Quote:
Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache
Can you do me a favour?
Please stop with the ‘you’ve got a goalie bias’ as a way to dismiss my point of view. It is weak.
If I have a position on goalies, it’s generally that they get too much credit for their success and their failure. I’ve said before, a team can contribute +/- 10 or so points to sv%, a goalie can contribute maybe +5 or 10, and obviously lower on the minus side if they are really stinking.
And to discuss that, I point to things that aren’t captured in the data. What are reasonable expectations from a goalie, in various situations.
You know full well that the models don’t capture the things I mentioned.
It’s a cop out to say ‘well, to have the opinion that the Flames make more egregious costly mistakes than other teams, you have to watch every game of every team’. Technically, perhaps, but for practical purposes, I watch enough hockey that I am comfortable commenting.
I have seen the Flames lose many games due to bad goals on terrible coverage, and ill timed turnovers. This year, I have noticed massive poor decisions and brain farts that were not there last year.
There are two teams every time the Flames play. I watch all of the Flames games, so have those teams to compare, plus several of other teams. No, you can’t watch every game, but it’s a cop out to say ‘well, every team makes the same amount of mistakes’.
Go ahead and show me the fundamental mistakes by Chicago that resulted in high quality Flames chances. The two I mentioned were basic mistakes that pro players shouldn’t make, and gifted that game to a bad team.
There are several games where the Flames have out shot, but lost because they out-mistaked their opponent (yeah that’s a word now)
The goalies have had their stinkers, but the team D has left them hung out to dry more often than the good teams do to their goalies.
And again, these models and the capturing of the egregious mistakes I’m talking about are fully 100% independent.
It is not meaningful to point to the model, and say anything about the likelihood of teams busting outside them. Because I’m talking about something that the model doesn’t actually claim to measure
Just because it’s not measured does not mean it is not happening.
The Flames are exactly where they are in the standings because of costly mistakes. The models may show them being ‘better’ than they actually are. But they are right where they belong. Below expectations
|
Why would I stop? It's been pretty consistent. You come at things the same way over and over again.
We don't have to call it a bias though if you don't want.
I'm happy to say it's possible that the models themselves are easier on teams than goaltenders, or that goalie models (gsaa) are tough on all goaltenders.
But I won't make the leap that the Flames specifically have found a way to give up more high danger that isn't registered than other teams. That's a huge leap in my mind, and it's completely unfounded.
I don't blame you for not wanting to watch every game to prove it though!