View Single Post
Old
12-07-2012, 01:47 PM
  #38
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MastuhNinks View Post
It's not so black and white, please just learn to think about what the numbers mean. I bring up advanced statistics a lot because it's the only objective argument we really have here, otherwise it would just be a bunch of people saying, "Nuh-uh, you're wrong!" "No you're wrong!" etc, and I have no need for that kind of idiocy. I've always maintained that individual statistics are not the be-all, end-all, but they can certainly put things in perspective. I don't know why you need to act so childish about it, I never once suggested that whoever has the higher corsi is automatically the better player. Phaneuf played some of the top competition in the league, when he was on the ice his team had more shots relative to the competition, and his team got scored on less. That last one is pretty hard to do when you're up against that high of a level of competition, even a defensive beast like Seabrook has a higher GA ON/60 than a GA OFF/60. Now here's the part where you go "OH MY GOD YOU MUST THINK PHANEUF IS BETTER THAN SEABROOK DEFENSIVELY," no, I do not think that, I am just putting the numbers in perspective. With all that said, how can you really say that Phaneuf is terrible defensively, given all that information? Just throw the word corsi out of your vocabulary right now, you seem to have a preconceived hatred against it. The facts are, Phaneuf played some of the toughest minutes in the league, his team outshot opposition more when he was on the ice, and his team was scored on less when he was on the ice. Does that really sound like a player who is terrible defensively?
Relative CORSI is a terrible stat. Why? Because A) CORSI is highly driven by who you are on the ice with, and B) Relative CORSI is your CORSI On compared with the team's CORSI when you are not on the ice. Phaneuf played on a team that is thin on offense and defense, and he often played with the best offensive players. so of course he's going to be putting up better numbers than guys like Franson, etc. who are spending most of their time with Tim Connolly, Matthew Lombardi, and David Steckel. RelCORSI hurts players who play for a deep team, such as Detroit or Vancouver. Detroit had four defensemen (including Quincey) in the top 30 in CORSI On last season, and that doesn't include Kronwall, who was stapled to the black hole that is Brad Stuart. So going by RelCORSI, the Wings' defensemen will be hurt a lot more than Phaneuf by their teammates' performances. Even though it's quite clear that the Wings are, in fact, much deeper on D than Toronto - especially before Lidstrom retired.

Using CORSI is like using +/-. It's a severely flawed statistic. As for GA On/GA off? That goes back to teammates. This board voted Erik Johnson as the 16th-best defensive defenseman. He's not even on his team's shutdown pair, and he was on for more than he was off for.

In other words: CORSI is a relatively useless tool because you can't just compare players individually based on team performance. It's no different than using GAA alone to determine the best goalie.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote