Quote:
Originally Posted by ricardodw
This confuses the heck out of me. The article presents a bunch of charts that have the Flames as a strong analytics team last season and blames Gio Andersson, Monahan and Markstrom and then concludes:
Somehow Gaudreau Tanev Tkachuk Lindholm, Hanifin, Mangiapane were stars but that didn't make a difference last year and likely will not this year.
I think that this pro-analytics article (along with the posting of how good the JFresh Flames were) is a solid argument that just says that throws up its hands and says analytics don't matter.
|
That wouldn't be my conclusion.
Analytics matter because they track how a team plays. If you're getting 40% of the shot attempts and scoring chances you're just not a good hockey team, but may be getting bailed out by your goaltending and/or finishing.
The Oilers have high finish rates because of their star power, and their offensive lean (blowing the zone / employing defenders that don't defend).
That's likely sustainable because that's what they are.
The Flames under Sutter were a dominant analytics team without the finish, and without the save. When that happens the analytics aren't wrong, nor would I say they don't matter ... but the talent wasn't there to do the "average" job expected from what you created and what you gave up.
Not a rosy picture for the Flames unless you thought there was some bad puck luck etc factoring.