Quote:
Originally Posted by FanIn80
And this is where the advanced stats fail...
Lomberg intercepts a puck high in the air while standing all alone 8 feet in front of the SJS net. He pulls it down, and gets a shot away, completely untouched/unchalleneged/unhurried. That's a high-danger shot and an expected goal any day of the week... which looks pretty good if all you care about are dangers and XGs... But if you care about being accurate, then you also have to take into consideration that it's Lomberg shooting, and it took him a good couple seconds to get the shot off, giving Askarov time to get set, and then he just kind of flung it right into the crest for one of the easiest saves any goalie will ever have to make.
When I talk about dangers in a game that I've watched, I'm not talking about what shows up on the statline. I'm talking about plays and shots that are actually dangerous.
Weegsy on an in-tight wraparound... another high-danger XG... except he already knew where he was going to shoot it when he started the wrap, and shot it exactly there - even though Askarov was already snug and fully covering the shortside low-mid. Result: puck swallowed with zero need for reaction from Askarov. Not even a rebound. Just a frozen puck and a faceoff, just like it was a low-danger from the point with no traffic.
I wish there was a better stat that incorportaed shooter, shot selection, timing, release, blade angle etc, because not all slot shots are equal. This is probably why there's often so much variance stat lines and eyeballs, and why so many coaches and GMs will remind people that advanced stats are only a portion of the picture. You absolutely have to have eyes-on as well.
Annnyway. It was a fun game to watch. I was really impressed with Wolf in the last half of the third. I also thought Coronato had a hell of a game. Didn't think Kerins was really used in a way that explained his callup, but I liked his game regardless.
|
you are way off on this one...like way off
This was one of the most dominant games you will ever see in the NHL. Eyes on? even the sharks announcers were calling it one of the most lopsided games they had ever seen...one compared it to a game the Flames won 13-1 in the 90s.
Like the Sharks had one scoring chance in the first 40 minutes. On no planet were the quality chances even remotely close to even.