The Armchair GM Thread - Part XXX - Naughty Edition
View Single Post
09-28-2012, 10:19 AM
Join Date: Jul 2005
Originally Posted by
Drop the Sopel
That's exactly it, 160th at EV puts Booth in the below average 2nd line forward category.
Now how many forwards in the NHL come with a bigger cap hit? You would have to think much less than 160...
He's also been 24th and 33rd, with the only difference between those seasons and his last two being his on ice shooting percentage. Basically you've got a guy who in his last four qualifying seasons has twice scored like a top end first liner and twice scored like a bottom end second liner. If you average things out, he profiles like an above average second liner.
Originally Posted by
The two problems I have with Corsi are a) it seems to me that a player can boost his #'s without too much difficulty and
Obviously a player could (Scott Gomez is a prime example of this) but the point is that most players don't, and neatly fit into a small range of on-ice shooting percentages, meaning that Corsi is a better predictor that the quality of shots produced. Ideally, you'd use scoring chances to measure players, but there's around a .9 correlation between Corsi and scoring chances as measured by various stats websites over the last few years.
b) its a numerical representation of the player's on-ice performance and is not his actual performance - in other words, the devil is in the details - ex. Corsi might describe a single 45 second shift as 1 shot for and 2 against whereas the reality is much richer - broke up a pass, covered for his own dman, won 2 puck battles, kept cool after taking an elbow to the head. etc etc etc minor details.
Scurr already mentioned this but the key is that players that make those good plays will, over the long term, end up with more positive Corsi events than an equivalent player who doesn't make those plays. Corsi isn't a tool for short term evaluation - for that, no stat can beat the eyes (at least for now).
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by pitseleh