No man, the long post featuring all of the stats.
- James_Tanner

Ya, OK. Do you watch the games?

Zone starts and QoC don't matter to JT.
- uf1910

It's not that they don't matter, it's that they don't sufficiently explain away things like people think they do.

For instance, if you shelter most players to the extent of Patrick Kane, guess what, they don't score anywhere close to how much he does and he probably wouldn't do all that differently if he didn't play on a team with a different line featuring elite players.

That being said, I even included context information for Gardiner and it looks good. (Only 30 D play significantly tougher minutes than he does, his zone starts are split equally) .

But whatever, it's not like I expect anyone to actually change their mind when confronted with new information.

I'm a bit confused by the bold here. So the margin for error only applies to Gardiner bumping him up 30 spots but the players he jumped don't apply in that margin for error?
- uf1910

What's confusing? It just shows that those players all play top-line competition and that none of them play significantly harder comp. than the others. It's thirty guys separated by less than one percentage point. If I was making an argument for the merits of any player in any situation, i'd make the same exact point. If you don't people go "oh 61st isn't that great" and, well, it is.

What color is the sky in your world?

Is this blog Opposite Day or something? What a bunch of dumb statements. Gardiner is a middle pairing dman on every playoff team. He's not actually very good at defense. The Oilers DO NOT have the best forward group of the salary cap era. None of them have ever made any achievement at the NHL level, none have even been an all star. Rinne is an elite level goalie who has struggled with injuries but when he's healthy he is excellent. And the Preds cannot get Rinne and Bishop under the salary cap. Benn is 26 and the best all around winger in the league, Kucherov is a fine complimentary player but he's no top star. I have forgotten what else you have said that is pure nonsense but I'm sure there was more.
- Dcoms

This is your argument: Instead of learning or at least questioning what I assumed to be true, I'm just basically going to say "I know you are, but what am I" to everything you said. I won't say why, I'll just say it's dumb because.


In school, this is called Pee-Wee Hermaning and it is not an approach that warrants much response.

What color is the sky in your world?
- PatShart

The sky has no colour. It's just particles floating through the air that reflect light that give it the illusion of having a colour.

right about what? Gardiner is about to enter his prime and his best season to date is 31 points.
- tomburton99

Typical. Complain about why I'm wrong, get a response that shows I'm not, so ignore it and make up something else to complain about.

By the way, five straight thirty point seasons on the Leafs of the last five years is pretty impressive actually.

Typical. Complain about why I'm wrong, get a response that shows I'm not, so ignore it and make up something else to complain about.

By the way, five straight thirty point seasons on the Leafs of the last five years is pretty impressive actually.
- James_Tanner

How did they miss him during the Norris voting..

Because it's a commonly accepted fact that Bergeron is that good

- James_Tanner

Logical fallacy-appeal to authority alert!

Typical. Complain about why I'm wrong, get a response that shows I'm not, so ignore it and make up something else to complain about.

By the way, five straight thirty point seasons on the Leafs of the last five years is pretty impressive actually.
- James_Tanner

24 ain't 30. For somebody obsessed with numbers, you should know that.

It's not that they don't matter, it's that they don't sufficiently explain away things like people think they do.

For instance, if you shelter most players to the extent of Patrick Kane, guess what, they don't score anywhere close to how much he does and he probably wouldn't do all that differently if he didn't play on a team with a different line featuring elite players.

That being said, I even included context information for Gardiner and it looks good. (Only 30 D play significantly tougher minutes than he does, his zone starts are split equally) .

But whatever, it's not like I expect anyone to actually change their mind when confronted with new information.
- James_Tanner

It isn't about changing minds b/c put simply that means you feel you are right and everyone else who disagrees is wrong. Couldn't there possibly be some (frank)ing middle ground in between? That is and always has been my argument with some of what you say. You point to stats and make declarative statements based on said stats, but disqualify any stats that don't fit your narrative. You will use a "margin for error" to qualify the stats you base your argument on to the positive while conveniently ignoring the other players being compared are also subject to that same margin for error.

This isn't (nor should it be) about changing minds. I absolutely believe the analytic stats have a place in the game. But this is where you and I go separate on how they are applied. Specifically to a guy like Gardiner you point to his stats and make declarative statement that he's a top pair dman and top whatever overall in the league whereas I look at Gardiner who isn't even top pair on his team (without even accounting for the fact the team around him has been weak and thus adds more questions of why Gardiner hasn't been top pair on a weak team). So either you believe you are smarter than many of the Leafs brass for not putting Gardiner top pair or the stats don't tell the entire story and there is some middle ground between the 2 extremes of Gardiner is great and Gardiner sucks. The analytics don't explain this conundrum yet somehow in your theory the analytics answer every question about certain players.

