The problem I have is the notion that advanced stats like Corsi are a predictive tool.
Maybe that's the case for fans and observers, but if I'm running a team, I'm using the stats as an analysis tool, and reconciling the gaps between what the stats indicate should happen vs what actually is. The second you rely on "the stats say we should be winning more than we are, so we'll keep doing what we're doing" is the second you're missing the point. Perhaps after looking at all the factors, you are just unlucky and it's best to stay the course. Or, after reviewing the tape you're finding your guys are strong on the puck, but have bad shooting accuracy and keep firing the puck right at the goalie's chest. Maybe a team has terrible possession stats, but keep the other team to the outside, and have the speed and skill to score on the rush, so nothing needs to change.
Basically, it operates under the assumption that the past predicts the future, without taking into account how teams learn from the past to change how they play (or not) in the future based on expected/actual results.
|