Tri - can you be a little more of a teacher here rather than a bully? Sure people dont want to do the legwork to communicate stochastically (holy f**k can you BE anymore supercilious and alienating?)
But people do want to know what you're getting at. If you don't want them to, then save it for your blog, right? But if you DO - then practice putting things in laymans terms. Doesn't that kind of seem less stressful for everyone? If squishy is just here to fight he'll make himself look stupid all on his own. If you try to rush the process you look equally as inept. Just sayin' (if you get your pedantry i get my colloquialisms)
If I thought Squishy hadn't seen these arguments before, I'd make them without being a bully (see also how I responded to that guy who coaches youth hockey). But he has 7000 posts and has been here for a long time. And again, if I thought Squishy was doing anything besides creating silly strawman arguments, I'd also respond thoughtfully, as I have done to many others who are much more skeptical than I of these statistics.
As for the word stochastically, I don't like it either, but it's hard to write out something like 'is aware of the extreme randomness observed in small samples and the large role randomness plays in the game of hockey even in larger samples'.
YOU. you did that. This very thread was you creating a topic to judge a player and all you opened with was his terrible corsi. Maybe you went on later to justify your argument but the opening post was essentially "Stephen Gionta is killing this team, and the reason is his corsi".
Did I say that Gionta had a bad game Corsi wise and therefore he is bad? Absolutely not. Over at In Lou We Trust, the guy who writes the game recaps will often say things like Player X had a good Corsi thus he had a good game and I've often admonished him not to do that. Single game Corsi doesn't tell much of a story. It tells you where the puck was 5 on 5, but in a very limited way - it doesn't tell you WHY it was where it was.
So, no, I didn't lay out the case perfectly in my opening post. We can't change the past.
I look at 4 main stats, which I already explained to NLInfante when I look at a player who I don't know that well:
Fenwick or Corsi - Where's the puck, generally, when this player is on the ice?
Zone Start - How often is his coach starting him in the offensive or defensive zone relative to one another?
Corsi Rel Qualcomp or Corsi Qualcomp - Who is he playing against? Is he playing against the other team's top territorial players generally?
Corsi Rel Qualteam or Corsi Qualteam - Who is he playing with? Do his teammates suck?
I will also look at ice time (since this is a good indicator of how a coach feels about a player), shots on goal, goals, and assists, but it's rare that some guy will pop up out of nowhere with good offensive numbers who I haven't heard of.
Now there's issues with all of these which we can get into. But right now, Gionta ranks middle of the pack in team in terms of Corsi Rel Qualcomp, which sounds about right - he faces top lines sometimes, fourth lines sometimes - the CBGB line is tops among NJ forwards in Corsi QoC which suggests they face the toughest competition, although it wouldn't surprise me if to a degree they've brought that on themselves. They're doing better in terms of Corsi and Corsi Rel but they are still at the bottom among forwards with 10+ games. So it is trending upwards, though I suspect that is in part because they are less frequently playing against top lines since Carter got hurt and Gionta got moved down for a couple games. Gionta himself starts in the offensive zone more frequently than most of the Devils' forwards.
Right now they're being pushed back a tolerable amount, although I think this has more to do with the fact that the Devils are frequently now trailing in games instead of leading as they were at the beginning of the season. They're also playing Sidney Crosby a lot less.