Recalled/Assigned: Aube-Kubel and Goulbourne up, Vorobyev down

[deadhead]

Knight has to stay healthy first.
I don't see Goul getting much PT, maybe a game or two on the West Coast for obvious reasons, but that's about it.
He's your body in the press box in case someone gets injured.

But people make a big deal about a 12th forward getting 6-8 minutes, all you want from that guy, whether it's Goul or Weise, is hard skating, hitting and don't screw up. As I've shown, 4th line guys are lucky to get 15 points all season, because they don't play a lot of minutes and the reason they're on the 4th line is generally a lack of offensive skills.

Next year we may have a 4th line with real skill, in which case they'll take minutes from the 3rd line.

 

[Rebels57]

I mean, he is an ok PKer in the AHL...

but on the Phantoms last couple of years:

Lindblom
Laughton
Knight
Leier
Bardreau

Were all arguably better PKers... at least in the coaching staff's mind in LHV in terms of usage etc.

Actually it surprised me they did not try Knight-Lindblom yet for the Flyers, since that was maybe LHV's best PK pairing when together last season.

But I really don't think anything changes on the PK just because of personnel, they need a philosophy change.

Nothing surprises me with these idiots.

This is the same team that used Brandon Manning over Travis Sanheim on the Powerplay last season, because reasons.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

I directly addressed your question by showing it is irrelevant as well as a failed comparison.

No. You skirted the simple question of if by “rate” you were judging by games or minutes. For a guy who is obsessed on people directly answering questions, you sure did your best to dodge this incredibly simple one.

 

[Beef Invictus]

No. You skirted the simple question of if by “rate” you were judging by games or minutes. For a guy who is obsessed on people directly answering questions, you sure did your best to dodge this incredibly simple one.

You are aware that measuring by minutes does nothing to alter the impact on games, right? Because he plays so little. The outcome is identical.

Like I said. Your question was utter nonsense. It's not my fault.

This is a really weird and poorly planned hill for you to die on.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

You are aware that measuring by minutes does nothing to alter the impact on games, right? Because he plays so little. The outcome is identical.

Like I said. Your question was utter nonsense. It's not my fault.

This is a really weird and poorly planned hill for you to die on.

If you’re going to be a guy who obsesses on people answering questions, you should answer the simple yes/no question of when you say Goulbourne hits at an identical rate to Provorov you are basing that “rate” on a per game or per ice time basis. Everyone can see you’re dodging it for a reason, but since Your hill to die on has been calling out people for refusing to distinctly answer questions, it looks really bad on you to skirt this one.

Who hits more when they’re on the ice: Goulbourne or Provorov?

 

[Beef Invictus]

If you’re going to be a guy who obsesses on people answering questions, you should answer the simple yes/no question of when you say Goulbourne hits at an identical rate to Provorov you are basing that “rate” on a per game or per ice time basis. Everyone can see you’re dodging it for a reason, but since Your hill to die on has been calling out people for refusing to distinctly answer questions, it looks really bad on you to skirt this one.

Who hits more when they’re on the ice: Goulbourne or Provorov?

I don't ask nonsense questions.

Ghoul hits more. However, here is what you are ignoring: we are talking about their impact on the game. Their hitting has an identical impact because Ghoul isn't good enough to play. You're ignoring that context, why? To nitpick unsuccessfully? It doesn't change a thing. Ignoring that is what steers your questioning into unrelated nonsense.

 

[Adtar02]

I don't ask nonsense questions.

Ghoul hits more. However, here is what you are ignoring: we are talking about their impact on the game. Their hitting has an identical impact because Ghoul isn't good enough to play. You're ignoring that context, why? To nitpick unsuccessfully? It doesn't change a thing. Ignoring that is what steers your questioning into unrelated nonsense.

Either way point per 60 or goals per 60 are not great stats as they are generally declining stats. Ie the more mins the low the number goes. They don’t equate to instantly better production which is how they are used in arguments. They don’t account for anything else like qoc zone starts roles. Any of that. Deployment and systems also effect players in this stat. It’s good for individual info. Ie a player who has less regression than the mean is generally better at production. But again it is system based at times. Team that play wide open like the leafs all see an increase against a team that plays more defensive dump and crash.

 

[Rebels57]

I don't ask nonsense questions.

Ghoul hits more. However, here is what you are ignoring: we are talking about their impact on the game. Their hitting has an identical impact because Ghoul isn't good enough to play. You're ignoring that context, why? To nitpick unsuccessfully? It doesn't change a thing. Ignoring that is what steers your questioning into unrelated nonsense.

You know why.

