AHL- Apolyton Hockey League 10/11: Preseason

[notyoueither]

Who would you rather have on your team, Bob Probert or some random 20 goal scorer who is a candidate for the Lady Byng?

[Guynemer]

I'm a Red Wings fan. You must be familiar with their run of dominance over the past 20 years without ever even coming close to leading the league in penalty minutes, no?

[Guynemer]

Who would you rather have on your team, Bob Probert or some random 20 goal scorer who is a candidate for the Lady Byng?

The 20 goal scorer, every day of the week.

Frankly, I think players should get a minus when an opposing team scores while said player is in the penalty box.

[Guynemer]

The searchable stats on NHL.com only go back 12 seasons for this, but:

In the past 12 seasons, during which the Red Wings have been the dominant force in the NHL, not once did they finish in the top ten in total penalty minutes. In fact, in the past 12 seasons, only once did they not finish in the top ten in fewest penalty minutes.

[notyoueither]

You should ask Steve Yzerman his opinion.

If you ask Wayne Gretsky, he will tell you that Dave Semenko was a very large factor in his and the Oilers success in the '80s. There is no way the Oilers win their five cups without being one of the tougher teams of their time. Players like Semenko, McSorley, McClelland, Brown, etc. earned those cup rings. Not to mention what toughness and a mean streak added to the value of a player like Messier.

[Guynemer]

You can be tough without taking penalties. Datsyuk is regularly one of the Wings' leaders in hits, and yet he is a perennial Byng winner.

I'm pretty sure Steve Yzerman would rather have five skaters on the ice most of the time this season as opposed to the Bolts' performance last year.

[Guynemer]

Here are the teams with the fewest penalty minutes last season, listed with their final position in their conference:

1. Predators (7)
2. Red Wings (5)
3. Devils (2)
4. Sabres (3)
5. Blackhawks (2)
6. Wild (13)
7. Coyotes (4)
8. Canadiens (7T)
9. Capitals (1)
10. Islanders (13)


So that's eight for ten making the playoffs, including the Stanley Cup champs, as well as the President's Trophy winners.

I rest my case. For now. Maybe.

[notyoueither]

The searchable stats on NHL.com only go back 12 seasons for this, but:

In the past 12 seasons, during which the Red Wings have been the dominant force in the NHL, not once did they finish in the top ten in total penalty minutes. In fact, in the past 12 seasons, only once did they not finish in the top ten in fewest penalty minutes.

Yes, the Red Wings have built a good thing on the foundation of punishing teams on the power play. Some say that results in tougher teams laying off them for fear of the refs.

However, not every team does or needs to do it that way. In fact, most can't. There are only so many Fetisovs, Lidstroms, Yzermans, etc. to go around. BTW, the 07 Ducks that I mentioned earlier ran over the Red Wings in the conference final. That year toughness won. Toughness doesn't have to win every year to make it an important part of the game.

[Guynemer]

And, of course, in 09, the Wings beat the Ducks.

No, toughness doesn't have to win every year. Toughness is important. But penalty minutes do not measure toughness. They measure penalties: by definition, a negative for your team, putting your team at a disadvantage.

[notyoueither]

Here are the teams with the fewest penalty minutes last season, listed with their final position in their conference:

1. Predators (7)
2. Red Wings (5)
3. Devils (2)
4. Sabres (3)
5. Blackhawks (2)
6. Wild (13)
7. Coyotes (4)
8. Canadiens (7T)
9. Capitals (1)
10. Islanders (13)


So that's eight for ten making the playoffs, including the Stanley Cup champs, as well as the President's Trophy winners.

I rest my case. For now. Maybe.

I note that the conference winners were one from each of your lists.

[Guynemer]

And I note that the teams that had fewer penalty minutes, on average, had significantly more success than those teams that were penalized more.


Which makes sense, because they are penalties.

[notyoueither]

And, of course, in 09, the Wings beat the Ducks.

No, toughness doesn't have to win every year. Toughness is important. But penalty minutes do not measure toughness. They measure penalties: by definition, a negative for your team, putting your team at a disadvantage.

There are dumb penalties, yes, but the tougher players take a majority of their PiMs as a consequence of their style of play. Their style of play adds to their value to the teams that choose to employ them.

BTW, Yzerman gave Steve Downie a fairly substantial raise.

[Guynemer]

Clearly, you and I aren't going to come to an agreement about this. In regards to the hallowed AHL: how about we put it to a vote, instant run-off style?

Option 1: I don't want to count PIM
Option 2: I want PIM to be a negative
Option 3: I want PIM to be a positive


I'm #2, with #1 as second choice.

[snoopy369]

I don't think PIM can be a negative. Positive or nothing.

If I got a vote, I'd vote for not counting PIM.

[notyoueither]

Clearly, you and I aren't going to come to an agreement about this. In regards to the hallowed AHL: how about we put it to a vote, instant run-off style?

Option 1: I don't want to count PIM
Option 2: I want PIM to be a negative
Option 3: I want PIM to be a positive


I'm #2, with #1 as second choice.

I wasn't advocating adding PiMs to the AHL. I think part of the charm of the league is its simplicity. I'm in other leagues where I can excercise my fondness for aggressive players.

I am willing to discuss the importance of players to NHL teams who tend to rack up a lot of them.

I don't think option two is possible.

