Clueless

If Martin were actually “slow, turnover prone, soft, and overall just not effective in any zone for the most part,” then he’d be an awful possession player, especially because he is going up against such top competition. The fact that he is so good at possession makes it really difficult to take your comment seriously.

Also, as I mentioned above, Paul Martin had the most ice time last year. If he is really “slow, turnover prone, soft, and overall just not effective in any zone for the most part,” then isn’t Bylsma an awful coach for relying on him so much? What’s more, isn’t Ray Shero a terrible GM for not firing a coach that gives so much playing time to such a crappy player?

I think it was a even trade if you really think about it. At the time of the trade deadline, the Pens needed a goal scored with Sid out can Dallas needed a offensive puck moving defencemen that’s been needed since Sergei Zubov retired and that’s what both teams got in the Neal-Gogo trade.

Neither Gabe nor anyone else has said that you don’t need to watch the game to make an informed judgment about a player or a team. This is a straw man argument. What they do say (myself included) is that we should use stats in addition to observation, in evaluating players because they give us a bigger and more accurate picture of what’s going on. When statements about a player—like Yohe’s—stretch so far from the statistics, then we can question whether our subjectively driven eye test is faulty.

Simple as that. Sometimes if you wat a certain player on your team, your going to have to pay for it. Can’t expect every player in the league to take a discount to play here.

I rather believe that it is Martin’s style of passive, positional defense that seems to offend many. He and Michalek are not violent and aggressive players like Letang, Orpik and Engelland. They play a far less attacking mode. Scuderi played that way and still does as does Lidstrom. While that may not bee your preference, it is effective for the most part when Martin plays.

I’d rather all defensemen be able to play that way and use the body when necessary. I have much more respect for a player who can prevent a shot through positioning and good stick play than I do for one who simply uses brute force. Even well-timed brute force can leave you out of position to play the puck (inherently, because you have to move out of position to hit someone), but if you play sound positional defense, you’ll rarely be in the wrong place.

I don’t think Martin has totally under performed. I think the stats, in some instances here, lead one to the assumption that he’s been a monster. I think some others lead to the assumption that he’s bottom of the barrel.

I tried to make a few points:

1). I agree that Martin was good last year.
2). I disagree that Martin was good all this year, but on the balance is improving.
3). I think there’s a big difference between start of the year Paul Martin (horrid) and current Paul Martin (solid).
4). I think that was Yohe’s contention.

LetsGoPens! brings up a lot of very valid points. Martin does have very difficult assignments on a nightly basis. And the Penguins do tend to control the puck more when he’s out there against those tough opponents. That’s not easy and is often a recipe for success.

Corsi (or my preferred Fenwick) numbers can essentially show you puck possession in the NHL, since we don’t get those numbers yet for whatever reason. The logic holds that if your team takes more shots than you opponent while you’re on the ice, you’ve likely held the puck for a longer period of time.

Not too hard to argue with. The inferences, deductions and applications of that information can go a number of ways. A number of the advanced stat bloggers (I’m not one, but read up on it enough to know how the numbers work) feel that it has very strong application in showing a team’s strength and likelihood of winning.

Whether you agree that Corsi is the most important stat or not, Martin having those good Corsi numbers at least shows that the Penguins are able to sustain possession while he’s out there. And if they’re able to do that against tough opponents, you have to give some credit to his offensive and defensive skills.

And thanks for the welcome, it’s appreciated :)

Speaking a bit more broadly, I think Engelland’s evolution from a pure enforcer to a well-rounded 2nd/3rd pairing guy has been one of the most unexpected (but awesome!) storylines that has developed this year, and one that has gone a bit under the radar.

if Martin truly put together a borderline disastrous first six weeks, his numbers would have reflected that. His TOI and possession numbers would be way down. Unfortunately I can’t get numbers for the first six weeks of his play alone, but given that his numbers are high—as a whole—I think that’s presumptive evidence that he was never borderline disastrous for the first part of the season.

I feel that calling Yohe clueless is a bit harsh, but I agree with you overall on most points. Except the quote above. You do admitt that it is presumptive evidence so I can’t be too hard on you. But, that said a I can recall a number of people mentioning Martins poor start to the year. Including some from the Pens announcers as well. I think the reason for his stats not showing his poor start is simply because he has also had a rather good season after the first month or so. Basically he is regressing back to his norms as quickly as he diverted from them.

I think the idea that he was indifferent last year is preposterous. And, as you pointed out, the numbers bear the truth of what actually happened. In the end it looks like he will have a solid season once again this year. But, it is not out of line to say he had a rough start. I think a lot of the vocal disappointment we have heard this season is due to the way he was sold to the fans when he was signed. The fans can’t be expected to conduct an depth statistical analisys. We should be able to take the organizations statements in good faith. So, in that respect maybe he has been a bit of a letdown, but that doesn’t mean he isn’t a solid Dman, and in my eyes at least, well worth his contract.

Judging by that number, we can Martin has been terribly unlucky. Regardless of who he is playing with, the puck is not going in that often while he’s on the ice, and he has absolutely no control over that.

I think that’s too strong of an assertion to jump upon due to the numbers. I spent about three hours (sadly) the other day going through the arguments for and against the relevance of shot quality.

At the very worst, in the article you’re listing below, they assign 11% of on-ice shooting percentage to shot quality. and that’s the very least. I wouldn’t exactly call that entirely uninfluential.

But you also repeatedly see these bloggers admit that shot quality may not exist on a “team” level, but it does exist on an “individual” level. If Martin is frequently playing with individual forwards taking a large number of shots who score on them and possess a high shooting percentage, I find it hard to take that it’s simply “luck” working against him.

I think the biggest point that has been made time and again in many of these analyses is that looking at statistics which narrowly focus only on when the puck is going in (like goals, assists, or +/-) misses the bigger picture of why those goals are going in more often than not. We know it’s driven by possession. That’s why the best possession players are always toward the top of the league. And most importantly, that’s why the best possession teams are always toward the top of the standings.

I don’t disagree with this in principle. Possession numbers are obviously highly indicative of who has control of the game. But I think simply narrowing down an individual players strengths or struggles to who has possession more while he’s out there really takes too much out of the equation.

Is he turning the puck over and giving up odd-man rushes on a frequent basis?
If he’s so frequently selling out to maintaining possession, does he often find himself badly out of position when his team loses the puck?
What is his individual play like in the defensive zone? Does he box out defenders well? Do players find soft spots that he should be covering?

I only pointed out Martin’s +/- numbers because they went contrary to the club’s tendencies over a specific period of time. I think some information can be culled from that.

And I meant the compliment. I think it’s good work (maybe aside from some of the incendiary language) and agree with much of what you posted.