WJC: 2015 — Canada Roster Talk

[Romang67]

To which I asked, then why are Virtanen, Fleury, Petan and Ritchie all on your rosters when there are players playing better than them and having the same pedigree the past few years?

Which players have the same pedigree the past few years as these players and are being left out?

You can't just make claims with nothing to back them up.

 

[cneely]

To which I asked, then why are Virtanen, Fleury, Petan and Ritchie all on your rosters when there are players playing better than them and having the same pedigree the past few years?

We could argue the individual merits of each if you like.
Petan for example, has led the WHL in scoring each of the last 2 years, and despite a slow start is still near the top in PPG.

If you want to question the inclusion of any of these skaters, I think that's a legitimate debate, just like the Fucale debate.

 

[Mathletic]

We could argue the individual merits of each if you like.
Petan for example, has led the WHL in scoring each of the last 2 years, and despite a slow start is still near the top in PPG.

If you want to question the inclusion of any of these skaters, I think that's a legitimate debate, just like the Fucale debate.

Nothing against Petan, I have him on my team for the same reason Fucale is on there.

 

[cneely]

Oh yeah right. Because the Q is so much weaker then the WHL. Forgot about that. Like Bibeau sucked so bad when he faced teams from other leagues.

I'm not even sure what this means. The Q has been traditionally higher scoring I believe.

Fucale's minutes as a 16 year old: 3249 regular season minutes and 1022 minutes in the playoffs.

Oh, playoffs as well. Didn't include those to remove bias as Comrie's team has very few playoff games with him in net.

 

[3 Minute Minor]

Nothing against Petan, I have him on my team for the same reason Fucale is on there.

I didn't realize Petan was a french Canadian goalie drafted by Montreal.

 

[Mathletic]

I'm not even sure what this means. The Q has been traditionally higher scoring I believe.

Oh, playoffs as well. Didn't include those to remove bias as Comrie's team has very few playoff games with him in net.

I thought you meant that we shouldn't care about SV% rank as this would only apply if leagues were equivalent.

 

[cneely]

Nothing against Petan, I have him on my team for the same reason Fucale is on there.

Can you tell me what that reason is?

Because I believe leading a league in stats multiple years sort of proves you to be an elite player. Has Fucale ever led the QMJHL in Sv% or GAA?

 

[Mathletic]

Can you tell me what that reason is?

Because I believe leading a league in stats multiple years sort of proves you to be an elite player. Has Fucale ever led the QMJHL in Sv% or GAA?

Hm yeah, last year?

 

[cneely]

I thought you meant that we shouldn't care about SV% rank as this would only apply if leagues were equivalent.

No, not at all. My point is comparing to peers is shaky. We don't know the quality of their peers.

We could probably adjust Sv% for the level of scoring in each league to be fair in comparing across leagues.

 

[cneely]

Hm yeah, last year?

Fair enough. I didn't know, it was an honest question.

 

[3 Minute Minor]

Fair enough. I didn't know, it was an honest question.

A silly question anyway lol GAA is a team stat. Only way to get anything from it is to relate it back to the save%

i.e if you have the best GAA in the league but you also stop less shots on average (bad save%), odds are I'll take the guy with the better save% & worse GAA.

.922Save% 3.25GAA looks a lot better than a .902save% with a 2.00gaa

 

[Mathletic]

A silly question anyway lol GAA is a team stat. Only way to get anything from it is to relate it back to the save%

i.e if you have the best GAA in the league but you also stop less shots on average (bad save%), odds are I'll take the guy with the better save% & worse GAA.

.922Save% 3.25GAA looks a lot better than a .902save% with a 2.00gaa

Completely agree with you. That said, not like Petan didn't benefit from the rest of the team either. Besides, 3rd best SV% isn't all that bad.

 

[3 Minute Minor]

Completely agree with you. That said, not like Petan didn't benefit from the rest of the team either. Besides, 3rd best SV% isn't all that bad.

His save% is currently 14th in the 18 team QMJHL.

Also he's never been 3rd in Save% in the Q

 

[CaptainChef]

To which I asked: then why are Virtanen, Fleury, Petan and Ritchie all on your rosters when there are players playing better than them and having the same pedigree the past few years?



.

Anytime you're losing the goalie argument switch to forwards

 

[Mathletic]

His save% is currently 14th in the 18 team QMJHL.

Also he's never been 3rd in Save% in the Q

Ok? Because being tied for 3rd isn't good enough?

With some good faith, is there that big a gap between a .909 and a .907 SV%. I wouldn't say of a 102 point scorer that he's clearly better than a 101 point scorer.

 

[cneely]

Ok? Because being tied for 3rd isn't good enough?

With some good faith, is there that big a gap between a .909 and a .907 SV%. I wouldn't say of a 102 point scorer that he's clearly better than a 101 point scorer.

LOL

That's pretty disingenuous

 

[sickest flow bro]

Let's ignore the fact that all 4 goalies who got invited to camp got a chance to compete with the same team and same opponent with Fucale outperforming Jarry and Comrie. We should take the best team based on stats from league play and ignore direct competition. Appleby and Comrie will be our goalies this year.

 

[3 Minute Minor]

Ok? Because being tied for 3rd isn't good enough?

With some good faith, is there that big a gap between a .909 and a .907 SV%. I wouldn't say of a 102 point scorer that he's clearly better than a 101 point scorer.

The odds of ever being tied in save% are extremely extremely extremely slim. There's a reason he's listed as 4th, his save% was rounded up from a lower number when dividing the saves by shots against.

The guy in 3rd actually faced 4.3 more shots per game. Might seem insignificant but when he played 58 that's a total of 249 shots which would have taken Fucale 10 more games played to get those shots.

 

[Mathletic]

The odds of ever being tied in save% are extremely extremely extremely slim. There's a reason he's listed as 4th, his save% was rounded up from a lower number when dividing the saves by shots against.

The guy in 3rd actually faced 4.3 more shots per game. Might seem insignificant but when he played 58 that's a total of 249 shots which would have taken Fucale 10 more games played to get those shots.

Ok then

 

[3 Minute Minor]

Let's ignore the fact that all 4 goalies who got invited to camp got a chance to compete with the same team and same opponent with Fucale outperforming Jarry and Comrie. We should take the best team based on stats from league play and ignore direct competition. Appleby and Comrie will be our goalies this year.

Based on that logic shouldn't Phil Desrosier be the starter?

 

[cneely]

Let's ignore the fact that all 4 goalies who got invited to camp got a chance to compete with the same team and same opponent with Fucale outperforming Jarry and Comrie. We should take the best team based on stats from league play and ignore direct competition. Appleby and Comrie will be our goalies this year.

So again, for the 50th time, we should choose to weigh our decision on a one game sample size instead of a 200 game sample size?

 

[sickest flow bro]

Based on that logic shouldn't Phil Desrosier be the starter?

Maybe he will be and Fucale will be the back up. Guess we'll find out tomorrow. Can guarantee Fucale will be there.

 

[CaptainChef]

Completely agree with you. That said, not like Petan didn't benefit from the rest of the team either. Besides, 3rd best SV% isn't all that bad.

No 6th best save % last year - tied with two others at that. So pretty average among starters in the Q I'd say. And currently 0.886 which trails all but the worst in the Q

By contrast, Comrie was 2nd in the WHL last season and is currently leading the pack.

Who might you want to go to battle with I wonder.

 

[cneely]

Ok then

The salient point is that there were 5 guys in his own league who played better than him.

 

[Mathletic]

The salient point is that there were 5 guys in his own league who played better than him.

Yes because we can clearly draw the conclusion that a ,909 SV% is a clearly better goalie based on skill than a ,907 SV% goalie. The same way that an 82 pt guy is clearly better than an 81 pt guy.