Quote:
Originally Posted by Imported_Aussie
|
I was actually about to start a thread on that article. (Bingo or a mod can split If they like, I suppose), but I will comment here instead.
I look at that article as showing the good and the bad of hockey analytics.
First, the good. The Corsi chart shows that what the Flames are doing is unusual, and why people are skeptical. If the post-season began today, the Flames would qualify with the second-worst Corsi against/60 of any playoff team since 2007. We appear to be about 15-17th worst in Corsi for/60. People keep waiting for the other shoe to drop because the other shoe usually drops. It doesn't always, however, and I think Yost does show that with that table. So a point to the good for him.
But the bad is very bad, and highlights why so many people are so skeptical of analytics itself. Travis Yost correctly points out that one of the reasons why we are where we are is that we have one of the best 5-on-5 shooting percentages in hockey at 8.9%. He notes this is significantly better than the 7.8% we shot last year. That is all fair game. But for some reason, Yost declares that a "betting man" should assume we will be closer to that 7.8% over the next 30 games than the 8.9%, but he gives no actual reason for why that should be.
The most reasonable explanation is the kind of circular logic that advanced stat people are extremely prone to falling into: We will fall back because he believes we should fall back.
But that argument opens up some rather important questions. First, why a false dichotomy? When we have gone 54 games at 8.9%, how does one justify that we will fall to the 7.8% over 82 games last year? (Implied: why is a 54-game sample insignificant compared to 82?). If he wants to argue the roster is "basically the same", then why wouldn't he combine the two years and pull a figure for 136 games that should be the "reasonable expectation"?
His comment about overtime is both apt and silly. I agree that OT/SO performance is not a skill a team can reliably reproduce. But pretending that LA and Calgary don't have the records they do to make a point is silly. We do have the records we do, and that is why we are in a playoff spot and LA isn't. Again, abusing the data to try and fit a preconceived belief rather than taking the data for what it is.
The third point is self-evident: Gio and Brodie drive this team. No surprise there.