BruinDust
Registered User
- Aug 2, 2005
- 25,128
- 23,754
maybe stop shitting on analytics every time you see some random HFBoards poster misuse it. It's really frustrating and I think you're smarter than that.
Analytics can tell us how a guy like Heinen performs in whatever sample size of data is available. It can tell us that in certain situations (and maybe limited ice time) how he has performed. In Heinen's case he has put up strong defensive numbers in the situations he has been used in. That suggests that maybe that defensive performance might translate to other situations (like PK) or increased usage. It's not a guarantee, just a positive sign or an indicator. Analytics in this way can be used to help identify trends and see if players are being underused or might be suited to certain assignments. It's then up to a coach to do whatever they want with that data. Again, it's not a guarantee and it's up to the player to maintain that performance when given more minutes or new assignements. Anyone who uses this data to call a player an "elite defensive forward" based on limited data or narrow usage is just misusing the data. You should blame that person and not the entire field of statistics.
I don't, plenty of posts are made here regarding analytics and I don't say jack. It's just in this case the subject is Danton Heinen, and basically the only evidence we have to show he's a useful NHL forward is his analytic numbers. When his eye-test and his usage by his coaches say differently.
I actually like Heinen, but my point was basically him (and other jack-of-all-trades types like him) are hard players for coaches to utilize with a fully-healthy roster. Like I said, he's not an offensive player, yet he's not a defensive player either. If your better at stopping the opposition from scoring than you are at scoring yourself, yet you don't see the ice in PK situations, in a league where half of your 12 forwards will kill penalties on any given night, than your not a defensive forward.