The Puck Stops Here
Next entry: Post Season Award Voting and Elite Goalies
Previous entry: Montreal Canadiens Potentially Sold
Selke Trophy Voting: All Messed Up
by PuckStopsHere on 06/22/09 at 01:07 AM ET
Comments (58)
They asked 131 sports writers to name the five best defensive forwards in the NHL in the 2008/09 season and found they received 70 different answers. Even the most popular answers were missing from 10% or more of the ballots. The winner Pavel Datsyuk was named on 120 of 131 ballots. The runner up Mike Richards appeared on 113 ballots. Clearly there isn’t any uniformity in the way hockey writes judge defensive forwards. The voting can be found here.
Some of the choices which were relatively popular look like pretty poor choices. David Krejci of the Boston Bruins faced a near average quality of opposition and posted a league leading +37 +/- rating. He wasn’t used as a shutdown guy in Boston. He finished in sixth place in the voting. Travis Zajac was another high +/- guy. He led the New Jersey Devils with a +33 rating. He wasn’t their main shutdown player. He finished seventh in the voting. Among many voters, there was a tendency to vote for high +/- ratings who are not exactly defensive forwards.
There is also a tendency among some voters to vote for established names that have done well in the award voting in the past. Rod Brind’Amour of the Carolina Hurricanes won the Selke in 2006 and 2007. This season was a bit of a disaster for him. His -23 +/- was the worst among all forwards in the league. He finished 16th in the voting and even had a first place vote.
The tendency to vote for past winners and to vote for high +/- ratings both benefit Pavel Datsyuk of Detroit. Datsyuk is the defending winner of the Selke Trophy and posted a +34 rating, third best in the NHL. Given the number of odd votes cast, I think those tendencies alone gave Datsyuk the 2009 Selke Trophy. Datsyuk won by only seven points (one second place vote) over Mike Richards of the Philadelphia Flyers. Richards was named as a first place choice on more ballots than Datsyuk (61 to 55). Richards was named on fewer overall ballots because some of the out to lunch voters had not discovered him as a top defensive forward. His +/- rating was a very good +22 (second on his team), but it was back of the league leaders. He has never been a Selke nominee in the past. Richards has a very high quality of opposition that he played against all season. He was a very successful penalty killer. He played almost three minutes per game on the penalty kill against high quality first line power play units and usually shut them down. He led the league with seven short handed goals and nine short handed points. Only 20 goals were scored during the time Richards was on the ice short handed. There was a net of 11 goals scored by his opposition (subtracting off the short handed goals his team scored). That number is ridiculously low and is unapproached by anyone else who has as much short handed time as Richards.
The main advantage Mike Richards should have over Pavel Datsyuk in Selke voting is that he plays in far more defensive situations. The Detroit Red Wings largely roll out all four lines. This limits Datsyuk’s ice time. He plays more than two minutes fewer per game than Mike Richards. Over the course of the season this worked out to about 160 minutes of playing time. This playing time was largely in these defensive match ups that Philadelphia coach John Stevens tried harder to establish than Detroit coach Mike Babcock did. This played Mike Richards in far more defensive situations over the season. The top defensive forward should be the player who plays well in the most defensive situations. If the Red Wings chose not to commit Datsyuk to as many defensive situations then his chances of winning that award should decrease. Based on the fact that Richards received more first place votes, it seems many voters understood that. However, with the rather large number of poor selections made in the voting allowed Datsyuk to win anyway.
There is a lot of variation in the Selke voting. Seventy different names were mentioned on 131 ballots. Some of those names were poor choices. The voting was very close between the two top contenders in Pavel Datsyuk and Mike Richards. Some of the incorrect biases of voters, rewarding players who have done well in the past in the voting and rewarding players with high */- ratings without concern for the circumstances of those numbers both benefitted Pavel Datsyuk. Those biases were enough to give him an award that Mike Richards would have better deserved.
Filed in: | The Puck Stops Here | Permalink
Tags: David+Krejci, Mike+Richards, Pavel+Datsyuk, Rod+Brind'Amour, Travis+Zajac,
Comments
Mike Babcock tends to prefer to play his top lines against the opposition’s top lines instead of trying to get his team’s offensive leaders “away” from the other team’s checkers, and 100% of the time that a penalty kill started with both Datsyuk and Zetterberg in the lineup, either Datsyuk or Zetterberg hit the ice to take the initial penalty-killing shift, with the other player taking the next shift.
That’s how it works in Detroit. Yes, the Wings tend to roll four lines, but the players understand that they’re not going to get 18-22 minutes of ice time a night unless they can play a dual shut/down and scoring role, prime time on the PK included.
