Comments for David Krejci vs. Patrice Bergeron at http://hockey.dobbersports.com , comment 1 to 15 out of 15 comments http://hockey.dobbersports.com Sun, 19 May 2013 07:51:45 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/laidlaw/3721-david-krejci-vs-patrice-bergeron#comment-14598 Sorry Steve, It was actually Pengwin7 who made a ratio of +/- scores when he was trying to equate Krejci's peripherals (PPP & +/-) with Bergeron's SOG advantage. All I intended to say is that there are statistical/scientific reasons why different statistics may not be comparable, so your countering of his argument using 'margins' was unnecessary. I should have been more clear about that. I certainly never meant to say that you were wrong bout +/- being a minefield, but debating statistical categories becomes futile when one version is invalid. In fact, PPP are also statistically unsound variables, but I chose not to discuss them. That explanation concerns Poissant & Gaussian distributed variables, and I didn't think I could explain those in layman's terms. Personally, I liked this cage match; I'd pick whichever one plays 1st line C next year, but I wouldn't pick the one playing 2nd line (even if they're really 1A & 1B in BOS). When coaches evaluate their players, they don't guess at future upside. They look at who's been the the better player for longer. Thanks for the sound comparison. - Jeff Mon, 13 Jun 2011 12:25:19 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/laidlaw/3721-david-krejci-vs-patrice-bergeron#comment-14504 Pengwin7 my main issue, and this was pointed out by others, is tact. To me making an accusation as though you know it vs. as you are thinking it is a huge distinction. The latter is a lot less offensive. Regarding the 300 SOG. I state explicitly that it`s upside so I don`t think I have to elaborate on all the things that would have to change as any number of things could change to make things more optimal for Bergeron and likewise for Krejci. Coaching change or a trade of Krejci would work but other things would also. The point of demonstrating the upside is to cover those thinking about the long term future and not about the next couple seasons where I`m not predicting change. I also took issue with your continual statements that things are going too far back. You think it`s not valuable but I do. We`ve reached an impass regarding this. Regarding the SOG difference I countered your points about the other categories and stressed the fact I`d pointed out margins originally and elaborated. Probably simply a confusion over wording though. Regarding linemates. Bergeron played with a mess of different linemates this season. He may have played the most with Recchi and Marchand but I don`t think it was predominantly that trio so I chose not to point them out. I did however mention Lucic and Horton and that Krejci had the better linemates. You tossed out the blanket title `Linemates` so I took it to mean you thought it hadnt been covered at all when it had. Regarding PPP. I never disagreed with this or the fact new information was included. As far as your mathematical model is concerned, I`d have to see how you did that specific scoring to take it as gospel. I`d also point out that Krejci`s scoring would barely be higher IF he played the 80 games. Overall, there was fingerpointing and disagreements but I don`t think it was juvenille. It`s tough to convey tone or intent over the internet so misunderstandings happen. I invite your comments in the future but I really want you to see where I`m coming from with stuff like my inclusion of past numbers. All-In, a few general points. Yes your example is an exaggeration but you`ll note that with all my match ups I`ve done them with similarly aged players. When necessary (young players who haven`t broken out) I`ve made some general projections or indicated that there will be an upward trend. Often though, these players are in their primes (such as this week`s) so are projections necessary when I`m talking about there current production staying the same without any drastic lineup changes? I do discuss situations regarding players when necessary but as I pointed out, this week I saw little reason to. Krejci has better linemates but that did him no good. That was part of the point of the article. Yes I do watch games but with regards to Krejci/Bergeron I have no bias or favourite. As far as upside goes, I literally pointed out upside and the fact I think Bergeron has more and I think I always mention this in my articles. I definitely could/should have pointed out who has the better chance of getting there but I did mention I don't like the health of either one so really that's a coin toss IMO. So yeah, I feel like I am giving my opinions but as mentioned in another post perhaps that's comething I need to be more clear on. Jeff, I still think margins are a factor. With