View Single Post
09-28-2012, 04:04 AM
Bleach Clean
Registered User
Bleach Clean's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,818
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Drop the Sopel View Post
The oversight is not factoring in games played and pace, which the article discounts entirely. Those numbers look a lot differrent if you do so. I would prefer to see what the totals look like factoring in points/game from top 6 forwards that play 40 games or more...

Booth's point totals are okay if you look at his pace, if you look at strictly his production like they did in that article it's not as impressive - he's averaged 29 points over the last 3 years and wouldn't be classified as a top 6 forward.

If all Gillis wanted out of his 2nd line forwards was a 40 point pace he wouldn't have gone after David Booth in the first place to replace Mason Raymond on the 2nd line. In reality, the bar must be set much higher if you have championship aspirations.

Putting aside the motivation for Gillis to pursue Booth for a minute, let's look at the argument this article poses: By the strictest definition, people look at point totals first to determine top6 capable players. Do you disagree with this basic premise?

Meaning, is looking at the top 180 players' point totals disingenuous? If so, then you disagree with the premise outside of discussing how Booth fits within it. If not, then we have a basis for further argument.

Now, assuming you agree with the premise, I think it's better to take a larger sample than having an arbitrary cut off of 40 games and pro-rating totals alongside it. In this way, we get more stable results. So let's look closer at this:

In 2011-2012, the top 180 forward points cut off was 32 points.

2010-2011 - As pointed out through this article, the cut off was 34 points.

2009-2010 - The cut off was 33 points.

2008-2009 - The cut off was 35 points.

2007-2008 - The cut off was 33 points.

Hmmm I'm noticing a trend here... If we accept that injuries for differing players happen at different times, and if you take a large enough sample, we should be able to see patterns persist regardless of injured players affecting the outcome. Over the last 5 yrs, the range has been from 32 points to 35 points. The article purports the balance of 34 points to be the cut off... I'd say the theory still holds water without pro-rating the totals of injured players over _only_ this season.

For Booth, it means that he was definitely a top6 forward in 2008 and 2011. He was a 1st liner in 2009. Injured in 2010. And finally, pro-rated to be top6 in 2012...

Basically, if you want to argue semantics between Pitseleh's "comfortably in the top6" to being a "below average 2nd line forward", that's up to you. But if either case is true, and by your very own verbiage he's still a 2nd liner, then your comment on him being a step above waivers cannot be. Hence, the outlandish nature of your initial statements on Booth.

Bleach Clean is online now