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.
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.
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.
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
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.
"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
This is what I said on that topic.........
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.
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
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.