[Signing] Maple Leafs sign John Klingberg

[Miss Korea Bob.Loblaw]

35 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

O% defence from a defenceman that played 67 games in the NHL? Yeah right. I know Klingberg isn't the best but this chart tells hockey people absolutely nothing except maybe this player is not as good as some of his peers. Maybe ... I guess possibly, it's pretty generically useless.  Obviously the method is horribly flawed and lacking in any relevant description of the player except to maybe for 5 year old. But why would a 5 year old that doesn't understand hockey be looking at a JFresh card in the first place? 

 

Why don't you explain to us in detail everything this tells us about Klingberg and how you read this card? Like a lot of these flawed advanced stats they attempt to take really simplistic stats (which aren't even gathered uniformly) and try to bend them into something else. Most of these numbers don't actually measure what they are represented to. Like high danger chances they count everything in close or to the sides of the net, or when the goalie moves from side to side. However lots of those chances are not high danger in reality.  

 

0% as in he is in the 0th percentile.  Just like someone had to be the best, someone had to be the worst.  It's no secret that he and Karlsson are the worst defenders in the league.  Their upside comes from driving offensive play and generating scoring chances.  Why does it bother you that much?  If you've watched either player this year, you'll be able to tell right away that they don't defend.

[Gawdzukes]

4 minutes ago, Bob.Loblaw said:

0% as in he is in the 0th percentile.  Just like someone had to be the best, someone had to be the worst.  It's no secret that he and Karlsson are the worst defenders in the league.  Their upside comes from driving offensive play and generating scoring chances.  Why does it bother you that much?  If you've watched either player this year, you'll be able to tell right away that they don't defend.

I know they are both very offensively orientated, aren't overly currently committed to defence, and Karlsson plays like a 4th forward at times. I don't need a number to tell me that though and not sure how I should interpret a 0% or what that says to anyone. I'm also not sure they are the worst defenders in the league either. I would rather have one of them than Myers, Bear, or Stillman. Is there a number that tells you when they are good at defending or should a person just base all hockey decisions on the higher WAR # through comparison between two players?

 

It doesn't really bother me all that much I just find them so useless they're misleading and silly. Kind of a crutch for people that don't watch or don't have the experience to interpret/describe what they're seeing.  I won't comment on them any more though.

 

 

[Miss Korea Bob.Loblaw]

15 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

I know they are both very offensively orientated, aren't overly currently committed to defence, and Karlsson plays like a 4th forward at times. I don't need a number to tell me that though and not sure how I should interpret a 0% or what that says to anyone. I'm also not sure they are the worst defenders in the league either. I would rather have one of them than Myers, Bear, or Stillman. Is there a number that tells you when they are good at defending or should a person just base all hockey decisions on the higher WAR # through comparison between two players?

 

It doesn't really bother me all that much I just find them so useless they're misleading and silly. Kind of a crutch for people that don't watch or don't have the experience to interpret/describe what they're seeing.  I won't comment on them any more though.

Of course it's a crutch.  I can't watch all the NHL games at the same time.  Nobody can, unless you're committed to watching tape like a coach.

 

Interpret a 0% the same way you interpret a 100%.  Some are the best, some are the worst.  You don't have to agree with it but what is there to interpret?