Old Man Take A Look At My Life... But Judge Me For Who I Am Today

Rink Rule: Quote Neil, get rec’d.

On the substance, I think in sports there’s a need to use past performance as one of many tools in the evaluation of current performance. If current performance varies wildly from a well-established “norm” for a player, it’s probably worth trying to figure out why that is and if it’s sustainable.

For a guy like Poti, his numbers are down overall, and it’s clear that’s a result of diminished power play time. But digging a little deeper, his even strength numbers are down recently, too, so we ask why that is.

Past performance has it’s limits, but looking at players out of the context of what they’ve done previously isn’t a great idea either – you’ve got to be able to see the forest for the trees, and past performance helps to fill in that forest.

Adding in my two cents. . .

Like JP said, it’s important to see the forest for the trees, and vice versa. Statistics. . . well, good statistics, are one way of helping you do that. They can help you spot trends, or determine when an event is a statistical fluke. This is true for other sports as well, but I’ll give you a good hockey example, because this is a hockey site. :)

Shooting percentage is one stat that, if looked at correctly, can tell you a lot about a player and the season he’s having, and it can also help you predict the kind of season he might have next year. Shooters don’t control everything about their shots, because the goalies obviously have a say. There are some other variables in there as well, including the ever-present dumb luck. As a result, most players’ shooting percentage varies from year to year.

Jason Blake (left wing for Toronto Maple Leafs) is a very good NHL player, but a couple of steps down from Ovie and Semin, talent-wise. In the summer of 2007, the Leafs signed him to a 5 year/$20 million contract. They did this in large part because Blake had scored 40 goals and 69 points the year before. However, the Leafs failed to note that Blake had a 13.11 shooting percentage that year, which was more than four percentage points better than his career average. Given that Blake consistently takes over 300 shots per year, that’s a 12-goal swing. Not surprisingly, his goal total the year prior was 28 goals on 9.2% shooting. Still, 28 goals is nothing to sneeze at, and at $4 million/year, that’s a pretty good deal. However, Blake was 34 when he signed that contract, which means that, statistically speaking, he should be in decline.

The next year, Blake was diagnosed with a treatable form of cancer. He played most of the season, but put up horrendous numbers compared to his salary: 15 goals and 52 points. Interestingly, he shot a little under 5%, which was about half of his career average. At the time, Leafs fans were apoplectic that they had signed Blake. A fan with a little bit of statistical knowledge would have understood that his 2007-08 performance was likely an aberration, since shooting percentages tend to regress to the mean over time.

Sure enough, this year Blake is back near his career average shooting percentage of a little over 9%, and he’s on pace to score 28 goals.

Speaking of shooting percentage, as impressive as Mike Green‘s season has been, he’s unlikely to repeat it consistently in the future. I say that because his shooting percentage, 12.67, is above his career average, and it’s high relative to other defensemen in the league. What makes Green a tough case to call though, is that he’s only played a few years in the NHL, and much of that time was spent under Glen Hanlon, who didn’t let him maximize his offensive potential. Even with such a small sample size, I still think that it’s unlikely that he’ll put up a shooting percentage or a goal total this high every year. It doesn’t mean he’s not awesome, though.

Ok, that’s more like 10 cents, but you get the idea. :)