Page 85 of 412 FirstFirst ... 35 75 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 95 135 185 ... LastLast
Results 1,261 to 1,275 of 6179

Thread: Toronto Maple Leafs

  1. #1261
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Rep Power
    50

    Dobber Sports Grand Master

    Default Re: Toronto Maple Leafs

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Guru View Post
    I just don't agree with it.

    Those same pundits wouldn't have put the Leafs that high in the standings come March.

    And I would bet my left nut, March 1st, those guys wouldn't have predicted (an epic collapse to see) the Leafs (lose 8 straight and) miss the playoffs.

    All the Leafs had to do was play 500 hockey after the break. They have been playing at least 500 hockey for 100 games. 15 games vs 100 games; what's a better indicator?

    Now they lose 8 straight and it's the 'I told you so' game.

    ...........

    How do they miss the playoffs. Wow. What terrible leadership! I want Phaneuf gone. Carlyle too.
    Hey Guru, want to argue with me now about how the Leafs aren't a bubble team?

  2. #1262
    Big Ev's Avatar
    Big Ev is offline
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    17,867
    Rep Power
    0

    Banned

    Default Re: Toronto Maple Leafs

    Quote Originally Posted by eyemissgilmour View Post
    Wow, so because they didn't exactly predict an 8 game losing streak, they deserve no credit? lol

    Cam Charron wrote in July of 2013... "Bernier better be real, real good, because he'll be facing 35+ shots a game next season." http://theleafsnation.com/2013/7/4/s...-be-bought-out

    Travis Yost pointed out in December 2013 that they were actually worse than Buffalo, from a possesion perspective... " http://nhlnumbers.com/2013/12/13/jus...to-maple-leafs

    James Mirtle wrote in October 2013... http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sport...ticle14623017/

    In other words, don't give me this crap that nobody saw this coming. That is absolute crap. They didn't predict an 8 game losing streak. But they most certainly did warn fans about the Leafs winning on luck. Their poor possession numbers were right there... for everyone to see. You buried your head in the sand like so many, and now you're bitter that the analytical folks were correct all along. Their luck did run out, as predicted. And you sit there and say that they were wrong because the luck didn't run out sooner? That is way too funny.
    None of these guys are actual hockey analysts, just numbers guys. This is the problem. We will need sources from hockey people. Were they saying the Leafs were guaranteed?

  3. #1263
    Big Ev's Avatar
    Big Ev is offline
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    17,867
    Rep Power
    0

    Banned

    Default Re: Toronto Maple Leafs

    you did not address/answer my question.

    Funny, that guy Rob Vollman had Ottawa as a big Cup favourite going into the year. Even though they were outshot a ton last year.

  4. #1264
    Big Ev's Avatar
    Big Ev is offline
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    17,867
    Rep Power
    0

    Banned

    Default Re: Toronto Maple Leafs

    Quote Originally Posted by eyemissgilmour View Post
    No, the problem is too many fans overrate the subjective evaluation done by old school hockey minds. This kind of old school thinking gets David Clarkson signed for his "intangibles."
    Analytics takes out that subjective element, which is why so many of us believe in it. The numbers guys have been saying since last year that Toronto's been winning on luck.
    And that their luck would run out eventually.
    Well, it most certainly has.
    Calling them wrong simply because their warnings didn't come to fruition sooner is as stubborn as it gets.
    Quote Originally Posted by eyemissgilmour View Post
    No, the problem is too many fans overrate the subjective evaluation done by old school hockey minds. This kind of old school thinking gets David Clarkson signed for his "intangibles."
    Analytics takes out that subjective element, which is why so many of us believe in it. The numbers guys have been saying since last year that Toronto's been winning on luck.
    And that their luck would run out eventually.
    Well, it most certainly has.
    Calling them wrong simply because their warnings didn't come to fruition sooner is as stubborn as it gets.
    Toronto is on a losing streak. Just because they're unlucky right now doesn't make them a bad team.

    None of these geeks could have predicted that they would lose so many in a row without getting a single point.

    If you base all your decisions on analytics, you're gonna have a bad time.

  5. #1265
    Big Ev's Avatar
    Big Ev is offline
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    17,867
    Rep Power
    0

    Banned

    Default Re: Toronto Maple Leafs

    Quote Originally Posted by eyemissgilmour View Post
    uh huh, so being wrong on that call invalidates all his work. Typical counter argument from a parochial thinker.
    The point is, why would he say the Leafs were so lucky but the Sens weren't? Why did he assume they'd magically become a Cup contender getting guys back from injury, even though they have played this way for the last three years?

  6. #1266
    Big Ev's Avatar
    Big Ev is offline
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    17,867
    Rep Power
    0

    Banned

    Default Re: Toronto Maple Leafs

    Well two weeks ago the probability of the Leafs making the playoffs was over 90%. So clearly the probabilities do not go the way you think they always will.

  7. #1267
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Rep Power
    50

    Dobber Sports Grand Master

    Default Re: Toronto Maple Leafs

    Quote Originally Posted by Big Ev View Post
    Well two weeks ago the probability of the Leafs making the playoffs was over 90%. So clearly the probabilities do not go the way you think they always will.
    Two weeks ago lots of people were calling them a bubble team. Those arguments seemed to have held true.

  8. #1268
    mounD's Avatar
    mounD is offline
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    8,483
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Rep Power
    50

    Dobber Sports Giant

    Default Re: Toronto Maple Leafs

    I'm sick of people straw-manning arguments against analytics ... we're not sitting here saying that advanced statistics make clear every aspect of the game. We're not saying that analytics are to be relied on 100% of the time, that's just ludicrous. It's a piece of information, just like any other, that should be weighed and evaluated in the context of other available information. It's pretty simple. But to discredit advanced statistics entirely because it can't predict outcomes with absolute certainty is completely missing the point. There aren't any valid counter-arguments to using analytic evidence in conjunction with other statistics to arrive at a probable outcome. That's how this stuff works, and is meant to work. It's not the be-all end-all of statistics, but it's a better indicator of future performance than just about anything we've got right now.

    Nobody is saying advanced statistics like Corsi / Fenwick are infallible; of course, they're not. But they are great tools to project future performance of individuals / teams, and in the case of the Toronto Maple Leafs, the statistics are indicating that the current losing streak isn't really surprising, given the historically bad possession numbers. These statistics are an indicator, not an answer. Nobody is saying as much, so please refrain from planting straw-man arguments like "watch the games" and "analysts didn't predict 8+ game losing streak." It's only making you look misinformed on the subject.

    Discrediting advanced statistics for failing to predict exactly how many games the Leafs would lose is like saying Nate Silver didn't project the 2012 US Presidential elections just because he couldn't predict exactly how many people voted. It's missing the point entirely. Get it?
    MounD - Double Threat FHL (18-19 champs)

    10-Team Yahoo daily H2H Dynasty
    3C, 3LW, 3RW, 6D, 2G, 7Bn (IR)
    G, A, +/-, PPP, SHP, SOG, FW, HIT, BLK // W, Sv, GAA, Sv%, SHO

    C: Bergeron, Barkov, Aho, Point, Kadri
    LW: Marchand, Landeskog, Hertl, Marchessault
    RW: Stamkos, Tarasenko, Laine, Palmieri
    D: Carlson, Letang, Dumba, Weber, Pietrangelo, Ristolainen, Byfuglien*
    G: Bobrovsky, Holtby, Lehner, Greiss-Varlamov

    Farm: Turcotte, Cozens, Denisenko, Newhook // Sandin, Jokiharju, Dobson, K'Andre // Shesterkin

  9. #1269
    Big Ev's Avatar
    Big Ev is offline
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    17,867
    Rep Power
    0

    Banned

    Default Re: Toronto Maple Leafs

    Quote Originally Posted by mounD View Post
    I'm sick of people straw-manning arguments against analytics ... we're not sitting here saying that advanced statistics make clear every aspect of the game. We're not saying that analytics are to be relied on 100% of the time, that's just ludicrous. It's a piece of information, just like any other, that should be weighed and evaluated in the context of other available information. It's pretty simple. But to discredit advanced statistics entirely because it can't predict outcomes with absolute certainty is completely missing the point. There aren't any valid counter-arguments to using analytic evidence in conjunction with other statistics to arrive at a probable outcome. That's how this stuff works, and is meant to work. It's not the be-all end-all of statistics, but it's a better indicator of future performance than just about anything we've got right now.

    Nobody is saying advanced statistics like Corsi / Fenwick are infallible; of course, they're not. But they are great tools to project future performance of individuals / teams, and in the case of the Toronto Maple Leafs, the statistics are indicating that the current losing streak isn't really surprising, given the historically bad possession numbers. These statistics are an indicator, not an answer. Nobody is saying as much, so please refrain from planting straw-man arguments like "watch the games" and "analysts didn't predict 8+ game losing streak." It's only making you look misinformed on the subject.

    Discrediting advanced statistics for failing to predict exactly how many games the Leafs would lose is like saying Nate Silver didn't project the 2012 US Presidential elections just because he couldn't predict exactly how many people voted. It's missing the point entirely. Get it?
    Not even remotely close to the same thing lol.

    Whatever, I won't comment any further because I personally don't care for advanced stats and I don't think people like Travis Yost etc. actually know what they're talking about outside of looking at the numbers so I will digress. THESE guys look misinformed when they say "oh, this guy is terribe because he has such a poor corsi and fenwick etc. etc." even though NHL teams really like the guy and are valuing him fairly high at the deadline, free agency, whatever. I don't care that David Clarkson had poor advanced stats, he would be a guy I sign any day of the week. He just went to the worst team he could have went to in regards to his personal success.

    I personally don't care for stats, even though I work in a numbers oriented job. For hockey, I will rely on other tools.

