Isles777

Isles777
Membre depuis
9 jun 2019
Équipe préférée
Islanders de New York
Localisation
New York
Messages dans les forums
4430
Messages par jour
12,17
Sujets de discussion
358
Forum: Armchair-GM26 mai à 22 h 53
Sujet: First round choke and lafreniere
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>PleaseBanMeForMyOwnGood</b></div><div>So I did look back at numbers for Washington players under Trotz and your claim falls short, much like everything you say. Washington was a very good possession team and they had very good expected goal percentages as well. Why? Because the team was very good at protecting their net but also could create offense. The better players in Nashville generally all had positive numbers in possession and expected goals. Good teams allow less chances than they create, the Islanders do not do that. Which is why their expected goal percentages are below 50% that can work over a short sample size but it will eventually come back to haunt you. Ottawa went to the Conference finals and was a goal away from going to the cup but that team was really bad at possessing the puck and creating offence. The next season it all balanced out and they were terrible. That is what you can look forward to. Success over a long term comes from being able to outscore your opponent and I am not saying you just have to score more and not defend, you need both and if you can show a positive expected goal numbers consistently, you'll win more than you lose. And I'd you don't have a positive expected goal metric, over the long run you won't be winning much.</div></div>

Wrong!

17-18 caps
47.36% xGF% (24th)
48.3 CF% (23rd)
48.6 SCF% (23rd)

And they were ranked 29th in xGA/60
Forum: Armchair-GM26 mai à 22 h 25
Sujet: First round choke and lafreniere
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>PleaseBanMeForMyOwnGood</b></div><div>Corsi and everything on natural statrick are easy to follow and understand. They use numbers that point directly to play and shows how a player plays across many different areas. The others don't really show how they even come to their conclusions which is why many people, not just myself are unsure of how accurate those other metrics are. What is funny about your words though is how you ignore everything but use only what paints a bright picture for your argument.</div></div>

Oh so you only want to look at metrics that are easy to understand. Got it! Trotz teams rarely have good 5 v 5 metrics (especially Corsi) and another thing, his teams almost always outperform their expected goals for % . It’s almost as if the context matters ;)

It’s pretty funny watching you do mental gymnastics trying to prove that pelech and pulock aren’t top pairing defenseman. You should go argue with every person on this site and twitter (including many leafs writers) that acknowledge that they are.
Forum: Armchair-GM26 mai à 21 h 40
Sujet: First round choke and lafreniere
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>PleaseBanMeForMyOwnGood</b></div><div>I don't really know how accurate WAR, SPAR and GAR, they don't provide enough methodology for my liking. Hockey is way too much of a team sport for baseball style analytics. A team like the Islanders had a good season last year points wise but had crazy PDO numbers and negative in a lot of important metrics but still ended with a good season. Which makes those stats highly suspect. I still don't see any proof those other metrics tell anything other than hindsight success. And what I mean by that is a team wins 50 games in the season but was outshot out chanced and and frankly out played but still win, they show good in WAR and SPAR but the number red flags show the team isn't going to sustain its success. There are a lot of red flags with the Islanders and you can keep being a cheerleader and thinks it's going to be fine regardless of everything pointing to rough waters ahead. If the Leafs had as many red flags I would be gravely concerned. Fortunately for Leaf fans, most of their underlying numbers are terrific and with them being really young and just learning a new system, the sky's the limit on where they can go.</div></div>

“They don’t provide enough methodology for my liking”

Basically you want to disregard the metrics so you don’t have to admit the player is good! Sounds rational to me.

By the way, the caps were not a good 5 v 5 team the year they won the cup. In fact, they were well below average by every metric including expected goals!

I know that just put a dent in your narrative, that’s my bad.
Forum: Armchair-GM26 mai à 19 h 57
Forum: Armchair-GM26 mai à 19 h 50
Sujet: First round choke and lafreniere
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>PleaseBanMeForMyOwnGood</b></div><div>So GAR is usefull but it also has some glaring weaknesses and that really becomes apparent when you start digging into the Islanders as an example.

The following quote was taken from this article <a href="https://www.pensionplanpuppets.com/2017/6/16/15774850/advanced-stats-102-what-is-gar-dawson-sprigings-nhl" rel="nofollow noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">https://www.pensionplanpuppets.com/2017/6/16/15774850/advanced-stats-102-what-is-gar-dawson-sprigings-nhl</a>

"While I think the stat is tremendously useful, there are a few things you have to keep in mind when using it. For one, GAR values are estimates - because it uses regression techniques in some places, there is inherent uncertainty in the values output by the system. Those error bars are hidden from view - we don’t really get to see them, and as a result, you have to be careful not to make conclusions based on GAR values that are relatively close to one another.

Along these same lines, sometimes it spits out counterintuitive values, and it’s hard to see exactly why. The complexity of the model means there’s no longer easy mappings from things we consider ‘inputs’ to player value (points, possession ability, etc.) to the GAR output. They’re obviously correlated, but there are now contextual factors (teammates, competition, score usage) included that make the mapping from input to output more opaque. In that way, the model is perhaps more opaque than one would like. However, this is no different from the heavily accepted WAR stats used in baseball. You can break them down into their core components, but it takes a fair bit of effort.

When I asked Sprigings what he thought the biggest weakness of the stat is, he mentions a more conceptual issue, noting that the stat straddles the line between being a measure of ‘true talent’ as opposed to ‘the value a player provided’. Parts of the even strength offense and defense are more a measure of ‘true talent’ but the rest tends to be a measure of what happened. Sprigings brought up an example where assists per 60 minutes are used as one of the inputs to assess even strength offense. That is a measure of what happened. However, Sprigings feels it would make more sense to use something like expected assists, which is a more apt measure of talent.

