Quite honestly I think it's ridiculous to compare Skinner and Hamilton. Hamilton has more points in less games over the last two seasons playing defense than Skinner does the last two seasons playing forward. It would be like claiming Joe Pavelski is in the same conversation as Erik Karlsson.
Yep, data without context, is well, just data.
And so you proceed to post a picture missing some significant context. Specifically
-Difference between
team possession (using CorsiOn instead of CorsiRel)
-Difference between teammate possession (Quality of Teammate)
...That's some pretty significant contextual data to be removing just like that while making a case that one player is seeing tougher context.
I'm not saying Faulk is "great" defensively
...And I am not saying Hamilton is "great" defensively either for what it's worth. I am saying the two are comparable though.
but he faces much tougher assignments than Hamilton,
Much tougher? He did face tougher competition last season, yes but Hamilton was still playing a top 4 role and without any artificial offensive zone push. The difference between top pair and middle pair competition still has a ton of overlap.
And Faulk also did not face significantly tougher competition the season prior (which is 33% of a hero chart):
or the season prior either (which is an additional 22% of a hero chart). Forgive me if I don't buy that Hamilton suddenly lost his ability to face higher competition levels. And again, all of this comparing assumes Hamilton and Faulk are the same age, when Hamilton is a full year younger and should logically be behind developmentally.
Faulk is a good top pairing defenseman, but there are still red flags to him. They are not as clear on a team like Carolina which has a 5-on-5 shot suppression (CA60) of 50.85 with him
off the ice(54.22 on), but might start to reveal themselves as legitimate warts on a team like Calgary who had a 57.10 shot suppression with Hamilton off the ice (59.84 on). Teams that as a team see less chances against inherently shelter the player from looking bad as often.
It takes five skaters, a coach, and even a goalie to influence visual perception of an individual. The HERO chart posted earlier does already suggest that a small context difference between Hamilton and Faulk exists. That does not mean all contextual elements are in Faulk's favour though and the findings of the chart ultimately show the players are closer together than apart. It also did not help that Hamilton was anchored down by the likes of Kris Russell and Jyrki Jokipakka, bottom pairing guys, while Faulk was paired with Hainsey, who may not be a top pairing guy but is definitely a middle pair guy, whereas Russell's effect on possession more closely resembles an AHLer:
Either you don't use any data at all to compare, or you use as much data available within reason to compare. The former then becomes a guessing game unless you've, without bias, watched equal and sufficient amounts of both players. Using as much data as possible does not favour Faulk to any significant degree. It does not prove one player has any significant edge in ability compared to the other.
plays > 4 min/game TOI more than Hamilton (including 2min/game ES and 1.5min/game SH more than Hamilton)
Which is true, but is also affected by roster makeup as Calgary has a top pair that too would drop Faulk to second pairing status.
and is a much better possession player.
That one is simply not true.
Tougher assignments and more TOI/G have an effect on shot suppression.
Just as Teammates and systems do.
On top of that, Faulk's 2016 data includes the last 10 games he played while not recovered (and after missing almost 20 games) and frankly, a shell of his healthy self (it was reported in mid-late July that he still hadn't recovered from the injury).
And Hamilton's 2016 data includes the first 15-20 games he played while learning a new system under a new coach with new linemates and frankly, was a shell of his usual self.
I'm just adding context to the hero chart provided.
And I am just amending the so-called context for accuracy.
