Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
dudacek

True or false: Risto was much improved under Ralph?

Yes or no  

22 members have voted

  1. 1. Yes or no

    • Yes. True
      15
    • Nope
      7


Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Xzy89c said:

not even close.  trying to compare those guys into the current NHL is equal to wondering if leather helmet NFL players could play in today's NFL.

Guys like that do play still in the NHL.  I just don't have them at my fingertips any more -- unlike the 1970's, I don't have the line-ups for the entire league memorised.  Ah, youth.

 

  • Thanks (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Calm down. I was simply asking it to be compared to really understand what the jump was.

Okay, how many more ES minutes was he playing? If his pp time went down but his TOI stayed similar it had to be replaced with PK or ES time. What was his ES p/60?

:rolleyes:

So, we can take that as a 'no?' 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/19/2020 at 11:28 PM, SwampD said:

I don't even knife what to do with this post other than laugh.

This is like saying, "See? Less is less than more!"

Where's the wall bash emogi?

Is Yashin still getting paid?

What are you even talking about?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Thorny said:

What are you even talking about?

That’s a very good question. Going to have to go back and revisit that.

I’m going to assume that know was autocorrected to knife.
 

Okay, making a blanket statement on two years worth of one stat is silly enough.

Isn’t expected goals an offensive stat? He went from scoring less than he “should have” to scoring more than he “should have”. What does that have to do with how the other team does against us when he is on the ice?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, SwampD said:

That’s a very good question. Going to have to go back and revisit that.

I’m going to assume that know was autocorrected to knife.
 

Okay, making a blanket statement on two years worth of one stat is silly enough.

Isn’t expected goals an offensive stat? He went from scoring less than he “should have” to scoring more than he “should have”. What does that have to do with how the other team does against us when he is on the ice?

It’s the % of the expected goals scored while he’s on the ice. So if you put stock in the stat, and you see a player is below 50%, the stat is saying, when Risto is on the ice, his team is expected to score less than half of the total goals scored - ie, the other team is getting the better of the play. 

Again, if you put stock in the stat, Risto’s “better” results are a function of luck rather than an indication of a swing in play, based on his still poor expected goals stat. 

Everyone’s mileage may vary on advanced stats but I didn’t think the post was of the bash your head on the wall variety especially considering I followed up with more posts. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Thorny said:

It’s the % of the expected goals scored while he’s on the ice. So if you put stock in the stat, and you see a player is below 50%, the stat is saying, when Risto is on the ice, his team is expected to score less than half of the total goals scored - ie, the other team is getting the better of the play. 

Again, if you put stock in the stat, Risto’s “better” results are a function of luck rather than an indication of a swing in play, based on his still poor expected goals stat. 

Everyone’s mileage may vary on advanced stats but I didn’t think the post was of the bash your head on the wall variety especially considering I followed up with more posts. 

Ah yes, the %. It was of the bash your head variety because for some reason with advstats, especially when it relates to a Sabre,  the low number is always viewed as the truth and the high one is always just luck, soon to be reverted to the mean.

It’s like stats folk never want me to be happy.

Edited by SwampD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, SwampD said:

Ah yes, the %. It was of the bash your head variety because for some reason with advstats, especially when it relates to a Sabre,  the low number is always viewed as the truth and the high one is always just luck, soon to be reverted to the mean.

It’s like stats folk never want me to be happy.

It’s like the “Botterill can’t draft” on the other thread.

Casey was picked 8th and is 7th in games played, 8th in goals and 9th in points from his draft year. That doesn’t matter because he sucks.

Dahlin is the 2nd highest scoring teen defenceman of all-time. That doesn’t matter, a donkey would have picked him.

Cozens improves all his numbers to among the best in his league, plays 1st line on a gold medal team canada squad and gets universal acclaim for his effort and attitude. Doesn’t matter they’ll ruin him.

And besides, have any of Botterill’s other picks done a thing?

Well, nobody after pick 3 from 2019 has played a game in the NHL yet, nobody after pick 14 in 2018 (and only 6 players overall) has become a regular yet, and only two players picked after pick 21 in 2017 are regulars yet (one of them is Sabre Henri Jokiharju). So it’s kinda early to tell. Practically nobody’s picks have done anything.

See! Nothing! He sucks!

Edited by dudacek
  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, SwampD said:

Ah yes, the %. It was of the bash your head variety because for some reason with advstats, especially when it relates to a Sabre,  the low number is always viewed as the truth and the high one is always just luck, soon to be reverted to the mean.

It’s like stats folk never want me to be happy.

I don’t really agree with this reading, personally. To me, it comes down to one’s personal preference for either the expected stat or the straight %, or both, or neither. I like the stat so I put a bit more weight on the expected stat, others don’t like it, but I don’t think I’m reading it with an anti-Sabres bias. 

For arguments sake, so what if I was reading it with an anti-Risto bias? I’m stating out right, by the metrics you prefer to evaluate by, that I don’t like Risto the player. The part of the stat I’m focusing on is a valid piece of information, regardless of if my choosing to focus on it is indicative of my bias. 

Bias, in other words, opinion. There are many admissible forms of information when one is constructing their own. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, dudacek said:

It’s like the “Botterill can’t draft” on the other thread.

It’s really not. 

It’s funny. If I had come in and said, “don’t like Risto’s style of play, he’s got a low hockey IQ and he’s prone to gaffes, though he’s improved those a little. I’d like to move him.” 

It would go unchallenged because it didn’t incorporate a form of information that ruffles so many feathers. 

The stats are neutral. One’s interpretation of them is not. But don’t forget that *every* other metric you are using to formulate your opinion incorporates subjectivity in the interpretation process. 

Edited by Thorny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Thorny said:

It’s really not. 

It’s funny. If I had come in and said, “don’t like Risto’s style of play, he’s got a low hockey IQ and he’s prone to gaffes, though he’s improved those a little. I’d like to move him.” 

It would go unchallenged because it didn’t incorporate a form of information that ruffles so many feathers. 

The stats are neutral. One’s interpretation of them is not. But don’t forget that *every* other metric you are using to formulate your opinion incorporates subjectivity in the interpretation process. 

Sorry, wasn’t trying to draw an analogy between my scenario and your analytics.

i was saying the draft thing makes me feel the same way that analytics scenario makes Swamp feel.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bob_sauve28 said:

Risto’s contract should be extended now 

Not even possible.  Can’t be done more than a year from the date of expiration.  He has over two years remaining currently.

  • Awesome! (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...