Leafs win 3-2 in SO
View Single Post
03-21-2010, 10:57 AM
Join Date: Jul 2009
Originally Posted by
Oh dear jesus, the win-loss argument, again? I am going to have to spell out exactly why this is a terrible argument to make. In fact, you basically spell it out in this section of the post. "The team wins," exactly. It's the team that does the winning and the losing. Halak's effect on the team winning or losing cannot be just automatically assumed, otherwise, you're correlating two things without demonstrating a clear link between them. Saying "when halak is in net, we win more often" is alot like this:
1.) Halak is in net
3.) More wins!!! Yay!
Here's another example of correlation going wrong. Water freezes as the atmospheric temperature approaches 0. Mercury in a thermometer shrinks as the atmospheric temperature approaches 0. Therefore, water freezes because mercury in a thermometer shrinks.
The two are intimately linked, yet the role that "mercury shrinking" plays in water freezing is not established, and therefore, this argument is ridiculous.
Do you see what I'm saying? You can't take a function of a team(winning or losing) and attribute it to something as superficial as halak playing or not. A win loss stat does not take into account what role Halak played in that, only that he was there.
The stats don't lie(how could a number lie about what it is, itself?), but what they actually say is very easily misinterpreted. They only say in a very superficial way "what" happened, and not "how" it happened. Furthermore, the stats that you're most probably using are in no way a sophisticated enough metric to rely on alone.
I am not a Price hater and neither a halak basher. But what you are trying to say doesn't make sense at all. For sure Halak/Price isn't the only factor as to why the teams wins or not but still they have their role to play. And if you didn't knew... Halak/Price are part of the team and yes if halak lets in 10 goals in 10 shots the team looses and if he stop 50 shot on 50 shot the teams win...
Look at your schema and you will se it doesn't make any sense. You can't take two variable and isolate them. The fact is that with halak in net (variable 1) the teams (variable 2) tends to play better. One affect the other.
With your example of thermomether and mercury you are trying to do a link with two different variable who as nothing to link between so it's a very bad example. And like I said, if you are isolating variable 1 from variable 2 and says that they are working totally appart.
Unfurtonately I will go with number because I dont care if Price looses but it's not is fault or Halak win and it's not is fault because at the end of the day halaks gets the majority of the win and saying this is coincidence is denying the impact a Goalie can have on a team.
(Ps: I am not saying that halak nor price is better than the other)
Water + temperature = Ice
Mercury + Thermometer = Shrinks
Halak in net + Team = Better overall team effort (maybe more confidence) and leads to more win. (for sure it's not the only reason but still is true.)
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by FuriousBob