The fact that Datsyuk played less PK time reflects the fact that the Wings try to roll three or four PK’er shifts as well as lines, not that the Wings somehow don’t rely on him to fulfill a defensive role.
I’ll take quality over quantity in my biased opinion that Datsyuk may not have “deserved” the Selke, but he sure as hell earned it.
Posted by George Malik from South Lyon, MI on 06/22/09 at 05:09 AM ET
Is it “messed up” because the award wasn’t given to the player who you thought should win?
Posted by Steve Strowbridge from St. John's, NL, CA on 06/22/09 at 06:40 AM ET
Its messed up because they picked a wide array of players, some of whom had no reason to get votes. Many of the voters clearly didn’t have much idea how to select a top defensive forward. A symptom of that is that they picked the wrong player.
Posted by PuckStopsHere on 06/22/09 at 06:45 AM ET
this may just be my black and vegas gold glasses talking but how can voters not tossing a vote for Malkin in. granted there was no way he’d win, but at least some token votes. after all he did lead the league in take aways, and that doesn’t happen by cherry picking at center red all day
Posted by Pensfan21 from erie on 06/22/09 at 06:57 AM ET
Malkin also had a huge number of giveaways.
Selke isn’t really for the best defensive forward out there, because there are quite a few great shut down men. It’s for those who are solid defensively *and* had solid offensive output. I’m not backing this definition, just saying that the award seems to be understood that way. Draper won the Selke when he had a 30 goal season I believe, even while retaining his faceoff and defensive prowess.
Pasha (Datsyuk) had an MVP caliber season, played in all defensive situations, and only got less ice time than Richards because, as Malik already pointed out, his team has a number of players they like to use in those situations. He is not our only horse, but is used everywhere.
Richards had a great season and should be lauded for it. Pasha, according to this Wing homer, is a better player and had a better season. In short, he’s a fuching Gangsta.
Posted by Osrt on 06/22/09 at 07:41 AM ET
Wait, how did you figure that simply playing more equals more defensive situations?
And you didn’t include any of Pav’s stats either.
Jesus you suck PSH.
Posted by moore00 from Columbus, OH/Grand Rapids, MI on 06/22/09 at 07:42 AM ET
Its messed up because they picked a wide array of players, some of whom had no reason to get votes.
In YOUR opinion.
Is there ANY reason in the world to think that you can analyze the opinions of 131 different people in the span of a couple of paragraphs? It’s a fool’s errand!
And to assume that the “odd” choices gave Datsyuk the award is completely baseless. If you eliminated the odd choices, those writers might have placed Datyuk higher on their ballots, which could have made him the winner by a larger margin.
And lastly, the fact that Detroit can roll four lines somehow factors against Datsyuk? How about the fact that his line was often playing against the best offensive line of the opposition?
Posted by Garth on 06/22/09 at 07:44 AM ET
Based on the fact that Richards received more first place votes, it seems many voters understood that.
I’m sorry, but “most”?
How about the fact that 15% of the writers didn’t even put him in the TOP FIVE?!?!
These “the person I wanted to win didn’t, so everybody’s wrong” articles are ridiculous, man…
Posted by Garth on 06/22/09 at 07:48 AM ET
It is very clear that the 160 or so more minutes Richards played were largely in defensive situations. Mike Richards spent more than double the time on the penalty kill than Datsyuk did (264 minutes to 129). That 135 minutes alone nearly makes up the ice time difference between the players and it is clearly in defensive situations.
At even strength, behind the net ranks Mike Richards as having the highest quality of compettion among Philadelphia forwards (with any reasonable amount of ice time). It picks Henrik Zetterberg and Johan Franzen as having higher qualitiy of competition than Datsyuk. The raw numbers also support Richards, but it is problematic comparing numbers like that between teams.
Mike Richards played in defensive situations a lot more than Pavel Datsyuk. Hence he is a better Selke choice.
Posted by PuckStopsHere on 06/22/09 at 07:52 AM ET
Sorry but you’re a Buffoon !!!!!!!!!
Richards Can’t Carry Datsyuk’s Jock
Richards Despite the IDIOT Pierre McGuire Blowing Him all the Time is a Glorified 3rd Line Center
Posted by Evilpens on 06/22/09 at 07:58 AM ET
Obvious troll is obvious.
Posted by Incognetis from Delaware... Hi... I'm in... Delaware on 06/22/09 at 08:01 AM ET
Mike Richards played in defensive situations a lot more than Pavel Datsyuk. Hence he is a better Selke choice.
