inkman Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Passed out on Nyquil. I've heard of people doing this. I figured it was mostly chicks and kids. I'm going to need a bottle or two to make me "pass out". :unsure: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Sorry, SEVEN of the first nine (the games in October) were under .910. Does that negate the point that the majority Nevermind Tom, you win. I made a seemingly innocent comment that maybe Chad is starting just because he's been playing well and right on cue you challenge me. And then proceed to get upset when I defend myself. Maybe you like the discussion, maybe you just don't like me. Either way I've got better things to do. I mean it's a forum, we discuss things here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Sorry, SEVEN of the first nine (the games in October) were under .910. Does that negate the point that the majority Nevermind Tom, you win. I made a seemingly innocent comment that maybe Chad is starting just because he's been playing well and right on cue you challenge me. And then proceed to get upset when I defend myself. Maybe you like the discussion, maybe you just don't like me. Either way I've got better things to do. A) why do you think I'm upset? I was just countering your points b) this is the second time in a week you suggested I don't like you. I think you may be taking these discussions a little too personal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 I've heard of people doing this. I figured it was mostly chicks and kids. I'm going to need a bottle or two to make me "pass out". :unsure: I'm only 5'8, 165, so it doesn't take a lot of drugs to knock me out. Booze on the other hand, that's a different story Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorny Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 (edited) Projected Lines according to http://sabres.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=799483&navid=DL|BUF|home Kane - ROR - McGinn Moulson - Eichel - Girgensons Foligno - Larsson - Gionta COR - Schaller - Legwand Bogosian - Ristolainen McCabe - Franson Weber - Pysyk Scratched - Colaiacovo , Varone (my guess), Gorges (hurt) Injured - Deslauriers, Ennis, Reinhart Edited January 25, 2016 by Thorny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clintwestwood Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Why is goal support and record important for a goalie? They go hand in hand, and really don't dictate anything about his play Holy ###### there has to be some sort of Corsi for goalies....yup, here we are. http://www.hockey-reference.com/leagues/NHL_2016_goalies.html Quality Starts and Quality Start %: And, hold on to your hats here, cause guess what? Johnson is below average in BOTH of these categories, ranking 26th in QS, and 46th in QS%. And, wanna know how we know these stats are useful? Because the conventional thinking on who the top goalies in the league are appear at the top of these lists: QS: Crawford, Schneider, Lundqvist, Holtby, Quick QS% gives you a simlar top 5, although I'm only considering those goalies with above 20 GP. There's also ASV% (Adjusted Save Percentage) http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=744483 Who are our top 5 goalies here (played above 1000 minutes): http://war-on-ice.com/goalietable.html Reimer: ASV% = 95.30, SV% = 95.29 => (closer shots) Mrazek: ASV% = 94.61, SV% = 94.79 => (further shots) Schneider: ASV% = 93.78, SV% = 94.0 => (further shots) Lundqvist: ASV% = 93.85, SV% = 93.99 => (closer shots) Luongo: ASV% = 93.47, SV% = 93.94 => (further shots) Holtby: ASV% = 93.72, SV% = 93.85 => (closer shots) Where is Johnson on this list? 18th. Oddly enough, right ahead of Tuukka Rask Johnson: ASV% = 92.25, SV% = 92.54 => (easier shots faced) Rask: ASV% = 92.28, SV% = 92.53 => (easier shots faced) This also happens to be Rask's worst season he's ever had as a starter I believe, and Johnson's 2nd best WC with the post of the year so far. Awesome #fancystats Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Stats! It feels so good when stats vindicate what you've been thinking (i.e. Johnson is a mediocre, average goalie) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pi2000 Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Those goalie stats are great, nice find WIldCard. Ullmark a full 10 percentage points better QS% than Johnson. Will be interesting to see where Lehner ends up at the end of the season. Projected Lines according to http://sabres.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=799483&navid=DL|BUF|home Kane - ROR - McGinn Moulson - Eichel - Girgensons Foligno - Larsson - Gionta COR - Schaller - Legwand Bogosian - Ristolainen McCabe - Franson Weber - Pysyk Scratched - Colaiacovo , Gorges (hurt), Reinhart (hurt) Injured - Deslauriers, Ennis What ever happend to the McCabe/Pysyk pairing that was doing so well earlier in the season? Any details on the nature of Reinhart's injury? I would guess concussion? Maybe broken jaw? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 (edited) Those goalie stats are great, nice find WIldCard. Ullmark a full 10 percentage points better QS% than Johnson. Will be interesting to see where Lehner ends up at the end of the season. Yup. Despite starting 8 less games, Ullmark only has 2 less Quality Starts. Ullmark: QS = 10 QS% = .588 GS = 17 Johnson: QS = 12 QS% = .480 GS = 25 Edited January 25, 2016 by WildCard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Why is goal support and record important for a goalie? They go hand in hand, and really don't dictate anything about his play Holy ###### there has to be some sort of Corsi for goalies....yup, here we are. http://www.hockey-reference.com/leagues/NHL_2016_goalies.html Quality Starts and Quality Start %: And, hold on to your hats here, cause guess what? Johnson is below average in BOTH of these categories, ranking 26th in QS, and 46th in QS%. And, wanna know how we know these stats are useful? Because the conventional thinking on who the top goalies in the league are appear at the top of these lists: QS: Crawford, Schneider, Lundqvist, Holtby, Quick QS% gives you a simlar top 5, although I'm only considering those goalies with above 20 GP. There's also ASV% (Adjusted Save Percentage) http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=744483 Who are our top 5 goalies here (played above 1000 minutes): http://war-on-ice.com/goalietable.html Reimer: ASV% = 95.30, SV% = 95.29 => (closer shots) Mrazek: ASV% = 94.61, SV% = 94.79 => (further shots) Schneider: ASV% = 93.78, SV% = 94.0 => (further shots) Lundqvist: ASV% = 93.85, SV% = 93.99 => (closer shots) Luongo: ASV% = 93.47, SV% = 93.94 => (further shots) Holtby: ASV% = 93.72, SV% = 93.85 => (closer shots) Where is Johnson on this list? 18th. Oddly enough, right ahead of Tuukka Rask Johnson: ASV% = 92.25, SV% = 92.54 => (easier shots faced) Rask: ASV% = 92.28, SV% = 92.53 => (easier shots faced) This also happens to be Rask's worst season he's ever had as a starter I believe, and Johnson's 2nd best For one goal support and record means quite a bit. Why would you want a goaltender in net in which the team plays more conservatively and scores less because they may not be as comfortable in net? I mention this because it was a key point thrown at me when I compared Miller to Enroll but for some reason now it doesn't apply. Second, can you perform those same statistical comparisons over the last three months when Johnson had time to come off his injury, a new coach, a new system and 10 new players in the lineup? If you want to compare Rask, compare those same stats to Rask three years ago when he started almost 30 games playing behind the same team as him. A) why do you think I'm upset? I was just countering your points b) this is the second time in a week you suggested I don't like you. I think you may be taking these discussions a little too personal I guess I just base it off of the sparky comments you usually include with the discussion. Like the last discussion and others we've had when you used to post often. O It feels so good when stats vindicate what you've been thinking (i.e. Johnson is a mediocre, average goalie) It feels even better when you can cherry pick to match the narrative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 For one goal support and record means quite a bit. Why would you want a goaltender in net in which the team plays more conservatively and scores less because they may not be as comfortable in net? I mention this because it was a key point thrown at me when I compared Miller to Enroll but for some reason now it doesn't apply. Second, can you perform those same statistical comparisons over the last three months when Johnson had time to come off his injury, a new coach, a new system and 10 new players in the lineup? If you want to compare Rask, compare those same stats to Rask three years ago when he started almost 30 games playing behind the same team as him. And it's the same argument I tried to make with how much Price being out means to the Canadiens, and you denied it. I just did, I compared him to Ullmark, coming off of a hip-surgery, in his rookie year, with a new system, in a new country, in a new continent, with a new coach, a new system, and a new rink size. So you want me to compare Johnson's career year against one of Rasks? The 2013-2014 Boston Bruins, in which both players played in the same system: Rask: ASV% = 93.82 SV% = 94.24 QS = 39 QS% = .672 GS = 58 Johnson: ASV% = 93.94 SV% = 93.42 QS = 15 QS% = .652 GS = 23 BOOM. SCIENCE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Doesn't really say much about stats when you're comparing two goaltenders having similar seasons to a Vezina caliber goaltender. It's either a flaw in logic or a flaw in the legitimacy of the stats. The team plays a part in the stats of a goaltender, if you hold those stats in high regard 17th is pretty good considering the first month and also considering he plays on one of the work teams in the league. And when you consider the dysfunction that was the first month, still being able to hold on to an almost 500 record. And it's the same argument I tried to make with how much Price being out means to the Canadiens, and you denied it. I just did, I compared him to Ullmark, coming off of a hip-surgery, in his rookie year, with a new system, in a new country, in a new continent, with a new coach, a new system, and a new rink size. So you want me to compare Johnson's career year against one of Rasks? The 2013-2014 Boston Bruins, in which both players played in the same system: Rask: ASV% = 93.82 SV% = 94.24 QS = 39 QS% = .672 GS = 58 Johnson: ASV% = 93.94 SV% = 93.42 QS = 15 QS% = .652 GS = 23 BOOM. SCIENCE So they're very similar to a Vezina quality starter. Huh, imagine that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Doesn't really say much about stats when you're comparing two goaltenders having similar seasons to a Vezina caliber goaltender. It's either a flaw in logic or a flaw in the legitimacy of the stats. The team plays a part in the stats of a goaltender, if you hold those stats in high regard 17th is pretty good considering the first month and also considering he plays on one of the work teams in the league. And when you consider the dysfunction that was the first month, still being able to hold on to an almost 500 record. I can't convince you, can I? I compared Ullmark to Johnson, under the same conditions, and Ullmark was better. No dice. I compared Rask and Johnson, under the same conditions, and Rask was better. No dice. I compared Johnson's stats this year to league average and rankings, and no dice. It's not a flaw in the stats if every goalie we all think is good (i.e. Lundvist, Crawford, Holtby and Quick) lead those categories. You clearly didn't read any of the definitions I've given if you want to contend the bold. These stats are specifically designed to circumvent any effect of the team playing in front of the goalie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clintwestwood Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Doesn't really say much about stats when you're comparing two goaltenders having similar seasons to a Vezina caliber goaltender. It's either a flaw in logic or a flaw in the legitimacy of the stats. The team plays a part in the stats of a goaltender, if you hold those stats in high regard 17th is pretty good considering the first month and also considering he plays on one of the work teams in the league. And when you consider the dysfunction that was the first month, still being able to hold on to an almost 500 record. So they're very similar to a Vezina quality starter. Huh, imagine that. This is what you get out of that fact stacked post? This is a lost cause. :rolleyes: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 You compared Rask to Johnson and Rask was better. How much better? Almost insignificant. Johnson was in the top 5 in the league in save percentage that year if I'm not mistaken, and he played enough games to qualify for that comparison. Show me a stat that compares quality starts to team record, 17th (which is probably much higher since October) on a last place team is damn good. If you want to convince me, compare apples to apples. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 (edited) You compared Rask to Johnson and Rask was better. How much better? Almost insignificant. Johnson was in the top 5 in the league in save percentage that year if I'm not mistaken, and he played enough games to qualify for that comparison. Show me a stat that compares quality starts to team record, 17th (which is probably much higher since October) on a last place team is damn good. If you want to convince me, compare apples to apples. Why does the Ullmark comparison not apply? QS compared to team's record don't apply when we consider the fact that we're comparing two goalies on the same team Rask's SV% was better than Johnson's that year, and considerably so, 94.29% compared to 93.42%. Johnson's ASV% was .15% better than Rasks, and lead the league. He also faced 532 shots to Rask's 1470 shots, and played in 27 games to Rasks 66. So, we have Johnson facing an average of 19.7 shots/game, and Rask facing an average of 22.7 shots/game. Edited January 25, 2016 by WildCard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 This is what you get out of that fact stacked post? This is a lost cause. :rolleyes: I got it out of these stats which are damn near identical, are they not? Rask: ASV% = 93.82 SV% = 94.24 QS = 39 QS% = .672 GS = 58 Johnson: ASV% = 93.94 SV% = 93.42 QS = 15 QS% = .652 GS = 23 Why does the Ullmark comparison not apply? QS compared to team's record don't apply when we consider the fact that we're comparing two goalies on the same. They do apply, as does the goal support that clearly shows the team plays much more conservatively with Ullmark in net. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 (edited) They do apply, as does the goal support that clearly shows the team plays much more conservatively with Ullmark in net. That's not true. Goal support is not directly tied to how aggressive a team is. I got it out of these stats which are damn near identical, are they not? Look at all of the stats I've posted, of course they're all 'damn near identical', we're dealing with percentages. Does that mean all of these goalies are Vezina candidates? Of course not. It means little differences may mean a lot. You know what's not nearly identical? Ullmark's QS% compared to Johnson's. Edited January 25, 2016 by WildCard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 That's not true. Goal support is not directly tied to how aggressive a team is. Must be coincidence then that Johnson is in the top half and Ullmark is 3rd last. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Must be coincidence then that Johnson is in the top half and Ullmark is 3rd last. In what, goal support? Or lack thereof? Explain to me why Goal Support directly indicates how offensively aggressive a team is on a given night. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Confuscious say, he who run behind car get exhausted. Rangers should have heavy legs from yesterdays road game in Ottawa. Sabres need to jump on them early if they want to give themselves a chance. C'mon. It's Taro Sez ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 In what, goal support? Or lack thereof? Explain to me why Goal Support directly indicates how offensively aggressive a team is on a given night. Really? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Really? We've all seen games where a team is out shot 50-20 and hemmed in all night only to win 2-1. I swear, JJ, you and d4rk are my white whales. One day I'll get both of you to admit defeat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 We've all seen games where a team is out shot 50-20 and hemmed in all night only to win 2-1. I swear, JJ, you and d4rk are my white whales. One day I'll get both of you to admit defeat This isn't JJ's first go around denying fancystats. Frankly, I'm amazed you have the energy to do this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 We've all seen games where a team is out shot 50-20 and hemmed in all night only to win 2-1. I swear, JJ, you and d4rk are my white whales. One day I'll get both of you to admit defeat I'll admit defeat as soon as you can put together something conclusive enough to do so without ignoring the counterpoints. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.