Confirmed with Link: Logan Stanley 2 years 1.25 million

[Jet]

No idiots are the enemy of the truth.

Both of you are conveniently twisting any arguments in an extreme manner - like oh 'you ONLY trust a random internet dude' - and acting as if you guys aren't LESS informed than said random internet dude

There's a lot of shots at Garret on here, JFresh, etc... anyone knows that you take a holistic approach to data - look at various models, look at the basic statistics and then make an informed decision. Models already do that and the guys who make them are always careful to point out their potential flaws.

When someone uses ANY example that doesn't agree with you - both you and @Buffdog portray it like we are worshipping this one and ONLY ONE form of data.

I hate to break it to you guys - but we all watch the same games and see the same players, their actions form our bias - models and statistics exist to either confirm or reject this bias based on an array of data.

Neither of you - nor I - spend significant time analyzing data. When someone quotes a model or statistics, your only answer is to take things to an extreme example in order to refute that data... like @Buffdog arguing that I said 'statistics' instead model - when they serve the same purpose.

The level of banality that this board has reached makes me think its time for a break...

Here's your facts to end this ridiculousness
The Jets are stuck in a sunk-cost fallacy with Stanley - the odds of him emerging are almost zero
We are paying him twice what a 7th Dman should be making - in that sense he's using $$ that could go towards another asset
Nothing shows that he's an effective PKer - eye test or stats
He has only played extremely sheltered minutes - leaving our top 4 with a heavier workload
His stats this year were elevated by the Samberg effect
He was fatally exposed in the playoffs
He is slow and does not read lanes well
He has a long reach

Good luck with the Stan fan club... you're going to need it.

And again, your premise is that I am a member of the Stan fan club.

I've stated over and over again that I don't really care about Stanley one way or another, I see him for what he is, a depth defenseman.

Anyone who doesn't align with your feelings about Stanley is somehow in love with him, that's super objective.

As for the people behind advanced stats, I never mention them by name because I don't know enough about them. As a matter of fact even though I don't necessarily agree with garet I have a lot of respect for him.

My objections are purely with the science behind how the data is compiled, defined and aggregated. I've clearly stated my arguments here many times, yet you continue to rebut with non sequitirs.

I work with data every day in my job. I am not a data scientist, but I know enough about statistics and metrics to know the fundamentals of good data and model building to see the problems with advanced stats for hockey as they are today

Factual data in hockey is mostly fine, unless that data requires interpretation that can introduce bias or lack of expertise into it.

When you start trying to build models that attempt to display things like shot, competition, or chance quality, that opens the model up to a lot of environmental pollution and bias that can degrade the accuracy and consistency of the model.

It's funny that the same people that hate plus minus don't realize that some of these other advanced stats are just as flawed for many of the same reasons.

You go ahead and project what others have said on me, though. Keep that torch burnin!

 

[Jet]

Yes ........ but the discussion will continue.

Do you recommend we talk about something else in the Stanley thread? You know you can ignore threads, right?

 

[Buffdog]

Anyone who doesn't align with your feelings about Stanley is somehow in love with him, that's super objective.

Unfortunately, this could just be a byproduct of the times we live in. There doesn't seem to he room anymore for holding nuanced views or seeing things in shades of grey... on any topic, from politics to 6'7 defensemen lol.

I've lost track of how many times I've been labeled as "anti-analytics" on here despite the fact that I've never ONCE said that. I HAVE pointed out their flaws and made a case as to why you shouldn't use them alone to form opinions. But that's enough in this day and age to be "anti" something. "You're either with us, or you're against us"...

People also confuse understanding with agreement. You can understand how someone thinks about a topic and still disagree with them. If anything, I think that's a noble place to get to in an argument/disagreement. Ehlers usage is a perfect example. I may not AGREE with how he's been deployed, but I UNDERSTAND it. But, that makes me "anti-Ehlers" in these parts

 

[Jet]

Unfortunately, this could just be a byproduct of the times we live in. There doesn't seem to he room anymore for holding nuanced views or seeing things in shades of grey... on any topic, from politics to 6'7 defensemen lol.

I've lost track of how many times I've been labeled as "anti-analytics" on here despite the fact that I've never ONCE said that. I HAVE pointed out their flaws and made a case as to why you shouldn't use them alone to form opinions. But that's enough in this day and age to be "anti" something. "You're either with us, or you're against us"...

