Stats aren't old tyme hockey: who will come out against hockeymetrics?

Even though playoffs are on the horizon, and I'm pushing for the Jets and Blue Jackets to make it in, sometimes I like to read baseball articles. Articles like this piece on Max Scherzer are a blast to read, because of how the author uses the parallels of depression and sabrmetrics to make a point on how to pay attention to details. Sadly, the mirror image to this is some piece on the Grand Forks Herald that blocks bugmenot. However, there are some choice quotes people have pulled.

With ruthless determination, computer nerds have proven that statistical probability governs the game of baseball more than anybody ever imagined. "The law of averages," my Grandpa used to call it.

But Grandpa meant that if Hrbek was 0 for his last 10, the law of averages said he would more than likely get a hit his next time up. The computer nerds go much deeper.

Nobody says the phrase "computer nerd" unironically unless they're at least 45. But it doesn't stop there!

Let's make a trade. I propose sending all of baseball's statisticians to the federal government in exchange for a hot dog.

I don't even want the context for this. I will pay a calligrapher hard cash to scribe and frame this for me.

Baseball has immersed itself in advanced stats so much that games on tv will even post a player's on base percentage beside their batting average. Hockey has its feet wet in the pool too, as figures like Corsi, Fenwick, PDO, and other useful things with stupid names are becoming less obscure. History is set to repeat itself though. Elliott Friedman is bringing up fancystats while Glenn Healy's dented head has trouble accepting the concept, never mind that Healy has a hard enough time trying to pull back his hand if the stove burner's hot.

TV is one thing; words are another, and eventually, print journalists are going to eventually sound off on the issue, whether or not they can, or are willing to understand it. The way I see it, it's not going to be pretty. The more advanced stats are talked about, the more likely those writers are going to cover them. I mean the likes of Damien Cox, Bruce Garrioch, etc. Expect them to brush aside stats for heart, grit, and wins, unless it helps them make some silly point or other. However, who among them is most likely to release a diatribe about those fucking nerds who can't even skate backwards thinking they know hockey through their nerdy algebra for nerds? That's what I intend to divine. Bear in mind, while I will have source quotes, my primary resource is the same as any self respecting sports journalist: my ass.

Damien Cox

If anyone's the Skip Bayless of hockey, it's this guy. Don't expect him to write for Sun Media, but he covers Toronto, and gets a lot of screen time on Sportsnet. That affords him a lot of people to piss off. He also has the logical process to write an anti-hockeymetric article if you look at quotes like this one on Randy Carlyle's playoff performance with the Ducks:

Hired by Anaheim in 2005, Carlyle took the club to the playoffs in five of six seasons before being fired partway through last season. Under Carlyle, the club played in 11 playoff series, winning six. The Ducks never played the Kings, with their closest opponent being the Sharks, about 590 kilometres away. Otherwise it was Calgary or Edmonton or Vancouver or Dallas, with rest and hydration key elements of post-season preparation to adjust to travel and multiple time zone changes.

Wins. Just like in baseball, if you don't care about numbers, it boils down to wins. Doesn't matter who was in his roster, or the quality of his opponents. Hell, even some basic math would suggest that the Ducks only made it out of the 1st round twice in 5 years. Ol' Coxy should be prime to write a "fuck geeks" piece. Unless he doesn't want to step on any peers' toes.

All it's going to take for Cox to either shut his mouth or eat his words is if the right person says something good about hockey metrics. When that time comes, his feeble claims of "I uh, meant to say that all along" will be glorious. Don't expect this range of options though from...

Steve Simmons

He uses the term emotional leader in reference to a professional athlete. You don't use a phrase like that with a straight face for anything beyond high school. That should be enough proof Stevie watches hockey with the part of his brain that occasionally reminds him to eat. Out of everyone I cover, he has the second most blatant intangibles talk, so a "stats are ruining hockey" piece can't be far off. With his chances being so strong, Steve "the best part about today is I no longer have to see your face" Simmons is also the one person I hope follows through. Who better to spew venom against QualComp nerds than somebody who looks like a walking reddit stereotype.

Bruce Garrioch

He's a vindictive homer. He writes for the worst publication in Sun Media. He also uses sportsclubstats.com from time to time for playoff probability. My guess is he'll have no problem with fancystats until they make the Senators look bad. Expect him to say nothing of shot percentages, or PDO.

On the other hand, he might try to be clever and invent his own stats. For example, a Cooke rating for how much of an asshole he deems a player, or a Forensic rating on how much of a crime a hit on any Sens player is.

Eric Francis

First red flag I noticed from Francis was this:

Part of being a good enforcer is not only knowing when a fight is needed to spark his team, but when his energy and physicality can do it. 

He thinks fights help win games, so we have another intangibles bandwagoner. To add to his repetoire of not-stats, let's see what he thinks of "heart" in his Fuck the Russians piece from the World Juniors a few years back.

...(only to end as a one-goal game, thanks to Canada's heart)...

For those of you with short memories, this was the semi-final game for the 2012 World Juniors that Canada almost redeemed 50 minutes of bantam level playing in the last ten minutes. I can't even count the number of times I had to remind people that you don't win games by mailing in the first two periods.  But it doesn't stop there, let's go a little further down the same article.

In a Washington organization that also houses Ovechkin and Alex Semin, somehow we think Kuznetsov will fit right in.

 Really I could just use the whole article. It's full of misconceptions, forced narratives, and so on. Pair that up with covering the Calgary Flames, a team currently placing facepunchers like Brian McGrattan and Akim Aliu on the second and third lines, and you have potential for a "fancystats don't measure heart, grit, and determination" article. Only four players on the roster have a positive On-Ice Corsi; the aforementioned McGrattan and Aliu are getting the most sheltered of minutes, and the defensive depth begins and ends at Mark Giordano. But that's not going to stop Eric if Calgary has any length of a win streak next season.

So go nuts, Eric. Give unto me your platitudes of heart, respect, and toughness while you bray against the geeks that are ruining hockey for you by saying a bad team is bad. I'm sure your stats guy will have some way to polish those turds you call talking points.