Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo
High danger has to come from home plate ... he was off to the side of the net.
I hear what you're saying for sure, but by definition it wasn't.
|
I am starting to see less usefulness of the stats that use subjective qualifiers for certain things. Once the puck makes it's way to McDavid, that was about a 95% likelihood of a goal.
Let's say there's a two on one.
In scenario 1 puck carrier makes a perfect pass to the shooter but the goalie slides across and makes an incredible save.
In scenario 2, puck carrier muffs the pass and no scoring chance.
Scenario 1 is maybe high danger (depends where he receives the pass?) and I assume a high xGF%. But no idea exactly how the xgf% is actually calculated on that play.
Scenario 2 isn't measured by any stat is it?
Yet both scenarios were high danger scoring opps and should tell us something about how both teams were playing. The stats only seem to tell us something about the shooter and the goalie on that play.
I'm not knocking all advanced stats, it just seems hockey is a difficult game to measure accurately that way.
And of course I don't fully understand how these stats are calculated so much of the problem may be on my end.