Quote:
Originally Posted by Strange Brew
I wouldn't dismiss it so quickly. Bingo looks at that data more than anyone and he will tell you that not all high danger chances are created equal.
You can't dispute the data that is out there. Per natural stat trick, Flames are 6th best in the NHL for high danger chances against per 60, adjusted for score and venue (no idea how they do that). Oilers are 7th best.
Are we also calling Oilers elite defensively?
And the actual differences are small. Difference between Flame and middle of the league is less than one HDCA per 60. So if you accept that not all those chances are created equal, there is a lot of room to suggest that it is not the number of HDCA but the quality that is important.
There is at least enough room for interpretation that I'm not going to ridicule someone who thinks Flames are giving up higher quality chances.
Frankly the difference between 11.5 high danger chances against per game vs 12 against is almost imperceptible. I'm skeptical if someone thinks that is easily observed just by watching.
IMO there is lot of room in the data and the "eye test" to come to the conclusion that suits you.
|
Lots of room to improve for the data system for sure. And yeah you have different stripes of high danger chances within that stat and different shooters getting those chances.
The high danger model does account for the more dangerous plays by insisting they be on a pass/rebound/tip so they're already elevated above a scoring chance.
To be a team that gives up less of both is a good thing no matter how you look at it in my opinion.
And honestly I'm not interested in someone that is using an eye test to come to the conclusion that "suits" them. What the hell is that?
I went a decade arguing with Lanny on here over what he saw compared to every one else. Thank God I can just point to stats now. Less aggravating in handling the extreme see what I want to see viewer.