    As Tim Murray said, Corsi and the like are for people who don't understand things like hockey sense.

  10. #1270
    mounD's Avatar
    mounD is offline
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    8,483
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Rep Power
    50

    Dobber Sports Giant

    Default Re: Toronto Maple Leafs

    "Corsi and the like are for people who want to supplement their knowledge of things like "hockey sense" with actual verifiable statistical information that can potentially be used to bolster personnel decisions and effectively plan for the future of a franchise."

    Fixed that for ya.
    MounD - Double Threat FHL (18-19 champs)

    10-Team Yahoo daily H2H Dynasty
    3C, 3LW, 3RW, 6D, 2G, 7Bn (IR)
    G, A, +/-, PPP, SHP, SOG, FW, HIT, BLK // W, Sv, GAA, Sv%, SHO

    C: Bergeron, Barkov, Aho, Point, Kadri
    LW: Marchand, Landeskog, Hertl, Marchessault
    RW: Stamkos, Tarasenko, Laine, Palmieri
    D: Carlson, Letang, Dumba, Weber, Pietrangelo, Ristolainen, Byfuglien*
    G: Bobrovsky, Holtby, Lehner, Greiss-Varlamov

    Farm: Turcotte, Cozens, Denisenko, Newhook // Sandin, Jokiharju, Dobson, K'Andre // Shesterkin

  11. #1271
    Mr. Guru's Avatar
    Mr. Guru is offline
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    9,529
    Location
    Toronto
    Rep Power
    50

    The Great One

    Default Re: Toronto Maple Leafs

    Quote Originally Posted by mounD View Post
    .....But they are great tools to project future performance of individuals / teams, and in the case of the Toronto Maple Leafs, the statistics are indicating that the current losing streak isn't really surprising, given the historically bad possession numbers.

    So the 8 game losing streak isn't surprising.

    The 100 game above average winning streak was considered lucky.

    Don't you see how ridiculous that sounds?

  12. #1272
    Mr. Guru's Avatar
    Mr. Guru is offline
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    9,529
    Location
    Toronto
    Rep Power
    50

    The Great One

    Default Re: Toronto Maple Leafs

    Quote Originally Posted by rataylor22 View Post
    Hey Guru, want to argue with me now about how the Leafs aren't a bubble team?
    This is what I said on that topic.........

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Guru View Post
    And no, the Leafs aren't a bubble team to make the playoffs.

    500 hockey gets them in the postseason. Their 'lucky' season winning percentage is above that.
    Still stand by it. Unless 90% chance to make the playoffs equals a bubble team.

    This was a collapse of epic proportions. Not because they weren't supposed to make the playoffs. But because THEY WERE supposed to make it. And that alone is enough to convince me.

    Anyways at this point I'm done hammering this point home. Obviously we have different opinions. I don't care enough to continuously type the same shit over and over again.

    I appreciate the debate 100%. I love it actually. But it's time to move on for me.

  13. #1273
    Loch's Avatar
    Loch is offline
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    7,206
    Rep Power
    50

    Dobber Sports Master

    Default Re: Toronto Maple Leafs

    I don't care what anyone says, the Leafs plan to win one on April 1st the fool their fans into thinking they have a chance is a horrible trick.
    /S

    ~ I'm not a sociopath, it's just that my magnetic personality keeps throwing off my moral compass.~

    Victoria DH
    C(3): Athanasiou, Sissons, Zibanejad
    LW(3): Lehkonen, Burakovsky, Hymen
    RW(3): Bjorkstrand, Smith, Palmieri
    F(3): Stepan (C), Bjork (LW), Poehling (C)
    D(6): Carlson, Heiskanen, Bogosian, Edler, Hakanpaa, Fleury
    G(1): Talbot, Sorokin, Varlamov
    Bench: Parise (LW), Motte (C), Richardson (C), Hagg (D)
    IR: Wood, Henrique, Johnson, Dvorak

    Prospects: (F) Barre-Boulet, Khovanov, Beckman, Greig, N. Robertson, Fagemo, Tuomalaa, (D) Ceulemans, Hughes, Schneider, Zboril

  14. #1274
    Mr. Guru's Avatar
    Mr. Guru is offline
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    9,529
    Location
    Toronto
    Rep Power
    50

    The Great One

    Default Re: Toronto Maple Leafs

    Quote Originally Posted by Loch View Post
    I don't care what anyone says, the Leafs plan to win one on April 1st the fool their fans into thinking they have a chance is a horrible trick.

    haha i hate you!

  15. #1275
    Stringer's Avatar
    Stringer is offline
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    367
    Location
    London ON
    Rep Power
    16

    Dobber Sports Blue-Chipper

    Default Re: Toronto Maple Leafs

    Does ANYBODY think Remier can stand on his head against the Jets?
    I feel like we could see a little of the old Optimus Reim these last few games... IDK but I still love Reimer and I haven't lost total faith in him.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •