Windsor Spitfires 2018 Offseason Thread

[OHL4Life]

You mentioned two guys (which I gave kudos for, too). So, because they bring it up and apparently it's a "dead stat" (which I really don't believe), I'm not allowed to think it's valuable? Does that really make sense? Where did I say our team is great? Man, I say GWG and plus-minus are useful and... I don't know what all of this is. Strange.

let me try it this way. what is the best way to get a true look at how players are performing. two stats or multiple stats ? Single stats or advanced analytics. usually more information is better then less.

If it’s multiple, why are we not being up multiple stats?

 

[Crease Master]

let me try it this way. what is the best way to get a true look at how players are performing. two stats or multiple stats ? Single stats or advanced analytics. usually more information is better then less.

If it’s multiple, why are we not being up multiple stats?

The only stat that matters is wins and we have another one. The rest of the stats to me are just decoration. They don't give out trophies for having the best medium danger save percentage. (Seriously, some nerd actually came up with that stat!)

 

[OHLTG]

let me try it this way. what is the best way to get a true look at how players are performing. two stats or multiple stats ? Single stats or advanced analytics. usually more information is better then less.

If it’s multiple, why are we not being up multiple stats?

Where did I say multiple stats weren't best? All I've said from the start is I like GWG and plus-minus and how they work in the game. That doesn't take away from other stats at any point. Not everyone is going to like them, which is fine. I do.

 

[OHL4Life]

The only stat that matters is wins and we have another one. The rest of the stats to me are just decoration. They don't give out trophies for having the best medium danger save percentage. (Seriously, some nerd actually came up with that stat!)

And they keep getting hired by nhl teams

 

[OHL4Life]

Where did I say multiple stats weren't best? All I've said from the start is I like GWG and plus-minus and how they work in the game. That doesn't take away from other stats at any point. Not everyone is going to like them, which is fine. I do.

so with that in mind, if I where to post 10-12 stats that show the spits 00/01s are below average,probably in the bottom 20 percent of the league, are they still doing great?

all I’m asking for is a true examination of all stats, not just the stats that benefit us. Is that not fair?

I tried that once and was told to stop, that GWG means more then a more well rounded look at things

 

[youngblood10]

But in all seriousness I'd like to see the analytics of the 4 teams in last years Memorial Cup. Not many my self included gave the Spits much of a chance. I'd be interested if the numbers showed that the Spitfires would be so dominate in the tournament before hand.

 

[INTENTIONALLYOFFSIDE]

But in all seriousness I'd like to see the analytics of the 4 teams in last years Memorial Cup. Not many my self included gave the Spits much of a chance. I'd be interested if the numbers showed that the Spitfires would be so dominate in the tournament before hand.

You can't use last year as it was a one off. Windsor won the Memorial Cup because they hosted it; had they not been hosting it they would not have been there. The big question is what did the spits do in the 6 weeks off that dramatically changed their game other than having some injured players get healthy and as a team come into the tournament far more rested than the other teams. I don't follow Windsor that closely but the team that showed up and dominated in the tournament was not the team I saw in regular season.

 

[OHLTG]

so with that in mind, if I where to post 10-12 stats that show the spits 00/01s are below average,probably in the bottom 20 percent of the league, are they still doing great?

all I’m asking for is a true examination of all stats, not just the stats that benefit us. Is that not fair?

I tried that once and was told to stop, that GWG means more then a more well rounded look at things

The question I'd have then is what is there to prove with that? "Stats show that the 00s and 01s aren't great"... okay, now what?

Yes, I'd like to see more from a few players, but, as a whole, they're performing well. I think the bigger/better test will be post-deadline when guys like Brown, Day, and Luchuk should be gone.

 

[youngblood10]

You can't use last year as it was a one off. Windsor won the Memorial Cup because they hosted it; had they not been hosting it they would not have been there. The big question is what did the spits do in the 6 weeks off that dramatically changed their game other than having some injured players get healthy and as a team come into the tournament far more rested than the other teams. I don't follow Windsor that closely but the team that showed up and dominated in the tournament was not the team I saw in regular season.

That kinda kills the entire point of having analytics then. And I do think it can be a useful tool but if that's the case obviously it's not the end all be all. The problem with stats is although they can show trends etc.. they are calculated after the fact.

