Jump to content

GDT: Devils @ Canucks 4PM


Recommended Posts

22 hours ago, DevsMan84 said:

Advanced Stats: Where Goose is the worst player in the NHL, Bennett's release was enough to make Cordell have a twitter meltdown, Simmonds is just the unluckiest player on Earth and "expected goals" is an actual thing.

And the league embraces this sh!t with open arms. 🙄

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 224
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I think it’s ridiculous.  You’re talking about a guy who came over having never played in the NHL with an obvious adjustment to be made, and he’s playing on a team that has been half a dumpster f

Scene: John Hynes at his house after the long road trip. [Hynes turns off the lights, stubs his toe on the way into bed] Hynes: (muttering to himself) fvcking Zacha. ~end scene

Dear Hynes, Dont get cute. Don’t change a freaking thing. Signed, Me

Posted Images

36 minutes ago, MadDog2020 said:

And the league embraces this sh!t with open arms. 🙄

Not to a fault though...I think most front offices can distinguish that some guys aren't as good as their metrics would lead one to believe.

As for "unluckiest guy on Earth Simmonds", that really only applies to his lack of goals to this point.  Lots of other areas where he's simply just not that good.  I've said it before, but I'm glad he's only here for one season. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

these stats based on shots on goal will always be incredibly flawed cause it's qualifying all "shots" as the same metric/quality and compiling them.

Let's be clear if one shot is from Ovechkin in circles vs a unscreened wrister/dump in from Andy Greene from the blue linen is like comparing apple and oranges.

Then you can make the best setup play, crazy tic tac toe highlight of the month play just to miss the post by half an inch.. in the stat worlds it's like nothing happened.

Edited by SterioDesign
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, SterioDesign said:

these stats based on shots on goal will always be incredibly flawed cause it's qualifying all "shots" as the same metric/quality and compiling them.

Let's be clear if one shot is from Ovechkin in circles vs a unscreened wrister/dump in from Andy Greene from the blue linen is like comparing apple and oranges.

Then you can make the best setup play, crazy tic tac toe highlight of the month play just to miss the post by half an inch.. in the stat worlds it's like nothing happened.

I’m starting to think fvck stats completely, the only thing that counts are results. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, SterioDesign said:

Well it can be helpful to catch tendencies and stuff like that. But to put too much into them can be quite misleading

Not for me, maybe for the team. Doesn’t matter what tendencies I catch as a fan. I’m not ACTUALLY the Assistant GM lol.

Or...am I??

Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, SterioDesign said:

these stats based on shots on goal will always be incredibly flawed cause it's qualifying all "shots" as the same metric/quality and compiling them.

Let's be clear if one shot is from Ovechkin in circles vs a unscreened wrister/dump in from Andy Greene from the blue linen is like comparing apple and oranges.

Then you can make the best setup play, crazy tic tac toe highlight of the month play just to miss the post by half an inch.. in the stat worlds it's like nothing happened.

You have been talking about this stuff for 5 years, you have been saying the same thing for 5 years, and you still have no idea what you're talking about.  Still.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, SterioDesign said:

these stats based on shots on goal will always be incredibly flawed cause it's qualifying all "shots" as the same metric/quality and compiling them.

Let's be clear if one shot is from Ovechkin in circles vs a unscreened wrister/dump in from Andy Greene from the blue linen is like comparing apple and oranges.

Then you can make the best setup play, crazy tic tac toe highlight of the month play just to miss the post by half an inch.. in the stat worlds it's like nothing happened.

This could not be more ignorant. Amazing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

See that's what i hate the most about it lol

How pretentious stats people get thinking they know more than you or that if you don't agree with them that you're just dumb.

The way some talk its CLEAR that they never played the sport or at least not at a level where it's serious

Baseball. darts, curling... fine that can be all about stats cause it's so black and white. Hockey has so much nuance that you just can't translate everything to numbers. It's simply impossible.

edit: if you guys are SO damn knowlegeable you'd have some sort of counter argument better than "you're ignorant". When you rely on insults it means you lost

Edited by SterioDesign
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SterioDesign said:

these stats based on shots on goal will always be incredibly flawed cause it's qualifying all "shots" as the same metric/quality and compiling them.

Let's be clear if one shot is from Ovechkin in circles vs a unscreened wrister/dump in from Andy Greene from the blue linen is like comparing apple and oranges.

Then you can make the best setup play, crazy tic tac toe highlight of the month play just to miss the post by half an inch.. in the stat worlds it's like nothing happened.

Wait is this true @Neb00rs - all shots are captured under the same category when utilizing predictive statistics? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Devilsfan118 said:

Wait is this true @Neb00rs - all shots are captured under the same category when utilizing predictive statistics? 

corsi for example is basically just... how many shots were made when you were on the ice. Just like +/-. You could be jumping off the bench and not being part of the play at all and boom... your personal stat is affected even if you had nothing to do with it. 

Again over the course of a season those kind of events are far and between so you still get some sort of good indication but it's nothing more than that. But no stats can be looked at and be taken as it is. There's always need to be a context along with it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Devilsfan118 said:

Wait is this true @Neb00rs - all shots are captured under the same category when utilizing predictive statistics? 

No. This is one of the more egregious misunderstandings the lay people of hockeydom have with so-called "advanced stats." - egregious because they're so ready to attack what they demanded in the first place. All of these "advanced stats" that have come about - just as statistics come about in more academic circles - are reactions to questions that are being asked by average fans - it's not just "stats for the experts." Why does Corsi exist? Because average people wondered why certain players who had high-plus minuses and good point totals one year, didn't the next. People have been making the complaint SD is making for years now - decades just about - and so the hockey statistics community and the NHL responded by tracking shot quality - developing and evolving algorithms over the years to do so. The NHL has an API (Application Programming Interface) that tracks detailed information about individual shots in its game summaries (distance, angle, etc...) and this is what advanced stats sites (and mainstream sites like TSN, NHL.com, etc...) use to produce much of their data.

Expected goals, for instance, is a direct result of Corsi's shortcomings, and tracks shot quality and the differences between shots. So many stats now are extensions of expected goals and take into account shot quality.

Edited by Neb00rs
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Neb00rs said:

No. This is one of the more egregious misunderstandings the lay people of hockeydom have with so-called "advanced stats." - egregious because they're so ready to attack what they demanded in the first place. All of these "advanced stats" that have come about - just as statistics come about in more academic circles - are reactions to questions that are being asked by average fans - it's not just "stats for the experts." Why does Corsi exist? Because average people wondered why certain players who had high-plus minuses and good point totals one year, and then didn't the next. People have been making the complaint SD is making for years now - decades just about - and so the hockey statistics community and the NHL responded by tracking shot quality - developing and evolving algorithms over the years to do so. The NHL has an API (Application Programming Interface) that tracks detailed information about individual shots in its game summaries (distance, angle, etc...) and this is what advanced stats sites (and mainstream sites like TSN, NHL.com, etc...) use to produce much of their data.

Expected goals, for instance, is a direct result of Corsi's shortcomings, and tracks shot quality and the differences between shots. So many stats now are extensions of expected goals and take into account shot quality.

Sure and i get that. I'm not "ignorant". Fact is you can never look at any stats and get the whole story without knowing the context of the game. Then whats the point?

Stats should "support" what you're seeing or showing trends that makes you pay more attention to something live.

Not looking at a stat and make an opinion strictly on them and ignoring the eye test. It has to be a mix of both

My fav is "Kovalchuk was never really good for us, because his number shows he was not driving the play" lol i mean you can be as butthurt about him leaving. If you're gonna sit here and tell me Kovy was not dominant at times. You were just not watching the games.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SterioDesign said:

See that's what i hate the most about it lol

How pretentious stats people get thinking they know more than you or that if you don't agree with them that you're just dumb.