 

[TB87]

Either way point per 60 or goals per 60 are not great stats as they are generally declining stats. Ie the more mins the low the number goes. They don’t equate to instantly better production which is how they are used in arguments. They don’t account for anything else like qoc zone starts roles. Any of that. Deployment and systems also effect players in this stat. It’s good for individual info. Ie a player who has less regression than the mean is generally better at production. But again it is system based at times. Team that play wide open like the leafs all see an increase against a team that plays more defensive dump and crash.

Eh...per 60 stats are the only stats currently available that measure players production relative to their icetime. That doesn’t mean that it isn’t without flaws (no stat is without flaws). Your issues with its use in not accounting for all of these different variables is short-sighted. A model/statistic does not need to account for everything in order for it to have utility. Statistics and data science are not perfect. Nothing is. Expecting something to be nearly perfect in order for its use to be valid isn’t logical or reasonable.

 

[Adtar02]

Eh...per 60 stats are the only stats currently available that measure players production relative to their icetime. That doesn’t mean that it isn’t without flaws (no stat is without flaws). Your issues with its use in not accounting for all of these different variables is short-sighted. A model/statistic does not need to account for everything in order for it to have utility. Statistics and data science are not perfect. Nothing is. Expecting something to be nearly perfect in order for its use to be valid isn’t logical or reasonable.

My issue is how it’s used. Not that it doesn’t account for them. The stat is too often used as linear proof that a player is better. That’s all.

 

[Adtar02]

Eh...per 60 stats are the only stats currently available that measure players production relative to their icetime. That doesn’t mean that it isn’t without flaws (no stat is without flaws). Your issues with its use in not accounting for all of these different variables is short-sighted. A model/statistic does not need to account for everything in order for it to have utility. Statistics and data science are not perfect. Nothing is. Expecting something to be nearly perfect in order for its use to be valid isn’t logical or reasonable.

It’s a great stat to show impact a player has had. It along with others are good for seening specific things. Like I said a player whose regression is above the mean is generally a better player.

 

[TB87]

It’s a great stat to show impact a player has had. It along with others are good for seening specific things. Like I said a player whose regression is above the mean is generally a better player.

There’s a way to make player comparison’s that eliminates some of the issues you have with these stats:
- eliminate all players who have very similar TOI at a specific game situation
- only keep the players who have very similar TOI
- Use Corsica’s Zone-Adjustment function that accounts for zone starts

The above example shows that Travis Konecny was one of the best 5v5 forwards with 1000~TOI in Goals Per 60, Points Per 60, Primary Points Per 60, and Game Score Per 60. There’s a way to compile accurate (or as accurate as possible) comparisons between a group of players. You really can’t eliminate every extraneous variable but this does as good a job as any.

 

[Adtar02]

View attachment 150653

There’s a way to make player comparison’s that eliminates some of the issues you have with these stats:
- eliminate all players who have very similar TOI at a specific game situation
- only keep the players who have very similar TOI
- Use Corsica’s Zone-Adjustment function that accounts for zone starts

The above example shows that Travis Konecny was one of the best 5v5 forwards with 1000~TOI in Goals Per 60, Points Per 60, Primary Points Per 60, and Game Score Per 60. There’s a way to compile accurate (or as accurate as possible) comparisons between a group of players. You really can’t eliminate every extraneous variable but this does as good a job as any.

Don’t disagree. But like I said don’t like how people use it. And I don’t think it shows he was one of the best players but more that his production was one of the best for comparable measures. The way it’s worded. I just not a fan mostly cause it’s a stat people use to fit an agenda.

My thought is what happens when time increases for tk. Does he regress like the mean or is he above the curve. That would indicate he is and better player. It’s just harder to look at all those numbers

 

[TB87]

Don’t disagree. But like I said don’t like how people use it. And I don’t think it shows he was one of the best players but more that his production was one of the best for comparable measures. The way it’s worded. I just not a fan mostly cause it’s a stat people use to fit an agenda.

My thought is what happens when time increases for tk. Does he regress like the mean or is he above the curve. That would indicate he is and better player. It’s just harder to look at all those numbers

The example shows he was one of the best forwards with 1000~TOI in Goals Per 60, Points Per 60, Primary Points Per 60, and Game Score Per 60. My statement heavily implies that he’s one of the best FWDS among his closest comparables, & just among his closest comparables. I thought that was clear as day by my wording.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

I don't ask nonsense questions.

Ghoul hits more. However, here is what you are ignoring: we are talking about their impact on the game. Their hitting has an identical impact because Ghoul isn't good enough to play. You're ignoring that context, why? To nitpick unsuccessfully? It doesn't change a thing. Ignoring that is what steers your questioning into unrelated nonsense.

You said Ghoul hits at the same “rate” as Provorov.

For a guy who loves to nitpick & bitch about people avoiding questions, you sure as hell did all you can do to skirt the simple question if Ghoul hits more per ice time than Provorov.

