Goals are obviously more important but I feel a great playmaker can give an average goal scorer above average numbers more often than the other way around.
How much more valuable are goals compared to assists?
- Thread starter Dion TheFluff
- Start date
-
HF Sportsbook has been reset for the new season - Click here to play.
PatrikBerglund
Registered User
- May 29, 2017
- 4,628
- 2,656
The Marquis
Moderator
You know they say that all points are created equal, but you look at goals and you look at assists and you can see that statement is not true. See, normally if you go one on one between goals and assists, you got a 50/50 chance of of one being more important. But goals are genetic freaks and they're not normal! So assists got a 25%, AT BEST, at being the right answer. Then you add secondary assists to the mix, assists chances of being the right answer drastic go down. See when getting points in the NHL, assists got a 33 1/3 chance of being the right answer, but goals, goals got a 66 and 2/3 chance of being the right answer, because secondary assists KNOWS he shouldn't exist and he's not even gonna try!
So Assists, you take your 33 1/3 chance, minus goals 25% chance and you got an 8 1/3 chance of being the right answer. But then you take goals 75% chance of being the right answer, if we was to go one on one, and then add 66 2/3 per cents, goals got 141 2/3 chance of being the right answer. See Assists, the numbers don't lie, and they spell disaster for you.
See, but I'm gonna break it down for all you ladies. Would you rather be with goals? Or would you rather be with Assists?
tl;dr - Goals are infinitely more important than assists, because one requires the other to even exists... and the ladies.
So Assists, you take your 33 1/3 chance, minus goals 25% chance and you got an 8 1/3 chance of being the right answer. But then you take goals 75% chance of being the right answer, if we was to go one on one, and then add 66 2/3 per cents, goals got 141 2/3 chance of being the right answer. See Assists, the numbers don't lie, and they spell disaster for you.
See, but I'm gonna break it down for all you ladies. Would you rather be with goals? Or would you rather be with Assists?
tl;dr - Goals are infinitely more important than assists, because one requires the other to even exists... and the ladies.
What are you even talking about? That’s not the argument at all. It’s simply you can’t make a blanket statement of every goal is worth 1.25x more than an assist like some people are saying here.
Every single goal has a different value for goals and assist and until someone evaluated every single goal scored this season then awarding equal value for everything is likely the most accurate way of looking at things.
Unless you have a better theory.
haseoke39
Registered User
- Mar 29, 2011
- 13,938
- 2,492
And sometimes the most valuable player on the ice is the guy who screens the goalie and never touches the puck, and sometimes it's the transition player who creates a 3-2 going the other way but doesn't get even a secondary.
This is, like, a machine learning question beyond human knowledge. I'd ask a computer to watch every NHL game in history and analyze where the players were on the ice and what they did so that the machine can simulate what would have happened if the assister didn't assist or the goalscorer wasn't in such and such position. And somewhere at the bottom of an infinite analysis, they'd be able to generalize that the average assister represented a play that increased the chances of a goal occurring by x% and the average goalscorer increases the chances of a goal being scored by y%, and then x/y would tell you how valuable an assist is.
But lacking that, Gretzky > Ovi, so my answer is 1:1.
This is, like, a machine learning question beyond human knowledge. I'd ask a computer to watch every NHL game in history and analyze where the players were on the ice and what they did so that the machine can simulate what would have happened if the assister didn't assist or the goalscorer wasn't in such and such position. And somewhere at the bottom of an infinite analysis, they'd be able to generalize that the average assister represented a play that increased the chances of a goal occurring by x% and the average goalscorer increases the chances of a goal being scored by y%, and then x/y would tell you how valuable an assist is.
But lacking that, Gretzky > Ovi, so my answer is 1:1.
KrisLetAngry
MrJukeBoy
He said play driver.
As a pens fan early Ovechkin was a play driver who scored goals.
Still can be a play driver.
Maybe you mistook play driver with play maker.
pi314
Registered User
Just clicked on games from last night and this was the first play I clicked.
The first assist was the most important part of the play because it sprung the goal scorer in space.
On what planet is the goal worth extra just because?
Is it possible that your favorite player is a goal scorer?
Mr Positive
Cap Crunch Incoming
- Nov 20, 2013
- 37,769
- 18,670
there's lots of assists handed out, and some of them seem like padding, but there is some of that with goals as well. There are bad goals that are not the result of skill, but just luck, goalie error, and own goals. There are also empty net goals that are very important but not as hard as beating a goalie. If you think this is a bigger problem with assists, prove it.
As others have said, many times assists are the most impressive part of a goal. Players who pile up assists are more often the team's best play drivers, because they are the best puck distributors. So, it's not just measuring importance on the scoreboard.
If you want nuance added, you have to judge each goal. Some people do that, where they track things like "grade A contribution to a scoring chance" and you can judge goal scorers that way too.
As others have said, many times assists are the most impressive part of a goal. Players who pile up assists are more often the team's best play drivers, because they are the best puck distributors. So, it's not just measuring importance on the scoreboard.
If you want nuance added, you have to judge each goal. Some people do that, where they track things like "grade A contribution to a scoring chance" and you can judge goal scorers that way too.
filinski77
Registered User
- Feb 12, 2017
- 2,672
- 4,402
I would say overall that goals > assists, due to the fact that goals are the ultimate point of the game, and that it doesn't matter how great a play/pass etc. is, if it doesn't result in a goal. Plus, there are statistically more assists handed out than goals.
For example, all things equal:
Player A: 60 goals & 100 points
Player B: 40 goals & 100 points
I would say that Player A was easily better (most of the time). This is because a goal is a goal no matter what. Regardless of how easy of a tap-in it was (or how hard it was), you made the play that ultimately decided if your team got a goal on the board. When looking at the assists though, without going in-depth on each one, it's impossible to tell how many of those were routine plays that lead to an assist.
If the NHL 100 years ago decided there were only 1 assists awarded, and that never changed, no one would care at all. Just like no one cares that there aren't 3 assists awarded. 2 assists were randomly chosen (instead of 1 or 3), and to me, that at least devalues secondary assists slightly (not completely).
For example, all things equal:
Player A: 60 goals & 100 points
Player B: 40 goals & 100 points
I would say that Player A was easily better (most of the time). This is because a goal is a goal no matter what. Regardless of how easy of a tap-in it was (or how hard it was), you made the play that ultimately decided if your team got a goal on the board. When looking at the assists though, without going in-depth on each one, it's impossible to tell how many of those were routine plays that lead to an assist.
If the NHL 100 years ago decided there were only 1 assists awarded, and that never changed, no one would care at all. Just like no one cares that there aren't 3 assists awarded. 2 assists were randomly chosen (instead of 1 or 3), and to me, that at least devalues secondary assists slightly (not completely).
- Feb 10, 2010
- 14,250
- 11,057
- Oct 9, 2012
- 32,112
- 31,064
- Oct 23, 2014
- 29,673
- 41,837
On any given play, it depends. It could be a 2nd or even 3rd assist that 'did the most work' in creating the goal.
But over a larger period of time, a guy who can consistenly pot a lot of goals is probably more valuable than a guy who can consistently rack up a similar amount of assists, if all else is close to equal.
Goal scoring is more finicky/random and 'harder' to do.
But over a larger period of time, a guy who can consistenly pot a lot of goals is probably more valuable than a guy who can consistently rack up a similar amount of assists, if all else is close to equal.
Goal scoring is more finicky/random and 'harder' to do.
Unless players are dangling all the way to the net to score, I don't think goals are as more important than assists as might be perceived. Many times it's the assist man or men that create the offensive opportunity to score the goal. By them actually manipulating the defense with their puck handling skills and such.
HugeInTheShire
You may not like me but, I'm Huge in the Shire
Why don't we just rename the thread to "Please validate my reasoning for Matthews over McDavid for the Hart"
As that was clearly the premise and the thread has just devolved into a who should win thread
As that was clearly the premise and the thread has just devolved into a who should win thread
Incorrect. Some goals have no assists and some have one assist.
There are not twice as many assists as goals.
Baberham Lincoln
Registered User
It depends on the player, like Henrik Sedin is an example of when an assist is as valuable or more valuable than the goal since he generates the entire play until the very end when some random player taps it in.
Of course not, but everyone agrees 65 goal 112 point Ovechkin > 96 assist 125 point Thornton
Suntouchable13
Registered User
It is a nonsense argument created by people that never played hockey and have no idea how much skill and talent it actually takes to be a great playmaker.
ScaredStreit
Registered User
It really depends. A really nice play setting up a goal is more valuable than scoring an empty net goal you dumped down the ice.
