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.