring.
There is absolutely a vast difference in defensive play style, but not in effectiveness or end result. They both get the job done with different approaches.
That last doesn't actually support your position. Faceoff effectiveness is not the same as defensive effectiveness, although it does play an important part in defensive strategy. If Wennberg was more consistent in the faceoff circle, I guarantee you'd see him out in those situations more often.
We have different ideas of, "effectiveness", "end results" and "getting the job done".
These "numbers" and "end results" are MISSING MANY VARIABLES AND CONTEXT.
Ok. Tell yourself that. Though I'll ask, what supports THAT position??
I'd argue if Dubois wasn't given such heavy "1st line" and PP time that HE would (or should IMO) be put in these defensive situations over Wennberg.
And its not like they EVER put Wennberg out there last shift as the 2nd or even 3rd forward, to "close out" a game. Dubinsky, Jenner, Foligno, Anderson....among OTHERS. Why?
Separate names with a comma.