Reality is, you dont know whats a soft shot and whats a good shot when looking at daate because adv stats dont say so

What Leafman is trying to say. Its flawed.
- jbold

Shots on goals aren't advanced statistics.

The less you control the puck, the less shots you take and the more shots you allow. And chances are, the more goals you allow.

The Leafs are bottom 5 in shots for, dead last in shots against.
They're also 26th in Goals Against.

I'm not sure what you and Leafman are trying to say, but this is pretty damn clear to me.

Not sure. Think so. But most adv stat guys ignore it. Simply to get their point across.


Also. Those are track adv stats for sites. Whats their definition of a good quality scoring chance, a good shot, ect?

It definitely varies.

A soft wrister from the op of the circle against isnt a good shot and its not big deal, but for Senstroll, its a shot, which apparently is bad thing...
- jbold

I think this is what is driving me nuts about your posts amigo....advanced stat guys aren't just corsi guys.

I think this is what is driving me nuts about your posts amigo....advanced stat guys aren't just corsi guys.
- mykokes

Yes, they are.

THEY DON'T WATCH THE GAMES!!!

The fact Bernier and Reimer had such a high spct coupled with a high GAA facing those 40 soft shots tells me they weren't soft shots. Again to me the true definition of advanced stats is using all the stats at your disposal to draw out an opinion. The only thing black and white in hockey is wins and losses.....somehow that came across as racist.
- mykokes

I dont mind Adv stats. I just hate how those who use it, ignore most things just to prove themselves as 'right'.

I dont look at adv stats. I dont need fancy stats to tell me which leafs were bad, which leafs were good, and that we were giving up to many shots. Unlike some, I can see that for myself while watching a game. I dont need to check adv stat sites.

- Yeti1181

What are you laughing at? I've always been a voice of reason. It's just that my opinion can frighten some people because of it's intense honesty.

Some take it to the extreme, yes adv. stats are useful but you cannot use it as a complete tool to judge a player, like I said, why have scouts if adv.stats are 100% correct? No middle ground with some.
- LeafMan

And that's why Mirtle and Yost are at tsn. They provide one point of view. Take what you want from them, what you deem useful. Combine it will what guys like Bob Mac and others say. Form your own middle ground. But don't just ignore half the conversation simply because you dislike it.

What are you laughing at? I've always been a voice of reason. It's just that my opinion can frighten some people because of it's intense honesty.
- bloatedmosquito

sure

Shots on goals aren't advanced statistics.

The less you control the puck, the less shots you take and the more shots you allow. And chances are, the more goals you allow.

The Leafs are bottom 5 in shots for, dead last in shots against.
They're also 26th in Goals Against.

I'm not sure what you and Leafman are trying to say, but this is pretty damn clear to me.
- Pecafan Fan

We're trying to say, that Senstroll opinion is flawed while using ADV stats and Corsi crap.

"more shots against is bad... stop trying to pretend they are all weak meaningless shots"--- That is incredibly stupid.

I'm basically arguing quality vs quantity.

Something he doesnt get, simply because stats dont show it.

I dont mind Adv stats. I just hate how those who use it, ignore most things just to prove themselves as 'right'.

I dont look at adv stats. I dont need fancy stats to tell me which leafs were bad, which leafs were good, and that we were giving up to many shots. Unlike some, I can see that for myself while watching a game. I dont need to check adv stat sites.
- jbold

Funny how NHL teams stock full of professional and seasoned scouts and ex players in management still feel the need to hire people who check adv stats sites. I wonder why they don't just get these people to watch the games?

We're trying to say, that Senstroll opinion is flawed while using ADV stats and Corsi crap.

"more shots against is bad... stop trying to pretend they are all weak meaningless shots"--- That is incredibly stupid.

I'm basically arguing quality vs quantity.

Something he doesnt get, simply because stats dont show it.
- jbold

But the truth is, according to the leafs results, he's right...

And that's why Mirtle and Yost are at tsn. He provides one point of view. Take what you want from him, what you deem useful. Combine it will what guys like Bob Mac and others say. Form your own middle ground. But don't just ignore half the conversation simply because you dislike it.
- mykokes

I don't think he's ignoring, he's just saying some take it to the extreme

I dont mind Adv stats. I just hate how those who use it, ignore most things just to prove themselves as 'right'.

I dont look at adv stats. I dont need fancy stats to tell me which leafs were bad, which leafs were good, and that we were giving up to many shots. Unlike some, I can see that for myself while watching a game. I dont need to check adv stat sites.
- jbold

He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts...for support rather than illumination......

my favourite quote when it comes to statistics.

My favourite "stats" to judge players are:
ATOI-d-men--coupled with SHTOI and PPTOI
Shooting percentage-to determine if a guy is actually a scorer. THough this requires a little more looking into.

But the truth is, according to the leafs results, he's right...
- Pecafan Fan

I have to agree with you here. The more shots the better chance there is going to be more quality shots.

