Pimlach Posted March 18, 2019 Report Share Posted March 18, 2019 4 hours ago, tom webster said: If you are hitting you don’t have the puck True, so if you don't have the puck - hit. Hit hard and clean, separate your man from the puck so as to regain the puck. This creates opportunities to play with the puck and score goals. For much of the time this season we don't have puck possession and we stand and watch, often without picking up a man. You're allowed to hit the man with the puck, so you should. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted March 18, 2019 Report Share Posted March 18, 2019 18 minutes ago, Pimlach said: True, so if you don't have the puck - hit. Hit hard and clean, separate your man from the puck so as to regain the puck. This creates opportunities to play with the puck and score goals. For much of the time this season we don't have puck possession and we stand and watch, often without picking up a man. You're allowed to hit the man with the puck, so you should. It actually can be a quite effective method of separating him from said puck. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted March 18, 2019 Report Share Posted March 18, 2019 Again, you don’t have to like it, but the numbers are the numbers. Obviously you want some hitting and if you can find a Tom Wilson who can destroy people and still score, awesome. But the fact of the matter is, teams that hit a lot don’t win. The playoffs are a different matter and the reason coaches like Lindy Russ constantly said, the key to the playoffs is guys playing out of their comfort zone and playing more physical and yes, as someone said upthread, it can have a cumulative effect, which is why teams often target two or three key players for said physicality. Or, you can hire Ted Nolan, never make the playoffs, but have something to cheer about for about ten home games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted March 18, 2019 Report Share Posted March 18, 2019 1 hour ago, tom webster said: Again, you don’t have to like it, but the numbers are the numbers. Obviously you want some hitting and if you can find a Tom Wilson who can destroy people and still score, awesome. But the fact of the matter is, teams that hit a lot don’t win. The playoffs are a different matter and the reason coaches like Lindy Russ constantly said, the key to the playoffs is guys playing out of their comfort zone and playing more physical and yes, as someone said upthread, it can have a cumulative effect, which is why teams often target two or three key players for said physicality. Or, you can hire Ted Nolan, never make the playoffs, but have something to cheer about for about ten home games. The numbers aren't obvious. https://www.foxsports.com/nhl/team-stats?season=2018&category=MISCELLANEOUS&group=1&time=0&pos=0&team=1&page=1 Top 10 teams in hits this season are a mix of playoff and non-playoff teams. Pittsburgh, Vegas, Edmonton, Montreal, NYR, Tampa, Carolina, NYI, Arizona, Boston. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted March 19, 2019 Report Share Posted March 19, 2019 1 hour ago, Weave said: The numbers aren't obvious. https://www.foxsports.com/nhl/team-stats?season=2018&category=MISCELLANEOUS&group=1&time=0&pos=0&team=1&page=1 Top 10 teams in hits this season are a mix of playoff and non-playoff teams. Pittsburgh, Vegas, Edmonton, Montreal, NYR, Tampa, Carolina, NYI, Arizona, Boston. I don't think hitting and winning have to be mutually exclusive. The Venn diagram should intersect. Just gimme Tom Wilson, Cal Clutterbuck and a couple other guys that finish their checks and can play hockey (not a Kaleta type). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted March 19, 2019 Report Share Posted March 19, 2019 12 minutes ago, inkman said: I don't think hitting and winning have to be mutually exclusive. The Venn diagram should intersect. Just gimme Tom Wilson, Cal Clutterbuck and a couple other guys that finish their checks and can play hockey (not a Kaleta type). The link I posted shows that hitting and winning are not mutually exclusive. I’d like to see what data tom webster is seeing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDS Posted March 19, 2019 Report Share Posted March 19, 2019 23 minutes ago, Weave said: The link I posted shows that hitting and winning are not mutually exclusive. I’d like to see what data tom webster is seeing. I am not sure he stated it correctly. What I have heard and just read is that there is no correlation between the two, not necessarily a negative correlation. This particular analysis says there is no correlation or perhaps there is a slight negative correlation between hits and goals scored by the hitting team. https://model284.com/my-model-monday-understanding-the-impact-of-hits-in-the-nhl/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted March 19, 2019 Report Share Posted March 19, 2019 1 hour ago, SDS said: I am not sure he stated it correctly. What I have heard and just read is that there is no correlation between the two, not necessarily a negative correlation. This particular analysis says there is no correlation or perhaps there is a slight negative correlation between hits and goals scored by the hitting team. https://model284.com/my-model-monday-understanding-the-impact-of-hits-in-the-nhl/ Maybe there are different ways to win. …and to lose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted March 19, 2019 Report Share Posted March 19, 2019 Just now, SwampD said: Maybe there are different ways to win. …and to lose. ...and love. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonHextallsShoulderPads Posted March 19, 2019 Report Share Posted March 19, 2019 Anybody got a video of these hits? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted March 19, 2019 Report Share Posted March 19, 2019 20 minutes ago, ... said: ...and love. It is better to have lost and lost than never to have won at all. Want to change the sign? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
... Posted March 19, 2019 Report Share Posted March 19, 2019 19 minutes ago, PASabreFan said: It is better to have lost and lost than never to have won at all. Want to change the sign? No. Love only occurs between suffering. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted March 19, 2019 Report Share Posted March 19, 2019 (edited) It’s not that hitting is counterproductive to winning, it’s that winning teams have the puck more, and therefore have less opportunity to hit. Losing teams have the puck less and have more opportunity to hit. The stats are are largely a byproduct, not a cause. Edited March 19, 2019 by dudacek 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Posted March 19, 2019 Report Share Posted March 19, 2019 Had you pulled me aside, long ago, and told me that in the future the efficacy of “hitting in hockey” would be debated ... A lesson for the youth. Your immutables have shelf lives! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDS Posted March 19, 2019 Report Share Posted March 19, 2019 13 hours ago, SwampD said: Maybe there are different ways to win. …and to lose. Not sure what the point you are making. There are a whole bunch of mathematically inclined people mining data to see what conventional wisdom holds merit. So far, as far as I can determine, the current research and subsequent conclusions say that hitting the other guy has no bearing on wins and losses (and perhaps is even slightly negatively correlated.). So when fans clamor for more hitting, it should be because it is for their entertainment, not because they are frustrated with the outcome of the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PASabreFan Posted March 19, 2019 Report Share Posted March 19, 2019 What if hitting is a proxy for giving a *****, and giving a ***** correlates with winning? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDS Posted March 19, 2019 Report Share Posted March 19, 2019 49 minutes ago, PASabreFan said: What if hitting is a proxy for giving a *****, and giving a ***** correlates with winning? The the numbers would bear this out. As far as we know, it doesn’t. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted March 19, 2019 Report Share Posted March 19, 2019 (edited) 28 minutes ago, SDS said: Them the numbers would bear this out. As far as we know, it doesn’t. What if they already do, thus my different ways to win comment. Weave already showed that some good teams are hit leaders. What if those teams are winning because they are more physical and hit? What if the other good teams are winning a different way and don't need to hit. Correlation isn't causation,... except when talking advanced stats in sports. Edited March 19, 2019 by SwampD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#freejame Posted March 19, 2019 Report Share Posted March 19, 2019 The Sabres aren’t going to control every single possession, no matter how good they are. All people want is a team that will be aggressive and play like they give a ***** (which includes finishing checks). How is that so hard to understand? The Flames hit less than us, but I guarantee Sabres fans would be happy with their numbers if it came with their effort and aggressiveness of the hits. There are opportunities in every game to separate your man from the puck using a check. One team (Flames) does that. One team (Buffalo) doesn’t. Flames have fewer “hits” because they control possession more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Posted March 19, 2019 Report Share Posted March 19, 2019 Interesting side path ... what the fans want to see v’s. what wins. I am reminded of the 1990s New Jersey Devils, or the franchise that nearly killed hockey. The left wing lock/neutral zone trap. We hated it. New Jersey loved it. It was effective and not entertaining. If there’s little or no correlation to hitting and winning, what do we want to see? I suspect winning would silence a lot of the hitting talk. Just an observation. I’m casting no vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallawaySabres Posted March 19, 2019 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2019 This really is not as complicated as people are making it. 75% of the time this team looks disinterested.....they are professional athletes, step up the aggressiveness (checking, hitting, getting back to the play, whatever) - just step it the F up! 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabel79 Posted March 19, 2019 Report Share Posted March 19, 2019 13 minutes ago, Neo said: I suspect winning would silence a lot of the hitting talk. Winner, winner, chicken dinner. “Hits” are an absolute canard. The team is bad. Different people will attribute this to different failings, wether it be they’re not hitting/punching/scoring/saving enough. It could, theoretically, be any/all of these things, but we have data showing hits don’t equal wins. So maybe just be better at hockey? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallawaySabres Posted March 19, 2019 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2019 26 minutes ago, Sabel79 said: Winner, winner, chicken dinner. “Hits” are an absolute canard. The team is bad. Different people will attribute this to different failings, wether it be they’re not hitting/punching/scoring/saving enough. It could, theoretically, be any/all of these things, but we have data showing hits don’t equal wins. So maybe just be better at hockey? I don't think anyone is trying to say that hitting more will produce more wins, I am trying to say that until this team gets out of its own way, try other things that will at LEAST get the crowd engaged. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDS Posted March 19, 2019 Report Share Posted March 19, 2019 47 minutes ago, SwampD said: What if they already do, thus my different ways to win comment. Weave already showed that some good teams are hit leaders. What if those teams are winning because they are more physical and hit? What if the other good teams are winning a different way and don't need to hit. Correlation isn't causation,... except when talking advanced stats in sports. This just basically agrees that there is nothing intrinsically beneficial to hitting as it relates to wins in general. I'm not sure where you are going with the last line. If there is no correlation then there certainly is no causation. One idea behind advanced stats is to look for universal truths. If hitting is not correlated with winning, then these teams that hit more AND win must be doing something better than those that hit and lose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted March 19, 2019 Report Share Posted March 19, 2019 2 minutes ago, SDS said: This just basically agrees that there is nothing intrinsically beneficial to hitting as it relates to wins in general. I'm not sure where you are going with the last line. If there is no correlation then there certainly is no causation. One idea behind advanced stats is to look for universal truths. If hitting is not correlated with winning, then these teams that hit more AND win must be doing something better than those that hit and lose. This is the part that just makes me crazy. Every team is different. Stats actually give us the exact percentage of how often they don't matter. Possession and goals are very important stats to indicate winning teams, correct? But if you have a generational goalie and a great defensive system that takes advantage of odd man rushes, they don't matter as much. There can be and are different ways to win. Stats tell us the way most teams do it, not the only way. FTR, even if we were winning, I'd want to see more hits. I like 'em. 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.