both +/- and PPP it takes a couple of bounces to alter the winner of the category. With SOG it's a much more dependable number to track. I'd also like to point out that my critique of size was only to do with PPP and not +/-, although it does to a lesser extent coincide. So I do agree with your analysis and I thank you for it as it was extensive. In the article I call +/- a minefield and that was meant to convey my frustration with the category, and also to generally explain what you broke down so superbly. - steve laidlaw Thu, 09 Jun 2011 16:30:21 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/laidlaw/3721-david-krejci-vs-patrice-bergeron#comment-14503 "In fact +/- is not even an [s]ordinal[/s] unit of measure, which would allow for comparisons of the form A = B + x." - Jeff Thu, 09 Jun 2011 16:30:02 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/laidlaw/3721-david-krejci-vs-patrice-bergeron#comment-14500 I would have to agree with Steve that the SOG difference is likely more significant than the +/- difference between Krejci & Bergeron. However, it wouldn't be for the same reason that Steve gives. The [i]real[/i] difference (in terms of statistical/scientific measurement scales) isn't the absolute magnitude of the number, but how it's arrived at. Time for a quick lesson in measurement & statistics... On one hand, SOG is simply the additive aggregate of all shots on goal, and constitutes ratio scale unit of measurement. Ratio scales have a MEANINGFUL zero point denoting the absence of the measured event (i.e. 0 SOG indicates the absence of ANY shots on goal). As well, RATIOS (comparisons of the form A/B, where A and B are measurements on the same scale) exist only in ratio scales of measurement, obviously. On the other hand, +/- is NOT an additive aggregate (different events are added and subtracted), and does NOT constitute a ratio scale unit of measurement. Remember from ratio scales that [i]they must have a meaningful zero point[/i]. +/- records two events simultaneously (on the ice during goal for AND on the ice during a goal against), and therefore fails to have a meaningful zero point (a +/- of 0 might indicate +12 and -12, +5 & -5 or 0 & 0). A +/- of 0 does not necessarily indicate the absence of EITHER of the events it measures. In fact +/- is not even an ordinal unit of measure, which would allow for comparisons of the form A = B + x. That last bit just means "A is x units more than B". The best example of such scales is temperature. A temperature of zero degrees just means its chilly outside; it doesn't mean there is a total absence of temperature (that's actually at -273 degrees celcius). That's also why you never hear the weatherman say "it's twice as hot out today as it was yesterday"; ratios do not exist on non-ratio scales of measurement. Instead, the weatherman could say "it's X degrees hotter today than it was yesterday", where A = today, B = yesterday (A = B + x). To understand why +/- doesn't fit ordinal scales either, think about how you would phrase "A is x units more than B" in terms of +/-. If one player has a +12 and the other a 0, we cannot say how many more +'s or -'s one player has than the other. We can ONLY say that +12 is 'better' than 0. Now consider two players who have a +/- of 0; player A is +12/-12, while player B is +0/-0. Personally, I'd rather have the +12/-12 player on my hockey team, even though his +/- is IDENTICAL to his counerpart's. As to the "size of the numbers" argument, it's not false, but it's out of context here. +/- typically has smaller values than SOG, but that's because of the way it's measured. If we counted only +'s, the values would probably (although not certainly) be much larger. I hope it's clear that the value of a +/- score does not reflect the sample size from which is it drawn. The same thing applies to ANY other statistic. Think of goals per game, for instance. Players A & B have 2 & 1 goals per game respectively. Player B DOES have 200% of player B's goals per game. What DOES matter is the number of games over which this statistic was recorded. If I told you that these measures were taken over a span of 5 games, you'd be less inclined to believe that they represent the palyer's ability than if I told you they were taken over 82 games. The +/- measures you have are all recorded over samples of 80+ games, so don't confuse the magnitude of the statistic with the size of the sample. In sum, the right way to deal with +/- scores is to break them down into two different categories: +'s and -'s. Each of these statistics, separately, is a ratio unit of measurement. The practical way to do it is to ignore it completely because it's a fairly meaningless statistic. Considering only one or the other, ratios comparing Krejci and Lucic would be appropriate. Looking at +/- is equivalent to computing SOG by adding all shots on goal and subtracting all shots that missed the goal. It's wrong and it shouldn't be done. Sorry if this post seems obtuse and self-righteous, but I promise it's accurate! More respect to Dobber for hating +/-. - Jeff Thu, 09 Jun 2011 13:02:15 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/laidlaw/3721-david-krejci-vs-patrice-bergeron#comment-14499 Steve, if you give me permission, I would say that Pengwin is right… but has some difficulties to explain it with tact. I also feel like your articles are too often based on the past of the players and not enough about future. Stats are fun but don’t mean everything. Pengwin is right about saying that you should have talk about linemates and coaching staff. You didn’t talk about Savard because you think he will retire… why not having tell it? That would have been a plus to your article. We need some kind of projections here. We want to know wich one is going to be the best player during the following years… not the past years. Following your kind of article based almost only on past stats, I’m pretty sure that a match between Recchi and Seguin would have concluded to pick Seguin for next year ;) Of course I exaggerate, but I hope you understand what I mean. I don’t want to be mean, you’re doing a good job to compare stats, but we need more meat around the environment of players. Also, do you watch games and players? I mean, do you have a favourite before your match-up? Do you think Krejci or Bergeron has more upside? Wich one has already reach his ceiling? We want writers to give their opinions and not only to compile stats… and I’m sure you're able to do so. - All-in Thu, 09 Jun 2011 11:59:57 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/laidlaw/3721-david-krejci-vs-patrice-bergeron#comment-14493 Our very own cage match! LOL! :D [b]Match 1:[/b] My assumption wording: "It is almost like you have decided in advance..." Your assumption wording: "I kind of feel like you must skim these articles..." You are now saying that my accusation is much worse (and different) than yours because you chose the word "feel". Oh come on now.... really... [b]Match 2:[/b] "....however you pointed out a lot of stuff that was covered in the article and that's frustrating to me". Yes - and I've already mentioned that a counter-point is made by referencing something that was initially stated. I presented a LOT of information that you did NOT. You are sweeping all of my points under the rug because I "pointed out a lot of stuff that was covered in the article and that's frustrating". Point 1: I mention the effect of Julien. (Krejci wasn't even playing for Boston when Bergeron had his 300 SOG seasons.) NEW INFORMATION: You did not mention Julien in your article. (And I'm not even sure you should go back this far considering how much Boston has been re-tooled since then) Point 2: SOG difference. You say the SOG difference is a "pretty big advantage". I say the advantage can be balanced out by other statistics. NEW POINT: You decided not to consider that two minor category differences (+/-, PPP) could offset that one visible category difference. Point 3: Linemates. Where can I find the names Recchi & Marchand in your article? NEW INFORMATION: Recchi could very well retire. Marchand played this season out-of-his-mind to prove himself and had a high shooting percentage. Your article does not mention Recchi or Marchand... and should have. Point 4: Bergeron's spot on the PPP. Your focal sentence "Krejci does hold a slight advantage in PPP. It has nothing to do with minutes though so I am less inclined to see it as something major." NEW INFORMATION: I focus on the fact that Krejci's line + Chara will likely be PP1 and that Bergeron could be on PP2. You mention nothing about which unit each player plays on except to say: "It has nothing to do with minutes though so I am less inclined to see it as something major." I disagree. Often PP1 will play the first minute and PP2 will play the second minute. I'd still rather have the player on PP1... especially if it is likely that Chara will be on that PP. I did a mathematical model of a 6-cat league based on this year's statistics. FINAL SCORE Bergeron 4.65 (in 80games) Krejci 4.62 (in 75games) Take those for what they are worth... in a full-82 game season, Krejci would have scored higher. I think he is the better bet for next year. Overall - we've just clogged up your comment boards with all kind of finger-pointing and counter-accusations. Sort of a juvenile shouting match from both of us. I apologize. I give mods permission to withdraw all of my comments. I will try to refrain from commenting on future articles... I don't think it is in the best interest of your work. Sorry, man. - Pengwin7 Thu, 09 Jun 2011 06:41:53 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/laidlaw/3721-david-krejci-vs-patrice-bergeron#comment-14489 Pengwin7, take a look at how you word your assumption versus mine. Yours is a statement and mine is a feeling. I'm fully aware of the hypocrisy behind calling someone out for assumptions and then making my own BUT mine is based on feeling where as you stated yours as if it were fact. For me that's where the line is. Now I can take criticism and I think you've seen that in the past, however you pointed out a lot of stuff that was covered in the article and that's frustrating to me. Obviously it tells me to be more clear and concise in my writing if things are being missed so ultimately there is value but it doesn't mean I won't defend my piece, especially not when you asked for the bears. I knew (and even stated as much) that there would be folks still clinging to Krejci. I think that's mainly because of perceived upside and odds of hitting it. Because as we both have mentioned Bergeron's big seasons were four years ago and Krejci's were only two people I thinks there's a big chance for recency bias to play a role. JHM, there's no conflict here. Your main point was perfectly valid. These are tough decisions and I'm just telling you what I believe. As long as the piece has you thinking critically about the decision then I've done my job, regardless of if I've swayed you or not. - steve laidlaw Thu, 09 Jun 2011 05:53:56 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/laidlaw/3721-david-krejci-vs-patrice-bergeron#comment-14484 Steve, Sorry, not trying to throw sand in the wheel. I enjoy your pieces. They do an excellent job of getting us thinking and comparing. I like to think and compare! Striving for conflict is never my intention. Keep up the good work! JHM - Jocular Hockey Manager Thu, 09 Jun 2011 05:05:55 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/laidlaw/3721-david-krejci-vs-patrice-bergeron#comment-14483 "Pengwin, you assume too much man. ... I kinda feel like you must skim these articles because your quibbles regarded a lot of information I already covered." [b]OUCH.[/b] 1. You have made an assumption too - that I skim articles. Oh no. I read it over [b]three times[/b]. I had five browsers open at one time. I opened up two side-by-side browsers with each players stats, opened a 3rd browser to cross-reference Julien's tenure/bio and a 4th browser to access Frozen Pools for line combinations throughout the year, last 10 games of reg, and playoffs. [i]There is a word that can be used when somebody accuses another of a poor assumption and then makes a poor assumption themselves.[/i] I love the Cage Match articles... but they are a long way from the value of pieces written by Ma, Angus, Dub, Miller. My criticism is only here to help identify some holes in your writing/analysis style. If you intend on seriously writing about hockey, you have to learn to take some criticism and build from it without attacking your reader (with a really, really, really bad assumption). - Pengwin7 Thu, 09 Jun 2011 04:55:28 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/laidlaw/3721-david-krejci-vs-patrice-bergeron#comment-14469 Thanks Gates! Good to be back but it was also good to see my absence allowed others to contribute. Pengwin, you assume too much man. I never predetermine my winners. I look for good battles and I go through the process of comparison and then I write my article. I don't and I won't do it the other way around. I kinda feel like you must skim these articles because your quibbles regarded a lot of information I already covered. I love the feedback but I hate repeating myself. With regard to your first quibble about SOG. I mention that this is upside. It's something he's done before. I stress that it was five years ago and prior to his concussions but never the less I feel that it is important to note what he is capable of under the correct circumstances. Secondly regarding SOG. They are more important than the 20% difference in PPP because the margins are much greater. When 20% is the equivalent of 3 points that`s not a big difference. That`s only a few lucky bounces here and there. 40 SOG on the other hand is not something that any player can make up in a single game and that makes it a lot more significant. Again this is something I stressed in the piece. I also mention that Krejci has better linemates but that it did nothing to improve his numbers over Bergeron`s. You make some valid points but most of them were already covered in the article. Jocular, regarding your suggestion regarding picking one`s poison. That is often the case with these Cage Matches but I like to be decisive whenever possible. Maybe I didn`t sway you and probably not a lot of other people but I definitely convinced myself. Larry, I basically wrote off Savard. With his head issues I think his career is over. 5Hole, if you have a small child, use it as a shield. - steve laidlaw Wed, 08 Jun 2011 15:32:47 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/laidlaw/3721-david-krejci-vs-patrice-bergeron#comment-14466 Im with Krecji! - 5hole Wed, 08 Jun 2011 12:28:42 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/laidlaw/3721-david-krejci-vs-patrice-bergeron#comment-14454 Marc Savard- if he's healthy (what is it with Bruin centers?) he figures into the top 6 somewhere. Put me in the camp that sees Seguin on the wing- which would be an upgrade offensively over all their wingers save for Lucic/Horton. Next season might not be a slam dunk for him-but its not far off.I'd be surprised if both Ryder and Recchi return,Boston could see quite a few changes for next season. - Larry Wed, 08 Jun 2011 07:47:32 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/laidlaw/3721-david-krejci-vs-patrice-bergeron#comment-14453 1) Shots of goal, sorry 160 to 200, I'm not going to dig in too much on that. 200 to 300 and I buy the theory. This could swing one way or the other over a short period of time. Neither is a shoot first guy. 2) Bergeron is one of the top draw men in the world. I believe he "edges' Krejci in this category. Again, not a deciding point. 3) age - resolves nothing 4) health - if you're worried about health, then Bergeron must be considered a concern. 5) World Class - yes both are World Class. They could face off against each other with one minute to go in the Olympic Gold game (one goal game) 6) proven history - again, not an overly decisive topic 7) linemates - What????? They have the same TEAMMATES. Linemates, change shift-to-shift. 8) A trade could affect one of them. They'd look pretty snappy as the centre for a world class winger. I'm not trading for either of them speculating that they might be traded. Being traded wouldn't guarantee a world class winger. I would suggest each Fantasy owner needs to 'pick his poison'! I was clearly Bergeron prior to 2010-11. At this point, six of one, half a dozen of the other. The playoff scoring race re-emphasizes this! They are 1A & 1B on a team three wins short of STANLEY! They're both impressive! Both require multi-cat leagues, to be highly valuable in Fantasy. - Jocular Hockey Manager Wed, 08 Jun 2011 07:42:50 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/laidlaw/3721-david-krejci-vs-patrice-bergeron#comment-14449 A good battle for the cage match. There are still way too many comparisons you are "choosing" to pick your winner. It's almost like you have decided in advance who the winner will be and then go searching for the statistics to justify it. 1. re: SOG. You say "Bergeron is in fact capable of putting up numbers that double Krejci’s in this category". Looking at Bergeron's 2005-2006 seasons is going [b]WAY[/b] to far back. He is consistently posting 200 SOG in an 80-game season these days. Stay with that. Boston is a defensive-minded hockey team coached by a former defenseman (Julien). Bergeron posted 300 SOG [u]before[/u] Julien showed up. Things are different now - it is a bad argument to go back to pre-Julien numbers. 2. SOG difference. 40 shots, 25%. This is not as great a difference as you think. Just because the numbers are high (200-160) doesn't mean it is a huge difference. +15.5/+13 = 20% difference in plus/minus. 13PPP/9.5 PPP = 37% difference. There, Krejci's +20% & +37% just trumped Bergeron's 25% SOG difference. And I think you can count on Krejci maintaining his +/- and PPP advantages, read on. 3. Linemates. Krejci played the majority of the season as the #1 center with Lucic & Horton. All three players are under contract for next season. I would guess that they will stick together. Lucic & Horton are both shooters... which means BOS will stick with keeping the "playmaker" between them. Bergeron played the majority of the season as the #2 center with Recchi & Marchand. Is Recchi really going to play another season? IDK. Can Marchand repeat the 14.1% SH% he posted this year? Probably not. 4. PPP. Julien typically keep his lines in check on the PP. Lucic-Krejci-Horton will start PP1, if fresh. Chara will be on one point. The other point has been several players, Kaberle since he was acquired. PP2 is likely to be Marchand-Recchi-Seguin with Bergeron manning one point. Chara's "in front of the net" thing won't continue into next year as he takes too much of a beating to do that over a regular season. [u][b]Summary:[/b][/u] Going forward to next season, there is a lot to like about Krejci's cemented position on the team and less to like about Bergeron's position on the team. The SOG difference is not enough for Bergeron to win this war. Unleash the bears, I'm going with Krejci! - Pengwin7 Wed, 08 Jun 2011 05:36:05 +0100 http://hockey.dobbersports.com/index.php/columnistsarticles-mainmenu-77/laidlaw/3721-david-krejci-vs-patrice-bergeron#comment-14445 Glad to have you back! This edition was Bear-tastic. ;D - GMGates Wed, 08 Jun 2011 04:28:34 +0100