Member Since
Dec. 15, 2017
Favourite Team
Vancouver Canucks
Forum Posts
Posts per Day
Forum: Armchair-GMTue. at 4:06 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMMon. at 8:11 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMSep. 16 at 3:25 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMSep. 15 at 8:17 p.m.
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Caniac2000</b></div><div>Burns was arguably better! Josi just had a 100 point year, that's incredible. He also had 8 games against Chicago and Arizona, played in the notoriously weaker conference and was still a trash can defensively. So to recap, his QoC is lower, his defense is BAHAHAHAHAH, and his offensive is incredible. Burns on the other hand at his best was playing against the might of the California era. Yes, 8 games a year against Arizona and Edmonton, but the highest of the highs were better. So, QoC favors Burns. Let's talk QoT. Well, that's fairly simple. This Predators team doesn't have the offense the sharks used to. Okay, fair. So, what about the underlyings? Burn's dxG numbers remain some of the best ever in the one year he wasn't an entirely useless trash can in his own end. Josi put up 100 points and his dxG is barely above EVEN. It's just about greater than 0. He had to put up 100 points to be a net positive this year! So, that favors Burns. Eye test, well, I still personally believe Burns looked better than Josi did this year, but that is subjective. But Josi does not belong in this conversation, and there's no evidence outside of subjective viewership that suggests Josi should be in here. Even his base defensive stats were bad.</div></div>

Subjective views based on the eye test are worth more than analytics, by a lot. When evaluating how good a player is, analytics are worth 20% max. Eye test, role within the team, performance under pressure, situational use and rarity around the league are more important.
Forum: Armchair-GMSep. 15 at 6:24 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMSep. 15 at 4:37 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMSep. 15 at 1:26 a.m.
Forum: Vancouver CanucksSep. 15 at 1:03 a.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMSep. 13 at 2:49 p.m.