• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
unkempt

Hudler: More Icetime - Worse Performance ?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Has anyone thought maybe it's a conditioning issue? Perhaps his TOI is limited due to conditioning concerns- he needs to build up the endurance to play that extra 4 minutes a game. Common enough with Euro transplants, at least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yea, that's where I'm at.. but I've already got a long winded post detailing that.

I found it interesting that YG actually worked against his own point by showing a significant decline in PPM as Hudler gains increased ice time.

He showed that with a 2 and a half minute differential, Hudler loses 6 points to his total, but his PPM also significantly increases.

On the other hand, if you were to scratch 2 and a half minutes off of Datsyuk's or Zetterberg's current average icetime, his point totals would also fall, but it probably wouldn't result in as significant of a PPM increase (and that's not even counting into discussion the defensive presence the team would lose those 2 and a half minutes).

The undertone in all of this is that some people here think that a player like Cleary or Flip, since they aren't producing as many points (but providing great defense) should be reduced 2 or so minutes in ice time, and that ice time should be given to Hudler. Interestingly enough, when Dats and Z were on seperate lines, you didn't see anyone arguing that Z, who is producing less than Dats, should be dropped 2 minutes in ice time so Dats could put up a handful of extra points.

It just doesn't work like that.

His increase in ice time doesn't equate to better linemates, either. In the games where hes getting more minutes, hes playing more, but with the same "third line" linemates. If hes going to get 16 minutes a game on average, hes going to have better linemates.

And if you're going to drop Hank's time and increase Datsyuk's time, that creates a 4 minute difference. Essentially, you're going to be taking Hank off of his line and giving Datsyuk double shifts. Thats why no one is advocating that issue.

Edited by YoungGuns1340

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
His increase in ice time doesn't equate to better linemates, either. In the games where hes getting more minutes, hes playing more, but with the same "third line" linemates. If hes going to get 16 minutes a game on average, hes going to have better linemates.

No, because then he's going to be going up against better opposition.. a situation in which Hudler does not thrive as much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, because then he's going to be going up against better opposition.. a situation in which Hudler does not thrive as much.

If hes going up against better opposition, then he has better linemates, and those better linemates are going to see the brunt of the defense. Do top-pairing units target Homer like they do Datsyuk and Zetterberg? No.

At any rate, Hudler has never been given the chance to play in that position. Unless you want to count the "1 and 1/2 game" sample, as "playing against better opposition." Laughable. :rolleyes:

Hudler is going to be held back by "facing the top opposition" just like his skating and stature has kept him from ever being effective at the NHL level. Again, :rolleyes: He adapts better than anyone on this Wings team has in years.

Edited by YoungGuns1340

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a visual thing for the not so math inclined among you:

ppmefficiency.jpg

As you can see, increased production over increased icetime does not necessarily equate to increased performance. It can actually be indicative of decreased performance, depending on what happens to the -rate- of production.

Note: Graphs not 100% accurate or even particularly well drawn

Edited by Datsyerberger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regardless of how much ice-time Hudler has been looking better and better this year. However, if we can sign Hossa and Franzen meaning Hudler has to go... I will be absolutely ok with that if it means that by trade or offer sheet we can get a highish 1st round pick this year. Zack Kasian may be a possibility.... I'm good with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hudler has played all of 8 games this year with more than 16 minutes TOI - while Filppula is averaging more than that - so obviously your hudler sample size has a lot more room for error.

The first three games Hudler played with over 16 minutes, he did not score. Since then, and it has been quite easy to visually see his improvement this year, he has had 2 goals and 4 assists (6 pts) in the 5 games he has seen more than 16 minutes, or 1.2 pts per game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If hes going up against better opposition, then he has better linemates, and those better linemates are going to see the brunt of the defense. Do top-pairing units target Homer like they do Datsyuk and Zetterberg? No.

Do you pay attention to what you post? An abundance of rolly-eyes doesn't make you appear any more intelligent.

I suppose Holmstrom's groin strains, knee injures and back spasms come from him just skating in a slow, straight line and then standing somewhere.

Fact is, whenever Holmstrom's in the offensive zone he almost always has a particular d-man (if not two as a couple teams do) targeting just him and he takes a lot of abuse, whereas Datsyuk and Zetterberg are generally covered with zonal or positional coverage. You should know better than that.

That comment takes you in about a 180 of the point you were trying to prove.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hudler has played all of 8 games this year with more than 16 minutes TOI - while Filppula is averaging more than that - so obviously your hudler sample size has a lot more room for error.

The first three games Hudler played with over 16 minutes, he did not score. Since then, and it has been quite easy to visually see his improvement this year, he has had 2 goals and 4 assists (6 pts) in the 5 games he has seen more than 16 minutes, or 1.2 pts per game.

But, if you examine the graph above, you will see that's a rapid decline in points per minute, which is the best asset for guaging icetime efficiency (when it comes to point totals).

The lack of lower minute data on Flip is a bit limiting, but there are samples out there.

Hudler PPG

67 pts, 13.5 minutes: 0.82

73 pts, 16 minutes: 0.89

Filppula PPG

35 pts, 13.5 minutes: 0.43

41 pts, 16 minutes: 0.50

Identical PPG differential, and the PPG ratio between their 16 minute PPG numbers and their 13.5 minute numbers decreases, showing either decreased production rate for Hudler, increased production rate for Flip, or both.

Of course, this entire discussion is pointless if there isn't an understanding that there's a difference between production totals and rate of production (not directed at you, egroen).

Edit: If we're only going to include recent instances in which Hudler produced at the exclusion of times earlier that he didn't, then it would be just as relevant to only include the recent times that Flip has played with Hossa for purposes of determining his PPG and comparing the differential between the two.

Edited by Datsyerberger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think Babcock just likes having a legitimate scoring threat on the bottom lines and it is as simple as that. More so than any forward outside of Datsyuk, Hudler makes the players around him better and will single-handidly make a line of Helm and McCarty a consistent scoring threat.

It's all about putting the right pieces together -- and obviously Hudler needs to play with someone with wheels and can backcheck:

Holmstrom Hudler Leino -- would get scored on every shift.

But I am dieing to see a Franzen Hudler Hossa line.

In fact, I am salivating over the potential of that line.

Franzen needs a playmaker - and Filppula does not cut it. Hossa can create plays by himself, but is not a bad passer once he has drawn a couple defenders to himself. Again, Filppula is not the guy you want him passing to. But both Franzen and Hudler are more than capable of burying it. You have two quality backcheckers, three goal scorers, one net front presence, one elite playmaker and another good one, two fast skaters and two big bodies -- What a line!

And it lets you keep the Euro Twins together, but still keeps a legitimate 1b line.

yeah, I think that line would be killer. I think Huds is a better playmaker than Flip.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yeah, I think that line would be killer. I think Huds is a better playmaker than Flip.

I think they're a lot closer in that regard than some people here think. Huddles is without a doubt a better goalscorer, though. Flip's finishing needs some work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think they're a lot closer in that regard than some people here think. Huddles is without a doubt a better goalscorer, though. Flip's finishing needs some work.

Gotta disagree. The passes I've seen Hudler make are far and away more impressive, and numerous, than Flipper. The stats don't necessarily bear that out, but it's what I've observed. In the same way Sammy gets lots of garbage points from dicking around on the PP and not really contributing, Flipper to me has been propped up by Hossa's play of late and isn't really impressing me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gotta disagree. The passes I've seen Hudler make are far and away more impressive, and numerous, than Flipper. The stats don't necessarily bear that out, but it's what I've observed. In the same way Sammy gets lots of garbage points from dicking around on the PP and not really contributing, Flipper to me has been propped up by Hossa's play of late and isn't really impressing me.

This is where you have to just eyeball it -- and while an assist is an assit on the stat sheet, I see a big difference between Hudler's and Filppula's assists of late. Filppula can just get the puck to Hossa, and Hossa can make something of nothing - but Hudler is actually able to set him up for an immediate opportunity. In the same way, Franzen often needs his goals served on a platter to him, and Hudler is better equipped to do so. I just think that line with Hudler would be an offensive powerhouse, and I hope we get to see it going into the playoffs here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you pay attention to what you post? An abundance of rolly-eyes doesn't make you appear any more intelligent.

I suppose Holmstrom's groin strains, knee injures and back spasms come from him just skating in a slow, straight line and then standing somewhere.

