Yes they are.
http://www.fearthefin.com...ng-score-adjusted-fenwick

http://www.nhl.com/ice/st...e=con#&navid=nav-stn-conf
- Talkshowhost

That just showed me how off those predictions really are, it did nothing to prove their accuracy at predicting anything.

Yes they are.
http://www.fearthefin.com...ng-score-adjusted-fenwick

http://www.nhl.com/ice/st...e=con#&navid=nav-stn-conf
- Talkshowhost

My mistake. When I said they weren't predictive I meant they couldn't ACCURATELY predict results. Not that they didn't try.

They were completely wrong...but hey, they predicted.

That just showed me how off those predictions really are, it did nothing to prove their accuracy at predicting anything.
- systemtool

15/16 teams predicited made the playoffs. That's meaningless to you?

What's worse is that people try to use those stats as predictors and they are terrible at it.

Corsi fans are constantly trying to tell us the actual results are wrong and not their half-baked predictions. They decide on the conclusion, then force reality to match up.

"Oh, the Leafs are winning in spite of my plethora of convoluted numbers? Must be luck. Let's assign a numerical value for luck, too."

When reality doesn't match your hypothesis, you change your hypothesis.
- Leeman4Gilmour

Exactly.

My mistake. When I said they weren't predictive I meant they couldn't ACCURATELY predict results. Not that they didn't try.

They were completely wrong...but hey, they predicted.
- djamon

Nice.

15/16 teams predicited made the playoffs. That's meaningless to you?
- Talkshowhost

16/16 teams that had most points made the playoffs.

15/16 teams predicited made the playoffs. That's meaningless to you?
- Talkshowhost

15 out of 16? Count again.

Edit - Oh, wait. These "predictions" are from 2 years ago. Nice job Corsi. Predict who's making he playoffs at the 40 game mark.

I don't think I need these stats to predict who will make the playoffs in January lol I use the stats called the standings and since more than every 2nd makes it in - it really a pretty easy thing to get right (of course I would probably get the order wrong....so basically I am = Score Adjusted Fenwick).

I think all the stats have some value. I mean, they do accurately represent something about last year's Leafs...they got hemmed in a lot and gave up shots. But they had good goaltending, and they boxed out well I thought...they just subsequently failed to clear the zone and would give up another shot.

I just disagree when so many people were using those stats to discount all the other very strong stats the Leafs had. They were a weird case study of a team last year, big strengths and weaknesses. But bottom line was it added up to they were a top ten team last year, and you don't fluke those kind of results. If anything the Leafs demonstrated you can be weak in those stat sets but be a good team with goaltending and special teams.

I don't know a whole ton of people that put a prediction out there or bet money on the Leafs not making the playoffs again, based on advanced stats....lol a lot of mouth not much money being put out there when it comes to the Leafs were just lucky theory

15 out of 16? Count again.

Edit - Oh, wait. These "predictions" are from 2 years ago. Nice job Corsi. Predict who's making he playoffs at the 40 game mark.
- djamon

Going out on a limb.

15/16 teams predicited made the playoffs. That's meaningless to you?
- Talkshowhost

Yes. Especially considering that they had teams who finished 2nd, finishing 11th in their rankings. What a joke.

I think all the stats have some value. I mean, they do accurately represent something about last year's Leafs...they got hemmed in a lot and gave up shots. But they had good goaltending, and they boxed out well I thought...they just subsequently failed to clear the zone and would give up another shot.

I just disagree when so many people were using those stats to discount all the other very strong stats the Leafs had. They were a weird case study of a team last year, big strengths and weaknesses. But bottom line was it added up to they were a top ten team last year, and you don't fluke those kind of results. If anything the Leafs demonstrated you can be weak in those stat sets but be a good team with goaltending and special teams.

I don't know a whole ton of people that put a prediction out there or bet money on the Leafs not making the playoffs again, based on advanced stats....lol a lot of mouth not much money being put out there when it comes to the Leafs were just lucky theory
- Zezel

It's one thing to use a stat as a form of analysis after a season to see where you can improve or where you went wrong.

But when they claim they can predict the future they lose me. They're saying the team's going to play the exact same regardless of roster changes, coaching changes, schedule differences, injuries etc.

They're trying...and they'll keep trying...but they ain't there yet.

Okay....

So based on tonight, I would ordinarily call this a tie.


However, there can be no ties.


So here goes. Dreams will be broken. Statuses will get destroyed....


