Phil Posted August 8, 2019 Share Posted August 8, 2019 Link: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Future Posted August 8, 2019 Share Posted August 8, 2019 Hmmm, not sure I really get this one. I guess he could be your #7, if Smith is in Hartford, but I don't see how that makes sense for him OR the Rangers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJWantsTheCup Posted August 8, 2019 Share Posted August 8, 2019 I rather see them going after Stone as a 7th dman. He was just bought out and probably will sign for much cheaper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LindG1000 Posted August 8, 2019 Share Posted August 8, 2019 Analytics darling kind of player, iirc. Could be a good bargain bin pickup. Not really sure where or how he fits though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Future Posted August 8, 2019 Share Posted August 8, 2019 Analytics darling kind of player, iirc. Could be a good bargain bin pickup. Not really sure where or how he fits though. Nah, his analytics are trash. I guess that could make him a Staal replacement lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangersIn7 Posted August 8, 2019 Share Posted August 8, 2019 Maybe they like the idea of a more experienced guy as a spare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gravesy Posted August 8, 2019 Share Posted August 8, 2019 Assuming the idea is to bury Smith in Hartford they probably do need a depth signing. In a perfect world Hajek and Rykov can handle it, but that’s by no means a given. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted August 8, 2019 Author Share Posted August 8, 2019 Nah, his analytics are trash. I guess that could make him a Staal replacement lol Yeah, I was gonna say, his relative numbers are dog shit. LOL. He's... Pionk? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted August 8, 2019 Author Share Posted August 8, 2019 Assuming the idea is to bury Smith in Hartford they probably do need a depth signing. In a perfect world Hajek and Rykov can handle it, but that’s by no means a given. They should sign Claesson, then. Not this guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LindG1000 Posted August 8, 2019 Share Posted August 8, 2019 Nah, his analytics are trash. I guess that could make him a Staal replacement lol His defensive analytics are fantastic. His offensive analytics are bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gravesy Posted August 8, 2019 Share Posted August 8, 2019 They should sign Claesson, then. Not this guy. I wouldn’t mind that at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozzy Posted August 8, 2019 Share Posted August 8, 2019 They should sign Claesson, then. Not this guy. I liked Claesson! He was pretty decent back there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThirtyONE Posted August 8, 2019 Share Posted August 8, 2019 Who cares who the 7th d-man is so long has he's cheap... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Future Posted August 8, 2019 Share Posted August 8, 2019 His defensive analytics are fantastic. His offensive analytics are bad. What are they? "Analytic darlings" are pretty exclusively defined by shot share, and Hutton's are poor. I guess he could be good at defending the blueline or something, but so is Brendan Smith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sod16 Posted August 8, 2019 Share Posted August 8, 2019 I'd rather sink or swim with Hayek, Rykov, Lindgren and Fox and don't want to take playing time away from anyone. They don't need any more one way contracts, even small ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted August 8, 2019 Share Posted August 8, 2019 Again players are living and dying by analytics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LindG1000 Posted August 9, 2019 Share Posted August 9, 2019 What are they? "Analytic darlings" are pretty exclusively defined by shot share, and Hutton's are poor. I guess he could be good at defending the blueline or something, but so is Brendan Smith. Zone entry metrics; breakups, possessions allowed. Fancystats are more than Corsi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangersIn7 Posted August 9, 2019 Share Posted August 9, 2019 Again players are living and dying by analytics. Traditional stats and the eye test have worked for 50+ years of modern era, post-expansion hockey. They still do the job well if your scouts and talent evaluators (I mean pro level guys, not for amateurs) do their jobs well. Analytics don’t often paint an entirely new picture. They just fill in the existing one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gravesy Posted August 9, 2019 Share Posted August 9, 2019 Traditional stats and the eye test have worked for 50+ years of modern era, post-expansion hockey. They still do the job well if your scouts and talent evaluators (I mean pro level guys, not for amateurs) do their jobs well. Analytics don’t often paint an entirely new picture. They just fill in the existing one. They're not meant to paint an entirely new picture. They're meant to be an additional set of input evaluators can use to make informed decisions, in conjunction with every other bit of information available on a player. Making decisions solely based on analytics is a folly. "Not believing" in analytics is archaic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted August 9, 2019 Share Posted August 9, 2019 They're not meant to paint an entirely new picture. They're meant to be an additional set of input evaluators can use to make informed decisions, in conjunction with every other bit of information available on a player. Making decisions solely based on analytics is a folly. "Not believing" in analytics is archaic.And yet here we are on a message board where I don't think anyone even knows what this guy looks like and they're judging him based on shit like shot share. I don't even know who this guy is so I don't really care, but the commentary is infuriating. no one on this board can actually say they watched this guy play extensively enough to judge if he's good or not good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Future Posted August 9, 2019 Share Posted August 9, 2019 Zone entry metrics; breakups, possessions allowed. Fancystats are more than Corsi. Lol. I mean what are they for Hutton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MuddyInTheMiddle Posted August 9, 2019 Share Posted August 9, 2019 And yet here we are on a message board where I don't think anyone even knows what this guy looks like and they're judging him based on shit like shot share. What does what he look like have to do with how he plays? I know you are being facetious, but what is wrong with the community debating whether adding an NHL defensemen to the roster can help the team, using objective metrics during a time of the year when there is 0% new and relevant Rangers news to discuss. Some of your posts come off like you just like to argue for arguments sake. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LindG1000 Posted August 9, 2019 Share Posted August 9, 2019 Traditional stats and the eye test have worked for 50+ years of modern era, post-expansion hockey. They still do the job well if your scouts and talent evaluators (I mean pro level guys, not for amateurs) do their jobs well. Analytics don’t often paint an entirely new picture. They just fill in the existing one. This is interesting, because my gut was that you're completely wrong, but I've not really seen a reason to believe you are. I'm willing to bet that the hit rate on UFAs, draft picks, etc, has been significantly (statistically, not WHOA LOOK AT THE DIFFERENCE) better over the last 10 years than it has been in the rest of the history of the modern NHL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted August 9, 2019 Share Posted August 9, 2019 What does what he look like have to do with how he plays? I know you are being facetious, but what is wrong with the community debating whether adding an NHL defensemen to the roster can help the team, using objective metrics during a time of the year when there is 0% new and relevant Rangers news to discuss. Some of your posts come off like you just like to argue for arguments sake. OK, so just skip over them then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted August 9, 2019 Share Posted August 9, 2019 This is interesting, because my gut was that you're completely wrong, but I've not really seen a reason to believe you are. I'm willing to bet that the hit rate on UFAs, draft picks, etc, has been significantly (statistically, not WHOA LOOK AT THE DIFFERENCE) better over the last 10 years than it has been in the rest of the history of the modern NHL.Of course they have. Analytics help. We all know this. That's not the issue. The issue is that not many people here can honestly say they knew who this guy was without Googling him, and if they did, they certainly have only seen him play in snippets. Yet the commentary is "Why? He's terrible, look at the analytics". That's just as short sighted and closed minded as ignoring the fancy stuff. But I don't want keep going and derail the thread with another analytics debated. It's just annoying that people claim they don't only look at but it's pretty evident that they do. I'll leave it at that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now