Membre depuis
28 nov. 2021
Messages dans les forums
Messages par jour
Forum: Armchair-GM1 nov. à 23 h 20
Forum: Armchair-GM28 oct. à 8 h 48
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Byrr</b></div><div>While Martin Brodeur is vastly overrated, he still has multiple vezinas, cup wins, etc, to go with his resume. What does Ned have again to give him the benefit of the doubt? A long history of strong, consistent play? Nope. Individual awards? Nope. What does Ned have to earn the benefit of the doubt that someone like Brodeur gets? Why would someone believe Ned is the goalie of his first 20 games rather than his last 60?

You'll notice I never said the only thing you pay attention to is stats. You pay attention to them as well as what you see, what experts tell you, etc. You get all of the information and weigh it together. His stats havent been good, most Red Wings fans will tell you he hasn't looked particularly good, the experts don't think he's been great, etc. You are the one advocating that we outright ignore the information we have at hand though to rely solely on your eye test which we have good reason to believe is pure bias.

Even if we ignore all that and go solely based on your heavily flawed eye test...we would still have to ask, why don't the Red Wings see it the way you do? They went out and paid starting goalie money, and gave term, to Ville Husso rather than relying on Ned to be their guy.</div></div>

I’m the least bias red wings fan on this forum. In fact, I’d even go as far as saying I have zero bias. A lot of wings fans on here actually probably hate me and accuse me of not being a wings fan for many of my opinions.

With that being said, GM’s and scouts make mistakes all the time. Just like you, they get caught up in the stats and advanced metrics, and while those are helpful to provide some insight, it doesn’t always translate to success. Two good goalies is better than one, especially in todays NHL where goal scoring is at something like a 25 year high.

You and I are obviously getting nowhere on this matter so, I would recommend tuning in to the next game he is likely to start in which would probably be Friday against the Wild. If you’re out of market, I can suggest a couple ways to watch the game if you’d like. He is quite fun to watch.
Forum: Armchair-GM28 oct. à 0 h 54
Forum: Armchair-GM28 oct. à 0 h 29
Forum: Armchair-GM27 oct. à 23 h 53
Forum: Armchair-GM27 oct. à 23 h 37
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Byrr</b></div><div>Lucky for you, I speak metrics. For public access metrics, we would use expected goals vs goals allowed to account for how dangerous the chances against that goalie were. So far this season, Ned is allowing 0.594 goals more than expected per game for the shots he is facing. Last season that number was 0.128 more than expected per game. What these numbers tell us is ... it's not just the team. Bernier, for example, managed positive numbers his last couple of years on those terrible Red Wings teams.</div></div>
How’s Bernier doing now?

Look I’m a fan of stats. I appreciate them, even the advanced metrics. They’re cool and provide another element of player evaluation and theory.

Stats in general and even advanced metrics do not tell you who is better than someone else. They give you an idea to assist in evaluating player potential, but it isn’t factual data that can measure how “good” or “bad” someone is, unless the numbers are staggering.

If that were the case, there would be no busts in sports.

Every player scouted using stats and advanced metrics would turn out exactly as the numbers would indicate, but they don’t.

I’m a big time numbers guy, but in professional sports, especially one that isn’t one on one like boxing or tennis, I tend to rely on my eyes.

I’ve watched Nedjelkovic his standout year in CAR, and every single game last year and this year. I think he can be a high level player consistently and has the ability to steal games for his team.

You can think what you would like about me for that point of view but, that’s your opinion and right to have that. And that’s okay.