Jump to content
Randall Flagg

First Third of Season Report Card

Recommended Posts

I got this idea from hfboards. We didn't have one for the quarter-pole, so we can do one now (well, technically the season will be 1/3 over after the first period Monday, but whatever). You can grade however you want, but I'll go through player by player and assign letter grades. I will be grading relative to my expectations for each player before the season. C is average, meeting expectations, and won't deserve the negative light it probably gets perceived with. B is a bit better than expected, A is much better than expected. D is a bit worse than expected, D- is way worse than expected, and F is ***** this guy should not be in the NHL WTF is up. There are no A+'s. 

First, starting up top. 
Jason Botterill: A-. He has every level of this organization winning games, prospects are developing, and the key reasons for the turnaround, Skinner, Hutton, and improved depth (albeit from the hot garbage he was fine with starting last year with), have his finger prints all over. An A will be rewarded if we hang on and make the playoffs. 
Phil Housley: B+. Phil has shown tremendous improvement in role deployment. Jack isn't all that much better at D, though his effort is through the roof back there, and Skinner is a defensive disaster, and yet those guys are tilting the ice and not allowing a lot of goals against while scoring many themselves, and the reason is that Phil did what I asked before the season: our two best offensive players are getting primo offensive minutes.The amount of set defense they have to play is a minimum, they can focus on attacking with the puck in the Sabres possession or in the o-zone already and don't have to worry about getting it back from a team that's already pitched a tent in their zone, and the result is that Jack is winning his on-ice ES matchups (in a huge way) for the first time in his career. The growth this represents over last year's "defensive 2C role" for offensive player #2 is exponential. His work with Tage paid off very quickly, and the players are ready to play and have shown immense improvement in their abilities to make and receive passes in fast game situations, something he's been working at with them since his first training camp. Needs to get his depth lines sorted out better. 
Now the players:
Jack Eichel: A-. If three of his posts go in, and if he takes and makes that shot in OT last night, it's an A. Goals and the mental funk that is keeping him from shooting are something that needs to be sorted out, but his playmaking has been sublime, his effort is the best we've ever seen, along with his two-way play, and the man led the Buffalo Sabres through the best stretch of hockey we've seen in a decade. Not much more to say. He's showing he deserves the C. I expected 80-85 points, bad defense, and getting outscored, and he's pacing for 95+, playing reasonably well defensively, and has a plus minus that lets pi sleep easy.
Jeff Skinner: A-. We just wanted ~30 goals and top-six NHL forward level play, with hopefully not too much disaster in his own end. Boy has he spoiled us. If only he could pass a teensy bit better. Get this man signed.
Jason Pominville: A-. I know he's regressed a bit as the games have piled up, but since I expected him to be our 13th best forward this season and looking like this from the start, what we've gotten from him in the meantime has been awesome, and such a treat for the nostalgic. Hopefully 3 games in our next 10 days lets him rest up. 
Sam Reinhart: B+. He started off fairly slow again, though not nearly as bad as last year's start. He's turned it up about two months earlier than last year too. He's been one of our only sources of secondary scoring, and is doing very well in his trips up to the top line as well. And I think he'll keep getting better as the season goes on. That's how he works. Wouldn't be surprised at all to see him wind up with 65+ points, which will give him an A at the end. 
Kyle Okposo: A. Kyle is another benefit of Housley's role revelations. He has put his head down, churned his legs, and done very well as a mentor and on-ice pressure release valve for our rookie C, and has been able to safely put his game back together without the pressure of needing to be for Jack what Skinner is. I thought his career was sharply becoming that of a Matt Moulson, but Kyle says no effing way. Hope he can stay healthy and keep his legs for as long as possible. 
Conor Sheary: C. He has been no more and no less than what I expected: A source of ~15-25 goals from the middle six that looks great some nights and has stretches that Pens fans warned us about, where he can't stay on his feet and nothing seems to go right. A huge upgrade at depth wing over what we've seen the last few years, and still an absolute steal of a trade. 
Casey Mittelstadt: C. The rook took a while to get used to the size and speed of NHLers, as expected. He couldn't really do anything at ES for a few weeks, and has gotten slightly better each and every game since. The scoring is starting to come, and I envision his 27 point current pace will wind up finishing in the upper 30s, which is what I was hoping for in the beginning. His two-way play has been surprisingly good to balance out a bit worse of a time scoring than I expected. Mildly worried about the 2C position long-term and definitely worried short-term, but he'll probably wind up being very good in that role. 
Zemgus Girgensons: B. I was never as down on Zemgus as many, but he's showing us all that he can be a piece on a legitimately good fourth line. He brings solid defensive play and shot suppression, an effective cycle game, and is a key piece to a good penalty killing unit. 
Johan Larsson: A. I, like many, thought this guy was done and waived. He responded with playing like we thought he might one day play when he was running the FLG line in 15-16. His hands are back from that injury and he makes a wonderful pair with Zemgus on the 4th line and PK. 
Patrik Berglund: C. A useful depth piece that is a big upgrade on guys who had his role last year. His goal scoring has completely evaporated for some reason, I don't remember the last time he got a reasonably exciting scoring chance, but his shot suppression has been as good as ever and he is the final piece to the best fourth line we've seen in ages, nobody does it quite as well as him.
Vladimir Sobotka: C. I've written essays about this guy so I won't say much, but those essays describe pretty much exactly what I expected to get from Vlad. Any negative he and Berglund bring are more from coaching decisions than themselves, because we should know what they do and don't bring to the team. I wouldn't be surprised to see him get good grades from some SSers and bad grades from others since he and Patrik's scoring numbers are far down from even last season's production, but IMO that was always going to happen. While useless offensively, Vlad is reasonably good defensively and another key piece to a different PK duo. 
Evan Rodrigues: C. Maintaining his career scoring rate, adding some events to an event-starved bottom six, and being effective on the PK with Vladdy. Inconsistency and dumb penalties are the negatives, that prevent him from escaping the press box merry-go-round.
Tage Thompson: C+. Expectations are based on what i saw in TC and preseason, which is always a dangerous place to make them. Would be a B if this stretch had started earlier - was a D for 15 games, and B+/A- the last 5. Hopefully he keeps getting better and better and solves a depth scoring problem. Glad to see the confidence levels rising, and I expect a strong finish and a very good final grade.
Remi Elie: C. We knew what we were getting and we got it, no more, no less. 

