No interest in a multi year cap dump

Sure deal

He’s not really a cap dump he’s still a capable player. Just is on a very cap strapped team

Bouchard is better than parayko

We dont have a need or a want to take on salary so its a cap dump for us

That's just not true lol.

Defensively no, offensively yes. That stated, Blues should make the move if given the opportunity. Bouchard still has room for growth, Parayko does not.

It is though

">

">

I wasn't trying to say they shouldn't make the move. But stating that Bouchard is just purely better just isn't true. They're used in completely different roles. I do agree Bouchard's offensive upside is much higher than Parayko's. The issue at hand within moving Parayko is the whole defense crumbles even more if he is moved. He's starting 62% of his shifts in the DZ he's matched within the shutdown role, and he's partnered with Nick Leddy to be a shutdown defender. His stats are bad for a lot of reasons. Most of them are pretty clear to see why as well. For reference he has 2 less points than Bouchard does on a team that scores a boatload more, however, Parayko does get quite a few more minutes/game

I have this problem with using advanced analytics in hockey because I don't fully understand how they factor in Quality of Competition or Quality of Teammates. Could you enlighten me?

This model does isolate players using QOC and QOT. Here’s a write up on how they do it

https://evolving-hockey.com/glossary/regularized-adjusted-plus-minus/

I didn't really see anything on measuring QoC/QoT. I just fail to see how this can be a sole source of comparison I guess is the best way to put it. I think it generally gives a good view of how a player leans in terms of usage. I just fail to see how it can measure the difference between being on the ice 1/3rd of the time with a McDavid or however many minutes he is and then scale it that way I guess is the best way to put it. I don't think it's any secret that Edmonton scores at a much much higher rate than St. Louis. I just find it hard to really put a percentage value like it does on a defensemans output on the situation and not clearly define it as being a part of the product of surroundings.

Sorry the bar chart has spoken. It does not need to be analyzed or questioned; simply look at the bars, they have quantified a numerical value of the players that cannot be debated.

Are you subbed to the site to be able to see this? No hate, just curious. I'd love to have access to it too, but it always tells me I need to pay

Yes it’s $5 per month

So are you just ignoring the fact Parayko has played 400 more minutes despite the fact he's played in 5 less games than Bouchard? Also ignoring zone start percentage which is lopsided in Bouchard's favor.

the model accounts for zone starts . Most players zone starts are on the fly anyways. Why does TOI matter? What matters is how effective a player is in those minutes

TOI is a reflection of the players usage. 350 minutes is equivalent to playing nearly 6 more games in a shorter time span. But the thing is that, and this is my problem with analytics in hockey, is that hockey is a team sport. This doesn't account for teammates on the ice with you at any given time. Given the lackluster play of the Blues in general it's no wonder why his numbers are lower. Zone start percentage can't be factored in to this equation that easily because of the team game factor.

Analytics does account for teammates and competition. Paraykos analytics have been declining for 3 straight years, the blues are mediocre , they’re not a bottom feeder. Parayko getting big minutes is a big reason why the blues have regressed as a whole

They don't account for teammates. That's the problem. They try to isolate it to only the player is on the ice, but that is impossible in a team game where there are 5 other players on the ice to account for. Analytics also don't tell the story of player positioning. If analytics were the end all be all, then teams wouldn't be interested in him, yet they are. If you rely on analytics to win, you'll lose just about every time.