Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadaMatt
I’m very confused, are you suggesting that James Neals goal output has absolutely no bearing on the flames win/loss record? ...and that if he scored say 10 more goals (to this point) then the Flames would likely have had no additional wins or OTL’s
Why are the Flames spending an incremental $7+ million on a player whose performances (good or bad) you think are so inconsequential to team success.
|
No, what he is saying is that there is no way to reasonably allocate the goals that Neal should have scored. Sure, go ahead and say Neal should have 10 goals. But in which games? You can't just allocate his theoretical goals to games in which the Flames lost by 1 goal, and then say 'he cost us X points'. It doesn't work that way. Goals tend to get scored in bunches, and in all likelihood, the majority of his goals would have come in games when the team was putting up several (this is true for all scorers).
Would it help to have more secondary scoring? Absolutely.
Would Neal having a bunch more goals mean we probably have more points? No doubt.
But, unlike with a goalie (where the mistakes are clear, and the results are clear), there is no way to determine how many more points we might have if Neal had more goals.