Better than using WHL points or the "watch the game where I judge one guy as a promising teenager and one guy as an overpaid contract that the last GM made an ill-advised trade to chase playoffs hyper-biased eye test" or whatever else you're using.
Manipulate? The point is Jones actually does have an NHL track record. It's not HHOF stuff here, but it's a track record all the same.
OK, he falls all the way down to 22nd. Oh no, what a bum!
A lifetime? He's 29. Lol, that's still a prime age for a defensemen. Yes, the Hawks suck, somehow Jones is either immune from the effects of that or somehow the entire root cause of it? I honestly can't tell with some of you "Jones must be the whipping boy for everything" guys.
Never said Jones was "one of the best PP QBs"
The point is 7 years is a joke and you know it and you know why you picked 7 years. Why because you had to make sure you included his one great season, which was a statistic outlier, as he has never come close to that again. A person not trying to manipulate data would never chose 7 years of data randomly.They would yous maybe 5 years, or this decade, last season, or since he has been a Hawk.
Pat Kane is a FA right now, do you think a GM will look at date from 7 years ago to determine the kinda of production he likely to produce this year? No.
Anyway you are pretty much alone on thinking Jones deserves to be on PP1. Pretty much everyone on this boards want him off PP1 as he has been brutal. And the recent data supports that as well.
Let's take a look at some relevant data, since you want data and not the eye test.
Current year.
48th in PPP, 13th in PPTOI
Ya I know small sample size.
Add Last Season (22/23-YTD)
43th in PPP, 14th in PPTOI
How about with the Hawks. (21/22-YTD)
32nd in PPP, 6th in PPTOI
Ya I know it's the Hawks not Jones
How about last 5 seasons (19/20-YTD)
33rd in PPP, 14th in PPTOI
And at 5 years it gets less relevant.
As you can all of this date is far more relevant to the current Jones and much better then the random 7 year data (which we all know you didn't mean to manipulate and just picked the number 7 out of a hat).And guess what it backs up the eye test that everyone on these boards are talking, he just isn't good as a PPQB1. So definitely don't see a good enough track record that say he deserves to be on the PP1.
Yeah, it doesn't look like he has the puck skills or creativity for that style of PP. It seems he would be better off having someone set him up for one timers.
Yep. Basically he just stands flat footed most the time at his point.
