Sabre the Win
Joke of a Franchise
- Jun 27, 2013
- 12,245
- 4,920
And a Stanley CupDan Bylsma has a Jack Adams trophy.
Just saying...
And a Stanley CupDan Bylsma has a Jack Adams trophy.
Just saying...
And a Stanley Cup
And a Stanley Cup
The only other team 16th or better in point generation and 17th or worse in *all* of the stats I listed are the Islanders.Since advanced stats are being used to define Housley in this thread, I'll put these examples here. According to xGF and xGA (expected goals for and against), the difference between those two numbers is xG+/-...basically the same type of stat as GF vs GA as a +/- in most website standings. The rankings for xG+/- gives the following "stellar" results...
Carolina should be the best team in the league by far.
Edmonton is better than Nash, Tor, Buf, CBJ, Wpg, Wash
StL is better than Ana, Was, Van
LA is better than those teams plus Col, Wpg, Buf, NYI
Mon and NJ rank 6 and 7
On and on...take those numbers for what you will, but I wouldn't make any big judgments based on them.
NHL Team Stats - Corsica Hockey
The only other team 16th or better in point generation and 17th or worse in *all* of the stats I listed are the Islanders.
Good cherrypick, though.
13 of the 16 xG teams are also in the top 16 in terms of points per game.I didn't sift through a bunch of stats enough to cherry pick anything. I went straight to what should be the ultimate goal behind all the other advanced stats - ie generating the biggest positive difference between expected goals for and expected goals against.
If teams are doing all the underlying tasks well enough to create the best positive difference, it should show in the xGF+/-. I'm sure you'll tell me that's somehow wrong though, since the xGF+/- doesn't reflect the standings with any consistency.
13 of the 16 xG teams are also in the top 16 in terms of points per game.
You are cherrypicking one of a handful of stats presented to you to obfuscate the fact that the Sabres are a comprehensively below average ES team backed up by a bad power play.
"We were not ready" has been echoed already this season by a couple players before the 10 game win streak so that means Housley wasnt doing his job?His team is ready to compete. That is on Housley not the players. Housley gets credit for having his team show up every night.
Lets not downplay the fact that in sports the coach's job is to have his team prepared. They are in every game they play. 100% that is Housley. If you are a Housley hater you can spin it any way you want but 99% of the time of a team doesn't like a coach they don't play for him and there is always in house fighting.
This year the team is prepared and competing.
2018-19 NHL Summary | Hockey-Reference.com
NHL Team Stats - Corsica Hockey
Go to the top link and click on pts% for a 1-31 rank of teams, go to the next link and click on xG+/- so it shows best to worst, and compare the two lists.
1st - only 11 of the top teams in pts% are in the top 16 of xG+/-.
2nd - you obfuscate by generalizing when you simply say "x number of teams in one column are also in the other column". There is a huge variation of where teams rank between the two lists. I'll make it easy for everyone else by listing each team by their pts% rank, then list their xG+/- rank...
TBL - 5
TOR - 15
BUF - 20
COL - 18
NSH- 13
WAS - 26
BOS - 12
CBJ - 14
WPG - 22
CAL - 8
MIN - 4
CAR - 1
NYI - 19
SJS - 3
DAL - 16
MON - 6
NYR - 24
VGS - 2
ANA - 31
PIT - 11
EDM - 10
DET - 27
ARI - 25
OTT - 29
NJD - 7
FLA - 21
PHI - 9
VAN - 30
CHI - 28
STL - 23
LAK - 17
The top 4 teams in xG+/- don't crack the top 10 in pts%
3 teams in the top 10 pts% rank in the 20s in xG+/-
I can go on but it's an easy eye test to look at that list and realize there is not a good correlation between the two rankings. But let's not say "sample size" and instead take a look at last season...
NSH - 15
WPG - 7
TBL - 8
BOS - 2
VGS - 16
WAS - 23
TOR - 12
ANA - 21
...oh forget it...this is boring. Clearly, again, the rankings jump all over. The only thing I learned is that Barry Trotz must be as bad as Housley because his fancy stats say so. Again xG+/- is basically a summary of how well a team both generates and defends against expected goals. It encompasses shots for and against, attempts for each, and high danger chances...all the stats you threw out on the previous page.
I suspect Trotz is better because he has been a successful professional head coach for longer than Housley has been retired.
This set of argumentation is so flawed, that it’s hard to believe. One stat amongst dozens is not perfectly clear and silver bullet enough for my quick review, therefore your wrong to use any source other than, not ahhh
Please provide me that footage. Quite frankly I don't believe you."We were not ready" has been echoed already this season by a couple players before the 10 game win streak so that means Housley wasnt doing his job?
I found the one, I don't have the time to find the others.Please provide me that footage. Quite frankly I don't believe you.
Trotz IS a better coach, and that's the point (that you apparently missed) - advanced stats don't give an accurate picture of how good a coach is.
xG+/- is not just one stat out of dozens. Would you rather measure SOG or quality chances that should result in goals for or against? If you say quality chances (which you should) then would you rather measure those in just "for", just "against", or see how each team performs in both categories and see a differential, the same way goals for and against differential is used on about every NHL standings link you can find?
I'd think we all would want to see a list of the last category. It's way more informational than most other advanced stats, but IMO, it is still clearly flawed when there is such a variation when compared to pts or pts%. I don't even know what the last comment is about...
Old nippy here, having just checked this, your missing the point. I don’t want to look at any one advanced stat or traditional stat to prove anything. It’s pretty clear to anyone reasonable, that there are no perfect evaluation tools or one easy way to tell you who is the best anything in hockey.
High danger chances, regular shot totals, Corsi, Fenwick, eye test, pdo, percentage of goals after passing across the Royal Road, none of that individually tells you dick, look at Carolina a shot creating machine. Is Toronto a monster offensive team that is playing with the lead a lot or a less powerful team with a high shooting percentage?
My point is I think your making a leap to argue so much that Struck is basing the majority of his opinion on xg +-. All of these things are just small pieces of the puzzle, none are individually definitive.
It’s just a portion of his endless comments on the topic of Phil Housley.
The revolving door of bad players on the point is working great as the only changes to it. Please put Dahlin there for awhile, at least as long as he gave KO to prove he couldn't handle it.So too, PP coaching.