Confirmed with Link: Ryan O'Reilly traded to STL for Tage Thompson, Patrik Berglund, Vladimir Sobotka, 2019 1st, 2021 2nd

[joshjull]

Yet they don't go anywhere in the playoffs. They're not a good team at all. You just don't get it.

The Wild aren't a great team but its hard to argue a team that continually makes the playoffs is not a good team.

 

[Duddy]

Yet they don't go anywhere in the playoffs. They're not a good team at all. You just don't get it.

If playoff teams aren't good, what are we?
We just spend another season trending down instead of up.

 

[Aladyyn]

Yet they don't go anywhere in the playoffs. They're not a good team at all. You just don't get it.

Hockey is random. This year they lost their most important player, no shit they didn't go anywhere...

 

[Aladyyn]

The Wild aren't a great team but its hard to argue a team that continually makes the playoffs is not a good team.

Nah man, making the playoffs for 6 straight years in the most competitive division in hockey is basically worthless.

 

[sabrebuild]

Yet they don't go anywhere in the playoffs. They're not a good team at all. You just don't get it.

So just so we are clear, in your own words, a consistent playoff team sucks. One that in the last 5 years in order, won a first round series then lost to blackhawks dynasty, won a first round series and then lost to the Blackhawks. Then their worst performance a first round loss to Dallas, followed by a loss to conference finalist the Jets this year and an excellent Blues team last year.

So just to be clear a team that made it to the playoffs for the last 6 years in a row, and lost three rounds to the Blackhawks, while advancing twice, is a team that sucks....

Maybe just agree you were being hyperbolic...

 

[EichHart]

If playoff teams aren't good, what are we?
We just spend another season trending down instead of up.

Can't be worse then we were last year. If we're better this year without ROR what does that say? Hockey games are played on the ice, not paper. If they were the Vegas Knights would have not been in the Stanley Cup last year.

 

[EichHart]

Nah man, making the playoffs for 6 straight years in the most competitive division in hockey is basically worthless.

Pretty much, sharks fans have made the playoffs what 15 out of 16 seasons? Without Cup appearances/wins it doesn't mean much. The Wild don't pass the eye test, stats aside. Go play the game and tell me what you think. This is just my opinion. Advanced stats are highly overrated in hockey.

 

[EichHart]

Hockey is random. This year they lost their most important player, no **** they didn't go anywhere...

At least we agree on something.

 

[GameMisconduct]

Pretty much, sharks fans have made the playoffs what 15 out of 16 seasons? Without Cup appearances/wins it doesn't mean much. The Wild don't pass the eye test, stats aside. Go play the game and tell me what you think. This is just my opinion. Advanced stats are highly overrated in hockey.

Trying to refute someone with a 'Go play the game' argument and nothing else is more spurious than relying on advanced stats.

 

[hizzoner]

I know that statistics, properly used, help coaches and managers to determine how players match up against others. All very important. What those damn stats do not tell us is if we are being entertained. Yes winning is part of it--a big part. But consistent winning gets boring if all we get is shot suppression and kitty bar the door crap. I want to be lifted out of my seat with excitement. I want to see marvellous plays offensively and defensively. If stats are kept to kill offensive opportunities then the game of hockey as entertainment may as well be a paint drying scenario. If most baseball games were no hitters I think even those statistic nuts would find the game begin to pall. There. Glad to get that off my chest!

 

[start winnin]

Still unbelievable that we traded O'Reilly for peanuts. There must have some kind locker room divide that Botts had to resolve because strictly from a value perspective we lost big time.

 

[Sabre the Win]

Pretty much, sharks fans have made the playoffs what 15 out of 16 seasons? Without Cup appearances/wins it doesn't mean much. The Wild don't pass the eye test, stats aside. Go play the game and tell me what you think. This is just my opinion. Advanced stats are highly overrated in hockey.

Apparently so are your eyes.

 

[joshjull]

Trying to refute someone with a 'Go play the game' argument and nothing else is more spurious than relying on advanced stats.

I would say they are on par with the way some use analytics on here

 

[Husko]

Go play the game!!!

 

[valet]

Go play the game!!!

 

[GameMisconduct]

I would say they are on par with the way some use analytics on here

Not really.

Analytics a can be overwrought, but they at least have some basis that you can look at, debate, question etc.


Pulling a 'go play the game' with nothing else isn't even that.

Someone wants to add some specific insight based on thier experience, that's different. You can appreciate that, reject it, put it into context, etc. The same as you can with a stat. It could be something or it could be nothing. But at least there something to judge.

A blind appeal to someone's own authority with nothing else because of 'playing the game' isn't even that.

 

[joshjull]

Not really.

Analytics a can be overwrought, but they at least have some basis that you can look at, debate, question etc.

Pulling a 'go play the game' with nothing else isn't even that.

Someone wants to add some specific insight based on thier experience, that's different. You can appreciate that, reject it, put it into context, etc. The same as you can with a stat. It could be something or it could be nothing. But at least there something to judge.

A blind appeal to someone's own authority with nothing else because of 'playing the game' isn't even that.

I'll rephrase it

Trying to refute someone by just posting a random chart, graph or stat that doesn't tell the story you think it does and nothing else is just as spurious as saying 'Go play the game' as an argument.

