|
Koskinen loving sucks poo poo
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 15:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 23:43 |
|
|
The Penguins probably won't be this bad all year, but they also probably won't make the playoffs from the Metro. Their superstars are old, they have no cap space now and won't have any cap space anytime soon (assuming they extend Malkin), there is no young talent on the way... I want to find reasons for optimism but there are none. It's over. It was a hell of a ride. The galling thing isn't so much that they're bad, but they're boring bad. They haven't looked this listless since Mike Johnston. Dumo, Kap, Zucker, Marino... they all are drifting around the ice like ghosts. They either are playing seriously hurt or they don't give a poo poo. For the first time, the worrisome thought begins to creep into my head that the team is tuning Sullivan out. Eric the Mauve fucked around with this message at 15:40 on Nov 15, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 15:13
|
|
|
WeaponX posted:Montreal and/or Vancouver have to start canning people right? Right?? Montreal already fired their coach last season and Ducharme is on his first official non-provisional stint (he was still a temporary coach during the playoffs). Bergevin's contract is not being renewed so he's sort of finishing the season but maybe that could be accelerated. So far this season Montreal has had something like 25-40% of their cap space sitting in injured reserve, LTIR, or the league's programs at any point in time, and might be the most impacted team in the league. They're currently icing their third goaltender (who was taken on waivers to avoid icing their fourth goaltender) and their fourth goaltender (whoops), while missing key veteran players, some which may never be replaced. They decided to send Cole Caufield back into the AHL to probably protect him from lovely play and still letting him develop in a saner environment. They just have nobody left to fire, aside from just getting rid of Bergevin faster or finding some other coach, but they're a team that barely made playoffs last season and then lost their #1 (and now #2) goaltenders, first line center, first defence, and then one of their top offensive player is in and out of injuries as well. They probably have no significant assets to trade either, and the Laval team isn't producing players all that great. Amidst all that, and even while having the second lowest goals-for-per-game stats in the league (and the 4th worst goals-against-per-game), Nick Suzuki has 14 points in 17 games and is the current best piece in the lineup, so that one is certainly the one player I can't imagine them ever moving now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 15:17
|
|
|
blues finally called up perunovich! he won't solve the defensive defense issues, but at least he'll be a puck mover and not a pylon
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 15:22
|
|
|
Eric the Mauve posted:The Penguins probably won't be this bad all year, but they also probably won't make the playoffs from the Metro. Their superstars are old, they have no cap space now and won't have any cap space anytime soon (assuming they extend Malkin), there is no young talent on the way... I want to find reasons for optimism but there are none. It's over. It was a hell of a ride. Sullivan has had an amazing ride, it’s probably time to blow it up this offseason. He needs a new team and a fresh start too.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 15:37
|
|
|
But that's the hell of it--how exactly do you blow up this team? Zucker, Kapanen, and Matheson are all bad contracts the Penguins would have to retain salary or give up draft picks to move. Malkin and Letang are pending UFAs. The team could let them walk to open up cap space, but they won't. They'll re-sign them. There's not really even a question about it. Rust is a pending UFA too, and they definitely won't have the cap space to extend him (and shouldn't even if they could, he's 30 and speed is his game) so they could and should trade him before the deadline, for probably a 2nd and a 4th or something. Dumoulin has one year left at $4.1M, but he also has a limited no-trade and wouldn't bring much back. But if they got something for him I wouldn't hate moving him. He looks cooked. He's 30 and has had 170 injuries the last few years. Who else do they have that could be traded for significant futures? Guentzel? He's in his prime and locked in, you don't trade him unless you're actively tanking. Pettersson probably has more value staying on the team than what he'd bring back in a trade. ZAR, Blueger, et. al. are also in this category, unless you're tanking it all the way it makes no sense to trade those guys because they won't bring much back, but they're NHL players and you have to dress 26 guys. Obviously trading Crosby would be suicidal even if he didn't have a NMC--and as long as Crosby is there, there ain't gonna be no tank. If they get a high lottery slot they'll have done it with good old fashioned honest incompetence. Sullivan was just extended too, but it wouldn't surprise me if a mutual agreement came about to let him go elsewhere next offseason or the one after that. Sullivan is a very good coach, but it's a truism in sports that almost every coach goes stale after about 4-5 years with a team. Eric the Mauve fucked around with this message at 15:59 on Nov 15, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 15:50
