Quote:
Originally Posted by Zevo
While advanced stats can put a quantifiable number on things, do we really need them to know that the third pairing D on a rebuilding team is going to struggle against any teams top line? I get that they can be fun to look into, but isn't it pretty obvious without the stats?
For advanced stats to be useful(to me, totally my opinion), they need to show me something I don't see by just watching the game. I don't think you would even need to watch the game to know your 5th and 6th slow defensemen will struggle against any teams top line.
|
True enough. And yes, hockey's advanced stats right now largely only quantify what we are already able to observe. But in that respect, I think they carry value in helping to eliminate confirmation bias.
They also can modify an argument. In this case, I would modify from "Smid and Engelland were terrible" to "Smid and Engelland were terrible against the top line." A small change, but a significant one. In part because it could indicate that Hartley did a poor job of line matching against the Coyotes' top line last night if those two were drowning that badly.