They are advanced numbers. They are difficult to read on their own, and this is regularized adjusted plus minus (RAPM), which takes the already hard to understand numbers and throws them off a cliff and asks you to read the fine print written on them to understand them (If you don't fully understand what they are showing that is).

The chart says Lindell took lower % shots than his team did when he was on the ice vs off, and that he scored on a higher % of those shots than would be expected, but a lesser amount than his team would have done had Lindell been off the ice. That is a summation of the first two columns.

The off_Corsi column says that Lindell's team had more possession when Lindell was off the ice than on (ie his team was in the other teams end more without Lindell on the ice).
The argument I know you are about to make is that he is a DFD and that ofc he would be in his own end more. That is not what is being measured. The stat is measured in a way that it shows possession of the puck, and so it means that Lindell cannot get the puck out of his end and into the pother teams end as well as his team mates when Lindell is off the ice.

the DF_xGF column says that when Lindell was on the ice, his team allowed the other team to shoot from higher % areas (more dangerous areas) then when he was off the ice, but only by a bit more than his team would have allowed without him (this effectively shows how well a guy can keep opposition to the outside).

The DF_Corsi column shows that when Lindell was on the ice, the other team had the puck more and was in Dallas' end. It is the other side of column 3 essentially.
It means he was stuck in his own end worse than had he not been on the ice.

Regularized Adjusted Plus Minus (RAPM) means the following:
Regularized: A players performance on the ice...
Plus-Minus: ...vs his team when the player is off the ice
Adjusted: This accouints for things such as zone starts and quality of competition and quality of team mates (tl;dr: The chart is saying that Klingberg did all the heavy lifting)

The charts, which are why I posted them, show that Lindell was being made to look good by Klingberg, which is why the contract will look very, very bad.
The whole point of the chart is to prove that your eyes are lying to you.

Fair enough. Actually the fact that Stars uses Lindell in every single defensive situation and he plays 25-30 minutes a night explains some of those statistics. And since DAL is not exactly an offensive team and live by mostly counterattacking, those numbers get inflated quickly.

You missed the point when I said you should watch Stars games. Charts do not always tell the whole story. Those same charts tells me that Honka is very good yet the organization lost all trust in him. End of story

They are advanced numbers. They are difficult to read on their own, and this is regularized adjusted plus minus (RAPM), which takes the already hard to understand numbers and throws them off a cliff and asks you to read the fine print written on them to understand them (If you don't fully understand what they are showing that is).

The chart says Lindell took lower % shots than his team did when he was on the ice vs off, and that he scored on a higher % of those shots than would be expected, but a lesser amount than his team would have done had Lindell been off the ice. That is a summation of the first two columns.

The off_Corsi column says that Lindell's team had more possession when Lindell was off the ice than on (ie his team was in the other teams end more without Lindell on the ice).
The argument I know you are about to make is that he is a DFD and that ofc he would be in his own end more. That is not what is being measured. The stat is measured in a way that it shows possession of the puck, and so it means that Lindell cannot get the puck out of his end and into the other teams end as well as his team mates when Lindell is off the ice (aka without Klingberg doing it for him).

the DF_xGF column says that when Lindell was on the ice, his team allowed the other team to shoot from higher % areas (more dangerous areas) then when he was off the ice, but only by a bit more than his team would have allowed without him (this effectively shows how well a guy can keep opposition to the outside).

The DF_Corsi column shows that when Lindell was on the ice, the other team had the puck more and was in Dallas' end. It is the other side of column 3 essentially.
It means he was stuck in his own end worse than had he not been on the ice.

Regularized Adjusted Plus Minus (RAPM) means the following:
Regularized: A players performance on the ice...
Plus-Minus: ...vs his team when the player is off the ice
Adjusted: This accouints for things such as zone starts and quality of competition and quality of team mates (tl;dr: The chart is saying that Klingberg did all the heavy lifting)

On an aside, I always find it funny that those who comment saying the charts are bogus have little to no understanding of them. Literally every single time the commenter says something that easily exposes this. For example:



As I just explained, that is not what the chart says

If Lindell were part of that counter attack and were helping in that regard, his chart would look something like this

Actually it was quite regular from DAL to swap Lindell and Heiskanen back and forth depending on which end of the ice the face-off was. That explains some of it, too. Heiskanen and Polak were used as a pair in the line-ups, but they didn't play together that often pretty much at all.

If Lindell were part of that counter attack and were helping in that regard, his chart would look something like this:

It is why Zaitsev's chart looked like:

... in his good year. He WAS actually contributing, but Rielly was doing all the heavy lifting (so Z was a passenger on the pair).

You do you I guess. But you still have to watch the games to see him play. So with that being said I do not trust advanced analytics that much and that is that. You will see why Lindell is worth the money when next season rolls around



Please refer to the following. It explains why you fundamentally do not understand what you are looking at. Also, Dallas is one of the teams who are known to not use underlying metrics: If they gave up on him, there is a decent chance they were wrong.

High-ish pick is not the issue. As you stated, Nutivaara and Heiskanen could form a dominating pair, and with Nutivaara's contract, he's like a dream pick for Seattle. It's worth for Seattle to take Nutivaara over a roster player and a first round pick at that point, which is something I worry about...

Then you protect all 4 of them with Benn, Seguin, Radulov, & Hintz. Let Seattle pick between Gurianov & Faksa, both of who are far easier to replace with guys like Robertson, Felhaber, & Dellandrea.

So with that being said I do not trust advanced analytics that much and that is that.

Why does Dallas trade their first for their 3rd?

Is Felhaber any good? Haven't heard anything about him...