dogbazinho
Registered User
They werent booing the goalie. More that play was stopped and they didnt realize what happened.
CAR vs SJ - Legendary Corsi Battle on Friday
- Thread starter GoldiFox
- Start date
They werent booing the goalie. More that play was stopped and they didnt realize what happened.
Alwalys
Phu m.
- May 19, 2010
- 25,894
- 6,140
Hockey is a fast sport. Dell went down without any body contact. The refs blew the play dead with the Canes having possession and in a position to score. Any crowd will boo in that situation. Once they showed the replay that allowed the fans to see what happened, the booing stopped.
If you want to hate on Carolina fans, find something other than this nothingburger.
Roboturner913
Registered User
- Jul 3, 2012
- 25,853
- 55,526
Not if it's a followthrough on a shot, which it was it appeared to be.
Alwalys
Phu m.
- May 19, 2010
- 25,894
- 6,140
Thanks to winning the Corsi Bowl, the Carolina Hurricanes now hold the top 8 spots in Corsi Differential.
[TBODY]
[/TBODY]Who in the world is Warren Foegele?
| 1 | DOUGIE.HAMILTON | 93 |
| 2 | JUSTIN.WILLIAMS | 90 |
| 3 | CALVIN.DE HAAN | 86 |
| 4 | JACCOB.SLAVIN | 85 |
| 5 | WARREN.FOEGELE | 85 |
| 6 | JUSTIN.FAULK | 80 |
| 7 | JORDAN.STAAL | 78 |
| 8 | JORDAN.MARTINOOK | 73 |
BigEezyE22
Continuing to not support HF.
Wanna play that game...Crosby and Kunitz have more cups than Toews and Kopitar.
Maplebeasts
I See Demons!!!!!
Clearly. He has the 5th-best Corsi Differential in the entire league and I've never heard of him. You don't get much more underrated than that. If he keeps this up, everyone will soon know the name of Warren Fo... what is it again... oh, Foegele.
Last edited:
the halleJOKEL
strong as brickwall
didn't burns lift foegele's stick into dells face? if foegele's stick wasn't there, burns would have decapitated dell himself
6 Karlsson 5
Registered User
- Aug 9, 2012
- 3,671
- 262
Idk what is worse, this post or the fact that multiple people liked it
Your first sentence is just wrong, and you clearly don't have a strong understanding of what correlation is based on your reasoning for claiming the first sentence
Last edited:
I dont know which one is worse, quoting a post without reading forward to see that it has already been discussed, or not making a point at all and just being rude.
But thanks for the insight.
Last edited:
LakeLivin
Armchair Quarterback
Fast 22yo 6'2" rookie. 28 goals including 4 shorties in 73 games in the AHL last year (where he wasn't really used on the PP). The kid creates opportunities out of nothing. My bold prediction is that down the road Foegele proves to be even more valuable to the Canes than Teravainen, and that's not a negative reflection on Turbo.
An excerpt from the following article: From invisible to indispensable: The story of Warren Foegele
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
The Carolina Hurricanes left winger has been labeled a moose by linemate Jordan Staal; a horse by eclectic broadcaster Tripp Tracy; and a dog by, well, just about everybody who has watched him closely over the years.
"He’s like a dog on a bone," said Jeff McKercher, a former scout for the OHL’s Kingston Frontenacs.
"He’s a guy who dogs the puck," added David Manning, hockey coach at St. Andrew’s College. "The engine that never stops."
Moose, horse, dog - yes, these are compliments in hockey’s vernacular, words reserved for the havoc-creating skaters, the space-gulping forecheckers, and the stress-inducing penalty killers. And they all suit Foegele perfectly.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
6 Karlsson 5
Registered User
- Aug 9, 2012
- 3,671
- 262
Frankly, it's quite annoying seeing people who know nothing about statistics critque said stat. I read your other posts. Nothing you said has anything to do with the correlation being True or not
Accounting for other varaibale does not show the correlation is false
Showing specific examples does not show correlation is false
Look at any thread on this board talking about correlation, and you will see people doing the above
Last edited:
Atleast you bothered to make a point this time and not just bully. like i said before i dont have a strong opinion of corsi whatsoever. But ill give you some disussion as you seem like you are looking for one
You can get annoyed as much as you need to and look down on us idiots, but it doesnt do any good for your case of presenting your great wisdom.
