Quote:
Originally Posted by Itse
They suggest nothing of the sort. They say they spend x time. (Or do they? Does it actually include zone time?) . You're suggesting x is too much and that they're bad because they spend too much to in their own zone.
This is not what "bad" is. Bad is a team that scores less than their opponent and loses games.
When you're ignoring goals, you're choosing to ignore stats that don't fit what you want to believe.
The Jets are not garbage. They have weaknesses, and the shot-based stats do bring out some of those weaknesses, but you're stretching their significance way further than what the data says.
|
As I said ... you can stop at the bottom line, the result and call it a day. Not the deepest look at something, but I can't stop you.
But no ... it's not that simple.
Hellebucyck is part of their team so they have better five on five actual results than the Flames, but they're not the better five on five hockey club. There are plenty of statistics that prove that out.
I'm choosing to go deeper than the result, you don't have to. But I'm not ignoring stats that don't fit what I believe. I'm choosing to look into other elements than just goals to see how they play.
It's not hard to find stats that say they get out played five on five but have a great goaltender. Almost every preview of the Jets or the series by any source has said the exact same thing.