Thank you, I think he's just mixing me up with someone else ......... or his long term memory is not so good.


It's just an even handed way to measure teams records during the season, because of the stupid points system they use, and every team not playing the same number of games during the season.
- D0PPELGANGER

I understand what your doing and it makes sense to me. I bench mark the relative position of teams by subtracting games played from points. So, for example, Ottawa has played 5 games and has 8 points (8-5=3). We know a team needs to come in at +10 (92 points) to be assured of a playoff spot. Lightening are +4, Leafs are +3 and Wings are +2. You can see how quickly a team can drop off the pace (Florida is even, Boston -1, Montreal -2 and Buffalo is at -3).

Agreed. It was amazing that the sens and pens both lost the corsi battle when they played in the playoffs but there was only one winner.
- Tumbleweed

That is actually pretty astute and you need to look at Corsi for each of the individual games. I think you will see that the Corsi numbers are entirely inconclusive.

dp

He argued on a number of occasions that having a lower Point% didn't matter if a team had games in hand.
- Feeling Glucky?

A 100% complete lie.


thought you were better than that.

You're conflating two different things discussed in the past.

That is actually pretty astute and you need to look at Corsi for each of the individual games. I think you will see that the Corsi numbers are entirely inconclusive.
- spatso

You're inconclusive

You're inconclusive
- Tumbleweed

Your making progress. We always move from the general to the particular when establishing a statistical profile. You can say, for example, historically a team that dominates possession of the puck wins a hockey game more often than not. You cannot say a team that dominates possession wins. Or, you can't even say a team that dominates possession should win.

You can say. Last year, Eastern teams that dominated regular season possession (Washington and Boston) did not do as well in the playoffs as teams that did not play a positive possession game (Pittsburgh and Ottawa).

So, what does that really mean?

Keep it real simple.

In the current TSN power rankings 10 of the top 15 teams have a negative possession number (under 50%). 10 of the lower ranked 16 teams have a positive possession number.

In past years TSN placed more emphasis on the possession number for their power rankings.

What does it mean when Edmonton, San Jose, Montreal and Dallas have huge possession numbers but remain in the bottom 1/3 of the standings.

It means squat.

A 100% complete lie.


thought you were better than that.

You're conflating two different things discussed in the past.



- D0PPELGANGER

Sounds like you're setting the bar for success a little low.

But I guess when your team has had so little success over the past decade, when compared to the Senators, any little perceived advantage that you can see, is a victory in your eyes.


In any case the race for the wildcard spots is certainly interesting, and when comparing toronto vs the teams, two of which they need to finish ahead to secure a playoff spot, I see the team they definitely need to finish ahead of foremost, is the Blue Jackets and then the Capitals. Plus, all the teams in the race have game(s) in hand over the leafs.


Who was it that said "the games in hand don't matter too much"???

Rangers .569 / 95.0% Chance of making PO........ one game in hand
Detroit .563 / 68.9% Chance of making PO.......... two games in hand
Columbus .549 / 56.6% Chance of making PO....... two games in hand
Washington .549 / 31.8% Chance of making PO..... one game in hand
toronto .548 / 34.5% Chance of making PO
- Doppleganger

You're talking about games in hand, while simultaneously talking about pts%..... You sure Gluck isn't correct?

Keep it real simple.

In the current TSN power rankings 10 of the top 15 teams have a negative possession number (under 50%). 10 of the lower ranked 16 teams have a positive possession number.

In past years TSN placed more emphasis on the possession number for their power rankings.

What does it mean when Edmonton, San Jose, Montreal and Dallas have huge possession numbers but remain in the bottom 1/3 of the standings.

It means squat.
- spatso

OH NO, systemfool's head is going to explode!!

A 100% complete lie.


thought you were better than that.

You're conflating two different things discussed in the past.



- D0PPELGANGER

If I typed the same amount of embarrassing poop you typed, I’d probably understand the urge to lie about it. But as the saying goes, if I was in your position, I wouldn’t be in your position.

Again, over your head.


Currently the Boston Bruins with 47 points in 41 games (.5731) trail the Detroit Red Wings who have 51 points in 43 games (0.593).

Do you see the two games in hand the Bruins have as an advantage, or a disadvantage in their ability to over take the Red Wings in the Standings?
- D0PPELGANGER

You're talking about games in hand, while simultaneously talking about pts%..... You sure Gluck isn't correct?
- burn

In his defence, he does use points% when it makes the Sens look good.

It just seems like he doesn’t know what it means.

In his defence, he does use points% when it makes the Sens look good.

It just seems like he doesn’t know what it means.


- Feeling Glucky?

The number are what they are. Everyone can interpret or take meaning from their understanding. I understand exactly what he is looking for and everyone in baseball believes it is the right way to look at the numbers. I am not as sure. But it certainly makes sense for anyone wanting to better understand games in hand.

The number are what they are. Everyone can interpret or take meaning from their understanding. I understand exactly what he is looking for and everyone in baseball believes it is the right way to look at the numbers. I am not as sure. But it certainly makes sense for anyone wanting to better understand games in hand.
- spatso

There is the problem right there. Glucky is talking about hockey...

There is the problem right there. Glucky is talking about hockey...
- bixll

We can go slowly here if you like. Everything that is being done in the area of analytics is merely and extension of what they have been doing in baseball for many years. The numbers and events may be different but the desire to measure indicators of probable success are similar. In the cases of wins and losses, scoring and not scoring many of the same principles are in play.

A 100% complete lie.


thought you were better than that.

You're conflating two different things discussed in the past.



- D0PPELGANGER

Speaking of lies..

Did you find that quote yet where I was planning the parade, or how about any quote even remotely similar.