Fact is, whenever Holmstrom's in the offensive zone he almost always has a particular d-man (if not two as a couple teams do) targeting just him and he takes a lot of abuse, whereas Datsyuk and Zetterberg are generally covered with zonal or positional coverage. You should know better than that.

That comment takes you in about a 180 of the point you were trying to prove.

Not at all. What you are suggesting is that the top forward unit is going to yield the top opposition. Fact is, that isn't the case when you have to manage shifts and have home-ice advantage vs without, but I'll ignore those complexities for now, despite the fact that they bolster my argument. In particular, the key assumption is that the coach wants his top DEFENSEMAN out on the ice against a top offensive unit more than anything - if he can get his best checking line out there, thats great, but that takes more efficiency that many coaches don't have for the majority of the game. Regardless, the point remains that there are 3 forwards, and 2 defenseman. And the defenseman are going to focus on the two best forwards. That leaves out 1 - in this case Holmstrom.

Also, I don't know if you noticed, but Holmstrom isn't staked out in front of the net at even strength. He does his fair share of skating and cycling.

But further from that, why is it that Hudler is going to have particular difficulty with top pairing units? Because of his size and strength? Yes, that makes sense. Because all top pairing defenseman are typically big and physical. Wait for it, wait for it...:rolleyes:

The overwhelming assumption on this board is that somehow, Hudler is easy to defend against. Which is not even close to the case. His creativity and passing skills make him defy tight coverage. I suppose Datsyuk was easy to defend against as a small, meek, little rookie? Now, if the assumption is that hes going to suffer when being paired up with the stronger, more physical defenseman, then the chance that hes going to see those kind of defenseman on the top unit is less likely than where is now. Typically, strong, physical defenseman are en masse on the bottom pairings around the NHL while the offensive, positionally sound defenders fill out the upper ranks. Would Hudler somehow have a tougher time facing Rafalski or Lilja?

Oh, and by the way. Hudler's scoring rate decreases from when given 15 minutes up from 13.5, but it increases on the 15 minute rate when bumped up to 16 minutes. Essentially, Hudler scores at the highest rate at 13.5, the lowest at 15, and somewhere in the middle at 16. In short, if you were to average the rates at which Hudler scores at 15 and at 16, he would be on pace to score 82 points in 19.5 minutes per game. Thats down from the incredible 99 points he would statistically score if given 19.5 minutes a game on average, but its also 5 points more than Henrik Zetterberg is on pace to score in about 20 minutes per game.

So basically, even though Hudler's rate decreases, hes still showing that the statistics are on his side.

Edited by YoungGuns1340

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not at all. What you are suggesting is that the top forward unit is going to yield the top opposition. Fact is, that isn't the case when you have to manage shifts and have home-ice advantage vs without, but I'll ignore those complexities for now, despite the fact that they bolster my argument. In particular, the key assumption is that the coach wants his top DEFENSEMAN out on the ice against a top offensive unit more than anything - if he can get his best checking line out there, thats great, but that takes more efficiency that many coaches don't have for the majority of the game. Regardless, the point remains that there are 3 forwards, and 2 defenseman. And the defenseman are going to focus on the two best forwards. That leaves out 1 - in this case Holmstrom.

Also, I don't know if you noticed, but Holmstrom isn't staked out in front of the net at even strength. He does his fair share of skating and cycling.

But further from that, why is it that Hudler is going to have particular difficulty with top pairing units? Because of his size and strength? Yes, that makes sense. Because all top pairing defenseman are typically big and physical. Wait for it, wait for it...:rolleyes:

The overwhelming assumption on this board is that somehow, Hudler is easy to defend against. Which is not even close to the case. His creativity and passing skills make him defy tight coverage. I suppose Datsyuk was easy to defend against as a small, meek, little rookie? Now, if the assumption is that hes going to suffer when being paired up with the stronger, more physical defenseman, then the chance that hes going to see those kind of defenseman on the top unit is less likely than where is now. Typically, strong, physical defenseman are en masse on the bottom pairings around the NHL while the offensive, positionally sound defenders fill out the upper ranks. Would Hudler somehow have a tougher time facing Rafalski or Lilja?

