View Single Post
09-11-2012, 12:47 PM
Student Of The Game
seventieslord's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 31,119
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Do what the teams do. Ignore all individual awards and honours in the evaluation process. Step two ignore all media opinions about player evaluations.
- For post-lockout players who have not regularly received more than token votes for awards (which includes players like Streit and Ehrhoff), I 100% agree. We have seen them and we have much better stats with which we can see the big picture than relying on the opinions of 2-11% of hockey writers.
- For post lockout players who have received significant recognition, I still agree but at the same time the significant recognition was almost certainly merited.
- For pre-lockout players who the majority of us have seen, we should still have enough advanced statistics (particularly ice time era players) and first hand experience watching them to understand their greatness, but token award voting starts to become more important.
- For pre-1998 players who some of us did not see regularly, token award voting becomes even more important, even if it is still a relatively minor aspect.
- For post-expansion players up to 1990, who the majority of us are not old enough to have watched regularly and critically analyze, it becomes that much more important. Not only for the above reason, but also because the writers would have had better knowledge of the players (12-21 teams, not 30) And estimated TOI becomes quite important.
- For pre-expansion players, all-star/Norris voting is probably THE most important objective measure we have for them, so even token award support has to carry some weight. Also, 1) defensemen didn’t score a lot of points and not a lot of defensemen stood out from a “hockey card stats” perspective so there was little chance of point totals skewing perceptions of which players were the best overall, and 2) all the voters saw all the players presumably 14 times a year.

In recent years, more all-star and Norris voting records have been unearthed from 1930 to 1980, and that has been a really helpful tool, allowing our draft lists to better reflect which players recognized as the better players in the league more often. I can think of a half dozen players off the top of my head that it has helped, and a half dozen others who have shown to not be all that special.

But that has also extended to some post-lockout results and I think we should know better.

Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Given how hard it is for defensemen on non-playoff teams to get votes, I think you'd be hard pressed to say Streit was overrated by the voters. I get what you mean about getting massive amounts of PP time, but what about the fact that he didn't have any decent forwards to get the puck to?

Islanders leading scorers:


1. Streit 16-40-56 +5
2. Okposo 18-21-39 -6
3. Weight 10-28-38 -15
4. Guerin 16-20-36 -15
5. Nielson 9-24-33 -4


1. Tavares 24-30-54 -15
2. Okposo 19-33-52 -22
3. Streit 11-38-49 0
4. Moulson 30-18-48 -1
5. Nielson 12-26-38 +4
It kinda falls into the whole “someone has to score on a bad team” saying. But of course, he is a great PP pointman, that is obvious.

Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Streit's 2010 was clearly underrated by the writers because his team didn't make the playoffs, just like his 2008 was overrated (he actually recovered more votes in 2008).
Well, 2008 was obviously overrated, as no 17 minute defenseman should ever be considered top-5 in the NHL by anyone. There is no exception.

2010 underrated? Please explain. Should more than three writers have thought he was top-5 in the NHL that year? Looking at the names that finished ahead of him, I’m more surprised three writers saw fit to mention Streit’s name over at least two of them, than the other way around.

In any case, it’s disingenuous to refer to 3 votes from 133 voters in modern times, as anything meaningful. It’s fluff. One could at least refer to it as somewhat meaningful but acknowledge that there are better ways to judge a player than by using 3 votes. (same goes for a guy like Ehrhoff, if 9 and 12 writers in 2011 didn’t incorrectly name him a top-5 defenseman, we’d just be looking at a guy with 5 seasons as a #1-3 defenseman on good teams, which is a decent 5-year performance but doesn’t set him apart from a bevy of undrafted defensemen. The fact that he was selected as high as he was in the last two drafts is a symptom of overreliance on token voting for a post-lockout player)

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote