View Single Post
Old
11-03-2012, 02:42 PM
  #176
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,582
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Well those people, if they even exist in reality, would be incorrect as Bourque holds the advantage in Adjusted stats, which would make sense since he was the better offensive player.
If they exist eh?
Heh, there was a post in the History section just yesterday saying Lidstrom would be a 100 point player in the 80's and would wipe Bourque off the map when his defense is factored in so...lets just put to rest any notion that I'm chasing rainbows here shall we.


Quote:
These flaws you talk about only seem to exist in your mind as how Adjusted stats don't show the dominance , that you see with your favorite guys, rather than a real mathematical or systematic one.
No, there are flaws, it's not perfect and doesn't always give you an accurate representation.
And AGAIN, if you are only using AS's you are not making a very informed comparison.


Quote:
You didn't actually show that AS was off, it's still the same relationship to other players in those years as to their team situations, since everything is the same relationship wise as raw stats are.
It's not though. Top tier scoring hasn't dropped off by as much as as second tier scoring and second tier scoring hasn't dropped off as much as third tier and so on and so forth.
Adjusted stats figures out the value of a goal, that's all it does and the value of that goal is being driven up by the absence of goals from the lower tiers.
So while the value of a goal has gone up overall, the actual value of a goal from a first tier player(99% of the players we talk about around here) hasn't gone up by any where near the same as the value of a goal from a 3rd tier player has.


Example:
Team from 80's scored 325 goals
1rst line 125g
2nd line 100g
3rd line 75g
4th line 25g

Now that team is taken to today and they are now adjusted to have scored 265 goals, which of following would you think is more accurate...
That there is an exactly equal drop off between all 4 lines like so...
265 goals
1rst line 102g
2nd line 77g
3rd line 63g
4th line 20g

Or that there is more of a filtering effect where the less talented players are having a lot more trouble maintaining their previous scoring level than the more talented players are like so...
265 goals
1rst line 117g
2nd line 85g
3rd line 53g
4th line 10g

Especially considering that the second option is EXACTLY what the data on scoring by tier tells us from the 80's compared to today.

A 3rd line player today scoring 20 goals compared to a 3rd line player scoring 20 goals in 1985 has a hell of a lot more relative value than a 1rst line player scoring 50 goals today than a 1rst line player scoring 50 in 1985.

Chris Nilan playing as a 3rd/4th line enforcer had 21 goals in '85 along with 358pims and you want me to believe that according to adjusted stats, he's going to be a 17 goal scorer in today's NHL in that same role? Are you ****ing kidding me? He's going to score as many goals as Plekanec, Clowe or Wheeler?


So I really don't mind if you keep accusing me of going on a "Witch hunt" as long as you realise that there actually are "witches".


Last edited by Rhiessan71: 11-03-2012 at 03:22 PM.
Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote