Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo
I still don't think the stat has much merit.
And you don't need it because his expected numbers weren't that good either, so why go to the silly stat?
Go with xGA/60. That's what you are on the ice for in generation against. It doesn't get affected by having a boosted on ice shooting percentage, or a high on ice save percentage ... which happens in a full season.
Andersson was a team worst 2.64 xGA60 on the season.
But then you dig into his expected splits on the season and he's -2.38 on the season compared to -20 5 on 5 in actual goals.
The difference is goals for ... he was only on for 42 goals for compared to 62 in expected goals.
He was also the shutdown guy playing more minutes against elite than any other defenseman. That has to factor in to some degree too ... almost 4 games worth of ice time more than Weegar.
He said he had a rough season, and didn't make any excuses, but the numbers aren't quite as simple as comparing a useless stat.
|
Why is it always assumed that low shooting percent is all luck and nothing to do with the player? Why is low on ice save percent always on the goalie and not the defender?
I didn't compare Rasmus to Weegar...I used Bahl as Bahl was on the ice with Rasmus for 75% of Rasmus ES minutes. Can I assume that Bahl also played against elite players?