View Single Post
Old
02-21-2013, 01:50 PM
  #68
Grind
Stomacheache AllStar
 
Grind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Manitoba
Posts: 4,146
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy66 View Post
This sounds like a job for Garrett9 (as he is rushing to the phone booth to put on his super hero stat outfit )

But yes it would be interesting to compare ROR, Little and Burmi based on TOI, compeition and the corsi stuff....gah I may have to admit I am getting interested and more and more intrigued in the advanced stats that Garret puts up
well i nlou of garrett i did osme peaking.

now i may just be an understudy but ROR last year looks like the better player.

ROR started on th o zone less, faced tougher competition, and beat them, scored at a considerably higher rate per 60, as well as had a better penalty differntial then burmi.

now i don't have my corsi numbers totally strait, as in which one means which, but ROR's were higher, and positive across the board compared to burmis (negative aside from corsi-rel and corsi on).

ROR had a lower on ice sh% then burmi, but got stronger goaltending, but burmi still benefited more from the luck numbers (combined better on ice shot % and on ice save %).

figuring that out you end up with 1.32 points per 60 for burmi, and 1.75 points per 60 for ROR.


ROR had 230+ more ES minutes then burmi as well, so the differnce might not be as high as it seems.

True, ROR had better linemates (primarily Lando and Hejduk) but he didn't have an inflated secondary assist total, meaning he wasn't getting "lucky" points.

Usage is interesting as ROR had 188.95 minute son hte poerplay, 1st for centers on his team, while burmi had only 92, 5th for centers on his team.

PK wise though[B] ROR[/B ]had 93 minutes, where's burmi had 134, so burmi was used much more defensively.

On the power play minute burmi did have, he as average luck wise (1000) but had 1.95 points per 60

ROR on the other hand had 4.76 Points per 60 while having better luck (1047 but i don't know how the luck stat, pdo, works for PP/PK time or if its still relevent)


Sorry i don't have nice tables....

In short it looks like ROR was a better player across the board, but he also got better opportunities powerplay wise, but worse opportunities 5v5. But he is not looking better just because of those opportunities. He got harder minutes then burmi and produces more 5v5. He produces more against tougher competition at even strength then burmi does, and also produces more per minute on the power play then burmi does.

he was pretty much a better player in every measurable way.

If i could remember BB tables i'd do it but since i can't you have to tak emy word for it, or check out behidnthenet.ca

[edit] Some of this post has been edited


Last edited by Grind: 02-21-2013 at 01:54 PM. Reason: bold edited
Grind is offline   Reply With Quote