I don’t use this space to get on the soapbox much. In fact, rarely.
It is my hope that this blog will not only shed light on how I go about formulating a series prediction, but maybe will help drive a more respectful, analytical and fact-based dialogue about hockey here on this site—can’t hurt to try.
So on an off day before the Finals, my series prediction in, and my Game 1 Preview coming tomorrow, allow me to wax a bit on the value of predictions, opinions, etc., in advance of a series.
I have covered 19 playoff series in my tenure at HockeyBuzz. I have done previews on all of them. For what it’s worth, my accuracy is pretty good. I can’t recall if I’ve picked the Hawks in every series they’ve played in, in fact, I’m pretty sure that I picked Vancouver, at least, in the first round in 2011. But I think in that span I’m something like 16-3 or 15-4 as far as picking winners and I’m gonna say I’ve had the number of games right close to half the time. Not bad.
Also doesn’t hurt to cover the team with the best playoff record in that span either. Is that arrogant?
Well, arrogance is an entirely subjective interpretation that goes 50/50: what someone intends and how you choose to infer their intent. For my part, I do not intend to be arrogant.
I will say, having written 19 series predictions since 2009, and then covering the entirety of each series, there is a typical flow of information, retort, name-calling and sheer silliness that goes something like this:
I go through regular season and playoff statistics of both teams, head-to-head and likely line and pairing matchups, I form my opinions, I write the blog and include the statistics and trends and analyses that I form my opinions on, I post the blog.
The replies flow in (to the good):
“…Spot on.…
“I think you nailed it.…
“Great work.…
And to the negative.
“You’re disrespecting the (fill in team name).…
“You don’t know what you’re talking about.…
“You only use the facts that support your argument.…
“You’re a homer.…
Funny, there is a wide swath of the Hawk fan base and entire blog/web communities who have devoted significant bandwidth to portraying me as the Anti-Hawk, glass half full Hawk blogger.
So which is it?
I don’t know. I also don’t really care. It is all emotional overflow, especially at this time of year.
Someone called me a “name… on Michael Stuart’s thread this morning. Really. Someone who’s never met me, doesn’t know how old I am, how many kids I have, what kind of father I am, where I go to church, etc.
I’m “such a ______… because I wrote an “arrogant… blog predicting the Blackhawks would win the Stanley Cup Finals in 6 games, and I playfully noted that Stuart’s thread contained a lot of similar “Jaeckel’s arrogant… sentiment from Lighting, Duck and Predator fans.
OK, I’m “such a ______.… Point taken.
Touche’.
Yawn.
Now let me be blunt and say something not just in my defense, but that of every blogger who dares post a series preview and prediction.
If you’re going to attack a hockeybuzz blogger for making a prediction, sometimes based on reams of fact included in their blog, then please also go attack the “legitimate… writers who post essentially the same predictions, oftentimes with less factual support or in-depth analysis.
Or is that and are they somehow less arrogant? Like in the case of the Stanley Cup Finals, 9 out of 12 writers at ESPN who’ve taken Chicago. Kevin Allen, Barry Melrose, The Sporting News, Craig Button, and I’m certain many others who’ve had “arrogance… to take the Blackhawks.
So now the default argument is “you said the Lighting can only win if Bishop stands on his head. You’re not respecting the Lighting. You’re arrogant.…
No I didn’t say that—or just that. I also said if the Lightning push a wide open pace and the Hawks join it, the Lighting could get some bounces and win the series. Which to me indicates a fairly close, somewhat evenly matched series—albeit one that on paper at least favors Chicago.
I won’t re-litigate it here. But here’s the link. Go read it. All of it. Including the stats and trends and actual match ups.
http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog.php?post_id=68992
For that matter, read the Ducks Previews here (because that was also “arrogant…):
http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog/John-Jaeckel/Rundblads-On-The-PondHawks-in-6/128/68565
http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog/John-Jaeckel/A-Deeper-Look-At-The-WCF-Matchup/128/68624
And the Wild preview (same thing) where I called it too close to call, even though it didn’t really turn out that way,
http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog.php?post_id=68249
Is that arrogant? Or are fans just shooting the most convenient messenger? fine, i get it, that goes with the territory. But it also unnecessarily lowers the value of the dialogue.
So I will say, and this is the real point of this blog, if you’re going to have an opinion, have some facts to back it up.
“Our goalie is better than their goalie… is not a fact. It is an opinion. I read that this morning about why someone thinks Tampa will beat Chicago.
The facts are: Corey Crawford was marginally to somewhat better than Ben Bishop in the regular season, and their save percentages in the playoffs are about the same, although Bishop’s GAA is better. Crawford has also been here and done it before. Bishop to this point has not.
My “arrogant… blog also made clear that Crawford is not the equal of Carey Price and Henrik Lundqvist. But whatever.
“Our bottom 6 is better than Chicago’s… is also not a fact. It is an opinion, and based on regular season and playoff production, it is also completely wrong.
I welcome any or all opinions on my message board and honor them elsewhere, provided they are backed up by facts. And I pretty much always expect the same of myself.
You might not like the facts (tough way to go through life) or accuse me of being selective in my use of them, but I have also explained why I use certain stats and trends ‘til the cows come home.
Sure, there’s an element of homerism in my blogs, I am a fan. And, newsflash, so are many of the “respected… journalists who cover the game. I know a few of them personally. And there is a degree of homerism on my message board threads which, surprise, surprise, are populated by mostly Hawk fans
But what is ironic (and really pretty silly) is the cat-calling of “bandwagon (ie, post 2007/Jonathan Toews) fans…—by fans of expansion teams, when most posters on my thread have been fans of the Hawks going back as far as the 1950s.
Conversely, Hawk fans going after Pred or Bolt fans for their clubs’ ticket policies is on about the same level.
In fact, the hockey discussion on my threads (and this is all about the readers and not me) is some of the best pure hockey discussion I have seen anywhere on the internet, and shows ample respect for many Hawk opponents, including, yes, the Tampa Bay Lightning.
So, everyone, please. Relax. Read all of the blog, consider the full context, not just the parts you find offensive. Stop with the name-calling.
There is a lot to be learned on hockeybuzz, from true hockey thinkers like Ryan Wilson, Jammer who's written on the Blues, Pete Tessier, and others. I did not always agree with Travis Yost, and disagreed fairly publicly with him on the 2013 WCF, but Travis clearly knows his stuff and did when he contributed here.
And to be learned from numerous posters that include not just long-time fans, but other hockey journalists, former players, scouts, coaches, agents and even, rumor has it, a few current players.
Thanks for hearing me out,
JJ
Check out Hockey Streams. See NHL, AHL and CHL streamed in HD right to your computer, tablet or gaming device for a small donation: http://www.hockeystreams.com/ref/51981