## Heroes and Zeroes - End of Playoffs and 2011-2012 Season

Well, the season's over. What a year! Here's the final, not-so-scientific Heroes and Zeroes results. I did not separate the playoffs from the regular season, as creating the table is a time consuming process.

 Name Hero Count Zero Count Difference (Hero - Zero) Anderson 32 9 23 Alfredsson 25 2 23 Michalek 19 2 17 Karlsson 26 11 15 Spezza 19 8 11 Cowen 16 6 10 Phillips 13 3 10 Neil 13 3 10 Greening 11 2 9 Smith 10 1 9 Turris 11 3 8 Foligno 9 2 7 Condra 9 2 7 Gonchar 13 7 6 Daugavins 7 2 5 Kuba 9 5 4 Lehner 4 0 4 Bishop 4 1 3 O'Brien 3 0 3 Butler 6 4 2 Rundblad 5 3 2 Carkner 5 3 2 Regin 2 0 2 Lee 2 1 1 Hoffman 1 0 1 Klinkhammer 1 0 1 Stone 1 0 1 Auld 3 3 0 Gilroy 1 1 0 Winchester 1 1 0 Silfverberg 0 0 0 Da Costa 3 4 -1 Filatov 0 1 -1 Zibanejad 0 1 -1 Konopka 2 5 -3

Ok, here's my interpretation of the results. As the Heroes and Zeroes points are compiled based on mentions in the Heroes and Zeroes or Honourable Mentions section, what this table really shows is how popular individual players are with the writers. Or put another way: How forgiving are the Silver Seven authors to a particular player's performance?

For example: Take a look at Spezza's numbers. He finished the season with a team leading 84 points, and lead the Sens in playoffs scoring. Yet he finished with a mere 19 "hero" points and eight "zero" points. For a leading scorer, he sure doesn't get a lot of press, good or bad. It makes me wonder if someone was afraid to pump him up or to put him down. On the other hand, he could simply be scoring a lot of garbage points, but I don't think so.

Another example would be Konopka. He finished with a -3 difference. Based on that, it would be very easy to conclude that the Sens would be stupid to try to re-sign him. Yet, I doubt anyone feels that way and I would be very surprised if he is let go. I feel his result is almost entirely due to being simply overlooked. If game recaps are written to summarize the event and encapsulate the feeling of the night, few recaps are going to gush glowingly about face-off percentages, blocked shots, hits or other less "legal" efforts.

Few NHLers are so terribly bad on a consistent basis to gain a huge amount of Zeroes points, it is much more likely that many players' off nights are simply unmentioned. This would go unrecorded in this compilation, and I think this statistically biased the results. For example, take a look at Filatov results, nine games and only a -1 result. That would imply he had one bad game and eight OK ones. However, to anyone who watched his play it was obvious that for every game, except possibly one, he was not an NHL caliber player. And that's just my point: At the highest level of competition, games where a player is forgettable or unseen is JUST AS BAD as a game where the player is obviously a "zero".

This FanPost was written by a member of the Silver Seven community, and does not necessarily reflect the beliefs or opinions of the site managers, editors, or Sports Blogs Nation, Inc.

## Trending Discussions

forgot?

As part of the new SB Nation launch, prior users will need to choose a permanent username, along with a new password.

I already have a Vox Media account!

### Verify Vox Media account

As part of the new SB Nation launch, prior MT authors will need to choose a new username and password.

We'll email you a reset link.

Try another email?

### Almost done,

By becoming a registered user, you are also agreeing to our Terms and confirming that you have read our Privacy Policy.

### Join Silver Seven

You must be a member of Silver Seven to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at Silver Seven. You should read them.

### Join Silver Seven

You must be a member of Silver Seven to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at Silver Seven. You should read them.