Thread: Sergei Fedorov
View Single Post
11-09-2012, 06:57 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by trentmccleary View Post
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.
It's not a perfectly adjusted system; it was basically what I laid out. I didn't make adjustments that first-liners would be adjusted a greater deal than second liners, etc. If I end up managing to find the time to really put in the work on this idea, that will be incorporated. But right now it's basically the idea that each team has somewhere between 3-8 "core" offensive players that they rely on for output, which translates to an average of somewhere between 5-15 points per player.

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).
A more comprehensive system could be constructed; it would likely need to be based off of a combination of points and on-ice goals for (perhaps add the two together, and divide by total team points plus TGF x 4.8, or whatever ratio it would be for PP/PK). That could more properly distribute the actual difference. Until then, we just have "The difference is probably somewhere in this range."

pdd is offline