Pre-Game Talk: Game 3: Tuesday May 6th 7:00 PM

[SirClintonPortis]

Haaaa... the elusive concept of momentum. Nobody can say what it is, nobody can say when it will change or even take any part in the proceedings, yet, it is there, you can feel it if you believe in it.

Sounds religious to me.

When looking at scoring, momentum simply doesn't exist:

http://statsbylopez.com/2014/04/29/momentum-and-hockey/

Long story short, if a team just scored 2 goals (or even 3) to tie the game, it is NOT more likely to score the next goal. Yet, hockey wisdom would indicate that this team had a boatload of momentum going its way when tying the score.

Anyway, I fully expect to be disproved by anectodal evidence. In fact, I will be disappointed if it does not happen!

Players executing well in hockey does not necessarily result in goals. But momentum is description of physical phenomena that the viewer perceives as one team executing their **** extremely well while other side is struggling to hold them off. It could manifest itself in non-quantifiable ways, such as one team being much faster at skating or struggling to execute the breakout, or in difficult-to-quantify measurable, such as dominating possession or turning over the puck a lot.

 

[Shawarma*]

Haaaa... the elusive concept of momentum. Nobody can say what it is, nobody can say when it will change or even take any part in the proceedings, yet, it is there, you can feel it if you believe in it.

Sounds religious to me.

When looking at scoring, momentum simply doesn't exist:

http://statsbylopez.com/2014/04/29/momentum-and-hockey/

Long story short, if a team just scored 2 goals (or even 3) to tie the game, it is NOT more likely to score the next goal. Yet, hockey wisdom would indicate that this team had a boatload of momentum going its way when tying the score.

Anyway, I fully expect to be disproved by anectodal evidence. In fact, I will be disappointed if it does not happen!

Hope this guy didn't try to submit this to an academic journal, because his fundamental analysis is based on a faulty sampling of statistics. He looked only at tied games and tried to see if the moment recent team to score would then be the next to score. There is no way that even comes close to measuring "momentum" as it is classically understood in sports.

Momentum is just sustained energy swings in the game. They can be tangibly assesed by viewers but are difficult, if not impossible to capture statistically since it is simply the minute one team begins playing at its full capacity, as a unit. To do so you would literally have to quantify the moment a team turns on an extra gear, which is impossible.

 

[Hackett]

I think that pacioretty will have his fair share of chances for this game, with the last line change on home ice. He will see a little more of krug and bartkowski, and a little less of chara. (Same for desharnais)

It is these home games where he really needs to get his points. And that would be good enough for Montreal given that they don't have to win in Boston again if they take care of business in their own rink.

It will be interesting to see how the team reacts to their first loss in the playoffs. I hope that after game 3, we will look back to game 2 as the game that woke the team out of their bad play, rather than the game that got away.

 

[Hoople]

I am not speaking for him, but while I believe the Bruins had momentum, it's not like they haven't gone through the experience before. They've been good in the third period all year and they've already made a pretty spectacular comeback against Toronto last season.

So have we. So has every other team. Momentum is not a phenomenon restricted to only a certain team. Even amateur and pee wee teams experience it, whether positive or negative.

And the peculiarity of momentum swings is that it is different for each and every team on different nights or days.

But anyway, if you have played competitive sports, team or individual, you will understand what I am talking about. Momentum happens and it is not always at your command.

 

[Hoople]

And you were there?

Claude Julien said he didn't think Thornton's return was a factor in the momentum switch (not sure why you keep ignoring this). But hey, he wasn't there either I guess.

This is exactly why you are an internet poster and Julien coaches an NHL team that plays for keeps.

You think that a coach is going to answer a reporter's question with 100% honesty? If you do, well, good on you for being naive and believing everything that is spoon fed to you.

 

[sheed36]

The next time Julien cries and whines about "crap" to the media like he did after Saturday's game someone from the Habs should do this with the mic he's talking into just to shut that whiner up.

 

[Kriss E]

This is exactly why you are an internet poster and Julien coaches an NHL team that plays for keeps.

You think that a coach is going to answer a reporter's question with 100% honesty? If you do, well, good on you for being naive and believing everything that is spoon fed to you.

Why would he not be truthful about this? We're not talking about strategies, injuries, comments or anything that can favor your opponent.

It would be like asking Therrien if he thought Bournival in for Moen changed anything, and he would lie about the answer. There is 0 logic behind lying here. Such a desperate attempt to prove your point, which is completely ridiculous to begin with.

For someone that keeps telling others to stop using strawman, you'd figure you wouldn't use the oldest one in the book ''you're an internet poster and not a coach''. Ironically, you're the one that is pretending to be inside Julien's head and think that this is all part of some mysterious mastermind to not admit that Thornton is a key player..?! While I actually believe his word. But sure, I'm the one pretending to be a ''know it all''..

Dude, you make 0 sense here.

 

[uiCk]

Hope this guy didn't try to submit this to an academic journal, because his fundamental analysis is based on a faulty sampling of statistics. He looked only at tied games and tried to see if the moment recent team to score would then be the next to score. There is no way that even comes close to measuring "momentum" as it is classically understood in sports.

Momentum is just sustained energy swings in the game. They can be tangibly assesed by viewers but are difficult, if not impossible to capture statistically since it is simply the minute one team begins playing at its full capacity, as a unit. To do so you would literally have to quantify the moment a team turns on an extra gear, which is impossible.

So if you build team with players that individually "turn on a extra gear" at all time (I believe this is what is referred to as hardworking/having character) , you have "momentum" 100% of the time? Obviously the system in place is good and everyone on team has exact knowledge of their roles on the team.

 

[SirClintonPortis]

So have we. So has every other team. Momentum is not a phenomenon restricted to only a certain team. Even amateur and pee wee teams experience it, whether positive or negative.

And the peculiarity of momentum swings is that it is different for each and every team on different nights or days.

But anyway, if you have played competitive sports, team or individual, you will understand what I am talking about. Momentum happens and it is not always at your command.

I already said that I believe it exists, just not that Thornton was some sort of catalyst this time. But keep on misreading what I say.

 

[S Bah]

[/QUOTE]


The Habs " Riders On The Storm " hunting those Bruin Labrador Retreiver thieves from Boston, Probably Marchand he knows his way around Candiac!

Do they still hang horse thieves er dog thieves, in Canada?

 

[Brainiac]

Hope this guy didn't try to submit this to an academic journal, because his fundamental analysis is based on a faulty sampling of statistics. He looked only at tied games and tried to see if the moment recent team to score would then be the next to score. There is no way that even comes close to measuring "momentum" as it is classically understood in sports.

First, the guy did not look only at tied games, he looked at the moment a game is tied and tried to assess if previous scoring gave any momentum. You certainly don't turn your extra gear when your team is leading 6-0 in the last 10 minutes of the game anyway.

I find his observations extremely interesting. 100% honest here, if you asked me 'What happens when a team comes back from a 0-3 deficit? Are the guys more likely to score that 4th goal?' I would have said, probably, yes. Even if I don't believe in momentum swings, I'd say the guys that got back from 0-3 certainly have something going. Turns out it's completely wrong. The team that came back is even less likely to score the 4th goal.

Momentum is just sustained energy swings in the game. They can be tangibly assesed by viewers but are difficult, if not impossible to capture statistically since it is simply the minute one team begins playing at its full capacity, as a unit. To do so you would literally have to quantify the moment a team turns on an extra gear, which is impossible.

With regard to that, I guess momentum would then results in more shots on goal, better scoring chances and, ultimately, more goals scored? Otherwise, what's the point?

The link I provided just shows that, as regards with the main objective of the game - i.e. to score goals - momentum is nowhere to be found.

Or, if you'd rather say that momentum is more elusive than that and cannot be directly linked to goal scoring well, eh? I'd say momentum is pretty useless then.

The point with these analyses is not to measure momentum. There's never gonna be a momentumeter. I get what you guys are saying. We can look at the game and see that one team has something going.

The only problem is that your brain will often trick you by building some narrative where there isn't any. Like that team coming back from a 0-3 deficit. It's so much more epic when they score that 4th goal that you remember it for a long time and tend to forget the times the other team actually got it back and scored. That's why we use stats to look at the big picture.

 

[Hoople]

I already said that I believe it exists, just not that Thornton was some sort of catalyst this time. But keep on misreading what I say.

We can disagree.

No big deal.

Cheers.

 

[Shawarma*]

So if you build team with players that individually "turn on a extra gear" at all time (I believe this is what is referred to as hardworking/having character) , you have "momentum" 100% of the time? Obviously the system in place is good and everyone on team has exact knowledge of their roles on the team.

No. If it's a bunch of scrubs playing with energy, it isn't momentum. It's the Habs 4th line.

Momentum is when a team, as a unit, brings a noticeably higher level of energy and execution for a sustained period.

I think the last ten minutes of the Bruins game was a good example: They scored a goal, they got wind in their sails, and all four lines started skating faster, braking out of their zone more quickly, getting in front of the net, etc.

Does momentum always end in results? That's another debate, and I think that's where the study you referenced (which quite interesting) failed ultimately: it was looking to end reults to make a conclusion about momentum.

The Bruins had all kinds of momentum in Game 1 but they lost.

