View Single Post
02-22-2011, 02:11 AM
Registered User
THE HOFF's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,182
vCash: 500
just_thoughts ...

when you say that having more metric data will flush the problems away ... I have to disagree. Sometimes, to highlight one variable without taking another into consideration is worst than ignoring them both. To explain emotions and human reactions, I'd stay away from scientific behaviorism ...

Normal stats aren't perfect. But when have you seen a player being (-3) having a great game ? Sometimes , it happens, in the complexity of the game...the stats aren't always providing justice...but they do most of the time. once you start making some other variables count, the ones you neglect will hit your analysis twice as hard.

I fully expect some players to lose the puck ... ie: Gomez or PK ... as they are a good example of players I expect to try and beat an oponent 1v1, or carry the puck. The roles of players become very important when you decide to analyse things so deeply. A defensive mistake made by hall gill or jeff halpern should count more than a defensive mistake make by A.kos. . And with each game that goes by in which a top 6 player doesn't record a shot, his score should be affected... but then, what happens if he doesn't get fed properly...or if he did such a bad job at getting open ? you see where I'm getting... once you go down that road... the ''answer'' may become harder to find than by leaving some variables cancel each other out...

its only a comment... I respect the time and the energy you put into this... and I hope that your determination and scientific approach will prevail on my freudian comments.

THE HOFF is offline