I’m sorry, but point ‘a’ does not result in point ‘b’. For a guy who uses so many made up numbers and stats, you can’t just boil it down to that. You CAN’T!
Posted by Garth on 06/22/09 at 08:20 AM ET
Of course you can. Richards and Datsyuk played at abput the same level when they were in defensive situations (for the sake of our argument it is approximately true - and any difference between them will not change things) and Richards played in far more defensive situations (the numbers clearly show that).
Hence Richards should win.
Posted by PuckStopsHere on 06/22/09 at 08:25 AM ET
Or what if the rest of Richards’ team was lacking in defensive abilities and the rest of the Wings are very quality? Does that reflect on Datsyuk’s ability? Nope.
Just because someone plays more doesn’t mean that they are a better player.
Posted by moore00 from Columbus, OH/Grand Rapids, MI on 06/22/09 at 08:34 AM ET
The Selke Trophy is for the best defensive forward in the season. Datsyuk didn’t play as a defensive forward enough to beat out those who should have won.
It isn’t for the player who could have been the best if he had more of a chance to show it.
Posted by PuckStopsHere on 06/22/09 at 08:42 AM ET
The Selke Trophy is for the best defensive forward in the season. Datsyuk didn’t play as a defensive forward enough to beat out those who should have won.
Because, yeah, you only play defense in certain situations.
Posted by HockeyinHD on 06/22/09 at 08:46 AM ET
Because, yeah, you only play defense in certain situations.
For the most part this is true. There are many situations where this clear. For example, on the power play, when you are pressing for a goal when you are behind, when you are a top offensive player playing against a checking line that seldom scores. These are all situations you don’t play defence much.
Posted by PuckStopsHere on 06/22/09 at 08:48 AM ET
Are you KIDDING ME? That’s the POINT of giving it to Datsyuk. You can and DO absolutely play defense on the powere play. Any time you stop the PK from clearing the puck you are PLAYING DEFENSE, even if you’re in the offensive zone.
Question: Have you ever watched hockey? I’m not being sarcastic, I’m being serious. I mean, outside of the episode of South Park that had Stan coaching a hockey team, HAVE YOU EVER WATCHED HOCKEY?
What’s most amazing about your argument is that you give less credence to defense when arguing the Norris Trophy than you do the Selke.
Sorry, you can’t have it both ways.
Posted by Garth on 06/22/09 at 09:45 AM ET
It is perfectly reasonable to worry more about defensive play for the Selke Trophy than for the Norris Trophy.
The Norris is for the best defenceman. This includes both offensive and defensive contributions to the game.
The Selke is for the best defensive forward. This does NOT include offensive contributions to the game. It only includes his defence.
Posted by PuckStopsHere on 06/22/09 at 09:49 AM ET
Of course it includes offensive contributions, are you kidding me? If it didn’t, it wouldn’t always go to a top two-way player. That’s just ridiculous to pretend it doesn’t include offensive numbers.
And no, it’s not reasonable to give more credence to offense than to defence when judging defencemen. At ALL.
Posted by Garth on 06/22/09 at 09:57 AM ET
The Norris Trophy is awarded annually to the National Hockey League’s top “defense player who demonstrates throughout the season the greatest all-round ability in the position”
It doesn’t matter if the player’s game is offensive or defensive or both as long as he is the best defenceman. As I said in the previous comments, the defenceman who is worth the most goals (goals created offensively plus goals prevented defensively). Being that the position is defence, likely the player has a strong defensive value but there is no reason this necessarily must be so.
The Frank J. Selke Trophy is awarded annually to the National Hockey League forward who demonstrates the most skill in the defensive component of the game
Here there is no mention of offensive ability whatsoever. We have seen that the hockey writiers do take it into account, but they shouldn’t there is no need for it in the description of what the trophy is for.
In other words Garth, as usual, you are incorrect.
Posted by PuckStopsHere on 06/22/09 at 10:03 AM ET
The Selke Trophy is for the best defensive forward in the season. Datsyuk didn’t play as a defensive forward enough to beat out those who should have won.
It isn’t for the player who could have been the best if he had more of a chance to show it.
Wait, because of two minutes difference per game, somehow Datsyuk is not worthy? We aren’t talking about a player that is playing 8 minutes a game here…
What an argument. Seriously. Keep going. I love this blog now. Keep writing. In fact, write more. Paul, put me on an email list that will notify me anytime a new article pops up. Or any time that PSH even thinks about what to write about next. If these articles are the one he wants published, I can’t imagine what else goes on in this guy’s head. An argument that Phoenix has the best fans in the league? Or that Mike Milbury is a better GM than Ken Holland? I wouldn’t be surprised to see either of these by now.
In other words PSH, you are a douche. Keep douching it up for all of us. We appreciate it.
Posted by moore00 from Columbus, OH/Grand Rapids, MI on 06/22/09 at 10:16 AM ET
It doesn’t matter if the player’s game is offensive or defensive or both as long as he is the best defenceman.
Did you miss the part where it says “all around”? That means BOTH. He has to excel at the OFFENCE and the DEFENCE.
The kills your argument for Green.
Here there is no mention of offensive ability whatsoever.
Have you ever seen the award presented? It’s always presented to the best two-way player.
Quote whatever you want, but you can’t take issue with the way it was PRESENTED this year since it is completely in step with the way it is presented every year.
But, since we’re using your semantics, tell me where it says “the player who plays well in more defensive situations than other players”. Can you find that? What? You can’t? Oh jeez, seems like you make up another BS argument that don’t hold up under the same scrutiny you’re using to shoot down other arguments.
It says NOTHING about how often a player is in defensive situations, it says the player who demonstrates the most skill at defense.
Cripes, your OWN arguments don’t hold up under your OWN microscope!
Thanks for coming out and disproving your arguments without the help of anyone else, though. It’s refreshing to see someone who, on the one hand refuses to admit he’s wrong, but on the other hand uses his own arguments to DEMONSTRATE that he is wrong.
It’s a beautiful thing to watch you destroy your own arguments while trying to challenge others. Absolutely beautiful.
Posted by Garth on 06/22/09 at 10:23 AM ET
For the most part this is true.
And this is why pretty much everyone thinks you are stubborn, obtuse idiot.
And, as it happens, rightly so.
Posted by HockeyinHD on 06/22/09 at 11:44 AM ET
I’m not sure why I’m jumping in this wonderful flame war, but I do want to throw my 2 cents in on this:
Did you miss the part where it says “all around”? That means BOTH. He has to excel at the OFFENCE and the DEFENCE.
The kills your argument for Green.
Green actually has respectable defensive stats. His EVGA/60 is better than Chara’s, although his quality of competition is much worse. He did play a far amount of shorthanded minutes, but that wasn’t his role. Certainly his offensive game clearly outshines his defensive game, but to say his D is atrocious (playoffs notwithstanding) isn’t accurate.
Posted by mepex on 06/22/09 at 11:53 AM ET
“If the Red Wings chose not to commit Datsyuk to as many defensive situations then his chances of winning that award should decrease”
This is strange logic. Does it matter that Datsyuk is the better player? Not using your logic. The player on the ice more should win according to you.
Give any team in the league a choice of having Pavel Datsyuk on their team or Mike Richards.
Who do you think EVERY TEAM would choose?
Why?
Posted by johnny 2 in kalamazoo on 06/22/09 at 11:55 AM ET
His EVGA/60 is better than Chara’s, although his quality of competition is much worse…but to say his D is atrocious (playoffs notwithstanding) isn’t accurate.
Well, EVGA/60 is no more indicative of his play than +/- is. He could have one of the lowest EVGA/60 numbers in the league, but if he is the direct cause of every goal he’s on the ice for, then it doesn’t make him good. Obviously I’m using an extreme example, but I’m just making a point.
And I’m not sure if that second part was directed at me, but I don’t think I said he was atrocious. I don’t think he’s elite in his defensive abilities though, and I think to be a legit Norris candidate you HAVE to be.
Posted by Garth on 06/22/09 at 12:04 PM ET
Just to add more fuel to the fire, Datsyuk was 5th on his own team in PK time among forwards. In my opinion, to be rightfully considered for the Selke, you should be among the leaders in SH time on your own team. If your own coach doesn’t see you as a top defensive forward, why would the voters?
And this isn’t a knock on Datsyuk. He’s one of the best two or three players in hockey. The question is, was he THE best defensive forward in 08-09? I don’t think so.
Posted by mepex on 06/22/09 at 12:05 PM ET
He could have one of the lowest EVGA/60 numbers in the league, but if he is the direct cause of every goal he’s on the ice for, then it doesn’t make him good. Obviously I’m using an extreme example, but I’m just making a point.
Of course. But now we’re operating in a theoretical world where we can perfectly measure what everyone’s defensive contribution is, and attribute goals against directly to certain players. We are not anywhere close to that point. At least according to the stats we have access to, Green is a good (if not very good) defensive defenseman. His goal scoring ability outshines that. Those two components together would give him my vote for Norris this year.
Posted by mepex on 06/22/09 at 12:09 PM ET
His EVGA/60 is better than Chara’s, although his quality of competition is much worse.
Goaltender save percentage.
Posted by HockeyinHD on 06/22/09 at 12:16 PM ET
And this isn’t a knock on Datsyuk. He’s one of the best two or three players in hockey. The question is, was he THE best defensive forward in 08-09? I don’t think so.
When was the last time a Selke winner didn’t have at least 20 goals?
The point is, anyone who thinks this award is just about defense hasn’t been paying attention for the past 15 years…
...which, considering we’re talking about TPSH here, is entirely possible.
Posted by HockeyinHD on 06/22/09 at 12:17 PM ET
The point is, anyone who thinks this award is just about defense hasn’t been paying attention for the past 15 years…
The real question is, do you want to follow the heard and vote how it’s gone historically, or vote according to the description, which is the “best defensive forward”? I read TPSH’s article partially as an argument to not go with the way voters have traditionally gone.
If the trophy is for the “elite player who can also play defense well” then it becomes more of a popularity contest than anything. There are a number of elite players. Does it matter more that Datsyuk is a better player than Richards? Or that Richards was better defensively? This is why we have 70 nominated candidates.
Posted by mepex on 06/22/09 at 12:37 PM ET
If your own coach doesn’t see you as a top defensive forward, why would the voters?
I highly doubt the suggestion that Babcock doesn’t consider Datsyuk as a top defensive forward. There is one player with more than 9 more seconds of SH time per game that isn’t also a former Selke winner.
Even if Babcock doesn’t, you’ll have to ask the voters why they did.
Posted by MarkK from Maryland on 06/22/09 at 01:55 PM ET
The real question is, do you want to follow the heard and vote how it’s gone historically, or vote according to the description, which is the “best defensive forward”?
I get to vote? Hey… now I’m all pissed I missed the deadline.
The Selke and Norris voting has been moderately loopy for over a decade now. At some point people just need to accept that it is what it is.
A guy isn’t winning the Selke unless he also scores 20 goals. A guy isn’t going to win the Norris unless he puts up 60+ points.
Posted by HockeyinHD on 06/22/09 at 02:31 PM ET
It doesn’t matter if the player’s game is offensive or defensive or both as long as he is the best defenceman.
====
Did you miss the part where it says “all around”? That means BOTH. He has to excel at the OFFENCE and the DEFENCE.
Reading comprehension is your friend. He’s saying the same thing.
Here there is no mention of offensive ability whatsoever.
=====
Have you ever seen the award presented? It’s always presented to the best two-way player.
Quote whatever you want, but you can’t take issue with the way it was PRESENTED this year since it is completely in step with the way it is presented every year.
So because the writers steadfastly ignore the very specific criteria of the award, that makes it okay? Just because it doesn’t go to the Bob Gaineys of the NHL anymore doesn’t mean that it isn’t still expressly intended for that type of player.
Posted by Doogie2K from Calgary on 06/22/09 at 02:51 PM ET
If your own coach doesn’t see you as a top defensive forward, why would the voters?
So he gets knocked because he’s on a good team that rolls four lines, even on the PK?
Again, WHY does the amount of time spent defending matter? The away isn’t given to the player who spends the most time on defence. If it was, then only fourth liners and shut down centres would win…EVER.
If the trophy is for the “elite player who can also play defense well” then it becomes more of a popularity contest than anything.
Your mistake is in thinking that it’s not, or ever would be a popularity contest. All but THREE tropheis that are given out are popularity contests. The Ross, the Richard and the Jennings are the only completely objective awards given out. The rest rely on VOTES from up to 131 people. Of COURSE they’re opinion awards.
THAT is the flaw in TPSH’s article from the get go. He’s arguing that 131 people, collaborating on an award were “wrong” because those 131 people didn’t agree with him.
I read TPSH’s article partially as an argument to not go with the way voters have traditionally gone.
Well, you can attribute anything you want to the article, but he didn’t say that, so it’s no argument.
I can say that I read his article partially as an argument that he shouldn’t be allowed to publish his opinion on a blog. Doesn’t mean it has anything to do with the truth.
Posted by Garth on 06/22/09 at 02:59 PM ET
What appears to be lost in the discussion above is that the three Selke finalists—Pavel Datsyuk, Mike Richards and Ryan Kesler—were all excellent choices. The award could have gone to any one of them and it would have been a deserving selection. Team partisanship aside, there really was no wrong choice.
We’ve come a long way on the Selke. I remember when it was argued that Jari Kurri—Wayne Gretzky’s defensive conscience—couldn’t win a Selke because he scored too many points. Now it’s regularly handed out to one of the top scorers in the league. And rightfully so, in the case of Pavel Datsyuk.
The fact that 70 different candidates received consideration on the 131 ballots is more indicative that we lack obvious and consistently applied measures for the defensive part of the game. Plus / minus is a misleadingly poor metric, and it’s likely the best of the statistical bunch.
Of all the awards handed out by the NHL, the Selke is likely the most subjective, and I doubt there is a satisfactory way to resolve this debate when we are just wandering about in a wilderness of opinion.
Posted by Matthew McCallum from Redding, California on 06/22/09 at 02:59 PM ET
Reading comprehension is your friend. He’s saying the same thing.
Yikes, you need to take your own advice.
He’s NOT saying the same thing as I am.
What I was arguing is that Green does not (read that as “DOES NOT”, which is the opposite of “DOES”) excell defensively and thus should not (that is “SHOULD NOT”, opposite of “SHOULD”) be considered the best ALL AROUND defenceman.
Get it? I’m not sure I can explain myself any clearer.
Quote whatever you want, but you can’t take issue with the way it was PRESENTED this year since it is completely in step with the way it is presented every year.
Reading comprehension is YOUR friend too, because that’s the point I was making. It HAS BEEN given to the best two-way player, so Datsyuk winning it this year is right. In my opinion.
Posted by Garth on 06/22/09 at 03:03 PM ET
So he gets knocked because he’s on a good team that rolls four lines, even on the PK?
In some ways, yes. Separating a player’s abilities and qualities from those of his linemates’ and team’s are one of the devilishly difficult things to do with hockey stats. And it works both ways.
Again, WHY does the amount of time spent defending matter? The away isn’t given to the player who spends the most time on defence. If it was, then only fourth liners and shut down centres would win…EVER.
I agree it’s not a perfect correlation, but ice time is the one big affect a coach has on a game. You put the best personnel on the ice in the situations where they are most suited. You could easily make the case that Datsyuk isn’t one of the top 4 PK guys on DET in terms of ice time because he’s just more dangerous in more offensive situations. Maybe Datsyuk isn’t out there more because the rest of the Wings are great defensively. Maybe Richards is out there so much because the rest of the Flyers suck defensively. It’s difficult to normalize these things out. To me, all else being equal, more time is better than less. It’s why Seaver was a ‘better pitcher’ than Koufax.
What appears to be lost in the discussion above is that the three Selke finalists—Pavel Datsyuk, Mike Richards and Ryan Kesler—were all excellent choices. The award could have gone to any one of them and it would have been a deserving selection. Team partisanship aside, there really was no wrong choice.
While I agree with this in principle, this isn’t youth soccer where everyone gets a trophy. The goal is to identify the ‘best’ defensive forward, and to make the best possible choice. Maybe Koivu was a better choice as a finalist, or Marleau. I’m not of the opinion that this is too thorny of an issue to ever figure out. There are smart people around, and sophisticated statistical tools. I’d like to believe that this selection process could be better.
Posted by mepex on 06/22/09 at 04:00 PM ET
This can be a subjective award or it can be an award based on pure statistics. It can not be both. If you tell everybody they have to use certain statistics and they must be applied a certain way it is no longer subjective.
So all of you can just stop arguing about who is better statistically because that is not how the award is decided.
ME
Don’t like it? Find another sport or ask the NHL to change for you.
Posted by 13datsyukfan13 from Mid Michigan on 06/22/09 at 06:56 PM ET
You could easily make the case that Datsyuk isn’t one of the top 4 PK guys on DET in terms of ice time because he’s just more dangerous in more offensive situations.
That’s all well and good in a vaccuum, but the moment you see Datsyuk play, you know that’s not true.
My point is, just because the Wings don’t RELY on him (because, and I think most of us will agree, they have a pretty solid team top to bottom) doesn’t diminish Datsyuk’s abilities.
It just friggin kills me. Red Wing players simply can’t get a break. Hudler, Samuelson, Lebda and Osgood are only good because they’re on a good team, a product of a great system. But now Datsyuk is NOT as impressive because he’s on a good team? Jesus, which is it?
Posted by Garth on 06/22/09 at 09:12 PM ET
This can be a subjective award or it can be an award based on pure statistics. It can not be both. If you tell everybody they have to use certain statistics and they must be applied a certain way it is no longer subjective.
If you’re saying subjective just means everyone has a gut feeling about who the best defensive forward is and votes based on that, then I completely disagree. I don’t think it’s too much to ask for the voters to acquaint themselves with relevant statistics, and make a concerted effort to vote based on the evidence at hand, not just who they like or who they ‘think’ is good. Of course they are going to disagree amongst themselves about which stats are best and weight of such, and in that context it’s subjective.
Posted by mepex on 06/23/09 at 12:04 PM ET
It just friggin kills me. Red Wing players simply can’t get a break.
Took the words right out of my mouth. Datsyuk wins the Selke and Byng the last two years, nominated for the Hart both years. Such injustice!
Hudler, Samuelson, Lebda and Osgood are only good because they’re on a good team, a product of a great system. But now Datsyuk is NOT as impressive because he’s on a good team?
I understand your admiration for Datsyuk, and as I said before, I agree that he is one of the very best in the game, but isn’t it possible he’s not THE very best at everything?
Jesus, which is it?
Actually, it’s both. It’s a compression effect. Better players don’t look at impressive because there’s a backdrop of better talent, and worse players look better because of all the talent around them.
Posted by mepex on 06/23/09 at 12:21 PM ET
‘The Frank J. Selke Trophy is awarded annually to the National Hockey League forward who demonstrates the most skill in the defensive component of the game
Here there is no mention of offensive ability whatsoever. We have seen that the hockey writiers do take it into account, but they shouldn’t there is no need for it in the description of what the trophy is for. ‘
But than again it what you choose to make of defensive. Datsyuk has a far better Give Away/Take Away diffrence and a much better face-off percentage.
with 30 seconds left and facing a 6 on 5 who would you pick TPSH to take the faceoff in your own defensive zone Datsyuk or Richards?
Posted by Paul on 06/23/09 at 02:57 PM ET
with 30 seconds left and facing a 6 on 5 who would you pick TPSH to take the faceoff in your own defensive zone Datsyuk or Richards?
Datsyuk, because of FW%. But I might take Draper over Datsyuk for the same reason. And maybe I’d take Brind’Amour over Draper. Or I’d do what most coaches would do - look at the faceoff matchup stats for that night and see who’s killing it.
I’d rather have Richards out there than Datsyuk with the game tied and on the PK with 5 minutes left in the 3rd.
Posted by mepex on 06/23/09 at 03:06 PM ET
However my point was just that TPSH tends to focus on his one preferred stat for whatever award he is looking at - or fob it off to history and bias. In this case His preferred candidate has very bad Face off % - that would seem to mind to figure in ones quality as a defensive forward {just as he elevates PM to the only quality of the LB award in essence here is aggravated that more as been added to defensive forward, but he is happy to reduce the LB to just gentlemanly play =>lowest PM (even when more is required)]
Its true your other 2 options beat Datsyuk in the FO (but by much less than Datsyuk bests Richards) but who is more likely at this point to carry that winning puck up ice and deep into the opposing zone and effectively back check?
Posted by Paul on 06/23/09 at 03:19 PM ET
Its true your other 2 options beat Datsyuk in the FO (but by much less than Datsyuk bests Richards) but who is more likely at this point to carry that winning puck up ice and deep into the opposing zone and effectively back check?
Now the goal posts are moving a bit. With 30 seconds left in the game, I’d say it’s not likely a guy would win the faceoff, control the puck himself, skate it up ice and deep into the opponents’ zone, and then backcheck the guy with the puck. Also, considering I didn’t see all of Datsyuk’s or Richards’ games this year, I’m not qualified to make that judgment. Since there are no statistical tools that I’m aware of that measure “carrying the puck up ice” or “effectively back checking” I’m going to have to punt and say I don’t know. Maybe I’d go with a guy like Patrick Marleau with amazing wheels, but that’s more of a guess than anything.
I suppose my point is there isn’t one particular situation in a game that perfectly models a players defensive ability. It’s an amalgamation of all situations.
Posted by mepex on 06/23/09 at 03:29 PM ET
‘I suppose my point is there isn’t one particular situation in a game that perfectly models a players defensive ability. It’s an amalgamation of all situations. ‘
I agree - and since I only maybe 2 Philly games all year I also admit I a poor judge of Richards. My issue is mostly just that there are many ways to skin the defensive cat and its always difficult to separate team and individual in Hockey aside form the gimmick of the shoot out there is no real one on one isolated play. Stats can be refined ,over refined and used five ways from Sunday.
The up ice and back check had more to do with your counter example with 5 minutes left.
SO I don’t see why the best defensive forward should be easy and clear to vote one. A team like Philly draws a lot of penalties and has one clear goto-guy in a defensive crises (although hopfuly Philly has someone else take the face off), Detroit has/does neither.
TPSH would seem to want to elevate players on teams with only one clear defensive star as as a winner.
I mean realistically and I know post season does not count but did Richard shut down SC as well as Zetterberg (i don’t know)? but if Zetterburg wins the award next year it hard not to imagine a post saying he won it on reputation.
Posted by Paul on 06/23/09 at 03:44 PM ET
You know I’d really like an edit option to deal with my first take grammar/sp errors…
Posted by Paul on 06/23/09 at 03:46 PM ET
You know I’d really like an edit option to deal with my first take grammar/sp errors…
Posted by Paul
It just may happen over the summer, but only for KK members.
Posted by Paul from Motown Area on 06/23/09 at 03:49 PM ET
Well you just got a new member than - hmm I don’t like the sound of that…
Posted by Paul on 06/23/09 at 04:06 PM ET
Wow, you make a very reasonably good case for Richards and some of these commenters get all bent out of shape. They talk as if you’re a trader to “Hockeytown”. As if you besmirched the great Pavel Datsyuk. . Let’s be honest Richards did deserve the Selke Award this year. Another example is Jordan Staal . He’s objectively one of the top 5-10 best defensive fowards in the NHL. The voters had him 32nd. PuckStopsHere has it 100% correct -the voting is all messed up. Some Wing fans know alot about the Red Wings but very little about hockey.
Posted by lindas1st on 06/23/09 at 04:28 PM ET
SO I don’t see why the best defensive forward should be easy and clear to vote one. A team like Philly draws a lot of penalties and has one clear goto-guy in a defensive crises (although hopfuly Philly has someone else take the face off), Detroit has/does neither.
TPSH would seem to want to elevate players on teams with only one clear defensive star as as a winner.
I agree that’s it’s not easy and clear. But there’s still a lot of room between where the voters are now, and where they could go (IMHO) based just on the available stats. For instance, I think Joe Pavelski was a better candidate in almost every respect than Chris Conroy, looking at EV and SH numbers. Yet Conroy got 13 votes (including 2 second place votes) and Pavelski 5. These are the kind of things that I’d like to see reduced.
Posted by mepex on 06/23/09 at 05:34 PM ET
lindas1st:
Let’s be honest Richards did deserve the Selke Award this year.
I think Richards was the best choice, but I wouldn’t say any of the finalists didn’t ‘deserve’ to win it, and I don’t recall anyone else said that either. Selke is definitely the toughest to evaluate for.
Another example is Jordan Staal . He’s objectively one of the top 5-10 best defensive fowards in the NHL.
Objectively, he’s #1 in SH ice time on his own team. I think it would be pretty easy to make a case that he’s the best defensive player on the Pens. But I would put him behind Elias, who got positively jobbed at #40.
Posted by mepex on 06/23/09 at 05:43 PM ET
with 30 seconds left and facing a 6 on 5 who would you pick TPSH to take the faceoff in your own defensive zone Datsyuk or Richards?
I think I would choose Max Talbot.
Posted by miah from Portland, OR on 06/29/09 at 03:49 PM ET
Add a Comment
Please limit embedded image or media size to 575 pixels wide.
Add your own avatar by joining Kukla's Korner, or logging in and uploading one in your member control panel.
Captchas bug you? Join KK or log in and you won't have to bother.
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.
Most Recent Blog Posts
Missing Other League All Star Games
Top Defenceman So Far This Season
About The Puck Stops Here
The Puck Stops Here was founded during the 2004/05 lockout as a place to rant about hockey. The original site contains over 1000 posts, some of which were also published on FoxSports.com.
Who am I?
A diehard hockey fan.
Why am I blogging?
I want to.
Why are you reading it?
???
Email: .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
When learning from experts it’s best to learn personally from them, or from their blog. We can provide that with poker lessons blog, your home to learn poker personally.
Do you get shocked from the luck in the game of poker? Stop getting shocked and start being a Poker Shoker
Donate to Kukla’s Korner
The balloting process for the HHOF is one known as a Borda Count. Under the system, if you were to vote on the three best candidates, you would get three votes for your first choice, two votes for your second, and one vote for your third choice.
The key to winning the system is not necessarily to be the BEST candidate (as determined by the number of first place votes) but rather to be everyone’s SECOND best candidate. In other words it is better not to “offend” anybody than it is to be the best in everyone’s eyes.
Given that Datsyuk did not get the most first place votes, it is notable that Richards (who did receive the most first place votes) had play that the other voters found to be lacking. That said, the results are ridiculously close, and is a great illustration of the fundamental nature of Borda Counts…. the key to win is to be everyone’s second choice.
Posted by VooX from Behind the Bar in the Hasek Club Car on 06/22/09 at 01:37 AM ET