Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashasx
Just wondering how else you would like people to rate free agent signings.
I mean, we can all say we've watched a player and do or do not like him. That is subjective and emotional.
Stats aren't everything, but they are objective. And when they are particularly terrible as in Brouwer's case, it's hard not to absolutely hate this signing.
|
Here's the thing about backyard analytics types: The don't let statistics rule their emotions. They let emotions rule their statistics. You did it yourself in trying to compare Brouwer - a sought after commodity - with Glencross - who was forced to retire when nobody wanted to hire him. And you did so on the basis of, quite literally, two stats: P/60 and CorsiRel.
Now, Brouwer was middle of the pack among Blues forwards for both GF/60 abd GA/60 at 5 on 5. So while his CorsiRel was low - in part a function of being one of the guys the Blues leaned on most heavily for defensive zone starts - he clearly wasn't hurting his team. In fact, he was probably a bit unlucky last year as his 7.41 shooting percentage at evens was well below his career norms of 10-12%. And that would be why he failed to reach 20 goals last year. If he returns to normal, he should pass that mark this year.
Beyond that, he checks several boxes on our list of glaring needs - right shooting right wing. Physical/size. Veteran leadership. Intangibles that spreadsheets can't capture - and it is up to you to decide if you value that or not given it doesn't fit a column on stats.hockeyanalysis.com, but very clearly NHL teams do. And like it or not, that increases his value and cost. As it is, Brouwer is going to be our fourth highest paid forward next year, and of the players likely to be on the roster, he will have recorded the fourth most points among those forwards last season.
The evidence points to Brouwer's contract being market value. Not a bargain, but not a rip-off either.