Quote:
Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist
Yes and no. I agree it's the best stat for determining who's good, but the purpose of the other statistics is to help predict who will win later and they do that better than wins/losses
|
I don't even agree it's the best stat for determining who's good. How many games do you need to determine this? IIRC, there was a point about 1/4 of the way through the season where the Leafs had a better record than Chicago. Were the Leafs a better team? Did they suddenly get worse at hockey when Chicago passed them? Right now, the Kings have fewer wins than the Canucks, Wild and Flames, but in my opinion at least they're better than all three of those teams.
When you say a stat is more useful at "predicting who will win later", that to me is a better indicator of who is good at hockey, whatever that stat may be. I don't think reducing stats to that descriptor is a useful process because it's misleading (no stat can tell you who will win the NYR / CHI game today with any certainty), though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by heep223
My biggest issue is that "possession" stats don't actually track possession. A team could be holding the puck for 2 minutes cycling in the o-zone and have some great scoring chances that don't end up in actual shot attempts. Then the other team rushes back with a weak shot attempt from the outside and they are winning the Corsi battle.
|
This is another common refrain. In theory, you're right, but any effort made to track this has determined that it's not what happens. Remember, the Leafs in 2012 were actually saying to the press (coaches AND management) that this is what they were doing. When checked against actual O-zone time of possession:
