[Trade] PK Subban for Shea Weber. 1 for 1.

[868904]

Originally Posted by SofaProfessor

Ask and ye shall receive...

So Phaneuf is better than Weber now?

So why is Team Canada, with free reign to select from the very best defencemen the country has to offer, constantly selecting Shea Weber?

Are these managers just dumb? Why are they taking Weber over Phaneuf and Subban?

[Locke]

Originally Posted by 868904

So Phaneuf is better than Weber now?

So why is Team Canada, with free reign to select from the very best defencemen the country has to offer, constantly selecting Shea Weber?

Are these managers just dumb? Why are they taking Weber over Phaneuf and Subban?

So they can be heros! Just for one day!

[dustygoon]

Originally Posted by Locke

Oh no! Then how will the Oilers know who to draft 1st overall?

HA! so true. Somewhere i sense an opportunity to create a new rag and under the guise of a name like "Toe Drags Monthly" we act as "insiders", we create a top 30 prospect list (the other rounds don't matter), and point the oil towards the next Yak and Tenderness. Or just do the top 5....other 25 don't matter.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Based on unit of performance per dollar Weber is decidedly average.

lol

By that standard, Backlund and Colborne are more valuable than Crosby and Kane.

It's not as linear as each dollar more equals x amount more of production.

It's a 23 man roster, and only 6 guys are on the ice at any time. Better players are worth more. Period. So they cost more.

There is no intelligent metric that slots Weber in as an average player.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by homestand

Pfeffer has cancelled his scheduled appearance with Elliott Price tonight,

https://mobile.twitter.com/ElliottPrice

I think Pfeffer has realized he shouldn't do any bad mouthing if he wants another NHL job. Best just to stay quiet.

[SofaProfessor]

Originally Posted by 868904

So Phaneuf is better than Weber now?

So why is Team Canada, with free reign to select from the very best defencemen the country has to offer, constantly selecting Shea Weber?

Are these managers just dumb? Why are they taking Weber over Phaneuf and Subban?

To me it looks like Weber has the edge in offensive production while Phaneuf has a slightly more sound defensive game which pretty much backs up what a few posters said earlier in the thread. I don't think that means Phaneuf is better than Weber, even if you're only considering the context of the chart and nothing else.

Also, these charts really only show you a few basic stats. There's more to judge a player by and then there's intangibles which no chart can reflect. These guys play on separate teams in entirely different situations and schemes. I'm not a huge fan of the HERO charts, I just posted it as a tongue-in-cheek response to someone else's tongue-in-cheek comment. That said, it's not a bad starting point for comparing players as long as you recognize the chart can only show you so much and there's more to the story than shown.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by SofaProfessor

To me it looks like Weber has the edge in offensive production while Phaneuf has a slightly more sound defensive game which pretty much backs up what a few posters said earlier in the thread. I don't think that means Phaneuf is better than Weber, even if you're only considering the context of the chart and nothing else.

Also, these charts really only show you a few basic stats. There's more to judge a player by and then there's intangibles which no chart can reflect. These guys play on separate teams in entirely different situations and schemes. I'm not a huge fan of the HERO charts, I just posted it as a tongue-in-cheek response to someone else's tongue-in-cheek comment. That said, it's not a bad starting point for comparing players as long as you recognize the chart can only show you so much and there's more to the story than shown.

Wait, what? Where am I? Whats going on?

[SofaProfessor]

Originally Posted by Locke

Wait, what? Where am I? Whats going on?

That's what the chart shows. Not my opinion of Phaneuf.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

HERO charts are made up on a relative basis. On-ice vs off-ice. Toronto is terrible, so Phaneuf is being compared to worse players. Weber is being compared to one of the better blue line corps in the league.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

HERO charts are made up on a relative basis. On-ice vs off-ice. Toronto is terrible, so Phaneuf is being compared to worse players. Weber is being compared to one of the better blue line corps in the league.

So comparing two players from two different teams means squat.

[GranteedEV]

Yeah a hero chart doesn't tell the whole story about Weber due to the incredible Ellis-Ekholm pair.

However I've said it before, there were times in the playoffs where Weber was on his face as often as Kris Russell. The HERO chart does tell some of the story. I don't think Shea Weber is a #1. Dion also isn't as bad as people think he is. He's still an effective top pair D with the right partner, and definitely a good #3. Basically you've got two guys who are best suited as #2s who have similar point production rates.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

HERO charts are made up on a relative basis. On-ice vs off-ice. Toronto is terrible, so Phaneuf is being compared to worse players. Weber is being compared to one of the better blue line corps in the league.

Also, HERO charts literally only track two stats. Points/60 and CorsiRel. The problem with HERO charts is that nobody uses them properly, including the creator of them.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

So comparing two players from two different teams means squat.

Not at all. You just need to understand that context to use them properly. Weber is supposed to be an elite defenseman - even though the rest of Nashville's blue line is excellent and frankly quite underrated, his shortcomings in shot suppression should still raise eyebrows for a guy who's signed for huge dollars until Milliways. The fact that Nashville gets peppered with shots far more when he's on the ice compared to when he's on the bench is still useful information.

