ATD Chat Thread XX

[VanIslander]

"Teams are built around game breaking offensive talents. The only defenseman that fits that bill is Orr unfortunately".

That may be my dumb quote of the day. Apparently, guys such as Bourque and Coffey (both top 16 in points playing dman) are not "game breaking offensive talents".

Bourque is clearly #1 dman in NHL career shots.

The only forward with more (a position from which one should shoot more)... is OV.

To be clear: Bourque has more than 1000 shots over #2 MacInnis (harder shot, but Raymond's more legendary accurate a.ka. owning many 4-corner shots ); Bourque has nearly 2000 shots over #3 Coffey.

(There have been about 80 games a year, if healthy; do the math. Ray has been otherworldly in putting shots on net.)

That said, Bourque often defensively put shots on net from downtown to end turnovers against and initiate line changes.

 

[VanIslander]

Most importantly:

 

[seventieslord]

@Bear of Bad News - please delete this if it's not appropriate for me to post this on HFBoards

I have two tickets to the Hockey Hall of Fame game in Toronto (at the Scotiabank Arena) on Sunday November 10th. The game includes a brief ceremony for this year's HOF inductees, and then a (fun but low intensity) all-star game with retired players (some of the bigger names include Lindros, Datsyuk, Getzlaf, Weber, Roenick, Gartner, Turgeon, Bondra, etc).

It's a fun game and I go most years. But I'm being pulled in too many directions this year and need to step back from a few things.

They're in section 117, row 2 (which is actually the first row of the section). I'm asking for face value ($99.50 CDN) - which is less than what comparable tickets are going for on StubHub. Let me know if interested.

Damn, that sounds worth flying in for!

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Damn, that sounds worth flying in for!

No joke, if you fly in, they're yours for free.

(Just let me know if you do that - I have a listing up on Stubhub, which I'd have to take down).

 

[VanIslander]

A coffee with Hockey Outsider & sevenieslord seems like an event worth our participation. If we're invited.

 

[seventieslord]

Every time I go to the greater Toronto area I make sure to let a few hfboards and leafs chat guys in the area know, just in case a meetup is possible.

But you? You're in Korea, aren't you?

 

[seventieslord]

No joke, if you fly in, they're yours for free.

(Just let me know if you do that - I have a listing up on Stubhub, which I'd have to take down).

@Habsfan18

Amanda's not planning on flying anywhere anytime soon. What's your availability like around then?

 

[VanIslander]

Yesh. Now. But it seems like an event worth our participation if you and another ATDer (there must be a GTA'er) attend.

One obstacle to travel is: i have cats. They are 10-year-old part-Angora siblings. I also feed street cats daily (momma cat and orangy for a long time).

The biggest obstacle to travel is: i teach classes five days a week at an academy with ZERO SUBSTITUTE teacher options! The owner of the biz is a long-time friend i joined up with two years ago here. If i could find a sub teacher i'd be THERE! I'd love to attend a hockey event and enjoy it with fellow hockey lovers.

i live in S.Korea where soccer, baseball, basketball and - oddly - women's volleyball, professionally, gets the attention and the popular attention. But not a hint of hockey or football, alas - hence my unlimited data plan.)

 

[Habsfan18]

@Habsfan18

Amanda's not planning on flying anywhere anytime soon. What's your availability like around then?

Hmm, let me see if I can make that work. Would be an awesome time. I'll get back to you.

 

[Ben Grimm]

​

In 1966 the Bs drafted dman Barry Gibbs before Brad Park. The Athletic has Hedman ranked higher than Park.

 

[Professor What]

Is anybody else unhappy with the awards section of the "updated" Hockey Reference pages? They don't highlight second-team all-star selections anymore, and for older players, they don't even list all-star selections on the seasons. They include All-Star game selections now, but honestly, I don't really care about those, because I don't find them as informative.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Crosby hits 1600 points and Malkin 500 goals in the same game tonight.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Make that 1601 and 1602 (OT, GWG) for the ancient Crosby.

The even greyer Malkin has 11 points in his first 5 games (2+9) so far.

Pretty amazing that the Penguins have managed to keep both in the same uniform all these years later. It seems surreal we're coming up on 2 decades. One of the all time great 1-2 punches down the middle. Very fortunate I got to see them so many times, in person or otherwise.

 

[jigglysquishy]

Didn't Mikita and Hull do it?

 

[ImporterExporter]

Didn't Mikita and Hull do it?

No.

They both eclipsed 500 but not while playing together for all 500 each.

 

[tinyzombies]

Interesting idea to compare both careers AND peaks AND pace together, instead of just - his peak is good enough to match up against longevity.

Long tumble for some:

Where do the NHL’s active star forwards rank among the greatest of all-time?

How do Crosby, McDavid, Matthews and more measure up against the best forwards of any eras?

www.dailyfaceoff.com

 

[MadArcand]

How exactly do McDavid and Crosby get more points for awards then Howe??

 

[tinyzombies]

How exactly do McDavid and Crosby get more points for awards then Howe??

More competition? And NHL talent is deep now, so maybe just as deep skillwise as it was then. Dubious claim.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

How exactly do McDavid and Crosby get more points for awards then Howe??

I'm familiar with his system (I was going to write a post about it at some point). Essentially, for forwards, he's taking Hart trophy shares. He's using my old approach (see link).

The results are highly correlated to what I posted there. (Take an excerpt from list Gretzky 59, Crosby 35, Lemieux 34, Ovechkin 29, Jagr 28, Sakic 9. If you take my list and scale Gretzky to 59, you'd get Crosby 33, Lemieux 32, Ovechkin 27, Jagr 26, Sakic 9). Not quite identical, but very close to what I have.

The one thing I can't explain is why he ranks Howe behind Crosby/McDavid. He's either applying some kind of era penalty (which, if you read his blog, seems unlikely - he's very open to considering great players from all eras) or he's simply lacking some data on Howe (if he just used hockey-reference.com, that could explain it).

(EDIT - to be clear, I'm not suggesting that he copied my system. The fact that there are differences is pretty good evidence that he came up with him independently, and got similar but not identical results).

 

[VanIslander]

The results are highly correlated to what I posted there. (Take an excerpt from list Gretzky 59, Crosby 35, Lemieux 34, Ovechkin 29, Jagr 28, Sakic 9. If you take my list and scale Gretzky to 59, you'd get Crosby 33, Lemieux 32, Ovechkin 27, Jagr 26, Sakic 9). Not quite identical, but very close to what I have.

The one thing I can't explain is why he ranks Howe behind Crosby/McDavid. He's either applying some kind of era penalty (which, if you read his blog, seems unlikely - he's very open to considering great players from all eras) or he's simply lacking some data on Howe (if he just used hockey-reference.com, that could explain it).

1. Gretzky continually stands apart from the crowd with analyses.
2. Howe is continually underrated.

 

[tinyzombies]

I'm familiar with his system (I was going to write a post about it at some point). Essentially, for forwards, he's taking Hart trophy shares. He's using my old approach (see link).

The results are highly correlated to what I posted there. (Take an excerpt from list Gretzky 59, Crosby 35, Lemieux 34, Ovechkin 29, Jagr 28, Sakic 9. If you take my list and scale Gretzky to 59, you'd get Crosby 33, Lemieux 32, Ovechkin 27, Jagr 26, Sakic 9). Not quite identical, but very close to what I have.

The one thing I can't explain is why he ranks Howe behind Crosby/McDavid. He's either applying some kind of era penalty (which, if you read his blog, seems unlikely - he's very open to considering great players from all eras) or he's simply lacking some data on Howe (if he just used hockey-reference.com, that could explain it).

(EDIT - to be clear, I'm not suggesting that he copied my system. The fact that there are differences is pretty good evidence that he came up with him independently, and got similar but not identical results).

Shouldn't there be a tier system across eras. If there are more players in an elite tier, it should be harder to win, and you should get more points? Not saying that's the case here, just in general. Similar to a roster-size adjustment, except it's tiers. And apply it to point finishes maybe??, etc.

 

[VanIslander]

I remain:

Tier 1: 9 & 99
Tier 2: what ifs Orr & Mario.
Tier 2b: Hasek & Roy

Everyone else thereafter.

 

[tinyzombies]

I remain:

Tier 1: 9 & 99
Tier 2: what ifs Orr & Mario.
Tier 2b: Hasek & Roy

Everyone else thereafter.

I mean for each era separately

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Shouldn't there be a tier system across eras. If there are more players in an elite tier, it should be harder to win, and you should get more points? Not saying that's the case here, just in general. Similar to a roster-size adjustment, except it's tiers. And apply it to point finishes maybe??, etc.

I think it depends on what your objective is - are you trying to compile data, or make an argument?

If you're just trying to compile data, then the numbers that are presented are (more or less) accurate. It's no different than saying that Jamie Benn won an Art Ross, but Steve Yzerman didn't. It's a factual summary of what actually happened.

If you're trying to make an argument (or a greatest players list) - yes, for sure, you need to consider the context. (That's when you get into comments like "Yzerman would have won at least 1 Art Ross if not for Gretzky/Lemieux, and Benn peaked during an unusually weak season").

Factual summaries can (and should) support a position, but they're never a position on their own.

 

[VanIslander]

... Jamie Benn won an Art Ross, but Steve Yzerman didn't. It's a factual summary of what actually happened.

If you're trying to make an argument (or a greatest players list) - yes, for sure, you need to consider the context...

Indeed.