I can 100% get behind your point with this. You explained it well. Thank you.

iM jUsT A gUy WiTh a bRaiN

Hockey is evolving. It's time to embrace that. If you want to watch it only, fine, but you'll miss a lot of subtilities that the human eye doesn't record.

I only know analytics basics.

How is Weber's season looking? I've heard he's playing pretty brutally last few weeks, is that showing in the stats as well?

It is. 0.7 xWAR compared to 1.9 last year and 2.6 the year before.

So a lot of the Jones talk in here can be applied to Weber as well?

Yes I guess but Weber's stats are still better than Jones.

This is well said, I believe analytics are crucial to analyzing a player because no matter how much you think you know about hockey you don't see everything that happens during a game. I saw someone on here say "obviously the stat geeks haven't found analytics that measure a defenseman's ability well" this is likely because the analytics didn't show him what he wanted to see. And there are people who I believe use analytics too much to evaluate players. I believe there is a happy medium to be found that nobody really knows where it is, because as much as analytics help there are areas of the game that no analytics can measure, I also believe people refuse to use them because it doesn't tell the story they want to hear, so finding a realistic balance is important.

Regarding Jones, while he may hurt CBJ the most he's by no means their worst player, as you mentioned he is just severely over utilized, proper usage and I think he's an effective NHL dman, not an elite one, but effective.

Do you not like analytics because they don't tell you the story you want to see? Tampa and Colorado have used analytics for a few years to build their teams, St. Louis started to use them a year before they won the cup, seems to have worked out for them. Analytics are important cuz no matter how much you think you know, you don't see everything that happens in a game. They are not everything, but they have value or else NHL clubs wouldn't be using them if they were useless.

The worst player on Vegas is one of Reaves or Carrier. Coughlan is a rookie defenseman play wing and defense around injuries.

They use analytics in amateur scouting. It’s like 2% of what they do.

Analytics are dumb, but not as dumb as those that use them. It’s a subjective game.

You think Seth jones is the worst player on the columbus blue jackets. There is no greater argument for how flawed analytics are than that.

Free advice: don’t use tHe WhOlE CaPs thing. When you do, it says to everyone reading it: I have absolutely nothing clever to say. Not a thing. Nothing funny. Nothing smart. Nothing witty. So instead I’m going to use this internet thing where i hit the shift key every now and then.

It really is pitiful. Be clever if you’re going to try to give me crap, i won’t mind.

Have you looked into who is on the ice for the opposition when he’s out there? He’s having a down year, and is still one of their best players. He’s asked to do a lot.

Can you think of a time where a guy that’s obviously the worst player on his team marched into free agency and walked away with a huge ticket?

Colorado went after Toews instead of the other 30 defenseman in his same value range as he had good analytics, the old school teams with old school coaches don't use them but the progressive thinking teams and coaching staffs use them, I know for a fact Keefe uses them. You can call people who use analytics dumb all you want but it's an objective opinion with no support.

It’s a tool to measure like, maybe 5% of variables. I’ll admit it has a little value for forwards, especially middle six guys, but for d men, it’s virtually useless.

Matt murray got a big contract based on reputation, the same will happen to Jones

Who were the other 30? We’re they available? Did they have cost certainty, or were they free agents?

In reality, someone in the room might have said, “oooooh, toews has good numbers,” at which point Sakic probably said, “no crap dude, thanks for the help, we have eyes.” It also really helps that he was very very very available.

And he’ll probably go back to being the guy he’s been his entire career, rather than the guy he’s been in a weird pandemic season without a pre season, with nothing but intradivsion play. Just a guess.

Matt Murray was a quasi good example though.

This year probably bumped jones from a 10 million contract to 7.

Last season Jones was a #3 at best. The issue is people act like he’s this top 10 defenseman, which he’s not. He’s a solid 2nd pairing D

5%???? Like come on man you can’t discredit the value of them
My stating some arbitrary value in an effort to pass off personal feelings as a data

If you need an example of the power of analytics used properly and in line with the coaching staffs deployment and systems, look no further than the avs, they are built by targeting players with certain skill sets

It’s not a fluke they are a top team in the league housing teams in terms of shot share etc

Analytics ignores skills. Completely. It uses numbers. Watching evaluates skills. Analytics doesn’t understand the difference between a lucky play, and a skillful play that end in the same result.

It does not ignore skill, and Im now starting to believe you don’t grasp the concept, as you use analytics as a blanket statement

That is what we mean when she say context is important, you use live game feed to break down what the data is telling you

But the data doesn’t lie and you based on your comments I get the sense you believe it does

Lucky play,,,,PDO, that is what that measures, so to your point it does understand a lucky play

Yes quality of competition is measured, and he plays against top opponents while getting crushed, so planting too much against competition he can not manage, so like I said his deployment is a major issue for his poor his impacts are

How can it not ignore skill? It’s a number... let me ask you a question, from an analytic standpoint, what is the difference between these two plays?

1. Defensemen tries to clear the puck. It banks off player X, going directly to player y, for a perfect one timer pass. He scores. Player x gets the primary assist.
2. Defensemen tries to clear the puck. Player X expertly knocks it down, and in one swift motion kicks it to his stick, fakes a shot, and slides it over to player Y for an easy one timer goal.

You really aren’t grasping the convo...you want to talk about one certain thing when ignoring the Dozen other metrics here

No one is discrediting “skill or eye tests” as you put it for “numbers”. Skilled plays can still be tracked with primary points, controlled zone exits etc etc, it takes skill to do those things, you want got use the build up of a moment to an end result as a weird metricX

If there was value in tracking kicking pucks to your stick let 60, guys would track it

Data is projecting and tracking of information, I don’t see how using non qualifiable descriptors like “expertly” “perfect” strengthen you’re counter points, it’s just buzz words trying to make what is pretty routine in every game as a skill set that can’t be tracked,