Are Analytics Killing Hockey?
I’m a numbers guy. I like stats and analytics. But some of the stats and graphs (even this guys heartbeat during a game) are getting a little crazy.
Sometimes I just want to watch the game. And whether or not my team is playing, I can still enjoy it without breaking statistics about who is going to do something next.
I agree with Puck Daddy’s thoughts:
With the acknowledgement that, yes, they can sometimes undeniably suck the joy out of discussing this game.
Rick Nash is a good example of this.
The New York Rangers star has four goals in 17 playoff games so far this season and a total of eight in 54 playoff games with the Blueshirts. The reflex for many of us would be to burn him at the stake in the middle of Madison Square Park using his salary money as kindling, but there’s been a sizable number of people who have defended Nash fervidly.
His possession numbers show he’s not overall been a liability despite his lack of goals. In defense of his underwhelming shooting percentage, his defenders cite similar declines among his comparable peers. (Looking at you, Patrick Sharp.)
What tips the scales for Nash, ultimately, is that when you talk to really, really smart hockey people, they’ll side-eye the goal stats while breaking down all the little things Nash does right to turn down the heat on him: the defense, the possession, the special teams play, the screens for goals.
One level of the narrative is that Nash isn’t putting the puck in the net in the playoffs, and that’s frankly undeniable given his work history. But if someone takes that prolonged slump and extrapolates that he’s “hurting the Rangers” overall, that’s as accurate as saying he skates in SCUBA flippers.
But to bring it back to Arndt’s piece, there’s a middle ground between “watch the game” luddites and “look at the analytics” seers that’s frustratingly missing from the complete picture on any given narrative, which is the players’ perspective.
That’s where “intangibles” actually have value, despite being a word that’s been totally demonized today.
From Arndt:
If Gregory Campbell goes out on the ice, breaks his leg, and finishes his shift, it’s ok to think that’s badass. We don’t particularly need somebody to scream at us that in fact, Gregory Campbell played like human garbage after his leg broke, hurt his team’s chances, and he’s an idiot for risking further injury. Sometimes we just want to enjoy a dude for doing something that we might not have been able to do.
If a player scores five overtime goals in the playoffs en route to a Stanley Cup, it’s ok for people to call him clutch. Let people enjoy the fact somebody did something special in the playoffs. We don’t particularly need to hear about his shooting percentage being unsustainable with an accompanying lengthy document outlining how “clutch” isn’t even a thing.
And yet the Boston Bruins, to a man, were inspired by it. That guy with the five overtime game winners is adding to an overall feeling of destiny or inevitability in that locker room, even if it’s pure luck and probably can’t be quantified as “clutch.”
Image courtesy of Melanie Holtsman.
