And for the keyboard mashers who take stats as gospel, i'm not ignoring stats. I think, as
@Scandale du Jour and many others said, it's imperative to watch the game and take those stats to make your own conclusion.
Example 1: When Mur/Fleury were splitting, I felt there were a lot less rebounds when Mur played as opposed to Fleury. I went through every game and look at rebounds/game stoppages due to goaltending. I found what my eyes were telling me actually supported by stats. However those are just stats. It doesn't give me a conclusion on where those rebounds went. Even if Murray had half the rebounds but they were all to the middle of the ice, it isn't something I can hang my hat on as a definitive. It just showed me one part of what I needed. There were so many other pending examples that were in play such as where the rebounds were being directed, second chance opportunities for the opponent, who made more high danger zone area saves, weight of each opponent in terms of their abilities, etc. I found one stat that supported my eye test but it was a weak stat because it didn't tell the whole story. I didn't use it as gospel.
Example 2: Penguins are ranked 6th overall on the PK. Does anyone feel that stat matches the eye test? Does anyone want to take a crack at this one before the stat mashers throw a hissy fit? This is another example where I feel the stat does not match up with the play in front of us. And I forget the users who mentioned it, but talked about DeSmith being godlike on the kill. So a credit to DeSmith SHOULD NOT be a credit to the PK unit.