Quote:
Originally Posted by Pointman
This metric is measuring "grit" and grit always happens when the other team has the puck (except the rare case of hitting a guy while skating with the puck, like young Ovechkin used to do). So, the issue you have is not with this metric, but rather with "grit" itself. And that's silly issue, because what you are saying is essentially that it's useless to have ANY metric that is designed to measure what players are doing when the other team has the puck.
|
The issue is not that it happens when you haven't got the puck. The issue is that it happens most often when your team is so bad that you NEVER have the puck. If you have a game between two teams with equally 'gritty' players, and one of them controls the puck for 36 minutes and the other for 24 minutes, then the team that only has the puck for 24 minutes will seem 1.5 times as gritty as the other. To that extent, a high 'grit' score is a consequence of failure. And if it's measuring failure, it isn't measuring grit.
A metric that measures one thing is good. A metric that measures two things, and gives no way of distinguishing between them, is worse than useless.