VainGretzky
Registered User
- Jun 4, 2015
- 12,834
- 10,048
It's fine the way it is. A lot of times it's the primary (sometimes secondary) assist that creates easy goals.
I value goals more than assists tbh. But it's fine the way it is. Just compare players without using secondary assists since they don't seem to be much of a factor anyway.Not a bad move. It might be underappreciating goals slightly but it should be a relatively safe number.
I value goals more than assists tbh. But it's fine the way it is. Just compare players without using secondary assists since they don't seem to be much of a factor anyway.
A lot of times 'easy goals' misses wide open net even empty net.A lot of times it's the primary assist that creates easy goals.
Has anyone made a list of Art Ross winners if only primary assists were counted?
Ovi | Sid | |
2005-2006 | 88 | 83 |
2006-2007 | 78 | 85 |
2007-2008 | 101 | 57 |
2008-2009 | 88 | 84 |
2009-2010 | 88 | 87 |
2010-2011 | 62 | 52 |
2011-2012 | 52 | 24 |
2012-2013 | 45 | 43 |
2013-2014 | 68 | 70 |
2014-2015 | 74 | 59 |
2015-2016 | 56 | 64 |
2016-2017 | 53 | 72 |
2017-2018 | 69 | 62 |
Just eliminate the second assist.
Ok, you've convinced me. I'm going to start making general rules according to exceptions rather than what typically happens.
Haven't read through, safe to assume this thread became an Ovi vs Crosby pissing contest?
For now I have Sid vs Ovi stats.
By primary points only Ovi outscored Sid in 9 seasons out of 13 and have 80 primary points lead:
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Ovi Sid 2005-2006 88 83 2006-2007 78 85 2007-2008 101 57 2008-2009 88 84 2009-2010 88 87 2010-2011 62 52 2011-2012 52 24 2012-2013 45 43 2013-2014 68 70 2014-2015 74 59 2015-2016 56 64 2016-2017 53 72 2017-2018 69 62
Hey, I also think game winning goals in shootouts should count towards that players season total.
How can you have a game winning goal but the player never really gets credited for it.
Because shoot-outs are crapfest, and they sure do get credited more than enough for it.
Yes Let's give Maroon 2 points on this play and McDavid 1.
You are the one here who are claiming the general rule is the assists are easier. And make up examples, or at best, show some hasty generalization for it. And when someone try to explain to you the assist-guys may have done great work they never got anything for, because the men with the easy finishing-job wiffed, that is something you blow off as "one example".
Haven't read through, safe to assume this thread became an Ovi vs Crosby pissing contest?
Not at all, didn't even come up until the post above.
Why?I disagree with the suggestion:
- Goal scorers would become prohibitively expensive
- Threading the needle is a skill I'd argue is as important as finishing a play
Your out to lunch man. Just stop. It's pure idiocy to suggest goals are somehow more valuable then assists, especially when you watch generational players gift wrap goal after goal for thier linemates. Cheechoo would have finished ahead of Joe Thornton in 06 if Thornton played the full season by your analysis....lolHuh? Did you notice that the post I was responding to was one where someone posted a video of a great McDavid assist in order to mock the notion of valuing goals more than assists? Or read where I acknowledged that there are times where a passer "contributes" more to a goal than the actual scorer? Or read the article where a statistician actually did an analysis exploring the relative "scoring value" of goals vs. primary assists vs. secondary assists?
Your out to lunch man. Just stop. It's pure idiocy to suggest goals are somehow more valuable then assists, especially when you watch generational players gift wrap goal after goal for thier linemates. Cheechoo would have finished ahead of Joe Thornton in 06 if Thornton played the full season by your analysis....lol
I assume outside of the Carolina Hurricanes you dont get to watch much hockey, one out of every 3 points by 97 is usually plays similar to this just slightly less spectacular....so it becomes the norm.