HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Philadelphia Flyers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Gagne really could be the one to go

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-02-2010, 12:36 AM
  #176
Valhoun*
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: West Chester, PA
Posts: 10,311
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Valhoun*
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Here's why it makes sense:

1) We do need to shed some salary.

2) We can't keep Gagne past next season no matter what after Holmgren went and committed all that money to the next two years salary.
I think today was all a ruse to turn my hatred from Michael Leighton and put it squarely on Homer.

Valhoun* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2010, 12:36 AM
  #177
supa scoop
Registered User
 
supa scoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Bridgeton, NJ
Posts: 401
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobbyClarkeFan16 View Post
there two are the stupidest ***k giraffes in the dumb dumb salad.
Nice.

supa scoop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2010, 12:40 AM
  #178
turkinaa
Registered User
 
turkinaa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 915
vCash: 500
The biggest problems I see with moving Gagne is (1) he is a vet who has been with the Flyers his entire career and can be used in any situation and (2) moving a forward might give us cap space but we need to be able to fill the gap. We can't keep moving forwards and hope that we fill in the points we lose like with not resigning Knuble and trading Lupul. Moving Gagne has to give us a forward who can fill in for at least part of the production Gagne would have and give us enough space to get the goalie we need and fit under cap.

turkinaa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2010, 12:41 AM
  #179
mercury
Registered User
 
mercury's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: South Philly/SoCal
Country: United States
Posts: 11,105
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Shafer View Post
Carter is more important to this team than any goalie we could move him for including free agent goalies we could acquire with his cap space (unless we are talking about Vokoun, Miller, Lundqvist, Luongo, or Brodeur).

The difference is, we could get a king's ransom for Carter.

The only players with big money who are less important to this team than roughly any goalie we could acquire are Hartnell and Carle. Briere's name might get thrown into that hat cautiously only because his contract could be a big issue later.

I don't always agree with you, Chris, but we do here. You don't trade Carter or Gagne+ unless you are getting an elite goaltender (or another package that helps the team fills more than one major hole).

mercury is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2010, 12:46 AM
  #180
TheLegendkiller
Registered User
 
TheLegendkiller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,470
vCash: 500
Its a rumor. This hasn't happened yet so there's no point in getting all freaked-out and pissed. And of course this rumor would make sense. ALL good rumors that are meant to get people thinking make sense.

TheLegendkiller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2010, 12:51 AM
  #181
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am The Mush View Post
Regarding the second point. Statistics are as good as the people gathering the data. Goal tending statisticians in Florida are known to be very generous. It has been written about and discussed before.
Well, if they are, then we should expect to see variation as players leave there, or show up there.

Craig Anderson: .935 (17 games in FLA), .924 (31 games in FLA), .917 (71 games)
Thomas Vokoun: .919 (NSH), .920 (NSH), .919 (FLA), .926, .925
Luongo: .918, .931, .914 (FLA), .921, .917, .920, .913 (VAN)

Doesn't look all that fishy. Anderson gave up a bit more as he had to play a lot more games (pretty common, not as fresh for each game, etc.)... Vokoun ran right along and has had two stellar years. Luongo puttered right along.

Quote:
My brain and eyes are bad at quantifying large volumes of data. My statement is more of a qualitative one about a pretty complex thing, and you're drawing conclusions to the contrary from some basic statistics. You're using statistics to say that my qualitative opinion on the effects of various factors in the game is wrong, because you're not seeing a correlation when you look at some pretty simplified #'s. I play the game (as do you), I see how one thing effects another. It is plain and right there to see.
Oh, I can bore down into it.

My basic perception of defensive play is that it loosely operates as a formula that looks like this:

Shots On Goals [SOG] = (%Quality chances + %Average chances + %Poor chances [totals 100%])

Team Defensive Factor * [SOG] = what the goalie sees.