What ive said is that i dont agree how the corsi is demonstrated as it counts all shots and attempts equal and that to me doesnt make sense.
I just dont see a 56% take of a small sample size of 165 series and calling other variables irrelevant enough to call it a day. Instead of telling me i dont understand what correlation means, you can bring your fancy data from the ”other topics” and prove me wrong.
Showing examples was just for the discussion and i completely know they dont make the correlation false. As well as counter examples do not make it anymore true.
Edit. Just to be clear, if we are talking correlation in literal way, then of course yes, corsi has a correlation on winning and losing as much as any other statline too - like faceoffs% and delivered hits etc. As i understand ”correlation” in this context means ”propability” to win.
Last edited:
They were not gassed. They've had too many off days for that to be a legitimate excuse here.
The S5
Registered User
- Jul 27, 2017
- 4,422
- 4,217
Atleast you bothered to make a point this time and not just bully. like i said before i dont have a strong opinion of corsi whatsoever. But ill give you some disussion as you seem like you are looking for one
You can get annoyed as much as you need to and look down on us idiots, but it doesnt do any good for your case of presenting your great wisdom.
What ive said is that i dont agree how the corsi is demonstrated as it counts all shots and attempts equal and that to me doesnt make sense.
I just dont see a 56% take of a small sample size of 165 series and calling other variables irrelevant enough to call it a day. Instead of telling me i dont understand what correlation means, you can bring your fancy data from the ”other topics” and prove me wrong.
Showing examples was just for the discussion and i completely know they dont make the correlation false. As well as counter examples do not make it anymore true.
What line is Corsi on?
Alwalys
Phu m.
- May 19, 2010
- 25,894
- 6,140
there is no exception in the rule for the result of a stick battle.
Maybe this isn't the place for this question, but I am under the impression that the idea is that:
Possession of puck = higher change of winning
And, that, SOG is being used in Corsi as a proxy for puck possession.
Is that correct? If so, then pure Corsi itself is slightly flawed. Not fatally flawed, mind you, but flawed, and leads to the possibility of SOME strong Corsi teams actually not having as much puck possession because they are 'quick to shoot'.
Please fill me in on this....
Second, 94/165 series won by the team with better Corsi may or may not be significant when 94/165 series were also won by the team with more points. You end up asking the question: Is a high Corsi the REASON for winning the series? Or, is there something about being the better team which also leads to a high Corsi, so that you are seeing correlation, not causality? If the second, then the goal of having a high Corsi is perhaps not the correct goal.
For those interested in further development of this idea, please type into your search engine "Feynmann cargo cult science" and read Richard Feynmann's excellent graduation speech to scientists (physicists) about intellectual honesty and how to actually find out what you want to, rather than getting sidetracked.
Possession of puck = higher change of winning
And, that, SOG is being used in Corsi as a proxy for puck possession.
Is that correct? If so, then pure Corsi itself is slightly flawed. Not fatally flawed, mind you, but flawed, and leads to the possibility of SOME strong Corsi teams actually not having as much puck possession because they are 'quick to shoot'.
Please fill me in on this....
Second, 94/165 series won by the team with better Corsi may or may not be significant when 94/165 series were also won by the team with more points. You end up asking the question: Is a high Corsi the REASON for winning the series? Or, is there something about being the better team which also leads to a high Corsi, so that you are seeing correlation, not causality? If the second, then the goal of having a high Corsi is perhaps not the correct goal.
For those interested in further development of this idea, please type into your search engine "Feynmann cargo cult science" and read Richard Feynmann's excellent graduation speech to scientists (physicists) about intellectual honesty and how to actually find out what you want to, rather than getting sidetracked.
LakeLivin
Armchair Quarterback
LakeLivin
Armchair Quarterback
Is it possible that they might have been gassed, not from the road trip, but from racing up and down the ice all night with an even younger team that also likes to fly? Sharks were icing the puck an awfully lot at the end there. Which doesn't take away from your point that the road trip wasn't to blame . . .
aufheben
#Norris4Fox
Corsi is all shot attempts, not just shots on goal. Someone may have to correct me on this but I believe some consider shot rates more important than possession, (in terms of predicting wins). It gets most of the attention but there are many other stats available, often used in conjunction like this:
Hockey is a chaotic sport, and will always be harder to predict than other sports. The nice thing about shot attempts is it provides a huge sample size, and teams are able to repeat it with some consistency,
Last edited:
