And looky at that, Spezza's numbers away from Michalek in that span are even better! a 0.994 GF20 vs a 0.870 GA20. Giving up more than Michalek away from him, but also getting a good deal more.
Have you considered the alternate linemates? When Spezza wasn't with Michalek, he tended to get guys like Alfredsson (2011-2013), MacArthur, or Zibanejad as a replacement. When Michalek downgrade from Spezza, it was to Zibanejad, Smith, Foligno (2011/12). Bit of a difference; Spezza was a legit star player with no comparable replacement (even if his last year hear was plagued with recover)
And if you want to talk about being selective, you excluded 2 of Michalek's 5 years here. Allows for that single 35 goal and 60 point season to play a much bigger role in your numbers.
I chose three years as it is relevant to how he currently plays. Is it problematic that his last fully healthy season he was very good away from Spezza? Or that he was good without Spezza prior to getting injured in 12/13?
It's also fun to see how many ways some posters can say "management is paid to do this, thus you need to shut up!"
I've done no such thing. I have however shown that your analysis was sorely lacking, and if that's the kind of analytics you hope our management engages in I honestly don't know what to say other than it would lead to very poorly backed decision making.
You seem to think that because their conclusion was different than yours, that they didn't look at all the facts, but you've shown to be only looking at the smallest of samples, and not considering the most obvious of variables. Maybe the team did look deeper than that, maybe they didn't, but what you provided as evidence in this thread was not a solid foundation to make an informed decision, and likely would do more damage to the process than good.
