View Single Post
11-09-2012, 04:07 PM
Join Date: Mar 2002
Originally Posted by
eva unit zero
I weighted the 5-15 range based on the idea that teams have somewhere between 3-8 "core" offensive players depending on depth and team system, basically the "go-to" guys who were out there when a goal was needed. For some teams, such as a Rick Nash Columbus team, the same guy(s) were always out there. It's unlikely that Datsyuk would pick up the full 15 if the West were adjusted to be scoring like the East using a method to account for such things - probably closer to 5 or 10. But Staal would probably lose somewhere between 10-15, as Pittburgh's offense is not as deep; it simply rides a few highly talented players.
At some point I intend to actually do a study of scoring distribution in this regard, which would give a much better picture of how to evaluate players across division and conference lines. One example is that in Team 5/5 GF/GA ratio last season, the top two teams were both Central teams. The Central had three of the top ten and four of the top 14. The Atlantic had 3 of the top 7. In team +/-, the Central was 2/3, 3/8, and 4/11 while the Atlantic was again 3/7.
So we clearly have two top divisions statistically here just from that few moments of analysis. But this thread isn't about all of that, we'll leave it for later. The general point is that the East scores more than the West, and it's most notably pointed out when you compare the top scorers (almost all Eastern forwards), and then compare team totals (most Eastern teams are in the top 15, most Western teams are in the bottom 15). Those simple facts provide the indication that it's not just a few high end talents on top of the leaderboard, but a more widespread phenomenon leading to the Eastern players posting higher totals. It's almost a reverse of the 90s, when the East was highly locked down and the West was more free-flowing offensively.
You're still being way too generous with those points.
If Staal is 10-15, than Neal might be 15-20 and Malkin might be 20-25. Even the low end of each of those numbers is 45 points out of the 40-ish you had to allocate... and nobody else on the team benefitted at all?
You're talking about 3-8 players primarily benefitting; IMO, the list that I posted accounts for that much better than what you're posting.
3 players = 12 / 40 points (nearly 1/3)
5 players = 19 / 40 points (nearly 1/2)
8 players = 28 / 40 points (more than 2/3)
Leaving 12 points for the bottom 10 depth players to split.
Exaggerating the differences the way you did for the two players in your specific comparison makes it appear as if you were just trying to invalidate all production numbers in the East to suit whatever you're arguing on a given day. That is, if the way you're doing this became popular or you just liked arguing between Pitt & Det... then I'd expect that after all of the comparisons had been done individually over as many as 20 different threads, that your method would end up closer to tallying up as a 100 goal difference (totalling 250 points) instead of 16 goals (totalling 40 points).
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by trentmccleary