GAR, in my opinion, also struggles a little bit in divvying up credit between teammates. Sprigings uses robust mathematical techniques to try and separate the effects from teammates, but it is a non-trivial problem, and even the most robust method may struggle if players spend all of their time on ice together and have very little time apart. This can be more pronounced in situations where one of the players doesn’t have a lot of historical data to go off of (for example, rookies)."

What tells me, is that GAR kind of correlates results without showing what made those results which would then ignore certain red flags about a players season infavour of actual results. So Rielly for example he's very obviously more talented than Pulock but the defensive numbers of the leafs were worse and GAR is based too much on end results rather than what made up the results.

So with all that in mind, and diving into the on ice play metrics of different players, you are 1000% looking for confirmation bias by ignoring every single red flag in the Islanders play and only accepting stats that make you feel more secure in your opinion. Which is exactly what confirmation bias is.</div></div>

That’s one stat down, now do WAR and SPAR! Cmon buddy it seems like you have all day!
Forum: Armchair-GM26 mai à 19 h 38
Forum: Armchair-GM26 mai à 19 h 35
Sujet: First round choke and lafreniere
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>PleaseBanMeForMyOwnGood</b></div><div>I don't spend money on those sites so I can't confirm what you are saying, but like everything else, you ignore everything in favour of whatever 1 singular stat makes you feel better. Expected goals is one of the best factors to determine a players ability. If you create enough offense and defend well enough to have the positive expected goal shares, over 100 games, that results in wins. The Islanders are a negative team in that regard, eventually the lucks going to run out. But please ignore all those stats, insult me for not believing in advanced stats and then use 1 or 2 isolated numbers to make yourself feel good. You're a joke and all the say that.</div></div>

One or two advanced stats? WAR, GAR, XGAR, SPAR are all better indicators of a good defenseman than the metrics you are using.
Forum: Armchair-GM26 mai à 19 h 33
Sujet: First round choke and lafreniere
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>PleaseBanMeForMyOwnGood</b></div><div>I won't deny that Rielly had a really lucky year last year. However, his possession numbers were above 50%, his shot share percentage was below 50 but his expected goals were above. So I am not sure what point you are making. Trotz keeping everyone to the outside only matters if thats what is happening but the majority of Islander players had negative expected goal percentages. That doesn't at all paint the picture that the Islanders are terrific defensively, they are pretty good but they don't create enough offense to outweigh what they give up defensively. They have been lucky. TO on the other hand has positive numbers almost across the board and this past season spent a long stretch at around .98 for their PDO.

As I have said many many times, I do believe in advance stats and think they tell a story but you need to understand more about hockey to know how all the pieces fit together. You clearly don't if you did you'd be incredibly worried about the Islanders. There is very little evidence that they are going to keep above water over the long run, they just don't have the talent to compete against better teams. They have a good system that limits some of the problems they have as a team but when the percentages swing back the other way as they always do, the Islanders just don't have the guns to outscore even normal luck.</div></div>

You talk like someone who would get mad if he found out one of the leafs players read books by Jordan peterson.
Forum: Armchair-GM26 mai à 19 h 28
Sujet: First round choke and lafreniere
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>PleaseBanMeForMyOwnGood</b></div><div>Pelech also has negative metrics in most important stats. His PDO is above 1 as well. The team just was never that good, for over a year they outscored their expected goal share and that just doesn't last. Its like when a player scores a bunch of goals one year but had a shooting % that was incredibly high, it will average out and you'll see them fall back to earth. Like William Karlsson, he shot way above his career normals and when it fell back to normal numbers he was a 25 goal scorer. Still had the same number of chances and shots but didn't score at a ridiculous percentage.</div></div>

Interesting, pelech 3 year xGAR (even strength defense) is 3.9, which is better than 91% of NHL defenseman. Keep it up with the confirmation bias!
Forum: Armchair-GM26 mai à 19 h 25
Sujet: First round choke and lafreniere
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>PleaseBanMeForMyOwnGood</b></div><div>Pelech also has negative metrics in most important stats. His PDO is above 1 as well. The team just was never that good, for over a year they outscored their expected goal share and that just doesn't last. Its like when a player scores a bunch of goals one year but had a shooting % that was incredibly high, it will average out and you'll see them fall back to earth. Like William Karlsson, he shot way above his career normals and when it fell back to normal numbers he was a 25 goal scorer. Still had the same number of chances and shots but didn't score at a ridiculous percentage.</div></div>

Most important stats ha! - he has better defensive metrics than any player on the leafs and he is elite on the PK.
Forum: Armchair-GM26 mai à 19 h 22
Sujet: First round choke and lafreniere
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>PleaseBanMeForMyOwnGood</b></div><div>Of course you would say that. It especially funny considering Trotz's system was the same in Washington and yet they were far better across the board. According to natural stattrick, the Islanders are just extremely lucky. Only 5 of their players have a positive expected goals percentage. In case you don't understand what that means, it means that the Islanders according to the chances they create vs what they give up should usually be in the negative. No one in the world survives for long with numbers like that. They lack talent and have been lucky. As you yourself likes to say, numbers don't lie.</div></div>

Now you use natstattrick lol - yes, the isles get "outplayed" because trotz doesn't care if the opposing team spends time in our zone, as long as shots are kept to the outside.

You know who else got lucky? Morgan Rielly with his insane shooting percentage last season. At least he got a Norris vote! He came back down to earth this season.