Oh, and by the way. Hudler's scoring rate decreases from when given 15 minutes up from 13.5, but it increases on the 15 minute rate when bumped up to 16 minutes. Essentially, Hudler scores at the highest rate at 13.5, the lowest at 15, and somewhere in the middle at 16. In short, if you were to average the rates at which Hudler scores at 15 and at 16, he would be on pace to score 82 points in 19.5 minutes per game. Thats down from the incredible 99 points he would statistically score if given 19.5 minutes a game on average, but its also 5 points more than Henrik Zetterberg is on pace to score in about 20 minutes per game.

So basically, even though Hudler's rate decreases, hes still showing that the statistics are on his side.

You have completely missed the concept of production amount vs production rate. If the image above didn't help, debating this with you is without a point. Regardless, one last attempt:

PPM = production/scoring rate

Point totals = production/point totals

It is clear that Hudler's total production goes up with more icetime. That is irrefutable. However, his rate of production goes down. The efficiency of his production starts dropping rapidly beyond 13-14 minutes, and the two most likely candidates for this are: limit of endurance, or: unfavorable line matching. With either of these factors, his rate of production would likely further drop at 19 minutes of play. At that point, it could stagnate or even go negative (that is, his total production at 19 minutes could actually be less than at 16). Eventually, the curve begins to swing downwards.. Datsyuk isn't gonna be superman if he logs 60 minutes a game.

It is at that certain point that it becomes similarly or more efficient to play someone who's RATE of production will not fall with a couple minutes of added ice time.

If Hudler's point totals will rise by 6 with 2.5 minutes of added ice time (only a small percentage increase) and Flip's points will rise by 6 with the same amount of ice time (almost double the increase, percentage-wise), and when considering the other intangibles.. who do you want out there?

On another note, Babs likes talent on talent line matching. A higher line for Hudler would often mean facing higher levels of talent. That's also another reason I think Babs doesn't play Huddles much on the 2nd line. All of the players in the top 2 lines are very solid two-way players. Hudler doesn't suck defensively, but everyone above him is better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On another note, Babs likes talent on talent line matching. A higher line for Hudler would often mean facing higher levels of talent. That's also another reason I think Babs doesn't play Huddles much on the 2nd line. All of the players in the top 2 lines are very solid two-way players. Hudler doesn't suck defensively, but everyone above him is better.

Holmstrom! Huddles blows him away defensively :)

I think one pure offensive player per line in the top two is just fine. Now Hudler and Holmstrom on the same line, yeah that could spell disaster!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You have completely missed the concept of production amount vs production rate. If the image above didn't help, debating this with you is without a point. Regardless, one last attempt:

PPM = production/scoring rate

Point totals = production/point totals

It is clear that Hudler's total production goes up with more icetime. That is irrefutable. However, his rate of production goes down. The efficiency of his production starts dropping rapidly beyond 13-14 minutes, and the two most likely candidates for this are: limit of endurance, or: unfavorable line matching. With either of these factors, his rate of production would likely further drop at 19 minutes of play. At that point, it could stagnate or even go negative (that is, his total production at 19 minutes could actually be less than at 16). Eventually, the curve begins to swing downwards.. Datsyuk isn't gonna be superman if he logs 60 minutes a game.

It is at that certain point that it becomes similarly or more efficient to play someone who's RATE of production will not fall with a couple minutes of added ice time.

If Hudler's point totals will rise by 6 with 2.5 minutes of added ice time (only a small percentage increase) and Flip's points will rise by 6 with the same amount of ice time (almost double the increase, percentage-wise), and when considering the other intangibles.. who do you want out there?

On another note, Babs likes talent on talent line matching. A higher line for Hudler would often mean facing higher levels of talent. That's also another reason I think Babs doesn't play Huddles much on the 2nd line. All of the players in the top 2 lines are very solid two-way players. Hudler doesn't suck defensively, but everyone above him is better.

And the differntial of the scoring rate when minutes added = exactly that.

To illustrate, Hudler's PPM decreases by 1.02 but the differential between that and 1 more minute is a mere .40. If you continue the differential pattern (roughly 2/3rds), then the scoring differential plateaus at almost exactly 17:00 minutes exactly (and, naturally, Hudler's PPM plateaus as well) having decreased by a negligible 2.1 per minute until 17 minutes, where the decrease becomes too small to measure, or basically stagnant. So, given our only sample of 7 games at 15, and 9 games at 16, Hudler's scoring rate at 17 minutes per game would be 18.6. Or, 75 points @ 17 minutes per game. 79.3 points @ 18 minutes, 83.7 points @ 19 minutes, and 88.1 minutes @ 20 minutes per game.