[Guynemer]

That's strange. When one searches team penalty minutes on NHL.com, the league leader is the team with the least PIM, so one would think you could have that as an option with Yahoo. C'est la vie. I'm content with not having PIM.

[snoopy369]

In Fantasy, PIM are sort of a historical thing - back in the day they wanted to have a way to quantify people who weren't just pansy ass, err, goal scoring types but actually did the grunt work; and PIM were the only stat that was easily available. Hits not only weren't always as easy to get, but they're incredibly vulnerable to home scorers who either count everything as a hit, or nothing. Asher had some nice posts about, iirc, the LA Kings scorer who was insane. Or maybe the Oilers. Don't recall.

Anyway, that's why positive PIM are a default stat in hockey leagues.

[Sparrowhawk]

Sparrowhawk*

* needs to join league

Joined....I got the invite and thought I finished registering earlier, but apparently I didn't complete the process.

One caveat for me is that I have gone through several major changes and have limited computer access now until September 30th.....I still will check daily and more often, and am happy to sned a pick list to someone, but just to let you know before I hold up the draft, I am happy to be bpay'd if necessary, or even booted from the league if it's an issue....just don't say I didn't warn you! lol

As of October 1st it should be a non-issue for me (I hope).

/me

Guynemer's discussion of PIM brings up a stat I would love to see the league track (and maybe they do) and that is Power plays goals scored against while any specific player sits in the box or maybe even a power play goals against per penalty. I would like to now which players penalties hurt a team the most, and which players seldom see a goal scored while they watch from the box. I would think a teams top penalty killer would be more likely to see a goal scored against as he is not killing the penalty. Similarly I would think that a team would have more success killing penalties that are "smart" penalties then they would killing off penalties by the stupid idiot that keeps taking penalties for retaliation after the whistle and what not. Anyone know if anything like this is tracked anywhere?

[Flubber]

Coming late to the PIM discussion but

1. I agree with Guy that PIMs are not necessarily positive but then again the highest PIM guys rarely hurt their team since they usually take offsetting fighting majors. I could never really argue that PIMs are generally "good"
2. That said I would generally be in support of some "different" stat whether it be hits or blocked shots or PIM. I know scoring is the most important and easily trackable thing etc etc but I would love to have a stat that was completely different for pool purposes. I like the idea of people having to pick between a potential 60 point guy and maybe a 40 poinnter who hits, blocks shots or take penalties.
3. Part of this is a desire to value d-men more. As it stands, with some very rare exceptions, your dmen will have point totals somewhere near mediocre compared to forwards. I would love it if a stat like hits made some 40 point d-men potential category winners for you
4. I have had this debate in a couple of the last few years and my recollection was there was never more than marginal support for ANY new stats . A few people were philosophically opposed to rewarding penalty takers and Asher pointed out how slanted the hits category can be by local stats keepers (maybe true for blocked shots too ?). There never has been a stat with even close to majority support.

I'll play whatever. BUt I have always thought that something other than scoring could be used somehow and would be interesting. If we added hits, some folks might ignore it since scoring still dominates the categories BUT there would be another strategic choice.

[notyoueither]

Blocked shots and hits both share the weakness of being dependent on the building and score keepers.

[Guynemer]

As are giveaways and takeaways, sadly. Faceoff wins would be okay, but obviously would only apply to forwards.

Sadly, the only other measurable, precise stat is PIM. That's just the nature of hockey.

[Asher]

Do we need another skater stat?

Swap SHO for GAA and we're good, right?

[notyoueither]

We should count up opinion. How about this?

Those in favour of an added skater stat:


Opposed:


Undecided/Don't care:
notyoueither


Skater stat to add if we add one:


Those in favour of dropping SHO and adding GAA:


Opposed:


Undecided/Don't care:
notyoueither

[notyoueither]

I've put myself as undecided. I'm flexible.


Make it easier for people to vote.

In favour of adding skater stat: yes/no
Skater stat to add if we add one: state
In favour of dropping SHO and adding GAA: yes/no

[Asher]

I'm officially indifferent on both counts.

[notyoueither]

Adding a goal stat without taking one away would throw the balance of skaters and goal way off. We'd definitely have to add at least two skater stats, IMO.

Please state clearly that you want to add a goal stat without taking one away if you want to do this.

[Flubber]

Hmmm

I would REPLACE shutouts with GAA

If we found a skater stat that enough people liked I would then eliminate PPG and PPA in favor of PPP ( I always thought PPG and PPA both was a bit of overkill)-- End result is we retain the 5-3 balance


If we added a stat, I would favor hits as I understand Yahoo now allows this-- While it is subject to some decided variation among buildings, that is a point that CAN be researched and be one more factor in your choice. If for example, you KNOW that LA gives out a ton of the "hit' stat to everyone, maybe you value some LA Kings higher-- Its researchable and non-random--

[Guynemer]

I'll do whatever, honestly.

[Flubber]

I'll do whatever, honestly.

me too

I just make the case that something a little different in the mix might be nice-- As it stands we pretty much just pick the best scorer. With a 'different" stat to me it just adds a bit more decision making -- take a guy projected to score 10 less points since he lays on the body a LOT for instance

But either way

[mrboo123]

I think the number of stats is fine, just switch GAA with SHO. If a goalie gets a shutout his SV% and GAA will benfit enough.