It has been a few days now. I expect you to man up and admit you just make poop up.

That is actually pretty astute and you need to look at Corsi for each of the individual games. I think you will see that the Corsi numbers are entirely inconclusive.
- spatso

in smaller samples like 5 games I wouldnt put much meaning into it, if you are still seeing sub 48 Corsi results after 30+ games I would worry.

expected goals is a better stat to look at for smaller samples, takes into account the shot location and how dangerous the chance is.

the Van and Calgary games were close in that regard, Edmonton had the high exp goals in that game.
http://moneypuck.com/g.htm?id=2017020073
http://moneypuck.com/g.htm?id=2017020061
http://moneypuck.com/g.htm?id=2017020044

Sens look like they were fortunate to come away with those results overall

in smaller samples like 5 games I wouldnt put much meaning into it, if you are still seeing sub 48 Corsi results after 30+ games I would worry.

expected goals is a better stat to look at for smaller samples, takes into account the shot location and how dangerous the chance is.

the Van and Calgary games were close in that regard, Edmonton had the high exp goals in that game.
http://moneypuck.com/g.htm?id=2017020073
http://moneypuck.com/g.htm?id=2017020061
http://moneypuck.com/g.htm?id=2017020044

Sens look like they were fortunate to come away with those results overall
- senstroll

Entirely serious comment. And, this was the discussion yesterday morning on Serius. Sens dominated both games. The Calgary guy was talking about the analytics and how they just don't take into account the defensive speed and counter attack of teams like Pittsburgh and Ottawa.

It is like a bunch of coaches are now coaching against Corsi and possession.

The Ottawa/Edmonton game was bizarre. On the ice Ottawa dominated every aspect of the game. Edmonton looked slow, even lethargic. Yet at the end of the game Edmonton had decisively won the possession number. Something is awry.

Entirely serious comment. And, this was the discussion yesterday morning on Serius. Sens dominated both games. The Calgary guy was talking about the analytics and how they just don't take into account the defensive speed and counter attack of teams like Pittsburgh and Ottawa.

It is like a bunch of coaches are now coaching against Corsi and possession.

The Ottawa/Edmonton game was bizarre. On the ice Ottawa dominated every aspect of the game. Edmonton looked slow, even lethargic. Yet at the end of the game Edmonton had decisively won the possession number. Something is awry.
- spatso

if you look at the scoring chances picture, there is a whole lot of blue right in front of the Sens net. Looks to me like Edmonton had the better chances overall (by a lot)
http://moneypuck.com/g.htm?id=2017020073

i dont see how it matters how the shot from 3 feet in front of the net happened (slow Dmen etc) if one team gets 5 of them and the other get 2 ..why does it really matter how they ended up with those close shots? I would still r ather have 5 chances over 2..even if the sens scored on both and Edmonton didnt score.

When you watch the game its with a biased eye and with terrible memories.

if you look at the scoring chances picture, there is a whole lot of blue right in front of the Sens net. Looks to me like Edmonton had the better chances overall (by a lot)
http://moneypuck.com/g.htm?id=2017020073

i dont see how it matters how the shot from 3 feet in front of the net happened (slow Dmen etc) if one team gets 5 of them and the other get 2 ..why does it really matter how they ended up with those close shots? I would still r ather have 5 chances over 2..even if the sens scored on both and Edmonton didnt score.

When you watch the game its with a biased eye and with terrible memories.
- senstroll

I think this is exactly the point of the commentator on Serius. Ottawa leads the league in blocked shots and often attacks directly off of those blocks. In effect all those shots are obstructed or altered shots. Goalie is not really being tested. The possession and shot attempt numbers make things appear upside down from what is really happening.

I think this is exactly the point of the commentator on Serius. Ottawa leads the league in blocked shots and often attacks directly off of those blocks. In effect all those shots are obstructed or altered shots. Goalie is not really being tested. The possession and shot attempt numbers make things appear upside down from what is really happening.
- spatso

I understand what you are saying and it sounds a lot like the 2012-13 Leafs in a way

Justin Bourne just wrote an interesting article on the sens

https://theathletic.com/1...sks-too-much-of-forwards/

Your making progress. We always move from the general to the particular when establishing a statistical profile. You can say, for example, historically a team that dominates possession of the puck wins a hockey game more often than not. You cannot say a team that dominates possession wins. Or, you can't even say a team that dominates possession should win.

You can say. Last year, Eastern teams that dominated regular season possession (Washington and Boston) did not do as well in the playoffs as teams that did not play a positive possession game (Pittsburgh and Ottawa).

So, what does that really mean?
- spatso

that you're a (frank)ing idiot

Entirely serious comment. And, this was the discussion yesterday morning on Serius. Sens dominated both games. The Calgary guy was talking about the analytics and how they just don't take into account the defensive speed and counter attack of teams like Pittsburgh and Ottawa.

It is like a bunch of coaches are now coaching against Corsi and possession.

The Ottawa/Edmonton game was bizarre. On the ice Ottawa dominated every aspect of the game. Edmonton looked slow, even lethargic. Yet at the end of the game Edmonton had decisively won the possession number. Something is awry.
- spatso

This is happening far too often to be a typo.

Weird schtick.

that you're a (frank)ing idiot
- Tumbleweed

Very clever.

We can go slowly here if you like. Everything that is being done in the area of analytics is merely and extension of what they have been doing in baseball for many years. The numbers and events may be different but the desire to measure indicators of probable success are similar. In the cases of wins and losses, scoring and not scoring many of the same principles are in play.
- spatso

You are an attention hound.. You love the attention. Pretty funny really..

OH NO, systemfool's head is going to explode!!
- D0PPELGANGER

if you keep sucking it will.