The way some talk its CLEAR that they never played the sport or at least not at a level where it's serious

Baseball. darts, curling... fine that can be all about stats cause it's so black and white. Hockey has so much nuance that you just can't translate everything to numbers. It's simply impossible.

edit: if you guys are SO damn knowlegeable you'd have some sort of counter argument better than "you're ignorant". When you rely on insults it means you lost

I don't have a counter argument because you have been here for 6 years and you have chosen to remain totally ignorant.  I can go find at least 3 times I've rebutted your original point on this since 2014 and you still spout the same bullsh!t.  You don't have any idea of what you're talking about and you think you do - there's really no countering that level of ignorance.  People can disagree with these things in an educated fashion - they can learn about these things and ask questions that indicate thought.  You had one response to this the first time you saw it - 'hey wait a minute this treats every shot equally and they're not!' and that's the thing you have been pounding on the for the last 6 years, posting it here as if it's some kind of revelation.  No fvcking sh!t, dude.  Yes, that's what Corsi does.  It still is a meaningful measurement of how hockey teams are doing when context is taken into account.  There's things that are trying to take into account the quality of shots also, by measuring pre-shot passing and where a shot is taken from.  Unfortunately the pre-shot passing stuff isn't quite systematized yet, but it's something people are tracking.  People have objections to Corsi and they're trying to improve it.  It's still meaningful, whether you want it to be or not.

Edited by Triumph
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Triumph said:

I don't have a counter argument because you have been here for 6 years and you have chosen to remain totally ignorant.  I can go find at least 3 times I've rebutted your original point on this since 2014 and you still spout the same bullsh!t.  You don't have any idea of what you're talking about and you think you do - there's really no countering that level of ignorance.  People can disagree with these things in an educated fashion - they can learn about these things and ask questions that indicate thought.  You had one response to this the first time you saw it - 'hey wait a minute this treats every shot equally and they're not!' and that's the thing you have been pounding on the for the last 6 years, posting it here as if it's some kind of revelation.  No fvcking sh!t, dude.  Yes, that's what Corsi does.  It still is a meaningful measurement of how hockey teams are doing when context is taken into account.  There's things that are trying to take into account the quality of shots also, by measuring pre-shot passing and where a shot is taken from.  Unfortunately the pre-shot passing stuff isn't quite systematized yet, but it's something people are tracking.  People have objections to Corsi and they're trying to improve it.  It's still meaningful, whether you want it to be or not.

6 years? I've been here since 2009. You can easily check my profile and see that. Who's really ignorant here? haha

I'm here saying stats can be useful to see tendencies and all but that they have to be taken with a grain of salt. I also never said stats were meaningless i said they were flawed (just go back and check... i indeed said flawed.. which you kind of agreed with your post.. so why are you mad? lol). And that it will never replace watching the game with full context. And you're the one saying tangibles are worth nothing and that this and this players are "not really good" strictly based on stats. When they've been productive and clearly helping the team. Seriously dude get off  your high horses, im the one putting water in his wine about all this and you're the one with a stiff opinion.

No stat alone can be looked at and its telling you the story. You have to look at corsi.. well then look at quality of competition... then look at quality of shots? then by the end you're looking at what? like 10 stats to get some context? Thats just trying to go through hoops to justify other stats

Edited by SterioDesign
Link to post
Share on other sites

It will be dark boring ages when winner will be chosen according advanced stat. Before that it’s a goals for and against. Players score or help to score. Or players lose the man who scored in current moment. Anything other can help or can’t. We may play in hockey manager, take all advanced monsters on lines and start simulation. Or we can see how Gusev or Hall can make some smart and fast decisions and change the game. If Gusev can’t play in his own zone - give him someone who doesn’t look and play like Bratt and Hughes(it’s working in reverse). And give him some time on ice. I was watching the end of the last season and team show some grit and won some games. They played actually like that played 3-4-5 years ago. It isn’t a way to win the cup. Zacha made something I don’t know what Zacha did and went on fourth line, woody - mister expected goal went to Hischier and they played like garbage - they didn’t do anything in offensive zone. 

If you like the way how Gusev looks after Elias meeting, how wood looks after Elias meeting - hire Elias into the coaching stuff.

btw if this team will not blow the league and hall will go in his own way - do we really have enough material to let Gusev into the same own way?

 

advanced shmadvenced

Edited by Guadana
  • Like 1
Link to post
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.