View Single Post
11-29-2012, 11:40 AM
Talks to Goalposts
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,069
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by JohnnyOnTheSpot View Post
You ever watch Michael Handzus on the PK? As a Flyers fan, I'd cheer because it broke up cross ice passes for a clean breakaway constantly, then cry when I realized it was the mud monster, and he would be caught before he hit the red line. Takeaways aren't always the best hahaha.

As for Moneyball, it'd never work in the NHL, but the closest I think we see to the concept is the Predators. They continuously ice a competitive team every year, on a budget. They get the most out of the players, and when someone prices out, they manufacture a replacement. Baseball is a stat sport because it's X vs. Y, there are so many more variables in hockey and so much left to uncertainty. You smack one out of the park in baseball, it's a homerun. No matter how perfect of a shot you take, goalie can always interject.

Your making a huge leap from, "its harder than baseball because of X" to "it will never work." That doesn't follow at all.

All it actually means is the methods must be more sophisticated for them to work.

One of the real lessons of "Moneyball" was that you're understanding doesn't need to be perfect to be successful, it just has to be better than your competitors. You don't need a "Grand Unified Theory of Hockey" to have a leg up on other teams, just a better idea of what to value.

If you want to see an actual "Moneypuck" team, it was last year's Kings, who were built exactly the way modern hockey statistical theory said they should, especially on the acquisitions of Penner, Richards and Carter.

Last edited by Talks to Goalposts: 11-29-2012 at 11:49 AM.
Talks to Goalposts is offline   Reply With Quote