You lost me at "That's a whole different thing."
- 1979AD

Sorry, too many words. Next time I'll keep it to tweet length.

You can't see the flaws in your reasoning, that is what is pathetic. You assume that all the numbers are 100% correct. I'm pointing out it's flaws and not to take them as fact as you are doing, it is like analytic's are the NHL bible to you.
- LeafMan

that stuff has been taken into account and analyzed to death also... those flaws were brought up years ago ..lots of stuff out there addressing it

not my fault you want to ignore it and make it sound like you are finding some flaw that nobody else saw

Shots on goals aren't advanced statistics.

The less you control the puck, the less shots you take and the more shots you allow. And chances are, the more goals you allow.

The Leafs are bottom 5 in shots for, dead last in shots against.
They're also 26th in Goals Against.

I'm not sure what you and Leafman are trying to say, but this is pretty damn clear to me.
- Pecafan Fan

I prefer watching and paying attention to the game, I can see a guy hold on to the puck in the corner for 10 to 15 seconds then make a blind pass and the opposition goes up the ice and scores, what good was his possession time if he was instrumental in the goal against? Has to be in context.

There are so many variables that make these stats flawed, again, they can be used as a tool but nothing is better than good old watching the game, you can later augment it with the stats if you choose but if you payed attention while watching, it should be self evident, imo.

Funny how NHL teams stock full of professional and seasoned scouts and ex players in management still feel the need to hire people who check adv stats sites. I wonder why they don't just get these people to watch the games?
- 1979AD

I wonder why NHL teams just dont fire these professionals and seasoned scouts because Adv stats can do their job for them

I prefer watching and paying attention to the game, I can see a guy hold on to the puck in the corner for 10 to 15 seconds then make a blind pass and the opposition goes up the ice and scores, what good was his possession time if he was instrumental in the goal against? Has to be in context.


- LeafMan

This happened with Gardiner.

Good puck possession numbers. Adv stats crowd loves him. But if you watched the game, you'd know that he'd take the puck behind his net, skate up to the blueline, circle back and carry the puck for another 10 seconds..

I don't think he's ignoring, he's just saying some take it to the extreme
- Yeti1181

But that's what they're being asked to do, and that's what they're good at.

It's pretty obvious that Yost saw an opportunity with it, and good on him for making the most of it. I debated getting into the whole analytics field, but here's the thing, I barely understand any of it. It takes a certain individual to understand it, much the same way it takes a certain degree of whit and humour to be a columnist, a certain people skill to be able to conduct the perfect interview, a certain people skill to ask the right questions etc. etc.

No matter what, any and all coverage in hockey or even sports has some sort of bias. Which is why I think the more information that is out there, the better.

I prefer watching and paying attention to the game, I can see a guy hold on to the puck in the corner for 10 to 15 seconds then make a blind pass and the opposition goes up the ice and scores, what good was his possession time if he was instrumental in the goal against? Has to be in context.

There are so many variables that make these stats flawed, again, they can be used as a tool but nothing is better than good old watching the game, you can later augment it with the stats if you choose but if you payed attention while watching, it should be self evident, imo.
- LeafMan

That's an anecdote compared to a full season of data (nearly 3000 shots against).
There are variables, of course. But the fact is, more shots against = less possession = more goals against.

As shown by nothing more than the leafs record and basic statistics available on nhl.com

But that's what they're being asked to do, and that's what they're good at.

It's pretty obvious that Yost saw an opportunity with it, and good on him for making the most of it. I debated getting into the whole analytics field, but here's the thing, I barely understand any of it. It takes a certain individual to understand it, much the same way it takes a certain degree of whit and humour to be a columnist, a certain people skill to be able to conduct the perfect interview, a certain people skill to ask the right questions etc. etc.

No matter what, any and all coverage in hockey or even sports has some sort of bias. Which is why I think the more information that is out there, the better.
- mykokes

I agree with your last point 100%

No matter what, any and all coverage in hockey or even sports has some sort of bias. Which is why I think the more information that is out there, the better.
- mykokes

100 x yes

Shots on goals aren't advanced statistics.

The less you control the puck, the less shots you take and the more shots you allow. And chances are, the more goals you allow.

The Leafs are bottom 5 in shots for, dead last in shots against.
They're also 26th in Goals Against.

I'm not sure what you and Leafman are trying to say, but this is pretty damn clear to me.
- Pecafan Fan

explain colorado and montreal to me then

So, I think Josh Leivo could make this team this year. Thought he was the best player in that tournament.

We're trying to say, that Senstroll opinion is flawed while using ADV stats and Corsi crap.

"more shots against is bad... stop trying to pretend they are all weak meaningless shots"--- That is incredibly stupid.

I'm basically arguing quality vs quantity.

Something he doesnt get, simply because stats dont show it.
- jbold

I am saying with thousands or tens of thousands of data points the shot location info is not as valuable as you are making it our to be.

yes I get a break away is better than a screened point shot.. but thats not what I am talking about.