GDT: WCQF: Game 6 - Vancouver Canucks @ Nashville Predators , 7pm ET

Status
Not open for further replies.

McFlyingV

Registered User
Feb 22, 2013
23,143
14,164
Edmonton, Alberta
You keep making his argument for him.

If it’s at all subjective, then it can’t be objective.
But data in itself can't be subjective. The only thing that is subjective is the meaning of a high danger chance. The way they quantify high danger chances are from locations where a higher percentage of shot attempts go into the net. So in a vacuum these numbers show how many shot attempts happened from areas that we know a higher percentage of shots go in from. The only thing subjective about it is whether we should call them high danger chances or if we should call them shot attempts from areas where a higher percentage of shots result in goals.

And for the record I understand how flawed high danger chance measures are because all they account for is shot location and no other variable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Summer Rose

BB79

Registered User
Apr 30, 2011
4,769
5,754
Hits are even at 20, Nashville blocking shots by almost a 2-1 ratio though. They're gonna be hurtin tomorrow

Blocked shots now 26-12
 
  • Like
Reactions: Summer Rose

BMOK33

Registered User
Oct 5, 2005
27,270
4,831
Boeser shot that way too fast he needed to skate maybe another half step and the whole net was open
 
  • Like
Reactions: Summer Rose

Three On Zero

Deranged Oreo Dolphin Parking Instructor
Sponsor
Oct 9, 2012
30,046
27,576
Well in a sense it is objective in that it objectively measures where shots are coming from. Yes, different models vary slightly. But that's still not really subjective. Subjective would be watching a chance and saying "I think that's a scoring chance" or "I don't think that's a scoring chance". The measures lean more heavily to objective than subjective.

Doesn't mean their objective data is right, but its still objective.
Nope.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad