Jump to content

GDT: Devils @ Islanders 7:00 PM


MadDog2020

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, Triumph said:

This is not what happens.  This is an example of the gambler's fallacy.  There is no reason why we would expect a supposed 'hot streak' to be followed by a 'cold streak' or vice versa.  

C'mon...you know that these things have a way of evening out, especially for a guy like Gibby who had no history of being able to score like he was earlier on...and like I've pointed out, he had an abnormally high shooting% and a low volume of shots.  Pinpointing exactly when he would "cool off" (whatever you want to call it) wouldn't be easy (if anything I think he kept it up much longer than anyone could've expected), but it was damned near bound to happen.  Don't act like you don't know anything about regression.   

So what should have we expected from Gibby after his "hot streak"?  Especially since he had zero track record of finding the net at that rate previously and outside of occasional 3+ shot games, isn't a guy who gets a lot of shots.  I don't see how you'd expect anything more than a cold streak from Gibby after a run like that...especially since he's not the kind of player who keeps shooting so much that he'll eventually shoot his way out of it.    

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Colorado Rockies 1976 said:

C'mon...you know that these things have a way of evening out, especially for a guy like Gibby who had no history of being able to score like he was earlier on...and like I've pointed out, he had an abnormally high shooting% and a low volume of shots.  Pinpointing exactly when he would "cool off" (whatever you want to call it) wouldn't be easy (if anything I think he kept it up much longer than anyone could've expected), but it was damned near bound to happen.  Don't act like you don't know anything about regression.   

So what should have we expected from Gibby after his "hot streak"?  Especially since he had zero track record of finding the net at that rate previously and outside of occasional 3+ shot games, isn't a guy who gets a lot of shots.  I don't see how you'd expect anything more than a cold streak from Gibby after a run like that...especially since he's not the kind of player who keeps shooting so much that he'll eventually shoot his way out of it.    

No, I don't know that.  You're doubling down on the gambler's fallacy.  All regression towards the mean means is that after a given streak of extreme X, we should expect the next streak of Y to be closer to true talent than the previous run.  So if we flip a fair coin ten times and it comes up heads 8 times, we should expect the next 10 flips to be closer to the average of 5.  It doesn't mean that we should expect 8 tails.  That may happen, but it's no more likely to happen than at any other time.  Granted, players aren't coins, and confidence is probably real, but it's going to be a much smaller factor than plain old luck.

Gibbons has historically been a reasonably high percentage shooter in his career - he shoots 12% in the AHL and he had a 10% shooting percentage in the NHL coming into this season.  So I guess I'd expect him to shoot 10% or thereabouts, but maybe a little higher because of his short-handed work.  Call it 11%.  That's what I'd expect, an average of a goal every 9 shots.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sports isn't the MGM Grand. These are human beings. Cold or unlucky streaks for most athletes do occur and many occur after hot streaks. Psychology and confidence play a big part in it, a hot streak...then a few posts, then a few big saves, then a few whiffs and all of a sudden it becomes a mental challenge for the player as they grip their stick tighter and get frustrated. We've seen this a million times. 

You just can't compare movements of intimate objects in a casino to human athletes. 

Edited by '7'
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Triumph said:

No, I don't know that.  You're doubling down on the gambler's fallacy.  All regression towards the mean means is that after a given streak of extreme X, we should expect the next streak of Y to be closer to true talent than the previous run.  So if we flip a fair coin ten times and it comes up heads 8 times, we should expect the next 10 flips to be closer to the average of 5.  It doesn't mean that we should expect 8 tails.  That may happen, but it's no more likely to happen than at any other time.  Granted, players aren't coins, and confidence is probably real, but it's going to be a much smaller factor than plain old luck.

Gibbons has historically been a reasonably high percentage shooter in his career - he shoots 12% in the AHL and he had a 10% shooting percentage in the NHL coming into this season.  So I guess I'd expect him to shoot 10% or thereabouts, but maybe a little higher because of his short-handed work.  Call it 11%.  That's what I'd expect, an average of a goal every 9 shots.  

The problem is that you're partly basing Gibby's mean on the 66 games he played in the NHL prior to this year, back in 2013-14 and 2014-15 (which I'm not sure are that relevant given the time frame)...sure, he shot 10% in those games (though in second season of that sample (25 games) he went 0-for-21 in his SOG...does show that he can go through cold streaks), but is that sample so solid and consistent that anyone can definitively say "I can expect Gibby to be a 10-11% shooter from here on out, once an insane hot streak ends?"  I don't think that has any more merit than expecting him to go through an ice-cold steak.      

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very nice win. Thank god we're finished playing in that hellhole this season. Really like how they put Palmieri on Zacha's line to spread out the offense. Zacha hasn't shown it by the numbers, but he has the skill to keep up with KP. That line torched the Isles all night. Put Noesen with Zajac/Johansson and Coleman with Boyle and Gibbons and I think that's the forward lineup I wanna see. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Colorado Rockies 1976 said:

The problem is that you're partly basing Gibby's mean on the 66 games he played in the NHL prior to this year, back in 2013-14 and 2014-15 (which I'm not sure are that relevant given the time frame)...sure, he shot 10% in those games (though in second season of that sample (25 games) he went 0-for-21 in his SOG...does show that he can go through cold streaks), but is that sample so solid and consistent that anyone can definitively say "I can expect Gibby to be a 10-11% shooter from here on out, once an insane hot streak ends?"  I don't think that has any more merit than expecting him to go through an ice-cold steak.      

I guess you missed the part where I cited his AHL shooting numbers?  So yeah, anyone can shoot 10% in 66 NHL games, but over 447 AHL games, not anyone can shoot 12%.  

I'm basing my expectation of his performance in part on the fact that Gibbons does not get a lot of shots and so players like that tend to be more selective with their shots and score on a higher percentage of them.  Is this necessarily true, of course not, there's Josefsons out there, but they are comparatively rare.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Triumph said:

I guess you missed the part where I cited his AHL shooting numbers?  So yeah, anyone can shoot 10% in 66 NHL games, but over 447 AHL games, not anyone can shoot 12%.  

I'm basing my expectation of his performance in part on the fact that Gibbons does not get a lot of shots and so players like that tend to be more selective with their shots and score on a higher percentage of them.  Is this necessarily true, of course not, there's Josefsons out there, but they are comparatively rare.

No, I saw the 12% (which is why I said "partly basing"), just not sure how much relevance his AHL numbers have to this debate.  Should I really care all that much that Gibby was a 12.3% shooter in the AHL, especially with some of those years coming as overage, and with his 2013-14 AHL season (20.7%) inflating his overall shooting% somewhat?  In his last three AHL seasons, he shot 7.3% in 26 GP, 8.3% in 63 GP, and 13.3% in 72 GP, so he wasn't consistent in recent years down there, for whatever that's worth.

Also FWIW it's not like I think Gibby will shoot 3.4% for the rest of the year, but I don't think his mean will necessarily be 10-11% either.       

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Nicomo said:

He missed a lot of games a in Edmonton. Only played 70+ twice in 6 seasons. 

With the chemistry he has with Nico and Bratt I think 30 goals a season is realistic for him if he stays healthy. 

True, and I didn't really notice that either.  Glad he's been pretty healthy for us thus far.  It's good that he's on a line with a really young guy like Nico, who is only going to continue to get better, which will have a direct effect on Hall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, NJDfan1711 said:

True, and I didn't really notice that either.  Glad he's been pretty healthy for us thus far.  It's good that he's on a line with a really young guy like Nico, who is only going to continue to get better, which will have a direct effect on Hall.

