The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted November 26, 2013 Share Posted November 26, 2013 If we get suckered by the Leafs into playing their game, then they smoke us. If we play our game, we can beat them. As for their excellence vs. mediocrity, I'm inclined to look at their longer-term trend. Two years ago, they had a dynamite first half and a second half collapse: knocking on the door, but not ready. Last season, they kicked open the door and took the mighty Prunes to Game 7 before one of the most comically hysterical chokes in memory. This season, they racked up Ws before falling back to their more normal location (lower-seed playoff team). I would not be surprised, therefore, to see them build on last season and win a playoff round or two. They're on an overall upward trajectory and have been through all the right growing pains. Not to be underestimated whatever the advanced stats say, IMHO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted November 26, 2013 Share Posted November 26, 2013 I don't have anything against advanced stats, the more quality analysis the better. The amount that people are buying into them is outrageous, especially EOTP. For example, Philly outshot FLA in the game I went to tonight, so their possession stats were better, and Tim Thomas had a better PDO or whatever, so according to fancy stats Florida was lucky to win, even though Philly couldn't make a pass out of their own zone and were a trash fire. That's why advanced stats are supplementary information to me instead of the main dish. yes they are supplementary information, but what you are describing isn't advanced stats. Advanced stats are more than just pure shots on goal. The shots were 39 to 31 for Philly However They were 10-6 on the PP, and PP doesn't count in this stat. so that breaks down to 29 to 25 meaning it was a pretty even game at ES for just shots. and then you have 7 missed shots for Philly and 10 for florida and its 36 to 35 in terms of fenwick there is no huge difference here that says a team was lucky to win... the possession was pretty even. But thats not how these stats are supposed to work.... they don't tell you who is winning any one individual game. They do tell you over the long run... over full 82 game seasons, that the correlation between teams who do well in these stats and the number of wins they get in a full season is very high. They only become statistically significant in high sample sizes. In individual games there is too much white noise. The trends have to be looked at in at least 10 game segments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted November 26, 2013 Share Posted November 26, 2013 The last thing to notice about the Philly/Florida game is that Florida was actually a better team when the game was close (tied or 1 goal game).... Philly really racked up their shot total after Florida got a two goal lead. There are stats that have recognized the fact that when teams get ahead two or more goals there is a natural tendency to go into a defensive shell.... and teams that are trailing usually up the offence in these situations. This is something that happens around the league. And thats why numbers like "Corsi Close" or "fenwick close" ie.... what the results are when the game is tied, or within one goal, are more valuable than just the pure Corsi or Fenwick number. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neech Posted November 26, 2013 Share Posted November 26, 2013 As for their excellence vs. mediocrity, I'm inclined to look at their longer-term trend. Two years ago, they had a dynamite first half and a second half collapse: knocking on the door, but not ready. Last season, they kicked open the door and took the mighty Prunes to Game 7 before one of the most comically hysterical chokes in memory. This season, they racked up Ws before falling back to their more normal location (lower-seed playoff team). I would not be surprised, therefore, to see them build on last season and win a playoff round or two. They're on an overall upward trajectory and have been through all the right growing pains. Not to be underestimated whatever the advanced stats say, IMHO. They're on an overall upward trend, yes, (hard not to be after their sustained post-lockout suckage), but I don't think their current core has that high of a ceiling. I want them to re-sign Phaneuf for 7 million, and then they'll be going forward with him, Kessel, Clarkson, Bozak, Lupul, JVR etc. It's decent but it won't get you a place among the elites. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted November 26, 2013 Share Posted November 26, 2013 They're on an overall upward trend, yes, (hard not to be after their sustained post-lockout suckage), but I don't think their current core has that high of a ceiling. I want them to re-sign Phaneuf for 7 million, and then they'll be going forward with him, Kessel, Clarkson, Bozak, Lupul, JVR etc. It's decent but it won't get you a place among the elites. No, I don't see them as contenders. But I think their pieces at FW are quite strong - considerably moreso than ours. The D is more of a dog's breakfast, but they're rugged, can score, have (as I said before) gone through all sorts of adversity, and now seem to have strong netminding. Hence the lower-rung playoff team status; but such teams are also the sort that, if they can stay healthy and pull it all together, can play the dark horse role in a playoff run. A quality squad. Not elite. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted November 26, 2013 Share Posted November 26, 2013 They're on an overall upward trend, yes, (hard not to be after their sustained post-lockout suckage), but I don't think their current core has that high of a ceiling. I want them to re-sign Phaneuf for 7 million, and then they'll be going forward with him, Kessel, Clarkson, Bozak, Lupul, JVR etc. It's decent but it won't get you a place among the elites. And the 40 years before the lock-out also they managed to avoid being "elite", which is quite a feat of management that few sports teams can match, cept maybe Chicago Cubs, Detroit Lions, LA Clippers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neech Posted November 26, 2013 Share Posted November 26, 2013 No, I don't see them as contenders. But I think their pieces at FW are quite strong - considerably moreso than ours. The D is more of a dog's breakfast, but they're rugged, can score, have (as I said before) gone through all sorts of adversity, and now seem to have strong netminding. Hence the lower-rung playoff team status; but such teams are also the sort that, if they can stay healthy and pull it all together, can play the dark horse role in a playoff run. A quality squad. Not elite. I'd give them the advantage at forward, but they're missing all-around guys like Pleks. We also have more room for improvement than they do with Galchenyuk. Their C's are quite suspect. My point was that they're locked in with a bunch of one-dimesional players that won't win them very much signifigant. If Kessel had a Toews beside him like Kane does it would be a different story, but he's got Bozak. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lovett's Magnatones Posted November 26, 2013 Share Posted November 26, 2013 yes they are supplementary information, but what you are describing isn't advanced stats. Advanced stats are more than just pure shots on goal. The shots were 39 to 31 for Philly However They were 10-6 on the PP, and PP doesn't count in this stat. so that breaks down to 29 to 25 meaning it was a pretty even game at ES for just shots. and then you have 7 missed shots for Philly and 10 for florida and its 36 to 35 in terms of fenwick there is no huge difference here that says a team was lucky to win... the possession was pretty even. But thats not how these stats are supposed to work.... they don't tell you who is winning any one individual game. They do tell you over the long run... over full 82 game seasons, that the correlation between teams who do well in these stats and the number of wins they get in a full season is very high. They only become statistically significant in high sample sizes. In individual games there is too much white noise. The trends have to be looked at in at least 10 game segments. So advanced stats "smell themselves" to the point where they invent extra stats to make up for their own deficiencies? If I understand your definitions correctly, the only possession stat that carries any water is "fenwick/corsi close." Meaning that these stats are relevant only during ES when the score is close. That's about 20-40 minutes of an average hockey game. Does anyone wonder why the relevance of these stats are questioned? Is there an advanced stat for the percentage of SB Nation hockey writers who buy into this stuff so they can write extra articles to generate more clicks? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLassister Posted November 26, 2013 Share Posted November 26, 2013 I won't give a rat about Corsi or Fenwick til the day it will take into account where the shots were from, their speed/velocity, their heights, the trafic infront of the net, if they were deflected, etc. I'm under the impression that these stats don't consider any of these things, and, for me, it's MUCH more relevant than the number of shots on the net itself and the score of the game at the time these shots were taken. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted November 27, 2013 Share Posted November 27, 2013 I won't give a rat about Corsi or Fenwick til the day it will take into account where the shots were from, their speed/velocity, their heights, the trafic infront of the net, if they were deflected, etc. I'm under the impression that these stats don't consider any of these things, and, for me, it's MUCH more relevant than the number of shots on the net itself and the score of the game at the time these shots were taken. Thats true. And that is why they are part of the answer and not the whole answer. In most cases though, you will find that the number of scoring chances.... ie... the number of shots with traffic, and from high quality areas, usually tracks extremely close to corsi and fenwick.... over large sample sizes the correlation is extremely high. Sure they won't replace scouting by eye, but they are useful. The idea that they are worthless is just as misguided as the SB Nation philosophy that they are the be all and end all. This isn't black and white. This isn't extreme positions.... they can be a valuable tool without being perfect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machine of Loving Grace Posted November 27, 2013 Share Posted November 27, 2013 Pretty much. The Leafs have a poor possession, their defence has been lucky and their goaltending has been strong but that doesn't change the fact they are winning games. People acting like Leafs winning is going to break advanced stats are silly. Same to those who think the Leafs falling is going to push advanced stats to a higher level. The dumbest thing stated by SB Nation people are that quality of shot doesn't matter over a long enough timeline. Reminds me of the Fight Club quote, "On a long enough timeline, the survival rate of everyone drops to zero." Chris Higgins is 12th in shots right now. Are you going to take him over PA Parenteau just because he always has the puck and is always shooting it at bad angles? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted November 28, 2013 Share Posted November 28, 2013 Pretty much. The Leafs have a poor possession, their defence has been lucky and their goaltending has been strong but that doesn't change the fact they are winning games. People acting like Leafs winning is going to break advanced stats are silly. Same to those who think the Leafs falling is going to push advanced stats to a higher level. The dumbest thing stated by SB Nation people are that quality of shot doesn't matter over a long enough timeline. Reminds me of the Fight Club quote, "On a long enough timeline, the survival rate of everyone drops to zero." Chris Higgins is 12th in shots right now. Are you going to take him over PA Parenteau just because he always has the puck and is always shooting it at bad angles? Exactly, there are exceptions to the rule, which you can identify by watching the player and team.... ie Higgins... but that doesnt mean the whole idea behind these stats is useless, just that you have to learn how to use them. As for the Leafs that tire fire got out shot 17-0 in the third period, including what TSN tracked as 10 scoring chances. They blew a 3 goal 2nd period lead (and 2 goal third period lead) giving up 5 goals to the Pens and losing in a shootout. That defence? TIRE FIRE. Dion #3 miscast as a #1 Gunnarson a #4 miscast as a 2 Franson... good #3 Rielly, will be great, but is NOT ready. Fraser Should not be in the NHL Ranger Should not be in the NHL Gardiner.... in press box cause every time he makes one little mistake Carlyle treats him like shit and benches him. Carlyle is ruining the kid and he needs out of Toronto. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stogey24 Posted November 28, 2013 Share Posted November 28, 2013 Exactly, there are exceptions to the rule, which you can identify by watching the player and team.... ie Higgins... but that doesnt mean the whole idea behind these stats is useless, just that you have to learn how to use them. As for the Leafs that tire fire got out shot 17-0 in the third period, including what TSN tracked as 10 scoring chances. They blew a 3 goal 2nd period lead (and 2 goal third period lead) giving up 5 goals to the Pens and losing in a shootout. That defence? TIRE FIRE. Dion #3 miscast as a #1 Gunnarson a #4 miscast as a 2 Franson... good #3 Rielly, will be great, but is NOT ready. Fraser Should not be in the NHL Ranger Should not be in the NHL Gardiner.... in press box cause every time he makes one little mistake Carlyle treats him like shit and benches him. Carlyle is ruining the kid and he needs out of Toronto. All so true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.