No forwards were below a C, which is a big reason why we're 17-7-3. 

Rasmus Ristolainen: B. Coupling his frustrating lobs to the NZ or to Nikita Kucherov with engaged physical play and offensive flair, Risto has done a good job, particularly recently, of minimizing the painful stuff that drive his bad underlying metrics far more than his extensive PP time, and maximizing the stuff that helps the Sabres win. Unfortunately, his TOI is still in the range that has caused deterioration around game 40-50 of every season he's played since we drafted Jack Eichel. I expect nothing different this year, and it's not his fault. For now he's doing a good job, in the words of Rayzor. 
Jake McCabe: A-. Jake has cemented himself as a legitimate 2nd pairing defenseman that we thought he could become when he was showing flashes 2/3 seasons ago. Hopefully he's just sick and can stay healthy, because this team needs him and he might be the most important player back there all things considered. He plays physical and is keeping the brainfarts to a minimum. 
Rasmus Dahlin: B-. He's everything we thought he would be. There have been no shortages of "woah." moments, and his metrics and play indicate that he's already, right now, the possession-driving transition defenseman we've been drooling about for years. He's had plenty of bad games in which the size and speed of the game overwhelms, but even in those there are moments (that deking in Pittsburgh) that have us giddy for the future. We are very lucky to have Rasmus Dahlin. Also, he's on pace to more than double the rookie year scoring of Doughty, Karlsson, and Hedman, while being younger than any of them were when those numbers were posted. 
Zach Bogosian: A-. We've actually gotten games from this guy, and though the Bogo bunker moments are starting to creep in more and more, he's been a key part of our transition game, and gives the whole team a boost of energy. It's far more than I expected and I hope, but can't yet expect, that it continues.
Marco Scandella: D. I don't know what Marco has been battling this year, but it hasn't been pretty. It's his first two weeks of last year, but extended into December. I hope he can figure it out cuz I love the guy and we need him at his best. Hopefully whatever is keeping him out isn't serious and he can be back fixing up his game shortly. Luckily with the players above, we haven't needed him as much as we did last year, and hopefully in a situation mirroring Okposo w.r.t. less expectations, he can start to do a similar thing in rebuilding his game and becoming an asset again. 
Nathan Beaulieu: B+. He's definitely rebounded into being a 6/7D we are all mostly fine with for now. An offensive touch has balanced any shakiness defensively, and instead of using him on PP1 and pairing 2 like we did last year for stretches, he's been safely sheltered and is better for it. Also, A+ on the community work.
Casey Nelson: C. Exactly what we'd expect, no more, no less. Isn't losing us games when he has to play, and brings a good first pass to the table. Completely fine with him as a 7/8D for now. 

