Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo
And you'd be right. But the inconsistency is applied across every team and every goaltender.
So to ignore the number you'd have to have a case where team X or goalie Y have specifically wrong numbers because they thwart the model more than their counterparts.
You have a huge bias towards goaltenders, you walk it out 12 times a year.
And I don't say "look at me" about anything.
|
Didn’t say you do. I just said I don’t
Quote:
But I certainly love that you can look something up that principally unbiased and negate someone who walks into every situation with an eye test bias and an inability to see anything but what they've told themselves to see (not pointing at you directly on that one)
|
You don’t need to ignore the number. You just take it with a grain of salt. Understand what it does, and what it doesn’t do. Use it as a basis for discussion, but use a ton of caution trying to use it as a proof point.
I agree. It’s principally unbiased. But also inadequate. To improve it, you’d have to measure so many qualifiers that become inputs, and that would thereby reduce the statistical significance.
Again, the Nashville third period. 21 shots. Nothing threatening. We all saw it.
The fact that the Flames have the third worst shooting percentage in the league is a perfect example. It’s not random. It is a consequence of how they are playing.
But what I am calling in this case ‘how they are playing’ just isn’t measured in the models.
On the goalie thing…
I am not sure what you mean by me having a ‘bias toward goaltenders’. The way it reads, it comes across as a bad thing.
I think it’s a heck of a lot better to understand if an actual shot is reasonably stoppable than to just say ‘oh, he’s gotta make a save’
If you cover 85 percent of the net, you have a good chance of Ovi’s one timer hitting you. But if it finds a hole, it’s going in. The goalie has pretty much nothing to do with the outcome other than how the 85 percent of the net he is covering matches up with where the shot goes. Because it’s physically impossible to react between when the shot is actually taken and when it finds its destination. Some people struggle with that. (Not pointing at you)
That’s not a bias toward goaltenders, it’s a bias towards science