 

[OHL4Life]

The question I'd have then is what is there to prove with that? "Stats show that the 00s and 01s aren't great"... okay, now what?

Yes, I'd like to see more from a few players, but, as a whole, they're performing well. I think the bigger/better test will be post-deadline when guys like Brown, Day, and Luchuk should be gone.

Well, when I attempted to before, not even that advanced, I was told that GWG mattered more, not by you but you joined in later. my only point would be to give credence to those of us who told were out to lunch for not simply using gwg as a measure of evaluation. I agree, what happens in the future is more important then what happened in the past, I’m just not sure why we where dismissed.

now, if these advanced stats, abd basic stats, say we our rookies are below most everyone else, how can we say they are ‘doing well’?

 

[OHL4Life]

But in all seriousness I'd like to see the analytics of the 4 teams in last years Memorial Cup. Not many my self included gave the Spits much of a chance. I'd be interested if the numbers showed that the Spitfires would be so dominate in the tournament before hand.

the smaller the sanple size, the more variance there is in the numbers, the more luck becomes a factor. that’s why 7 game series are harder to win if your the lesser skilled team, luck becomes less and less a factor.

 

[youngblood10]

the smaller the sanple size, the more variance there is in the numbers, the more luck becomes a factor. that’s why 7 game series are harder to win if your the lesser skilled team, luck becomes less and less a factor.

But those four teams would have a seasons worth of data to go by. There must have been indicators pointing towards Windsor's chance at success.

 

[OHL4Life]

But those four teams would have a seasons worth of data to go by. There must have been indicators pointing towards Windsor's chance at success.

problem being they play in different leagues, with the OHL being dominant last year, there is no way to project accurately how that would look when complaining them. you can’t measure what QMJHL numbers mean vs WHL vs OHL. you can only fairly measure league vs league. and like I said, once the games start, the lack of games they play makes it almost pointless. there’s alot of luck in single game situations

 

[OHLTG]

now, if these advanced stats, abd basic stats, say we our rookies are below most everyone else, how can we say they are ‘doing well’?

Watching them game-in and game-out. There are no stats to measure energy or heart and those are two big things you want in a young player. Would I like more points from some younger players (Angle, Playfair, etc)? Of course. Do I see the potential, though? Yeah. Once the deadline is passed, we'll see more.

 

[OHL4Life]

Watching them game-in and game-out. There are no stats to measure energy or heart and those are two big things you want in a young player. Would I like more points from some younger players (Angle, Playfair, etc)? Of course. Do I see the potential, though? Yeah. Once the deadline is passed, we'll see more.

so you completely dismiss any stat that shows they are below average? heart and complete are completely subjective to the observer, end of the day you still need to generate offensive opportunities to be valuable. jr a is filled with hard working players, you can grab one for free to play 5/7 minutes a night. the 00/01 are suppose to be our core moving forward. when Hall/Ellis where here, we were talking about there skill at 16/17, not their complete /energy.

 

[KyGuy9]

so you completely dismiss any stat that shows they are below average? heart and complete are completely subjective to the observer, end of the day you still need to generate offensive opportunities to be valuable. jr a is filled with hard working players, you can grab one for free to play 5/7 minutes a night. the 00/01 are suppose to be our core moving forward. when Hall/Ellis where here, we were talking about there skill at 16/17, not their complete /energy.

For what they are, middle/late round picks, they are doing fine. Comparing a 7th rounder with a 1st rounder and asking why they aren't at the same skill level is ridiculous. Sanctions are the reason they don't have that skillful 1st rounder 17 year old this year (imagine having a guy like McShane) and you can't say sanctions aren't an excuse, because it most definitely is a factor. Skillwise, Staios really should be the one guy you can fairly compare with other high-end 16-year olds skill wise.

 

[OHL4Life]

For what they are, middle/late round picks, they are doing fine. Comparing a 7th rounder with a 1st rounder and asking why they aren't at the same skill level is ridiculous. Sanctions are the reason they don't have that skillful 1st rounder 17 year old this year (imagine having a guy like McShane) and you can't say sanctions aren't an excuse, because it most definitely is a factor. Skillwise, Staios really should be the one guy you can fairly compare with other high-end 16-year olds skill wise.

your not wrong, most of my point goes back to asset management, some due to sactioud, some due to bad trades (Baird). your kinda making my point for me thou, we have a whole bunch of average, replacement level young players (MacDougall excluded, that was a sharp pickup). not their fault, but saying they are better then other teams 00/01s because of GWG and complete? that’s silly.

