View Single Post
04-12-2013, 03:05 PM
Et le But
Registered User
Et le But's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: New York
Country: Argentina
Posts: 18,982
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by LyricalLyricist View Post
But opposition's 'top line' definition changes so much depending on which argument people want to spin.

Originally, it was he's weak defensively so cant play vs their top offensive lines which is fair. Then it was noted he plays vs some very good defensive lines but people are comparing the offensive stats now and making the same justifications.

FWIW, offensive zone starts is a fair argument but coincidently that implies he's facing some above average faceoff men for the defensive side but we rarely see that brought up.
What it means is he's playing against mainly "third liners" and some fourth liners, whatever that means. It's not a science and it's something plenty of us have argued plenty of times when it comes to calling Eller a "third liner" or whether or not Plekanec is a "first liner" or not. What it does mean is the the type of players Desharnais & co. play against are the type that start in their own zone, which means they are expected to exert energy on defense more or at least as much as they do on offense. This includes everything from two way threats like Eller to defensive specialists to tweeners put there because nobody knows what else to do with them.

What that does mean is Desharnais does play against quality competition at times, including defenses that are difficult to break down. Which means Desharnais has to at least be above replacement level offensively to produce, which he clearly is. What it also means is that he can focus on the offensive side of things more exclusively than others on this team which makes his job easier in that regard. I'm sure you will agree that Desharnais doesn't have to fight for the puck as much as other centers on this team do. Would Plekanec and Eller be more productive offensively in Desharnais' role? Most likely. Would they be significantly more productive than Desharnais? This is debatable, in my opinion Plekanec would, but not to a significant degree. And having Plekanec get 60 points in a 2 way role is far more valuable than having him get 70 in a 1 way role.

And yes, sometimes "third lines" are more dangerous than "first lines". What we do mean though, is that if Therrien knows that the the opposing coach just put out what he thinks is their best or even second best offensive line, he's putting out Plekanec, and if not Plek, then Eller or maybe even Halpern in some situations.

Originally Posted by LyricalLyricist View Post
The new thing now is "TOI per win/loss" which is just stupid. Yet, people look for stuff to support their claims not to discuss hockey. It's a discussion board not a I'm-right-you're-wrong board.
No arguments here. I'm sure this argument could work in some cases (if Boullion is playing more than Subban, it's probably effecting our win/loss record), but in this thread it seems cherry picked.

Originally Posted by LyricalLyricist View Post
If there's one thing that annoys me the most on this forum(hf in general) is people's use of stats. I feel people use biased stats to prove a point and it's annoying because they assume people won't see a flaw in their logic. It's not to say ALL stats are false, that would be extreme. Every stat is useful! Just context is important and so is mentioning a complete statistic.
I agree completely, and if I use stats more than most, it's because I hate to see them butchered for someone's agenda. In this thread, stats are being cherry picked by a few extreme posters on both sides. There's nothing wrong with using stats to fit your argument though, especially when they show an obvious trend. But I'm at least trying to frame things within context

Originally Posted by LyricalLyricist View Post
QCOM annoys me a bit because one minute people use it as a definition for offensive prowess and another people try to justify defensive strength using it.
QCOM is pretty useless without context. It's one of my favourite stats for comparisons though, as long as the comparisons are sane.

Originally Posted by LyricalLyricist View Post
Corsi is just using something that's somewhat correlated as a baseline. Shot differentials. Not really quality of shots, just shot differentials. Then we compare it relative to each other and make conclusions. It's an interesting way to use stats but not fool proof. For instance, if a line shoots often but low quality shots their value will be deemed higher than someone who shoots less often but better quality shots.

The idea is shots eventually win you games and the majority of the time you cannot be outshot and win long term. Fair enough but as long as people realize what this is based on.
Let me put it this way with Corsi, Desharnais has the highest corsi of any center on this team this year; last year only Gomez and Dumont had higher. Eller and Plekanec have slightly negative corsi. As far as I'm concerned it's a useless measure by itself. However, for an "exploitation" role having negative corsi would be unacceptable. Desharnais doesn't have this problem, so there's nothing to dicuss here. I think possession stats are more important looking at the team as a whole though.

As far as shots go, it's possible to be effective being both a high volume, low accuracy shooter (Gionta made a career of this!) and a high accuracy opportunist shooter, but it's pretty obvious if you are outshooting the oppisition by a considerable amount you are more likely to win. This doesn't take into account goaltending though, which makes or breaks team. This picture sums it up far better than I can: Basically, teams with high possession are 3/4ths more successful in the playoffs (poor Sharks). Since 2008 the only team to win the cup with a sub-.500 Fenwick was the 2009 Pens, and that's only because of the poor start of the season under MT - they well over it after Bylsma took over.

Originally Posted by LyricalLyricist View Post
PK plays vs other team's top lines and his rel QOC corsi is less than Desharnais. I guess he plays sheltered minutes? O-zone starts above 50% as well
Last I checked PK's QOC is greater than DD's, as his his starts. His stats are skewed by his usage for the first few weeks after holding out - another problem with stats is that this season is distorted by the lockout, individual games can mess the numbers up. Therrien has been using PK in a harder and harder role as the season has gone on.

Et le But is offline