(frank)ing Gerbe let his girlfriend go on his commissioner account and what did she do? Ban me from the league. Great
- chilliard77

Wtf?
Come on now Gerbe
U gotta fix that nonsense ASAP sir
Not cool

crappy way to treat girgens

put pouliot on the 4th line
- homiedclown

Agreed. Girgs has been one of their best players so far this year. Pouliot one of their worst.

Sabres stop Subban Jr's winning streak at 1. Sabres win 4 - 1. The big guns all score tonight - Jack, Kane, ROR and Okposo.

Wtf?
Come on now Gerbe
U gotta fix that nonsense ASAP sir
Not cool
- jdfitz77

He did. Apparently she needed to use my account to put Taylor in his place

fwiw Rejnhart has some of the best fancy stats for the year so far, and for the last 2 years. It's inconceivable cuz he gets knocked down more than anyone and is slower than anyone not named Matt Moulson.

BUT if we deal him, he will probably go on to make us regret it.

Sorta similarly, I'd much rather have Pysyk (sorry Kaiser) right now than what we got for him (which is a steaming skin-tag of nothing).

It is a small sample size, so u may be right in that it isn’t necessarily Gorges

BUT
Corsi is a terrible way to judge effectiveness & production
Always has been
It’s just a bigger sample size of a stat like +/- which is FLAWED

The above was spoken on WGR by an analytics expert they had on a week or so ago
Basically what I’ve been saying the whole time
- jdfitz77

I responded when you posted that. What he said was flawed too.

+/- measures a very, very small sample of events. Shots measure a large sample. So do scoring chances. The point is to make the sample as large as possible to have more info to base an opinion on.

It's also not just shots, Gorges has been on the ice for more scoring chances against than he is on for.

If he's good defensively, why do teams get more scoring chances with him on the ice?

In 3 games, Antipin was on the ice for 12 scoring chances against. In the next 3 games, Gorges has been on the ice for 12 scoring chances against.

I don't see a big difference at all, besides putting someone with offensive ability in the press box

(frank)ing Gerbe let his girlfriend go on his commissioner account and what did she do? Ban me from the league. Great
- chilliard77

He’s your boy, why rating on him calling him out lik3 that on a public forum?

He’s your boy, why rating on him calling him out lik3 that on a public forum?
- IonSabres

A. I called him out in private too

B. I wanted to make sure nobody else was removed

He did. Apparently she needed to use my account to put Taylor in his place
- chilliard77

I’ve been giving him sh!t,
but only bc he won’t stop running his mouth
He’s such a little punkass

I responded when you posted that. What he said was flawed too.

+/- measures a very, very small sample of events. Shots measure a large sample. So do scoring chances. The point is to make the sample as large as possible to have more info to base an opinion on.

It's also not just shots, Gorges has been on the ice for more scoring chances against than he is on for.

If he's good defensively, why do teams get more scoring chances with him on the ice?

In 3 games, Antipin was on the ice for 12 scoring chances against. In the next 3 games, Gorges has been on the ice for 12 scoring chances against.

I don't see a big difference at all, besides putting someone with offensive ability in the press box
- sbroads24

I missed your response then,
but just bc Corsi is a bigger sample size doesn’t mean that it isn’t flawed

On EVERY SHOT...
there’s guys who are doing their job perfectly, yet that shot still counts against them

It’s a terrible way to look at production

I responded when you posted that. What he said was flawed too.

+/- measures a very, very small sample of events. Shots measure a large sample. So do scoring chances. The point is to make the sample as large as possible to have more info to base an opinion on.

It's also not just shots, Gorges has been on the ice for more scoring chances against than he is on for.

If he's good defensively, why do teams get more scoring chances with him on the ice?

In 3 games, Antipin was on the ice for 12 scoring chances against. In the next 3 games, Gorges has been on the ice for 12 scoring chances against.

I don't see a big difference at all, besides putting someone with offensive ability in the press box
- sbroads24

To your point on Antipin vs Gorges...
I haven’t watched closely, and that’s why I didn’t weigh in

But my point would be...
depends how many of the scoring chances were actually the result of Antipin or Gorges

On any given play...
that scoring chance could be the result of someone else’s mistake,
and thus shouldn’t be reflective on how they’re actually playing

Just bc the sample size is bigger,
it doesn’t take away the inherent flaw in comparing guys by Corsi, or scoring chances, or +/-
U could say that Corsi or scoring chances allowed is better than +/-, and I’d agree...

but both are still flawed

I responded when you posted that. What he said was flawed too.

+/- measures a very, very small sample of events. Shots measure a large sample. So do scoring chances. The point is to make the sample as large as possible to have more info to base an opinion on.

It's also not just shots, Gorges has been on the ice for more scoring chances against than he is on for.

If he's good defensively, why do teams get more scoring chances with him on the ice?

In 3 games, Antipin was on the ice for 12 scoring chances against. In the next 3 games, Gorges has been on the ice for 12 scoring chances against.

I don't see a big difference at all, besides putting someone with offensive ability in the press box
- sbroads24

Does that take into account situational usage? Just wondering, from eyeball only, it seems that Gorges is more of a shutdown role, he's not going to be jumping into the play much just making sure others don't score.

Yes I understand the best defense keeps the puck out of their own zone, but this team isn't there yet, so if he's out there for a bunch of scoring chances from teams top line players mainly in a defensive role, I can understand that.

Is that 5 v 5 rating only?

I'm interested so I'd like to know.

I missed your response then,
but just bc Corsi is a bigger sample size doesn’t mean that it isn’t flawed

On EVERY SHOT...
there’s guys who are doing their job perfectly, yet that shot still counts against them

It’s a terrible way to look at production
- jdfitz77

I think what people miss is that Corsi is just one of dozens of stats that are looked at.

It's put on some pedestal as like the only thing analytics people measure, when that's entirely false.

Any 1 stat is a terrible way to rank or judge a player.

It's like saying Evander Kane is better than Eichel because Kane had 28 goals and Eichel had 23, while ignoring assists, shots etc. It's a peice to the puzzle. Not the answer to anything.

I responded when you posted that. What he said was flawed too.

+/- measures a very, very small sample of events. Shots measure a large sample. So do scoring chances. The point is to make the sample as large as possible to have more info to base an opinion on.

It's also not just shots, Gorges has been on the ice for more scoring chances against than he is on for.

If he's good defensively, why do teams get more scoring chances with him on the ice?

In 3 games, Antipin was on the ice for 12 scoring chances against. In the next 3 games, Gorges has been on the ice for 12 scoring chances against.

I don't see a big difference at all, besides putting someone with offensive ability in the press box
- sbroads24

I’m not sufficiently versed in the stats, but if what I’m understanding is the case, this is a really bad argument to say advanced stats are better than +/- . Whether for or against, if a shot is registered as datum for all players on the ice without regard to their actual involvement in the play, it’s unreliable data. By increasing the sample size, you’re not affecting the quality of the data, only the quantity. A lot of unreliable data is no more informative than a little bit of unreliable data.

Does that take into account situational usage? Just wondering, from eyeball only, it seems that Gorges is more of a shutdown role, he's not going to be jumping into the play much just making sure others don't score.

Yes I understand the best defense keeps the puck out of their own zone, but this team isn't there yet, so if he's out there for a bunch of scoring chances from teams top line players mainly in a defensive role, I can understand that.

Is that 5 v 5 rating only?

I'm interested so I'd like to know.
- gcomella34

It doesn't, but that stuff is measured. It is 5 on 5 only.

The problem with the "shut down" point IMO, is that blocking a shot or chipping it of the boards, so that the opposition can just wind up and shoot again, or carry right back into your zone, is an awfully over rated part of defending.

I'll take the guy who might make a mistake now and then, but can handle passing it out of the zone and creating a chance the other way, over a guy like Gorges.

To your point on Antipin vs Gorges...
I haven’t watched closely, and that’s why I didn’t weigh in

But my point would be...
depends how many of the scoring chances were actually the result of Antipin or Gorges

On any given play...
that scoring chance could be the result of someone else’s mistake,
and thus shouldn’t be reflective on how they’re actually playing

Just bc the sample size is bigger,
it doesn’t take away the inherent flaw in comparing guys by Corsi, or scoring chances, or +/-
U could say that Corsi or scoring chances allowed is better than +/-, and I’d agree...

but both are still flawed
- jdfitz77

I'd rather see what we have in antipin than reheat Tennyson for another year. I'd rather watch Fedun than both of them plus Gorges though

It doesn't, but that stuff is measured. It is 5 on 5 only.

The problem with the "shut down" point IMO, is that blocking a shot or chipping it of the boards, so that the opposition can just wind up and shoot again, or carry right back into your zone, is an awfully over rated part of defending.

I'll take the guy who might make a mistake now and then, but can handle passing it out of the zone and creating a chance the other way, over a guy like Gorges.
- sbroads24

I can't say I fully agree, but I am intrigued by your point. I'd like to see how this plays out as intuitively it seems to make sense.

(frank)ing Gerbe let his girlfriend go on his commissioner account and what did she do? Ban me from the league. Great
- chilliard77

Girls don't exist in my life.

Girls don't exist in my life.
- GERBE!!!75PTS

I’m not sufficiently versed in the stats, but if what I’m understanding is the case, this is a really bad argument to say advanced stats are better than +/- . Whether for or against, if a shot is registered as datum for all players on the ice without regard to their actual involvement in the play, it’s unreliable data. By increasing the sample size, you’re not affecting the quality of the data, only the quantity. A lot of unreliable data is no more informative than a little bit of unreliable data.
- Der Kaiser

What you are doing with larger sample sizes is finding trends.

If a guy scores 1 goal, in 1 game, but it's defelcted off his ass, that goal is unreliable to base any opinion of said player on.

If a guy scores 40 goals, over a full season, chances are most of them weren't flukes, and you can probably get a good gauge on whether he's good or not.

After 10 years of Josh Gorges being on the ice for WAY more shots and chances against, I think it's more of a trend than unreliable

What you are doing with larger sample sizes is finding trends.

If a guy scores 1 goal, in 1 game, but it's defelcted off his ass, that goal is unreliable to base any opinion of said player on.

If a guy scores 40 goals, over a full season, chances are most of them weren't flukes, and you can probably get a good gauge on whether he's good or not.

After 10 years of Josh Gorges being on the ice for WAY more shots and chances against, I think it's more of a trend than unreliable
- sbroads24

Could come into play that reason is more ice time and vs better players . Can you really judge from it ?

Could come into play that reason is more ice time and vs better players . Can you really judge from it ?
- cabin

When everyone on the ice is a better player than Josh Gorges, then it's a problem

When everyone on the ice is a better player than Josh Gorges, then it's a problem
- jcragcrumple

Could come into play that reason is more ice time and vs better players . Can you really judge from it ?
- cabin

Yeah, it matters, but over time that stuff isnt as big of a difference as people think.

Over Gorges career, he's played on different pairs, with different partners against different types of competition, and the results are really similar.

I'd rather see what we have in antipin than reheat Tennyson for another year. I'd rather watch Fedun than both of them plus Gorges though
- jcragcrumple

That’s fair
I wasn’t trying to make an argument for anyone on particular

Just saying that using Corsi as a measure for who’s playing better than others is flawed

- cabin

Seriously though, my problem with Gorges is that, honestly, you'll get 80% respectable, safe play and 20% blunders due to lack of speed. But you're guaranteed to never get an exceptional play, or even a goal for that matter. It's the ultimate safe play to put him in the lineup, but the coach can frame it as a move for intangibles and leadership and accountability