View Single Post
Old
09-27-2012, 01:16 PM
  #71
pitseleh
Registered User
 
pitseleh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,645
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drop the Sopel View Post
The obvious oversight in this article is the fact games played isn't factored in. Booth gets pro-rated to a 40 point player but the same isn't done for the dozens and dozens of other injured players...

Not to mention the point totals of players on weak teams that can't score is irrelevent. The objective isn't to be a poor or average hockey team... If it were, Gillis would have no reason to bring in another forward.
I agree, but on a per minute basis things are the same - he was 160th at EV and 30th on the PP (with GP/TOI limits to eliminate small sample sizes), which makes him comfortably a top-6 forward. His EV productivity was also hurt by an abnormally low EV SH%. Even if you think Booth is generating lower quality chances than average, it's still very unlikely that he's generating chances that are 25-30% worse in quality than an average NHLer.

pitseleh is offline