View Single Post
Old
06-18-2011, 09:12 PM
  #197
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 24,178
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
That's not true. Just because we've not seen him doesn't mean we have no information. We've been told that he's an above-average second-pairing D-man at the NHL level, from commenters as diverse as Pierre McGuire and Corey Pronman. I think he'll have a bit of a learning curve before he gets there, but it shouldn't be long.
We don't know how well he'll adjust and he's never played against NHL competition. He's got great potential and I'm excited that he's coming over but it's premature to say that he's going to be a huge difference maker for us. It's one thing to hope, it's another thing to have false expectations.

I hope he's great too though because we really need a tougher defensive guy in the lineup.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Spacek has gotten a bad rap, but he's better than his reputation. Montreal likes to chew up their own players like that.
I'd love to replace him. But I talked about this in the other thread so I won't elaborate here.


Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
One thing I like about Habs' management is that they don't make the all-too-common mistake of confusing physicality for defense. Everyone loves a big hitter and everything, but more often than not the positionally sound D-men are more effective, and it's not unheard of for a hitter type to take himself out of the play by trying to take the body. Not that it's impossible to be both physical and effective, but there's no intrinsic value to hitting, it is a tool.
There might not be an intrinsic statistical value to hitting but guys are going to think twice about going in front of the net if you clobber them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Komisarek didn't forget how to play hockey. He just no longer has Markov to babysit him.
He was never the seem after being smoked by Lucic. He stayed on with us and was largely ineffective with Markov. He just completely lost his confidence and was never the same again.

I guess somebody forgot to tell Lucic though that there's no intrinsic value in smoking another player. And I guess somebody forgot to tell that to the Sedin twins too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
No. I'm sick and tired of bringing things up and having them rejected with no basis at all. You don't have a scrap of anything to support your position and you keep arguing it as if it's some incontrovertible truth, and there's a bunch of research about it that you're not aware of that have looked at these things in detail.

I'm just about done wasting time and effort.
Stats need to be defended my friend. Saying that my arguments have 'no basis at all' does not lend creedence to what you've argued. Stats have to be able to endure scrutiny or they don't hold any water. You're talking like I'm just putting my hands over my ears and not listening... that hasn't been the case.

You asked me to read your sites, I did. You asked for reasons beyond luck as to why your stats don't match up with results and I think I've done a pretty good job in doing so. You aren't giving my arguments nearly enough respect here.


Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
You're grasping at straws and making up explanations because you're unaware how common this sort of thing is. Heck, the Bruins have gone low-high-low-high in shooting percentage over the last four years. This sort of thing happens and it's not because of some magic changes to their roster or playstyle. Like the Habs, the Bruins are no different from any team that's been in their situation.
See, this is what I'm talking about... you ask me what's the difference between the B's in 2010 and 2011 and then you scream... 'shooting percentage that's it!'

There was a huge change on that team from year to year. There top six had two guys who were much better from the year before. One, Horton wasn't on the club in 2010 and the other... Lucic made the expected strides in his development. It's not a surprise at all that they were better offensively with those two guys in the top six this season. That is not 'grasping at straws'... it is a logical explanation to your question.

Again though, it doesn't correspond with your calculator so I'm just making stuff up right? Before you ignore what I'm saying... think about it. Don't you think that there might be something to what I'm saying here?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
I could name more teams that have taken big transient swings in shooting percentage over the last few years. Colorado. Detroit. Philly. San Jose. There's a few every year. It never lasts. Shooting percentage at the team level is just not a sustainable talent.

Boston isn't special, and neither is Montreal.
Who cares? You've said that Detroit's shooting percentage was the same as Toronto's and yet Detroit scored something like 50 more goals. Why? Because they're a better team and get more shots to the net.

Since when did shooting percentage become the be all and end all of things? If I take one shot over an 82 game season and it results in a goal, my shooting percentage is 100% but I'm not likely to win any games other than maybe one if my goalie gets a shutout for me.


Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
Corsi is a lot more sustainable than shooting percentage. It is not impossible that it is a fluke, but it is far less likely than shooting percentage, especially because Montreal has been loading up on quality possession players and those players have merely returned to their career averages, whereas last year everyone was below.
We're coming off a wild swing here where you told us we were pathetic in 2010 and great in 2011. Who's to say we don't fall back into the middle of those two seasons? You say it's far more sustainable, well maybe it is and maybe some teams are consistently high in Corsi. But we've had a Jeckle and Hyde seasons back to back in this statistic so who knows what's going to happen next year?

I could at least understand it if we were consistently high in Corsi and you said that sooner or later the shooting percentage will improve but that hasn't been the case with us.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
If the Habs' puck possession goes down again, you will hear me screaming about it, don't doubt it, just like you heard it when it was horrid last year in spite of all the talent on the roster. But I don't think it will.

Dude, there's a lot of research that's gone into this stuff. No offense, but you keep arguing from a position of ignorance. And it is exceedingly frustrating to see you keep dismissing stuff that has research and evidence behind it based on nothing more than your personal impressions, which are naturally, as impressions are, molded based on your preconceived opinions.
I haven't dismissed it. I'm challenging it. There is a huge difference here. I have made the effort to try to understand the stats you've thrown at me and will continue to do so.

My belief right now is that the 'Sabremetrics' that you are using aren't at a mature enough level that they can offer strong accurate pictures of which players and teams will be successful. Perhaps there are others out there that I haven't read but I will always keep my mind open to it and I am willing to be convinced. The fact that I am not convinced now does not mean that I've dismissed anything.

It's pretty clear though that you've done what you're accusing me of. InYou've told me that there's no validity to what I've said. I'd say I've actually provided some strong arguments here and if you go back over them with an open mind you might actually start to see this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MathMan View Post
I also think you're underestimating the amount of talent on the Habs or, rather, overestimating what's on other individual teams. But it's a common problem with Habs fans, and it's probably fairly common among all fanbases.
I'd say I've been dead on for the past several years. I've categorized us as a bubble team and for the most part that's what we've been. I've argued that Price would be a star and so far that seems to be true too. I'm very happy with Subban and he's been as good as anyone could've hoped for. I didn't like the signings and said it would produce bubble teams. I said Cammy would be a 40 goal guy (missed on that one) and I said Gomez would be a horrific signing (though I never thought he'd sink below 50 points.) I think I've been pretty fair with my assessments actually.

I think we've got some good young players to build around and I felt we should've contributed to that instead of getting ovepaid FAs to come over here. I said that we'd be a mediocre team with those guys and that's what's happened but I know you don't want to hear about that.

As for most fan bases, I disagree. Most overestimate how good their teams are.


Last edited by Lafleurs Guy: 06-18-2011 at 09:19 PM.
Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote