Around the NHL, 11th Armored Tank Division

[Ace Rimmer]

Previous thread http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1985529

Click to read more...

 

[Johnny GODreau]

Entertaining Bruins-Redwings game.

 

[OvermanKingGainer]

Are the Red Wings a contender? It's weird but they seem to have almost everything it takes to be one this year other than a workhorse Dman. They've got a balanced blueline (Kronwall, DeKeyser, Green), a great forwards group, and a great goaltender.

P.S. For anyone else reading and buying into the propaganda in the previous thread...don't. It grossly simplifies the concepts that underlying statistics are built upon to make the poster posting it feel smarter than (s)he really is.

Even-strength (i.e. non-special teams) shot-differentials, over the course of a full season have an obvious and direct correlation to winning. Unless you're talking about teams with atrocious goaltending (The Carolina Hurricanes) or teams that take idiotic amounts of penalties (The Winnipeg Jets), there is a trend that's more than repeatable towards deep playoff runs.

Possession from a "good" cycle that results in just one good scoring chance shot is not greater in value to multiple shot-attempts because over time, the shot attempts being suppressed still add up into positive differentials. That is the key. There are many, many ways to score but few reliable ways to stop the other team from scoring. Even goaltenders like Lundqvist and Price can't stop everything when they're getting hemmed in and facing 50 shots, no matter how easy they are to stop, deflections happen, tired defenders happen. A guy like Quick can make just 18 saves in a game and post a shutout more easily. That's how Kipprusoff went from a nobody to a superstar, and that was an era before advanced "stats", but the same principles applied. Also offensively over a full season the skill level of these pro athletes averages out. Plus, "perimeter attempts" still create more rebounds (which create good scoring chances), deflections, offensive zone faceoffs (which are the best way to defend), and ultimately less opportunities to turn the puck over in the neutral zone (the neutral zone is a huge part of what something like "corsi-differential" identifies.. If anything though, overvaluing "time" with the puck also ignores the nature of the game, a lot of the best scoring chances come off of bang-bang forechecks and red line turnovers. Corsi/Fenwick become indicators of these all-important things.

Can you lose games while being the better team? We lost to the Blue Jackets a few games ago while carrying the vast majority of the play. But I bet you if you look at the tape, it's a lot easier to show Hamilton and co how to avoid turnovers leading to odd man rushes, than to look at the tape of the Coyotes game on Friday and show the guys how to carry the play at all, which they failed to do. That's the difference.

"Advanced" stats aren't a substitute for the eye test, but they're a guideline for it. And criticising their status as being advanced? Just plain pedantic.

 

[Johnny GODreau]

I'd say the Redwings are contenders. They're a team never to count out.

 

[Pirate King Luffy]

10/10 thread title

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

I don't mind advanced stats, but when someone starts a post with saying "player X is terrible or great because of their Corsi", that irks me. For example, Joe Colborne in my opinion has not been bad solely because of recent poor possession numbers, he's been bad because well, he's just been bad lately. If someone legitimately uses it to back up the eye test, then I see a place for it, but using it as your basis for judging a player, really leaves a lot out.

 

[tmurfin]

Red Wings are definitely flying under the radar. And once their in, they have the talent to make it happen. Also, TLDR no one reads the fine print

 

[InfinityIggy]

I don't mind advanced stats, but when someone starts a post with saying "player X is terrible or great because of their Corsi", that irks me. For example, Joe Colborne in my opinion has not been bad solely because of recent poor possession numbers, he's been bad because well, he's just been bad lately. If someone legitimately uses it to back up the eye test, then I see a place for it, but using it as your basis for judging a player, really leaves a lot out.

Advanced stats should supplement an argument. Not be the basis of an argument. Too many posters on HF base their entire argument on advanced stats.

 

[OvermanKingGainer]

Advanced stats should supplement an argument. Not be the basis of an argument. Too many posters on HF base their entire argument on advanced stats.

I would agree with this. However too many other people also base their entire argument on counting stats. A 30 goal scorer like Kessel will be immune to criticism "because 30 goals". If the entire argument is based on counting stats, advanced stats are a valid counter to show there's more to the "bigger picture".

 

[Bouma Fett*]

I like the Wings also. It's scary to think that they'd be one of the teams who could feasibly manage to add Stamkos too. They have Quincey and Richards done after this year freeing up 7+ off the cap alone, and they could buy out the last year of Kindl's contract too if they wanted. Then, imagine if they can find a taker for Howard.

Imagine going from the Yzerman/Federov era,to the Datsyuk/Zetterberg era, to the Stamkos/Larkin era

 

[Johnny GODreau]

Rongos vs Flyers pretty entertaining.

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

I'd be happy to see Stammer sign in Detroit.

 

[Snazu]

I'd be happy to see Stammer sign in Detroit.

What will Leaf fans talk about once that Stamkos saga is over? I just hope he doesn't sign with them....

 

[Johnny GODreau]

What will Leaf fans talk about once that Stamkos saga is over? I just hope he doesn't sign with them....

Rick Nash to the Leafs.

 

[Dertell]

Usually I don't bother with advanced stats arguments, because people on either sides repeat the same boring crap and no one will change their minds. However, I'll say this: The "balance" stance on advanced stats is just as flawed as not caring about stats. On practice, it doesn't hold up.

For example, if you look at the argument InfinityIggy used, and decode it, it means: "Advanced stats should supplement a confirmation bias". Because what is the basis of all argument, if not data? Your gut feeling, shocking events, narratives, etc. You'll end up cherry-picking datas to justify said confirmation bias. See the "Russell to Dallas" thread on the trade board.

IMO, the eye-test should be used to understand what the data shows, or what should be part of what is collected as data.

 

[Anglesmith]

Usually I don't bother with advanced stats arguments, because people on either sides repeat the same boring crap and no one will change their minds. However, I'll say this: The "balance" stance on advanced stats is just as flawed as not caring about stats. On practice, it doesn't hold up.

For example, if you look at the argument InfinityIggy used, and decode it, it means: "Advanced stats should supplement a confirmation bias". Because what is the basis of all argument, if not data? Your gut feeling, shocking events, narratives, etc. You'll end up cherry-picking datas to justify said confirmation bias. See the "Russell to Dallas" thread on the trade board.

IMO, the eye-test should be used to understand what the data shows, or what should be part of what is collected as data.

Both the eye-test and advanced stats, at least at this point, have downsides. The advanced stats crowd is eager to point out confirmation bias and ignore the sloppy approximations and assumptions made by advanced stats. The eye-test crowd is eager to point out the limitations of advanced stats and ignore or downplay the effect of personal bias. And so it goes.

At this point, I think the combination of both probably gives you a clearer idea than just one or just the other.

 

[Bouma Fett*]

I'd be happy to see Stammer sign in Detroit.

Yeah it would be really cool.

 

[Pirate King Luffy]

Hox, your Corsi sucks.

 

[Calculon]

 

[Calculon]

Coyotes GM admits tanking for shot at McDavid last season

"It's really reflective of our team," Maloney said. "Last year, we plunged. I did not do much to help our team (in) the last two months. If we were going to be bad, my attitude was, let's be real bad. There was a pretty big prize for being really bad."

But tanking doesn't exist.

 

[Bouma Fett*]

We didn't say it doesn't exist. It's more that a respectable franchise shouldn't do it. If I was a Coyotes fan, that remark would have me no longer supporting the team until Maloney was fired

 

[SKRusty]

Coyotes GM admits tanking for shot at McDavid last season

But tanking doesn't exist.

All you had to do was listen to Tim Murray after the lottery draw last year to confirm Buffalo's "Tank". Or the fact Murray was one of the few to vote against the changes for the lottery for first pick overall.

On the plus side of things this year 1,2 and 3 are all up for grabs by the bottom 14 teams. With Maloney on the record look for even more changes to discourage tanking.

Too bad it is only about 30 years late on that discussion.

 

[Volica]

Coyotes GM admits tanking for shot at McDavid last season

But tanking doesn't exist.

Everyone knows Tanking exists. What about the Yotes or Sabres lineup last year even remotely looked like an NHL lineup. How about the Leafs this year?

Teams tank because it's best for business. Sometimes you throw in the towel to be better in the long run. Every successful person in this world can vouch sometimes you go in the red to bounce back into the black.

 

[SKRusty]

We didn't say it doesn't exist. It's more that a respectable franchise shouldn't do it. If I was a Coyotes fan, that remark would have me no longer supporting the team until Maloney was fired

Maloney is not the evil here. Since the 83-84 the "Tank" has been in play. Maloney finally confirmed to the fans that this was the case.

He like most others wanted change. Now we might be able to finally see a quantifiable change made to the process.

Ironically the only GM to not vote for the changes was Tim Murray and I see few throwing him under the bus.

Make no mistake - Murray has been against the lottery process from the get-go. He was the only GM to vote against the format last season, sticking to his guns that the last place team should automatically get the top selection.

http://www.torontosun.com/2015/04/18/edmonton-oilers-win-first-overall-nhl-draft-pick-yet-again

 

[Anglesmith]

Maloney is not the evil here. Since the 83-84 the "Tank" has been in play. Maloney finally confirmed to the fans that this was the case.

He like most others wanted change. Now we might be able to finally see a quantifiable change made to the process.

Ironically the only GM to not vote for the changes was Tim Murray and I see few throwing him under the bus.



http://www.torontosun.com/2015/04/18/edmonton-oilers-win-first-overall-nhl-draft-pick-yet-again

You haven't seen Tim Murray thrown under the bus? Where were you last year?