Quote:
Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist
Agreed. That's what Resolute said too and how most knowledgeable "advanced stats" use it.
I wish we'd call them "stats" and use them the same. The stats are the same, the analysis and worrying of the stats in discussion of the game is what's changed.
Corsi is not advanced. Shots towards the net. It's less advanced than shots on goal, but somehow that is old so not as scary. PDO takes two very simple terms and adds them together. Again, not advanced.
The discussion is when they go awry. You start seeing columns where they claim one team is better than another strictly based on corsi. Corsi only tells you who puts more shots on net. While it does correlate with success, so does social teams success. Would I hold PP% and say x team is better than y team because they have a better PP? No. You need a deeper analysis than that.
Having said all that, unless the Flames improve a bit, they will regress a bit. Jooris isn't going to keep up this place unless he gets more shots. Giordano isn't likely going to finish at a PPG. The flames aren't going to win 18 games when talking after 2.
Who knows, maybe Gaudreau goes on a tear, maybe Glencross starts scoring. Maybe someone else steps up. Point is, the winning is not sustainable If nothing else changes.
I have faith that the Flames can make the playoffs for 2 reasons: 1) Their play is slowly improving as the season progresses, and 2) They've built up enough points it doesn't need to sustain to make the playoffs
|
Exactly. The problem was the original movement came from overzealous blogger-types who thought they had some kind of monumental breakthrough. They took good (surrogate) possession numbers as the be-all-end-all in hockey statistics. That of course pissed off a bunch of people who became the strong opposition.
Your point on PP% is exactly what I've been saying. I think there is value in the stats; taken as a small part of the bigger picture, not the entire picture. It's logical to think that if a team spends more time shooting than being shot at, they should have more success. Of course, this doesn't take into account shot distance or quality, which is why shot attempt stats can't be looked at as the be-all-end-all.
I truly wish that Corsi and Fenwick stats were slowly brought in, just as another metric to determine what makes a good team. Not whisked in on a horse-drawn carriage to the sound of trumpets with a town crier proclaiming the greatness of these newly found statistics.
Though at this point I hope the Flames possession numbers get worse and their shooting percentage gets better to see the heads of guys like Yost, Drance, and Lambert explode.