Despite a few turnovers, Ranger had +2, and at almost 22 mins, was the third most used D-man in the game. While not as physical, he brought almost everything that I would expect from Fraser, along with a few offensive moves, and was an inch or two away from recording the game winner.

With this in mind, the winner of tonight's challenge.....



HE now has one hour to claim his prize
- lumlums

Sorry, hang over knocked me down. Great game and where is Byfuglien Ate Me I have something funny for his location!

15/16 teams predicited made the playoffs. That's meaningless to you?
- Talkshowhost

Do me a favour.
Go look at the standings at that time.

Compare that to the teams that made the playoffs.

Let me know how that works out for you.

Do me a favour.
Go look at the standings at that time.

Compare that to the teams that made the playoffs.

Let me know how that works out for you.
- Aetherial

That doesn't take away the fact that shot differential ( fenwick not counting blocked shots) predicted the same thing

That doesn't take away the fact that shot differential ( fenwick not counting blocked shots) predicted the same thing
- Talkshowhost

That doesn't take away the fact that shot differential ( fenwick not counting blocked shots) predicted the same thing
- Talkshowhost

Okay, we get it. Advanced stats make for good humor but its a tired joke that we've all heard before. Think of some new material... jeez.

That doesn't take away the fact that shot differential ( fenwick not counting blocked shots) predicted the same thing
- Talkshowhost

So you're telling us Fenwick can't tell the difference between Causation and Correlation?

I think all the stats have some value. I mean, they do accurately represent something about last year's Leafs...they got hemmed in a lot and gave up shots. But they had good goaltending, and they boxed out well I thought...they just subsequently failed to clear the zone and would give up another shot.

I just disagree when so many people were using those stats to discount all the other very strong stats the Leafs had. They were a weird case study of a team last year, big strengths and weaknesses. But bottom line was it added up to they were a top ten team last year, and you don't fluke those kind of results. If anything the Leafs demonstrated you can be weak in those stat sets but be a good team with goaltending and special teams.

I don't know a whole ton of people that put a prediction out there or bet money on the Leafs not making the playoffs again, based on advanced stats....lol a lot of mouth not much money being put out there when it comes to the Leafs were just lucky theory
- Zezel

It is common knowledge to anybody who follows hockey that special teams play a big role in a teams failures and successes. That the game 5 on 5 produces only a portion of the overall scoring. The biggest portion, granted, but many goals come from special teams as well. These fenway, corsi and goonie goo goo stats completely ignore those variables and try to predict a teams ability to succeed without even bothering with them. Thats absurd, in my opinion.

That doesn't take away the fact that shot differential ( fenwick not counting blocked shots) predicted the same thing
- Talkshowhost

If team A takes 30 shots at the goalie from the blueline with no traffic in front of the goalie and team B takes only 15 shots but they are all backdoor plays with no one defending the player that is open which team will score more goals?

If team A takes 30 shots at the goalie from the blueline with no traffic in front of the goalie and team B takes only 15 shots but they are all backdoor plays with no one defending the player that is open which team will score more goals?
- BlowMonkey

Does Team B have Toskala in net?

It is common knowledge to anybody who follows hockey that special teams play a big role in a teams failures and successes. That the game 5 on 5 produces only a portion of the overall scoring. The biggest portion, granted, but many goals come from special teams as well. These fenway, corsi and goonie goo goo stats completely ignore those variables and try to predict a teams ability to succeed without even bothering with them. Thats absurd, in my opinion.
- systemtool

I think they have some usefulness and I'd definitely look at advanced stats if I was betting, but they're just one stat.

I think they have some usefulness and I'd definitely look at advanced stats if I was betting, but they're just one stat.
- Zezel

That would be foolish.

It is common knowledge to anybody who follows hockey that special teams play a big role in a teams failures and successes. That the game 5 on 5 produces only a portion of the overall scoring. The biggest portion, granted, but many goals come from special teams as well. These fenway, corsi and goonie goo goo stats completely ignore those variables and try to predict a teams ability to succeed without even bothering with them. Thats absurd, in my opinion.
- systemtool

They do an ok job at showing how a team does possession-wise. Not really any better than what the faceoff stats show though (ie % of faceoffs taken in each zone). Until they start recording actual time with the puck in each zone we'll have to settle with these stats anyway.

The more you have the puck you better you do. Except when there exceptions. Usually. Sometimes.

Then there's PP, PK, goaltending, players being better shots than others, and any other variable.

Stats are fun to look at but they're just stats. I wouldn't make any bets based on them. Maybe I'd use them to make me feel better about a bet I was already going to make but that's it.