 

[Brainiac]

Players executing well in hockey does not necessarily result in goals. But momentum is description of physical phenomena that the viewer perceives as one team executing their **** extremely well while other side is struggling to hold them off. It could manifest itself in non-quantifiable ways, such as one team being much faster at skating or struggling to execute the breakout, or in difficult-to-quantify measurable, such as dominating possession or turning over the puck a lot.

All the puck possession data/stats tend to correlate very well with goal scoring.

 

[Hoople]

No. If it's a bunch of scrubs playing with energy, it isn't momentum. It's the Habs 4th line.

Momentum is when a team, as a unit, brings a noticeably higher level of energy and execution for a sustained period.

I think the last ten minutes of the Bruins game was a good example: They scored a goal, they got wind in their sails, and all four lines started skating faster, braking out of their zone more quickly, getting in front of the net, etc.

Does momentum always end in results? That's another debate, and I think that's where the study you referenced (which quite interesting) failed ultimately: it was looking to end reults to make a conclusion about momentum.

The Bruins had all kinds of momentum in Game 1 but they lost.

The problem with momentum is that it has a variable length of efficacy since it can swing in opposite directions. It can be short-lived or it can be sustained.

 

[Hoople]

All the puck possession data/stats tend to correlate very well with goal scoring.

So..........how did we end up winning Game 1?

Stats say that the Bruins should have won convincingly.

 

[uiCk]

So..........how did we end up winning Game 1?

Stats say that the Bruins should have won convincingly.

couple of posts, and unreal price?

or was it because habs had the "momentum" ?


With stats, there usually isn't any "absulte predictions". Stats say that you win 1 out of 2 coin flips: you lose two in a row. OMG stats are useless???

 

[Kriss E]

couple of posts, and unreal price?

or was it because habs had the "momentum" ?


With stats, there usually isn't any "absulte predictions". Stats say that you win 1 out of 2 coin flips: you lose two in a row. OMG stats are useless???

Pretty much. I think there isn't too many people here that really understand what stats are.

 

[SirClintonPortis]

All the puck possession data/stats tend to correlate very well with goal scoring.

Probability is not unchangeable, if one team complete just quits mid-game, their probability of scoring drops all the way down to zero. This just an extreme example. Periods of poor play will result in lower probabilities of GF and higher probabilities of GA. These advanced stats not in the time domain, yet momentum is.

Just like how high voltage correlates with killing people; but without knowing amperage and resistance, you don't know if the device is there to kill or just to stun. Sitting in the ivory tower of correlations, oblivious to the physical phenomena in action, not even with an iota of skepticism as to what the limitations of the measures are.

And the physical phenomena of scoring involves being able to take a shot(Corsi/Fenwick), skill level(visual observation, Vanek's tip-in skills is not quantifiable), and the opponent's skill level, and goaltender quality. A grinding line can come out with a dominant shift,

Goal-scoring, like most forms of sports scores, uses either-or logic. Whatever work to score be damned, it doesn't matter if it was a grueling long shift or a quick 2-on-1, it is going to get recorded. A goal is a 1, a non-goal is a 0; everything else that happens on video is not contained in that data.

 

[SirClintonPortis]

So..........how did we end up winning Game 1?

Stats say that the Bruins should have won convincingly.

Goal-scoring is either-or. It doesn't matter how "close" you are, there is a small chance you can upset someone as long as the team generates scoring chances. Over a repeated number of trials, however, the number of victories will swing in favor of the better team. No different from rolling a die and getting two or three 1s in a row, there will be a long stream of rolling not a single 1 in subsequent rolls.

 

[ThaDevilGirl]

So..........how did we end up winning Game 1?

Stats say that the Bruins should have won convincingly.

Habs scored more goals than the Bruins.

 

[Bondurant]

Good luck, guys! My Wings are toast. I'm backing the Habs the rest of the way.

 

[Brainiac]

So..........how did we end up winning Game 1?

Stats say that the Bruins should have won convincingly.

You flip a coin 4 times and have 3 heads and 1 tails. Does heads have the momentum? Should heads be expected to win the next toss?

If you don't know what sample size is, don't even bother commenting on stats.

Nobody ever said that stats should predict the outcome of one play, or even one game, or heck, even one best of 7. That is not what stats are for.

 

[deandebean]

This is going to be THE game of the series. It will be tough, very tough, even at home. The Ruins are potent on the road.

 

[Hackett]

This is going to be THE game of the series. It will be tough, very tough, even at home. The Ruins are potent on the road.

The great thing about this rivalry is that no matter how much we break down the series, you can throw everything out the window when the puck is dropped.

Theoretically, the bruins should win this series with relative ease. Although pratically speaking, we know not to discount the unexpected