Carter Hutton: A-. I was very skeptical of him getting the largest load he's ever had, and he's delivered. The single biggest individual reason this team is better, and it's not particularly close. Stick taps for Hutton. Though, the way he jaws at his teammates and stares them down sometimes, and the tone of his postgame interviews, aren't my cup of tea. But he's playing well and it's helping us win games, and that's the important thing.
Linus Ullmark: A-. He's handling the backup role spectacularly well, and is a huge positive presence for the team. I feel relaxed and happy when he's on my TV 1200 miles away. Hopefully he can keep developing and steal the job sooner or later.
 

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, this is really good. I agree pretty much entirely with your assessments except for two grades:  I'd give Mitts at least a C+ because he has indeed shown improvement game-to-game.  He may have taken more time to adjust, unlike Dahlin, but Dahlin had the benefit of Euro pro experience where Mitts did not.  I also think we've seen Mitts neck size enlarge right before our eyes.

Also, Dahlin probably deserves a B to B+ IMHO.  The grade, like Mitts', needs to be weighted because of age and inexperience.  He does have Sabres style brain farts (ala Bogo or Risto), but unlike most Sabres d-men, he generally recovers.  Again, like Mitts', but reasonably advanced and accelerated, we have watched him develop right before our eyes in a near-dramatic fashion.  I think it's safe to say the aforementioned brain farts will become far fewer as he gains experience.  To this point, though, his mistakes are definitely outweighed by his contribution in-game. 

Edited by ...
Speaking of brain farts.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All of these are relative to MY expectations, not their actual results.

Botterill & Housley: A- Having this team 8 points ahead of where I'd expected them to be through 20 games is WELL above expectations.  Keep the NHL 0.600 (or better) rolling the rest of the way & the grade goes up to A+ (don't care that Randy says no A+'s; they'll both win end of season awardsif thst happens; being judged the best would be worth the A+).  Sneak into the playoffs & they get A's.

Eichel: B- As this is relative to expectations, almost gave him a C+.  Expected a PPG from him to this point & he's slightly ahead of that but goals are seriously trailing.  His D-zone play (primarily due to effort) has exceeded expectation.

Skinner: A Did NOT see him heading to a 40+ goal season.  (And on pace for much more than that.)

Reinhart: C+ Started slower than expected but has been at PPG for over 10 games now.  Thought he'd exceed his contract's value though it looked like that would be wrong in October.

Mittelstadt: B Really expected the way he played the 1st 4-5 games to be what we got through December.  He's been better than that.

Okposo: B Hoped he'd play this well.  Didn't expect it.  He's pretty much back.

Sheary: C- (D+?) Not quite what I'd expected, but really thought Housley would have him glued to Jack's hip which would've goosed his #'s.  (Glad Phil giving Skinner that role.)

Thompson: C+ Really stood out on day 1 at training camp.  Looked terrible 1st few real games.  Exceeding expectations since light bulb went on.

Sobotka: C+ (B-) Figured he was toast when the Sabres got him.  He's been better than that.

Pominville: B He looked very good for almost 10 games last year & then was a space filler.  Lasted longer than that this season.  Hopefully he does gets some breaks throughout the season, because he IS useful when fresh.

Girgensons: C+ (C) Expected he'd be good at 4th line & PK.  Hasn't disappointed.

Larsson: C Have said often that, should he recover from the arm injury & expected he would, heis an IDEAL 4th line C.  He did and he is.

Berglund: C Getting better D from him than expected but thought he'd still be able to be a 15 goal guy (basically expected Hecht) &  the scoring isn't there.  So the B & D equal a C.

Rodrigues: C- Thought he'd be more productive but he pretty much is as expected.

Elie: B Expected he was an AHLer.  He's a borderline NHLer.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Taro T no Dahlin?

Also, a C for Larsson?  Were your expectations for him higher?  You're a tough grader!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, ... said:

Okay, this is really good. I agree pretty much entirely with your assessments except for two grades:  I'd give Mitts at least a C+ because he has indeed shown improvement game-to-game.  He may have taken more time to adjust, unlike Dahlin, but Dahlin had the benefit of Euro pro experience where Mitts did not.  I also think we've seen Mitts neck size enlarge right before our eyes.

Also, Dahlin probably deserves a B to B+ IMHO.  The grade, like Mitts', needs to be weighted because of age and inexperience.  He does have Sabres style brain farts (ala Bogo or Risto), but unlike most Sabres d-men, he generally recovers.  Again, like Mitts', but reasonably advanced and accelerated, we have watched him develop right before our eyes in a near-dramatic fashion.  I think it's safe to say the aforementioned brain farts will become far fewer as he gains experience.  To this point, though, his mistakes are definitely outweighed by his contribution in-game. 

All fair. And I love what we've seen from both right now, but my expectations for Dahlin are sky-high, and he's still doing a little better than I had hoped for. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ristolainen: B- (C+) Thought he'd struggle a bit more than he had & he's scored a little more than expected.

McCabe: B+ Thought he had this level in him but didn't expect it nearly as consistently as it has.

Bogosian: A- Quality of play is right where I'd expected.  Quantity of play is faaaar ahead of expectations.

Dahlin: A-  (B+)  Expected the TB Rasmus faaaar more often than we've seen.  Knew he'd flash moments, but have to give props to the best rookie performance of November.

Scandella: D  Expected him to be top pairing all season.  Has worked his way to 3rd pairing.  Hope this break gets whatever the issue is cleared up.

Nelson: C+  Better on PK than expected.  Other than that, playing as expected.

Beaulieu: A  He's still 3rd pairing, but not the disaster in waiting he was all last year.

Pilut: C (Inc.)  1 gameis too small a sample.

Hutton: A- Much better than I'd expected.  Soooo calm.

Ullmark: B- Better than expected. About exactly where I'd hoped.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, ... said:

@Taro T no Dahlin?

Also, a C for Larsson?  Were your expectations for him higher?  You're a tough grader!

:lol:

When a topic has a lot of activity, my tablet tends to drop stuff from the edit panel, so rather than retype these thoughts 30 times, broke the evalinto 2 posts.  (And lucked out.)

I've always (well, when he's healthy) really liked Larsson as a 4th/temp 3rd C and HATED him at wing.  His play has probably been closest to my expectation of any player on this team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Randall Flagg said:

I got this idea from hfboards. We didn't have one for the quarter-pole, so we can do one now (well, technically the season will be 1/3 over after the first period Monday, but whatever). You can grade however you want, but I'll go through player by player and assign letter grades. I will be grading relative to my expectations for each player before the season. C is average, meeting expectations, and won't deserve the negative light it probably gets perceived with. B is a bit better than expected, A is much better than expected. D is a bit worse than expected, D- is way worse than expected, and F is ***** this guy should not be in the NHL WTF is up. There are no A+'s. 

 

Flagg,

Just logged in to post this.  Great post.  There may be a couple a grades I would have done a little differently, but with the effort and analysis you put in, I ain't gonna touch any of it.

Edited by Tondas
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Randall Flagg said:

...getting the largest load he's ever had...

Anyone should get an A+ for this 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good job Randall, not exactly sure why Eichel won't shoot but his effort has improved tenfold this year. Actually in the past two games he's been throwing his body around a bit. And I can't blame him for the OT goal to be honest; if he chases him Barkov is open, he ended up kinda stuck between a rock and a hard place since the other two Sabres practically ran into one another and he was trying to deter Huberdeou from driving the net. 

Otherwise the grades are spot on, a tad worried about the team's analytical statistics however outside Eichel + his two wingers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, inkman said:

Anyone should get an A+ for this 

Hopefully Randall has learned a painful lesson: you can't give ink an inch.

Edited by PASabreFan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

Hopefully Randall has learned a painful lesson: you can't give ink an inch.

My wife learned this not so painful lesson as well 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Above expectations:

* Jack Eichel is not getting enough credit. He is on pace for the best statistical season a Sabre has had since Danny Briere a decade ago and and might finish with a top 10 offensive season in franchise history. He has added consistency and defensive effort to his game. He is playing like a leader and a legitimate franchise centre and may be the best player in the league at carrying the puck into the zone.

* Carter Hutton has been more than a good back-up, he’s a winner who makes timely saves, battles to the end, and is a key factor in this team’s never-say-die attitude.

* Jake McCabe appears to have reached his ceiling as a complete, all-situations 2nd-pair guy who is making good decisions on both ends of the ice, making fewer brain farts, and winning more battles. And he never stops battling.

* I’ve been more of a fan of Zach Bogosian than many around here, but he has brought an element of steadiness we have never seen before. He’s a leader, a physical force and a rock on a surprisingly good penalty kill. And that’s on top of the fact that he’s above expectations simply by playing at all.

* The more I’ve watched Jeff Skinner, the more aware I have become of his flaws. He is a terrible passer, and decidedly average through the neutral zone. But his work below the dots and his ability to bury the puck is the best we’ve seen here in a decade. He gets chances and he finishes them, and at opportune times. We thought he would add scoring, but not that he would be one of the best scorers in the league.

* Phil Housley has kept the team focused and positive, he’s got players buying into their roles, the young players are improving and we play an exciting brand of hockey. Criticism of his lineup choices is quibbling. He’s a candidate for coach of the year.

Edited by dudacek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, dudacek said:

* The more I’ve watched Jeff Skinner, the more aware I have become of his flaws. He is a terrible passer, and decidedly average through the neutral zone. But his ability to bury the puck is the best we’ve seen here in a decade. He gets chances and he buries them, and at opportune times. We thought he would add scoring, but not that he would be one of the best scorers in the league.

  

I really want to get this deal done. But I would be negotiating hard because of this. Skinner is not a 9 mil, or an 8.5 mil player. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, dudacek said:

* The more I’ve watched Jeff Skinner, the more aware I have become of his flaws. He is a terrible passer, and decidedly average through the neutral zone. But his work below the dots and his ability to bury the puck is the best we’ve seen here in a decade. He gets chances and he finishes them, and at opportune times. We thought he would add scoring, but not that he would be one of the best scorers in the league.

Interesting observations on Skinner and I don't believe you're off the mark.  

6 hours ago, Randall Flagg said:

I really want to get this deal done. But I would be negotiating hard because of this. Skinner is not a 9 mil, or an 8.5 mil player. 

Yeah, good thing JBotts didn't succumb to the pressure during the 10-game-streak.  I'm sure somewhere on this site comparables have been brought up, but I am right now wondering what they are.  There are so many narratives with this team right now, dudacek jogged my memory that I thought something was odd about Skinner during the last two losses.  Was he hit too hard?  Maybe.  But I recall noticing he was definitely being squeezed along the boards more and the rest of his play was noticeably meh.

Anyway, his scoring obviously is exciting, but a comprehensive look at the rest of his game measured against that ought to give us a better handle on what he's worth and the comparables will tell us what he's likely to want.  This is a long-winded way of getting at I agree, again, RF on your point.  I am wondering what the high and low ranges are, though.  

I think the rest of the NHL recognizes he has a thing with Eichel and Phil's system, and this is likely not to be replicated on too many teams around the league, if any.  A desperate team looking to make a splash signing might offer him more than he's worth, but will he take it?  Ugh, all of this is for another thread, though.  Sorry!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Skinner has always been a good goal scorer, but, as has been mentioned here and in the media, he has never played with a centre as good as Eich.

Based on history, I believe Skinner to be in the $7M area.  Do the Sabres want to give a bit of a premium in that they believe his goal scoring pace this season, so far, has as much, or more, to do with him playing with Jack as it does that it's a contract year?  That does not seem to be JBOT's style.  

On the other hand, will Skinner be willing to leave a bit of $ on the table since he likes it here and is in a very good spot playing with Jack?

I think the Sabres do plan on signing Skinner to an extension.  I believe they were maybe 50/50 at the time of the trade and wanted to see how it worked.  Well, it has worked out very well.  So, I think the Sabres will sign Skinner for 7 years and $7.5M / year, as front loaded as currently allowed by the CBA.

In the back of JBOT's mind will be the inevitable lockout and salary rollback.

Edited by New Scotland (NS)
sticky fingers ... yummy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

View image on Twitter

Rather than rank individuals for the 1/3 report card (Not that there is anything wrong with that) I would also like to look at the overall team. 

I think a few of of us in the last several game threads have expressed some concerns with the eye test and it appears some stats are bearing that out.  Note this below is from WGR550 site article https://wgr550.radio.com/articles/opinion/time-turnaround  but worth mentioning   

Let’s take a peak at some of Buffalo’s rankings from naturalstattrick.com:

Shot share at 5-on-5 - 21st
Shot share 5-on-5 within one goal - 24th
High Danger Chances For - 28th
High Danger Chance % - 28th
High Danger Save % - 4th
This team is living on the edge… The Sabres give up an awful lot of high danger chances, and they don’t get too many of their own.

Regulation wins are the true testament to how good you are. 3-on-3 overtime and shootouts can get you to the playoffs, but once you’re there… 

So not trying to be wet blanket and yes I am enjoying the ride and actually being in the conversation just pointing out that the law of averages do catch up with you and things even out over time and come back to a mean, and the team mean for last 2 weeks has not been a sustainable winning model. 

So Phil get to work and get this train back on the winning  track...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That graph matches what I see.  They were not the better team the last 8 games, regardless of the final score.  They will need to figure it out.  It only tightens up from here.

Fortunately, what those games did show is, they have the talent to get through it if they do figure it out.  They don't need to be perfect, just better, or maybe more consistently better is the correct wording.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Weave said:

That graph matches what I see.  They were not the better team the last 8 games, regardless of the final score.  They will need to figure it out.  It only tightens up from here.

Fortunately, what those games did show is, they have the talent to get through it if they do figure it out.  They don't need to be perfect, just better, or maybe more consistently better is the correct wording.

What is also very nice is that, although they didn't look great doing so, they banked 20 out of a possible 20 points on the streak.  No one can take those away come crunch time in March.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great thread and OP, @Randall Flagg.

My areas of disagreement:

- Pommer -- I'd give him a B-minus, as he appears to have hit the wall.  So while his start may have exceeded expectations, he seems to have settled back to expectation-level.

- KO -- I'd give him a B -- as I've posted elsewhere, his legs look good, he's playing a strong-on-the-puck game and is on pace for 40-ish points, all of which is good, but he's got 1 goal in his last 13 games and his hands in the O-zone look lousy to me.  I'll be happily surprised if he gets to 20 goals this season.  IMHO, that adds up to exceeding expectations, but not wildly so.

- Sheary -- I'd give him a B -- I think his speed and tenacity, especially on the forecheck, have made him pretty effective.  His absence is a factor in the Sabres backsliding into a 1-line team.

- TT -- I'd give him a B -- he's showing signs of being a multitalented scorer and is pretty dangerous whenever he gets the puck in the O-zone.  I think at this point he's solidly exceeding expectations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess this is me being purely argumentative because I’m not necessarily arguing that the above graph itself is misleading. But I just want to point out that things like “high danger chances” represent arbitrary premises:

1) that shots from a certain area of the ice indicate “better” play.

2) which shots should qualify.

Hockey games are complex and chaotic. Individual skill sets matter. Systems and tactics catering to team strengths and weaknesses matter. When you make a save or score a goal matters. Context matters.

For example, I’d take 1 “high danger” chance from Jeff Skinner over 5 from Zemgus Girgensons. A “low-danger” chance from the blueline from Al McInnis is preferable to a “high-danger” chance from the slot from Bill Hajt. Carey Price was great at stopping all the shots he was supposed to stop, Dominik Hasek at stopping the ones he wasn’t supposed to stop. I’d shoot a lot from the point against Ryan Miller. I’d try a lot of cross ice passes to get Robin Lehner moving.

Carolina might look great on a chart, but that doesn’t mean they are great. It doesn’t even mean they are “carrying the play.” It just means that their players and their style of play matches the arbitrary premises of the rating system.

This isn’t a bash on analytics. Collecting and applying information is good and should be used to find and fix holes in your roster and your system.

I guess this rant is about a growing tendency to use analytics as the ultimate arbiter of how good a player or a team is by Internet fan boys (and to clarify, this isn’t really an issue here, and this certainly isn’t aimed at Duds) who aren’t even watching the players or teams in question.

Indulge in whatever intellectual argument you want, the game is about wins and losses and scoring more goals than the opponent.

Montreal won 10 games in overtime to win the cup in 93. Unsustainable, sure, but nobody gives a *****.

I’ll take the wins over sustainability every time.

Edited by dudacek
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×