Quote:
Originally Posted by IamNotKenKing
My read of Pro-Corsi writings is that they don't actually take shot locations and zone possession or rushes into account, and simply state more shots towards the net means you're better. That is the issue I have, as sure you can take 100 shots from the boards, and have great Corsi, or you can control the puck, pass it around and wait for a quality shot, and have a low Corsi, but score. Advanced stats don't seem to take the latter into account and rely on the former as gospel.
|
And I'll simply say that I've read that same argument a hundred times, as has anyone who takes analytics seriously, and it's not the case that these things are not taken into account. Here's an example:
http://nhlnumbers.com/2012/6/26/shot...nd-shot-totals
"you can control the puck, pass it around and wait for a quality shot, and have a low Corsi, but score"
This is also fundamentally untrue, by the way. You'd have a low CF, but even lower CA, if you're controlling the puck for that long. But this is also the sort of thing analytics can describe - a team that has high offensive time of possession would likely have low CF, low CA, a sky-high shooting percentage and the heat map for shot locations would probably indicate a lot of shots within home plate. In other words, if that's your theory of how X team is winning, you can make a pretty good analytics-based argument for it.