Are the Islanders really this good?

[hockeyguru]

In fairness, they've made the playoffs six of the last nine years (though they've never been a threat to go far)

...and in the 17 seasons (18 years) before that, they only made it 4 times

 

[SlapshotTheMovie]

No and i will get flamed today but when i bump this thread at the deadline when they are out of the playoffs i will get flamed again saying no one actually thought they were good. Oh well.

 

[BrockLobster]

No and i will get flamed today but when i bump this thread at the deadline when they are out of the playoffs i will get flamed again saying no one actually thought they were good. Oh well.

Kind of like we heard all last year?

 

[blinkman360]

No and i will get flamed today but when i bump this thread at the deadline when they are out of the playoffs i will get flamed again saying no one actually thought they were good. Oh well.

Misery loves company, I guess.

 

[IslesCLT]

No and i will get flamed today but when i bump this thread at the deadline when they are out of the playoffs i will get flamed again saying no one actually thought they were good. Oh well.

The avatar says it all...nothing to see here

 

[Thrasymachus]

No and i will get flamed today but when i bump this thread at the deadline when they are out of the playoffs i will get flamed again saying no one actually thought they were good. Oh well.

I will bookmark this post so that when you are wrong you can think of a different way to "prove" we arent good

 

[Pure Slaughter Value]

...and in the 17 seasons (18 years) before that, they only made it 4 times

...and in the 17 seasons (18 years) before that, they won 4 Cups!

 

[ThreeLeftSkates]

No and i will get flamed today but when i bump this thread at the deadline when they are out of the playoffs i will get flamed again saying no one actually thought they were good. Oh well.

Excuse him, everyone. He thought he was in the "Are the Rangers really this bad" thread.

 

[Crazydounut]

Underlying stats (PDO, Corsi, Shot Rates, XG+/-) would say the Isles are actually a bottom 5 team. But they were like this last season and made it to the 2nd round.

They are definitely an enigma in terms of being able to determine how good they are. The numbers say they SHOULD be a bottom 5 team yet they keep winning.

Getting good luck and good coaching will do that for a team.

 

[islesfan186]

In fairness, they've made the playoffs six of the last nine years (though they've never been a threat to go far)

No they haven’t. Since 2010 they’ve made the playoffs 4 times (2013, 2015, 2016, 2019).
They’ve played 6 rounds, only advancing past round one twice (2016,2019). Maybe that’s what you were thinking?

 

[Pure Slaughter Value]

No they haven’t. Since 2010 they’ve made the playoffs 4 times (2013, 2015, 2016, 2019).
They’ve played 6 rounds, only advancing past round one twice (2016,2019). Maybe that’s what you were thinking?

Exactly what I was thinking! Bah, should’ve paid a little more attention lol. Thanks for correcting me.

 

[Frankie41987]

Underlying stats (PDO, Corsi, Shot Rates, XG+/-) would say the Isles are actually a bottom 5 team. But they were like this last season and made it to the 2nd round.

They are definitely an enigma in terms of being able to determine how good they are. The numbers say they SHOULD be a bottom 5 team yet they keep winning.

Getting good luck and good coaching will do that for a team.

this isn’t true at all. They are a top 10 team in xGF%. And PDO isn’t designed to indicate a ‘good or bad team’. And their PDO this year is at a sustainable number.

They’re Corsi (which is the same as shot share) is bad, that’s it. And it’s because Trotz style has always been more quality>quantity. Everyone keeps acting like they are some anomaly with regard to statistics but it’s really just that Corsi isn’t a good descriptor for the game they play.

This isn’t a case of ‘analytics are dumb’ it’s a case of people are dumb and using the numbers wrong. Context, use context.

 

[BrockLobster]

Underlying stats (PDO, Corsi, Shot Rates, XG+/-) would say the Isles are actually a bottom 5 team. But they were like this last season and made it to the 2nd round.

They are definitely an enigma in terms of being able to determine how good they are. The numbers say they SHOULD be a bottom 5 team yet they keep winning.

Getting good luck and good coaching will do that for a team.

And they also allow less goals than anyone else. Im no statistician but im pretty sure thats important to winning hockey games.

 

[Zeeker]

No and i will get flamed today but when i bump this thread at the deadline when they are out of the playoffs i will get flamed again saying no one actually thought they were good. Oh well.

I remember this guy - he was especially excited the Rangers got Panarin over the Islanders. That's turning out great for them!

 

[BrockLobster]

I remember this guy - he was especially excited the Rangers got Panarin over the Islanders. That's turning out great for them!

Now theyre terrible with no cap space. A deadly combination.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

Underlying stats (PDO, Corsi, Shot Rates, XG+/-) would say the Isles are actually a bottom 5 team. But they were like this last season and made it to the 2nd round.

They are definitely an enigma in terms of being able to determine how good they are. The numbers say they SHOULD be a bottom 5 team yet they keep winning.

Getting good luck and good coaching will do that for a team.

You would think people would know by now corsi is not a good stat for predicting cup winners. Also pdo is useless when last season most of the top teams had a high pdo. Not sure why the Isles are the only team that is apparently lucky in this group.

 

[Kevin27NYI]

Now theyre terrible with no cap space. A deadly combination.

Sucks to suck

 

[BrockLobster]

Sucks to suck

Lol. Dont we know it!

 

[leeroggy]

Not exactly. Belichick is a genius at gameplanning for the opponent, seemingly never doing the same thing twice. Trotz says here's what we do, this is who we are, try and beat us. It's basically the same plan every game.

John Wooden NEVER worried about what the other team was going to do. Trotz is on that side of the equation.

 

[Draftman]

The Islanders are not a good fantasy team. Only on the ice. Some people just don't think that's what 's important.

Remember the old saying, "statistics are for losers."

 

[sufferer]

Systems team.

 

[Hunn]

You would think people would know by now corsi is not a good stat for predicting cup winners. Also pdo is useless when last season most of the top teams had a high pdo. Not sure why the Isles are the only team that is apparently lucky in this group.

This is how PDO works every damn season: top teams tend to have high PDO not because "they're lucky", but because they're top teams.

 

[cobra427]

Underlying stats (PDO, Corsi, Shot Rates, XG+/-) would say the Isles are actually a bottom 5 team. But they were like this last season and made it to the 2nd round.

They are definitely an enigma in terms of being able to determine how good they are. The numbers say they SHOULD be a bottom 5 team yet they keep winning.

Getting good luck and good coaching will do that for a team.

Great example as to why advanced stats are a tool but not an end all be all. Isles are a very good team and well coached team.

 

[Chardo]

I visited the HOF recently. Couldn't find the trophy for best corsi. What's it called?

 

[Frankie41987]

This is how PDO works every damn season: top teams tend to have high PDO not because "they're lucky", but because they're top teams.

People don’t understand how to interpret PDO at all. Top teams are always likely to have higher PDO because they tend to have better shooters or good goaltending. it’s not a measure of how good or bad a team is, but there is a sustainable range and an unsustainable range. If you go back in the last 12 years, every team in the league regresses either positively or negatively to a range between 98 to about 102.5. So if you are either above or below that point at any point during the season you are likely to regress either in a good way or bad way.