3 ms·

On the other hand, a star quarterback or goalie has a disproportionate positive effect on the team's winning chances, and chances to win championships.

SomeStupidPoint 9y ago
Sure. But even great quarterbacks struggle if the O-line is dysfunctional. And you definitely wouldn't be better off with 6 star quarterbacks than 1 average quarterback and 5 O-line players.
dionidium 9y ago
This is probably true of a quarterback, but it's not generally true of hockey goalies. You'd much rather build your team around Sidney Crosby than any goalie to ever play the game.
- Will_Parker 9y ago
  Ok, fair enough! Though, has anyone ever analyzed this question rigorously with data? I.e. is there a Bill James equivalent in the ice hockey world? The larger point is that individual stars definitely matter a lot in pro sports. And recruiting and retaining them with extremely disproportionate amounts of money doesn't seem to be irrational for most sports.
  - jabv 9y ago
    Look into Corsi and Fenwick.
  - dionidium 9y ago
    See my link to an attempt at a hockey WAR (wins above replacement) elsewhere in this thread.
- badloginagain 9y ago
  That's not true. You can take a look at the Rangers right now, whose only true "superstar" is the goalie- Lundqvist.
  - dionidium 9y ago
    OK, but that's my claim. My claim is that you'd still rather have Crosby, because there's a much bigger talent gap between him and his hypothetical league-average replacement at center than between Lundqvist and a league-average goalie.
    - dionidium 9y ago
      Obviously I meant to say that's not my claim :)
debacle 9y ago
With exceedingly diminishing returns.
nilkn 9y ago
That's an argument for snatching up one of these people per team, but not an entire team of them. The analogy being made I believe is that there's simply no benefit to having two or three quarterbacks on a single football team. It doesn't even make sense.

SomeStupidPoint 9y ago

Sure. But even great quarterbacks struggle if the O-line is dysfunctional. And you definitely wouldn't be better off with 6 star quarterbacks than 1 average quarterback and 5 O-line players.

dionidium 9y ago

This is probably true of a quarterback, but it's not generally true of hockey goalies. You'd much rather build your team around Sidney Crosby than any goalie to ever play the game.

Will_Parker 9y ago
Ok, fair enough! Though, has anyone ever analyzed this question rigorously with data? I.e. is there a Bill James equivalent in the ice hockey world? The larger point is that individual stars definitely matter a lot in pro sports. And recruiting and retaining them with extremely disproportionate amounts of money doesn't seem to be irrational for most sports.
- jabv 9y ago
  Look into Corsi and Fenwick.
- dionidium 9y ago
  See my link to an attempt at a hockey WAR (wins above replacement) elsewhere in this thread.
badloginagain 9y ago
That's not true. You can take a look at the Rangers right now, whose only true "superstar" is the goalie- Lundqvist.
- dionidium 9y ago
  OK, but that's my claim. My claim is that you'd still rather have Crosby, because there's a much bigger talent gap between him and his hypothetical league-average replacement at center than between Lundqvist and a league-average goalie.
  - dionidium 9y ago
    Obviously I meant to say that's not my claim :)

debacle 9y ago

With exceedingly diminishing returns.

nilkn 9y ago

That's an argument for snatching up one of these people per team, but not an entire team of them. The analogy being made I believe is that there's simply no benefit to having two or three quarterbacks on a single football team. It doesn't even make sense.