And he's gone....

Wow! The month of February!
We all know James wasn't going to pay the bills with his Yotes blogs.
I guess he wants to make sure the bills are paid early this month.
Wash, Rinse, Repeat!

Where is your list of players to support your claim that the Panthers are a 5-6 man team?

Roman Polak has 4 less points then Jake Gardiner!

I think I can agree Jake Garinder is a bit under appreciated, but there are a lot of things to consider when looking at stats. It's one thing to look at them, it is another learning to interpret them.
People have pointed it out already, but Gardiner has good CorsiRel stats on a team where the opportunity to create some space between him and the other Dmen present is more pronounced. Doughty is surrounded by positive Corsi. LA is the Top Corsi team in the league. Toronto is the lowest. Not to downplay professional players in Toronto, but it is easier to be the best when you are surrounded by poor players. It's much more impressive to be the best when surrounded by the elite. If I played defense along side some 10 year old kids my CorsiRel would be through the roof. That doesn't mean I'm a better Dman than doughty.

Not to crap on Gardiner ( seriously guys, he's a decent Dman ), but the giveaway argument is valid. It's important for a Dman to effectively move the puck, but a give away isn't something obscure like some other stats. It's a definitive loss of possession. Gardiner is an excellent passer who get the puck out of his zone well, but he has 3.28 give aways per 60 minutes. Doughty is 2.79, which is a significant improvement. Since you Bring up Karlsson, who a lot of people see as risky when trying to generate plays, he is at 2.36 giveaways per 60. This shows that you can be a guy who is a great passer who generates zone exits, but not inflate your turnover numbers. Great Dmen can do both. Gardiner struggles with being a great outlet man, while also being a reliable option generating passes.

It should be pointed out that Gardiner doesn't produce as many points ( in general ), despite being on a team where he is given more opportunity than he would on many other teams. On a team that has more options when throwing Dmen on the ice, Doughty generally produces more points.

There are a lot of other things to consider as well. But in the end, I guess I'd say you have to be careful about CorsiRel. If you ignore other stuff, it can be misleading.

Just stop has become one of the worst cliches there is. Like "just saying" only worse.

I will never stop. You may notice the difference between us is I backed up my views with facts and evidence while you attempted to be condescending without reading it. If you read it, you'd see some amusing irony in your post.
- James_Tanner

when you refused to read or refute themariner's rebuttal on a previous blog, I took the same attitude with your work.

I think I can agree Jake Garinder is a bit under appreciated, but there are a lot of things to consider when looking at stats. It's one thing to look at them, it is another learning to interpret them.
People have pointed it out already, but Gardiner has good CorsiRel stats on a team where the opportunity to create some space between him and the other Dmen present is more pronounced. Doughty is surrounded by positive Corsi. LA is the Top Corsi team in the league. Toronto is the lowest. Not to downplay professional players in Toronto, but it is easier to be the best when you are surrounded by poor players. It's much more impressive to be the best when surrounded by the elite. If I played defense along side some 10 year old kids my CorsiRel would be through the roof. That doesn't mean I'm a better Dman than doughty.

Not to crap on Gardiner ( seriously guys, he's a decent Dman ), but the giveaway argument is valid. It's important for a Dman to effectively move the puck, but a give away isn't something obscure like some other stats. It's a definitive loss of possession. Gardiner is an excellent passer who get the puck out of his zone well, but he has 3.28 give aways per 60 minutes. Doughty is 2.79, which is a significant improvement. Since you Bring up Karlsson, who a lot of people see as risky when trying to generate plays, he is at 2.36 giveaways per 60. This shows that you can be a guy who is a great passer who generates zone exits, but not inflate your turnover numbers. Great Dmen can do both. Gardiner struggles with being a great outlet man, while also being a reliable option generating passes.

It should be pointed out that Gardiner doesn't produce as many points ( in general ), despite being on a team where he is given more opportunity than he would on many other teams. On a team that has more options when throwing Dmen on the ice, Doughty generally produces more points.

There are a lot of other things to consider as well. But in the end, I guess I'd say you have to be careful about CorsiRel. If you ignore other stuff, it can be misleading.
- MaxTLimit

He plays against weaker opponents...especially weaker than Rielly and Hunwick. Ignore QOC all they want ( nerds ) it's really not ignorable and has a large impact on all the stats. I had just got started and I had 40 guys I would take over Jake.

Roman Polak has 4 less points then Jake Gardiner!
- camfor

Points are just luck.

Roman Polak has 4 less points then Jake Gardiner!
- camfor

Dude, come on..........goals, assists, and the fact that you play most of your shifts against 3rd and 4th liners is meaningless.

The only thing that makes a player great are the carefully selected stats that tanner chooses that prove his point......and not the plethora of more relevant stats that prove he's out to lunch

He plays against weaker opponents...especially weaker than Rielly and Hunwick. Ignore QOC all they want ( nerds ) it's really not ignorable and has a large impact on all the stats. I had just got started and I had 40 guys I would take over Jake.
- Garnie

I didn't even get around to Qualcomp. I think it is another stat where context matters. Just because you have decent stats paired with low qualcom, doesn't necessarily mean they will be bad with higher qualcomp. It CAN be safely said that your stats probably won't improve with higher qualcomp though. It's pretty rare that you'd do better against higher competition. However, it could be that a certain style of play is as effective against tough competition as it is against low competition. I think Gardiner is a guy who would be pretty similar with higher qualcomp, because a lot of his mistakes ( from the eye test ) are from his own sort of mental focus issues. Now this is subjective, but I think he would do about the same because it isn't the opponents skill that burns him. It's his own mistakes that burn him. I don't think Gardiner has any troubles with his skill. I think he has a bit of decision making issues. Watching guys who have ability but make those sort of 'mental' mistakes can be pretty frustrating.

Again, that is a subjective view.

I didn't even get around to Qualcomp. I think it is another stat where context matters. Just because you have decent stats paired with low qualcom, doesn't necessarily mean they will be bad with higher qualcomp. It CAN be safely said that your stats probably won't improve with higher qualcomp though. It's pretty rare that you'd do better against higher competition. However, it could be that a certain style of play is as effective against tough competition as it is against low competition. I think Gardiner is a guy who would be pretty similar with higher qualcomp, because a lot of his mistakes ( from the eye test ) are from his own sort of mental focus issues. Now this is subjective, but I think he would do about the same because it isn't the opponents skill that burns him. It's his own mistakes that burn him. I don't think Gardiner has any troubles with his skill. I think he has a bit of decision making issues. Watching guys who have ability but make those sort of 'mental' mistakes can be pretty frustrating.

Again, that is a subjective view.
- MaxTLimit

Nice series of posts.

I didn't even get around to Qualcomp. I think it is another stat where context matters. Just because you have decent stats paired with low qualcom, doesn't necessarily mean they will be bad with higher qualcomp. It CAN be safely said that your stats probably won't improve with higher qualcomp though. It's pretty rare that you'd do better against higher competition. However, it could be that a certain style of play is as effective against tough competition as it is against low competition. I think Gardiner is a guy who would be pretty similar with higher qualcomp, because a lot of his mistakes ( from the eye test ) are from his own sort of mental focus issues. Now this is subjective, but I think he would do about the same because it isn't the opponents skill that burns him. It's his own mistakes that burn him. I don't think Gardiner has any troubles with his skill. I think he has a bit of decision making issues. Watching guys who have ability but make those sort of 'mental' mistakes can be pretty frustrating.

Again, that is a subjective view.
- MaxTLimit

Who takes the most shots in the NHL? My guess is Ovie....who doesn't play against Ovie? The answer is Jake Gardiner, he also doesn't play against Benn or Seguin....I'm seeing a pattern here. I could keep going but I'm sure you get it. Is Jake a useful D...for sure, but telling people he's top 20 in the league and it's time to actually start watching the games and matching data ( useful data ) IMO

As I said I got to 40 guys I'd take before JG in a short amount of time and I think there's quite a few more.

As I said I got to 40 guys I'd take before JG in a short amount of time and I think there's quite a few more.
- Garnie

Hypotehtically there are 60 "top pairing dmen" in the NHL. I think it is safe to say Gardiner is a capable 2/3D on most any team. That's pretty damn good for his salary. Yet if you went by the opinion of many Toronto fans you'd think he was worse than Phaneuf.

Correlation does not imply causation: Look that one up in your logic text.
- yzermaneely

Correlation DOES imply causation, which is why it is such a common problem. I think you mean "Correlation is not causation," which is true.

Hypotehtically there are 60 "top pairing dmen" in the NHL. I think it is safe to say Gardiner is a capable 2/3D on most any team. That's pretty damn good for his salary. Yet if you went by the opinion of many Toronto fans you'd think he was worse than Phaneuf.
- jfkst1

You have to watch him, he's ok if given space - put a little pressure on him and he stops moving his legs and is separated from the puck easily - he's very weak in his own end without the puck / can't box out.

This year he's been a bit better, except the last few weeks IMO

I'm starting to like him more this year but top 20 in the NHL makes me giggle a bit.

I think I can agree Jake Garinder is a bit under appreciated, but there are a lot of things to consider when looking at stats. It's one thing to look at them, it is another learning to interpret them.
People have pointed it out already, but Gardiner has good CorsiRel stats on a team where the opportunity to create some space between him and the other Dmen present is more pronounced. Doughty is surrounded by positive Corsi. LA is the Top Corsi team in the league. Toronto is the lowest. Not to downplay professional players in Toronto, but it is easier to be the best when you are surrounded by poor players. It's much more impressive to be the best when surrounded by the elite. If I played defense along side some 10 year old kids my CorsiRel would be through the roof. That doesn't mean I'm a better Dman than doughty.

Not to crap on Gardiner ( seriously guys, he's a decent Dman ), but the giveaway argument is valid. It's important for a Dman to effectively move the puck, but a give away isn't something obscure like some other stats. It's a definitive loss of possession. Gardiner is an excellent passer who get the puck out of his zone well, but he has 3.28 give aways per 60 minutes. Doughty is 2.79, which is a significant improvement. Since you Bring up Karlsson, who a lot of people see as risky when trying to generate plays, he is at 2.36 giveaways per 60. This shows that you can be a guy who is a great passer who generates zone exits, but not inflate your turnover numbers. Great Dmen can do both. Gardiner struggles with being a great outlet man, while also being a reliable option generating passes.

It should be pointed out that Gardiner doesn't produce as many points ( in general ), despite being on a team where he is given more opportunity than he would on many other teams. On a team that has more options when throwing Dmen on the ice, Doughty generally produces more points.

There are a lot of other things to consider as well. But in the end, I guess I'd say you have to be careful about CorsiRel. If you ignore other stuff, it can be misleading.
- MaxTLimit

Good post, but as I said earlier, if it is easier to outplay the guys on your team, you also lose out on the boost you get playing with good players.

So sure, while Doughty has to go a ways to seperate himself from his good team, he also gets to play with Kopitar, Muzzin, Lucic, Toffoli etc. Gardiner does not.

It all pretty much balances out.

So in the end, while comparing across teams is difficult, relative corsi gives you a better barometer than just raw numbers.

He plays against weaker opponents...especially weaker than Rielly and Hunwick. Ignore QOC all they want ( nerds ) it's really not ignorable and has a large impact on all the stats. I had just got started and I had 40 guys I would take over Jake.
- Garnie

OK you've made you point about a 653 times and even though it's been explained to you and I've given you links, you don't care.

You say the same thing every day.

Your argument is literally "I don't agree with all the experts, here is my take." But your take is ridiculous. That'll be the last time you hear from me on it, but you've crossed the line into super-repetitive and I don't think you have to keep repeating yourself.

We get it, you know better than every single stat expert.

You have to watch him, he's ok if given space - put a little pressure on him and he stops moving his legs and is separated from the puck easily - he's very weak in his own end without the puck / can't box out.

This year he's been a bit better, except the last few weeks IMO

I'm starting to like him more this year but top 20 in the NHL makes me giggle a bit.
- Garnie

Gardiner is definitely a top 20....
So should be no problem trading him for Drouin.....get her done lou!

Connor and Eberle together

Connor and Eberle together
- HB77

What does that have to do with Gardiner??

Or do you mean McD and Eberle (together) for Gardiner in a trade?

Dude, come on..........goals, assists, and the fact that you play most of your shifts against 3rd and 4th liners is meaningless.

The only thing that makes a player great are the carefully selected stats that tanner chooses that prove his point......and not the plethora of more relevant stats that prove he's out to lunch
- sensarmy_11

See this is so ridiculous. It is not difficult to understand that points are a result rather than a process. If you don't understand how or why this works and seriously want to, I'd be happy to explain.

If you play against weak comp, you tend to play with weak comp, which is why when guys graduate to harder minutes, they tend to do good if they were all ready doing good. Many people besides myself have suggested that the impact of QOC is not what people think.

Finally, I am happy to use any stats that I think are relevent. If you think there's one that proves your point, then bring it up and tell me what I missed and why. Otherwise, you're just emptily trolling because you're not bringing anything to back your point.

What does that have to do with Gardiner??

Or do you mean McD and Eberle (together) for Gardiner in a trade?
- Cooshie

Exactly

I was proposing a deal

Exactly

I was proposing a deal
- HB77

It's close, real close.....let me think on it.

It's close, real close.....let me think on it.
- Cooshie

Take your time

I can understand your apprehension

See this is so ridiculous. It is not difficult to understand that points are a result rather than a process. If you don't understand how or why this works and seriously want to, I'd be happy to explain.

If you play against weak comp, you tend to play with weak comp, which is why when guys graduate to harder minutes, they tend to do good if they were all ready doing good. Many people besides myself have suggested that the impact of QOC is not what people think.

Finally, I am happy to use any stats that I think are relevent. If you think there's one that proves your point, then bring it up and tell me what I missed and why. Otherwise, you're just emptily trolling because you're not bringing anything to back your point.
- James_Tanner

Tanner, in your opinion who wins this trade?
Drouin for Gardiner