Call me crazy, but regardless of Hudler's PPM decreasing after 13.5 minutes, 75 points with 17 minutes per game is still a great scoring rate for a guy you consider to be a third liner. And on top of that 20 minutes = 1st line minutes, and 88 points = 1st line production. So, essentially, from our known sample, Hudler's increase in role is paralleled to his increase in production. I.E, if Hudler were on the 2nd line, he would put up 2nd line minutes according to our model. If Hudler were on the 1st line, he would put up 1st line points according to our model.

To reiterate:

It is at that certain point that it becomes similarly or more efficient to play someone who's RATE of production will not fall with a couple minutes of added ice time.

That rate of production for Hudler is 17 minutes.

At any rate, the irony of this situation is that you were demeaning Hudler scoring 73 points in 16 minutes in the 1st place. Thats a great top 6 player on any team in the league.

Finally, your "comparison model" with Filppula doesn't equate. Hudler's increase in time does not coincide with an increase in linemate quality. Hudler sees more more time with Samuelsson and Leino. Filppula sees more time, and it comes centering Marian Hossa. So essentially, if we wanted to compare, then we'd have to look only at stats where Hudler and Filppula both play 16+ minutes a game on Hossa's line. Which we don't have.

And, before I run out of breath, no, Filppula is not "close" to Hudler in offensive talent.

If Hudler's point totals will rise by 6 with 2.5 minutes of added ice time (only a small percentage increase) and Flip's points will rise by 6 with the same amount of ice time (almost double the increase, percentage-wise), and when considering the other intangibles.. who do you want out there?

I'm confused by this point. Are you saying that if Hudler gets 2.5 more minutes a game - on top of 13.5 for a total of 16 - and he only puts up 6 more than what he would put at 13.5 for a total of 73 points and then comparing that to if Filppula were to get an increase of 2.5 minutes per game - on top of 16 minutes for a total of 18.5 - that he would put the same extra 6 points, for a total of 47 points? Is that what you're saying?

Edited by YoungGuns1340

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was just curious as to how much Hossa was helping Filppula'a game recently, because to my eyes, it was pretty significant. So I quickly went through the past few games, where Filppula has been putting up points nicely, and here is what I found:

6 out of 7 of Filppula's points have come as assists before Hossa inevitably touches the puck.

The other was a secondary assist on a Lidstrom goal.

No big significance, I was just curious, and thought I would share.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And the differntial of the scoring rate when minutes added = exactly that.

To illustrate, Hudler's PPM decreases by 1.02 but the differential between that and 1 more minute is a mere .40. If you continue the differential pattern (roughly 2/3rds), then the scoring differential plateaus at almost exactly 17:00 minutes exactly (and, naturally, Hudler's PPM plateaus as well) having decreased by a negligible 2.1 per minute until 17 minutes, where the decrease becomes too small to measure, or basically stagnant. So, given our only sample of 7 games at 15, and 9 games at 16, Hudler's scoring rate at 17 minutes per game would be 18.6. Or, 75 points @ 17 minutes per game. 79.3 points @ 18 minutes, 83.7 points @ 19 minutes, and 88.1 minutes @ 20 minutes per game.

I don't want to comment on where exactly Hudler's most efficient point is... I don't think we have the data right now to show that. And anyways, I'm pretty sure that Babcock does know and is playing him at that point. Regardless, where I and others disagree with you is the idea of a plateau of production. By your model, you are assuming that at a certain point, a player's production becomes constant. In this case, you are saying that after 17 minutes, every extra minute per game he gets will merit 4.4 extra points per season. It does not work that way. If it did, we could thusly also say that Hudler would get 110 points playing 25 mpg, 132 points playing 30 mpg, and 264 points playing 60 mpg.

The relationship between minutes played and point production per minute is probably very close to being parabolic... rate increases as minutes increase until a point, and then the rate drops. The model you're describing has some sort of limit... rate increases as minutes increase and steadily approaches a constant number with no drop. You cannot extrapolate a constant increase in points with a constant increase with minutes; otherwise, you'd just play your best 5 players 60 minutes a game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You cannot extrapolate a constant increase in points with a constant increase with minutes; otherwise, you'd just play your best 5 players 60 minutes a game.

I agree with what you're saying in principle, but this a bad example. You've taken the point into the realm of absurdity. It's reasonable to make guesses about players potentially getting an extra 5-6 minutes a game; the same can't be said for 40.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Holmstrom! Huddles blows him away defensively :)

I think one pure offensive player per line in the top two is just fine. Now Hudler and Holmstrom on the same line, yeah that could spell disaster!

Well, I decided to call Hudler and Holmstrom a draw since Homer plays with more physicality, but yea, I did miss that. Noone here is gonna debate Homer's top line minutes, though XD

I still like to step back for a moment whenever we have debates like this on LGW and realize just how NICE it is we're having debates about who's not the worst, but rather, the "least best" player for not only our top 2 but sometimes 3/4 of our forward lines!

Personally, I hope Hudler - Flip - Hossa stays together. Hudler and Hossa have been freakin sweet together, because they'll both make plays, both shoot accurately, and both go to the net to finish stuff off. With ZDH as the top line, Flip is the best available for center for those two, as he's 4th for our centers in faceoffs.. unless of course you want Draper centering those two :P. He also helps provide breakout speed, and we know if he gets the puck to Hossa before he gets out-muscled, Hossa will do something worthwhile with it. That also makes for a line that has awesome shutdown potential, not as good as Z+D, but Flip + Hossa is no slouch in the backchecking department. Playing with hot hands like that is bound to boost Flip's offensive confidence, too.

My third line?

Leino - Franzen - Sammy

Again, two defensively solid players and an offensive type. A playmaker, a shooter, and a scorer/screener/big body. It's a good, good day to be a Wings fan when this is your THIRD line.

#4

Helm - Draper - Cleary

It's that fourth line with grit, energy, and a youthful spark all along with Draper's faceoff ability that we've wanted all damned year. Putting Cleary on this line is not a knock against him. I put him here with the knowledge that he can be slotted into every other line in place of a tired player to give them energy, as well as log substantial PK time, taking the burden somewhat off of our more offensive players. Cleary is the ultimate utility player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't want to comment on where exactly Hudler's most efficient point is... I don't think we have the data right now to show that. And anyways, I'm pretty sure that Babcock does know and is playing him at that point. Regardless, where I and others disagree with you is the idea of a plateau of production. By your model, you are assuming that at a certain point, a player's production becomes constant. In this case, you are saying that after 17 minutes, every extra minute per game he gets will merit 4.4 extra points per season. It does not work that way. If it did, we could thusly also say that Hudler would get 110 points playing 25 mpg, 132 points playing 30 mpg, and 264 points playing 60 mpg.

The relationship between minutes played and point production per minute is probably very close to being parabolic... rate increases as minutes increase until a point, and then the rate drops. The model you're describing has some sort of limit... rate increases as minutes increase and steadily approaches a constant number with no drop. You cannot extrapolate a constant increase in points with a constant increase with minutes; otherwise, you'd just play your best 5 players 60 minutes a game.

Of course it doesn't. Its not a perfect model. But this is based on statistics and hypotheticals, and the points rendered here. Hmm, lets see, that Hudler would produce less with more has been proved statistically null, and similarly in terms of his continual PPM drop-off.

The fact that statistics suggest that Hudler WOULD produce more supports my argument - which is merely opinion as much as yours. But because the statistics support my opinion, and not yours, I'm not supposed to use them? The only reason you're deducing what I'm saying to irrational levels and presumptions is because they go against what you are saying.

One of the first things you learn in a science or research methods class is that you work to prove a hypothesis wrong, not right. What I just did was use all the statistical evidence that we have of Hudler, and it did not prove my point wrong. Did it prove your point wrong either? No. But theres a reason why half of the popular research articles you read on the internet start with phrases such as "research shows..." or "The statistics suggest..." Going by all the evidence you half, you make solid theories based on them. Which exactly what I've done.

This is just a sensitive subject for the people who want to assume that Hudler is destined to be an obsolete NHLer, yet have no statistical evidence to back it up, and must rely on biases to carry them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I will throw you a gauntlet - do you know of any actual case, throughout the NHL, where a player was given more ice time and his performance suffered as a result (all other parameter ideally remaining the same - linemates, proportion of ES / PP etc.)?

2046360964_9b5c49ed2d.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this