|
|
|
Cartoon Man posted:Sullivan has had an amazing ride, it’s probably time to blow it up this offseason. He needs a new team and a fresh start too. Those back to back teams were the best hockey I've ever seen, no doubt, and I will be chasing that high forever. They loving swarmed and if he ever gets a team with those legs again I'm sure he'll be just a successful with it, there was no defending that speed. Now it feels like there's hardly a team out there that can't outskate the Pens. JR hosed'em hard on the way out doubling down on the absolute wrong skill sets.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 15:51
|
|
|
I wish I'd saved video of every game the Penguins played from the day they fired Johnston to the day they won the second Cup. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 15:58
|
|
|
Do I correctly understand that the stance of The Analytics Crowd, as represented by JFresh, is that goaltending performance is a solved problem that the fancystats have successfully 100% separated from the defense played by the rest of the team? It's not a good look to double down and refuse to acknowledge that if your model says a team is awesome at defense but its goalie sucks, the possibility exists that there are elements to preventing goals your model hasn't figured out yet. Like watching Seattle games it quickly becomes clear that opponents don't shoot much against Seattle because they know that two successful side-to-side passes will result in a golden scoring chance, and Seattle never adjusts or changes tactic, so that's what their opponents do, over and over. Like against a team with a clue, in the NHL like 90% of goals fall into one of four categories: (1) Power play, (2) Random deflections in front of the net, (3) Odd man rush/breakaway, and (4) Random unsaveable sniper shots into the top corner. The other 10% is goalie mistakes and really sweet team passing moves setting up an easy shot/Connor McDavid doing insane Connor McDavid poo poo. So mostly offensive strategy is about trying to generate neutral zone turnovers -> odd man rushes, and throwing random poo poo at a screened goalie and trying for a deflection. Against a team that is bad at defense in very predictable ways, such as Seattle, or Philly when Hakstol was there, or the Penguins the last few years, opponents know they can reliably pull the defense out of position and create a scoring chance by successfully executing a few certain passes, so that's what they do. They don't take a ton of random shots hoping for deflections because they know they can more reliably score goals otherwise. If teams studied video and really reached the conclusion "Seattle is great at defense but wow does their goalie suck" then they would be throwing the puck at the net at every opportunity. Watch ten minutes of a Seattle game and you will see that their opponents are in fact doing the opposite of that. tl;dr in Seattle's case the low shots allowed is an effect of bad defense not good defense Eric the Mauve fucked around with this message at 17:22 on Nov 15, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 16:28
|
|
|
I predicted Seattle was gonna be poo poo and I didn't even need a bunch of graphs to do it
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 16:42
|
|
|
My personal opinion, which is solely based on my views of him and not stats or anything, is that I don't think Grubauer was ever actually that good of a goalie to begin with. He was a backup to Holtby on a stacked Capitals team and then he went to a stacked Colorado team. I don't think he's a bad goalie or anything, he's perfectly fine, but I have never been super impressed with him when I watch him and he's always seemed like an average goalie, maybe slight above average. A backup you can trust to play a little more than normal or a starter on a good team that can cover for his shortcomings. I think that now that he's not on a good team he's struggling, although he should still be better than this.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 16:49
|
|
|
I like his name because it makes me think of Macgruber.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 16:50
|
|
|
Agreed with Jamwad. Grubauer's a pretty bog standard starting caliber NHL goaltender. Colorado made him look good, Seattle makes him look bad, plus the random variance you always get with goalies. He's OK. That may change because Hakstol is hard at work annihilating his confidence, but he's always been a decent enough goalie. Francis thinking he was getting a superstar is just one of many pieces of evidence to suggest he is incompetent (and Sakic letting him walk rather than megapay him, evidence to suggest he is competent).
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 17:03
|
|
|
Eric the Mauve posted:Agreed with Jamwad. Grubauer's a pretty bog standard starting caliber NHL goaltender. Colorado made him look good, Seattle makes him look bad, plus the random variance you always get with goalies. He's OK. That may change because Hakstol is hard at work annihilating his confidence, but he's always been a decent enough goalie. Francis thinking he was getting a superstar is just one of many pieces of evidence to suggest he is incompetent (and Sakic letting him walk rather than megapay him, evidence to suggest he is competent). Your assessment of Kraken defense upthread was a good read. I'm curious what JFresh would say in response; is it okay with you if I clean it up a bit and post it in reply to the tweet?
