View Single Post
03-30-2013, 09:44 AM
Dark Cloud
LSCII's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Central MA
Country: United States
Posts: 34,964
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by sjaustin77 View Post
First, thanks that you appreciate the work I put in. I think there are some that just totally dismiss it.

Yes I was condescending, and snarky. I was because you are the one that laughs at every post of mine like I'm an idiot, and who said you will keep it simple for me. You misconstrue and twist my argument almost every time instead of responding to what I am actually saying. Obviously it is hard to make everything clear so I don't know if that is intentional, but I think it often is. I wasn't overly defensive, I was just defending my argument, and clearing things up for you. If you want to keep it simple, then just say you disagree (to which I would like to know why), or leave it alone.

Don't misunderstand what I am saying every time. Don't (wrongly) take out small pieces of my data - it usually doesn't prove your point anyway. If you have conflicting data or more data that will prove your point then use it. I knew you wouldn't actually take a look at anything, and that is fine. If people aren't going to back anything up, then this place just becomes a place with posts saying I agree, or I disagree. I think discussion on a message board is more useful, but what do I know?

Also, can you point out what mulitpliers and advanced stats I'm using just to fit my argument, especially in this instance? I use a lot of data, ones that my and other studies have shown are the most important in contributing to winning. I don't just pick and choose data, or small sample sizes, or anomalies to fit my argument. I also look at team component in my analysis of anything. My analysis tells me Rask is good in "the clutch", and the team is letting him down big time right now.

If each goal isn't equal then you also need to look at what happened on each goal. It is also nice to compare him to his peers and not some fantasy of what you think he should be.

Lastly and this is to everyone - If Ryder didn't make a glove save, Gionta doesn't shoot back into Thomas, or the Bruins offense doesn't come up big, or a number of other things - Thomas' run never happens, Julien is fired, the team looks a lot different (and i doubt better), and we don't have a cup. Thomas is labeled a major choker. Think about that for a bit....
Welcome to the internet...

In all seriousness though, I think the problem you have is that other people aren't going to use stats in the same manner as you do. A lot of sports can be processed via stats, and it's certainly interesting to look at them. The problem is that you can provide a ton of data and draw a conclusion, and someone else can use the same stats to say the exact opposite. It also doesn't really give the whole picture either, since emotion, heart, character, health, and ability also need to be considered.

In the end, I don't think we're every going to really agree since you view it so differently than I do. To me, statistics are nothing more than a frame of reference to what a player is capable of. It's not set in stone, it's not a finite thing. It's just another factor to consider.

Now in terms of the matter at hand, you can provide all the stats you want, but as sports are about wins and losses, and I can say that the amount of games they've blown in the 3rd period is a concern. I like Rask as a player, but I think he's got room for improvement. I also think he tends to feel the pressure more than Thomas did. It's nothing you can quantify with numbers, it's just something that shows up when you watch the games. Hopefully Rask develops that same big game attitude Thomas had and we raise a cup with him too.

LSCII is offline   Reply With Quote