Quote:
Originally Posted by Red
Or there was no need for plays that qualify as HDSC because they were given other avenues to create scoring chances. It's a variable that is not easily measured. A simple "why pass back and forth when I can skate right in and shoot". In a weird scenario you could have a team score 5 breakaway goals but register no HDSCs. Same for 2 on 1s that didn't have passing plays. To me those are major flaws. Two of the most dangerous plays in hockey, no?
Another poster made a great and detailed post in another thread where he said that there are too many possibilities and variables in each play to properly measure them and frame in any kind of a stat. I agree with that.
Every goal scored is a result of 11 guys (in general) doing or not doing something. How can we measure such endless stream of randomness? I dont think we can.
We can do a lot of other things. Some may be much better indicators that HDSC. But these are events that require eyeballs.
We can sort of define what a "clean" shot is.
We can count clean shots from the slot.
We can count clean shots with goalie screened.
We can count breakaways, odd man rushes etc.
We can count clean shots taken by certain players. Because that matters too.
Forehand/backhand etc.
Deflections in front of the net. And on and on. All of these can be dangerous chances. But I don't believe there is a stat that show all of these scenarios. They on their own tell a much better tale than corsi, fenwick, hdsc etc.
Question. If you listen to the game coverage they often mention scoring chance numbers. Are these commentators looking them up somewhere or do they mark them on a notepad as they happen?
A great exercise would be to mark them as you see them and then compare with what the websites collect. If you do it for your own sake you can remove the bias factor. Better yet, have someone else do the same and compare notes after.
|
The problem if you get into those issues ... subjectivity.
Then the whole data set gets thrown aside as someone's opinion.
As it stands it's an easy tick in a box when something happens. Sure a guy can say he was outside the home plate when he was in, and mistakes will happen.
But you don't have a guy like David Staples (check it out if you haven't seen it) counting scoring chances for and against and almost always ending up thinking Edmonton played better than they did.