David Rundblad trying to play Defense in the NHL. ^^

The problem is that he benefits from how he is used, and who he plays with, and the stats, are due to that, and not to his actual individual play. That is why you have to actually watch the game, and watch the player. Analytics by themselves, can only tell you what happens on the ice. Why they happen, requires analysis.
- MJL

When I see comments as idiotic as this I get why Tanner gets so frustrated.

Subban and letang over every d man on the Canadian roster!! They are the best 2 (including doughty) ... It's a joke....
- Brianandr1

Never forget the day James Tanner got absolutely destroyed in a debate about stats by TheMartimer and refused to respond because he had no rebuttal

http://www.hockeybuzz.com...p?thread_id=132362&page=5
- rangerdanger94

The Maritimer is a blowhard who comes on here to brag. Was here about a week ago to make sure we all know he's a world traveler. He says he rarely reads the blogs-too cool you know-but then he quotes Jim word for word from past blogs. If you guys are impressed with that tool I feel sorry for you, unless you're very young and easily fooled. If he's really a Maritimer he's not like any I know, thank goodness.

The Maritimer is a blowhard who comes on here to brag. Was here about a week ago to make sure we all know he's a world traveler. He says he rarely reads the blogs-too cool you know-but then he quotes Jim word for word from past blogs. If you guys are impressed with that tool I feel sorry for you, unless you're very young and easily fooled. If he's really a Maritimer he's not like any I know, thank goodness.
- shack67

"Sure he laid an epic beat down on Jimbo, but I personally don't like him, so that somehow negates the points he made."


Yeah, right on, kiddo.

Please tell me you're just being obtuse on purpose here, because the point I was making doesn't seem that hard to grasp - every player gets utilized how the coach thinks will make him more effective and as such it isn't a very good argument to detract from what he's done just because its much better than you would have expected from that player.

In short, when anyone says "Player X is garbage and his success is only due to how he was deployed" they are making a bad argument.

Obviously I agree Patrick Kane is an excellent player.
- James_Tanner

If Runblad was still a Hawk Jaeckel would would be singing his praises. Biggest homer on the Buzz.

"Sure he laid an epic beat down on Jimbo, but I personally don't like him, so that somehow negates the points he made."


Yeah, right on, kiddo.
- Steven_Seagull

I don't agree about the so-called beatdown. All I read was the ramblings of a guy who thinks way too much of himself. And he started his diatribe by hurling insults and when James refused to debate him it was genius. You could here the air come out of his inflated ego.

I don't agree about the so-called beatdown. All I read was the ramblings of a guy who thinks way too much of himself. And he started his diatribe by hurling insults and when James refused to debate him it was genius. You could here the air come out of his inflated ego.
- shack67

Sure thing, kiddo.

When I see comments as idiotic as this I get why Tanner gets so frustrated.
- djamon

Are you sure you're not Tanner?


Curious as to why you didn't actually address or discuss any of the points I made. No need for you to do so. I know why you didn't.

Are you sure you're not Tanner?


Curious as to why you didn't actually address or discuss any of the points I made. No need for you to do so. I know why you didn't.
- MJL

I'm sure it's taken you a long time and a lot of effort to come to your opinions, there's not much point in trying to change your mind now.

I'm sure it's taken you a long time and a lot of effort to come to your opinions, there's not much point in trying to change your mind now.
- djamon

You don't have a point. That's the reality. If you actually did, you'd have responded differently.

Hey James,
I commented on the last blog and was just wondering if you would give me your thoughts on it. Thanks

You don't have a point. That's the reality. If you actually did, you'd have responded differently.
- MJL

As soon as someone says "you have to watch the game" I know they're missing the point. How do you think statistics are collected...guesswork? It's just too idiotic to bother with (and yet here I am). Deniers think statistics exist outside reality, when in fact they represent reality.

There's no bias to them, no qualifications...they're just counting. You can understand that, can't you?

As soon as someone says "you have to watch the game" I know they're missing the point. How do you think statistics are collected...guesswork? It's just too idiotic to bother with (and yet here I am). Deniers think statistics exist outside reality, when in fact they represent reality.

There's no bias to them, no qualifications...they're just counting. You can understand that, can't you?
- djamon

No, I think it is you that is missing the point. The point is that stats alone, cannot paint the complete picture. In order to get the complete picture, you need to watch the game. You can understand that, can't you?

The bias is in the conclusions drawn from the stats. They require analysis. You can understand that, can't you?

As soon as someone says "you have to watch the game" I know they're missing the point. How do you think statistics are collected...guesswork? It's just too idiotic to bother with (and yet here I am). Deniers think statistics exist outside reality, when in fact they represent reality.

There's no bias to them, no qualifications...they're just counting. You can understand that, can't you?
- djamon

I'm pretty sure a two year old can understand that. I think the debates lies in how one or many statistics qualify as a measuring stick for ranking individual players. There is no consensus that statistic X is an iron clad metric for determining who the best forward is.

There are hundreds of statistics, hundreds of variables, and James Tanner

I'm pretty sure a two year old can understand that. I think the debates lies in how one or many statistics qualify as a measuring stick for ranking individual players. There is no consensus that statistic X is an iron clad metric for determining who the best forward is.

There are hundreds of statistics, hundreds of variables, and James Tanner
- sbroads24

Wow, someone understands it. I love it when someone tells you what you said was idiotic, when they themselves are the ones who don't understand.

and I'm guessing many of the people who seem to get our of bed everyday just to rip this blog won't - the point is to illustrate the vast difference between a vision of the game that is objective and just takes the numbers at face-value, and one that holds to more traditional methods of player evaluation.
- tanner

There is NOTHING objective whatsoever, about your use of numbers.

You blindly and willfully accept your pet stats as the one and only gospel truth and everyone with a dissenting opinion is stupid or narrowminded.

The fact that you can't see the irony in your position is actually pretty hilarious.

This is completely false and backwards. Errors matter more than you think, and they matter more than corsi does. Corsi is a team stat, not an individual stat. The confirmation bias here is looking at Runblad's stats and thinking they out weigh Runblad's actual play, and has more value than actually watching him play. Anyone who has actually watched Runblad play, knows that he is a borderline NHL player. Players stats can be padded by a number of factors, especially corsi.
- MJL

Give up.

He is either a troll, or an absolute (frank)ing idiot.

As soon as someone says "you have to watch the game" I know they're missing the point. How do you think statistics are collected...guesswork? It's just too idiotic to bother with (and yet here I am). Deniers think statistics exist outside reality, when in fact they represent reality.

There's no bias to them, no qualifications...they're just counting. You can understand that, can't you?
- djamon

I think you mean data, events and/or datasets have no bias. Correlative statistics always carry a bias. It is actually standard practice in academia and in discussion of statistics to disclose both known and potential biases of the statistical tools used in the discussion. In this case they have been discussing correlative statistics. So there will always be a bias, even if unintended it is inherent.

No, I think it is you that is missing the point. The point is that stats alone, cannot paint the complete picture. In order to get the complete picture, you need to watch the game. You can understand that, can't you?

The bias is in the conclusions drawn from the stats. They require analysis. You can understand that, can't you?

- MJL

If you want to augment the statistics with observations that's fine. If you want to ignore the statistics in favour of your observations then you're making a common mistake.

I'm pretty sure a two year old can understand that. I think the debates lies in how one or many statistics qualify as a measuring stick for ranking individual players. There is no consensus that statistic X is an iron clad metric for determining who the best forward is.

There are hundreds of statistics, hundreds of variables, and James Tanner
- sbroads24

No one...not even Tanner...is claiming there's an individual statistic that will determine that. That's just a strawman argument.

If you want to augment the statistics with observations that's fine. If you want to ignore the statistics in favour of your observations then you're making a common mistake.
- djamon

I think you're making a common mistake of assuming something that isn't the case. Not to mention that you obviously have made yourself look foolish by calling my statement idiotic, when you clearly didn't understand what was being said. Instead of actually discussing it, you chose the tact that you took.

No one...not even Tanner...is claiming there's an individual statistic that will determine that. That's just a strawman argument.
- djamon

Might want to review his comments on Runblad and the 55% corsi rating that he referenced while stating that Runblad was a good player.

I think you're making a common mistake of assuming something that isn't the case. Not to mention that you obviously have made yourself look foolish by calling my statement idiotic, when you clearly didn't understand what was being said. Instead of actually discussing it, you chose the tact that you took.
- MJL

Your statement was idiotic though. Sorry.

Tanner who gets signed and or invited to a camp first :
Rundblad or Grossman?