It's like if you just looked at shots against per 60 minutes when PK and Weber are on the ice at evens over the past 3 seasons - you'd notice they're pretty much the same. Weber's 117th in the NHL (among d-men with more than 2000 minutes played) and Subban's 122nd. But then you realize that Nashville is a top ten team at shot suppression over that period (8th) while Montreal is a bottom ten team (21st), so you'd actually expect Subban to be considerably worse given his teammates.

It's all just information, it's all helpful.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Not at all. You just need to understand that context to use them properly. Weber is supposed to be an elite defenseman - even though the rest of Nashville's blue line is excellent and frankly quite underrated, his shortcomings in shot suppression should still raise eyebrows for a guy who's signed for huge dollars until Milliways. The fact that Nashville gets peppered with shots far more when he's on the ice compared to when he's on the bench is still useful information.

It's like if you just looked at shots against per 60 minutes when PK and Weber are on the ice at evens over the past 3 seasons - you'd notice they're pretty much the same. Weber's 117th in the NHL (among d-men with more than 2000 minutes played) and Subban's 122nd. But then you realize that Nashville is a top ten team at shot suppression over that period (8th) while Montreal is a bottom ten team (21st), so you'd actually expect Subban to be considerably worse given his teammates.

It's all just information, it's all helpful.

Well sure but the Hero charts make no mention of this and even in your explanation, no mention of the level of competition each faces is made, so they are still worth squat.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Again, wrong. If you think one faces tougher competition, all you need to do is find out their corsi rel qualcomp and factor that into your analysis as well. Again, just more information upon which to form your conclusions about how a player is affecting the results his team gets when he's on the ice... all of it easily available if you want to look.

You seriously might as well say goals are worth squat because they only tell you one narrow fact about a player without any context.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Again, wrong. If you think one faces tougher competition, all you need to do is find out their corsi rel qualcomp and factor that into your analysis as well. Again, just more information upon which to form your conclusions about how a player is affecting the results his team gets when he's on the ice... all of it easily available if you want to look.

You seriously might as well say goals are worth squat because they only tell you one narrow fact about a player without any context.

and all this is taken into account in the Hero charts?

[Itse]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

So comparing two players from two different teams means squat.

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Again, wrong. If you think one faces tougher competition, all you need to do is find out their corsi rel qualcomp and factor that into your analysis as well. Again, just more information upon which to form your conclusions about how a player is affecting the results his team gets when he's on the ice... all of it easily available if you want to look.

You seriously might as well say goals are worth squat because they only tell you one narrow fact about a player without any context.

Without that additional information the chart is useless and misguiding as a comparison tool.

With that additional information you are most likely to notice the chart is useless for comparison because it's not an apples to apples comparison. But hey, at least you're not misguided anymore.

The fact that it's mostly misused is on the other hand a pretty big indication that the"advanced stats" crowd does not have a lot of clues when it comes to actually meaningful use of basic stats, let alone an advanced understanding.

[Da_Chief]

So these hero charts compare elite to elite, average to average and depth to depth?

So it's supposed to tell me who's better between Weber and Keith? Do I or anyone cares about that? Both are top pair elite dman that any team would be glad to have.

Useless exercise. The pro-analytics need to come up with something better or stop putting that crap online.

[Erick Estrada]

I was always a believer that Suter was the better defenseman of the Suter/Weber pairing even though Weber seemed to get more accolades largely due to his big shot. I'm not going to pile on him and call him average though as overall he's still a top pairing defender in the NHL but his game is slipping which I would be very concerned about if I was a Habs fan.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Not at all. You just need to understand that context to use them properly. Weber is supposed to be an elite defenseman - even though the rest of Nashville's blue line is excellent and frankly quite underrated, his shortcomings in shot suppression should still raise eyebrows for a guy who's signed for huge dollars until Milliways. The fact that Nashville gets peppered with shots far more when he's on the ice compared to when he's on the bench is still useful information.

It's like if you just looked at shots against per 60 minutes when PK and Weber are on the ice at evens over the past 3 seasons - you'd notice they're pretty much the same. Weber's 117th in the NHL (among d-men with more than 2000 minutes played) and Subban's 122nd. But then you realize that Nashville is a top ten team at shot suppression over that period (8th) while Montreal is a bottom ten team (21st), so you'd actually expect Subban to be considerably worse given his teammates.

It's all just information, it's all helpful.

But even knowing that, and factoring it, the comparisons are still useless.

Montreal has a mediocre (at best) defense corp and team overall. So they are going to face shots up and down the lineup. Looking at quality of competition won't help because all of their lines are giving up shots.

Nashville has probably the deepest D group in the NHL. And the whole team is focused on shot suppression. Weber gets the toughest minutes, and his group is going to face shots. The other lines, and other D, tend to out-match their opponents more often.

So Weber, getting tough minutes, will have lousy suppression numbers relative to his team.

Subban, also getting tough minutes, would have better relative numbers, simply because the rest of his team has poorer numbers than Weber's team-mates do, even though Subban wasn't doing better than Weber at his own job.

The stats will never capture that. And no hero chart is ever going to paint an accurate picture, no matter how much context one tries to add.