Power vs L. Hughes vs Edvinsson vs Clarke

[dgibb10]

Seems like you're asking "Great corsi in a normal role, or great results in a very tough role?" imo.

Not at all.

Your statement double counts the impact of the role.

Yes, considering the role, edvinsson's results are great.

In a vaccuum however, they aren't anything out of the ordinary.

If you want to seperately mention the role, you cannot then ALSO use that role to inflate his results in the other part of your statement.


It is disingenious and tries to ignore or devalue the large gap in on ice results.

Edvinsson has a significantly harder role.
Luke has significantly better results.

If you want to combine context and results into 1 with the statement "edvinsson has been excellent" go ahead. But then you cannot ALSO tack on context again seperately to try and make him look better.

 

[Pavels Dog]

Not at all.

Your statement double counts the impact of the role.

Yes, considering the role, edvinsson's results are great.

In a vaccuum however, they aren't anything out of the ordinary.

If you want to seperately mention the role, you cannot then ALSO use that role to inflate his results in the other part of your statement.


It is disingenious and tries to ignore or devalue the large gap in on ice results.

Edvinsson has a significantly harder role.
Luke has significantly better results.

If you want to combine context and results into 1 with the statement "edvinsson has been excellent" go ahead. But then you cannot ALSO tack on context again seperately to try and make him look better.

But.. Edvinsson has significantly better results than Hughes? Better production, better +/-, plays more etc.

I would consider Edvinsson’s results out of the ordinary so far. Even if he was sheltered a 40 point pace without PP would be fantastic.

 

[dgibb10]

But that works both ways because his teammates aren’t as good either. GAR and RAPM numbers suggest he’s providing quite a bit of value

Not that this applies to Edvinsson, but something I think is important to note on GAR and RAPM.

They use actual goal metrics for offense, and expected goal metrics for defense.

The logic is sound over a large sample of multiple years or a career (especially for forwards), since players have much more control over any things "missed" in the models such as being an elite shooter or the way Kane's chances were consistently underrated, and over a large sample size players will have their actual on ice goal numbers be more reflective of their offense than expected numbers.

However, this 100% runs into significant issues on smaller sample sizes of overrating players getting very good shooting luck, and underrating players getting very bad shooting luck.

 

[dgibb10]

But.. Edvinsson has significantly better results than Hughes? Better production, better +/-, plays more etc.

If we lived in 1995 and there weren't infinitely better ways to evaluate player performance than raw point totals, +/- and ice time maybe.

 

[dgibb10]

But that works both ways because his teammates aren’t as good either. GAR and RAPM numbers suggest he’s providing quite a bit of value

Also, important to note.

I am not suggesting that Edvinsson has not been excellent this year.

I am just pointing out that relative numbers which are comparing:

Edvinsson+Seider (2 excellent dman) to Chiarot, Holl, Petry, and Gustafsson (dogshit)

Obviously favour them over comparing luke and pesce to

Hamilton-Dillon and Siegs-Kovacevic.

 

[Regal]

Not that this applies to Edvinsson, but something I think is important to note on GAR and RAPM.

They use actual goal metrics for offense, and expected goal metrics for defense.

The logic is sound over a large sample of multiple years or a career (especially for forwards), since players have much more control over any things "missed" in the models such as being an elite shooter or the way Kane's chances were consistently underrated, and over a large sample size players will have their actual on ice goal numbers be more reflective of their offense than expected numbers.

However, this 100% runs into significant issues on smaller sample sizes of overrating players getting very good shooting luck, and underrating players getting very bad shooting luck.

This is true and Hughes has suffered from a significant lack of puck luck at ES which has hampered his numbers. But even the xGAR for both players is essentially even, though Hughes has done it in fewer minutes.

 

[Pavels Dog]

If we lived in 1995 and there weren't infinitely better ways to evaluate player performance than raw point totals, +/- and ice time maybe.

But those are results.. corsi, xG etc. are not..

 

[dgibb10]

But those are results.. corsi, xG etc. are not..

Those are box score stats.

on ice results are what I am talking about.

Edvinsson's minutes result have been pretty even. Both teams get about the same amount of chances, shots, quality chances, etc.

Hughes' minutes results have been dominant. NJD generates significantly more than their opponent.

 

[gritdash60]

Wouldn't trade Edvinsson for any hughes who isnt Q or J, i dont do L trades.

 

[Volica]

Those are box score stats.

on ice results are what I am talking about.

Edvinsson's minutes result have been pretty even. Both teams get about the same amount of chances, shots, quality chances, etc.

Hughes' minutes results have been dominant. NJD generates significantly more than their opponent.

I honestly thought as a hockey community we were sort of beyond small sample size advanced metrics because it's been proven that it needs to be reproducible over a number of years to have any value what-so-ever.

When you're evaluating guys playing in their first 2 full years, it's really hard to make correlations like that.
Like, are we now saying Luke Hughes will be a 60% xGF player moving forward? The only defenseman who has those statistics to his name over the past half decade is Charlie McAvoy, and that's is purely fueled by how dominant the Bergeron line was.

 

[Pavels Dog]

Those are box score stats.

on ice results are what I am talking about.

Edvinsson's minutes result have been pretty even. Both teams get about the same amount of chances, shots, quality chances, etc.

Hughes' minutes results have been dominant. NJD generates significantly more than their opponent.

I think we have different ideas of what ”results” means. Unless you believe Nashville’s gotten really good results so far.

Either way, playing evenly against the elite players of the NHL is fantastic stuff. Meanwhile I would expect players of the caliber discussed here to look good in a sheltered role. I mean if Hughes wasn’t at least getting good corsi numbers his season would be deeply concerning right now, so I’m not sure I’d point to that as a gold star as much as an absolute necessity.

 

[dgibb10]

This is true and Hughes has suffered from a significant lack of puck luck at ES which has hampered his numbers. But even the xGAR for both players is essentially even, though Hughes has done it in fewer minutes.

Yup. Both have been excellent.

And, unless I am mistaken, both xGAR and RAPM have QoC and QoT, and zone starts built in already, so the context of Edvinsson's harder assignments is acknowledged already within those metrics.

And so the end result being that they have been virtually even is fitting to me.

Now, I could complain about how the process of using relative numbers only, and then adjusting for team strength to acknowledge that better teams have better players hence their "0" relative is more impressive than bad teams "0" relative, does not fully account for roster makeup.

Eg, NJDs excellence is more based around their dcore, and so the boost for team doesn't properly outweigh the negative of having your relative compared to such good players, but I digress.

Like I said, pick your poison on whether you want good in a brutal situation, or excellent in a normal situation

 

[dgibb10]

I think we have different ideas of what ”results” means. Unless you believe Nashville’s gotten really good results so far.

Either way, playing evenly against the elite players of the NHL is fantastic stuff. Meanwhile I would expect players of the caliber discussed here to look good in a sheltered role. I mean if Hughes wasn’t at least getting good corsi numbers his season would be deeply concerning right now, so I’m not sure I’d point to that as a gold star as much as an absolute necessity.

Hughes has not been sheltered. NJD plays their pairings fairly evenly (note, Nemec-Casey was 100% sheltered)

Your claim that Luke's numbers have been just "good" is also disingenuous at best. They have been at/near the top of the league this year.

Yes, compared to a player who has had good results in a sheltered role, Edvinsson clears.

But we are not talking about such a player when we talk about Luke Hughes

 

[dgibb10]

I honestly thought as a hockey community we were sort of beyond small sample size advanced metrics because it's been proven that it needs to be reproducible over a number of years to have any value what-so-ever.

When you're evaluating guys playing in their first 2 full years, it's really hard to make correlations like that.
Like, are we now saying Luke Hughes will be a 60% xGF player moving forward? The only defenseman who has those statistics to his name over the past half decade is Charlie McAvoy, and that's is purely fueled by how dominant the Bergeron line was.

If I claimed "Luke Hughes will be a 60% xGF player for his entire career going forward" you'd have an argument.

Is your argument that Luke Hughes is playing too well this year for it to count?

But I'm sure simon edvinsson's small sample size argument that relies on the same small sample size is completely valid right?

Luke has a full year of quality play behind it to back it up even if he doesn't maintain this level of dominance

 

[TheKrebsCycle]

Doubtful but go ahead, and make it,
as it seems the last year , you could be his dad.

It’s very cringy. The answer is Hughes . His skating and defensive game is the best and whenever he starts getting pp 1 time his point totals will take off (assuming Hamilton wears out his welcome like he has at every stop for whatever reason ) . Haven’t watched Edvinsson much but obviously comes with impressive pedigree