Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo
You don't have to like xGA ... honestly I think it's a stat that will continue to evolve (definitions, weightings etc changing)
But it's hard to look past basic shot metrics and counting. There isn't anything wrong with a "model" that says you'd like your defenseman not to be at the bottom of the pile for giving up shots on goal (or shot attempts, or scoring chances).
Who you play with is part of it.
I think some felt that Tanev had his wheels come off, but it could be that his numbers were hurt carrying Hughes. I guess this year will help solve some of that.
|
Well, Nurse's XGA/60 numbers were middle of the pack the first year he played on the top pairing with Larsson.
The last three years his partners were Russell, Bear, and Barrie.
Russell, and Barrie in particular are beloved by the analytics community.
Why does Tanev get a rationalization and Nurse doesn't? I mean you admit yourself that XGA/60 is affected by teammates and situation. If we have to do a tonne of groundwork to explain why a stat is valid in certain cases then I don't see it as being that valid.
It's basically plus/minus at that point which has been dumped on for years.