Summer, the season of updating old charts
by Quisp on Jul 22, 2011 8:10 PM PDT
Email
Print
I got an email from The Hockey News about using my charts from last year's post, The History of 50 Goal Scorers After Age 26. Since the data was a year old I had to update the numbers, and while I was in there I de-bugged the sortable chart. I thought it was pretty interesting to revisit the data in light of how well Kovalchuk worked out in his first season with the Devils. Of course, no one expects him to stay down around 30 goals for the rest of his career, but he's likely to have more 30 goal seasons than 50 goal seasons, from here on out.
The History of 50 Goal Scorers After Age 26
Before you read this post, I want you to play the following thought experiment. We've all heard the various hypothetical/rumored long-term deals bandied about for Ilya Kovalchuk, everything from a (now considered shortish) seven years to an unimaginable 15 years. It's generally assumed that any deal cap-friendly enough for the Kings (or Devils) would have to be in the 10 year (plus) range, front-loaded, to bring the cap hit down. Which means it's likely that whoever signs Kovalchuk will be getting him for 10 years or more. Which is -- um -- a long time.
Here's the thought experiment: You sign IK for 10 years at a $7MM cap hit. How many 50 goal, 40 goal and 30 goal seasons do you need to get out of him to make the deal worth it? Assume he's going to play all ten years. How many times does he have to hit each milestone? Take your time. Get the number in your head and hold it there and don't change it.
Ready?
25 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
By the way, well done. Your analysis (and humor) frequently rivals or surpasses that of main stream press. Your a gem.
By the way, that chart was brilliant
Are Teemu Selanne and Melanie Griffith Twins?
by USHA#17 on Jul 23, 2011 6:32 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Moreover...
Two things.
First, what I remember from that chart was how Dionne kept his scoring up as he got older. Specifically look at this, really a remarkable achievement.
I remember this chart very clearly. It really illuminated what a bad investment Kovalchuk would have been at a competitive price. What it ultimately will come down to is whether or not the Devils win the Cup with him. Seems like a long-shot as most scorers that play into the higher age range experience a downward trajectory in productivity. Time will tell.
My point is, with the current NHL, purchasing high dollar free agents on the open market will not necessarily lead to a championship. The glaring exception would be Marion Hossa, but look what happened to a lot of the talent on that team—left for better deals. Was it worth it to win one cup? That’s a philosophical question with no right answer.
Anyhow, any perpetually losing team with a disproportionately highly paid forward is an embarrassment. Will a player laugh all the way to the bank with a shitty legacy like that? I don’t know really, nor do I want to learn, as that behavior is enabled by bad decision making.
I got an email from The Hockey News
I get those, too…but they only ask for money.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: Remember us when you go big-time, Quisp!
Usually, when The Hockey News contact me
It is through U.S. mail, to deliver the “PLAYOFF PREVIEW!” somewhere toward the end of Round 2.
To be fair, their Season Preview usually arrives in early October, with information as recent as August if you’re lucky.
But my best “Why do I still subscribe?” tale (note: out of tradition) is when they were having mailing problems, with issues arriving all torn up in your mailbox sometime in the ’90s. Their solution: Wrap one copy of the issue inside a second copy, and mail both. Because two torn-up issues are better than one!
Lighthouse Hockey: A flute with no holes is not a flute. A Dane with no holes is Frans Nielsen.
Off topic, Quisp, but with regards to http://lakingsinsider.com/2011/07/22/thoughts-on-commenting/#comment-639953, which I regard as the LA Kings efforts, through their employee, Rich Hammond, a heavy handed attempt to stifle critical comments, may I ask that you don’t do anything like this.
i made a comment in that thread which pretty well sums up my point of view on the topic
i respect your opinion. i think rich is just trying to figure out a better way to keep the conversation lively but civilized. as i said “over there,” I think that’s hard if not impossible to do when your population is that big.
Wait till this year.
i don't interpret what Rich is doing that way
And what he’s proposing is exactly what SB Nation already does so .. not sure where you’re getting the “stifle critical comments” from.
by Matt George on Jul 23, 2011 12:26 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
I don't see that either
Especially because I don’t get what kind of “critical comments” Rich is supposedly trying to stifle. Or him? Of the Kings? If he tried to censor both, it would be out of character for him. Well, granted, I’ve never seen anything really critical of him in the comments, but seriously, would you expect any of the commenters to tell Rich that he sucked? Most everyone appreciates him, as they should. And the notion that he tries to stifle criticism of the Kings players, coaches and management… well, if that was true, the Kings should have fired him long ago, because he sure as heck doesn’t do that.
I think Rich is being entirely honest about what he intends. It’s understandable that a popular blog should have a code of conduct for commenters (like Jon Weisman’s rules for posting at Dodger Thoughts), and I understand Rich wanting to spend less time moderating,
I do understand people reacting negatively because they feel like they’re being dragged toward Facebook, though.
"I think you just outed yourself as Dean Lombardi. I knew it all along." — Rudy Kelly
Concur 100%.
If I had a dollar for every time I’ve broken my own vow and read the comments (only to be reminded of why I swore off of them the last time) … I wouldn’t be playing the muni courses.
by OneTimer. on Jul 23, 2011 9:09 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Maybe the Kings should hire a moderator or something. Rich writes so much, he should be freed from that.
In Dinglebarn We Trust -- JftC
Stifle?
“…because it’s been proven, time and again, that there’s a higher level of responsibility and accountability when people actually attach their names to what they say.” —R.H.
Stifle or an attempt to raise the level of discourse. Could cut either or both ways. Perhaps spurred by the recent Anthonyy reference.
Are Teemu Selanne and Melanie Griffith Twins?
I assume that Rich here is referring to stuff that a lot of people never get to see because he deletes it from the comments. He states that profanity and personal attacks against other commenters are subject to moderation (not unusual among blogs with wide readership), and sometimes that stuff gets pulled PDQ. The theory is that people will be less nasty to each other if they can’t use posting IDs and have to reveal their “real” identities.
I understand the theory, don’t really think this would work. You can have multiple FB accounts, and you don’t have to use your real name on any of them. Besides, I think some of the rough stuff comes from people posting while drunk or otherwise not in full control of their judgment, so discretion means little to them in that situation anyway.
"I think you just outed yourself as Dean Lombardi. I knew it all along." — Rudy Kelly
I get the feeling that more a matter of age, many seem fairly young and relatively new to hockey. On the whole (and not factoring Rich’s contributions) other blogs tend to provide more timely and insightful comments with a noticeable lack of rancor.
But on topic, I also ask why a person should have to give up their computer ID to Facebook in order to post? It won’t make any difference.
.
Are Teemu Selanne and Melanie Griffith Twins?
I get the feeling that more a matter of age, many seem fairly young and relatively new to hockey. On the whole (and not factoring Rich’s contributions) other blogs tend to provide more timely and insightful comments with a noticeable lack of rancor.
I submit TSN’s comments section in rebuttal.
Funny thing is they heavily moderate those comments at TSN.
After many years of reading TSN, I finally created an account a few months back in order to make the occasional comment in Kings’ related stories etc… I’ve probably had something like 3 out of 8 submissions rejected, and these were relatively straightforward posts, bearing my somewhat knowledgeable opinions. I couldn’t care less, but it’s interesting as it seems to suggest that the consistent trollers there are actually welcomed at the Toronto Sports Network…
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Jewels From The Crown
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
