Taro T Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 C'mon. It's Taro Sez ... Don't go roping me into this rodeo. ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 (edited) This isn't JJ's first go around denying fancystats. Frankly, I'm amazed you have the energy to do this. Do you have something relevant to add besides your typical snark? What fancy stats, the ones where Rask and Johnson were almost identical two years ago, or the ones where they are almost identical this year? Edited January 25, 2016 by JJFIVEOH Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 I'll admit defeat as soon as you can put together something conclusive enough to do so without ignoring the counterpoints. ....really? I'm genuinely confused by this This isn't JJ's first go around denying fancystats. Frankly, I'm amazed you have the energy to do this. I think I just hit my wall Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwksndmonster Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 I think I know how WC got to over 9,000 so fast. (seriously, you and Hoss are impressive) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted January 25, 2016 Author Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 So they're very similar to a Vezina quality starter. Huh, imagine that.An n of 15 and an n of 39 I would say make that comparison questionable. We can't extrapolate 15 out to 39 reliable enough to call them similar. I think Johnson has been good for us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Do you have something relevant to add besides your typical snark? What fancy stats, the ones where Rask and Johnson were almost identical two years ago, or the ones where they are almost identical this year? They weren't almost identical 2 years ago. And how about some context for those stats? The one where Rask is having a career low and Johnson the 2nd best of his career. Or where the same goalie on the same team with more hurdles to overcome has better stats than him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Not sure what's worse, the fact that so many people get upset by the fact somebody said a particular player is doing well, or the fact so many people want so badly to prove a certain player is doing poorly. Only in BFLO can so much effort be wasted on a GDT in trying to prove how much one of their players sucks. Sad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 (edited) An n of 15 and an n of 39 I would say make that comparison questionable. We can't extrapolate 15 out to 39 reliable enough to call them similar. I think Johnson has been good for us. I'm not saying he hasn't, but he's a career backup for a reason. Hence the Ullmark comparison and the QS% comparison for Johnson and Rask. Edited January 25, 2016 by WildCard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brawndo Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 King Henrik in net for the Rangers, Nash still out Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 (edited) Not sure what's worse, the fact that so many people get upset by the fact somebody said a particular player is doing well, or the fact so many people want so badly to prove a certain player is doing poorly. Only in BFLO can so much effort be wasted on a GDT in trying to prove how much one of their players sucks. Sad. I'll take one from your page, don't be a prick. We're having a discussion about a player on our team that is starting tonight, and it's a legitimate discussion. There's nothing 'sad' about it. Edited January 25, 2016 by WildCard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwksndmonster Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Not sure what's worse, the fact that so many people get upset by the fact somebody said a particular player is doing well, or the fact so many people want so badly to prove a certain player is doing poorly. Only in BFLO can so much effort be wasted on a GDT in trying to prove how much one of their players sucks. Sad. Nobody got upset but you. Most on here have been pleased with how Johnson has played for us, despite the fact that he's a career backup. Why do you think you get into so many of these arguments? Is it because the board has some sort of vendetta against you? Wait, that's definitely it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 King Henrik in net for the Rangers, Nash still out Well, there's some good news Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clintwestwood Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Not sure what's worse, the fact that so many people get upset by the fact somebody said a particular player is doing well, or the fact so many people want so badly to prove a certain player is doing poorly. Only in BFLO can so much effort be wasted on a GDT in trying to prove how much one of their players sucks. Sad. Nobody is upset that Johnson is playing well. Hell, I wish our whole team was overachieving like he is. But the key word in that sentence is overachieving. He is not, career wise, the player he has been this year. And there's nothing wrong with that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 They weren't almost identical 2 years ago. And how about some context for those stats? The one where Rask is having a career low and Johnson the 2nd best of his career. Or where the same goalie on the same team with more hurdles to overcome has better stats than him? Both with . 93x save percentages and a 2% difference in QS isn't nearly identical? Top 5 in the entire league isn't nearly identical? How can you compare the two but say this year doesn't count for Rask because it's a bad year, can I cherry pick my stats too? Johnson's 2nd best season? He's only played two full seasons! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Do you have something relevant to add besides your typical snark? What fancy stats, the ones where Rask and Johnson were almost identical two years ago, or the ones where they are almost identical this year? Nope. just snark. I know you like the attention so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted January 25, 2016 Author Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Both with . 93x save percentages and a 2% difference in QS isn't nearly identical? Top 5 in the entire league isn't nearly identical? How can you compare the two but say this year doesn't count for Rask because it's a bad year, can I cherry pick my stats too? Johnson's 2nd best season? He's only played two full seasons!We're still comparing 15 starts to 39 and that is statistically significant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Nobody got upset but you. Most on here have been pleased with how Johnson has played for us, despite the fact that he's a career backup. Why do you think you get into so many of these arguments? Is it because the board has some sort of vendetta against you? Wait, that's definitely it. They're not arguments, I keep them as discussions until they decide to make it personal. Take note of the people I get into "arguments" with, they're usually the same 5 people that are notorious for doing the same to others. There's more than one common denominator here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted January 25, 2016 Author Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 I do wonder if Johnson never got a fair shake as a starter. I'd also like to see the gaa of the team when he plays to see how good or bad his team has been Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 (edited) Nope. just snark. I know you like the attention so. Atta boy...... We're still comparing 15 starts to 39 and that is statistically significant. No, we're comparing 23 starts and 27 games which was enough for the league to qualify him for statistical significance. Nobody is upset that Johnson is playing well. Hell, I wish our whole team was overachieving like he is. But the key word in that sentence is overachieving. He is not, career wise, the player he has been this year. And there's nothing wrong with that. What was he doing in Boston? Edited January 25, 2016 by JJFIVEOH Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted January 25, 2016 Author Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 (edited) 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 You can't extrapolate 23gs and 15qs to 58gs and 39qs. I don't think JJ saying they are similar is a accurate statement. Atta boy...... No, we're comparing 23 starts and 27 games which was enough for the league to qualify him for statistical significance. What was he doing in Boston? I was looking at their qs. Their GS doesn't make my statement less true. Edited January 25, 2016 by LGR4GM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 The QS percentage is almost identical. I don't know how much more direct it can get. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted January 25, 2016 Author Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 The QS percentage is almost identical. I don't know how much more direct it can get.But it's 15 total qs versus 39. That's a large extrapolation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwksndmonster Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 They're not arguments, I keep them as discussions until they decide to make it personal. Take note of the people I get into "arguments" with, they're usually the same 5 people that are notorious for doing the same to others. There's more than one common denominator here. Yeah, that WildCard and Tom Webster, notorious around these parts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MODO Hockey Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 Hope Chad kills it tonite HEY BOYS !!!! :w00t: :w00t: :w00t: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted January 25, 2016 Report Share Posted January 25, 2016 (edited) Both with . 93x save percentages and a 2% difference in QS isn't nearly identical? Top 5 in the entire league isn't nearly identical? How can you compare the two but say this year doesn't count for Rask because it's a bad year, can I cherry pick my stats too? Johnson's 2nd best season? He's only played two full seasons! 2015-2016 leaders with above 30 starts are Mrazek and Crawford. The difference in their QS% is 1.8%. The difference in Mrazek to Johnson is a 27% difference. The difference between Ullmark and Johnson is 10.8%. Are those numbers still too identical? Career wise, we have (QS%) Rask at .634%, and Johnson at .534%. .634-.534 = .1, or a 10% difference. Edited January 25, 2016 by WildCard 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.