in the case of the Hawks unlucky has to mean old or slower. Toews and Saad can both be found on a milk carton locally. Keith, although still effective cannot carry the defense. Seabrook has seen better days. Kane misses his Russian buddy Panarin.
How many times, and for how long, does something need to happen for it not to be considered "luck?"
If a team plays well, but loses 8-10 games straight, okay, I can buy that. If a team loses 20 games straight, that's not "luck," that's just not playing well. Further, if you win fewer games than half of your conference over 2 seasons, that's not "luck" that's just playing poorly.
You can take and allow all the shot attempts that you want, but if you don't score enough on your shots and stop enough of the shots you allow over 2 years, that's more of a lack of skill than of luck.
Luck... heart... team chemistry... all solid examples of things that DO play a huge part in winning, and yet are immeasurable in this new world of advanced stats.
Last year's Penguins possessed all three, while they mowed over arguably better teams on their way to a second Stanley Cup. They found a way to win, and it was luck, heart and team chemistry that got them through tough injuries to key players along the way.
The Caps? I think they've lacked in all three aspects, maybe until this season...?
Location: The centre of the hockey universe Joined: 07.31.2006
Feb 6 @ 10:43 AM ET
Of course, some will no doubt use the fact that the second through sixth best Corsi teams are out of the playoffs as "proof" that it's a "dumb stat," but they are welcome to go back through the years and see how often that happens.
- james_tanner1
The Penguins are currently third in the Metropolitan Division.
in the case of the Hawks unlucky has to mean old or slower. Toews and Saad can both be found on a milk carton locally. Keith, although still effective cannot carry the defense. Seabrook has seen better days. Kane misses his Russian buddy Panarin.
Hossa? we don't know if he'll ever play again.
This is how it is in the new NHL - weakglovehand
Kane misses Panarin?
You mean like Toews missed Saad? Yeah, THAT's working out well...
Wondering how this goes with your narrative that Chi is terrible GM, even tho the stats you love show they are actually an unlucky team and not as "bad" as you claim??
Wondering how this goes with your narrative that Chi is terrible GM, even tho the stats you love show they are actually an unlucky team and not as "bad" as you claim?? - Shyster19
Puck possession means nothing if you leak goals and can't defend. Especially Calgary and Edmonton. Calgary has the 13th place team +/- in the Western Conference. Edmonton is like 14 or 15th. +/- is the measure of a quality team. And imagine thats with Mike Smith being an allstar goalie and team MVP. +/- will usually correlate with a teams position in the Standings. Also single players like Gaudreau or McDavid will skew the corsi prop up the team numbers. When ever there on the ice they'll control the puck heavily. Corsi is a misleading team stat. Definately not a correlation to a good team as those teams prove. You can have a poor team with great individual players who will drive that stat.
Location: The centre of the hockey universe Joined: 07.31.2006
Feb 6 @ 12:09 PM ET
And all five teams (Wedgie edit: including Edmonton) happen to be in the bottom half of the league in 5v5 shooting percentage. And if you look at their rosters, they are all among the best on paper in the NHL. Between them, you've got what, five of the best seven or eight players in the NHL? Each of these teams has been sandbagged by occasionally shaky goaltending, and a low shooting percentage.
But that doesn't mean they are bad teams. The management of each of these teams would be smart to realize that short term results are nearly random and that they've actually built decent teams. Overreacting would be a terrible move. Trust the process.
- james_tanner1
Good advice, Tanner. I'm on board with this. You've clearly thought this out - over-reacting would be bad. Edmonton needs to stay the course.
The best place for Rick Nash is Edmonton. The Oilers - for some inexplicable reason - could use a scoring winger and Nash fits the bill. A lot of people think the Oilers are terrible, but I think they will surprise everyone and make the playoffs - at the very least come close.
While the Capitals have won despite poor analytics, the Oilers have the opposite problem. Over the course of time this should balance out. Realistically, there probably isn't enough time for that to happen this year, but if the Oilers get some luck to go with just playing well, I think they can win 9/10 and get back into the race. For that reason, they should trade for Rick Nash, who can't possibly cost that much. - Tanner
Wait, what?
The Edmonton Oilers - who SportsClubStats.com gives a 0.8 per cent chance of making the playoffs this year - should trade for an aging veteran who is a UFA at the end of the year?
Puck possession means nothing if you leak goals and can't defend. Especially Calgary and Edmonton. Calgary has the 13th place team +/- in the Western Conference. Edmonton is like 14 or 15th. +/- is the measure of a quality team. And imagine thats with Mike Smith being an allstar goalie and team MVP. +/- will usually correlate with a teams position in the Standings. Also single players like Gaudreau or McDavid will skew the corsi prop up the team numbers. When ever there on the ice they'll control the puck heavily. Corsi is a misleading team stat. Definately not a correlation to a good team as those teams prove. You can have a poor team with great individual players who will drive that stat. - morrison1980
Can you please stop using logic and context and just look at the raw numbers like Saint Tanner does?
You mean like Toews missed Saad? Yeah, THAT's working out well... - skridscousin
Not sure why he wrote that Kane misses Panarin as it certainly doesn't show on the ice. From a fan's perspective, I wish they were still playing together, because they had amazing hockey chemistry. Regardless, Kane has been one of the few bright spots in an otherwise dismal year for the Blackhawks.
Toews and Saad are a big mystery to me. Why they are struggling to regain the same magic they had together in the first go around is hard to understand. They are both very talented players, and hopefully they can figure it out because they are both locked up contract wise for at least 4 more years.
It will be interesting to see if they Penguins suffer the same gradual decline that the Blackhawks have over the past 3 years after a similar stretch of elite success, although Chicago’s regression has included peaks and valleys along the way (first round exit to the St. Louis Blows in 2016, albeit in a grueling 7 games series… followed by winning the Western Conference regular season point total in 2017, but losing to the 8th seed Preds in the first round… and now struggling to reach .500 this year).
Tanner is right about the parity in the league in terms of the regular season, something the salary cap certainly contributes heavily to. The ability to maintain a steady pipeline of young talent is extremely difficult when you are always drafting late first round. Not all teams are afforded the luxury of consecutive draft windfalls like a Toews & Kane (2006/2007) or Malkin & Crosby (2004/2005). Not surprisingly, the Penguins and Blackhawks have won 6 of the last 9 Stanley Cups, although it contradicts the parity concept created relative to the regular season.
If corsi is the thing that most correlates with winning, and five of the top six corsi teams are losing, then there might be something wrong with your statistic. Maybe it doesn't correlate with winning the way some people think it does. Maybe it's just another stat that can sometimes be linked with winning.
If corsi is the thing that most correlates with winning, and five of the top six corsi teams are losing, then there might be something wrong with your statistic. Maybe it doesn't correlate with winning the way some people think it does. Maybe it's just another stat that can sometimes be linked with winning. - mgriffen
In an ideal world where all things are equal, taking more shot attempts than you allow should equate to scoring more goals than the opposition and winning more often than not. However, hockey is not an ideal world, and things like "skill" and "strategy" often come into play.
Location: avid reader of the daily douche news Joined: 03.14.2014
Feb 6 @ 12:37 PM ET
If corsi is the thing that most correlates with winning, and five of the top six corsi teams are losing, then there might be something wrong with your statistic. Maybe it doesn't correlate with winning the way some people think it does. Maybe it's just another stat that can sometimes be linked with winning. - mgriffen
I’d say it’s about 80% accurate. But tanner seems to think it should guarantee playoffs and if you’re not in the playoffs it can only be luck.
Bad goaltending and lack of scoring talent has Carolina with both below average save percentage and shooting percentage year, after year, after year, after year….nothing to do with luck.
But tanner’s superficial views lend themselves better to hawt takes rather than actual thought.
C'mon James... earlier in the year, you proclaimed the Blackhawks to be the most overrated team in the league, now you are including them as one of the 5 best teams because they are ranked 3rd in corsi
On a different note, do you think Der Kommissar Gary Bettman is making a mistake by advocating against sending NHL players to Pyeongchang to compete in the Olympics?
[url]
Falco has mad skating skills here... someone should try these moves during the overtime shootout.
Not sure why he wrote that Kane misses Panarin as it certainly doesn't show on the ice. From a fan's perspective, I wish they were still playing together, because they had amazing hockey chemistry. Regardless, Kane has been one of the few bright spots in an otherwise dismal year for the Blackhawks.
Toews and Saad are a big mystery to me. Why they are struggling to regain the same magic they had together in the first go around is hard to understand. They are both very talented players, and hopefully they can figure it out because they are both locked up contract wise for at least 4 more years.
It will be interesting to see if they Penguins suffer the same gradual decline that the Blackhawks have over the past 3 years after a similar stretch of elite success, although Chicago’s regression has included peaks and valleys along the way (first round exit to the St. Louis Blows in 2016, albeit in a grueling 7 games series… followed by winning the Western Conference regular season point total in 2017, but losing to the 8th seed Preds in the first round… and now struggling to reach .500 this year).
Tanner is right about the parity in the league in terms of the regular season, something the salary cap certainly contributes heavily to. The ability to maintain a steady pipeline of young talent is extremely difficult when you are always drafting late first round. Not all teams are afforded the luxury of consecutive draft windfalls like a Toews & Kane (2006/2007) or Malkin & Crosby (2004/2005). Not surprisingly, the Penguins and Blackhawks have won 6 of the last 9 Stanley Cups, although it contradicts the parity concept created relative to the regular season. - Katana777
Beyond this season, it could get interesting for the Pens. We'll still have Sid and Geno, but that chemistry thing... or lack of... has already made it's appearance this season, as it's really taken the team quite some time to get going without Bonino, Cullen and Kunitz. All the stats say 'you can just replace those guys with other guys'... I don't know about that, and thus the point I was trying to make with Tanner. Heart, chemistry... and luck... all are immeasurable, but play a HUGE part in a team's success.
You are what your record says you are. If your going to blame luck, then blame the refs. At least we know the refs are real and affect games.... - Queenie_5_hole
Luck affects the game as well, although the definition of luck can be debated. Would you consider a weird bounce of the puck off your own player and into the net in overtime of game 7 of the conference finals to be anything other than luck? Because it cost us what coulda/woulda/shoulda been 3 Stanley Cups in a row.
Luck... heart... team chemistry... all solid examples of things that DO play a huge part in winning, and yet are immeasurable in this new world of advanced stats.
Last year's Penguins possessed all three, while they mowed over arguably better teams on their way to a second Stanley Cup. They found a way to win, and it was luck, heart and team chemistry that got them through tough injuries to key players along the way.
The Caps? I think they've lacked in all three aspects, maybe until this season...? - skridscousin
I disagree with the last part. The Caps have always had good chemistry and there isn't a player in the game with more heart than Ovi. They have just had a ton of bad luck the last few years. and before that they had a terrible team other than their first line.
I disagree with the last part. The Caps have always had good chemistry and there isn't a player in the game with more heart than Ovi. They have just had a ton of bad luck the last few years. and before that they had a terrible team other than their first line. - Maverick1818
Is the other team having a goalie playing really well now considered "luck?"
Luck affects the game as well, although the definition of luck can be debated. Would you consider a weird bounce of the puck off your own player and into the net in overtime of game 7 of the conference finals to be anything other than luck? Because it cost us what coulda/woulda/shoulda been 3 Stanley Cups in a row.
- Katana777[url]
Yes, I would consider that one specific play "luck."
However, the only reason that anyone remembers that play is because both teams were very skilled and used that skill (not "good luck") to get there.
Luck making you lose one or two games on a few bad bounces...okay, sure. Luck making you seem worse than you actually are over an 82 game season...I'm not buying it.