He's been on pace for 30 in some seasons where he wasn't able to play 82 games.  I feel like as long as he doesn't miss more than 2-3 games, he can hit 30 this season. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Colorado Rockies 1976 said:

No, I saw the 12% (which is why I said "partly basing"), just not sure how much relevance his AHL numbers have to this debate.  Should I really care all that much that Gibby was a 12.3% shooter in the AHL, especially with some of those years coming as overage, and with his 2013-14 AHL season (20.7%) inflating his overall shooting% somewhat?  In his last three AHL seasons, he shot 7.3% in 26 GP, 8.3% in 63 GP, and 13.3% in 72 GP, so he wasn't consistent in recent years down there, for whatever that's worth.

Also FWIW it's not like I think Gibby will shoot 3.4% for the rest of the year, but I don't think his mean will necessarily be 10-11% either.       

You don't get to pick and choose which samples are relevant.  They're all part of the same whole.  Just as when next season if Gibbons is still here you go through your 'Well, since December 1 of 2017, Gibbons only has 6 goals etc. etc.' rigamarole - he scored 11 goals before that.  They all count, no matter where you stop and start.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Triumph said:

You don't get to pick and choose which samples are relevant.  They're all part of the same whole.  Just as when next season if Gibbons is still here you go through your 'Well, since December 1 of 2017, Gibbons only has 6 goals etc. etc.' rigamarole - he scored 11 goals before that.  They all count, no matter where you stop and start.

So I should care about what Gibby did in 2013-14?  Or about his AHL numbers?  Not me.  And like I've said, that freak stretch that saw him score waaaaay more than we ever could've expected was a lot of fun while it lasted, for him and everyone else...and it helped the Devils get off to a great start.  I don't have to define what an anomaly is for you...sometimes guys go on unforeseen tears, and sometimes there clear reasons as to WHY they go on tears, and why they'll come back to Earth, and why there's a very good chance that such a tear will be an isolated occurance.  Gibby didn't suddenly become a better scorer or figure out how to beat goalies at a crazy rate...it's worth isolating the sample because it's something that will almost certainly never happen again.  It's not representative at all of the player that Gibby really is, so no, it's not all part of the same whole.  Maybe if we're lucky, Gibby can somehow be around the 10% shooter you think he can be from now until his Devils career ends...I would take that, especially since like I've said in earlier posts, it's not like I ever expected him to be a goal-scorer, or a guy the Devils should rely on for that purpose.  Like you said, even if he only scores a few more goals from here on out, he's already earned his money for this season.     

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Triumph said:

You don't get to pick and choose which samples are relevant.  They're all part of the same whole.  Just as when next season if Gibbons is still here you go through your 'Well, since December 1 of 2017, Gibbons only has 6 goals etc. etc.' rigamarole - he scored 11 goals before that.  They all count, no matter where you stop and start.

Nobody was counting Stafford's 5 when he was 3rd on the team and everyone said he sucked...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, sundstrom said:

in order - gibbons, lovejoy, johannson, assist, severson, hall, palmieri, bratt, noeson, vatanen, greene, schneider

thanks for the recap. I was interested in the tweet but for the most part was unable to figure out what the hell he has writing about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, NJDfan1711 said:

Yeah, in all honesty, I'll be pretty disappointed if he doesn't notch a few seasons of 30 goals. I actually hadn't realized that he has never had a 30 goal season in his career yet.  Granted this year he's notched more assists, and usually does, but we still need goal scoring on a consistent basis, and with guys like Bratt and Gibbons not a shoe-in by any means to repeat their performances from this year again next year, I think we still need to count on Hall to put the puck in the net often.

It's too bad he isn't a great finisher, Hall can generate chances as well as dam near anybody.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Triumph said:

I dunno, it's not easy for a shooter to even hit the net from there, plus the pass comes from up top - it doesn't traverse the entire royal road.

It's not a "traditional" RR pass, but with the screen and everything it makes it tough for Halak and achieves a similar effect. 

palm1.PNG.9cef87358148efe22034c3c30ab8be79.PNGpalm2.PNG.222642eba6963d37555cf558d02b17da.PNG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.