View Single Post
Old
02-01-2012, 09:23 PM
  #362
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,908
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnLennon View Post
You're regurgitating nonsense that you read from others: Taking up Eller's ice time? Seriously? Eller has been crap lately. The only argument you have is that Gomez hasn't scored a goal in 50 games, and that is including his worst season of his life, and before and after his 30-GAME INJURY.
First, if Eller has been crap then Gomez has achieved a whole new level of excrement. One that produces a smell so bad that it's capable of breaking mirrors. Maybe that explains all the bad luck.

Secondly, I don't care if Eller has been crap or not. He's a kid that actually might have a future here. We should be worrying about THAT aspect of our team rather than fruitlessly trying to resusitate Gomez's career. We should be moving forward but instead we're stuck in neutral with this guy. So he hurts us now AND he hurts our future. Not sure why we keep playing him but...
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnLennon View Post
You brought no facts into the discussion, as I did, supporting your claim. You just make misinformed claims like "we win games in spite of him, not because of him" when the facts are CLEARLY against you on that. Corsi and Fenwick are much better indicators of his play than your "oh my god he hasn't scored in so long!" crap. A player can still play well while not scoring, and my whole argument is based on the fact that he hasn't been as bad as people claim..
Sure I did. You chose to ignore them. Here they are again... 0 goals in close to 50 games. 22 assists in that same time period. Those are facts man. Please pay attention to them because they are a hell of a lot more important than your CORSI stats.

And you're actually proving a point I made long ago. Microstats are not going to give you a great picture of how good a player actually is. They may not be completely useless but they certainly aren't near the value that some claim it is. I'm pretty sure Brett Hull would've had horrible puck possession numbers for example but he's going to be a lot better than those numbers indicate. You're letting microstats run amok here. Gomez is example A of this.

The whole point of microstats is to provide some kind of predictabity in terms of what a players' production will be. They should NOT be a substitution for production man. If a guy's CORSI numbers suck but he produces consistently, then for the love of God forget CORSI and go with the stats. But Gomez doesn't produce so you cling to CORSI as a means of defending him. You are letting the tail wag the dog and are so lost in your spreadsheet that you can't see what's going on on the ice.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnLennon View Post
I easily showed you 6 or 7 different statistics favoring Gomez, and you can only come up with your pathetic "he hasn't scored" and "that rating system is so flawed!" arguments. There is nothing going for you other than that: the stats show that when he is playing for the Habs, they are better than when he isn't. Maybe you should look up what the rating systems tell you, before ranting with your same used-up argument over and over again. You haven't proved anything except he hasn't scored. But you can't disprove that he has played well this season, because you have no evidence backing your claim, which I did.
And your stats don't mean squat. Sorry but they aren't a substitute for how he's produced. As for us having a better record with him in the lineup, I'd say that is coincidental. Sorry but he's not leading us to victories man, he's a passenger and that's why people are upset.

You sit there and say "SEE we have a better record with him in the lineup than without him." I say... so what? Yes, it's a fact (I'm taking your word for it) that our record is better with him in the lineup. That doesn't mean that it's a fact that he's the reason for that record. I have no problem with the facts you brought up there, it's the conclusion you've drawn from those stats that's problematic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnLennon View Post
It's like arguing with a child: no matter how much proof you show, they will repeat the same thing over and over until you just give up.
You want to hear something funny? When we traded for Gomez Mathman and I had a similar debate to what we're having now. I noted that Gomez's production had been slipping and was looking like it might be a trend. He screamed that Gomez's had great microstats and it supported him being better in the future. I said the guy would be a 2nd line center at best and he argued that the guy was pretty much a sure thing to produce better than he had.

Fast forward three years later and his production has actually gone from mediocre to horrific. It's even at the point now where you're telling us not to even expect 2nd line production out of him as though that's unrealistic. Even I'm surprised by how much he's sucked.

Look, if we can't rely on him to even be a 2nd line center, then what the hell are you defending him for? Seriously, if he can't produce at a 2nd line level then he's useless to us. Open your eyes to reality and just accept it man. It's not luck, it's just that he's sucked.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OneSharpMarble View Post
You know you are terrible when all your supporters have left to defend you are corsi numbers.
Yup. Hockey is a fluid game. These stats can't accurately reflect how good a player is going to perform on the ice. If Gomez isn't a glaring example of this, I don't know what is.


Last edited by Lafleurs Guy: 02-01-2012 at 09:30 PM.
Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote