Saint Nik said:
cw said:
I snickered at some of the analysis last night touting Ottawa's young age. Their average age is 27. The Leafs average age is 26.3. Yes, the Sens had a number of young, inexperienced guys - a couple more than the Leafs. They also had Anderson, Auld, Phillips, Kuba, Gonchar, Alfredsson, Spezza, Neil, Milachek, Konopka, etc. But with the Sens against the second youngest team in the NHL - that isn't where I'd chose to push that point as hard as they did to excuse their play without dwelling on what the Leafs have been trying to do with a young club. It's a point that would resonate more with nearly any other club in the NHL.
I think that's probably a better argument for why judging a team's youth by average age isn't terribly helpful than it is a straight up repudiation of the "excuse". Ottawa had 10 skaters last night under 25 to the Leafs' 5. That they have a handful of guys in their mid-late 30's will create a false impression of their average age and will distort the point being made. There's no real difference in terms of experience between JM Liles at 30 and Sergei Gonchar at 37. There's a world of difference between a 25 year old centre and Zibenajad.
Goaltending
- plays 3-4 times the minutes of the skater with the puck in his zone roughly half the time - a premium should be placed on the goaltender.
Between Reimer's half season and Anderson/Auld's NHL experience, it's no contest - significant advantage Ottawa in the position that requires the most development.
Defence
Ottawa iced one rookie, one dman with 4 years NHL experience & three dmen with 6 or more years NHL experience as did the Leafs. The difference was Karlson's two NHL seasons vs Gunnarsson's three. Very slight mathematical experience edge to the Leafs in the position that requires the second most development after goalies. A one year difference in NHL experience that's very fuzzy in terms of the measurable impact on the game. In other words, it's pretty close to a tie between the two using your criteria.
Forwards
require less development that goalies or dmen and play the least average amount of ice time per player but there are usually three of them on the ice at a time.
- The Leafs iced seven guys with 6 or more years NHL experience vs the Sens 5. The Leafs iced 1 rookie to the Sens 3. The Sens reduced that gap by playing Alfredsson, Spezza & Michalek more than the Leafs top forward in ice time, Kessel. Clear advantage to the Leafs.
To me, that advantage to the Leafs with their forwards NHL experience would be largely offset by their disadvantage in goaltending experience - ignoring the caliber of the player's talents or the exercise can get really circular and indecipherable.
In other words, there was NOT a gigantic gap in NHL experience between the two clubs - even using the criteria you proposed.
The age gap between the youngest team in the league and the oldest team in the league isn't a ton - roughly four to five years. When one team is .7 years younger in average age, that's significant enough to keep them fairly close when we split hairs on NHL experience - giving that edge to the older team.
Between the two clubs, saying one was significantly disadvantaged because of age last night was misleading. The fact of the matter is that in my opinion, compared to differences you'd see with these clubs between other clubs in the NHL, these two teams are much closer in that area than they would be with a lot of other NHL clubs. So to me, it was a misleading point. Ottawa was maybe at a slight disadvantage - not a major one. A good analyst should have realized that.