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 17:08
|
|
|
Aphrodite posted:I like his name because it makes me think of Macgruber. I like his name because it makes me think of Boomhauer. dang ol' yo.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 17:09
|
|
|
Eric the Mauve posted:Against a team that is bad at defense in very predictable ways, such as Seattle, or Philly when Hakstol was there, or the Penguins the last few years, opponents know they can reliably pull the defense out of position and create a scoring chance by successfully executing a few certain passes, so that's what they do. They don't take a ton of random shots hoping for deflections because they know they can more reliably score goals otherwise. This is going to sound extremely funny coming from me and it requires the assumption on my part of how JFresh, Micah, and Evolving Hockey people et all collect then manipulate their data and it's basically the basis/flaw of expected values and potentially a limit in data collection. The very simple gist of my thought here is that xG exists because all shots are not created equal. The wide open wrister from the point isn't the same as a wrister through traffic or wrister from the low slot. When you then add in the different angles and areas the puck travels from. Theoretically a breakaway vs a 2 on 1 vs a low to high one timer could all be weighted differently in regards to their conversion rate. Even a 2 on 1 can go a vast number of different ways. Whether that level of minutia is available and taken into account (High Danger 2 on 1....player shoots vs High Danger 2 on 1 player passes for 1 timer side to side OR are they both thrown together as HIGH DANGER regardless of how the play develops) is where I think some of the models struggle. Specifically with Seattle and their goaltending woes what the models assume is that the goalie is a constant and should be stopping X amount of chances of Y amount of type. This is a basic requirement. Otherwise you get even more junk in junk out. The other HUGE ASSUMPTION for this specific model is coaches, their systems, and their personnel choices are also a constant. Which is why I wrote a whole gently caress load of words about that stuff. Specific to Seattle they have 3 goalies from 3 different teams and different systems that have all put up the same results. When we look at the previous outcomes of Dave Hakestol in Philly we saw a demonstrated under-performance by the goaltenders in 3 of Hak's 4 seasons there. TL;DR - On the spreadsheet Seattle shouldn't be this bad. True! They are though! Why? Either Grubauer has gone full pumpkin. OR several factors outside of the spreadsheet are the cause for such an abnormal outcome relative to the expectation. IMO it is potentially a combination of how data is tracked and logged as well as basic assumptions required for expected values. If I had time I'd go watch Hakstol tape from his Philly years and compare it to his time in Seattle that would probably be the *best* way to determine wtf is going on. As it is I vomit this stuff out for fun and that's a lot of time effort for giggles  Edit: I'm going to add a quick addendum here - models should not account for your example. Seattle is an absolute outlier in regards to the model. Explaining or 'fixing' that by adjusting the model would be extremely bad and defeat the entire purpose for expected values. rex rabidorum vires fucked around with this message at 17:23 on Nov 15, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 17:14
|
|
|
Grubeaur isn’t Roy, but his numbers have been consistently good no matter where he goes. It’s not like he was putting up .875 in the A. He should be a top 10-20 guy, not a bottom 50 guy. There’s something else going on here. The defensive structure is probably a big factor, but the way they are just running him out and leaving him hanging cannot be helping. Just bad coaching and GMing all around.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 17:14
|
|
|
kalensc posted:Your assessment of Kraken defense upthread was a good read. I'm curious what JFresh would say in response; is it okay with you if I clean it up a bit and post it in reply to the tweet? Sure, but you'd be far better off using rex's posts on the subject IMO. He's way more statistically literate than I am, to someone like JFresh the stuff I wrote just sounds like a long winded way of saying "I don't need no fancystats, watch the games nerd!" (notwithstanding I actually love fancystats and love JFresh, I just think it's damaging to the enterprise to blithely assume your model is right and can't be missing stuff).
