McKenzie: Is there any doubt Russell would at least get 5 yrs x $5.5 million as UFA?

[saillias]

You're talking about 40-60%? I think this is the only range possession numbers fall in. A team above or below this range is a major anomaly so having a more encompassing y-axis is sorta dead space.

[powderjunkie]

There are 29 guys in the league today with a cap hit of > $5.5M. Ergo Russell would be a number 1 defenceman on the worst team in the league. Wait a minute...he would be Edmonton's best defenceman! IT ALL MAKES SENSE!

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Just as much doubt as there was that Franson was going to get 5 million+ last year at this point. A healthy amount of doubt is what is called for.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by Makarov

Look at the y axis.

That's not how misleading graphs work.

The variation in the Y axis is perfectly acceptable when the standard range of any player can be expected to fall within it.

It would be more misleading if the Y axis showed a greater range.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Franson (who is on Buffalo, I completely forgot), managed a 3.3m/year. Russell would be fortunate to get that much.

If he really is looking at 5 mil, there shouldn't be any negotiation left with the Flames.
Gio - 6.75, Dougie - 5.5 (Wideman - 5.25) Brodie - 4.8 Russell - maybe 3.3, sorry. You are not making more than Brodie. Good luck in Free Agency. Maybe we will see you back on July 1 (or more likely July 15th when things cool down)

[Makarov]

Ok, you stats nerds have convinced me. I stand corrected.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Makarov

Look at the y axis.

If you put the full 0-100 it would minimize what is actually a major difference. Full range isn't the standard, not should it be when small differences in % make big differences in results

[Makarov]

Now you're just rubbing it in.

[DJones]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

If you put the full 0-100 it would minimize what is actually a major difference. Full range isn't the standard, not should it be when small differences in % make big differences in results

So you are happy to show 43 is half as much as 47 and that is an accurate representation?

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by DJones

So you are happy to show 43 is half as much as 47 and that is an accurate representation?

Yes.

Otherwise every single defenseman is pretty much equally good. It's that a fair representation? A small difference in goals for over a season makes a very large difference in the standings. Chicago is only 4% above Columbus, wouldn't you say that's significant?

A 43% scoring chance for defenseman is significantly worse than a 47% one

[Madrox]

Originally Posted by DJones

So you are happy to show 43 is half as much as 47 and that is an accurate representation?

40-60% as a range on that graph is perfectly reasonable. There were only 2 players in all of the NHL below 40% last year, and 2 over 60% in CF%, and none of those played more than 14 games in the NHL. That's basically the range to reasonably do a comparison in.

Edit: D-men, not players.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by DJones

So you are happy to show 43 is half as much as 47 and that is an accurate representation?

When the range is that narrow, yes. You could also show the lowest measurement as zero and the highest as 100 and it would be the same.

Plus, 11 is one louder.

[Dajazz]

Russell is probably the worst defenseman on the team. He is good at blocking shots because he has too. I probably sound like a hater, but the guy neither passes the eye or stat test, he flops, he falls, he flails and can't tie down his man if his life depended on it.

He's a decent bortom pairing d-man and is paid accordingly. The only reason he is getting press, stats and ice time is Hartley's weird Love affair with him.

[DJones]

Haha I just keep picturing what my bosses would say if I handed in something like that.

http://tinyurl.com/hwxhm9k

In the 2nd bullet point of a paper on graph etiquette;

There are only a few basic types of graphs.
– Trend graphs. If you wish to emphasize the trend in a time series, a line chart (i.e. use a line to connect the data points to show the trend) is better than a series of side-by-side bars.
– Relative size graphs. Here side-by-side bar graphs are best, but all bars must be anchored at zero. All bars should be equal width, otherwise, readers of the graph will be confused by differences in area, rather than difference in lengths of the bars.
– Composition graphs. This is where pie-charts are often (badly) used. The trouble with pie charts is that people are not well programmed to compare angles of pies. A better graph is a segmented bar-chart where the bar (that streches from 0 to 100%) is segmented into pieces. Put the most important segments at the top or the bottom of the bar (so that they are anchored at 0% or 100%) – this enables most readers to accurately estimate the percentage of the bar used by the category

You nailed 2/3 of the very first things they teach you about graphs haha

[Samonadreau]

Mckenzie needs to lay off the crack.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Samonadreau

Mckenzie needs to lay off the crack.

Nope, keep smoking it Bob and drive that value up for us.

[calumniate]

Originally Posted by AC

Yep, I agree completely.

I'm a Russell fan and I would trade him. I'd consider bringing him back for $3 or $3.5 but that's it.

That's what I was thinking too. He's been playing well with Hamilton but hasn't put up the offensive numbers this year. I'd go up to 3.5 with him for sure though

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by mikephoen

I just wish people would remember that Kris is on a 2.6M (7th highest paid Dman on the Flames) contract THIS year and cut him some slack. To quote Bob that is a 'fantastic bargain'. Especially in the game threads, a lot of people seem to think he should be Chris Pronger out there, which is incredibly unrealistic.

I'm don't know about this 5.5 number, that sounds high to me, but right now, he makes 2.6 and is playing above that contract. Last year he played WAY above that. He's been a good player for the Flames, and if his time here is almost up then so be it. But I think he gave us excellent value while he was here.

I think you are looking at this wrong. Expectations of a player should not be based on a dollar figure. If they are put in a role they should be expected to fulfill that role, doesn't matter if they are paid 5.5 million or 550k. So if Russell is being played as the teams #4 defenseman, he should be performing as such.

[Split98]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

That's not how misleading graphs work.

The variation in the Y axis is perfectly acceptable when the standard range of any player can be expected to fall within it.

It would be more misleading if the Y axis showed a greater range.

Thanks! I was thinking the same thing as Makarov

[ricardodw]

An interesting question to McKenzie who has come up with the 5.5x5 expectation for Russell is:

Is Hartley the worst coach in the league?

Brodie at 4.6M is the lowest paid of the Flames top 5 d-men... ( Gio and Russell kicking in next year) and is #42 highest paid d-man.

There are 30 team in the league so rather than having 2 of the top 60 best d-men the Flames have 5!!!!

Who is under-performing their contracts? Hamilton, Gio, Brodie, Russell or Wideman.

Wideman is a given so that leaves 4 guys who are supposed to top-2 d-men.

BUT if it is not the individual d-men then the coach and the system needs to be looked at.

having a roster with what would have to be top 5 in the league on paper defense means that there is something else terribly wrong for a team to be in the bottom 3rd of the standings.