During a mailbag for the Players’ Tribune, Ontario Reign forward Paul Bissonnette made it perfectly clear where he stands on analytics, and their usefulness in the NHL when asked about the topic. The enforcer doesn’t seem to think they’re useful.
“So now you have all these bottom-feeder teams handing over boatloads of money and influence to analytics guys, and I don’t see the point. Now you’re just using stats to say how bad your team is when that’s apparent from just watching them play. These are guys who go, “Wow, Jonathan Toews has great puck possession.” Well no shit, he’s one of the best players in the world. I don’t need stats to tell me that.”
I’m not sure how many analytics guys are getting ‘boatloads of money’ or have a ton of influence, but he’s right when saying teams are hiring analysts to help with day-to-day operations. It’s archaic at this point to not take advantage of every advantage you have, including advanced stats, even if you don’t fully believe in them.
Bissonnette says he sees advanced stats, like Corsi, being more reflective of a line’s performance than an individual’s.
“Good teams generally have four great defensemen that advance the puck. So right there as a forward, you’re spending less time in your end and less time handling the puck. I find it hard to take a stat seriously when it’s mostly based off the performance of five other guys on the ice — from a struggling d-man, to a goalie who has trouble playing the puck, to a center that goes 3-for-10 on draws every night. Your advanced stats are generally more of a reflection of which lines you’re playing with and against.”
He denies that teams draft players based on possession numbers (it’s certainly something that’s examined), and that their performance on the ice is the best way to see their potential.
“Ultimately, teams don’t draft based on Corsi or possession numbers. You draft a player because you’ve watched how they perform on the ice and then consider their potential to improve.”
Bissonette says it’s ‘bullshit’ that advanced stats are used in contract negotiations, again saying it comes down to line performance and not individual. He concludes players who get bigger contracts because of possession numbers may not have justified them.
“But somehow they’re starting to use this bullshit in contract negotiations. You have teams saying, “Oh, wow, look at this player in Chicago who had a 60 percent possession number.” Well, yeah, because he’s an average player playing with Toews and Kane. So all of the sudden a team signs him for $3 million a year even though he’s a $1.5 million a year player, and they’re shocked when his possession isn’t as good. Are you kidding me?”
While I get the argument he’s trying to make, context is important in this case. There are plenty of stats which adjust for many things such as a player’s linemates and their numbers with or without them. NHL teams should be smart enough to realize a player’s numbers might spike due to playing with an elite possession player, and if they don’t, it’s why almost every team has hired a stats guy to tell them just that.
I respectfully disagree with Bissonnette.