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 17:20
|
|
|
kalensc posted:Your assessment of Kraken defense upthread was a good read. I'm curious what JFresh would say in response; is it okay with you if I clean it up a bit and post it in reply to the tweet? I think the far more interesting question is asking JFresh about how it compares to the actual outcomes vs expected outcomes of the Flyers specifically under Hakstol. That while JFresh likely updates and tweaks his models (or he could probably re-run the old data if he has it) it provides us with a different constant (Hakstol) to compare against.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 17:26
|
|
|
rex rabidorum vires posted:
I think the working theory was that Ron Francis was a good GM that was hamstrung by a shoestring budget, but looking at these draft selections I'm inclined to think he just wasn't that great.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 17:29
|
|
|
Hands up anyone who predicted this list of top 10 goalies in sv% at season start:code:Incidentally, Andersen's hips still look shot, but somehow he's putting up Vezina numbers in Carolina. Go figure. (No, I don't think Carolina's defense is that much better than Toronto's was last season, and anyway, consider Jack Campbell for comparison).
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 17:34
|
|
|
Yeah, I generally find 'goalies are voodoo' more compelling than 'goalie sv% primarily represents the team performance'. Of course, I haven't kept up with with the more recent stuff, but I remember the long look for contextual effects on goaltender performance and the impacts were slight and sparse. Of course it's conceptually possible that Seattle is consistently, systematically having defensive breakdowns in such a way that let their opponents get high EV chances in ways that the models meant to track high EV don't catch. But, well, that seems like a fairly strong claim.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 17:54
|
|
|
Jordan7hm posted:Grubeaur isn’t Roy, but his numbers have been consistently good no matter where he goes. It’s not like he was putting up .875 in the A. He should be a top 10-20 guy, not a bottom 50 guy. Well that's just it. He's put up good numbers everywhere but always while playing for good teams. I don't think he's a bottom 50 guy but I don't think he's a top 10-20 guy either. I think he's probably in the 25-30 range and he's always been in the right place at the right time. Even the AHL team he played for (Hershey) was excellent compared to it's contemporaries. This is all based on the eye test and my personal opinion, so it's obviously biased, but I've just never seen him and felt like he was a true starter. He's a perfectly competent goalie that can do well (and has!) in the right situation, but he's not a goalie that I would build a team around. If he was a forward he'd be a passenger winger who can score 30 goals, but only if his center is Sidney Crosby. Just the vibe I get.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 17:54
|
|
|
That's odd considering the cross checking in front of the net has dropped quite a bit. They're still shoving and fighting for positions, but it just feels different. Goalies are just out of control to start the season. I can't wait until people start saying the pads need to get smaller again.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 17:54
|
|
|
Dave Hakstol ran Brian Elliot into the ground by starting him every game in the month of November He sucks
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 18:08
|
|
|
Keefe changed all the Leafs lines in the second half of a back-to-back for no reason and they played like poo poo, so in response he’s changing them again BUT not to the combinations that were successful, he’s going back to the lines that didn’t work at the start of the season. The guy is allergic to learning anything.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 18:29
|
|
|
Hand Knit posted:Yeah, I generally find 'goalies are voodoo' more compelling than 'goalie sv% primarily represents the team performance'. Of course, I haven't kept up with with the more recent stuff, but I remember the long look for contextual effects on goaltender performance and the impacts were slight and sparse. Wasn't this one of the huge knocks on Erik Karlsson during his prime in Ottawa? That the available public models, at the time, made him look passable-to-good defensively, but that his on-ice defensive results were consistently way worse than what those models suggested? I'm completely out of the loop on most analytics stuff now (beyond beep boop someone posted a chart), but it seems that the public models 5-6 years ago weren't nearly as good as they are now - for example, when people argued about whether Karlsson was good defensively, the main things they were looking at were shot and scoring chance differentials. And while the models-of-the-day picked up on his skill in evading forechecks and transitioning the puck (leading to good shot/scoring chance differentials), they didn't account for the number of high danger rush chances that he gave up or the primo locations for all the shots-against while he was on the ice. And now that the models are taking these things into account, his past defensive shortcomings would be more accurately reflected today? Which is to say that hockey analytics really seems to be something that's still growing, and that in 4-5 years it might be possible to point to a clear Hakstol effect, beyond simply saying that goalies are voodoo. bub spank fucked around with this message at 18:45 on Nov 15, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 18:40
|
|
|
Honestly I'm flabbergasted that Keefe is still there. He's so clearly overmatched as an NHL coach. The Leafs had a lot of young talent that they've pissed away with this guy instead of getting a real coach--but of course, a real coach might be a threat to Dubas' authority, maybe even his job...
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 18:42
|
|
|
When do we start up the “FIRE HAKSTOL” posts? Should we wait till the new year at least?
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 18:46
|
|
|
They started up weeks ago, so you're already late.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 18:48
|
|
|
Eric the Mauve posted:Honestly I'm flabbergasted that Keefe is still there. He's so clearly overmatched as an NHL coach. The Leafs had a lot of young talent that they've pissed away with this guy instead of getting a real coach--but of course, a real coach might be a threat to Dubas' authority, maybe even his job... Keefe is #2 in point percentage* for active coaches, behind only Dean Evason (who? Oh, the Wild). Only the legendary Tom Johnson, Cooney Weiland, and Lou Lam are higher all-time, amongst those who coached 50+ games anyway. * yeah this stat is going to be worthless until the NHL brings back the beloved tie and gets rid of loser points.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 18:57
|
|
|
The Penguins have been hot garbage the past two games, so I don't know how much that's changed their numbers, but prior to this weekend they'd been a good 5v5 team analytically all season. Their two big issues have been losing like every shootout/OT they get into, and having a garbage powerplay. In theory Crosby helps both of those areas. Really curious what they will do this summer if they miss.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 19:05
|
|
|
bub spank posted:Wasn't this one of the huge knocks on Erik Karlsson during his prime in Ottawa? That the available public models, at the time, made him look passable-to-good defensively, but that his on-ice defensive results were consistently way worse than what those models suggested? I mean sure, it's possible. But, like, it's 'possibility' that's doing the work here. There's a simple fact that something is definitely going wrong for the Kraken because goals are going on. Strictly speaking, what's at issue isn't just whether or not it's the fault of the goalie, but also whether the gently caress ups on the part of the players are systemic (persistent features of how they play) or discrete (basically bad luck which does not entail that the probabilities underlying xG models are wrong). What's happening right now with the Kraken really doesn't deviate from hockey as we currently understand it. We see teams with good underlying numbers and naff goaltending (or goals against) all the time. So, in this case, 'goalies are voodoo' is just sticking with what we know rather than using it as a god of the gaps. Eric the Mauve posted:Honestly I'm flabbergasted that Keefe is still there. He's so clearly overmatched as an NHL coach. The Leafs had a lot of young talent that they've pissed away with this guy instead of getting a real coach--but of course, a real coach might be a threat to Dubas' authority, maybe even his job... It would be kinda weird to fire a winning coach who has not yet coached a full season. Like sure, you can think he's bad, but it's not confusing that he's still there.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 19:08
|
|
|
bub spank posted:Wasn't this one of the huge knocks on Erik Karlsson during his prime in Ottawa? That the available public models, at the time, made him look passable-to-good defensively, but that his on-ice defensive results were consistently way worse than what those models suggested? I feel like, and I may be wrong here, that early nhl analytics were heavily rooted in Corsi (shot quantity) over expected goals (a combo of shot quantity and quality) So for a guy like Karlsson he may have been a strong defensive analytics guy at that time because he generated so many chances while allowing a few, but the few he allowed were incredibly high danger odd man rushes, turnovers in front of the net, etc. But the popular models at the time did not take quality of shot in to account, only the raw volume of them and since Karlsson had the puck a majority of the time he looked great analytically. The same sort of deal applied team-wide for teams like Columbus under Torts or Carolina of 5+ years ago where they would throw pucks at the net from any angle and generate a ton of low danger shots. Great for Corsi, not so much for expected goals
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 19:08
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/NHLFlyers/status/1460307344764588034 OH BOY
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 19:11
|
|
|
Iodised QQ posted:I feel like, and I may be wrong here, that early nhl analytics were heavily rooted in Corsi (shot quantity) over expected goals (a combo of shot quantity and quality) It's probably worth adding that I'm with eXXon in really not being sold on xG type stuff. It feels like it's long on math, and short on explanation as to why that math works. You compared that to corsi/shot based metrics, which had a fairly straightforward explanation (all teams are trying to get/prevent shots from good areas and there's little spread in shooting talent so looking at shots/shot attempts will encompass the other relevant factors).