Cam Hillis has 23 points this year? That’s a good year for a 17 year old. I’m not sure how 5/6 pts for a 2000 is equally ‘good’.

 

[OHLTG]

so you completely dismiss any stat that shows they are below average? heart and complete are completely subjective to the observer, end of the day you still need to generate offensive opportunities to be valuable. jr a is filled with hard working players, you can grab one for free to play 5/7 minutes a night. the 00/01 are suppose to be our core moving forward. when Hall/Ellis where here, we were talking about there skill at 16/17, not their complete /energy.

So, let me ask - what SHOULD they be doing right now, points-wise?

Oh, are we really comparing Hall/Ellis, two elite prospects, to the guys we have now? The only guy we *might* be able to compare to Ellis is Staios, and I'm not sure I'd even do that at this point. Staios is going to be a beauty but Ellis was one of the best Spitfires of all-time.

Also, I'd argue you don't "need to generate offensive opportunities" to be successful, at least depending on your role, but that's a whole other topic.

 

[youngblood10]

so you completely dismiss any stat that shows they are below average? heart and complete are completely subjective to the observer, end of the day you still need to generate offensive opportunities to be valuable. jr a is filled with hard working players, you can grab one for free to play 5/7 minutes a night. the 00/01 are suppose to be our core moving forward. when Hall/Ellis where here, we were talking about there skill at 16/17, not their complete /energy.

However if the Spits 00/01 are scoring GWG, regardless if its a meaningless stat or not that means that they are on the ice when the game is still in doubt and scoring in those minutes.

 

[OHL4Life]

So, let me ask - what SHOULD they be doing right now, points-wise

I think they are probably where they should be, that’s not my point. my point is that as a group, outside of Macdougall, there’s a whole bunch of average players, who work hard but not a lot of skill/growth. no one to build around. that’s why the points are not there.

 

[OHL4Life]

However if the Spits 00/01 are scoring GWG, regardless if its a meaningless stat or not that means that they are on the ice when the game is still in doubt and scoring in those minutes.

you’d have to look at context and see when the goals are scored, that’s the proble with the stat, you never know when a gwg is scored. it could be 10 minutes left in the 1st. I’ll take points, even shots on net/GM over GWG, the best players in the league always lead the way with shots. if your 2000s are generating a lot of shots, there involved all game, not just one shift

 

[OHLTG]

I think they are probably where they should be, that’s not my point. my point is that as a group, outside of Macdougall, there’s a whole bunch of average players, who work hard but not a lot of skill/growth. no one to build around. that’s why the points are not there.

Angle got limited time last year, as did Playfair. They're both getting more shifts this year, but not in a top six role. Without that first-round pick last year, our first overall pick was a two-way D-man in Corcoran. It's unreasonable to ask him to put up first-round points. Have patience. Again, once the deadline is done, we'll see more of what the kids can do.

 

[OHL4Life]

Angle got limited time last year, as did Playfair. They're both getting more shifts this year, but not in a top six role. Without that first-round pick last year, our first overall pick was a two-way D-man in Corcoran. It's unreasonable to ask him to put up first-round points. Have patience. Again, once the deadline is done, we'll see more of what the kids can do.

I guess I’m confused why’s we’re suppose to I give them a pass? other 00/01s are outperforming them, if it was reversed, we would be celebrating that,not saying ‘wait’. like what ky guy said, there a bunch of 6/7 round picks playing like 6/7 round picks. they work hard, but statistically don’t move the needle. outside of MacDougall, there’s nothing really to build on. Corcoran looks like a fine 3/4, Staios as well, but the lack of 2/3/4/5th round picks the last 2/3/4 years hurts.

 

[OHLTG]

Not pass. "Patience." Difference.

 

[OHL4Life]

Not pass. "Patience." Difference.

I’m just asking for fair. if they where leading every catagory, we’d be celebrating, justifiably. they are near the bottom of most, so should we not act in kind? I know we wouldnt be talking ‘patince’ if everyone was outperforming expectations, why patience if their are not, fair is fair, no? just dont get the need to sugar coat, call it like it is, either positive or negative either way