There is a place in the game for analytics just like there is a place in the game for the unscientific "eye test". How we all balance those 2 is where the uncertainty and disagreements begin.

The best forward group of the salary cap era(on paper) is the 2013 Penguins. Crosby, Malkin, Iginla, James Neal, Kunitz, Morrow, Sutter, Jokinen, Dupuis. Too bad their 4th line was pure garbage.

24 ain't 30. For somebody obsessed with numbers, you should know that.
- tomburton99

Gardiner has scored 30 or more points 3 times in his NHL career. Somehow, that adds up to 5 straight 30 point seasons for the Leafs.

This is your argument: Instead of learning or at least questioning what I assumed to be true, I'm just basically going to say "I know you are, but what am I" to everything you said. I won't say why, I'll just say it's dumb because.


In school, this is called Pee-Wee Hermaning and it is not an approach that warrants much response.
- James_Tanner

You can't end a sentence with the word because. And congratulations for putting periods at the end of each grouping of words but non of them make sentences that offer any logical decipherability. You have the maturity level of a cantaloupe with half the personality.

The best forward group of the salary cap era(on paper) is the 2013 Penguins. Crosby, Malkin, Iginla, James Neal, Kunitz, Morrow, Sutter, Jokinen, Dupuis. Too bad their 4th line was pure garbage.
- Dcoms

The fleury's killed them..

Gardiner has scored 30 or more points 3 times in his NHL career. Somehow, that adds up to 5 straight 30 point seasons for the Leafs.
- MJL

Yeah. Numbers only work when they favor Tanner. If not, then you just don't understand the nuance.

Logical fallacy-appeal to authority alert!
- MJL

Nuance.

You can't end a sentence with the word because. And congratulations for putting periods at the end of each grouping of words but non of them make sentences that offer any logical decipherability. You have the maturity level of a cantaloupe with half the personality.
- Dcoms

This has to be the best post on here ever, and this guy will never get why either. Good times.

Yeah. Numbers only work when they favor Tanner. If not, then you just don't understand the nuance.
- tomburton99

This thread all but destroys the credibility of the three or four guys who will complain about every single thing I say. You got what you asked for and you responded exactly how I expected you to.

This has to be the best post on here ever, and this guy will never get why either. Good times.
- James_Tanner

It actually is kind of funny, just because

The best forward group of the salary cap era(on paper) is the 2013 Penguins. Crosby, Malkin, Iginla, James Neal, Kunitz, Morrow, Sutter, Jokinen, Dupuis. Too bad their 4th line was pure garbage.
- Dcoms

Better than the 2010 Hawks?
Toews, Hossa, Brouwer, Kane, Ladd, Sharp, Kopecky, Madden, Versteeg, Bolland, Byfuglien

Better than the 2010 Hawks?
Toews, Hossa, Brouwer, Kane, Ladd, Sharp, Kopecky, Madden, Versteeg, Bolland, Byfuglien
- PatShart

Lucic- McDavid - Yakupov
- Nugent-Hopkins - Eberle
- Draisaitl - Puljarvvi


Admittedly that's based on potential, and they don't really have a Hossa, but eventually we might consider this better. McDavid alone is the main reason because he's played 40 games in the NHL and is pretty much the best player already.

Lucic- McDavid - Yakupov
- Nugent-Hopkins - Eberle
- Draisaitl - Puljarvvi


Admittedly that's based on potential, and they don't really have a Hossa, but eventually we might consider this better. McDavid alone is the main reason because he's played 40 games in the NHL and is pretty much the best player already.
- James_Tanner

McDavid is not the best player already. Not even close. He may be in that conversation in the very near future, but not now, after 40 games.

One player is not enough to make a forward roster the best in the NHL, regardless of how good that player is. It's a team game.

Lucic- McDavid - Yakupov
- Nugent-Hopkins - Eberle
- Draisaitl - Puljarvvi


Admittedly that's based on potential, and they don't really have a Hossa, but eventually we might consider this better. McDavid alone is the main reason because he's played 40 games in the NHL and is pretty much the best player already.
- James_Tanner

I'll give you McDavid as superstar potential (as Kane had then as well)

Brouwer - Toews - Hossa
Ladd - Sharp - Kane
Versteeg - Bolland - Byfuglien
Eager - Madden - Kopecky

That's pretty deep. McDavid and possibly Lucic would be the only two to crack the top 6

I remember you arguing that Karlsson was the best D man ever so I am really confused. No more hockey has been played since that statement but now Gardiner is the best D man in hockey?
You also really need to get off the argument that Kane is a one dimensional player. for the first few years of his career I was not a fan because there were many times you would see him coasting behind the play but if you have actually watched him play over the last 3 seasons he hustles back and has created a lot of offense from turnovers. Kane will never be Hossa just like Gardiner will never be Keith.