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 19:12
|
|
|
lol cool, rushed him back and now he'll be out most of the season with our luck
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 19:26
|
|
|
Vargatron posted:I think the working theory was that Ron Francis was a good GM that was hamstrung by a shoestring budget, but looking at these draft selections I'm inclined to think he just wasn't that great. I could buy this theory if they hadn't then gone out and spent $17+ million dollars in free agency. $5.9 for Grubauer, $4.5 for Wennberg, $5.5 for Schwartz, and then $1.5 between Donato and Sheahan. SO I'M GOING TO MAKE ONE MORE THOUGHT POST ON THIS and stop. For today. Specifically about Seattle. Maybe. Lets finish beating this horse. Ignoring basically any and all potential cap dump trades I am still in utter shock and confusion at Ron Francis' inability to extract anything from anybody for anything. Lets just narrow all of this down to specifically 5 teams where Ron completely and utterly failed to get any value out of his picks. Buffalo, Chicago, Columbus, Detroit, and Philadelphia. Buffalo Will Borgen is a 24 y/o NCAA player with AHL experience and at time of drafting 14 games in the NHL where he played 16 minutes a night, took 9 shots, and was a -9. This is a career AHL'er. This isn't a player for the 'future'. This isn't a player that you can move down the line as a prospect. This is a random footnote contract to balance a trade. You are going to tell me a 'Veteran' NHL GM couldn't get interest from ANYONE in the NHL for Colin Miller or Zemgus or even freaking Cody Eakin. Chicago John Quenneville at least is more of a NHL'er than Will. Too bad he's in Switzerland now. Gaudette at 24 and RFA with 160 games might have value to someone. Vinnie I mentioned. De Haan extremely washed, but hey retain and someone might give you a 4th? Same for a veteran winner like Brett Connolly! Just setting the pick on fire. Columbus Lol. LMAO. Wavied and back with CBJ. Why even bother. Was there seriously no market for Max Domi? I find that extremely hard to believe. May as well get nothing though! Kukan might be worth a 6th? Idk Stenlund? You know you only get one chance at this right Ron? Detroit It's Cholowski. And I wanted to rent a movie tonight! Another player taken and not even with the org. Again you're going to tell me no one would offer anything for Namestnikov, Stecher, or even an extremely over cooked DeKeyser. loving unbelievable. Philadelphia Absolute nobody in Carsen Twarynski. Same poo poo as Borgen. Career minor league player that the most notable achievement will this draft and maybe their inclusion in some trade that no one cares about. The value lost here is wild. Expensive offensive capable players on both defense and forward! Not interested? Cheap capable defensemen as rentals! Not them either? How about a Lyon or Felix Sandstrom? REX CAN YOU PLEASE FINISH AND SHUT UP!!!!!!! Yeah yeah. My point is Seattle only had 1 shot at this and for FIVE....freaking FIVE of their 30 picks they got no value. None. Zero. Zilch. loving nadda. 16.6 repeating% of their WELCOME TO THE NHL DRAFT has nothing to show for it. I can not begin to comprehend the level of incompetence? Laziness? Lack of preparation, scouting, and phone/email/sounding work that seems to have occurred for a ground up building of a billion dollar enterprise. I can not imagine anyone (ok most/many) could, with a straight face, say this is average? Decent? Good? Smart? management for any franchise. That Francis and his front office couldn't work out deals for any of these players with or without salary retention to get picks, players, and/or prospects? I remain completely baffled and mystified at what the heck that front office was doing for the months prior to the draft.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 19:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 23:43 |
|
|
Early analytics were Corsi-driven because the current level of shot location tracking didn't exist publicly. But it was pretty strongly demonstrated over and over that good Corsi was strongly correlated with wins and with goals, this strawman of teams that take a million outside shots so they look good for analytics has never existed (because taking a million shots from the point doesn't actually give you more zone time to take more shots). I think the struggle with the causal relationship of 'soft' effects on numbers is that these models don't care about cause. Severely incompetent coaches usually get fired pretty quickly and so their effect on the team isn't much different than a long cold streak, both are due for regression even though we consider one luck and one systemic. There's a baseline of performance/competence in the NHL that makes the effect of coaching quite small on average, so historically people have confidently said things like "team play doesn't significantly affect sv%" even though it seems obviously not true, because the outliers that prove that wrong just don't stick around very long. Hand Knit posted:It would be kinda weird to fire a winning coach who has not yet coached a full season. Like sure, you can think he's bad, but it's not confusing that he's still there. Yeah Keefe is set up for success in every sense, his buddy got him promoted every step of the way, he's coached only loaded teams, and the pandemic has given him a built-in excuse to wave away any issues with on-ice results.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 19:52
|
|