Quote:
Originally Posted by Itse
The faulty logic is in interpretation. Shot-based stats are almost without exception applied with the logic that "big xGF good, therefore if team A has better xGF than team B then that is advantage team A". This just isn't true. It's both bad and good. I already said why in this thread.
All shot-based stats can ever definitively say is this: "With this value in this stat, this team has got these results." No matter how many shot-based stats you combine, this does not change. (Especially since it's all just different spins on mostly the same data.)
You can not use shot-based stats to say a team is playing good or bad, yet they are consistently, in fact almost without failure, used to say just that.
You yourself used shot-based stats to claim that
and
This is just nonsense. The Jets are in fact a slightly better 5-on-5 hockey team than the Flames when we look at the primary stats: goals for and against 5-on-5. In the last 20 games they've also gone 12-6-2, which again is hardly a tire fire. They've also scored 64 goals which is not too shabby and has nothing to do with Hellebuyck.
Your claim is the equivalent of looking at the horse powers of a race car and saying it's slow, while ignoring things like actual race times.
Shot-based stats do not measure how "good" or "bad" team plays. It just measures what it measures; shots. No matter whether you call it corsi or xGF or what ever, it all just measures shots. No more, no less.
There will always be more to "good hockey" than shots.
|
When you're out of the playoffs (Jets were) with the best goaltender in the league there's a pretty good chance you're not playing that well.
So yeah a race car can have other variables. The driver, the tires ... for sure. But if you want to say it's light on horse power it can be tested.
It isn't nonsense at all.
The Jets have bad balances on every single attempt, shot and chance metric. That's not a recipe for success.
You and Ricardo can name the actual results all you want. If that's all you care about I honestly don't care.
But some pretty easy stats suggest they spend too much time in their own zone, and that's not a good five on five hockey team.
The bolded part isn't even correct.
Corsi measure shot attempts, not shots. Xgf% takes into account location and danger level by parameters like passing into the slot or deflections, rebounds.
The only thing that measure just shots is the shot clock.