Trade Rumours and Proposals Thread Part 17: What does "bold" mean?
View Single Post
05-17-2013, 01:18 PM
Join Date: Sep 2004
Originally Posted by
I don't think the parameters changed, it's just that the way they calculate it requires a ton of events for the numbers to start making sense. Because of that, the QOC numbers are usually worthless until enough data is collected. But over time, things even out and it's actually fairly consistent with what most people who pay attention to who players are on the ice against would tell you. You'd probably get two very similar lists if you were to ask a season ticket holder who didn't own a computer, and a guy who didn't know a thing about hockey but knew where to find QOC data online, to make a list of every Oiler player in order of the quality of opposition they faced.
But it seems like there are still a lot of assumptions made, or maybe I don't quite understand it enough, but I don't put a lot of stock into QOC numbers. Especially when comparing players on different teams. When I said it had an affect on Corsi, I didn't necessarily mean the QOC numbers you find online are directly connected, but it does make sense to me that you're more likely to outshoot a team when you're facing their lesser players.
Viagra was originaly invented to treat high blood pressure, and Play-Doh was developed as a cleaning agent.
Sometimes things have uses beyond what they were intended for. And in the case of hockey and Corsi, it seems pretty reasonable that a goalie's workload is at least in part tied to the quality of the players in front of him (in fact, I'd say they're very much connected).
I honestly forget which "advanced stat" it was, but earlier in the year or sometime last year I saw it and for the most part it actually corroborated what common sense tells you. So it actually had SOME use if you prefer looking at graphs instead of watching games.
Originally Posted by
Yeah, that's why I said Corsi was basically meaningless without zonestart. Even zonestart isn't perfect, because it only deals with faceoff data, but it does give a pretty good indication of how players are being used, and certainly the best measurement available until the NHL starts tracking time of posession.
Possession time, scoring chances for/against, etc. would be the next big step. However I still believe that in a sport that isn't 1 on 1 that a lot of these stats aren't as solid as they would be in a 1 on 1 sport. I could imagine Brendan Morrison's corsi when he played with Bertuzzi and Naslund for example, I bet that it was better than a lot of better players than he was. The biggest issue that I still have is the sheer arrogance that has been shown by some of the people that push the usefulness of these stats as if they somehow think that they are some all knowing fans because of it. Basically if you don't buy what we're selling you are an idiot or you can't comprehend what we're saying. It really isn't rocket science nor is it an exact science, and it is a breath of fresh air to see someone like yourself who obviously enjoys looking at these stats say as much instead of treating it as gospel like I have seen so much of.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Bryanbryoil