ATD Chat Thread XX

[jigglysquishy]

Makar has now tied Brent Burns for most goals in a season by an active defenceman at 29. Mike Green at 31 is the only one with more since 1992-93

 

[Habsfan18]

Alex Ovechkin has just tied Gretzky.

Incredible.

 

[Habsfan18]

 

[Dr John Carlson]

A real privilege to watch him since I was just a kid. My GOAT!

 

[Professor What]

That was a sight to see. I'm going to do my dead level best to try to watch Sunday.

 

[VanIslander]

Gretzky still easily is 50 playoff goals ahead, when it matters most.

Ovechkin has less playoff goals than Pavelski and Ciccarelli.

 

[VanIslander]

Makar has now tied Brent Burns for most goals in a season by an active defenceman at 29. Mike Green at 31 is the only one with more since 1992-93

Markar has hit 30 with a 3-point night.

He ain't done.

 

[Professor What]

Well, the bad news is, I won't get to see the Caps game tomorrow, so if Ovi gets 895, I'll miss it.

The good news is, my dark theme is back on the forum!

 

[GKJ]

Well, the bad news is, I won't get to see the Caps game tomorrow, so if Ovi gets 895, I'll miss it.

The good news is, my dark theme is back on the forum!

He’s gonna wait to score at home.

 

[Habsfan18]

Ovechkin. 895.

 

[jigglysquishy]

I was at the Blackhawks game last night. Got to see Crosby, Malkin, and Bedard watch Ovechkin's 895 on the jumbotron.

 

[Habsfan18]

Likely won't get the record but I think he has a chance at 70. Either way, super impressive rookie campaign from him. He's so damn fun to watch.

 

[Johnny Engine]

View attachment 1009322

Likely won't get the record but I think he has a chance at 70. Either way, super impressive rookie campaign from him. He's so damn fun to watch.

Every other season on that list happened in the 80s.
Question is if years from now we see the 20s as another repeat of that decade where younger guys can come in, play loose and put up big numbers early on. If so, Hutson doesn't look quite  as impressive as it does now, but even so, that list of players is no joke.

 

[Johnny Engine]

For the record, Makar had 76 in his first 82. Now, he flat out missed a dozen games in both of his first two seasons, so it's not just the shutdown and bubble season slowing him down, and there's no reason to compensate for him being a little less durable than some other guys. Assuming he would have played about 80% of the 19-20 season without a virus intervening, he'd have around 60 points flat at the pace he started his career with.

 

[Dr John Carlson]

Not looking forward to (likely) seeing Lane versus us in Round 1. Even less so with Demidov coming...

 

[tinyzombies]

Every other season on that list happened in the 80s.
Question is if years from now we see the 20s as another repeat of that decade where younger guys can come in, play loose and put up big numbers early on. If so, Hutson doesn't look quite  as impressive as it does now, but even so, that list of players is no joke.

Hutson doesn't play loose, his defensive game is solid and the team has adjusted to his style, which was the problem early on. Every partner sees a big numbers boost next to him. He's top 3 in the league in stripped pucks, and is amazing at surfing bigger opponents off the puck. I never see him out of position. The only issue is turnovers sometimes, though that's worth the trade-off, for sure. and he's become selective about when he forces things. He needs help netfront sometimes, but not on the boards- he always gets body position and rarely loses puck battles. Doesn't take many big hits either. Also, his shot is average, but his release and timing and ability to get the puck through traffic for tips and rebounds is excellent. He was above average speed in a straight line earlier this year, but even that seems to have improved. And we know what he can do in a jagged line.. and now he finally has a top notch partner in Guhle and is going next level even more. But after that our blueline is patchwork and band-aids and a hope and a prayer. He comes by his offense honestly tho, those numbers aren't inflated, he creates every bit of that, and when Demidov hits his stride, the numbers will get even better.

 

[tinyzombies]

I've seen adjusted history cards out there (on Twitter). ATD needs to do something like that for VsX, no?

 

[Johnny Engine]

My day job is graphic design, so it's certainly very possible to create something similar. On the other hand, it is a bit of an investment of effort and I've more or less abandoned my personal social media channels, so I'd have to find some other reason for why I'd bother to make something like that. If you guys in this community ever intend to use them for anything, perhaps. We'll see if the time and motivation arises.

 

[tinyzombies]

My day job is graphic design, so it's certainly very possible to create something similar. On the other hand, it is a bit of an investment of effort and I've more or less abandoned my personal social media channels, so I'd have to find some other reason for why I'd bother to make something like that. If you guys in this community ever intend to use them for anything, perhaps. We'll see if the time and motivation arises.

My day job is graphic design, so it's certainly very possible to create something similar. On the other hand, it is a bit of an investment of effort and I've more or less abandoned my personal social media channels, so I'd have to find some other reason for why I'd bother to make something like that. If you guys in this community ever intend to use them for anything, perhaps. We'll see if the time and motivation arises.

We already have the numbers in spreadsheets. Would be nice to see size, speed, etc included as well as pace. How to credit those that did the work tho? I just want to see the cards. ChatGPT took a swing at it, but forgot to include V7G... and there's no playoff stuff or pace. Probably don't need positional and rush defense ratings either for a winger, since we don't have that info, but back then stay in the lanes guy so he was probably solid. Downgraded his skating too. Be nice to have top speed and speed bursts like NHL Edge - his top speed would be 98 or whatever, but not too many speed bursts in the games I saw on Youtube - he was more a predator, coasting around until he saw a chance to use his speed. Anyway, this is a mess.

 

[jigglysquishy]

Montreal Gazette, April 4, 1952

Newsy Lalonde had been quoted recently as saying that Gordie Howe was his choice as the best he had ever seen. Better than Howie Morenz or Rocket Richard or Elmer Lach or Milt Schmidt or Frank Nighbor or any of the other old-time greats.

Lynn Patrick was asked about this. "Howe is just a kid and still developing. Maybe he'll be better than any of them before he's through, but I'm still sticking with Schmidt."

He was asked about Rocket Richard

"He's the most dangerous play in the league. You've got to watch him every second he's on the ice. If you relax at all he's apt to get the goal that will beat you. He's like all those great scorers - once he gets a whiff of that net he's gone. You heard about Gordie Howe and The Rocket these days, but there was a right-winger who has to be bracketed with them. That's Bill Cook. You could've give Bill any more room than you give Richard or Howe."

 

[Habsfan18]

Гретцки – величайший хоккеист в истории по версии Федорова. Овечкин – 2-й, Кросби – 3-й, Ягр – 4-й, Дацюк – 5-й

– Кого вы считаете величайшими хоккеистами всех времен? Можете назвать свою пятерку лучших? – На мой взгляд, Уэйн Гретцки – номер один. После него я бы назвал Алекса Овечкина .

www.sports.ru

Sergei Fedorov's top 5 all-time is umm..interesting.

1. Gretzky
2. Ovechkin
3. Crosby
4. Jagr
5. Datsyuk

 

[Johnny Engine]

We already have the numbers in spreadsheets. Would be nice to see size, speed, etc included as well as pace. How to credit those that did the work tho? I just want to see the cards. ChatGPT took a swing at it, but forgot to include V7G... and there's no playoff stuff or pace. Probably don't need positional and rush defense ratings either for a winger, since we don't have that info, but back then stay in the lanes guy so he was probably solid. Downgraded his skating too. Be nice to have top speed and speed bursts like NHL Edge - his top speed would be 98 or whatever, but not too many speed bursts in the games I saw on Youtube - he was more a predator, coasting around until he saw a chance to use his speed. Anyway, this is a mess.

A few thoughts on the numbers we use in the ATD, some of which addresses your post, others are more general comments.

- The word "adjusted" gives me the piles. The implication that the numbers that were measured at any point in history are wrong and should be improved is wrong, and there's no clarity on the face of these adjustments that suggest what we should be adjusting to - the total historical average? The average for the current season? The average for the last 5 years? In addition, all of those are subject to change. This goes for both offense, and body measurements.
- Vs# metrics are more honest in that they express what their names say they do - a ratio between a real number and another real number. It's no more of a "crunched number" than save percentage is.
- I'm of two minds when it comes to VsX, versus other Vs# metric where the number is static. VsX does a much better job of adapting to changing conditions, but also requires a giant asterisk in the place of "X either means 2, or the next number down if 1 is 10 percent or more ahead of 2, and keeps moving down every time you see a 10% gap, oh and by the way we have a bunch of additional rules for war, Bobby Orr, and for reasons I can't fully remember, Andy Bathgate". In any event, I think it's honest enough to say that X is "the first guy in the pack", but that it takes a worrying amount of screwing around to find the pack.
- In my most recent bios, I've found the average height and weight for an NHL player in the median year of their career, and written down how much they deviated from it. So Gordie Howe is +1 inches and +25 pounds from the average guy in 1959. When I imagine ATD players competing against each other, Howe becomes 6'1" and 225 pounds in my mind, if only because 6'0" and 200 lbs are round numbers and not far off the average at some points in history, though I would never write that as his measurements because they're wrong, as per my stance on adjustments.
- Overpass's work on special teams usage is as good as one could possibly hope for. It might be a bit cleaner if the usage and quality numbers could be combined into a single figure, but I don't think we've ever done that.
- I don't believe the grades for certain skills can really be arrived at in an honest and satisfying way. Ultimately we're all making our own choices here for how to value the way these skills stacked up against their era, and how they developed over the course of careers that had many twists and turns. I think this is one area where you just have to read the book, watch the film. I don't mind the idea of finding a single pull quote about a player's most interesting attribute, but I ain't doing the work.
- We are absolutely not making up information that was never recorded, there's no need for that at all. I'm also of the opinion that most stats from contemporary cards like "rush defense" are horribly understood by 90% of the hockey fans I talk to, and don't at all translate to opinion-based analysis.

 

[tinyzombies]

A few thoughts on the numbers we use in the ATD, some of which addresses your post, others are more general comments.

- The word "adjusted" gives me the piles. The implication that the numbers that were measured at any point in history are wrong and should be improved is wrong, and there's no clarity on the face of these adjustments that suggest what we should be adjusting to - the total historical average? The average for the current season? The average for the last 5 years? In addition, all of those are subject to change. This goes for both offense, and body measurements.
- Vs# metrics are more honest in that they express what their names say they do - a ratio between a real number and another real number. It's no more of a "crunched number" than save percentage is.
- I'm of two minds when it comes to VsX, versus other Vs# metric where the number is static. VsX does a much better job of adapting to changing conditions, but also requires a giant asterisk in the place of "X either means 2, or the next number down if 1 is 10 percent or more ahead of 2, and keeps moving down every time you see a 10% gap, oh and by the way we have a bunch of additional rules for war, Bobby Orr, and for reasons I can't fully remember, Andy Bathgate". In any event, I think it's honest enough to say that X is "the first guy in the pack", but that it takes a worrying amount of screwing around to find the pack.
- In my most recent bios, I've found the average height and weight for an NHL player in the median year of their career, and written down how much they deviated from it. So Gordie Howe is +1 inches and +25 pounds from the average guy in 1959. When I imagine ATD players competing against each other, Howe becomes 6'1" and 225 pounds in my mind, if only because 6'0" and 200 lbs are round numbers and not far off the average at some points in history, though I would never write that as his measurements because they're wrong, as per my stance on adjustments.
- Overpass's work on special teams usage is as good as one could possibly hope for. It might be a bit cleaner if the usage and quality numbers could be combined into a single figure, but I don't think we've ever done that.
- I don't believe the grades for certain skills can really be arrived at in an honest and satisfying way. Ultimately we're all making our own choices here for how to value the way these skills stacked up against their era, and how they developed over the course of careers that had many twists and turns. I think this is one area where you just have to read the book, watch the film. I don't mind the idea of finding a single pull quote about a player's most interesting attribute, but I ain't doing the work.
- We are absolutely not making up information that was never recorded, there's no need for that at all. I'm also of the opinion that most stats from contemporary cards like "rush defense" are horribly understood by 90% of the hockey fans I talk to, and don't at all translate to opinion-based analysis.

I could care less about hockey fans, most are casual, but I guess some people who did the work would want to monetize. I just want an accurate snapshot of players I can look at for fun.

 

[Beliveau]

2+ O6 teams have made the playoffs every season.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Damien Cox (Toronto Star) just wrote an article explaining why he doesn't have Ovechkin in his all-time top 20. There are some strange rankings on the list (I would guess this is a result of Cox favouring the era he grew up watching). Steve Yzerman is in the top ten, while Kurri and Bossy are in the top twenty. He has Ovechkin in the "next" group (21st to 33rd) along with Beliveau and Hull (way too low), Fedorov, Bure and Chara (far too high) - and Scott Niedermayer (but no mention of Fetisov, Robinson, or Chelios). [EDIT - in fairness to Cox, this is an NHL ranking, so the exclusion of Fetisov is fine]

Over the years I've found Cox's articles superficial but they're not a bad snapshot of the mainstream hockey media. The overrating of Niedermayer continues.