Now, what's important to take away from that is that team defense cannot have a large impact on SVPCT, because the types of chances remain proportional. Team defense has a huge impact on GAA, and how difficult the goalies life is throughout a game, but SVPCT isn't affected. Now, sure, there's some wiggle room there (as there is with anything).

But the goalie owns his SVPCT, the team owns GAA.

Quote:
You're also trying to compare large sample sizes (with regard to Luongo) and say that one changed variable has no effect because you didn't see a large shift in svpct from sample to sample. This conclusions disregards a whole slew of other changes in variables that happened simultaneously.
Such as? You're arguing that teams affect SVPCT. I'm arguing it doesn't really affect it all that much. What other variable in team impact on SVPCT would you like to discuss since a goalie switching teams seems to be the cleanest form of analysis of this claim.

Cuz if teams had a significant effect on SVPCT, we'd see that affect manifested in the statistics that goalies produce. We don't.

Chris Osgood... played behind one of the best team defenses of this era. After the age of 26 his SVPCT was all over the place independent of whether he was on the Wings, Blues, or Islanders.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BobbyClarkeFan16 View Post
If salary needs to be shed, it'll be Carle and someone else sent packing. When Gagne signs his next deal, I think it's going to go down (after all, as we've seen today, there's only three players who really hit home runs in their contracts - Gonchar, Martin and Michalek).

The market looks like it's beginning to correct itself, so Gagne shouldn't be a problem to re-sign. Honestly, with the acquisition of Meszaros, the writing is on the wall for Carle. Meszaros is the same player offensively, but is much, much, much better defensively and can skate like the wind. It also helps that Andrej has a bit of a mean streak in him as well. And when you consider that last season was the first time in two seasons his shoulder was healthy, I think a decline in points was to be expected as he played it cautiously.

But yeah, I wouldn't put much faith or stock in the words of Doug MacLean or Nick Kypreos. That's like saying Eklund is the second coming of Bob MacKenzie.
Hey man, we SHOULD trade Carle. Am I holding my breath on Holmgren doing that? Nope. He's been all hot and bothered about having 5 top 4 D, now he's got 'em.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2010, 01:07 AM
  #182
Giroux tha Damaja
Registered User
 
Giroux tha Damaja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Mount Holly, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,231
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Giroux tha Damaja
Jester,

I disagree about the composition of chances remaining relatively consistent from good defenses to bad defenses. A greater portion of the shots against good defenses are poor percentage chances. This phenomenon is where I am putting 90% of the credit for Leighton's year.

My argument was that good defenses effect the quantity of good scoring chances against, relative to the total, and therefor save percentage. There are a lot of other variables than just the D that get changed when a goalie switches teams (coaching, system, forwards etc.).

Giroux tha Damaja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2010, 01:11 AM
  #183
mypunkrock
Registered User
 
mypunkrock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Downtown Phoenix, AZ
Country: United States
Posts: 2,450
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am The Mush View Post
Jester,

I disagree about the composition of chances remaining relatively consistent from good defenses to bad defenses. A greater portion of the shots against good defenses are poor percentage chances. This phenomenon is where I am putting 90% of the credit for Leighton's year.

My argument was that good defenses effect the quantity of good scoring chances against, relative to the total, and therefor save percentage. There are a lot of other variables than just the D that get changed when a goalie switches teams (coaching, system, forwards etc.).
You can still break shots down into low quality, middle quality, and high quality shots, in relation to the net and just go from there. Implicitly, teams with good defenses will cause the offensive team to take a larger number of low quality shots.

Just go from there. Similar to basic sabrmetrics and field division.

mypunkrock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2010, 01:13 AM
  #184
DeadPhish5858
Rumham!
 
DeadPhish5858's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: the Shade
Country: United States
Posts: 13,476
vCash: 0
Send a message via AIM to DeadPhish5858
I don't think you could get too much for him. Please don't move him. Please.

DeadPhish5858 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2010, 01:18 AM
  #185
Giroux tha Damaja
Registered User
 
Giroux tha Damaja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Mount Holly, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,231
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Giroux tha Damaja
Quote:
Originally Posted by mypunkrock View Post
You can still break shots down into low quality, middle quality, and high quality shots, in relation to the net and just go from there.

Implicitly, teams with good defenses will cause the offensive team to take a larger number of low quality shots.

Just go from there. Similar to basic sabrmetrics and field division.
Location isn't the only factor in whether a chance is good one or not, but yeah...

Jester believes the composition will be the same, just the quantity will change.

Giroux tha Damaja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2010, 01:21 AM
  #186
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am The Mush View Post
Jester,

I disagree about the composition of chances remaining relatively consistent from good defenses to bad defenses. A greater portion of the shots against good defenses are poor percentage chances. This phenomenon is where I am putting 90% of the credit for Leighton's year.

My argument was that good defenses effect the quantity of good scoring chances against, relative to the total, and therefor save percentage. There are a lot of other variables than just the D that get changed when a goalie switches teams (coaching, system, forwards etc.).
Eh, I think coaching has marginal effect when you're talking about guys in their mid-to-late 20s. They are what they are for the most part outside of minor tweaking (Leighton could move back to cover up some of his flaws a bit, but that's pretty minor). Forwards are part of team defense (particularly centers). I'm not just talking about defensemen here.

As to your point about it not remaining proportional... I disagree, and the reason for that is that NHL players and offenses don't just fling the puck away. There are variables in offensive talent from team-to-team (again, why larger sample sizes are important), but those guys are applying offense with purpose and they're good enough not to just give away the puck as a group.

Our team defense improved significantly this year from last... we allowed 4 less shots a game in that evolution. Doesn't seem like a lot, but the total range for SOGA was 7.5 (yes, within range for NHL teams we saw better than a 50% improvement). Our team SVPCT dropped from .913 to .905.

Good team defenses do not just take away "good chances" and leave the rest. They possess the puck more, they deny the point better (with their forwards and blocking shots), they control the slot... and in some cases, like Detroit has, they simply possess the puck better and deny offensive opportunities.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2010, 01:25 AM
  #187
Pantokrator
Who's the clown?
 
Pantokrator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Semmes, Alabama
Country: Guatemala
Posts: 4,363
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dig Out Your Soul View Post
You have it backwards. It'll be Gagne and a 4th round pick for somebody's crap. Remember, it doesn't matter how even the deal is, Paul always throws picks in like they're candy.
This sums up how Homer deals with Cap issues. He might throw in next year's first, just to get rid of Gagne's salary for the rights to Mike York.

Pantokrator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2010, 01:40 AM
  #188
Larry44
10 - 88
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 5,263
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hextall89 View Post
I don't know, I could see a scenario where Homer approaches him about a trade and he's offended/hurt to the point where he wants to get out. That may be me being dramatic though. I don't know how interactions like this happen.
Gagne has already told Homer 'no' on a couple occasions, so I'm not sure it would work.

Larry44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2010, 01:50 AM
  #189
Giroux tha Damaja
Registered User
 
Giroux tha Damaja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Mount Holly, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,231
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Giroux tha Damaja
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Eh, I think coaching has marginal effect when you're talking about guys in their mid-to-late 20s. They are what they are for the most part outside of minor tweaking (Leighton could move back to cover up some of his flaws a bit, but that's pretty minor). Forwards are part of team defense (particularly centers). I'm not just talking about defensemen here.
John Stevens vs. Peter Laviolette, no difference? (or were you speaking strictly in regards to goal tending coaches?)

Goalie coaches matter. Jim Corsi, Mitch Korn, Francois Allaire...there are all guys known as the best for a reason, and they always seem to be coaching successful goalies.

Though I agree the difference by the time guys are 25 or so has more to do with their heads and identifying little issues in their game before they can become big ones (i.e. consistency through out the year), which is something most professional goalie coaches should be able to do.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
As to your point about it not remaining proportional... I disagree, and the reason for that is that NHL players and offenses don't just fling the puck away. There are variables in offensive talent from team-to-team (again, why larger sample sizes are important), but those guys are applying offense with purpose and they're good enough not to just give away the puck as a group.
Right, NHL players don't just fling the puck away. They are smart enough to take as many of the best opportunities they can get offensively. If they know they aren't going to get great looks against a defense, they're going to take as many mediocre looks as they can, as opposed to banging their head against the wall and turning the puck over looking for what isn't there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Our team defense improved significantly this year from last... we allowed 4 less shots a game in that evolution. Doesn't seem like a lot, but the total range for SOGA was 7.5 (yes, within range for NHL teams we saw better than a 50% improvement). Our team SVPCT dropped from .913 to .905.
Look at the goalies in net. Almost voids the comparison entirely.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Good team defenses do not just take away "good chances" and leave the rest. They possess the puck more, they deny the point better (with their forwards and blocking shots), they control the slot... and in some cases, like Detroit has, they simply possess the puck better and deny offensive opportunities.
Nobody even came close to saying that.

Look at the scoring opportunities when Pronger's pairing is on the ice versus when Parent's pairing is on the ice. Are you really gonna tell me the only difference there is in quantity and not quality? Come on man, you know that's not true.


Last edited by Giroux tha Damaja: 07-02-2010 at 02:01 AM.
Giroux tha Damaja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2010, 01:54 AM
  #190
clodejirew
Registered User
 
clodejirew's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 365
vCash: 500
If they traded Gagne and they didn't get a CLEAR CUT #1 back, I'd be PISSED.

clodejirew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2010, 02:21 AM
  #191
Amateur Hour
Registered User
 
Amateur Hour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Negadelphia
Posts: 6,507
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GilbertsGuns View Post
If they traded Gagne and they didn't get a CLEAR CUT #1 back, I'd be PISSED.
Well, in that case, you're going to be pissed.

Amateur Hour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2010, 02:24 AM
  #192
DeadPhish5858
Rumham!
 
DeadPhish5858's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: the Shade
Country: United States
Posts: 13,476
vCash: 0
Send a message via AIM to DeadPhish5858
Unfortunately they won't be able to get much back for Gagne.

Trade Carter instead. Or Shelly.

DeadPhish5858 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2010, 03:30 AM
  #193
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am The Mush View Post
John Stevens vs. Peter Laviolette, no difference? (or were you speaking strictly in regards to goal tending coaches?)

Goalie coaches matter. Jim Corsi, Mitch Korn, Francois Allaire...there are all guys known as the best for a reason, and they always seem to be coaching successful goalies.

Though I agree the difference by the time guys are 25 or so has more to do with their heads and identifying little issues in their game before they can become big ones (i.e. consistency through out the year), which is something most professional goalie coaches should be able to do.
Talking about goaltending coaches... very much doubt Stevens and Laviolette have much of value to say to goalies at a technical level.

Quote:
Right, NHL players don't just fling the puck away. They are smart enough to take as many of the best opportunities they can get offensively. If they know they aren't going to get great looks against a defense, they're going to take as many mediocre looks as they can, as opposed to banging their head against the wall and turning the puck over looking for what isn't there.
But they don't... That's why shot totals drop against good defensive teams, even for teams that are very good offensively. They don't just throw it at the net at every mediocre chance, good offenses hold the puck and work it into a good chance. Shot totals go down, relative value of chances in that totals remains somewhat constant.

Quote:
Look at the goalies in net. Almost voids the comparison entirely.
Not really. If the claim is that the team plays a strong hand in the SVPCT statistic, why did we see such a noticeable drop despite much improved team defense? If you're argument is the goaltending was weaker on the whole, and thus SVPCT dropped... then, yes, I agree... that's the point. The team can't affect that a whole lot.

It can bring down the GAA, however.

Quote:
Nobody even came close to saying that.

Look at the scoring opportunities when Pronger's pairing is on the ice versus when Parent's pairing is on the ice. Are you really gonna tell me the only difference there is in quantity and not quality? Come on man, you know that's not true.
You wrote:

Quote:
My argument was that good defenses effect the quantity of good scoring chances against, relative to the total, and therefor save percentage.
So, yeah, that's pretty much exactly what you wrote. They effect the quantity of good, average, and bad chances across the board.

When Ryan Parent was on the ice, and the third pairing in general, there were more good, average, and poor chances across the board. There was more possession in the defensive zone, and thus more chances against.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2010, 04:04 AM
  #194
Spongolium*
Potato Magician
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Bridgend,UK
Country: Wales
Posts: 8,653
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CantSeeColors View Post
If this goes down, I'm 50/50 on renouncing my fandom until Holmgren is fired.
Lol. Yeah go you. I'm sure the flyers will be devastated. I just laugh at people around here sometimes.

Mommy Mommy they are not doing what i want them to do mommy. I'm not playing no more!

Spongolium* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2010, 04:05 AM
  #195
Giroux tha Damaja
Registered User
 
Giroux tha Damaja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Mount Holly, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,231
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Giroux tha Damaja
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
But they don't... That's why shot totals drop against good defensive teams, even for teams that are very good offensively. They don't just throw it at the net at every mediocre chance, good offenses hold the puck and work it into a good chance. Shot totals go down, relative value of chances in that totals remains somewhat constant.
Shot totals drop against good defensive teams because time of possession generally tends to favor the team with a better defense; a lot of times the other team would get weak attempts at net against a weaker defense, they don't even get shots off; and on the occasions that they do try to work for good chances they turn the puck over more frequently.



The only reason the spread in shots against across the best and worst defenses in the NHL is as small as it is, is because of the changes in decision making and shot selection that I brought up earlier.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Not really.
Yes. Really. We had an entirely different group of goalies. The team SVPCT stat from year to year isn't comparable if you're attempting to relate it exclusively to one component of the team. Multiple components changed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
If the claim is that the team plays a strong hand in the SVPCT statistic,
My claim was that the team influences the stat, not in a "stronger" way than the goalie usually, but they do effect it. You're very good at taking someone's argument further than they originally did. Then you either make it look like they're back pedaling if they disagree with how you give it back to them, or have them trying to defend a position that has been shifted to an untenable extreme. You have tried it twice in this conversation alone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
why did we see such a noticeable drop despite much improved team defense? If you're argument is the goaltending was weaker on the whole, and thus SVPCT dropped... then, yes, I agree... that's the point. The team can't affect that a whole lot.

It can bring down the GAA, however.
We had Michael Leighton and Brian Boucher in net, that's why. You improve the D, and put two garbage goalies in net, and you're going to see a net reduction in save percentage. Goalies have the biggest influence in that stat. Nobody is disagreeing with that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
You wrote:
Quote:
My argument was that good defenses effect the quantity of good scoring chances against, relative to the total (and therefor save percentage).
So, yeah, that's pretty much exactly what you wrote.
There is a huge difference between me saying the quote above, and saying that "Good team defenses just take away 'good chances' and leave the rest". The change in proportion is one result of a lot of other things they do.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
They effect the quantity of good, average, and bad chances across the board.
There's the rub in this whole argument. We've identified it a couple of times. Forgive me, but I trust my own experience and common sense as evidence regarding the dynamics of a hockey game than the ambitious conclusions you're drawing from basic stats that don't account for the presence or changes of any of a multitude of variables.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
When Ryan Parent was on the ice, and the third pairing in general, there were more good, average, and poor chances across the board. There was more possession in the defensive zone, and thus more chances against.
The quality of the chances against that pairing were of an astoundingly higher quality than those against Pronger's pairing. Offenses knew they could hold the puck and work for a prime chance against that pairing. There weren't very many low percentage shots taken against our team when Parent was on the ice.

I can't believe you're even arguing this. I'm done.


Last edited by Giroux tha Damaja: 07-02-2010 at 04:17 AM. Reason: fixed typos, clarified sentences
Giroux tha Damaja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2010, 04:06 AM
  #196
OriginJM
watch out im smart
 
OriginJM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 4,751
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spongolium View Post
Lol. Yeah go you. I'm sure the flyers will be devastated. I just laugh at people around here sometimes.

Mommy Mommy they are not doing what i want them to do mommy. I'm not playing no more!
Another serious case of someone missing the point.

OriginJM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2010, 08:36 AM
  #197
nevermore
Cap space since 2005
 
nevermore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Country: Austria
Posts: 11,899
vCash: 500
Gagne's NTC doesn't mean anything really. He already stated 2 years ago that when a team wants to trade you it usually will - no point in staying on a team that doesn't want you (there are exepctions from the rule, but Simon isn't one of them).
However I somehow doubt Homer would ask anyone to waive their NTC/NMC.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spongolium View Post
Lol. Yeah go you. I'm sure the flyers will be devastated. I just laugh at people around here sometimes.

Mommy Mommy they are not doing what i want them to do mommy. I'm not playing no more!
What the hell are you even talking about?


Btw, if Gags gets traded I'll probably spend the next couple days laying around in the fetal position.

nevermore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2010, 08:51 AM
  #198
DUHockey9
Registered User
 
DUHockey9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hogwarts
Country: United States
Posts: 4,472
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
They don't, my faith in statistics goes right along with watching the game. However, SVPCT is a pretty friggin simple objectively quantifiable number... it isn't some obscure statistical formula, it's simple: what percentage of shots put on a goalie did he stop.

In any one game, that's a terrible statistic. Over the course of thousands of shot, it's a pretty good statistic for simply getting at how good a goalie is at stopping pucks flying in his direction. Just like batting average is a terrible statistic if I'm looking at one game, and a very good statistic over larger sample sizes. Tedd Williams was one of the best hitters ever... he had slumps, though.

Large samples reduce the chaos (it's called statistical noise) by bringing together larger volumes of data.

So, two points:

1) I have not and will not ever use statistics to predict a single game. I do put a great deal of faith in statistics over larger sample sizes, and if the larger sample size is better for you that's the better choice.

2) Your brain and your eyes are unreliable. The human brain is TERRIBLE at objectively quantifying large volumes of data... it's just the way it is. This is one of the primary reasons I rely on statistics -- in fact, it's one of the reasons statistics have risen to such prominence in recent years as computers have enabled greater volumes of data analysis.
QFT.

DUHockey9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2010, 09:27 AM
  #199
CantSeeColors
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Country: Seychelles
Posts: 5,472
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spongolium View Post
Lol. Yeah go you. I'm sure the flyers will be devastated. I just laugh at people around here sometimes.

Mommy Mommy they are not doing what i want them to do mommy. I'm not playing no more!
Like I give a **** what they think. Or what you think. There's no reason to continue to care this much if all they do is piss me off. We're following a child's game here. Why shouldn't I get to act like a child?

CantSeeColors is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2010, 09:32 AM
  #200
Flyskippy
Registered User
 
Flyskippy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Audubon, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 1,078
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CantSeeColors View Post
Like I give a **** what they think. Or what you think. There's no reason to continue to care this much if all they do is piss me off. We're following a child's game here. Why shouldn't I get to act like a child?
As long as someone gets to punish, curb the behavior of, and send to bed early those who engage in childish antics, I'm all for it. It's entertaining to watch folks go ape****.

These reactions say more about the fanbase than they do the team. Sad.

Flyskippy 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 03:14 PM.

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.