People are pretty ignorant, I find, about English degrees.

First, whatever you major in, half your classes end up being economics, psychology, history, sociology etc.

But in English - especially at University level - you hardly ever talk about "english" most of what you learn is whatever the various novels are about, which actually makes it so that most Lit students have extremely wide knowledge bases, which is why, historically, we make the best Jeopardy players.
- James_Tanner

I thought that that was due to spending all of that time watching Jeopardy while they were unemployed...

Well, the majority of your articles are very anti Canuck. You predict them to finish last most years and labeling Bo Horvat as the worst 3rd line center is....classic Tanner. I think you can write I just notice you target certain fanbases. I assume it's for hits but perhaps it's not
- CanuckDon

I really am not anti-Canuck. If they were good, I'd be cheering for them as I am a huge fan of the Sedins and Chris Tanev.

However, Jim Benning has been a s___-show. Absolutely ruined the team for years, which, trust me, I just sat through years of Burke/Nonis and Maloney in phx, so I know how it feels.

I really don't target them, they just make more bad moves recently than anyone else.

And while I did pick them to finish last last year, that can't be called trolling since they finished 28th.

And while I did say Horvat was bad, I did offer the caveat that he's pretty young and not in a good situation. Still, though, stats are the stats and he didn't fare well in this evaluation.

In what way am I trolling? I can always defend why I said something and I can't think of a single example of saying something just to say it.

Please define what trolling means, because maybe I don't know. I thought I did, because it seems like something someone says when they don't like what you said.
- James_Tanner

So education aside why is Bo Horvat the worst third line center?

I thought that that was due to spending all of that time watching Jeopardy while they were unemployed...
- lumlums

Solid joke, but I don't know a single English major who is unemployed.

I really am not anti-Canuck. If they were good, I'd be cheering for them as I am a huge fan of the Sedins and Chris Tanev.

However, Jim Benning has been a s___-show. Absolutely ruined the team for years, which, trust me, I just sat through years of Burke/Nonis and Maloney in phx, so I know how it feels.

I really don't target them, they just make more bad moves recently than anyone else.

And while I did pick them to finish last last year, that can't be called trolling since they finished 28th.

And while I did say Horvat was bad, I did offer the caveat that he's pretty young and not in a good situation. Still, though, stats are the stats and he didn't fare well in this evaluation.
- James_Tanner

Benning hasn't been a sh!t show and Horvat has been great. If you want to comment on another team watch a franking game. I'm assuming you are a young guy that is limited to highlights and statistical analysis but you need to put in the work and watch teams play. I don't chirp th Hurricanes players because I don't watch their games. You need to move beyond simple stats

Anyways, if you think Kruger is good, please tell me why. I see a guy who got 4 points and is bad at defense. For the record, there are players who get tons of bad zone starts and are actually effective. Kruger is not one of them.

There are players who play unusually hard QOC and have good stats. Kruger is not one of them.

It's fascinating to me how you somehow find value in zone starts and QOC when you are defending your position, yet explicitly left them off your initial "analysis."

And I quote: "Everyone is entitled to their own opinions and I fully disclose that I don't care about things like face-offs, quality of competition and zone starts."
- devils_mike

James, I haven't seen you address my above concerns yet.

Benning hasn't been a sh!t show and Horvat has been great. If you want to comment on another team watch a franking game. I'm assuming you are a young guy that is limited to highlights and statistical analysis but you need to put in the work and watch teams play. I don't chirp th Hurricanes players because I don't watch their games. You need to move beyond simple stats
- CanuckDon

James loves Kadri and...

Bo Horvat is already better than Nazem Kadri was at the same age (20), also, he'll be a much better all-around player when he's Kadri's current age (25). One just has to look at all available information to clearly see this.

I thought that that was due to spending all of that time watching Jeopardy while they were unemployed...
- lumlums

Boo yah!!!

do stats matter or win and losses or cups you need help

I really am not anti-Canuck.
- James_Tanner

Right, you are anti-Blackhawk, and have realized that by writing click bait blogs to upset the audience of one of the most visited writers on the site, you get more hits.

Guess what? You will get even more if you write bad things about the Leafs.

Trust me, the Hawks will make a serious run again for the Cup this year. Every team you mentioned but Calgary got worse in the West over the summer.

Kruger, when healthy, is an absolute PITA to play against. Gives the Hawks top six matchup advantage. An intangible that does not exist in your "stats".

Why is Nick Bonino 2nd and Kevin Hayes 21 on your list ?

Hayes had better numbers for primary production per 60 and is way better in term of possession.

I love all the butt-hurt homers here lol

Why is Nick Bonino 2nd and Kevin Hayes 21 on your list ?

Hayes had better numbers for primary production per 60 and is way better in term of possession.


- nvrsoft

You may want to go back and check your numbers

Benning hasn't been a sh!t show and Horvat has been great. If you want to comment on another team watch a franking game. I'm assuming you are a young guy that is limited to highlights and statistical analysis but you need to put in the work and watch teams play. I don't chirp th Hurricanes players because I don't watch their games. You need to move beyond simple stats
- CanuckDon

To be fair, the Canucks do suck

Benning hasn't been a sh!t show and Horvat has been great. If you want to comment on another team watch a franking game. I'm assuming you are a young guy that is limited to highlights and statistical analysis but you need to put in the work and watch teams play. I don't chirp th Hurricanes players because I don't watch their games. You need to move beyond simple stats
- CanuckDon

Sums it up.

I read your blog because I find the outlandish things you say to be highly entertaining. Keep up the good work.

To be fair, the Canucks do suck
- rangerdanger94

lol you may wanna strap in for a long 5 years of Rangers suckage before commenting on other clubs broski.

Selke
Smythe
Top FO guy in the league
3 Cups
2 Olympic Golds
About 70 points a year, on top of the defense (a big part of a center's job)

So yeah, could be.
- John Jaeckel

Art Ross? Hart? You have to win both at least once to be even considered best in the league. Still Ctosby with a bullet.

Since you ask so nicely:

St. Louis
Nashville
Minnesota

Edmonton
San Jose
Calgary

Winnipeg
Dallas
- James_Tanner

Is this the paradox that the Oilers win the presidents trophy? So St.Louis is better than Dallas, Chicago and Nashville(they are not, they got worse over the summer, a lot worse)? And the Kings and the Ducks(who have the best defense in the NHL) are not going to make the playoffs at all? Bold and ultimately idiotic predictions for sure.

Great music! I listened to take me somewhere nice, maybe 1000 times in the past 6 months. Crazy seeing it on here. We have the exact same taste in music. But I don't always agree with you on hockey. Cheers, JT. Keep the great tunes coming
- Gomey

I always love that Mazzy Star song and video(no bras rule!)

[quote=cclipp]

Art Ross? Hart? You have to win both at least once to be even considered best in the league. Still Ctosby with a bullet.
- Dcoms

atleast hart

Why even write about quality of 3rd line centers if you are going to discount some of the most important stats of a center. Then only to say it would have been too long. If you are not including face offs (which makes being a center very important), defensive zone starts ( which you would think affects a good deal of stats), and quality of opponent. Sure don't worry if the 3rd line center faces the other teams best players every night or the 4th line most nights. You seem high on your horse for completing things half a$$.

Why even write about quality of 3rd line centers if you are going to discount some of the most important stats of a center. Then only to say it would have been too long. If you are not including face offs (which makes being a center very important), defensive zone starts ( which you would think affects a good deal of stats), and quality of opponent. Sure don't worry if the 3rd line center faces the other teams best players every night or the 4th line most nights. You seem high on your horse for completing things half a$$.
- cornnation

Exactly considering those are traditionally the traits 3cs are known for they should have been the most important metrics, then again this whole judging hockey anything by stats and nerd numbers is just ruining the fun of it. If your whole basis for judgement on the sport is data some website compiled then you are sitting in a sad empty seat in the game of life.

How come when I point out some very poor results when you rank players by CF%, I get told that there are "other" stats/analyses now that address some of the shortcomings. My response was to request that we don't use Corsi any more because it is obviously seriously flawed when ranking players.

What happens?... we get yet another opinion/analysis based largely on CF% and CF%RelTM.


2015-2016 season, minimum 1000 minutes played here are where some players rank CF%RelTM

Nino Neiderreiter - 2 (LOL!)
Kris Versteeg - 16
Patrick Kane - 49
Taylor Hall - 51
John Tavares - 64
Alex Ovechkin - 69
Brent Burns - 70
Jamie Benn - 71
Sidney Crosby - 83
Tarasenko - 86

... you get the idea.

Yes, I hand-picked a few questionable rankings here, but this list of very questionable rankings is far from complete... how about Anze Kopitar at 135? Corey Perry 161 or Jonathan Toews and 175, Stamkos at 191, or Seabrook at 245.

So, again I ask. What is this supposed to be telling me? I'll tell you what it does tell me is that the stat is an absolute pile of poop.

Why would I even use something this obviously flawed as even a small part of an assessment?