HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie
Notices

Do advanced stats really tell the story?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-31-2013, 02:06 PM
  #126
SouthernHab
Go Habs Go!
 
SouthernHab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,961
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterDecoy View Post
****!

Well I once fought a crippled...

I won. But To be fair, he started it,,.
It does not count as a win unless you yanked his prosthetic leg off and then beat him with it.

SouthernHab is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2013, 02:09 PM
  #127
Estimated_Prophet
Registered User
 
Estimated_Prophet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,604
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterDecoy View Post
****!

Well I once fought a crippled...

I won. But To be fair, he started it,,.
I am not impressed. The proper term is "Leaf Fan"

I have beat up many Leaf fans.......and I start it!

Estimated_Prophet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2013, 02:12 PM
  #128
MasterDecoy
Lo Pan's lovechild
 
MasterDecoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Beijing
Posts: 15,230
vCash: 500
Fine fine, I'll go back beating leafs fans geez....

MasterDecoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2013, 02:21 PM
  #129
Estimated_Prophet
Registered User
 
Estimated_Prophet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,604
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterDecoy View Post
Fine fine, I'll go back beating leafs fans geez....
I find the best way to defeat them is to gain a strangle hold on the back of their mullet in order to keep their empty cranium from thwarting my finishing blows. They are similar to zombies in that they are predictable and determined but always fall for the same tactics.

Estimated_Prophet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2013, 03:04 PM
  #130
sandysan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 10,859
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roulin View Post
Why would you think that stats are not "predictive" and are "universally applied post facto"? I've already posted links where GMs and scouts admit to using stats as part of their decision making, therefore not just "applied post facto."

On this "predictive" jazz - a ton of hockey stats are predictive. To take a basic one, goals scored in a season. Without ever getting to watch a player on the ice or knowing anything about their reputation, you can bet than a player with 30 goals last season will outscore a player with 8 goals last season, next season. It's predictive. You can then edit out some noise and get more predictive - goals per game, goals per 60min, goals per 60min at ES, shots per 60min at ES - each more predictive than the last, but definitely all predictive to some extent, and useful.
If you want me to explain what post facto means, all you have to do is ask. Having a ranking function that is achieved through multiple iterations is not going to help a coach in real time. And as predictive as your goals scored metric is the team would ice the first line for 60 minutes

If the intent of these advanced metrics is not to inform as to the most likely successful line combinations/matchups then pardon me asking what the hell are they for?

sandysan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2013, 04:23 PM
  #131
Noob616
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,503
vCash: 500
There certainly are people who use advanced stats in ways that don't make much sense (look at all the people ragging on Subban for his QoC metrics for example), but I also think the "watch the games" line is thrown out and misused far more often than stats are misused. There's a place for the "eye test", but the reality is that humans really aren't great at that sort of testing.

Confirmation bias is the biggest thing, when there's a fight and soon after the guy who won the fight's team scores a goal, it's brought up as the turning point. When there's a fight in a game and the score doesn't change after, it gets forgotten. We're more apt to remember the games where a guy fought or threw a big hit and it seemed to have changed the outcome of the game than the countless instances of a fight or big hit not leading to any significant change in score or shots on goal. It's similar to how when you buy a new car you suddenly see the same model everywhere.

Of course hockey is a fluid game and likely won't ever be modeled to the accuracy that baseball is statistically modeled, but to just throw up our hands and ignore any new ways to understand the game is the wrong approach IMO. NHL teams aren't bending over backwards to hire Cam Charron as GM, but that doesn't mean there's nothing valid about new statistical models. I'll admit I'm probably less accepting of the traditional hockey wisdom than I should be but I tend to see the predictions and trends of hockey bloggers using advanced stats turning out true more and more often than the Don Cherry's and other analysts.

Noob616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2013, 05:31 PM
  #132
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Baltimore, Maryland
Country: United States
Posts: 16,315
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
Someone should get Vegas on the phone and let them know they've been hacked... If the models for chance were actually effective, sport betting or any lottery would be a relic of the past and we'd have advanced AI well in place.
A friend of mine is a mathematician who worked for the gambling industry for a year.

His company took an extremely scientific approach to things: for every dollar that came into the slot machines, $0.95 should come out.

DAChampion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2013, 07:01 PM
  #133
onemorecup*
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,062
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MXD View Post
And they both really sucked in the playoffs.
all 4 are crap

onemorecup* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2013, 07:16 PM
  #134
Estimated_Prophet
Registered User
 
Estimated_Prophet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,604
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noob616 View Post
There certainly are people who use advanced stats in ways that don't make much sense (look at all the people ragging on Subban for his QoC metrics for example), but I also think the "watch the games" line is thrown out and misused far more often than stats are misused. There's a place for the "eye test", but the reality is that humans really aren't great at that sort of testing.

Confirmation bias is the biggest thing, when there's a fight and soon after the guy who won the fight's team scores a goal, it's brought up as the turning point. When there's a fight in a game and the score doesn't change after, it gets forgotten. We're more apt to remember the games where a guy fought or threw a big hit and it seemed to have changed the outcome of the game than the countless instances of a fight or big hit not leading to any significant change in score or shots on goal. It's similar to how when you buy a new car you suddenly see the same model everywhere.

Of course hockey is a fluid game and likely won't ever be modeled to the accuracy that baseball is statistically modeled, but to just throw up our hands and ignore any new ways to understand the game is the wrong approach IMO. NHL teams aren't bending over backwards to hire Cam Charron as GM, but that doesn't mean there's nothing valid about new statistical models. I'll admit I'm probably less accepting of the traditional hockey wisdom than I should be but I tend to see the predictions and trends of hockey bloggers using advanced stats turning out true more and more often than the Don Cherry's and other analysts.
I think that part of the problem is that the only analysts that we ever hear from are absolute morons. If guys like Tippet, Babcock, Bowman etc. were sharing their respective knowledge then you would have a new respect for visual observation. As it is we are left with idiots who can't get a job anymore due to the fact that they have proven themselves to be incompetent. We also have ex players who don't have the vaguest idea about why things happen on the ice. Most players are soldiers who carry out their little assignments but don't fully understand why they are given these assignments. Not only are these people unknowledgeable in their own "field of expertise" but they are simply not very intelligent to begin with.

When you apply critical thinking techniques to analyzing sports it is amazing how many truisms get exposed and things start to make sense. The use of advanced stats is only a supporting tool in this process as there is no substitute for watching an enormous volume of hockey from an educated and rational perspective. People like Don Cherry are exposed as simple clowns that dance for applause but offer no wisdom or meaningful insight.

I have listened to Scotty Bowman on a few occasions and was astounded by his passion for the game and his passion to understand the game. If you ever get a chance to listen to him talk tactics and strategy then make sure that you listen as he is a brilliant man.

I would conclude that the only use for advanced stats is for those who understand how to observe them in the proper context. That would rule out the vast majority of fans who read far more hockey than they watch.

Estimated_Prophet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2013, 07:18 PM
  #135
habsfanatics*
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 5,053
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
Of course depends on how one interprets "momentum"...

Semantic discussion aside, there is a very real element of human performance dynamics that involve an interplay of ever-evolving physical-psychological feedback which has both a real and powerful impact on the resulting performance.

The variables at play are so numerous at the past & present levels that expecting to predict and or control them is but the foolish idealism of those unable to find comfort in the inherent mystery of life itself...



Someone should get Vegas on the phone and let them know they've been hacked... If the models for chance were actually effective, sport betting or any lottery would be a relic of the past and we'd have advanced AI well in place.

The models in place, as you point out, ultimately boil down to the randomness of the coin toss. A convulsed hobby leading back to the same place... "50/50".

Momentum in sports is, likewise, can be worked through to minute controllable details (to put as many factors in ones favor) yet still involves a chaotic element that can't be accurately predicted. Not much use for a model that explains what a 4year old understands intuitively... Big words and complex math to explain simple realities are at their essence a reflection of the ego, and this is by no means a bad thing.


Only god possesses the omnipotence to fully see all the factors at play when the "momentum" shifts, we see parts of the picture but can never see the whole one... So yes, at its heart this discussion is about the nature of god and our ability/desire to be like her (or it or whatever ones imagery of that concept may be)


Momentum is real, this much is certain. Inability to agree on what it means or creating a model that perfectly explains it does not negate it.
You had me until to the whole god thingy, then you lost me.

habsfanatics* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2013, 07:23 PM
  #136
Estimated_Prophet
Registered User
 
Estimated_Prophet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,604
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsfanatics View Post
You had me until to the whole god thingy, then you lost me.
That was the agenda from the start just as I called it earlier.

Estimated_Prophet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2013, 07:32 PM
  #137
habsfanatics*
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 5,053
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandysan View Post
If you want me to explain what post facto means, all you have to do is ask. Having a ranking function that is achieved through multiple iterations is not going to help a coach in real time. And as predictive as your goals scored metric is the team would ice the first line for 60 minutes

If the intent of these advanced metrics is not to inform as to the most likely successful line combinations/matchups then pardon me asking what the hell are they for?
I think, now don't get me wrong, I could be wrong here, but I think they're around to try and make people feel smart.

They are borderline useless in real time. No coach is calling upstairs to get the Corsi numbers, better chance he's calling upstairs to get the lotto numbers..

habsfanatics* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2013, 07:36 PM
  #138
ECWHSWI
bought a MB jersey
 
ECWHSWI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 21,575
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
A friend of mine is a mathematician who worked for the gambling industry for a year.

His company took an extremely scientific approach to things: for every dollar that came into the slot machines, $0.95 should come out.
think the standard in this industry is between 92 and 97%, going for 95 was the thing to do.

ECWHSWI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2013, 08:15 PM
  #139
Estimated_Prophet
Registered User
 
Estimated_Prophet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,604
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ECWHSWI View Post
think the standard in this industry is between 92 and 97%, going for 95 was the thing to do.
Is there a site anywhere that monitor's these rates and publishes them? Would certainly be handy to know and would create competition between casinos.......or some John Doe's in the desert

Estimated_Prophet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2013, 11:32 PM
  #140
Roulin
Registered User
 
Roulin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Montreal
Posts: 4,242
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandysan View Post
If you want me to explain what post facto means, all you have to do is ask. Having a ranking function that is achieved through multiple iterations is not going to help a coach in real time. And as predictive as your goals scored metric is the team would ice the first line for 60 minutes

If the intent of these advanced metrics is not to inform as to the most likely successful line combinations/matchups then pardon me asking what the hell are they for?
I didn't ask because I didn't need to, it's not as complicated as you think.

If that's the only possible use you can think of for stats in sports, you need to think harder. Two blatant examples from the links I provided earlier in the thread are the Capitals using proprietary stats to inform their decision to sign Grabovski, and the Sharks tracking Corsi at the junior level to help with making decisions about prospects.

A coach may not "call upstairs" during a game for stats (which you seem oddly focused on), but planning ice time in general, head to head matchups and zone starts (to name a few off the top of my head) could of course be parts of game preparation that could benefit (and I'm sure does with more than a couple of teams) from statistical knowledge. And that's just coaching.


Last edited by Roulin: 08-31-2013 at 11:38 PM.
Roulin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2013, 11:41 PM
  #141
sandysan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 10,859
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roulin View Post
I didn't ask because it is simple and obvious.

If that's the only possible use you can think of for stats in sports, you need to think harder. Two blatant examples from the links I provided earlier in the thread are the Capitals using proprietary stats to inform their decision to sign Grabovski, and the Sharks tracking Corsi at the junior level to help with making decisions about prospects.

A coach may not "call upstairs" during a game for stats (which you seem oddly focused on), but planning ice time in general, head to head matchups and zone starts (to name a few off the top of my head) could of course be parts of game preparation that could benefit (and I'm sure does with more than a couple of teams) from statistical knowledge. And that's just coaching.
But you have zero evidence that the caps analysis is the same as those offered by excel geeks. Every team likely evaluates players completely differently. You can't rank players based on differential methods of evaluation, unless you want to say method x> method y WHICH YOU CANT DO.

And coaches do not call up, its not a question of may. Coaches play hunches, and base their decisions on their experiences.

Could have, should have, don't. And I can guarantee that there are way more prospects that are signed on eye ball only, than the other way around.

sandysan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2013, 12:06 AM
  #142
Ohashi_Jouzu*
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 30,337
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Estimated_Prophet View Post
Congratulations!!!!!

You have shown that "Psychological" and "Momentum" are actually words that are occasionally put together in order to form a description of an abstract theory.

This does not prove by any means that psychological momentum can exist as per their respective definitions. You conveniently overlooked the fact that I didn't refer to psychological momentum as a fictional term but instead cited "psychological mass" and "psychological velocity" as fictional terms....which they absolutely are. Technically psychological momentum can't exist (based on current science) but it can be used as a descriptive as it does paint a picture for the intended audience.
Whatever makes you sleep better.

edit:

And what I forgot to add last night, is that you don't exactly get any bonus points for pointing out that a phrase typed in quotations, implying a turning or coining of phrase, doesn't technically exist. What linear thinkers like yourself tend to forget, of course, is that our culture already has phrases such as "heavy heart" and "light spirits" and "weighed on one's mind", so you shouldn't be so resistant to the idea of "psychological mass". Furthermore, everyone is familiar with the observable difference between someone who is distracted or indifferent performing the same task as someone who is focused or motivated, so you shouldn't be so resistant to the idea of "psychological velocity", either, if you're now thinking laterally enough to follow. I know it's hard, because there's almost no way to assign values or measure these things as a process separate from the results. That would really bother a statistician/actuarial scientist, I'm sure...

But that's just tangential justification for language usage. Whether or not that's adequate for you does nothing to impact the existence of momentum in sports; especially at the level of a collective psyche's potential impact on it, as attested to by countless professional athletes throughout recorded history.


Last edited by Ohashi_Jouzu*: 09-01-2013 at 01:58 PM.
Ohashi_Jouzu* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2013, 12:14 AM
  #143
Roulin
Registered User
 
Roulin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Montreal
Posts: 4,242
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandysan View Post
But you have zero evidence that the caps analysis is the same as those offered by excel geeks. Every team likely evaluates players completely differently.
OK. I don't agree, I would bet that certain metrics have caught on with NHL teams more than others. But it's really beside the point. Stats are useful, and they are used at the highest level.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sandysan View Post
You can't rank players based on differential methods of evaluation, unless you want to say method x> method y WHICH YOU CANT DO.
Sure you can. Every team, every analyst, every scout, every coach has their own way of ranking players. Whether they want to incorporate stats into their method, how much emphasize they want to accord them, and which metrics they want to use? There will be as many opinions as there are evaluators.

I get the feeling you see stat talk in hockey as a quest to find one formula that will determine overall quality. That's really not what it's about. It's about finding different metrics that mean different things, that can interact with each other, the meanings of which can be argued about just like scouting reports can be argued about, but that contribute some objective facts to discussions. These metrics should be able to prove something, but don't need to represent everything to be useful.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sandysan View Post
And coaches do not call up, its not a question of may.
Prove it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sandysan View Post
Coaches play hunches, and base their decisions on their experiences.
I have no doubt that coaches rely on their experience and years of lessons they have internalized. I also have no doubt that they rely on preparation that includes meetings with assistants, watching video and yes, looking at numbers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sandysan View Post
And I can guarantee that there are way more prospects that are signed on eye ball only, than the other way around.
Not the argument. You asked "if the intent of these advanced metrics is not to inform as to the most likely successful line combinations/matchups then pardon me asking what the hell are they for?" I showed you quotes from NHL decision makers giving examples of answers to your question. I never claimed that scouting is obsolete.

Roulin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2013, 12:32 AM
  #144
Brainiac
Registered Offender
 
Brainiac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Montreal
Posts: 12,166
vCash: 500
It seems a lot of disagreement stems from the fact that 'descriptive' and 'predictive' are not well defined.

Most measurements and their associated stats/metrics are, intrinsically, descriptive. Tells you the current state of affairs. A stat, by definition, describe a certain amount of the variability you observe in the system.

Then, you have some very good metrics/stats that can actually help you predict future events - i.e. the prediction is said to be good 95% of the time - i.e. see election polls.

Now, with hockey, most metrics are not reliable enough for 95% predictive capacity. But even then, I don't mind. I'd rather have a look at those metrics and form my own opinion rather than the old 'duh, look at the games bla bla bla'.

All in all, advanced stats do tell a part of the story, but won't necesarily predict how the story will end. So my advice is: use advanced stats, but make sure you're not blinded by them.

Brainiac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2013, 12:35 AM
  #145
Miller Time
Registered User
 
Miller Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 11,248
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Estimated_Prophet View Post
Like I said, your agenda was clear from the start. Keep your magical stories on the magical story discussion boards.
Post like these make me so appreciative of the useful posters on this board... Gotta take the good with the bad I suppose. Thanks for providing such quality contrast!

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
A friend of mine is a mathematician who worked for the gambling industry for a year.

His company took an extremely scientific approach to things: for every dollar that came into the slot machines, $0.95 should come out.
If he was a better at what he does (or as good as some people suppose is possible), he'd make a much better living cashing in from the casino's instead of working for them.

Calculating momentum, in this example, is like calculating when that .05c is going to pay out... and without "cheating". Virtually impossible without omnipotence.


Quote:
Originally Posted by habsfanatics View Post
You had me until to the whole god thingy, then you lost me.
God is great, we aren't, no matter how many degrees we get... That was the just of it. (not being a believer in god, feel free to substitute that word for any other signifying a higher power or knowledge).

Miller Time is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2013, 05:42 AM
  #146
MasterDecoy
Lo Pan's lovechild
 
MasterDecoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Beijing
Posts: 15,230
vCash: 500
oh, you guys...


MasterDecoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2013, 07:05 AM
  #147
Whitesnake
Stormbringer
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 66,953
vCash: 500
Just wondering....what are you guys position on the subject again???

Whitesnake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2013, 07:06 AM
  #148
sandysan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 10,859
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roulin View Post
OK. I don't agree, I would bet that certain metrics have caught on with NHL teams more than others. But it's really beside the point. Stats are useful, and they are used at the highest level.



Sure you can. Every team, every analyst, every scout, every coach has their own way of ranking players. Whether they want to incorporate stats into their method, how much emphasize they want to accord them, and which metrics they want to use? There will be as many opinions as there are evaluators.

I get the feeling you see stat talk in hockey as a quest to find one formula that will determine overall quality. That's really not what it's about. It's about finding different metrics that mean different things, that can interact with each other, the meanings of which can be argued about just like scouting reports can be argued about, but that contribute some objective facts to discussions. These metrics should be able to prove something, but don't need to represent everything to be useful.



Prove it.
So let's get this straight, advanced stats are supposed to be more objective than the eyeball test, that it exposes relationships that are not readily apparent without an excel macro. But the coaches and GMs are perfectly allowed to subjectively and arbitrarily chose whichever evaluation method they like? So for two players 1 and 2 and two methods, a and b you get ranking 1-2 and 2-1, who is objectively better? Are they equivalent? Now extend it to a near infinite number of evaluation methods. It becomes nothing more that substituting the subjective eyeball test for the entirely subjective faith in different methods. How is this better? Subjecting personal biases for ones implicit or explicit in the evaluation method that are driven, almost exclusively by facile metrics is not the step forward you seem to think it is.

The idea that collecting data for collecting a sake in hopes it will expose previously hidden insights is woefully misplaced in my opinion. If statistics say that plecanec gets more points wearing a dicky than a turtle neck, who cares? It might be true, it might be statistically significant ( p < 0.05) and still be useless or at the very least a stupid way to pro actively run a team. You are approaching the level of superstition, I thought the intent was more objectivity?

As for proof, I can't prove a negative. This isn't some personal failing, no one can. Generally its the person making the assertion who is expected to provide the proof, so my friend I turn the tables and ask you to prove it.

sandysan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2013, 07:17 AM
  #149
Estimated_Prophet
Registered User
 
Estimated_Prophet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,604
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
Post like these make me so appreciative of the useful posters on this board... Gotta take the good with the bad I suppose. Thanks for providing such quality contrast!
Useful posters...... You mean the one's that are too PC to call you out on your agenda.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
If he was a better at what he does (or as good as some people suppose is possible), he'd make a much better living cashing in from the casino's instead of working for them.

Calculating momentum, in this example, is like calculating when that .05c is going to pay out... and without "cheating". Virtually impossible without omnipotence.
They are nothing alike, but given your agenda this is the type of response that should be expected. One example has known data that can be in put into an equation that will result in a high level of predictability. The other example has zero data and a formula that is not applicable in a metaphysical sense.....therefore the result is an absolute absence of predictive power. Clearly your examples are nothing alike....

I find it ironic that you throw the term "virtually impossible" around so flippantly when you refuse to hold your own agenda to the same level of plausibility that you hold science to. We are trying to discuss hockey stats here.......I doubt anyone came here today to be preached at or indoctrinated.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
God is great, we aren't, no matter how many degrees we get... That was the just of it. (not being a believer in god, feel free to substitute that word for any other signifying a higher power or knowledge).
The temptation is overwhelming..........but I don't want to offend the people on this site who are graceful enough to keep their religious opinions private on a hockey forum.

I respect your right to have your own beliefs but could you please respect everyone else's right not to have them forced upon us.

Estimated_Prophet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-01-2013, 08:01 AM
  #150
pezcore
Registered User
 
pezcore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: St-Hubert, Qc
Country: Canada
Posts: 652
vCash: 500
I would rather draw my own conclusion from watching the games. There`s so many aspect of players that can`t be analyze with advanced stats. Also, these stats can be manipulated in a way that someone who is trying to prove a point can interpret them in his advantage if hes trying to sell you a player.

However, When I do stumble on Corsi, sometimes it can give you a better understanding on the true value of some of the depth players with less ice times.

pezcore 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 04:30 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. @2017 All Rights Reserved.