Bell Curving the Kovalchuk Talk
by TheMetalChick on Jul 23, 2010 9:38 PM EDT
Email
PrintIve been reading a lot of comments about the Kovalchuk rejected contract. One of the points that Ive seen made many times is that Kovalchuk will play til he is 44, so whats the problem? Instead of arguing that, I thought Id approach the whole concept of playing at the age of 44.
Heres the thing about the age to which a player will play... if follows a bell curve just like height or mortality rates or intelligence or plenty of other things. Take a look at what I mean:
Consider as one example, player height- someone being 6ft tall is in the fairly meaty part of the bell curve. 6'2", a little more... even to 6'4 and 6'5" its still on the bell curve. However, once you start getting to 6'7, 6'8", the numbers fall- drastically. You could easily make a case that 6'7" is "only" two inches taller than 6'5".. and youd be absolutely correct in the most strict sense. You could also point out that on every team there are players that are separated by two or more inches. Again, youd be correct. However, this does NOT mean that it is in any way likely for a player to be 6'8"! Have there been people who are, say, 7'4"? Sure there have! But its so freakishly rare that pointing to that person does not make it any more likely that someone on your team is going to be 6'8"!
Age of retirement works pretty much the same way- along a bell curve. You can point to all the players who play to ages 37, 38, 39- and you are absolutely correct. You can even point to players who are 40 or 41 and there are a few- no argument here! Heck- we even have one in net for the Islanders! However- once you get to ages like 43, 44, it changes- drastically. Have there been players in their late 40s and even 50s? Sure- but, like the 7'4" person, they are so freakishly rare that pointing to them does not make it any more likely that a person is going to be playing hockey at 44 years of age. You could easily make a case that 44 is "only" two years older than 42... and youd be absolutely correct in the most strict sense. You could also point out that on every team there are players that are separated by two or more years. Again, youd be correct. However, this does NOT mean that it is in any way likely for a player to remain a viable part of an NHL team (and worthy of a SIX MILLION DOLLAR CAP HIT) at 44 years of age.
Kovalchuk playing until 44years of age- AT the NHL level, no less (because even if he is earning only 500 something K, it would be at a humungous 6M cap hit, which would be eliminated if he was waived and placed in the minors) is just not reality. Devils fans know this.. we ALL know this... and the NHL knows this.
Gordie Howe is like a 7'4" NHL hockey player.
Submitted FanPosts do not necessarily reflect the views of this blog or SB Nation. If you're reading this statement, you pass the fine print legalese test. Four stars for you.
16 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Not sure how the betting analogy works there… but I DO think that if Kovalchuk is lucky enough to defy remarkable odds and still play this game at 44 years of age, there is no team that would want him for a cap hit of ten times his salary just to do so.
Let Us Go, Islanders! (Ever notice how strange that sounds without the contraction?)
You’re probably right, but there might be.
A team looking to hit the cap floor could take on a contract like that that would count $6m against the cap but only cost the team $550 in actual cash.
Playing Devils' advocate since 1982.
Just like there might be a 7’4" player ranked in the top 50 of next years draft. I mean there might be, right?
But there wont be. :)
Let Us Go, Islanders! (Ever notice how strange that sounds without the contraction?)
by TheMetalChick on Jul 24, 2010 10:04 AM EDT up reply actions
I’m not trying to justify it, I’m just pointing out that it’s not entirely accurate to say there’s no team that would want him for that cap hit and salary as there is a fairly common financial situation around the league in which just such a contract could be desirable.
If said player was still good for 10 goals a season and brought that “veteran leadership” many teams seek, he and his league minimum actual salary would fit in nicely on a fourth line for 5-7 minutes per night.
Playing Devils' advocate since 1982.
A team would be “betting” now [with a long term contract] that a player would still be playing and contributing at an age past what is typical. Teams should be allowed to do that, in my opinion, even if that bet turns out to be wrong. That is the nature of any long term contract. That is why Kovy’s deal ending when he is 44 doesn’t bother me nearly as much as the change in annual salary. That is why I don’t think the Kovy and Hossa deals are all that different. They are both transparent attempts to circumvent the salary cap and should both either be allowed or disallowed.
A team would be "betting" now [with a long term contract] that a player would still be playing and contributing at an age past what is typical.
Thats the thing, Hakker- the thing is that they are betting on the exact opposite- for the sole sake of intentional cap circumvention. They are counting on the contract being a sham, and that there is no way the player will be playing at that time when their caphit will far, far exceed both their pay and their play.
Let Us Go, Islanders! (Ever notice how strange that sounds without the contraction?)
by TheMetalChick on Jul 24, 2010 12:10 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree that is precisely what they are doing but not because the contract ends when he is 44, TMC, but rather because of the large discrepancy in annual salary. Would you be alright with that same contract if it was given to Kovy 4 years ago so it would end when he is 40 [and on a fatter part of the bell curve]? I think it would be just as egregious.
I think that unlike a bell curve for something like height, a bell curve for a year the average player retires would be something I think would be pretty static. I would love to see statistics but I would assume players are retiring later, due to variables like better conditioning and advances in surgery and treatment of injuries. It would be interesting to see the average age of retirement in the NHL year by year. If there has been a change, I’d imagine it would be pretty small and we are still a long way off of 44 being anywhere near the average. Is there anyway to find out how much the age of retirement has changed over the years?
Interestingly, human height has increased over time due to things like nutrition, conditioning, etc- but there is still a natural limit to how tall you can reasonably expect a person to be, and by that same logic it is just as reasonable to conclude that there is a natural limit as to how old a person can reasonably be and still be productive against world-class athletes in their 20s-30s.
Id be interested in looking at an actual retirement graph, as well. Im going to look around for the data.
Let Us Go, Islanders! (Ever notice how strange that sounds without the contraction?)
by TheMetalChick on Jul 24, 2010 6:22 PM EDT up reply actions
Good point. Average height is something I think also would have increased in throughout the 20th century and no doubt would be reflected in professional sports. I also think there is a bit of a trend now in hockey that favors height more than ever before. We see smaller talented players passed up for the Charas and Myers of the hockey world. Just a theory but I think that the natural increase in height coupled with the success of tall hockey players has lead to tall young kids being groomed for hockey. Where as 40 years ago a really tall kid might not be encouraged to lace up because he was seen as to lanky to be a good hockey player; now with the success of big players, especially on the blue-line, those same kids nowadays would receive more attention and coaching.
If anything, it seems like there are less players playing at an older age now, due to the trend of NHL teams gearing towards signing younger players.
As as for hockey players over 7 feet tall, didn’t some minor league hockey team sign Manute Bol to a short contract?
Yup thats why I specified NHL hockey player...
There are minor league teams who will throw all sorts of stuff at the wall and see if it sticks- 7 foot guys, giant fat guys, 5’2" snipers, you name it.
Let Us Go, Islanders! (Ever notice how strange that sounds without the contraction?)
by TheMetalChick on Jul 25, 2010 10:18 AM EDT up reply actions
Given the proper evolutionary factors,,,
it is statistically possible the pigs might fly in our lifetimes too, but that doen’t mean an intelligent farmer is reasonably going to build his farm around aerial porkers, or that the agricultural industry should put up with tax dollar government subsidies being given to that farmer to build an aerial pig barn. Not the best of analogies, I realize, but you get the idea.
by Nova Scotia Isles Fan on Jul 25, 2010 9:04 AM EDT reply actions
Right
This is exactly the kind of thing I was getting at.
Let Us Go, Islanders! (Ever notice how strange that sounds without the contraction?)
by TheMetalChick on Jul 25, 2010 10:19 AM EDT up reply actions
Kovalchuk
Also, while some hockey player do make it into there 40s, I don’t think Kovalchuk will be one of those players. Kovalchuk is basically an offense only guy. He’s not someone who plays a great two-way game. When you look at most hockey players (and no doubt there are exceptions) offense is one of the first things that starts to decline in a players career. Players with long careers usually are multi-faceted players. Many great two-way players can play out the tale end of there career as checking forwards. Look at Trots, he lost his scoring touch relatively early in his career but continued playing in other roles beyond a first line center. There are plenty of other examples of offensive stars finishing there careers in this way. But for the most part these guys were already sound two way players before there scoring they lost there scoring touch. Someone mentioned a team might be willing to sign Kovie for a role on the fourth line with limited minutes later in his career. I don’t really see that happening unless Kovie really started to develop other aspects of his game. Maybe he could play into his 40s as a power play specialist, but I think he would be limited to that role, unless he started to refine the talents needed for a bottom six type role.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Lighthouse Hockey
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
Islanders Schedule
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- Coyotes’ Mike Smith believes Dustin Brown should be ‘done forever’ for Rozsival hit; slams Game 5 officiating
- Tuesday’s Three Stars: Penner’s overtime winner puts Kings in the Final
- Mike Milbury vs. Jeremy Roenick over Dustin Brown’s Game 5 OT hit on Michal Rozsival (VIDEO)
- Watch Kings, Coyotes in hostile handshake line after Dustin Penner sends LA to Stanley Cup Final (VIDEO)
- Kings vs. Coyotes Game 5; Pierre McGuire on Tortorella/DeBoer argument (Playoff Puck Previews)
SBNation.com Recent Stories
1979-80
Source: Uploaded by user via NYIslanders on Pinterest
May 24, 1980: Tonelli to Nystrom. At long last, the steady build of the New York Islanders from expansion doormat to surprise semifinalist to annual contender reaches the promised land: Buoyed by a late season trade for Butch Goring that gave the team the depth up the middle GM Bill Torrey had been seeking, the Islanders knock off the Philadelphia Flyers in six games.
The victory justified the faith in coach Al Arbour who guided them from their second season to their first Stanley Cup seven seasons later. The Islanders would not be the first expansion team to win the Stanley Cup, but they would be the only one capable of a dynasty.
1980-81
Source: Uploaded by user via NYIslanders on Pinterest
May 21, 1981: This time it was much easier. After falling to "only" 91 points in the 1979-80 season, the Islanders returned to their division title tradition, piling up 110 points -- a whole 13 points over second-place Philadelphia.
Between the quarterfinals (where they beat the upstart Oilers in six games) and the finals, the Islanders reeled off eight consecutive wins -- with a four-game sweep of archrival Rangers in between. As they defeated the Minnesota North Stars in five games for their second Cup, their goal difference in the final was a combined +10.
1981-82
Source: Uploaded by user via NYIslanders on Pinterest
May 16, 1982: Another year, another landslide title. The Islanders won the Patrick Division by a whopping 26 points over the second-place Rangers, and were seven points clear of their nearest competition for the President's Trophy, the still-not-quite-ripe Edmonton Oilers.
A first-round scare against the Pittsburgh Penguins turned in the Isles' favor thanks to John Tonelli's heroics, and a true dynasty was on its way: Past the Rangers in six games, then an eight-game sweep of the Quebec Nordiques and Vancouver Canucks to run away with the Stanley Cup.
1982-83
Source: Uploaded by user via NYIslanders on Pinterest
May 17, 1983: Not so fast, whipper-snappers. The Edmonton Oilers' steadily rising challenge for league supremacy took them all the way to the finals for the first time, where the New York Islanders summarily dispatched them in a four-game sweep. For the Islanders, the Dynasty was secured. For the Oilers, it was a powerful lesson in where talent ends and the demands of playoff hockey begin.
Four years, four Cups, 16 consecutive playoff series wins (a record that would grow to 19 until the rematch with the Oilers the following year). Mike Bossy scored 60 goals yet again, and Wayne Gretzky became acquainted with Billy Smith's crease.