Definitions of spurious.. 1)not being what it purports to be; false or fake. 2) (of a line of reasoning) apparently but not actually valid.

I would say poor or misleading use of analytics very much falls within the definitions of spurious.

Obviously a well reasoned argument using analytics as part of its case is not what I'm talking about.

 

[darcyRegier]

Rob Ray had a nice segment on WGR yesterday and he was asked a few questions about ROR (I'd try to post it but radio.com's website is shit)...he basically said how once the comments at the end of the year were made, it was time to move on.

I love ROR and I wish we could have kept him but I think he had to go. I think he wanted to leave as well and go somewhere where he didn't have to shoulder so much responsibility and lose constantly. I'll be rooting for St. Louis to just make the playoffs (and lose in the first round ). Sharkies all the way though

 

[GameMisconduct]

I'll rephrase it for you

Trying to refute someone by just posting a random chart, graph or stat that doesn't tell the story you think it does and nothing else is just as spurious as saying 'Go play the game' as an argument.

Definitions of spurious.. 1)not being what it purports to be; false or fake. 2) (of a line of reasoning) apparently but not actually valid.

I would say poor or misleading use of analytics very much falls within the definitions of spurious.

Obviously a well reasoned argument using analytics as part of its case is not what I'm talking about.

Oh I definitely agree that stats can be used spuriously. You don't need to quote an online dictionary as an 'igotcha' attempt to get me to agree to that. Side note: it's interesting to the variety of specific different ways that term is defined. The second definition is probably the more appropriate one here, or at least what I was operating from.

This really is not all what I pointed out in the post you responded to though. Let me try and return the favor and clarify further so we don't go back and forth on multiple pages about the word spurious.

I'm not arguing that advanced stats can't be used spuriously. However, a naked 'play the game' argument isn't "on par" with any use of advanced stats or chart, even if the stat/chart isn't used in a compelling or wholly honest manner.

An un-supplemented 'I played the game' based argument is basically empty beyond the establishing the angle of your argument in an exceedingly vague way. To borrow your phrasing, it would be "on par" with someone saying 'because advanced stats say so' as their argument. It's an appeal to establish credibility that you might credit a bit in passing, but isn't at all compelling with any consideration because there really is no specific information to support (or falsify). It's got a thin veneer of legitimacy, but that's about it.

If you make an advanced stats argument with a specific start/chart/whatever, then you have put forward a specific piece of evidence in support of your argument. The evidence might be bad, misleading, or vague, but there is a specific basis to characterize the argument as such. The 'I played the game' argument "on par" with that might be something like "I played D in high school and we learned a completely different breakout scheme". You can specifically evaluate that information as favorable or unfavorable, point out how it might be misleading, put it into context, etc.

So yes, I agree that posting a random chart graph or stat and misrepresenting is spurious. To me the significant difference is that you can judge it so because that chart/stat etc provides a basis to do so that a 'play the game' appeal doesn't.

Side note two: we're debating about bad arguments and both put more effort into the discussion than most bad arguments in either the stats or the play the game camp, which strikes me as pretty funny.

 

[EichHart]

Trying to refute someone with a 'Go play the game' argument and nothing else is more spurious than relying on advanced stats.

I agree with this. I just feel like advance stats have more credence in other sports then in hockey which is attributed to the more "randomness" of the sport. You simply cannot predict a lot of the minor things that go on every stride, shift, pass, etc...

 

[Montag DP]

I know that statistics, properly used, help coaches and managers to determine how players match up against others. All very important. What those damn stats do not tell us is if we are being entertained. Yes winning is part of it--a big part. But consistent winning gets boring if all we get is shot suppression and kitty bar the door crap. I want to be lifted out of my seat with excitement. I want to see marvellous plays offensively and defensively. If stats are kept to kill offensive opportunities then the game of hockey as entertainment may as well be a paint drying scenario. If most baseball games were no hitters I think even those statistic nuts would find the game begin to pall. There. Glad to get that off my chest!

Well, for the last few years we've been losing and still really boring. Actually, not just boring, but infuriating. I'll take winning and boring over that any day.

 

[valet]

this is such a boring topic, can we please move on to something better than about how we used to like ror but now we have to hate him because that's just how it is, we're sabres fans

 

[debaser66]

Rob Ray had a nice segment on WGR yesterday and he was asked a few questions about ROR (I'd try to post it but radio.com's website is ****)...he basically said how once the comments at the end of the year were made, it was time to move on.

I love ROR and I wish we could have kept him but I think he had to go. I think he wanted to leave as well and go somewhere where he didn't have to shoulder so much responsibility and lose constantly. I'll be rooting for St. Louis to just make the playoffs (and lose in the first round ). Sharkies all the way though

That's practically the repeat of what every bad hockey wannabe sports journalist tweeted after these comments have been made.

 

[hizzoner]

Well, for the last few years we've been losing and still really boring. Actually, not just boring, but infuriating. I'll take winning and boring over that any day.

Definition of a truism. Cannot think of anyone who would disagree. My point was not that the team was trying to lose and be boring. Rather it was trying to win in a boring way and still losing. I suspect we are on the same page.

 

[5 Minute Major]

That's practically the repeat of what every bad hockey wannabe sports journalist tweeted after these comments have been made.

Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

They may be spot on with their analysis. None of us knows.