HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Detroit Red Wings
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

DRW #1 and #3 in the League...

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-15-2012, 03:07 PM
  #1
snailderby
Registered User
 
snailderby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 622
vCash: 500
DRW #1 and #3 in the League...

...in Corsi and close score Fenwick rankings, respectively...for what that's worth. See http://kuklaskorner.com/psh/comments...-close-fenwick.

snailderby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2012, 04:07 PM
  #2
fimoknete
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Roesrath, Germany
Country: Germany
Posts: 861
vCash: 500
and nashville is 29th. as far as i remember is nashville the better team in a 7 game series. so whats the point of this?????

fimoknete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2012, 05:11 PM
  #3
Sameheda
Registered User
 
Sameheda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 1,229
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by fimoknete View Post
and nashville is 29th. as far as i remember is nashville the better team in a 7 game series. so whats the point of this?????
Did you even read the page? This isn't based on whether the Preds beat us in a 7 game playoff series. Corsi for example is the difference between shots directed at goal for and against in five on five situations.

Sameheda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2012, 05:22 PM
  #4
Flowah
Registered User
 
Flowah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 5,673
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sameheda View Post
Did you even read the page? This isn't based on whether the Preds beat us in a 7 game playoff series. Corsi for example is the difference between shots directed at goal for and against in five on five situations.
His point is that who cares about these random statistics if we can't even advance past the first round of the playoffs.

Flowah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2012, 05:32 PM
  #5
fimoknete
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Roesrath, Germany
Country: Germany
Posts: 861
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sameheda View Post
Did you even read the page? This isn't based on whether the Preds beat us in a 7 game playoff series. Corsi for example is the difference between shots directed at goal for and against in five on five situations.
i read the page and he is talking about success. but again what is the point of this statistics and what has that to do with success?
thats what he says:
This is the difference between shots directed at goal for and against in five on five situations. This is a strong indicator of puck possession for the team in question. It is a repeatable part of the success of any given team.

this stats are NOT a indicator for success.
we know the wings are afraid to go to the net and firing a lot of useless shots from the boards or other weak spots to the net or defenders pads. thats what the stats are backing up.
of course they get more shots then the opponent who try to score from better spots. so what has this to do with success?

i tell you some real important stats for a teams success.
playoffs 2011:
shots for per 60 minutes: detroit 33.1 (rank 4)
goals for per 60 minutes: detroit 1.1 (last, not even close)
shots against per 60 minutes: detroit 23.3 (second best)
goals against per 60 minutes: detroit 3.0 (tied for second worse)
this leaded to a well known "success".

there are no other stats you need to know.
but i have to agree one thing in this corsi ranking.
he says:
This is also a useful value because it is needed to make team adjustments on individual players.
this is damn right. but our management is failing since 4 years.

fimoknete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2012, 05:52 PM
  #6
jroc86
Registered User
 
jroc86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 339
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by fimoknete View Post
and nashville is 29th. as far as i remember is nashville the better team in a 7 game series. so whats the point of this?????
Whats the point of your post? What exactly does it contribute to any discussion going forward?

Nashville is an offensivley thin team with a freak goaltender and good defence ... so ya, their an outlier that can spend allot of time in their d-zone, give up shots/chances and still win games.

Do you honestly feel that Nashville was by and large the better team? I certainly dont. The team limped across the finish line as everyone was coming back from injuries and still managed to control the majority of the action against nashville and simply couldnt bury against Rinne and a few awful untimely defensive gaffes (Stuart and Quincey) put us behind late in games that "should" have already been won.

Ill take this stat as encouraging ... I enjoy watching a team that cycles and hovers around the oppositions net like buzzards on a ****-wagon and out-shoots/possesses team handily. Does it always work? Nope. On the whole is it an effective strategy? Hell yes.

Is Vancouver offensivley impotent? Given their 5 game defeat to LA your reasoning would indcate that. Is Pittsburgh going to have a GAA of 8 next year based on their 6 game loss to Philly in the first round? It was a disapointing playoff exit - but lets not let a small sample size skew our opinion regarding a system that has made this team competitive for 2 decades.

jroc86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2012, 05:57 PM
  #7
snailderby
Registered User
 
snailderby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 622
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by fimoknete View Post
i read the page and he is talking about success. but again what is the point of this statistics and what has that to do with success?
thats what he says:
This is the difference between shots directed at goal for and against in five on five situations. This is a strong indicator of puck possession for the team in question. It is a repeatable part of the success of any given team.

this stats are NOT a indicator for success.
we know the wings are afraid to go to the net and firing a lot of useless shots from the boards or other weak spots to the net or defenders pads. thats what the stats are backing up.
of course they get more shots then the opponent who try to score from better spots. so what has this to do with success?

i tell you some real important stats for a teams success.
playoffs 2011:
shots for per 60 minutes: detroit 33.1 (rank 4)
goals for per 60 minutes: detroit 1.1 (last, not even close)
shots against per 60 minutes: detroit 23.3 (second best)
goals against per 60 minutes: detroit 3.0 (tied for second worse)
this leaded to a well known "success".

there are no other stats you need to know.
but i have to agree one thing in this corsi ranking.
he says:
This is also a useful value because it is needed to make team adjustments on individual players.
this is damn right. but our management is failing since 4 years.
I think that's a fair point. I would argue that there is some correlation between Corsi stats and true "success" in that the players with the best Corsi ratings are often also some of the best players in the league (Chara, Bergeron, Malkin, Kopitar, Datsyuk, and Lidstrom). As with any stat, Corsi isn't always a true "indicator for success," like you said. I mean, Boychuk had the 18th highest Corsi rating in the league last year... But it can give you some useful information on how our team plays.


Last edited by snailderby: 09-16-2012 at 06:04 PM.
snailderby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2012, 05:59 PM
  #8
WingedWheel1987
Ken Holland's office
 
WingedWheel1987's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: GPP Michigan
Posts: 8,577
vCash: 500
The stats are irrelevant if you lose the game.

WingedWheel1987 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2012, 07:33 PM
  #9
Winger98
Moderator
powers combined
 
Winger98's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Cleveland
Posts: 14,176
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to Winger98
I'm not sure why Nashville is being used as a reason to debunk the article/stat. Since last season they lost Suter, Radulov and AK and replaced them with Scott Hannan. And a big reason they became a dangerous team late in the season was that they added Radulov and AK to give them depth up front.

__________________
blah, blah, blah
Winger98 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2012, 08:25 PM
  #10
RedWingsNow*
SaskatoonDeathSquad
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ann Arbor
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,356
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jroc86 View Post
Whats the point of your post? What exactly does it contribute to any discussion going forward?

Nashville is an offensivley thin team with a freak goaltender and good defence ... so ya, their an outlier that can spend allot of time in their d-zone, give up shots/chances and still win games.

Do you honestly feel that Nashville was by and large the better team? I certainly dont. The team limped across the finish line as everyone was coming back from injuries and still managed to control the majority of the action against nashville and simply couldnt bury against Rinne and a few awful untimely defensive gaffes (Stuart and Quincey) put us behind late in games that "should" have already been won.

Ill take this stat as encouraging ... I enjoy watching a team that cycles and hovers around the oppositions net like buzzards on a ****-wagon and out-shoots/possesses team handily. Does it always work? Nope. On the whole is it an effective strategy? Hell yes.

Is Vancouver offensivley impotent? Given their 5 game defeat to LA your reasoning would indcate that. Is Pittsburgh going to have a GAA of 8 next year based on their 6 game loss to Philly in the first round? It was a disapointing playoff exit - but lets not let a small sample size skew our opinion regarding a system that has made this team competitive for 2 decades.
take it as encouraging if you want. But the bottom line is that we won a single playoff game

RedWingsNow* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-17-2012, 04:30 AM
  #11
InjuredChoker
Registered User
 
InjuredChoker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: LTIR or golf course
Posts: 19,834
vCash: 872
Quote:
Originally Posted by WingedWheel1987 View Post
The stats are irrelevant if you lose the game.
Using stats may help you win the game next time around.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Winger98 View Post
I'm not sure why Nashville is being used as a reason to debunk the article/stat. Since last season they lost Suter, Radulov and AK and replaced them with Scott Hannan. And a big reason they became a dangerous team late in the season was that they added Radulov and AK to give them depth up front.
I'm not sure did Nashville have better record when they got Kostitsyn and Radulov but they we're still competitive team without them. Radulov played 9 games and POs, Kostitsyn maybe 10 or so more. Suter can be big loss, definitely.

Trotz didn't use Radulov effectively. Well, maybe it's too much to blame it on Trotz, possibly NO coach could have used Radulov effectively. He didn't care about D too much, tried too fancy plays, caused too many turnovers.. Compared to he's (potential) skill level, Radulov didn't give them all that much.

And they still have Rinne who seems to stands on he's head every time he plays against us.

Though I hope you're right, lol.

InjuredChoker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-17-2012, 05:33 AM
  #12
Henkka
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Finland
Posts: 9,403
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flowah View Post
His point is that who cares about these random statistics if we can't even advance past the first round of the playoffs.
Those stats were mostly mabe by our healthy regular season team. But at playoff time there was lots of injuries. Helm, 50% Datsyuk, 50% Lidström, etc.

And one BIG factor what is missing from Team-Based Corsi comparison, is the goaltender.

Henkka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-17-2012, 03:02 PM
  #13
joe89
#5
 
joe89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Country: Sweden
Posts: 17,584
vCash: 500
I'm not a fan of advanced stats. The most elemental things in hockey that win you games can't be measured with stats: heart and determination. Wings lacked a lot of that last year.

joe89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-17-2012, 04:06 PM
  #14
fimoknete
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Roesrath, Germany
Country: Germany
Posts: 861
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joe89 View Post
I'm not a fan of advanced stats. The most elemental things in hockey that win you games can't be measured with stats: heart and determination. Wings lacked a lot of that last year.
^ this

fimoknete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-17-2012, 04:37 PM
  #15
Winger98
Moderator
powers combined
 
Winger98's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Cleveland
Posts: 14,176
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to Winger98
Quote:
Originally Posted by kemisti View Post
Using stats may help you win the game next time around.



I'm not sure did Nashville have better record when they got Kostitsyn and Radulov but they we're still competitive team without them. Radulov played 9 games and POs, Kostitsyn maybe 10 or so more. Suter can be big loss, definitely.

Trotz didn't use Radulov effectively. Well, maybe it's too much to blame it on Trotz, possibly NO coach could have used Radulov effectively. He didn't care about D too much, tried too fancy plays, caused too many turnovers.. Compared to he's (potential) skill level, Radulov didn't give them all that much.

And they still have Rinne who seems to stands on he's head every time he plays against us.

Though I hope you're right, lol.
They were competitive without them, but they weren't dangerous. even with Radulov going awol in the second round he was tied for the team lead in points for the playoffs and between him and AK they accounted for 4 of their 22 goals (in ten games, so they weren't exactly an offensive powerhouse in any respect). The Nashville we faced in the playoffs was a different beast from the one we faced throughout the regular season.

Also, look at the list as a whole and it's clear that the majority of teams who were consistently good were in the upper half here. There will always be someone who is a bit of an outlier in either direction, but that shouldn't be used to debunk the whole concept of the stat.

Winger98 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-17-2012, 04:37 PM
  #16
FissionFire
Registered User
 
FissionFire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Country: United States
Posts: 10,760
vCash: 500
Taking a single series sample size as proof that a season-long statistic is invalid is just silly. Teams have ebbs and flows throughout a season and players have spurts and slumps. Overall the Wings were a strong team during the season, but going into the playoffs they seemed out of sync and it showed against a peaking Preds team.

The numbers do seem encouraging that we can still make playoffs, but I'm inclined to not put much relevance in them since this team sans Lidstrom really isn't an entirely new animal that past stats won't be a good predictor for.

FissionFire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-17-2012, 06:09 PM
  #17
TheOtherOne
Registered User
 
TheOtherOne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,286
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WingedWheel1987 View Post
The stats are irrelevant if you lose the game.
I always wondered why people with this mentality bother watching hockey. If all that matters to you is the W or L, why don't you just look up the record at the end of the season. The rest of us are actually interested in how we got there, what factors contributed to it, and what our strengths and weaknesses are.

If the only stat worth mentioning was wins, we could just flip a coin and give the winner the Stanley Cup.

TheOtherOne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-17-2012, 11:32 PM
  #18
FissionFire
Registered User
 
FissionFire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Country: United States
Posts: 10,760
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joe89 View Post
I'm not a fan of advanced stats. The most elemental things in hockey that win you games can't be measured with stats: heart and determination. Wings lacked a lot of that last year.
Heart and determination are just excuses fans use to justify losing when they can't find a better reason, or won't accept the fact that the other team was just better. No player on the Wings last season lacked in heart or determination, nor did any of the Predators somehow have more. The Predators were simply the better, more cohesive team during that series and that's why they won. They didn't "want it more" or "try harder".

FissionFire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-18-2012, 12:00 AM
  #19
RedWingsNow*
SaskatoonDeathSquad
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ann Arbor
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,356
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FissionFire View Post
Heart and determination are just excuses fans use to justify losing when they can't find a better reason, or won't accept the fact that the other team was just better. No player on the Wings last season lacked in heart or determination, nor did any of the Predators somehow have more. The Predators were simply the better, more cohesive team during that series and that's why they won. They didn't "want it more" or "try harder".
Hockey isn't baseball.
Stats only go so far.

Especially these so-called "advanced-stats" that make it sound like Detroit is awesome when they outshoot opponents 29-16, when fans who watch the game understand we took 25 harmless shots from the point and perimeter while giving up a break away, two two-on-ones and 4 point blank shots.

We've seen this, even going back to the dominating Detroit teams when we'd outshoot teams 45-17 with a methodically attack and great puck possession, but a true lack of quality scoring chances - and then we'd press, make a mistake and give up a ridiculously good scoring chance.

RedWingsNow* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-18-2012, 12:14 AM
  #20
jaster
I pay off the mods.
 
jaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicago, IL
Country: United States
Posts: 6,315
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FissionFire View Post
Heart and determination are just excuses fans use to justify losing when they can't find a better reason, or won't accept the fact that the other team was just better. No player on the Wings last season lacked in heart or determination, nor did any of the Predators somehow have more. The Predators were simply the better, more cohesive team during that series and that's why they won. They didn't "want it more" or "try harder".
Exactly. The 'heart and determination' argument is a bunch of tiresome baloney.

jaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-18-2012, 12:27 AM
  #21
Roy S
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,828
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Bob View Post
Hockey isn't baseball.
Stats only go so far.

Especially these so-called "advanced-stats" that make it sound like Detroit is awesome when they outshoot opponents 29-16, when fans who watch the game understand we took 25 harmless shots from the point and perimeter while giving up a break away, two two-on-ones and 4 point blank shots.

We've seen this, even going back to the dominating Detroit teams when we'd outshoot teams 45-17 with a methodically attack and great puck possession, but a true lack of quality scoring chances - and then we'd press, make a mistake and give up a ridiculously good scoring chance.
Scoring chances is a stat that can be and is tracked at both the individual and team level. It also correlates very well with Corsi and Fenwick if one just wants to use that quick metric instead.

Roy S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-18-2012, 12:40 AM
  #22
Frk It
#snipequist
 
Frk It's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 11,121
vCash: 500
Usually when someone brings up Corsi I stop taking the rest of their post seriously.

Frk It is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:17 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.