Quote:
Originally Posted by Table 5
I work with data quite a bit myself from a visualization perspective and one of primary things that I find is important is to assess and rank your data. You need to to understand what's driving the story, what adds detail, and what's just noise.
I find that advanced stats carry too much weight in the grand scheme of things. Personally, I think calling them "advanced stats" is a bit of a misnomer, as that implies that they are somehow better or more useful than basic stats if you are smart enough to understand them. To me, they are more akin to secondary stats...ie things that add nuance and detail to the big picture, but at the end of the day still rank behind the basics in terms of importance. As dumb as they are, Goals and Goal Differentials will always trump things like Shot-Counts or High-Quality Chances. You may win admiration with the latter stats, but you win hockey games with the former.
|
Very well said. I like the term secondary stats.
Quote:
However, I also think that we're starting to pull a bit of a Gully. We're so focused on stats and numbers, to realize that the solution may have nothing to do with statistics at all. The missing element may be the human touch. The problem with Gulutzan may be one of personality and leadership style. You don't go to war for a spreadsheet, you go to war with a leader. I never go the impression from the guy that he is someone that commands attention when he walks into a room.
Above strategy, above player utilization, above all else, this may be a team that just needs a General more than anything right now.
|
I think you have this upside down.
I think Gulutzan is a pretty s##t coach, and that's the main problem. There's this stupid term, "a student of the game" that's sometimes thrown around to describe I guess analytical people in hockey. I think it's very descriptive of Gulutzan. If you go watch his symposiums, they have all the hallmarks of a bad lecture. Mostly boring and often lacking in a clear point or solid practical advice. This is usually what happens when people who don't actually understand what they are talking about try to explain it. Looking at what he's good at (creating structure and system) and what he's bad at (making adjustments, proper use of players), this I think supports this.
I think GG just does not understand hockey that well. He's the hardworking student who can quote you long litanies from memory, but can't explain what any of it means. He can look at what someone like Babcock is doing and see what's going on, but he doesn't really know why an actually good coach would use that particular strategy in that situation with those players. Which is why he can pick a strategy and get a team to execute it, like the Flames are doing, but he can't get it to work properly and he doesn't know what to do when that happens. It's also why he's incapable of properly reacting to things that happen within a game. He's probably slow to see what happens, and even if he does he doesn't know what he should do, because he'd need to understand things better to know that. The most likely reason IMO of his poor player usage is basically the same: he doesn't really understand what makes a certain player really good at something. All he can look at is stats.
I don't see lack of leadership or charisma, because the team clearly, consistently keeps doing what they're told. They play the system to the the point of frustration and desperation and keep doing that even when the season is gone. That to me suggests the coach has strict control of the room. That is not his problem.
Gulutzan as a coach is like many other Trelivongs acquisitions: a workhorse lacking in actual talent and skill.
(Why people keep saying "he has a great hockey mind" I don't know, because I can't see any evidence of that. I think it's something Trelivongs said and people just went with it.)
I happen to think this is a really crucial thing, because if the Flames think the problem is lack of character instead of lack of skill and get it wrong, they will just double down on the original problem.
Which is what I'm afraid will happen with the player moves too. I really hope I'm wrong somewhere.