People also confuse understanding with agreement. You can understand how someone thinks about a topic and still disagree with them. If anything, I think that's a noble place to get to in an argument/disagreement. Ehlers usage is a perfect example. I may not AGREE with how he's been deployed, but I UNDERSTAND it. But, that makes me "anti-Ehlers" in these parts

It really is a shame.

I love having respectful discourse on here - I've had many spirited discussions on this forum with people I rarely agree with, but each takes the time to understand the other side, and have thoughtful counters. I've learned a lot and even changed my opinions based off those discussions.

You lose me when you start putting words in my mouth or obviously don't even take the time to read my arguments, just assigning me a position because I don't fully agree with your opinion.

I really can't stand when people choose to just belittle others in a post instead of countering with a cogent point. It adds nothing to the forum and just fosters aggression.

I'm rarely anti anything on this forum. I'm not anti stat, anti Ehlers, etc. We all have our biases but I try to form my opinions as objectively as possible and keep an open mind.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Do you recommend we talk about something else in the Stanley thread? You know you can ignore threads, right?

Huh?

 

[Jet]

Huh?

What?

 

[JetsWillFly4Ever]

Stanley sucks via eye-test.

Stanley sucks via traditional stats, advanced stats, models, etc.

I think Stanley just sucks. He looked decent for a few games last year and then went back to regular ol Stan in the playoffs. He doesn't have the footspeed or the brain to play a regular shift in the NHL. We should have traded him while he had value.

 

[Eyeseeing]

Stanley sucks via eye-test.

Stanley sucks via traditional stats, advanced stats, models, etc.

I think Stanley just sucks. He looked decent for a few games last year and then went back to regular ol Stan in the playoffs. He doesn't have the footspeed or the brain to play a regular shift in the NHL. We should have traded him while he had value.

Don’t need charts for that.
I don’t hate him at all.
Sure he’s a 7th defender and not a good one at that.
I think he’s overpaid for what he is, but TSNE thinks he’s worth it for whatever ever reason 6’ 7”

 

[Buffdog]

Stanley sucks via eye-test.

Stanley sucks via traditional stats, advanced stats, models, etc.

I think Stanley just sucks. He looked decent for a few games last year and then went back to regular ol Stan in the playoffs. He doesn't have the footspeed or the brain to play a regular shift in the NHL. We should have traded him while he had value.

Every 7/8 defender on every team sucks. There are 100 guys in the league in that tier that are interchangeable, including Stanley, Chisholm, Kovacevic, Fleury and Coghlan

Yes, the Jets took a big swing and whiffed on him in the 1st round. Yes, he's overpaid for the role he plays. Yes, he's been given a longer leash and more opportunity than other guys of similar skill

He's also by all accounts a hard worker, coachable and a good teammate. TNSE values those things and rewards them

 

[Gm0ney]

Every 7/8 defender on every team sucks. There are 100 guys in the league in that tier that are interchangeable, including Stanley, Chisholm, Kovacevic, Fleury and Coghlan

Yes, the Jets took a big swing and whiffed on him in the 1st round. Yes, he's overpaid for the role he plays. Yes, he's been given a longer leash and more opportunity than other guys of similar skill

He's also by all accounts a hard worker, coachable and a good teammate. TNSE values those things and rewards them

These guys are a dime a dozen - which is why it is dumb for the Jets to continue to pour time and money into Stanley. They just seem unable to cut bait with the guy.

 

[Buffdog]

It really is a shame.

I love having respectful discourse on here - I've had many spirited discussions on this forum with people I rarely agree with, but each takes the time to understand the other side, and have thoughtful counters. I've learned a lot and even changed my opinions based off those discussions.

You lose me when you start putting words in my mouth or obviously don't even take the time to read my arguments, just assigning me a position because I don't fully agree with your opinion.

I really can't stand when people choose to just belittle others in a post instead of countering with a cogent point. It adds nothing to the forum and just fosters aggression.

I'm rarely anti anything on this forum. I'm not anti stat, anti Ehlers, etc. We all have our biases but I try to form my opinions as objectively as possible and keep an open mind.

Great post

 

[JetsWillFly4Ever]

Every 7/8 defender on every team sucks. There are 100 guys in the league in that tier that are interchangeable, including Stanley, Chisholm, Kovacevic, Fleury and Coghlan

Yes, the Jets took a big swing and whiffed on him in the 1st round. Yes, he's overpaid for the role he plays. Yes, he's been given a longer leash and more opportunity than other guys of similar skill

He's also by all accounts a hard worker, coachable and a good teammate. TNSE values those things and rewards them

I think your first point is an oversimplification.

We signed Colin Miller for .25 mil more than Stanley. Stanley played ahead of Miller last year. Miller is significantly better than Stanley. Kovacevic has shown more at the NHL level than Stanley. Chisholm jury still out, Fleury/Coghlan are tweeners.

 

[Buffdog]

I think your first point is an oversimplification.

We signed Colin Miller for .25 mil more than Stanley. Stanley played ahead of Miller last year. Miller is significantly better than Stanley. Kovacevic has shown more at the NHL level than Stanley. Chisholm jury still out, Fleury/Coghlan are tweeners.

Miller was a healthy scratch in NJ before coming here. Let's watch him a bit before we decide how good he is

 

[JetsWillFly4Ever]

Miller was a healthy scratch in NJ before coming here. Let's watch him a bit before we decide how good he is

He played 79 games on a playoff team the year before that, and has posted positive rel cf every year his entire career. His track record is significantly better than Stanley.

 

[LowLefty]

Don’t need charts for that.
I don’t hate him at all.
Sure he’s a 7th defender and not a good one at that.
I think he’s overpaid for what he is, but TSNE thinks he’s worth it for whatever ever reason 6’ 7”

Who wouldn't want a dman that is 6'7" - I get that some feel that is all he brings but that size/height brings other things as well.
I found that he was getting much better at using his reach which helped reduce other issues such as his mobility - the wing span helps once you learn how to use it.
He also brings physicality - maybe not as much as we might want from a player this size - but more than most of our blueline.
He also has a hard shot - but needs to use it more. He's one of the few that can actually make defenders think twice about stepping in front of it.
He's decent at tangling up the cycle and he doesn't need to be super mobile to do it - again, his size and ability to get in the way along the walls, is a plus.
His passing is also decent, including outlets - he might be guilty of throwing it away up the boards, and most of our d are guilty of that - might be more of a coaching issue (why do our dmen over use this option? Do they all suck or is it planned?)

As a 7th, he fine -

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Unfortunately, this could just be a byproduct of the times we live in. There doesn't seem to he room anymore for holding nuanced views or seeing things in shades of grey... on any topic, from politics to 6'7 defensemen lol.

I've lost track of how many times I've been labeled as "anti-analytics" on here despite the fact that I've never ONCE said that. I HAVE pointed out their flaws and made a case as to why you shouldn't use them alone to form opinions. But that's enough in this day and age to be "anti" something. "You're either with us, or you're against us"...

People also confuse understanding with agreement. You can understand how someone thinks about a topic and still disagree with them. If anything, I think that's a noble place to get to in an argument/disagreement. Ehlers usage is a perfect example. I may not AGREE with how he's been deployed, but I UNDERSTAND it. But, that makes me "anti-Ehlers" in these parts

A lot of that is simply a byproduct of social media. Communicating remotely, by text, is very different than face to face.

As an example, something I see here often, or think I see, is a poster seeing himself as 1 individual and all of the rest of us as another. There will be a statement to the effect of, 'you all complain when we don't sign FA, then complain that we block prospects when we do sign FA'. But those 2 conflicting complaints come from 2 different people, or groups of people. Pardon the simplification here. It is just an illustration. There seems to be an inclination to see the other posters as a homogeneous group, or a small number of sub-groups.

If a manageable number of us were in a room, discussing many of these same topics, we would gain better understandings of one anothers thinking. Of course, face to face sometimes leads to tempers flaring a little further too. Hockey fights might break out.

 

[Buffdog]

These guys are a dime a dozen - which is why it is dumb for the Jets to continue to pour time and money into Stanley. They just seem unable to cut bait with the guy.

If I had more spare time, I'd photoshop Chevy and Stanley's faces on rhe Brokeback Mountain "I can't quit you" meme lol

 

[Buffdog]

He played 79 games on a playoff team the year before that, and has posted positive rel cf every year his entire career. His track record is significantly better than Stanley.

See, that's the issue

You cherrypicked one stat - and not even one of the ones that most analytics guys use

Stanley last season had better GF% and xGF% than Miller did on the Stars in 2022-23

*Maybe* he's a little better than Stanley, but it's debatable. He's not Cale Makar

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Every 7/8 defender on every team sucks. There are 100 guys in the league in that tier that are interchangeable, including Stanley, Chisholm, Kovacevic, Fleury and Coghlan

Yes, the Jets took a big swing and whiffed on him in the 1st round. Yes, he's overpaid for the role he plays. Yes, he's been given a longer leash and more opportunity than other guys of similar skill

He's also by all accounts a hard worker, coachable and a good teammate. TNSE values those things and rewards them

We can argue (and have done) the relative merits of those players. But I agree they are all on a similar tier. I would expand the tier a little to include 6/7/8 because there are tweeners.

Bottom line, there is not much point in debating which bad player is less bad because the differences are not that great anyway. The exceptions to that would be when other issues are attached, like the cap cost of a #7 at 6 mil vs a #7 at 1 mil, for example.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

As a 7th, he fine -

Yes - but is he the best 7th we could have? Is he the most economical?

 

[LowLefty]

Yes - but is he the best 7th we could have? Is he the most economical?

He's a Jet's drafted player that the org likes and continues to work with -
I'd hang onto him for that reason and the others I listed.
I don't see any point in splitting hairs on this level of player - not worth the deep dive IMO

Edit - I'd also include that he appears to be well liked by his team mates, and will defend them when needed - and that's probably worth something

 

[JetsWillFly4Ever]

See, that's the issue

You cherrypicked one stat - and not even one of the ones that most analytics guys use

Stanley last season had better GF% and xGF% than Miller did on the Stars in 2022-23

*Maybe* he's a little better than Stanley, but it's debatable. He's not Cale Makar

I'm not a big fan of GF% as it is highly variable on goaltending, finishing etc.

Comparing xGF% across teams is a fools errand, the quality of your teammates is too important. That's why those stats guys cards are valuable, they use all the different stats and assign weights to them. Now obviously they are not perfect either as they have human interpretation. All of those cards also say Miller is and always has been much better.

CF% rel is one I prefer because it compares you to the rest of your team, but it is only one stat and not a definitive answer.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

He's a Jet's drafted player that the org likes and continues to work with -
I'd hang onto him for that reason and the others I listed.
I don't see any point in splitting hairs on this level of player - not worth the deep dive IMO

Edit - I'd also include that he appears to be well liked by his team mates, and will defend them when needed - and that's probably worth something

Sure - but I think they have overpaid him by 3-400k. Not that big a deal.

The importance of small differences in overall quality of players at his level is just not that great.

 

[Buffdog]

I'm not a big fan of GF% as it is highly variable on goaltending, finishing etc.

Comparing xGF% across teams is a fools errand, the quality of your teammates is too important. That's why those stats guys cards are valuable, they use all the different stats and assign weights to them. Now obviously they are not perfect either as they have human interpretation. All of those cards also say Miller is and always has been much better.

CF% rel is one I prefer because it compares you to the rest of your team, but it is only one stat and not a definitive answer.

I guess we'll differ on how we define "much better"

JoMo is much better than Stanley. Miller is a mild upgrade, according to what you're using as criteria.

Unless a shot attempt or two one way or the other every 12 shifts qualifies as "much better", in which case I'm not sure what to say

Edit: JoMo and Schmidt had the same CF% last year, on the same team. So they were equivalent players?

 

[JetsWillFly4Ever]

I guess we'll differ on how we define "much better"

JoMo is much better than Stanley. Miller is a mild upgrade, according to what you're using as criteria.

Unless a shot attempt or two one way or the other every 12 shifts qualifies as "much better", in which case I'm not sure what to say

Edit: JoMo and Schmidt had the same CF% last year, on the same team. So they were equivalent players?

Obviously not to the bolded, as their quality of competition would be massively different.

You like to try to play this gotcha game, but you are just outing yourself. There is obviously no one stat, which I said right in that post, and the best tool are the cards because those guys track way more stats and then aggregate them. And yes, I am aware the cards are not perfect either.

I can live with a difference of opinion on how much better, but there is no argument Miller is not better than Stanley.