Now you’re trying to “move the goalposts,” as you like to accuse others of doing, into an entirely different question. You finally answered it. “Goulbourne hits more” than Provorov. All I was asking.

 

[Beef Invictus]

You said Ghoul hits at the same “rate” as Provorov.

For a guy who loves to nitpick & ***** about people avoiding questions, you sure as hell did all you can do to skirt the simple question if Ghoul hits more per ice time than Provorov.

Now you’re trying to “move the goalposts,” as you like to accuse others of doing, into an entirely different question. You finally answered it. “Goulbourne hits more” than Provorov. All I was asking.

Yes. At a per-game rate. Sorry if I didn't specify that, but I thought that it would be abundantly apparent based on context. I've only clarified it numerous times from the start, too.

You're asking about something entirely unrelated to the discussion, which was Ghoul's ability to impact games with his hitting. Are you refusing to understand for the sake of arguing, or what?

You haven't actually refuted my original point. You weren't even addressing it, which is something I tried pointing out over and over. What exactly was the point of all this? Something to do out of boredom?

 

[Ghosts Beer]

Yes. At a per-game rate. Sorry if I didn't specify that, but I thought that it would be abundantly apparent based on context. I've only clarified it numerous times from the start, too.

You're asking about something entirely unrelated to the discussion, which was Ghoul's ability to impact games with his hitting. Are you refusing to understand for the sake of arguing, or what?

You haven't actually refuted my original point. You weren't even addressing it, which is something I tried pointing out over and over. What exactly was the point of all this? Something to do out of boredom?

You seem to like to ask people questions & complain when they don’t answer them to your liking.

I asked you a simple yes/no question if Goulbourne hit at a higher “rate” when he was on the ice than Provorov, which you refused to answer for quite some time. Now, I don’t give a shit other than that you shouldn’t get so pissy about others not answering your questions if you’re going to obviously dodge questions yourself.

 

[deadhead]

The example shows he was one of the best forwards with 1000~TOI in Goals Per 60, Points Per 60, Primary Points Per 60, and Game Score Per 60. My statement heavily implies that he’s one of the best FWDS among his closest comparables, & just among his closest comparables. I thought that was clear as day by my wording.

He was one of the most productive forwards, whether that makes him one of the best is a different matter.
In fact, even though his production is down, I'd claim TK is playing better this year because he's playing a more well rounded game and he's not playing down to his linemates, rather he's lifting up their game.

 

[Beef Invictus]

You seem to like to ask people questions & complain when they don’t answer them to your liking.

I asked you a simple yes/no question if Goulbourne hit at a higher “rate” when he was on the ice than Provorov, which you refused to answer for quite some time. Now, I don’t give a **** other than that you shouldn’t get so pissy about others not answering your questions if you’re going to obviously dodge questions yourself.

I answered, so why are you still whining?


If I ever ask a question that is as absolutely unrelated and nonsensical as what you were going on about, feel free to be pissy. I don't do that though. You weren't able to justify your question. I make sure I can.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

I answered, so why are you still whining?


If I ever ask a question that is as absolutely unrelated and nonsensical as what you were going on about, feel free to be pissy. I don't do that though. You weren't able to justify your question. I make sure I can.

I’m laughing about how you, who loves to demand answers to questions you ask, took multiple posts to answer a simple question about Goulbourne’s hit “rate.” What goes around comes around.

 

[Beef Invictus]

I’m laughing about how you, who loves to demand answers to questions you ask, took multiple posts to answer a simple question about Goulbourne’s hit “rate.” What goes around comes around.

I mean, you should be laughing at yourself. Your question was vague, completely unrelated, and pointless. You started by comparing hits and goals, which is an awful start. I was trying to figure out what the hell your point even was so I could answer your question.

My questions, which get avoided, are far more straightforward and self-evident. Things like, "Do you think playing our best RW at a 3rd line rate is good coaching?"

 

[Daveyyaunce]

I'm so confused. Is this a straw man argument or an argument defending straw man arguments? What is happening.

 

[Beef Invictus]

I'm so confused. Is this a straw man argument or an argument defending straw man arguments? What is happening.

That's what I've been wondering since hits were compared to goals.

 

[Rebels57]

That's what I've been wondering since hits were compared to goals.

H/60 is obviously way more important than G/60.

Dafuq is wrong witchu Beef?

 

[smoochy]

H/60 is obviously way more important than G/60.

Dafuq is wrong witchu Beef?

Who said that?

Hockey is a contact sport. How many times have we all heard players talk about teams or individuals as being physical and wearing them down.

Of course goals are important. So is playing defence and keeping them out. So is being a hard working physical team to play against.

This game isn’t as simple as score more!!